CalgaryRapsFan wrote:
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Can we put to rest this nonsense about Landry Fields being overpaid?
Collapse
X
-
CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View PostIs Fields overpaid? Yes.
Did overpaying Fields by $2M per season hurt the team this offseason? No.
Is the entire contract and/or the amount by which Fields is overpaid enough to cause concern? No.
Could Fields' play over the next 3 seaons result in the $6M annual salary being perceived as good value? Yes.
I love how the title of this thread is pretty much the opposite of the majority of its content
Comment
-
NoBan wrote: View PostFair, but making these type of justifications cannot be the norm.
I love how the title of this thread is pretty much the opposite of the majority of its content
Comment
-
Hugmenot wrote: View PostI believe the Raptors would have been better served by simply waiting, even a year or two if needed, for a better player to become available - or, if lucky, for one of their players to show tremendous improvement - than to invest so heavily into a player who has yet to demonstrate he is nothing more than a weak starter-quality player / 6th or 7th man.
In our position, we didn't need a player like Landry for the amount we paid for him. I'd much rather wait the 2-3 years it will take for this team to become competitive, and then go out and look for a free agent (if we even need one, given that we already have DeRozan, Kleiza, and just drafted Ross) that we can offer a similar contract to.
A guy who has 5-7 years of playing well, versus this guy who has played 2 years and played well in one of them.your pal,
ebrian
Comment
-
Puffer wrote: View PostI count five posters suggesting that he is overpaid and five posters saying no he's not overpaid or that the overpaying is justified because all RFAs are overpaid. so I would say that the title of this thread is not the opposite of the majority.
of the 10 you count, 5 say "yes, overpaid". and of the other 5, a few still acknowledge the over-payment even though they think it's justified due to the RFA status. Those still count as "yes, overpaid" responses. That would be the majority. So you disagreed with my post while simultaneously proving I was correct. Another poster did the same thing to me in another thread yesterday. What is going on here? Majority or not, this thread has borne out that the opinion that Landry is overpaid is far from "nonsense" and should not be "put to rest"
Comment
-
NoBan wrote: View Postjustified due to the RFA status
I don't know whether to laugh or cry. And these are the people who agree with me that Fields is a good acquisition.
No wonder politicians have such an easy time lying to the public about economics, people refuse to understand even the most basic concepts like price and prefer to think in terms of metaphysical norms.
Pay no attention to markets, prices come from the gods, even if sometimes you can't buy something for it's "correct" price and thus it's "justified" to "overpay."
Oy vey.
Comment
-
We can put value on his past performances, but how can we possibly know if we overpaid if he hasen't played one game for us. What if he has a breakout year? What if he plays worse than last year? We won't know this until the season starts, and suddenly we're arguing about economics. We don't even know how what return we will get on our investment yet, and arguing about it is moot
Comment
-
Fuchan wrote: View PostWe can put value on his past performances, but how can we possibly know if we overpaid if he hasen't played one game for us. What if he has a breakout year? What if he plays worse than last year? We won't know this until the season starts, and suddenly we're arguing about economics. We don't even know how what return we will get on our investment yet, and arguing about it is moot
Comment
-
Soft Euro wrote: View PostI guess we should stop arguing about anything before it has taken place. So let's not talk about games before they are played, because we won't know what happens untill it happens. I also suggest we stop talking about games after they have been played. Because, what's the use, the outcome can't be changed anymore anyway. So let's just close the forum.
Comment
-
Soft Euro wrote: View PostI guess we should stop arguing about anything before it has taken place. So let's not talk about games before they are played, because we won't know what happens untill it happens. I also suggest we stop talking about games after they have been played. Because, what's the use, the outcome can't be changed anymore anyway. So let's just close the forum.
in all probablilty will bounce back from a tough sophmore year
but how can we possibly know .... he hasen't played one game for us.We don't even know how what return we will get on our investment yet, and arguing about it is moot
Isn't anyone arguing economics doing the same thing, but trying to take it a step further and estimate what that return on investment will be?
Comment
Comment