As mentioned previously, dumping Hughes and Ingles for nothing still wouldn't have gotten us out of the tax. If I recall, the discussion here last year was about getting out of the tax because the repeater issue would be problematic. We ended up being a few hundred thousand above it and you had ardently argued that they didn't **** up the math. So they intentionally went over the tax by a smidge. But now we're saying that those would be a basketball move to get under the tax this year to avoid the repeater tax? You can't say that we had good purpose to be a few hundred thousand over the tax last year has some good, master scheme behind it and that now it's imperative to get under the tax and that it's a good move. Those two ideas are completely at odds with each other and can only arise if we're parroting back the daily spin, without any thought of having to look at any consistency between narratives.
What about as an asset? Not to say him specifically, but just as an example, the Pacers were asking for two second round picks for Justin Holiday. What happens when you've emptied the cupboards to clean up previous messes and you don't have anything to trade mid-season? Do you think other teams would take an IOU of "this is a draft pick I'll buy you on draft night" in a trade? Do you think we could have had more doors open to us in trade if we were armed with a first round pick and two second rounders? Because that's what we've dumped in the past 9 months to "make basketball moves."