"If a minor deal is out there to be made, do not be surprised if Jerryd Bayless and his $3.1 million expiring contract are moved for a player like Detroit's Will Bynum who makes about $2.79 million, less than Bayless but has one year remaining on his current deal with the Pistons."

Quote from: hardlyyardley on February 17, 2014, 05:23:02 PM

Bring back Marc Spears

Miss that dude. Liked his recent piece about Paul's hesitance to leave NOLA.

Quote from: ssspence on February 17, 2014, 05:05:14 PM

Quote from: Fafnir on February 17, 2014, 04:58:43 PM

You seem to be pretty upset by a simple matter of missing punctuation.

Quote

"If a minor deal is out there to be made, do not be surprised if Jerryd Bayless and his $3.1 million expiring contract are moved for a player like Detroit's Will Bynum who makes about $2.79 million, less than Bayless but has one year remaining on his current deal with the Pistons."

There does the paragraph seem better now? He's saying the C's could take on a deal going into next year for assets. This is exactly what the C's already did with Joel Anthony.

Don't agree with you. Put the comma in and he's still not making any sense. If Sherod were making an argument about getting assets for taking back salary, he'd make it.

Instead, he says the following:

"Ainge loves what Bayless can do, but the idea of getting further under the luxury tax is even more appealing than keeping him. You can't really fault Ainge for feeling that way when you consider the Celtics are most likely going to be among the bottom-10 teams in the league this year and yet the teams' payroll will stack among the league's top-10."

That pretty clearly suggests he sees such a substantial difference in their deals, no? Unless the Cs have a follow-up deal that requires precisely that $400K or less, which again, IMO, should require some sort of reporting instead of the totally useless paragraph below.

Seems more likely that he misunderstood something he heard than he forgot a comma.

Yeah but even when you click the link you put in the OP, that line says "Will Bynum who makes 2.79 million which is less than Bayless"

So the comma and the word which essentially do the same thing, making the paragraph correct.

Quote from: pearljammer10 on February 17, 2014, 07:12:11 PM

Quote from: ssspence on February 17, 2014, 05:05:14 PM

Quote from: Fafnir on February 17, 2014, 04:58:43 PM

You seem to be pretty upset by a simple matter of missing punctuation.

Quote

"If a minor deal is out there to be made, do not be surprised if Jerryd Bayless and his $3.1 million expiring contract are moved for a player like Detroit's Will Bynum who makes about $2.79 million, less than Bayless but has one year remaining on his current deal with the Pistons."

There does the paragraph seem better now? He's saying the C's could take on a deal going into next year for assets. This is exactly what the C's already did with Joel Anthony.

Don't agree with you. Put the comma in and he's still not making any sense. If Sherod were making an argument about getting assets for taking back salary, he'd make it.

Instead, he says the following:

"Ainge loves what Bayless can do, but the idea of getting further under the luxury tax is even more appealing than keeping him. You can't really fault Ainge for feeling that way when you consider the Celtics are most likely going to be among the bottom-10 teams in the league this year and yet the teams' payroll will stack among the league's top-10."

That pretty clearly suggests he sees such a substantial difference in their deals, no? Unless the Cs have a follow-up deal that requires precisely that $400K or less, which again, IMO, should require some sort of reporting instead of the totally useless paragraph below.

Seems more likely that he misunderstood something he heard than he forgot a comma.

Yeah but even when you click the link you put in the OP, that line says "Will Bynum who makes 2.79 million which is less than Bayless"

So the comma and the word which essentially do the same thing, making the paragraph correct.

That's because Sherod edited the article after he or someone on his staff read this post. Doesn't mean he didn't toss up a complete airball, and would use Fafnir's argument to try to fudge his intentions.

At least we know he's reading here to make sure he actually knows what's going on...