|
|
Post by New York Knicks on Aug 19, 2008 16:52:13 GMT
the New York Knicks release Jerome James
$5,800,000 - $6,200,000 - $6,600,000
|
|
|
|
Post by Denver Nuggets on Aug 19, 2008 16:54:40 GMT
You know that he'll stay on your salary, right
|
|
|
|
Post by New York Knicks on Aug 20, 2008 7:54:19 GMT
yup. if not i'll just release malik rose and jared jefferies as well! haha. then no one would have salary cap problems!
|
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Aug 21, 2008 2:25:32 GMT
lol why pay a nasty contract for a guy that isnt even playing for u and that no one would want his contract after u release him
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Aug 21, 2008 14:36:35 GMT
This is a really stupid move, for some reason I'm going to let it go through.
|
|
|
|
Post by New York Knicks on Aug 21, 2008 15:54:42 GMT
why is it a stupid move enlighten me. I wont get people to take him anyways.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Aug 21, 2008 17:11:44 GMT
why is it a stupid move enlighten me. I wont get people to take him anyways. You might. |
|
|
|
Post by Dallas Mavericks on Aug 21, 2008 18:07:20 GMT
Can't you trade his contract
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Aug 21, 2008 20:41:56 GMT
Can't you trade his contract Yes, but who's going to want it I always just suppose it's worth keeping someone like Jerome James, even if they're Jerome James, lol. You could trade him along with someone else, that's usually the way overpaid, no hopers like him move around. I dunno, I suppose it isn't much difference afterall. |
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Aug 21, 2008 23:20:17 GMT
its always better to keep a bad contract instead of pay his nasty contract if he isnt in ur team really
|
|
|
|
Post by Dallas Mavericks on Aug 22, 2008 2:17:48 GMT
I don't think this is a dumb move at all, he still gets to move his contract, why would you want Jerome James taking up a roster spot when you can use that spot for someone much better
|
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Aug 22, 2008 2:39:23 GMT
Who would want his contract
|
|
|
|
Post by Denver Nuggets on Aug 22, 2008 3:56:26 GMT
Who would want his contract Someone that gets incentives in return. |
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Aug 22, 2008 4:01:09 GMT
I doubt that he will trade JUST his contract...getting Jerome James isnt that bad if u receive something that will help u a lot in return....but getting just his contract is stupid...I doubt that it will get traded.
|
|
|
|
Post by New York Knicks on Aug 22, 2008 4:09:28 GMT
haha well so its not so dumb a move after all. had me worried. thought i missed a league rule or some sort... jeez
|
|
|
|
Post by Dallas Mavericks on Aug 22, 2008 14:31:46 GMT
I doubt that he will trade JUST his contract...getting Jerome James isnt that bad if u receive something that will help u a lot in return....but getting just his contract is stupid...I doubt that it will get traded. Whats the difference between trading James and just his contract Nobody would want James in the first place, now his trade value is higher because it's JUST his contract. If anything his value is higher, not lower. I don't see how this is a dumb move, if anything it's a good move. |
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Aug 22, 2008 15:14:38 GMT
But JUST HIS CONTRACT is worse IMO...why pay a terrible salary for...nothing! but wherever...I wanna see if this contract will be traded....
|
|
|
|
Post by Milwaukee Bucks on Aug 22, 2008 15:15:49 GMT
I doubt that he will trade JUST his contract...getting Jerome James isnt that bad if u receive something that will help u a lot in return....but getting just his contract is stupid...I doubt that it will get traded. Whats the difference between trading James and just his contract Nobody would want James in the first place, now his trade value is higher because it's JUST his contract. If anything his value is higher, not lower. I don't see how this is a dumb move, if anything it's a good move. A body could actually give u points, might be rare in this case, but a cap hit gives u nothing but headaches trying to trade it, because a 5.8 mil cap hit x 3 years isn't that appealing...and no one really wants it. Personally, I don't care how shitty the player is, he could still provide the team with a few points here n there. Just my opinion... |
|
|
|
Post by New York Knicks on Aug 22, 2008 15:21:12 GMT
Whats the difference between trading James and just his contract Nobody would want James in the first place, now his trade value is higher because it's JUST his contract. If anything his value is higher, not lower. I don't see how this is a dumb move, if anything it's a good move. A body could actually give u points, might be rare in this case, but a cap hit gives u nothing but headaches trying to trade it, because a 5.8 mil cap hit x 3 years isn't that appealing...and no one really wants it. Personally, I don't care how shitty the player is, he could still provide the team with a few points here n there. Just my opinion... perhaps. but i would rather have justin williams than jerome james. its a move to make space for him basically. im just praying that he rejoins the nba or something |
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Aug 22, 2008 15:27:02 GMT
You could have released Mike Harris who is a one year guy if this was a move just to have roster space but oh well...You are the GM ;D
|
|
2007 MVP - Tim Duncan