Charlie Bell: The One That Got Away?

Well, as we all know (and some of us expected) the Bucks matched the Heat's offer for Charlie Bell - which means he won't be moving to Miami anytime soon.

We could all pin our hopes on a trade, but it was more likely the Heat were going to make a trade if they retained Bell than they would actually trade for Bell.

What this means is the Heat's offseason continues to disappoint. Sure, it was a long shot and Riley basically took a shot in the dark on this, but it wasn't quite like the genius moves of the 2003 offseason where Riley dangled money for Elton Brand only to snatch up the Clippers other RFA, Lamar Odom. Mo Williams re-signed with Milwaukee, but because they are possibly even cheaper than the Clippers they had enough money to match Bell, too.

But this brings up an interesting discussion - or two rather.

1) Is the restricted free agent situation even a worthwhile pursuit? It seems like teams hold all the cards and the only negotiation ploy for an RFA is to threaten to go to Europe. This is what Bell did, and it is what Sarunas Jasikevicius is doing as is Mickeal Pietrus. Pietrus just wants to play in Miami, but it is looking like Golden State has some kind of weird vendetta against Pietrus and will stop at nothing to flounder his ideas. So, he threatens to stay in Europe - but the trick is, even if he does go to Europe, when he comes back to the NBA the Warriors still hold his rights and he is still in the same situation.

As an RFA in the NBA, you're basically screwed. Methinks that will get tinkered with come time for the next CBA.

2) Did signing Smush as an act of desperation stifle the Heat's ability to sign a guy like Charlie Bell? Yes, it did. But the real question is, who was more valued - Bell or Smush? It seems Smush is, but if he isn't, than what is the explanation for the Heat? Bell was available all summer, yet they made no overtures. They would have been better off pushing for a deal at the start of the offseason, like the Raptors did with Kapono, and we may have had him here in Miami. After all, the Bucks had to deal with the Yi situation and then the Mo money scenario. Quietly going after Bell at that time would may have been too much for Milwaukee to handle and they might have let him go since they were trying to plan on retaining the other priorities.

That is, if you think Bell was a highly coveted target at all. I think it was more of a 'hey, why not?' kind of move for Miami. No risk, all reward. And now the Bucks have to deal with that 5 year contract.