Author Topic: Marquis' future  (Read 3887 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Marquis' future
« Reply #15 on: May 28, 2010, 12:30:54 PM »

Offline Chris

  • Global Moderator
  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18008
  • Tommy Points: 642
A team that is paying the luxury tax often looks for ways to cut costs any way they can.  Daniels isn't playing anyways, so the C's can find a much cheaper 12th man out there somewhere.  Fox example, Gaffney or Lafayette could play for the minimum, and if it's 500k less than Daniels, that's a million in savings w/ the luxury tax.  For a 12th man who isn't playing, I imagine the C's would rather take the discount.
Great point but the savings are even more extensive. A second rounder or NBDL player taking his place has a minimum salary around $500K. Given Daniels will probably seek a minimum of $2 million per year with luxury tax calculated that's a $3 million savings. In what could very well be a transition year, those type of savings up an down the roster could add up to a bunch of cash.

Very true.  However, I would argue that if it is a "transition" year, then perhaps they will prefer to resign Daniels for $1.5 million per year to be the 3rd/4th wing, rather than paying Tony $4-5 million per year to be the 3rd/4th wing. 

Re: Marquis' future
« Reply #16 on: May 28, 2010, 12:43:04 PM »

Offline colincb

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5095
  • Tommy Points: 501
I doubt he'd want to stay given how Doc lost confidence in him.

Re: Marquis' future
« Reply #17 on: May 28, 2010, 12:59:06 PM »

Offline Andy Jick

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3795
  • Tommy Points: 89
  • You know my methods, Watson.
It's funny...

Quisy & Nate prove one thing: there is a HUGE difference when you play for a team that is going nowhere and one that has championship aspirations.  The expectations are raised, and those are two guys that really disappoint me.  Their game never measured up...
"It was easier to know it than to explain why I know it."

Re: Marquis' future
« Reply #18 on: May 28, 2010, 01:04:06 PM »

Offline Eddie20

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8497
  • Tommy Points: 975
It all depends on what we do with the MLE. More than likely we'll use it on a swingman which means Daniels' days are numbered. In fact, if it's between Daniels and Finely (who has vet minimum written all over him) we'll probably chose Fin. for the contract, if not his play.

Re: Marquis' future
« Reply #19 on: May 28, 2010, 01:06:24 PM »

Offline Chris

  • Global Moderator
  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18008
  • Tommy Points: 642
It's funny...

Quisy & Nate prove one thing: there is a HUGE difference when you play for a team that is going nowhere and one that has championship aspirations.  The expectations are raised, and those are two guys that really disappoint me.  Their game never measured up...

Well, Daniels did play a decent role on the '06 Mavericks, so I don't think we can say that he is not capable of being a good player on a contender.  He just didn't fit in with this team as well as they had hoped, and more importantly, injuries (and Tony Allen making the leap) killed him.

Re: Marquis' future
« Reply #20 on: May 28, 2010, 01:19:25 PM »

Offline Bankshot

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7540
  • Tommy Points: 632
Not sure I want Daniels back. But I do want Nate back.  I think he can be good with some more time and coaching.  Get him in training camp.
"If somebody would have told you when he was playing with the Knicks that Nate Robinson was going to change a big time game and he was going to do it mostly because of his defense, somebody would have got slapped."  Mark Jackson

Re: Marquis' future
« Reply #21 on: May 28, 2010, 02:17:21 PM »

Offline Andy Jick

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3795
  • Tommy Points: 89
  • You know my methods, Watson.
It's funny...

Quisy & Nate prove one thing: there is a HUGE difference when you play for a team that is going nowhere and one that has championship aspirations.  The expectations are raised, and those are two guys that really disappoint me.  Their game never measured up...

Well, Daniels did play a decent role on the '06 Mavericks, so I don't think we can say that he is not capable of being a good player on a contender.  He just didn't fit in with this team as well as they had hoped, and more importantly, injuries (and Tony Allen making the leap) killed him.

He can't play defense as demanded here (or more to the point: won't LEARN to play that kind of defense) and I also believe he's not a point guard.  Actually, I'm having a hard time deciphering what position he actually plays.
"It was easier to know it than to explain why I know it."

Re: Marquis' future
« Reply #22 on: May 28, 2010, 02:40:52 PM »

Offline Chris

  • Global Moderator
  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18008
  • Tommy Points: 642
It's funny...

Quisy & Nate prove one thing: there is a HUGE difference when you play for a team that is going nowhere and one that has championship aspirations.  The expectations are raised, and those are two guys that really disappoint me.  Their game never measured up...

Well, Daniels did play a decent role on the '06 Mavericks, so I don't think we can say that he is not capable of being a good player on a contender.  He just didn't fit in with this team as well as they had hoped, and more importantly, injuries (and Tony Allen making the leap) killed him.

He can't play defense as demanded here (or more to the point: won't LEARN to play that kind of defense) and I also believe he's not a point guard.  Actually, I'm having a hard time deciphering what position he actually plays.

Really?  I thought play defense was basically all he did this year.  He was a liability on offense because he can't shoot, but defensively, I think he did an excellent job when he was in there.

I do agree though that he is certainly not a PG.  I think he was only considered a PG when he was playing with Eddie House, so Eddie could defend the point, but Marquis could handle the ball.