Hawks unable to sign or trade for players for more than 1 year

[SecondFiddle]

Harrington can still be signed and traded if he is traded for a player entering the last year of his contract, correct?

[herschel4heisman]

Originally Posted by WoGiTaLiA1

You know, in some twisted way, Belkin is once again on the right side. He was spot on with the Johnson deal and this whole process will stop them from using any of their capspace on anyone in this FA group. They are better off filling a few holes with 1 year contracts and really making a splash next year.

The problem with what you're saying is you're assuming that the Hawks are gonna spend that money if Belkin becomes the owner. The fear is he wants to be the new Sterling of the East by spending the least amount of money as possible and his actions really haven't done anything to alleviate those fears.

[hawkfan]

Originally Posted by herschel4heisman

The problem with what you're saying is you're assuming that the Hawks are gonna spend that money if Belkin becomes the owner. The fear is he wants to be the new Sterling of the East by spending the least amount of money as possible and his actions really haven't done anything to alleviate those fears.

That may be true.

But Stern forced Sterling to spend money.

There are things the league can do to force owners to spend money on players.

And in fairness to Sterling, he did offer guys more money who turned it down.

Bo Outlaw got a better offer from the Clippers but signed with the Magic.

Michael Olowokandi was offered 7 years, $50 million. He thought he deserved more, and he turned it down. He won't ever see type of money ever again.

But would Belkin not spend money? That is a legitimate issue for debate.

We will only know if he becomes an owner and we see what he does. Which may or may not happen.