Quote:
Originally Posted by freddyg12
If being able to shell out big bonuses for free agents while staying under the cap is managing "very well" then yes, they can do that.
But managing the cap this way created the turmoil we had at the end of the old cba. Remember the scenarios we faced if there was no cba last march? We would've had to purge the roster or get guys like lavar to not only restructure, but take a cut.
You could also argue that the real reason we didn't re-sign Smoot (though he is overpaid in Minn.) & Pierce was because cap hell loomed a year away. Add to that the Coles debacle, though it turned out well that we got santana, we ate a lot of dead cap space. The team didn't learn & signed AA & Loyd to deals which we're stuck with, whether they are here or not.
I guess you can say that Eric Schaffner (sp?) & the Dannay et al find creative ways to spend money w/in the cap, but their spending eventually catches up & we'll see that in a few years at the end of this cba if they continue like this.
|
Alot of teams were going to be in hot water if the new CBA didn't go through.
We've been hearing about the impending cap hell since 2000. They're obviously doing something right when it comes to working the numbers, that's all I'm saying.
I'm not trying to say all the moves have been wise ones, but they do have a great understanding of how the cap works and how to massage it to their advantage.