if Outlaw is amnestied, then any team who tries to claim him off waivers would have to commit to the 4 remaining years on his contract. this leads me to believe he will not be claimed and will instead become unrestricted.
if he indeed becomes unrestricted, is he a fit?
I feel like he's someone who would definitely get picked up. What under cap team wouldn't want to put a minimum bid for him, and lock him up on the cheap for 4 years? He's worth 2.5m per isn't he? I'd welcome since I'm at a loss who we could feasibly get to fill out the roster at this point.
He doesn't really contribute. His numbers are terrible across the board. At this point he is a vet minimum guy. Hesnt skilled enough to help us. Balkman is better.
EnySpree wrote:He doesn't really contribute. His numbers are terrible across the board. At this point he is a vet minimum guy. Hesnt skilled enough to help us. Balkman is better.
Ouch!
EnySpree wrote:He doesn't really contribute. His numbers are terrible across the board. At this point he is a vet minimum guy. Hesnt skilled enough to help us. Balkman is better.
ouch, if I was Outlaw, that would really hurt my feelings EnySpree LOL
I admit it, I thought Outlaw, could be have been a beast, while he was playing in Portland.
I thought he was a nice tweener from hit shooting abilities, his size, athleticism, and reach, letting him play
SF and PF, with even some SG with that combo. Thought he could have been a nice 6th man role.
It looks more apparent that I was wrong, just saying....
RonRon wrote:EnySpree wrote:He doesn't really contribute. His numbers are terrible across the board. At this point he is a vet minimum guy. Hesnt skilled enough to help us. Balkman is better.
ouch, if I was Outlaw, that would really hurt my feelings EnySpree LOL
I admit it, I thought Outlaw, could be have been a beast, while he was playing in Portland.
I thought he was a nice tweener from hit shooting abilities, his size, athleticism, and reach, letting him play
SF and PF, with even some SG with that combo. Thought he could have been a nice 6th man role.
It looks more apparent that I was wrong, just saying....
That's his rep....but seriously...he played for the nets last year. How many knew that? If you did do you remember him standing out on a team full of bums?
I would take Outlaw. Liked him a lot on Portland. Nets just paid him too much.
I would be shocked if someone doesn't claim him though. Only problem with him is that he was overpaid.
few years back...wasn't Portland acting like he was better then Will?
Rookie wrote:few years back...wasn't Portland acting like he was better then Will?
yeah. and he's pretty good defensively. but nowhere near the offensive player Wil turned into.
The Nets base their wretched existence on scrounging off of whatever the Knicks do. They are too far beneath the Knicks for us to try and return the favor.
They're the ones trying to keep up with us, not the other way around. For us to get Outlaw would look like a weak tit-for-tat, whre they get the better end of the deal.
IMO, the Knicks can get someone better than Outlaw, given enough patience. There is no need for us to be hasty.
HARDCOREKNICKSFAN wrote:The Nets base their wretched existence on scrounging off of whatever the Knicks do. They are too far beneath the Knicks for us to try and return the favor. They're the ones trying to keep up with us, not the other way around. For us to get Outlaw would look like a weak tit-for-tat, whre they get the better end of the deal.
IMO, the Knicks can get someone better than Outlaw, given enough patience. There is no need for us to be hasty.
Imagine if we can get Ak47, another Russian we signed b4 the Russian in Jersey!
He would be a great fit and I think he will be amnestied. He can play the 3/4 for D'Antoni and possibly the 5. He also can hit the three.
I dont see a all teams that are under the cap, letting him go at a possible steal price.
He isn't producing for the $ that Nets are paying him at but someone will take the risk with less money for him...
I would be very surprised if he made it through waivers...
The Knicks, who are now pursuing a forward to play off the bench, have expressed interest former Nets player Travis Outlaw if he clears the amnesty waiver process, according to an NBA source.The Knicks could offer Outlaw their $2.5 million exception that has already been turned down by Grant Hill, Jamal Crawford and Shawne WIlliams.
The Knicks are desperate for another bench player, especially with sixth man Billy Walker missing the past four practices with a groin strain.
"They have a shot (at Outlaw)," the source said.
Outlaw was the Nets' amnesty cut Thursday. He was signed as a free agent in 2010 and did not find success with New Jersey.
Mike D'Antoni said the Knicks are looking less for a shooting guard and more at the 3 and 4 forward positions.
Teams who are under the salary-cap have first chance at Outlaw through a bidding process.
http://www.nypost.com/p/blogs/knicksblog...
The guy is injury prone and he was unable to step it up while getting substantial minutes in New Jersey last year. What do you expect him to do here, with the stakes much higher? There no way I waste the $2.5 million exception on him.
Well hope we can get him and Barron D. Barron will def give us some scoring.
BigDaddyG wrote:The guy is injury prone and he was unable to step it up while getting substantial minutes in New Jersey last year. What do you expect him to do here, with the stakes much higher? There no way I waste the $2.5 million exception on him.
I think because he was amnestied he would sign for the vet minimum. I also think someone said it well earlier, he sucked for the money he was earning but he is not a bad role player for the vet minimum. He also can play the 3/4 and hit the three. He would definitely get minutes in my opinion and he has attributes that D'Antoni likes in a player.
Am I wrong that these articles are silly suggesting we would use anything but the veteran minimum, he gets paid his full contract no matter what, he basically just has to pick the team he wants to play for. There's no advantage for him for a team to offer him more money right? He get's paid his old contract, anything we offer is deducted from that? Or is just when they are going through the auction process? The amnestied player gets to "double dip"? Can someone clarify?
MattSuspect wrote:Am I wrong that these articles are silly suggesting we would use anything but the veteran minimum, he gets paid his full contract no matter what, he basically just has to pick the team he wants to play for. There's no advantage for him for a team to offer him more money right? He get's paid his old contract, anything we offer is deducted from that? Or is just when they are going through the auction process? The amnestied player gets to "double dip"? Can someone clarify?
yeah, i'm unclear if they get to double dip after they clear the bid/auction process. that seems like an unfair situation, if so, and different than waivers used to work. my understanding of the old rule was if a player cleared waivers and then signed a deal as a free agent, the money from his new team would still be deducted from the amount the old team had to pay - meaning the player could never get more than the original amount of their contract. i had thought the only way to circumvent that was a traditional buyout.
i asked larry coon this on twitter today and he never answered.
The Knicks are desperate for another bench player, especially with sixth man Billy Walker missing the past four practices with a groin strain.
Sixth man? Do they mean off the bench?
I'm not too impressed by Outlaw. I think I'd rather wait it out and sign Baron when healthy(or as others have brought up, one of the Chinese Nuggets when they've served their time).
In the mean time, I'm hopeful that we can take a chance on a couple D-League swing men, and see if one can provide anything off the bench and be our new Shawne.
