adamcz wrote:What is your basis for this? Why do you not believe that FA's go to the team that offers the most money? I know that Karl Malone once signed at a discount to finish his career with one last shot at a ring, but 99.9% of FA's follow the money.
Since you're saying that these other factors play a big role, I think you owe some examples of players who passed up more money to sign for good weather.
Bell would have played in Miami for less. Mo was very close to playing for less.
Money matters, but your obviously missing the point. Big market matters. This often equals more money for the player. Lime light matters. Weather matters. Role on the team matters. Winning matters. Perhaps not as much as money but combined they are a factor.
The Bucks overpaying for every player also matters.
The big names wont come here, often for some these reasons and of course Bird rights. Impact players will not likely be signed via free agency by our current Bucks team.
So that leaves us to try and outbid for a role player or 2 via FA. OK. We can do that. Been doing that and it hasn't resulted in much, but ok I am down that. But guys like Jake and Mason? backup players that are closer to being the 10th man on the team then breaking into the starting line up. Not that great and we overpaid for both of them.
If the money is even close most other teams are going to win out.
So. I fail to see how liquidating Redd into expiring contracts and say a pick or something, makes much sense. So with our 10M in FA we could wind up with something close to a Mason and a Jake. That is not worth the risk.
This town generally doesn't do well attracting FA's. We've had a couple decent ones and like I said we can still try and do a FA or 2, but I am not going to bank on that. This team needs talent and the best way to do it is swing a deal. Or keep the team relatively intact and let it develop.
Interesting fact: as a percentage of FGAs, Redd shoots fewer jumpers than virtually all the Mavs' scorers besides Devin Harris.
