Re: The Kevin Durant Problem
Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2025 2:20 pm
I think JC was trying to lower the payroll prior to the sale?
Like I said, it may be that saving the franchise a few bucks increased what Sarver was willing to pay for the franchise, and that was the motive. If so, it was the earliest sign that Sarver was more interested in lessening financial obligations than in being competitive. If not, I’m still confused.
Thanks for this list. I would also include OKC and Golden State on any possible trade partners list. Something like:Split T wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2025 1:17 pmMinny: Have to include two of Gobert, Randle, Reid, McDaniels
Dallas: Has to be at least 4 guys and needs to include 2 of Gafford/PJ/Klay
Spurs: Might be the team that could do it the easiest with less salary…not entirely sure their cap situation.
Rockets: Jalen Green is likely the salary match, plus you’d have to add another 10-15 million.
Knicks: Mikal/Hart or KAT would have to be the trade.
It's a reference to this recent spat:
“It doesn’t mean your best player is your leader," Perkins explained. "When I was with the Thunder, it wasn’t KD, it wasn’t Russ, it wasn’t James, I was the one leading.”
Yup. Suns are so screwed.Mori Chu wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2025 8:56 amThis KD interview on the Draymond Green podcast is wild. He makes it pretty clear that the Suns called him at the trade deadline and asked him if he was okay with being traded to Golden State, but he said no, because he didn't want the Warriors to have to give up so much and disrupt the team in the middle of the season. He says the team is going to trade him in the offseason. Which, I mean, okay, but he's basically saying he wants to minimize the return we get for him in a trade so that his new team isn't hampered by losing so many assets. Groan.
Just tell him to keep it inside 30 feet. He’s a good shooter well beyond the arc as long as he’s not getting completely crazy. Steph Curry he ain’t, more like Dan Majerle.
This only works if they have a strategy to bring in at least two versatile defenders, one of whom has to be a consistent starter. Trae is so compromised defensively that it caps his team's ceiling. He and Book could work well, I just think it's a tougher needle to thread than bringing in a more balanced combo guard to play next to him.
I think it would be pretty hard to pull off. But the idea would be to trade KD for role players and picks…then attach the picks to Beal for Trae.Flagrant Fowl wrote: ↑Thu Mar 06, 2025 3:28 amThis only works if they have a strategy to bring in at least two versatile defenders, one of whom has to be a consistent starter. Trae is so compromised defensively that it caps his team's ceiling. He and Book could work well, I just think it's a tougher needle to thread than bringing in a more balanced combo guard to play next to him.
Regardless, I think there's a next to zero chance Atlanta would do that.
I believe it was a condition of the sale to reduce debt and payroll. The trade saved 6 Mil, which was a bit more a the time and mattered more to a team that was running on borrowed money. It definitely wasn't a good basketball move, but it was a good business move for JC.Cap wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2025 2:39 pmLike I said, it may be that saving the franchise a few bucks increased what Sarver was willing to pay for the franchise, and that was the motive. If so, it was the earliest sign that Sarver was more interested in lessening financial obligations than in being competitive. If not, I’m still confused.
That’s my point. If Sarver (and the other investors) were committed to winning, they could have told JC, “Keep the picks, we’ll spend the extra money,” but they chose the money over the picks.O_Gardino wrote: ↑Thu Mar 06, 2025 9:40 amI believe it was a condition of the sale to reduce debt and payroll. The trade saved 6 Mil, which was a bit more a the time and mattered more to a team that was running on borrowed money. It definitely wasn't a good basketball move, but it was a good business move for JC.Cap wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2025 2:39 pmLike I said, it may be that saving the franchise a few bucks increased what Sarver was willing to pay for the franchise, and that was the motive. If so, it was the earliest sign that Sarver was more interested in lessening financial obligations than in being competitive. If not, I’m still confused.