Clips Nation: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Around SBN: Contact negotiations: "Showing the love" Bar-right-arrows



Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

What does this mean?

The better question is probably, why did they extend the QO in the first place? I don’t think Fazekas should have ever been viewed as a ‘lock’ to make the team. And it certainly didn’t appear that there were lots of suitors lined up to offer him truckloads of money. He played in the D-League all summer; he got called up by a team that literally didn’t have enough players in uniform without a couple D-Leaguers. Not exactly the stuff of long term contracts.

I’m assuming his status with the team is now more or less what it should be – he’ll make the roster unless they find someone they like better. Of course, he’s now free to go try to make another squad if he likes. That’s the advantage to him. The advantage to the Clippers is the that second year player min is lower than the QO that was on the table, so the could save $100K or so.

In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd

by ClipperSteve on Aug 1, 2008 6:21 PM PDT reply reply   0 recs

If this is about saving $100K

It’s a bad sign that the tendency toward cheapness is not completely gone from the Clips. It’s not like they were paying luxury tax on a guy that won’t contribute. I expect another team to swoop in and sign him now that we can’t match. Fazekas isn’t going to get paid much over the minimum, but he ought to be worth a guaranteed contract.

And I really don’t understand why they rescinded the QO for Fazekas before doing so for Williams.

by ClipCat on Aug 1, 2008 8:19 PM PDT reply reply   0 recs

Who knows maybe they are

going to pull Williams too and then do something with the money, I don’t know what they will do but they could have something up their sleeve. Maybe they have a trade in the works and they need the money for a trade exception, probably not but you never know.

by bestclipfan on Aug 1, 2008 9:13 PM PDT reply reply   0 recs

Actually

According to the Fazekas press release (which includes a recap of every transaction since the draft), they already rescinded Williams’ QO, back on July 16 when they renounced QRoss and Paul Davis. I completely missed that before. I’m not sure that it was ever reported anywhere. I know they did not send out a press release at the time.

In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd

by ClipperSteve on Aug 1, 2008 10:41 PM PDT reply reply   0 recs

Ok

so maybe there is a move in the works. Obviously there is something in the works seeing as we only have 12 players singed and Dunleavy likes to have 14 players on his roster with one open spot.

by bestclipfan on Aug 3, 2008 10:47 AM PDT reply reply   0 recs


User Tools

Welcome to Clips Nation!

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Team USA vs. The Aussies
Small
Clips resign Paul Davis
101_0904_small
Mix bag of Clippers stories
Small
Al Thornton: L.A. Story
101_0904_small
Yikes!...
Aston1_small
AND TO THINK, WE COULD HAVE HAD HIM
Small
If you live in the LA area....
101_0904_small
Dan Dickau off to Italy
101_0904_small
just in case anyone is up for it...some live Olympic blogging...
Small
Is Chris Kaman a sellout?

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Site Meter