Kevin Martin Buyout

[mrhockey89]

Ultimately, keeping vs getting rid of Martin should be about what we're going to do with his spot. Personally, I'd keep him unless I could get a trade to clear the cap space. There's a reason top teams would be looking at him if we buy him out...it's because the guy can flat out shoot and draw fouls. There's value in that. If we literally can get noone to give us something of value in return, we should be able to at least get help creating cap space. A guy who can score like that isn't overpaid at $7 mil/season, especially in the era of the inflating cap. And for that, you should be at the very least, have been able to get an expiring contract at the trade deadline.

[AbeVigodaLive]

To be fair, this is one of the seasons when cap space is largely irrelevant. I'd imagine the Wolves would be closer to meeting the cap floor... than its max.

[TRKO [enjin:12664595]]

I flip flop on this issue. I agree with those who have stated we've done a poor job of managing the process by paying guys to not play for us. But then I try and find the silver lining. For me, that silver lining is that (knowing guys like Martin and Miller don't have much value), at least we're not taking back garbage players/contracts for the sake of saying "we made a trade". If the end result of moving these guys out is that it clears the way for younger guys with potential, then I guess I'm fine with it. Getting back a Troy Danielson or a Gary Neal might make it look like we got "some value", but is it really any better?

When we traded Mo Williams we got back a future second rounder along with Gary Neal. That was a good move for a rebuilding team. I guess there were no trades on the table for Miller or Martin. Just getting a future second round pick would have been much better than cutting them for nothing. I would let Miller go, but not Martin. That makes no sense to me.

I think you could also argue that getting Gary Neal indirectly led to releasing GR3 who played the same position. Didn't he get cut loose like a month after we acquired Neal? So, yeah - we got a 2nd round pick, but we ended up releasing another 2nd round pick we'd carried the entire year. IDK. All I'm saying is there are only 15 roster spots. I don't want bad contracts and I'd prefer the young guys to get the opportunity to finish this year. We can add veterans via free agency and get guys who actually want to be here vs. guys who just filter through like Neal. At the end of the day, many trades are really nothing deals anyhow. I continue to feel they could do more harm than good until they settle on GM and Coach going forward.

I understand your point and I agree with it. My point was getting that extra second with Neal was great. Should have let Neal go after the move was made. I think we could get a second back for Martin.

[Monster]

I flip flop on this issue. I agree with those who have stated we've done a poor job of managing the process by paying guys to not play for us. But then I try and find the silver lining. For me, that silver lining is that (knowing guys like Martin and Miller don't have much value), at least we're not taking back garbage players/contracts for the sake of saying "we made a trade". If the end result of moving these guys out is that it clears the way for younger guys with potential, then I guess I'm fine with it. Getting back a Troy Danielson or a Gary Neal might make it look like we got "some value", but is it really any better?

When we traded Mo Williams we got back a future second rounder along with Gary Neal. That was a good move for a rebuilding team. I guess there were no trades on the table for Miller or Martin. Just getting a future second round pick would have been much better than cutting them for nothing. I would let Miller go, but not Martin. That makes no sense to me.

I think you could also argue that getting Gary Neal indirectly led to releasing GR3 who played the same position. Didn't he get cut loose like a month after we acquired Neal? So, yeah - we got a 2nd round pick, but we ended up releasing another 2nd round pick we'd carried the entire year. IDK. All I'm saying is there are only 15 roster spots. I don't want bad contracts and I'd prefer the young guys to get the opportunity to finish this year. We can add veterans via free agency and get guys who actually want to be here vs. guys who just filter through like Neal. At the end of the day, many trades are really nothing deals anyhow. I continue to feel they could do more harm than good until they settle on GM and Coach going forward.

I understand your point and I agree with it. My point was getting that extra second with Neal was great. Should have let Neal go after the move was made. I think we could get a second back for Martin.

They let go of GR3 because they wanted Justin Hamilton and to be fair they did sorta need a big at the time if I remember right. I don't think Neal had much to do with GR3 being let go. Remember GR3 was on basically a 1 year deal and it was sorta crowded at the wing position going forward.

[Carlos Danger]

I flip flop on this issue. I agree with those who have stated we've done a poor job of managing the process by paying guys to not play for us. But then I try and find the silver lining. For me, that silver lining is that (knowing guys like Martin and Miller don't have much value), at least we're not taking back garbage players/contracts for the sake of saying "we made a trade". If the end result of moving these guys out is that it clears the way for younger guys with potential, then I guess I'm fine with it. Getting back a Troy Danielson or a Gary Neal might make it look like we got "some value", but is it really any better?

When we traded Mo Williams we got back a future second rounder along with Gary Neal. That was a good move for a rebuilding team. I guess there were no trades on the table for Miller or Martin. Just getting a future second round pick would have been much better than cutting them for nothing. I would let Miller go, but not Martin. That makes no sense to me.

I think you could also argue that getting Gary Neal indirectly led to releasing GR3 who played the same position. Didn't he get cut loose like a month after we acquired Neal? So, yeah - we got a 2nd round pick, but we ended up releasing another 2nd round pick we'd carried the entire year. IDK. All I'm saying is there are only 15 roster spots. I don't want bad contracts and I'd prefer the young guys to get the opportunity to finish this year. We can add veterans via free agency and get guys who actually want to be here vs. guys who just filter through like Neal. At the end of the day, many trades are really nothing deals anyhow. I continue to feel they could do more harm than good until they settle on GM and Coach going forward.

I understand your point and I agree with it. My point was getting that extra second with Neal was great. Should have let Neal go after the move was made. I think we could get a second back for Martin.

They let go of GR3 because they wanted Justin Hamilton and to be fair they did sorta need a big at the time if I remember right. I don't think Neal had much to do with GR3 being let go. Remember GR3 was on basically a 1 year deal and it was sorta crowded at the wing position going forward.

It's a bit of hair splitting, but one could say that because they got back Gary Neal and kept him (vs. buying him out) it made GR3 redundant (he wasn't going to play). To TRKO's point, had they let Neal go, they would have had an open roster spot to sign Hamilton without giving up GR3. Again - it's splitting hairs and let's be honest GR3 isn't Kobe or anything. I was really just trying to make the point that all these deals which bring back players means roster spots keep getting tied up and sometimes those players take minutes from other guys I'd rather see get them.

[Tactical unit]

K-Mart isn't worth anything, to those that think we should have got something for him that ship sailed two years ago when I wanted to move him. Some will point to the news about the Spurs wanting him as proof that we somehow should have at least got a 2nd for him. NEWS FLASH people; The Spurs or any other contender only want him now because he cost no future asset and will be paid a vet min contract.

[bleedspeed]

Doesn't he have to be bought out today?

Why are we not going after Ray?
http://nypost.com/2016/02/29/jimmers-knicks-time-in-jeopardy-with-spurs-guard-available/

[bleedspeed]

Is Martin playing hardball or will he be bought out? I guess he was at practice today.

[Monster]

Is Martin playing hardball or will he be bought out? I guess he was at practice today.

I read somewhere midnight is the deadline for him to be eligible for another team to sign him for the playoffs. My guess is that next year option is a tricky point especially depending on the language of the contract. I am sure the Wolves don't have much interest in paying much money to him (and reduced cap space) next year for nothing.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Like I've been saying, the Wolves just don't have any [good] reason to buy him out.