10 Comments
User's avatar
Brian's avatar

While everyone assumes (and wants) Glasgow to be let go, I'd keep him, not as a starter, but as a valuable backup that can play all three interior positions

Jim's avatar

I'd rather keep a younger depth piece, like Sorsdal perhaps. Someone who is getting better and not declining. Glasgow had a good run.

giwan's avatar

I would not assume that

Justin Rogers's avatar

While everything should be weighed through the emotional toll of the season, he was pretty beat up and I didn't get the sense he had much interest in continuing his career after this season. Again, mindset changes when you get away from it for a few months, but that was my read in December.

Scott's avatar

Problem is you can’t keep him and have the money to sign the starter that he would be backing up.

giwan's avatar

They need to restructure which they will and have plenty of funds. GG seems like an excellent backup, short term fills at R or L guard and center

Scott's avatar

Yes you can always create cap room, but you don’t create cap room to give 9MM for the season to a backup.

Brian's avatar

He refused a restructure last year, I doubt he would be more inclined to do one this year.

Jim Pen's avatar

I don't think it was a restructure he refused. He refused a pay cut. At least that's what I recall. I suspect giwan was referring to restructuring other other players not GG. There are no years left on his contract so the only way to restructure Glasgow's contract would be by adding void years.

Brian's avatar

Possibly so. I'm not sure we know that for sure but yeah.