Comments on: Eddie Jordan and Mike O’Koren Visit Redskins Camp

By: Tom Mandel

Tom Mandel — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 11:38:33 +0000

Anyway, it gives us something to think about in these dog days of no basketball action.

(unless you’re watching the olympics, I mean — and I am intending to watch today)

By: GrifonRacing

GrifonRacing — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 02:40:08 +0000

or… maybe there was and it didn’t pan out?

By: GrifonRacing

GrifonRacing — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 02:38:44 +0000

That’s the only thing that makes sense to me Tom. There must be something in “the works”?

By: GrifonRacing

GrifonRacing — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 22:45:37 +0000

I believe it was in the press conferance Neal. I remember it surprised me at the time as I thought the number was Gil’s.

By: Tom Mandel

Tom Mandel — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 20:47:17 +0000

Hmmm, that’s kind of a good point. What was the rationale for asking Gil to take less than max, if it wasn’t in order to add at least one other piece? There is no more reason for us to be able to do that next year than this — we’ll be up against the luxury tax next year just like this.

Perhaps there is something going on that we don’t know about — and that SportsWiz doesn’t know about either? (He has been expressing his feeling that we’d go into the season w/ the current cast)

By: neal

neal — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 20:04:17 +0000

We will get the Phizzlies’ pick if they finish in the top 16 in the league. Fat chance. The year after next we’ll get it if they finish in the top 14. Fat chance.

Sounds like Finley wants more than we have.

Why do you say the 111 was Ernie’s number, Grifon?

Yes, Brown is signed. He could still be cut, but I don’t think Pollin would part with the guaranteed part of Brown’s contract unless Grunfeld REALLY wanted to cut him.

By: GrifonRacing

GrifonRacing — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 16:18:54 +0000

If we don’t sign another player it will be curious to me as to why Ernie asked Gil to take 16 mil less. I assumed at the time Ernie had a specific plan in mind since the 111 mil Gil accepted was Ernie’s number, not Gil’s. We won’t be in any position next season money wise to get involved in the “bumper crop” of free agents, so, it seems to me Ernie must have a plan in mind for this year?

By: Tom Mandel

Tom Mandel — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 15:07:54 +0000

But, Finley is looking for more than the minimum; San Antonio already offered him a deal above the minimum, and he turned it down to see what other offers he’d get. It’d be more accurate to say that he didn’t accept, rather than that he turned it down. I’m sure it’s still on the table if he wants it.

By: Tom Mandel

Tom Mandel — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 14:57:45 +0000

We have enough money to sign a veteran at the vet’s minimum, no problem. Will we do that, however? I don’t know.

By: dopeboyfresh

dopeboyfresh — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 11:49:52 +0000

ok, does that leave us any money for signing Micheal finley?