Re: URL: Clippers May Move Taylor (Time For Another Celtics Trade)

[Douglas342@aol.com]

In a message dated 09/08/1999 12:17:57 PM Central Daylight Time, 
wayray@ix.netcom.com writes:

> maximum?
>  Was Antoine worth the maximum? Of course not, but these flawed athletes
>  are paid for their potential, and Taylor has the potential to be a
>  dominating 
>  low post presence, something the C's desperately need. 

     This would be quite a deal, cap-wise.  I don't even begin to be able to 
figure out how it could be done.  But it raises a good point.  Antoine was 
paid for potential, and Taylor is in the last (I think) class of pre-new CBA 
players.  While he might have to be paid on potential, in the future we will 
have at least one more year to judge that potential.  So let me ask my 
ignorant question very plainly so we're all on the same page.
     Under the old CBA, a rookie signed for three years.  Unless he was 
signed to a new contract after two, however, he became a total free agent 
after the third year.  (The new contract, like Walker's, kicks in for the 
fourth year, I think.  The poor kid has to live with the rookie deal for 
three.)  
    Under the new CBA, a rookie signs for four with an option for a fifth, 
and can't be signed to a new contract until after the third year?  
     I don't know that this is accurate, so would appreciate correction.  
Thanks.
   (Tune in next week, when bewildered fan asks, "What's a sign and trade?")