Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 37
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    31,072
    Quote Originally Posted by likemystylez View Post
    with the warriors- roster size was never the issue. the warriors are paying guys to sit out because they are tanking... and they are against the hard cap as a result.

    And the people dumb enough to pay for tickets at chase center to go watch a d league team- are encouraging the warriors management to put out a garbage product and still make money.
    No. Wrong. Are you aware the d-league doesn't exist anymore?

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    31,072
    Quote Originally Posted by WhiteShadow42 View Post
    Probably a better idea. Expand it by a player or two. At the pace the game is played today and all the BS load managing that is going on, teams are going to need those extra roster spaces also.
    Maybe make it 20 players per team and have a max regular season games played limit of 70. That way the whole rest thing goes away and which games which players are going to play can be released in advance.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    15,710
    Quote Originally Posted by Iggie View Post
    What teams would you exclude?
    Knicks and bulls are clear cut the team you couldn't trust. After them probably the kings, magic, and suns as they're always dysfunctional.. Then the lakers because you can never count out unnecessary drama with Bron.
    MTM is my puppet and I am his puppet master.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    1,952
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    It is a model for bottom feeder teams to churn their roster and still keep players in their orbit. But yeah, it will certainly only work with players on the fringes of the NBA ... but it's something new regardless.

    FWIW, the Warriors generally stay below the 15 man limit until late in the season so they can fill it with whatever player they need then.
    Yeah but this isn't by choice. They just literally ran out of money to fill their roster.

    It also points to why they signed guys with less years of service because their veteran minimums are cheaper.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    6,898
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Maybe make it 20 players per team and have a max regular season games played limit of 70. That way the whole rest thing goes away and which games which players are going to play can be released in advance.
    Until someone gets hurt and everyone gets switched around. They need to simplify things and not allow loopholes, not make things even more complicated.

    Something like a hard cap, two rookie spots that are pre-designated and one uncapped spot.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    2,995
    I wouldn’t be surprised at changed in the roster limit or something like saddletramp said. Silver has been active with making changes.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The Bay
    Posts
    14,972
    Quote Originally Posted by Iggie View Post
    Are curry and klay out right now due to tanking?
    To Stylez... absolutely. Also Dlo and Dray are more than enough to get them to the playoffs if they were properly motivated and want to win.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    31,072
    Quote Originally Posted by Saddletramp View Post
    Until someone gets hurt and everyone gets switched around. They need to simplify things and not allow loopholes, not make things even more complicated.

    Something like a hard cap, two rookie spots that are pre-designated and one uncapped spot.
    Simpler still to just hard cap with no exceptions, and unlimited roster size.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    31,072
    Quote Originally Posted by NBA all the way View Post
    Yeah but this isn't by choice. They just literally ran out of money to fill their roster.

    It also points to why they signed guys with less years of service because their veteran minimums are cheaper.
    Running out of money may be why the Warriors came up with this, but other teams can use it to get two-way players on the NBA roster for 82 games which a couple other teams have run in to in the last few years.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Sonoma Beach
    Posts
    9,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Maybe make it 20 players per team and have a max regular season games played limit of 70. That way the whole rest thing goes away and which games which players are going to play can be released in advance.
    That many players might dilute the league. It already did it to a point when we went to 30 teams. 70 games though looks better. These guys would also play longer and as fans we get to see the greats more. I would say add one player for a year or two and see what happens. If the product is the same then add another couple of years later.

    "I set my DVR for the Biggest Loser, but it keeps recording Clippers games."

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Sonoma Beach
    Posts
    9,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Giannis94 View Post
    Knicks and bulls are clear cut the team you couldn't trust. After them probably the kings, magic, and suns as they're always dysfunctional.. Then the lakers because you can never count out unnecessary drama with Bron.
    You forgot the Celtics. I haven't forgotten what Ainge did to their aging superstars.

    "I set my DVR for the Biggest Loser, but it keeps recording Clippers games."

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Sonoma Beach
    Posts
    9,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Running out of money may be why the Warriors came up with this, but other teams can use it to get two-way players on the NBA roster for 82 games which a couple other teams have run in to in the last few years.
    Another way is to not limit the amount of time the 2 way player can spend their time in either the D-league or the NBA. Let the team choose as they see fit.

    "I set my DVR for the Biggest Loser, but it keeps recording Clippers games."

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    22,851
    Quote Originally Posted by WhiteShadow42 View Post
    Another way is to not limit the amount of time the 2 way player can spend their time in either the D-league or the NBA. Let the team choose as they see fit.
    disagree with this. if you wear out your time on your two way deal you should be allowed to get a minimum deal which really increases the money you make.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    22,851
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Running out of money may be why the Warriors came up with this, but other teams can use it to get two-way players on the NBA roster for 82 games which a couple other teams have run in to in the last few years.
    isn't that the point of two way deals though? for players to get another chance at getting on a roster? like if another team wanted they could have claimed chriss and he warriors couldn't have resigned him, but the other teams liked their guys more then him.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Sonoma Beach
    Posts
    9,399
    Quote Originally Posted by dhopisthename View Post
    disagree with this. if you wear out your time on your two way deal you should be allowed to get a minimum deal which really increases the money you make.
    I was just talking about opening up another roster spot per se instead of looking at the financial ramifications that this will also cause. Obviously some kind of deal would have to be made if the player spends more than 50% of his time on the NBA roster. You are correct though. They should make more.

    "I set my DVR for the Biggest Loser, but it keeps recording Clippers games."

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •