08-25-2023, 03:32 PM
(08-25-2023, 04:32 AM)Halfnir Wrote: That is not 100% correct. The payment to McGee is exactly the same. But the different cap acounting means less money to spend in future years and this is the money that could be saved (by not giving it to other players)
What I said was 100% correct. Which was - Once McGee is waived, whether he is stretched or not does not change how much Cuban pays McGee, nor when he pays McGee. So Cuban's payout to McGee won't be a factor in deciding whether to stretch the contract.
Obviously the choice to stretch (or not) changes the cap accounting, and one choice or another may provide less tax, or more flexibility in roster-building, than the other. That's what they must be weighing now, and we have been discussing here. Apparently the 3rd choice - to pay someone else to take him and waive him - has proven to be unavailable.