Liggins signs with the Pels

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...ed11497be4.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Liggins that is


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Expected him back if we did not need the roster spot. However, a little surprised by the timing. With 4 days left until the deadline, I would have expected Dell to leave the roster spot available in the event of a trade offer that would require an additional spot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Expected him back if we did not need the roster spot. However, a little surprised by the timing. With 4 days left until the deadline, I would have expected Dell to leave the roster spot available in the event of a trade offer that would require an additional spot.

---

Wouldn't be hard to release Okafor from his 10 day if needed

Love to see Liggins back, he plays good defense

Yeah, I like this. All season our biggest issue was defense, and with the loss of Cousins our offense has taken a hit. Obviously the best way to come back from that is add a little more offense, which we did with Mirotic, and try and add to the defense, which this move does. Liggins is a great defender and when Solo comes back a lineup of Jrue, Liggins, Solo, Mirotic, and AD will be ferocious defensively without completely destroying the offense.

I like it.

I like it too!

My guess is the 2nd year of this deal is a team option allowing us to use him in trades if we need to this summer because he can just be filler.

Doesn't affect us at the trade deadline since we can just release Okafor from his 10 day but allows Liggins to get back to the team. I'm a fan of the deal. Liggins played some solid off the bench ball for us.

I do wonder if this means we aren't targeting a guard in a trade then.

Nice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

My guess is the 2nd year of this deal is a team option allowing us to use him in trades if we need to this summer because he can just be filler.

Doesn't affect us at the trade deadline since we can just release Okafor from his 10 day but allows Liggins to get back to the team. I'm a fan of the deal. Liggins played some solid off the bench ball for us.

I do wonder if this means we aren't targeting a guard in a trade then.

---

I think if we are going to get a guard that is going to be a big contributor here it likely means Moore will have to go. He's one of our best assets and will be valuable to the right team. So Liggins gives us some insurance in this case as well. Either way good signing. If he can somehow become a decent3 point shooter this is a very good signing for some depth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GuardianAngel25

I think if we are going to get a guard that is going to be a big contributor here it likely means Moore will have to go. He's one of our best assets and will be valuable to the right team. So Liggins gives us some insurance in this case as well. Either way good signing. If he can somehow become a decent3 point shooter this is a very good signing for some depth.

---

I would have to imagine Moore is far too valuable to us to trade at the deadline.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

I would have to imagine Moore is far too valuable to us to trade at the deadline.

---

He's one of the few assets we have to be able to trade, and if we do pick up a wing or another good PG, Moore will probably be part of that package... Pretty interesting that all of a sudden he only played 12 minutes, with no explanation why, then next day we re-sign liggins back...

Could be reading to much into it, or it could mean something

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soggymoss

He's one of the few assets we have to be able to trade, and if we do pick up a wing or another good PG, Moore will probably be part of that package... Pretty interesting that all of a sudden he only played 12 minutes, with no explanation why, then next day we re-sign liggins back...

Could be reading to much into it, or it could mean something

---

You're reading too much into it.

Yea, really doubt Moore is going to be traded next week. For GA and sm: give us an example of a realistic trade involving Moore that would get the Pels a better player than him on just as good a contract. And keep in mind, the other team would have to agree, and Pels don't want to take on a lot of extra long-term salary.

Moore is probably our 4th best player right now. It just makes no sense to trade him at the deadline.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rheem654

Yea, really doubt Moore is going to be traded next week. For GA and sm: give us an example of a realistic trade involving Moore that would get the Pels a better player than him on just as good a contract. And keep in mind, the other team would have to agree, and Pels don't want to take on a lot of extra long-term salary.

---

http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=y92rsdy7
http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yagokpvp
http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ya9tvyu9

Just some examples, not sure if they even plausable without having 1st round picks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Moore is probably our 4th best player right now. It just makes no sense to trade him at the deadline.

---

He's still expendable for the right deal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Moore is probably our 4th best player right now. It just makes no sense to trade him at the deadline.

---

How does it make no sense to trade him? If it's the right player it absolutely makes sense to trade him. If Moore being included in a package to bring in someone like Fournier you do it. I could see a 3rd team giving a 1st rounder for him allowing us to package something Like Diallo and another teams 1st with whatever we want to throw in for Fournier. We won win big with Moore as our 4th best player and he is basically our only way to get that player. No do I give him up just to make a trade? Absolutely not.. one of the great things about his deal when we signed him was he had the potential to help bring in a bigger deal if he played to his potential.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soggymoss

He's one of the few assets we have to be able to trade, and if we do pick up a wing or another good PG, Moore will probably be part of that package... Pretty interesting that all of a sudden he only played 12 minutes, with no explanation why, then next day we re-sign liggins back...

Could be reading to much into it, or it could mean something

---

I don't know you might have something here.. I didn't even think about it.. no other explanation for why Moore didn't see more minutes.. if we are planning on bringing in another stud player sadly Moore is going to be what it takes for that to happen. I'm a huge Moore fan and would hate to see him go but there are a few players I would gladly move him to acquire.

It makes no sense because we cannot package him with other assets (because we have none until after the draft) to bring in a better player.

At best we trade him for a lateral move. The other option is we package him with NEGATIVE assets and we get a worse player.

We are in the middle of a playoff push. You don't trade your good players for worse players in that situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Moore is probably our 4th best player right now. It just makes no sense to trade him at the deadline.

---

If you can upgrade him...why wouldn't you wanna move him? He's got a good contract and he's got usable talents...another team might need him more than we do. I don't know.


I didn't see the Cousins trade coming at all...but still. I think there's no move forthcoming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

If you can upgrade him...why wouldn't you wanna move him? He's got a good contract and he's got usable talents...another team might need him more than we do. I don't know.


I didn't see the Cousins trade coming at all...but still. I think there's no move forthcoming.

---

How do you upgrade him when the next pick you can trade is 2022?

How do we even know it will be an upgrade adding a brand new player to a team in the middle of a playoff push for a guy who has 2 years in the system and knows his role?

All I'm saying is people need to be freaking realistic. Moore doesn't net us a star by himself, all other move able assets are negative, and we don't have a 1st to offer for 4 years...

I'd move Moore too as part of a package for a star, but we don't have the package to do it at the deadline.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

It makes no sense because we cannot package him with other assets (because we have none until after the draft) to bring in a better player.

At best we trade him for a lateral move. The other option is we package him with NEGATIVE assets and we get a worse player.

We are in the middle of a playoff push. You don't trade your good players for worse players in that situation.

---

Or you trade a good SG, which is a position of strength for us with Holiday, Moore, and now Liggins, for a position of weakness such as PG where we have an underperforming Rondo, Clark, and James (who is on a 2 way), or SF, and hopefully attach Ajinca along with that trade, even if you have to throw in a 2nd rounder or 2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soggymoss

Or you trade a good SG, which is a position of strength for us with Holiday, Moore, and now Liggins, for a position of weakness such as PG where we have an underperforming Rondo, Clark, and James (who is on a 2 way), or SF, and hopefully attach Ajinca along with that trade, even if you have to throw in a 2nd rounder or 2

---

Liggins, a guy we just picked up off of 10 day contracts, and a minimum level player now makes Shooting Guard a position of strength?!?! Come on dude....

We have Jrue, Moore, and Clark as good guards on our team. We should NOT use Moore to try and dump Ajinca, and we shouldn't try and trade him for another guard that we don't know how they will fit in our system when we are trying to make the playoffs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Liggins, a guy we just picked up off of 10 day contracts, and a minimum level player now makes Shooting Guard a position of strength?!?! Come on dude....

We have Jrue, Moore, and Clark as good guards on our team. We should NOT use Moore to try and dump Ajinca, and we shouldn't try and trade him for another guard that we don't know how they will fit in our system when we are trying to make the playoffs.

---

If Liggins plays like he did during the 2-10 day contracts we gave him, then yes it does become a position of strength..

He would immediately be our 3rd best guard behind Jrue and Moore if he keeps playing like that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

How do you upgrade him when the next pick you can trade is 2022?

How do we even know it will be an upgrade adding a brand new player to a team in the middle of a playoff push for a guy who has 2 years in the system and knows his role?

All I'm saying is people need to be freaking realistic. Moore doesn't net us a star by himself, all other move able assets are negative, and we don't have a 1st to offer for 4 years...

I'd move Moore too as part of a package for a star, but we don't have the package to do it at the deadline.

---

Yea, I agree with Mythrol here, the voice of reason.

Some of you guys have been around for too long to still think NBA trades have to make sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soggymoss

If Liggins plays like he did during the 2-10 day contracts we gave him, then yes it does become a position of strength..

He would immediately be our 3rd best guard behind Jrue and Moore if he keeps playing like that

---

So you're willing to risk trading our 2nd best guard in the middle of a playoff run because of a guy who played well in 4 games after being cut by another team already this year?

You're willing to bet on a 29 year old who shot 30% from 3pt in 35 games this season suddenly learned how to shoot after never being a good shooter in his entire career?

Let's just say I strongly think that is a foolish thing to bank on.

Reality is, Liggins will give you good minutes here and there but will probably underwhelm for the most part

Don't set your expectations for him too high unless you want to be disappointed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MSU-Sousaphone

Some of you guys have been around for too long to still think NBA trades have to make sense.

---

As soon as we leave the realm of sense we enter "hey anything can happen" realm... And I'd rather not play there.

Do people see all trades coming? No. Does that mean we should just start throwing around asinine trade ideas because anything can happen? No.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

So you're willing to risk trading our 2nd best guard in the middle of a playoff run because of a guy who played well in 4 games after being cut by another team already this year?

You're willing to bet on a 29 year old who shot 30% from 3pt in 35 games this season suddenly learned how to shoot after never being a good shooter in his entire career?

Let's just say I strongly think that is a foolish thing to bank on.

---

If he would land us an upgrade at PG or SF, then yes I would do it. Once Hill comes back, then Moore will probably be on the bench, because it seems Gentry is hell bent on starting Rondo...

If Moore could land us someone like Walker in a trade package (I know we can't get walker due to having no 1sts to trade, just using as an example), then yes you trade him all day everyday

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soggymoss

http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=y92rsdy7
http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yagokpvp
http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ya9tvyu9

Just some examples, not sure if they even plausable without having 1st round picks

---

decent attempts. ORL wouldn't want to take on Moore's long contract when they're in their rebuild, so it would likely have to involve a third team like CLE taking him on for a pick sent to ORL. But even then, we'd be replacing a lights-out 3pt shooter with 2 players who are below average 3pt shooters. Payton could be a good fit, but he will be a FA this summer and could get a contract equal or greater to Moore. As a RFA, there's a chance that a team like PHX could outbid any offer Pels could make. Simmons would be cool, but playing the same position as Hill and Miller, it creates a logjam at SF that we were trying to avoid at SG by trading Moore in the first place.

ATL is a tanking/rebuilding team, them have no use for a win-now player with a long contract like Moore. Especially at the cost of giving up one of their young potential players like Prince.

I don't think the MIN trade improves the team. Moore is better than Crawford at this point, Belijica is similar to Mirotic we just traded for (plus I think MIN really likes him and would be reluctant to give him up), Shabazz is not good.

So yea, the best route is probably to keep Moore. But after the draft this summer and we'll be able to trade 1sts again, the prospect of packing the 2020 1st with Moore and Ajinca (who will be on an expiring contract then) could be an option for the right player (Kemba?).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soggymoss

If he would land us an upgrade at PG or SF, then yes I would do it. Once Hill comes back, then Moore will probably be on the bench, because it seems Gentry is hell bent on starting Rondo...

If Moore could land us someone like Walker in a trade package (I know we can't get walker due to having no 1sts to trade, just using as an example), then yes you trade him all day everyday

---

Right, but that's exactly Mythrol's point. Trading Moore now wouldn't land us an upgrade at any position, including PG or SF.

And there you admit he can't land you someone like Walker (due to not having 1sts to trade). After the draft this offseason once we regain ability to trade 1sts, then it will be reasonable to speculate about including Moore in a trade. But now at the deadline, it's very unlikely and wouldn't make sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soggymoss

If he would land us an upgrade at PG or SF, then yes I would do it. Once Hill comes back, then Moore will probably be on the bench, because it seems Gentry is hell bent on starting Rondo...

If Moore could land us someone like Walker in a trade package (I know we can't get walker due to having no 1sts to trade, just using as an example), then yes you trade him all day everyday

---

Why would we need a PG if Gentry is hell bent on playing Rondo? That logic doesn't hold up.

Why would we need a SF if Hill comes back and plays good enough to put Moore on the bench? That logic doesn't hold up.

Why would you suggest a trade that you would do to send out Moore and even say while suggesting it that it would never happen? You want to win me over, then suggest a trade sending Moore out without a 1st that makes sense to do before the deadline. Otherwise, you're just proving my point.

I have no problem trading Moore for a better player and if we still had our 1st I'd even listen to the talks because Moore and a 1st plus filler might be enough to get a guy. But that's not the situation we are in.

Not even gonna go through and read your argument.. I can't point to trade after trader year after year where far better player then someone like Hood/Fournier was had for what we have.. Moore is enough to package for a 1st round pick and rumors are the Magic are asking for picks or young talent.. Moore nets us a 1st round pick while we can also send them young talent in Diallo/Jackson.. anybody that says we can't get a deal done for a better player either doesn't follow the NBA or are wrong and trying to argue out of hole. We just got Boogie for Buddy Hield.. Pistons just got Griffin for nothing.. we just freaking got Mirotic for a 1st with Asik attached to it! history says we absolutely have enough to get something done.. not saying we are going to land John Wall, Damian Lillard, or Devin Booker but yes we absolutely have enough assets to land someone like Fournier, Hood, or Clarkson.

We had a 1st and offered it for Clarkson and was turned down. You don't think Dell explored all options of players + a 1st before settling on the Mirotic trade?

Why would we give up Moore plus Diallo / Jackson for the right to overpay Fournier? Same goes for Hood?

We have a good player, and a reasonable contract and are right up against not only the luxury tax but the hard cap with Cousins monster contract coming this summer and people want to trade Moore for a rental or the right to overpay players who are marginally better than Moore?

Whatever floats your boat I guess but I just don't get some fans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

We had a 1st and offered it for Clarkson and was turned down. You don't think Dell explored all options of players + a 1st before settling on the Mirotic trade?

Why would we give up Moore plus Diallo / Jackson for the right to overpay Fournier? Same goes for Hood?

We have a good player, and a reasonable contract and are right up against not only the luxury tax but the hard cap with Cousins monster contract coming this summer and people want to trade Moore for a rental or the right to overpay players who are marginally better than Moore?

Whatever floats your boat I guess but I just don't get some fans.

---

The only reason the trade for Clarkson was turned down was because LA didn't want to take on Asik and that contract.. If they weren't trying to clear space they wouldve jumped all over it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soggymoss

The only reason the trade for Clarkson was turned down was because LA didn't want to take on Asik and that contract.. If they weren't trying to clear space they wouldve jumped all over it

---

So you're willing to trade Moore for Clarkson's contract? Because I sure as heck wouldn't do that.

First of all you have no earthly idea what really went on behind the scenes and what we were willing to give up and under what conditions. None of us know anything until it actually happens or else it was nothing but a rumor. I can tell you what trades that were steals did happen though and they do every single year. I guarantee the Lakers were not willing to take on Asik as well. Again we just got Mirotic for a 1st with Asik attatched to it.. trades happen every season for much less then anyone would have ever thought. So now it's why would we give up this for the right to over pay? LoL well that's a complete 180 from saying we have nothing to get a deal done. The point is we absolutely have the assets to get a deal done for a very good player.. I trade for Fournier all day if it takes getting rid of Moore.. we can always build up or bench with contributors like Moore but finding a stud is more difficult.. I think Fournier is the last big missing piece for this team along with some changes to the bench of course.

The argument you were making is we can't do it not you didn't like certain players involved. But you don't get some fans? Because it doesn't align with you? What is your magical plan to improve this roster in the next 2 years without moving Moore? Signing Lebron James in FA? LoL the only way we can improve this team with a big player is through a trade not FA.

No, my argument is be realistic with your suggestion of trades taking into account THIS organization.

We got Mirotic because he demanded to be traded and we were the only team to offer a 1st. They were also so far below the cap that having Asik's contracteans nothing to them.

All of this is stupid because people hide behind, "anything can happen" as they suggest trades that make no sense because they have a crush on a specific player.

Well here's mine: Moore + filler for K. Leonard. Don't tell me it doesn't make sense because every year we see trades that don't make sense! If you're going to play in fantasy land then at least dream big.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

So you're willing to trade Moore for Clarkson's contract? Because I sure as heck wouldn't do that.

---

Not at all, I'm glad the Lakers turned it down and we ended up with Niko...

That would've been a dumb trade by Dell

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GuardianAngel25

First of all you have no earthly idea what really went on behind the scenes and what we were willing to give up and under what conditions. None of us know anything until it actually happens or else it was nothing but a rumor. I can tell you what trades that were steals did happen though and they do every single year. I guarantee the Lakers were not willing to take on Asik as well. Again we just got Mirotic for a 1st with Asik attatched to it.. trades happen every season for much less then anyone would have ever thought. So now it's why would we give up this for the right to over pay? LoL well that's a complete 180 from saying we have nothing to get a deal done. The point is we absolutely have the assets to get a deal done for a very good player.. I trade for Fournier all day if it takes getting rid of Moore.. we can always build up or bench with contributors like Moore but finding a stud is more difficult.. I think Fournier is the last big missing piece for this team along with some changes to the bench of course.

The argument you were making is we can't do it not you didn't like certain players involved. But you don't get some fans? Because it doesn't align with you? What is your magical plan to improve this roster in the next 2 years without moving Moore? Signing Lebron James in FA? LoL the only way we can improve this team with a big player is through a trade not FA.

---

I'd forget about Fournier if I were you.. At 17 million over 4 years, there's just no way for us to afford him

So defend your point you propose an unrealistic trade LoL.. because you have absolutely nothing to argue out of the hole you have dug.. again history is on my side that multiple trades happen for little every single year.. super stars are had every year for crumbs.. so I'm playing in fantasy land suggesting a trade that you on the other hand say why would we give up that much lol.. hey guys just in case you didn't know don't suggest any trades on a basketball forum because if Mythrol doesn't like it then you are delusional for saying we can get it done.. now if someone doesn't want Fournier or another player on his level side fire away.. but to sit here and say it is unrealistic and anybody who thinks it is must be living in fantasy land is as dumb as it gets.. don't know when discussing trades that are very possible became fantasy lol.. I know I can post trade after trade showing a player being moved for a lot less then anyone would have thought while you can maybe find a handful over the years where someone had to give up a bounty for said player..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soggymoss

I'd forget about Fournier if I were you.. At 17 million over 4 years, there's just no way for us to afford him

---

Not true..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soggymoss

I'd forget about Fournier if I were you.. At 17 million over 4 years, there's just no way for us to afford him

---

Exactly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GuardianAngel25

Not true..

---

With Boogie's re-signing and the mandate to stay under the luxury tax, it's highly unlikely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GuardianAngel25

Not true..

---

The only way would be to send out Hill and Ajinca, but you would probably have to attach an unprotected 1st rounder or maybe even 2 to get that done..

That would also push us right up against and probably into the LT next year even filling out the roster with min contract players

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GuardianAngel25

So defend your point you propose an unrealistic trade LoL.. because you have absolutely nothing to argue out of the hole you have dug.. again history is on my side that multiple trades happen for little every single year.. super stars are had every year for crumbs.. so I'm playing in fantasy land suggesting a trade that you on the other hand say why would we give up that much lol.. hey guys just in case you didn't know don't suggest any trades on a basketball forum because if Mythrol doesn't like it then you are delusional for saying we can get it done.. now if someone doesn't want Fournier or another player on his level side fire away.. but to sit here and say it is unrealistic and anybody who thinks it is must be living in fantasy land is as dumb as it gets.. don't know when discussing trades that are very possible became fantasy lol.. I know I can post trade after trade showing a player being moved for a lot less then anyone would have thought while you can maybe find a handful over the years where someone had to give up a bounty for said player..

---

My entire point has been moving Moore at this deadline now makes no sense because we don't have a 1st for 4 years to Package with him. He is on a reasonable contract, Locked into it for a good amount of time, is having a career year, and knows our system... As we are in the middle of a playoff push.

It has nothing to do with Fournier himself because I would gladly take him on the team. But again, we HAD a 1st round pick we could have packaged WITH Moore already and nothing happened. We had the pieces to make a move like that but didn't do it and instead went in a different direction.

This doesn't even take into account the fact we have to deal with Cousins contract this summer and Fournier will be offered a big contract elsewhere that we'd have to match.

These are my reasons for saying Fournier is unrealistic. Your ONLY reason for saying he is, is because "hey random trades we didn't see coming happen". This isn't even an argument because you have none. You have nothing that supports your logic for us trading for Fournier. But you like him, so you want to trade for him.

Does that mean people cannot suggest whatever they want? Feel free! But I'm still going to be the voice of reason on this. The whole, "hey look at this trade that I didn't see coming" is an EXCUSE to allow yourself to dream of unrealistic trades. Which is what Moore for Fournier is.

I get it that people still want to see another big trade but don't get your hopes up. Mirotic was a GOOD move. Why is it 48 hours later people need that high of another big trade so they can be happy? Just be content with the team and whatever smaller moves we make at the deadline.

There will still be all summer for trade discussions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

So you're willing to trade Moore for Clarkson's contract? Because I sure as heck wouldn't do that.

---

Me neither. I would rather see what Frank Jackson can do. He seems like he’s got Clarkson like potential

Just funny how you have absolutely nothing to back up saying the trade is unrealistic yet are trying to tell me my argument is invalid because I have nothing to back it up lol.. I have a lot more to backup then what you are presenting.. like let's try.. one team for example the Magic have come out and stated they are willing to make trades for draft picks and young players since they are not in a win now mode but rebuilding.. that means Fournier is almost guaranteed to be on the trade block for draft picks and young players which we can provide.. we can move Moore for a 1st while being able to offer future 1st which have been done quite a few times.. we also have 2 young promising players if both are even needed.. then on the Pelicans side of the deal you have a team that has shown they are willing to try and make the team better through trades.. Fournier makes this team better. Trade history usually shows that teams who already have their hat tipped and have said player on the market that they are not going to get what people would qualify as full market price.. Fournier is not going to to bring in some huge haul.. I don't even see someone like Anthony Davis fetching what people would put together as his trade price but of course he will bring in a big haul.. it just doesn't happen and a player like Fournier is not unrealistic being mentioned as an option for our team through a trade by any means.. not even the slightest bit unrealistic.

You have just stuck yourself in a hole on the side of wrong and will try and push it as not possible and unrealistic yet you have offered no substance other then at times arguing against yourself saying it would be to much to give up while flipping back to its not possible if that makes sense.. all trades are pretty random by the way so I don't see your problem there when I'm sure you have presented quite a few "random" trades that were "unrealistic". What makes it not so random is the Magic are sellers and we are buyers.. so again what do you provide as your evidence that it is unrealistic? Because it's a random trade that you don't want to happen? Ok got it.

Now would I rather wait until this summer? Most likely yes but it depends.. if we can get the right player you pull the trigger.. I think we would be trading from more of a position of strength this summer but that's not always the case.. teams start to feel pressured when the offers aren't coming in forcing players to get moved for peanuts sometimes.. all depends on how the market is playing out and so far I would say it looks good with what we just landed.