Well, I don't think its use should be exclusively for that otherwise you are narrowing your opportunities.TrueBlue wrote: ↑Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:52 pmYou stretch a contract if it gets you the small amount of $ the one offseason you have $ available to get the next tier of player you couldn't have gotten. Doing this to Teague doesn't help us compete this year, and hurts us in future years when he would be completely off the books.mlhouse wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2019 10:17 pmTo create room to acquire young players and draft assets. Why would we not waive Jeff and stretch his contract?KevinBaconIsNotMyHero wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2019 10:14 pm Why are we stretching Teague’s contract? No.
The trade I hypothesized is the opportunity to trade cap space for some assets. The trade acquisition I hypothesized acquires 4 minor assets but assets nontheless. One is a 2018 first round pick in Wagner. Another a 20 year old PG whose 2020-21 salary is not guaranteed, and two 2nd round picks.
Lets put this another way. Lets say a team said we will trade you a player who was a late 2018 first round pick, a young 20 year old PG with a cheap contract, two 2nd round picks, plus a player that doesn't have any value but is owed $6.3 million the next three seasons for Jeff Teague. I think people would evaluate THAT trade completely different and state, I can't believe we got so much for fucking Jeff Teague.
With Teague's $19 million, basically we still "net" a clearing of $12.7 million off our cap THIS YEAR, plus the following two years. $12.7 or $19 makes no difference in who we are going to sign as free agents and in reality does not get us under the cap either. So, realistically speaking we still have the MLE and BE as our only mechanism for signing a free agent.