dgibb10
Registered User
- Feb 29, 2024
- 3,599
- 3,153
Yes, and I agree it's a good move.It's semantics. Kinda like with what we have been dealing with the offer sheets by STL to Edmonton. Are they risky? Yes. Can St. Louis afford the risk? Yes.
There is not a single formula to determine that contract or trade X is universally bad. It all depends on the teams involved, and their unique situation.
What I don't agree with is claims that this is risk free, or claims that it is some genius move (every bad team does this in one way or another).
I don't believe that GMs should be exempt from criticism for failed moves just because they are rebuilding, which seems to be the claim a lot of posters here seem to be making. This applies to both contracts and trades.
Too often I see "it doesn't matter that *insert GM* signed *insert dogshit contract* because that player won't be here when we're contending"