Joe Alexander is available...
by SF on Oct 30, 2009 8:28 PM CDT
Email
Print
Let's sign him! Ha. Any takers?? He's gotta have as much potential as Pecherov or Brewer, who were both picked up by our squad... or is he just plain horrible?
He's athletic (like Hollins) and there was a time he was known as a potential 3 point shooter.
We need an athletic 3, and he fits that bill yes?
Maybe he could fit into our "leading the league in player development" I think he's worth a shot
(Ed Note: You can read about the Bucks decision to decline Alexander's option by clicking here. Today is the day where options are picked up or denied. We'll keep an eye out for any big names.)
7 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'd trade Brewer for him.
So there’s that.
I’m not sure I’d want to keep both on the roster; that’s a lot of cap space to be using up.
Me too.
They’re comparable in terms of the picks expended on them, and hopefully the two teams will have made similar decisions about their options by tomorrow morning. Either one of them could use a fresh start, and the Wolves need what Alexander represents more than what Corey represents, in terms of “upside.”
Pavlovic and Damien Wilkins are defensively analogous to Brewer, and while both are painful offensive players in some ways, they at least can stay on the floor at that end.
Even better?
There was an article on Yahoo saying that Tyrus Thomas’ option wasn’t picked up either. These are the kinds of guys we could spend our cap space on if no other worthwhile players are interested in signing here.
Thomas is incredibly athletic and a great defensive player. A running team with a defensive emphasis and a focus on player development would be a great place for him. Granted, he’s a spotty jump-shooter and not the most consistent, but if there’s a young player with that much upside available I’d have no problems pulling the trigger for the right price.
Alexander's not better than Brewer
Corey has his problems offensively, but he still rebounds and defends at a very high rate. Joe can barely rebound and can’t defend at all.
But Tyrus Thomas….there’s a guy I’d definitely sign.
Some clarification
It seems like people are mixing up the two different contract situations/deadlines that are being discussed right now.
Alexander (like Brewer and Pecherov) had a team option for next year, for his 3rd-year rookie-scale salary (Brewer’s 2010-11 option is for his 4th-year rookie-scale salary, but it’s the same difference). Everything I say below would also pertain to the Wolves, if they decline Brewer’s option.
By declining that option, Milwaukee is giving up their restricted rights on Alexander, making him an UN-restricted FA next summer.
They’re also now limited to the $2.7m he would have earned next year, if they want to re-sign him using Bird Rights (if they use their MLE on him, however, they can pay him up to the full amount of that exception; if they were going to have free cap room, like the Wolves will, they could sign him for any contract that fit within their free cap space).
But they’re not giving him up yet, necessarily, they just think that IF they want to keep him, they’ll be able to sign him for less than the $2.7m he was owed, OR if he plays well enough to earn more, they’ll just have to use their MLE on him (in the Wolves’ case, if they decline their option on Brewer, they’d be able to use any of their available cap room to re-sign him).
They are risking a situation where he takes offense at not having his option picked up, and refuses to re-sign with them even if they make a competitive offer, but frankly, if he thinks that way, they probably don’t want him on the team anyway.
So it’s not at all certain that Alexander is “available”. The Bucks just don’t think that he’s going to be worth $2.7m next year. They may want to keep him, just for less than that.
As for Tyrus Thomas, he’s playing under the fourth year of his rookie-scale deal, and the Bulls declined to offer him an extension, as opposed to declining an option year. That just means that instead of giving him a big, market-rate contract now, they’ve decided to let him become a restricted FA next summer. They’re still have the ability to match any contract offer he receives (presuming that they make him a qualifying offer, which doesn’t have to happen until next summer).
I’d assume that Thomas’s camp was asking for at least $8m per year, on a 5 year deal, and with the potential to create max cap room next summer, there’s basically no chance that Chicago would give him that kind of money now, since he’ll still be restricted after this year.
That means he’s probably not any more available than he has been at any previous time, they just don’t want to commit big money to him for 5 more years, when they’re going to be in a position to have major cap room if they hold off, and they still can’t lose him unless they decide they don’t want him back.
by LA_33 on Oct 31, 2009 3:51 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
This helps clarify the situation, but I still feel the results would probably be the same. It would be nice to have some sort of historical record as to what percentage of unrestricted free agents, restricted free agents, or players whose options were not picked up, remain with their present team. I would suspect that the only one of that group that stays with their team to any degree is the restricted free agent. Of course, I think our present group has one of each. Sessions was pried away from the Bucks (wasn’t he?) and Wilkins was not pried away from Seattle a few years ago (they matched).
by ogishkemuncie on Nov 1, 2009 12:12 AM CDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
