Jump to content
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $390 of $700 target

So long Scotty


HawkItus

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

The updated trade details has Atlanta SENDING the cash, not RECEIVING it. It's probably to pay the balance of Scott's contract.

 

 

Lol I didn't see that it was officially listed as us sending cash considerations after it was initially reported as us receiving... I guess Budcox truly does value R. Kelly that much more than Scott.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bankingitbig said:

They could just renounce his rights and release his cap hold in the offseason to not have it count against the cap. This was a trade purely for $ and to help PHX get closer to the salary floor. Unless Budcox truly valued Ryan Kelley that much more than Scott.

No, they really couldn’t. Renouncing the rights to an active player is kind of seen as a d*ck move by the players. A player’s value begins and ends with his last contract. Renouncing those rights to an active player is a direct line to a minimum contract (unless the player is a legit starter who will command a salary). Players really, really don’t like it and it would net the Hawks bad will with future free agents or players wanting to sign.  Trading Mike, allows Mike to retain his stature and is a sign of good will. If the Hawks were going to release him, they would have done it before this season (as I openly campaigned for).

Had the Hawks done this type of a deal at the start of free agency, they would have had 3.3 million more under the cap and could have signed both Howard and Horford.  Don’t question the trade to Phoenix, it was the right deal. It just happened 8 months too late.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, hazer said:

Kelly sux 

Agreed. So Bud does indeed feel like Kelly is a NBA power forward and Moose is a NBA center. I must have been watching some other Hawk's team this year.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
1 hour ago, sturt said:

I would amend that to say it was purely for a trade exception.

Yep.  And it confirms what several of us have said which is that Mike Scott is one of several toxic assets on this team where you have to pay another team to take that player.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...