lipoli390 wrote:This is a head-scratcher. As Future noted, he couldn't even stick with the Lakers. Ask yourself if Matt Ryan is ever going to contribute anything significant minutes to the Wolves and the only honest answer is no. If Forbes isn't making a contribution, Matt Ryan won't either.
Cam's right about the proper use of 2-way contracts. This is a very poor use and a bad look for the franchise as they cut Lawson for a second time. The Wolves should have stuck with Lawson or signed one of the young guys Cam listed. The Wolves should be using their 2-way deals to sign young talent with upside, especially given the team's lack of future draft picks. And they should be focused on bringing in quick, athletic players like Lawson.
The Lakers get to save money every day he isn't on the roster. Let's see who they end up bringing into that roster spot. They may not make a move for a while but it seems likely they will at some point.
It's amusing how people who not long ago were like I don't even know why they signed Lawson in the first place are like why did we let him go for Matt Ryan?!?
lipoli390 wrote:This is a head-scratcher. As Future noted, he couldn't even stick with the Lakers. Ask yourself if Matt Ryan is ever going to contribute anything significant minutes to the Wolves and the only honest answer is no. If Forbes isn't making a contribution, Matt Ryan won't either.
Cam's right about the proper use of 2-way contracts. This is a very poor use and a bad look for the franchise as they cut Lawson for a second time. The Wolves should have stuck with Lawson or signed one of the young guys Cam listed. The Wolves should be using their 2-way deals to sign young talent with upside, especially given the team's lack of future draft picks. And they should be focused on bringing in quick, athletic players like Lawson.
The Lakers get to save money every day he isn't on the roster. Let's see who they end up bringing into that roster spot. They may not make a move for a while but it seems likely they will at some point.
It's amusing how people who not long ago were like I don't even know why they signed Lawson in the first place are like why did we let him go for Matt Ryan?!?
Not sure who those people were, Monster. It's all relative. There were some of us who would have preferred signing McClung or another young PG prospect instead of Lawson given relative potential and the team's need. But I've always liked Lawson's combo of athleticism, length and skill even though he hasn't yet proven himself to be a reliable shooter. He's a good prospect for a two-way contract, but not as good as other prospects some of us would have preferred.
Again, relatively speaking, some of us would much prefer Lawson over Matt Ryan. Seems pretty straight-forward and sensible to me. If you find it amusing, then I feel good about contributing to your amusement. :)
