Quote:
Originally Posted by taxbuster
LOL...if nobody wants them who's going to take each of those players...you?
A team can only trade someone for whom there is a market. If there is no market...guess what...NEWS FLASH!....NOTHING HAPPENS!
There are loads of players each year whose contract expires without getting traded, because, until they've seen where they stand for the next year, other teams just wait...because these types of players are available for free after July 1.
Yeesh. ELI5.
|
Thanks for the snark. Guess what? It’s called asset management for a reason. UFAs have declining value as their contract expires. No team needs to see where they stand for next year because there isn’t a next season for UFAs on their old contract. Of course they are “free” in the summer but how does that help the acquiring team in this season’s playoffs? I guess signing them in the summer shows that they do have value.
All players are assets. If there are no takers for a player, you keep them, waive them, or see if there’s a future consideration deal out there.
So no…”nothing happens” is simply inaccurate. Putting it in all caps doesn’t change that. This thread alone shows that there are floor limits for what some people would accept for players.
The point is that pure asset management means that assets are managed for the highest value. Sometimes the greatest value is keeping them. Sometimes it’s waiving them to the minors.
UFAs have zero value at the end of their contracted season. There is no value nor obligation for the seller nor acquiring team. I’m advocating for any return greater than zero. They walk no matter what when the contract ends. May as well get something at the trade deadline, or some other value.
I’ll add one wrinkle here: there will be a salary cap in the playoffs going forward. Does that increase or decrease the trade market for cheap players on expiring contracts?