Kevin Martin Buyout

[TRKO [enjin:12664595]]

I just don't see the benefit of cutting him. We should have traded him last year when he had good value. I think it's where Flip the coach took over for Flip the GM. We are still a rebuilding team and should be piling assets instead of keeping older guys like Martin who will be toast by the time the youngsters are ready or trading future firsts for Young and Payne. It's water under the bridge now, but those moves and non moves hurt.

[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?

[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.

[bleedspeed]

I would like to see us go after Ray McCallum as a replacement and give him a tryout.

http://www.clipsnation.com/2016/2/27/11128554/spurs-sign-andre-miller-waive-clippers-target-ray-mccallum

[BizarroJerry [enjin:6592520]]

Agreed bleed. Let's take one of their guys in return.

[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.

[Monster]

I would like to see us go after Ray McCallum as a replacement and give him a tryout.

http://www.clipsnation.com/2016/2/27/11128554/spurs-sign-andre-miller-waive-clippers-target-ray-mccallum

For McCallum going to the Clippers makes a lot of sense. Of course he isn't good enough for them to hand him their backup PG spot after this year but maybe they keep him around and he can grow into it. He doesn't seem to be a good shooter but I like how he plays. If we claimed him that would be a good trade for any of these guys that we wanted moved.

Let's be honest here if the Spurs want Martin he will make a buyout happen and the Wolves have played hardball on buyouts making guys give up money to get out. I don't see any way Martin and the Wolves don't come to some agreement that benefits both of them when playing for the Spurs is on the table.

[60WinTim]

This is actually Milt's final opportunity to put his stamp on this team. Savvy GMs have used open roster spots via buyouts to pick up an intriguing prospect (or two) for the remainder of the season, along with a team option for next season in the event the prospect is worthy of a longer look.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Bad teams are the ones who have to buy out vets so they can play elsewhere. The Wolves can try to play hardball... but it'll probably end up having longer-lasting residual effect. It is what it is.

Win more and it won't be a problem. Win even more and the Wolves can prey on crappy teams like what's happened to the Wolves in recent years.

[Coolbreeze44]

I think keeping Martin does more harm than good. We've all seen how ineffective he's been as a player this year, and any minutes he gets means less for our young players. Of course we need to play hardball and make the numbers benefit us financially, that's a given. What we should have done is traded him at last season's deadline as I campaigned at the time.