CrazyEye

But it isn't like you have to pay him more then he would earn in europe, so why would they decline the hawks offer?I guess, nobody in Utah discusses this over Burke even if US players have the same rights.

For peoplle who like stats: http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=teaguje01&y1=2013&p2=jennibr01&y2=2013&p3=ellismo01&y3=2013 Teague is the best in a lot of the advanced Stats like PER, Winshares. And if you look at his production per 36 minutes he scores just 2,5 point less then ellis and 1,5 less then jennings with nearly two more Assist and less shots. So you can argue that he have a bigger impact on the offense, without beeing such a crappy volume shooter. But Jenning FG%, isn't so bad since he takes a lot threes with a high percentage so his true sshooting is at least better then the one from Ellis who also takes many threes but barely hit then. But jennings would be an ok deal for you, since when he learns when to shoot his offense should get better and this should be easier then improving the Jump shot and i see a lot of potential in him

I believe he would be starting PG at least for the next year, he is still young and projecting player development is hard. So maybe he stays in front of him, or maybe he won't. But for the case he won't stay in front of schröder i see no problem to trade him, i believe that would be in the intrest of the hawks too since you should also get a more needed starter for him.Jenning should be an upgrade in comparision to him, but i believe the hawks have more important needs to work on first and having a PG who knows the system is always good.Jennings >> Ellis for sure

Which gives the option to make a sign an trade, but i hope he will also keep Teague. With one exception the Deal who was rumored here, who gave then Vasquez in a sign and trade with teague.But usually consistency on the 1 is good, and what i hear and read about Teague he is a good player for a reasonable price.

the " 3 years" was wrong i see that now more clearly. This one was directed to: I was happy to find a source now, who explains it a bit more in detail. Since i never understood, why players should be happy about getting drafted in the second round if it only limit your choiches to one club instead of giving you the possibility to negotiate with 3-4 clubs who finds you intresting. So i at least know now, that they need to offer him a contract, even when it isn't a contract you can count on.

not 100% right, the team had to offer him a contract to retain his rights. usually it is a non guaranteed one, so he get fired after accepting it. In this case he counts as waived, and other team can claim him off waivers. If i understood this right, and the source is trustworthy: http://data.shamsports.com/content/pages/data/draft/unsigneddraftpicks.jsp Edit: Even if i lack to udnerstand why signing those contracts is so abd, knowing you doN't have a chanche anymore at this team and are just a trade asset. And maybe other teams are still intrested in you, but don't want to offer anything for you and offer "your" minmum contract to someone else.

First round draft picks, you have to offer a contract. Which is pretty much a standard one, with a salary depending on the draft pick and +/- some percent depending on the negoating skills. The player is the only one who can say no, but he can not join a different NBA team them. The player need to accept the contract withim 2 season afaik. Second round draft picks, the drafting club got the exclusive ,right to negotiate with the player without limitations for the salary for the next 3 years. Both said prior draft that they want to play right away in the NBA if they get chanche, so if you don't want them don't draft them first round. Maybe at the end of the first round they might be situations, where it makes more sense to stay in europe for them since the salary difference is lower or maybe the salary is even higher in europe. Edit: thats why the Mavericks downtradet this draft, to get a sheeper salary instead of picking the best player avaiable and don't make him an offer in the first year if they could land on howard. The question for this thread who makes sense should be: Should we sign Muscala right away, or should we let him develop overseas?

you signed nogueira and schröder through the draft :)

Just because they are Euros you can not send them overseas. You have to offer them the contract, and they earn much more in the States so you could be pretty sure they will take it. I doubt you would ask the same, if you get an american players even when it would be an similiar decision. Let them in europe is usually a option when they have predraft a long and good contract, or more likely if you get them into the second round where in the past often the first picks was europeans cause of it. Schröder have an exit clause in his contract for the NBA, and he would earn up to 100.000$ if he keep it. So ask yourself what you would do Also i posted in the Schröder thread that he will play for the national team, in this report they also said that they agreed on an insurance for him which wouldn't be the case if Schröder don't have the contract for sure. Also the play on the point guard spot is quite different with FIBA rules, so i doubt it would be good for his development if he adjust to it(right now he plays a style which transforms well to the NBA), develope the "wrong skillset" and come back to atlanta where he have to get back to his old game. Nogueira is in the same situation like a player who finish college, he have no contract. So why decline that, to get a worse one. Silly question for me.