khans2k5 wrote:
We got cap savings with the deal. It's a lot easier to swallow under 2 million when you cut a guy than 5. Now we can cut this guy and keep Robbie and Lo Brown. All those moves should be just under the cost of Bud alone. Unless we have proof Flip could have flipped Chase for nothing (equivalent of a second round pick and a roster spot) this was as good as it was going to get.
I could accept that assuming Hummel > Budinger. But that's not what the stats show. They are roughly the same age:
khans2k5 wrote:
We got cap savings with the deal. It's a lot easier to swallow under 2 million when you cut a guy than 5. Now we can cut this guy and keep Robbie and Lo Brown. All those moves should be just under the cost of Bud alone. Unless we have proof Flip could have flipped Chase for nothing (equivalent of a second round pick and a roster spot) this was as good as it was going to get.
I could accept that assuming Hummel > Budinger. But that's not what the stats show. They are roughly the same age:
I agree with Carlos on this, I have not been a supporter of Buds. We wasted 10 mil in the first two years with him due to injuries, he also had the option to leave in the off season, but wanted to milk another 5 mil out of us knowing he would be unlikely to get it somewhere else. Now when he will finally have some value as a deep bench guy and a possible trade target at the deadline we trade him for nothing. There were rumors that Bud could have been moved at last years deadline, but he refused to waive his opt out.
I would take Bud over Robbie all day long, but even more importantly because we seem to have an over abundance of PF's on the roster.
khans2k5 wrote:
We got cap savings with the deal. It's a lot easier to swallow under 2 million when you cut a guy than 5. Now we can cut this guy and keep Robbie and Lo Brown. All those moves should be just under the cost of Bud alone. Unless we have proof Flip could have flipped Chase for nothing (equivalent of a second round pick and a roster spot) this was as good as it was going to get.
I could accept that assuming Hummel > Budinger. But that's not what the stats show. They are roughly the same age:
In this case it's not about who's the better player. Bud wasn't going to see the court this year and he was going to make 5 million. Hummel on the other hand will cost the minimum and just be happy to be on the roster (notice nobody else has swooped in to get him since we pulled the QO?). You just can't have 15 guys needing playing time because only 12 can be active on a given game night and only 9-10 should actually play. This way Hummel, Tyus or Lo Brown and one of the PF's can be the three end of the bench guys and there won't be any playing time issues except maybe the PF guy who gets left out, but our frontcourt injury situation makes it highly likely that guy might see the floor at some point this year. Bud's trade value goes right back to shit if he doesn't play at all because that means he wouldn't be game ready at the deadline to actually play and help a playoff contender. We can't take that risk basically hoping Wiggins or Bazz gets injured so Bud can play and keep his value to a playoff team. And if he doesn't play he loses that value.
khans2k5 wrote:
We got cap savings with the deal. It's a lot easier to swallow under 2 million when you cut a guy than 5. Now we can cut this guy and keep Robbie and Lo Brown. All those moves should be just under the cost of Bud alone. Unless we have proof Flip could have flipped Chase for nothing (equivalent of a second round pick and a roster spot) this was as good as it was going to get.
I could accept that assuming Hummel > Budinger. But that's not what the stats show. They are roughly the same age:
In this case it's not about who's the better player. Bud wasn't going to see the court this year and he was going to make 5 million. Hummel on the other hand will cost the minimum and just be happy to be on the roster (notice nobody else has swooped in to get him since we pulled the QO?). You just can't have 15 guys needing playing time because only 12 can be active on a given game night and only 9-10 should actually play. This way Hummel, Tyus or Lo Brown and one of the PF's can be the three end of the bench guys and there won't be any playing time issues except maybe the PF guy who gets left out, but our frontcourt injury situation makes it highly likely that guy might see the floor at some point this year.
Our injury history makes it likelly that all 15 guys will see significant time!
khans2k5 wrote:
In this case it's not about who's the better player. Bud wasn't going to see the court this year and he was going to make 5 million. Hummel on the other hand will cost the minimum and just be happy to be on the roster (notice nobody else has swooped in to get him since we pulled the QO?). You just can't have 15 guys needing playing time because only 12 can be active on a given game night and only 9-10 should actually play. This way Hummel, Tyus or Lo Brown and one of the PF's can be the three end of the bench guys and there won't be any playing time issues except maybe the PF guy who gets left out, but our frontcourt injury situation makes it highly likely that guy might see the floor at some point this year.
Our injury history makes it likelly that all 15 guys will see significant time!
Exactly. Again, I'm not trying to make too much of this. Bud was nothing special during his time here. And I agree with many of the points Kahns is making. But if what we know so far is the full story, I think it's a bad deal. We traded a 1st round pick to get Budinger a couple years ago. He was hurt most of his time here, but when healthy, he's a solid player (not great - but useful). As far as I can tell, we only have Wiggins and Bazz as our two SF. I think Bazz has lost time both his seasons to injury. Budinger would be playing on a contract year - he'd be motivated to play well when he had opportunity to do so i.e. Bazz or (God forbid) Wiggins goes down.
I think to a certain extent we are dismissing Rudez too quickly as nothing. He played a decent chunk of minutes as a rookie (although he is an older euro guy) for a team that won 38 games. He hit over 50% of his 3's and all his shots after the allstar break.
monsterpile wrote:I think to a certain extent we are dismissing Rudez too quickly as nothing. He played a decent chunk of minutes as a rookie (although he is an older euro guy) for a team that won 38 games. He hit over 50% of his 3's and all his shots after the allstar break.
Well, when our Owner comes out and says he's not a player they wanted or need...I sort of interpret that as he's not part of the big picture.
