Knicks · Knicks waived Kuzminskas (page 2)

newyorknewyork @ 11/12/2017 3:49 PM
Welpee wrote:Not happy about his, but perhaps this was a mutual thing to give him a chance to play elsewhere. Good luck to him. Seems like a really good dude. I hope Sessions is worth letting Kuz walk.

I absolutely think this is a mutual thing. Kuz can look for a better opportunity for playing time. This is a move that looks good to agents. Like we aren't going to hold players hostage.

Looks like this was covered already.

Welpee @ 11/12/2017 3:52 PM
Question: was Noah able to practice with the team during the suspension? If not, he's probably useless (no pun intended) for a while until he gets acclimated to the current team.
StarksEwing1 @ 11/12/2017 3:53 PM
They were trying to trade him but teams knew that they could possibly get him without giving up an asset. Im sure teams are very interested in him now
teamsport72 @ 11/12/2017 3:58 PM
I don't know how I feel about this. Beas is clearly brain damaged. They kept Beas for his size. Beas is not a long term keep for a team that wants to play smart.
Welpee @ 11/12/2017 4:00 PM
teamsport72 wrote:I don't know how I feel about this. Beas is clearly brain damaged. They kept Beas for his size. Beas is not a long term keep for a team that wants to play smart.
I guess they felt for better or worse they knew what they were getting from Beas. Kuz is still a bit of a mystery.
Ira @ 11/12/2017 4:00 PM
Regarding Sessions, we had to keep him because of Jack's injury history.
Welpee @ 11/12/2017 4:02 PM
Ira wrote:Regarding Sessions, we had to keep him because of Jack's injury history.
Even if they were obviously not satisfied with his play?
fishmike @ 11/12/2017 4:03 PM
Kuz was right choice. 28 years old, not in rotation, doesnt play a position where depth is needed. Whether is D or offense Kuz isnt playing over Dotson or McD at this point. Right move.
CrushAlot @ 11/12/2017 4:04 PM
Ira wrote:Regarding Sessions, we had to keep him because of Jack's injury history.

Have to wonder what Baker's role is. The Knicks have 4 point guards.
Knicksfan @ 11/12/2017 4:08 PM
CrushAlot wrote:
Ira wrote:Regarding Sessions, we had to keep him because of Jack's injury history.

Have to wonder what Baker's role is. The Knicks have 4 point guards.

3 point guards and whatever Baker is, because clearly they dont see him as either a PG nor a SG.

Ira @ 11/12/2017 5:50 PM
Best of luck to Kuz!
NYKBocker @ 11/12/2017 6:13 PM
NYKBocker @ 11/12/2017 6:14 PM
Thank you Kuz!
fishmike @ 11/12/2017 6:31 PM
classy guy. A guy worth bringing in to take a look at. Knicks went in a different direction.
CrushAlot @ 11/12/2017 8:21 PM
nyknickzingis @ 11/12/2017 8:41 PM
Liked Kuz.
However as some said, having McDermott made it hard to really give time to Kuz.
TripleThreat @ 11/12/2017 9:13 PM
Welpee wrote:Not happy about his, but perhaps this was a mutual thing to give him a chance to play elsewhere. Good luck to him. Seems like a really good dude. I hope Sessions is worth letting Kuz walk.


Cash Hit Versus Cap Hit.

Kuz's cap charge stay the same this season. Knicks are stuck with it. He MIGHT be claimed off of waivers, but I doubt it. Only way a team might do that is if they were below the cap floor threshold. No team now is in that situation.

The cash hit might be variable though. Not all buyouts are openly listed. The Knicks might have saved some money this way, given it's early in the season, the sooner they buy him out, the more he's likely to leave on the table to get a buyout. Consider if Kuz thinks he can get 2 million on the international market right now, if he gets bought out for 4 million and the Knicks save a million in cash, both sides come out ahead. He's making more and actually getting some minutes somewhere. Knicks weigh out the value of the million or so bucks is worth more than the very small chance he could be used as salary filler in a trade at the deadline.

Aside from the possible cash savings, that is the season long implication. His contract can no longer be used to equalize out a trade for salary matching purposes.

Cutting Beasley and/or Sessions doesn't impact the possible cash savings. They can be cut at anytime on the veteran's minimum.

IMHO, this was less about Beasley and/or Session's value to the team compared to just saving a little cash for a player they wanted to move on from anyway. I guess the bigger thought was during the OKC/Melo trade, could Kuz have been shipped out as well in some fashion. Even if it just boiled down to the rights to a Euro Stash not likely to make the NBA, that still would have been better than nothing. Probably not though, just a thought on it....

meloshouldgo @ 11/12/2017 9:48 PM
Welpee wrote:Not happy about his, but perhaps this was a mutual thing to give him a chance to play elsewhere. Good luck to him. Seems like a really good dude. I hope Sessions is worth letting Kuz walk.

Ugh - definitely not happy about this. Kuz was more valuable than Sessions

Nalod @ 11/12/2017 10:02 PM
Good for Kuz. I hope he can latch on a team and play in the NBA. We moved on.
Good guy. He got paid, Thats all we owed him. He came last year, did well, proved he can play in the NBA.
He is 28. He should get paid nice back in Europe.
TripleThreat @ 11/13/2017 12:28 AM
meloshouldgo wrote:Kuz was more valuable than Sessions

It depends on what is done with the saved money.

Here's a typical scenario in pro sports. "Find The Money"

A pro sports GM wants to do something that is outside and above his budgetary constraints. Maybe it's spending a little more on international scouting. Or applying certain bonuses to attract coaching talent. Or something as simple as luring in a support staff person from another franchise with a better contract package.

Owner in place says, fine, you can do it, but you have to "find the money"

No matter how cash rich a team is, no one can spend unchecked like it's going out of style. Even franchises like the LA Dodgers or the NY Yankees have to make fiscal considerations.

If Scott Perry wants to spend more on international scouting for example, to unearth the next Porzingis, Dolan can say, fine, spend another million and a half if you want, but you gotta find the money and not raise the operational budget. Buying out a player like Kuz might be one way to skin this cat.

A more salient example is the Timberwolves and former GM David Kahn wanting to move on from Kurt Rambis, but his coaching contract still had years on it. Owner said, fire him if you want, but you gotta pay for his contract somehow. So Kahn got bits and pieces of teams 3 million cash allotment into trades to pay for most of Rambis' remaining deal, so he could fire him.

Being on a minimum veteran contract is not job security, but it is job security, you are disposable, but you are cheap and expendable at any time, so there's reason to want to keep you for a little while versus not. If the Knicks engage in a trade that takes in 2 for 1 or 3 for 1, Sessions and Beasley can be cut without cap implications.

It's not just cap space, it's also the value of the raw roster spot in itself.

Welpee @ 11/13/2017 2:28 PM
TripleThreat wrote:
meloshouldgo wrote:Kuz was more valuable than Sessions

It depends on what is done with the saved money.

Here's a typical scenario in pro sports. "Find The Money"

A pro sports GM wants to do something that is outside and above his budgetary constraints. Maybe it's spending a little more on international scouting. Or applying certain bonuses to attract coaching talent. Or something as simple as luring in a support staff person from another franchise with a better contract package.

Owner in place says, fine, you can do it, but you have to "find the money"

No matter how cash rich a team is, no one can spend unchecked like it's going out of style. Even franchises like the LA Dodgers or the NY Yankees have to make fiscal considerations.

If Scott Perry wants to spend more on international scouting for example, to unearth the next Porzingis, Dolan can say, fine, spend another million and a half if you want, but you gotta find the money and not raise the operational budget. Buying out a player like Kuz might be one way to skin this cat.

A more salient example is the Timberwolves and former GM David Kahn wanting to move on from Kurt Rambis, but his coaching contract still had years on it. Owner said, fire him if you want, but you gotta pay for his contract somehow. So Kahn got bits and pieces of teams 3 million cash allotment into trades to pay for most of Rambis' remaining deal, so he could fire him.

Being on a minimum veteran contract is not job security, but it is job security, you are disposable, but you are cheap and expendable at any time, so there's reason to want to keep you for a little while versus not. If the Knicks engage in a trade that takes in 2 for 1 or 3 for 1, Sessions and Beasley can be cut without cap implications.

It's not just cap space, it's also the value of the raw roster spot in itself.

Maybe, but I have a hard time believing Dolan is nickle and dimeing to that extent.
Page 2 of 3