What Spurs fans would be willing to pay for Simmons is completely separate from the belief that Philly would not deal him.
I'm sure you're aware of the irony in these two sentences.
I'm saying that you, TD21 are making a claim that's logically inconsistent. You're judging Levert by his "perceived" value and Murray by his "actual" value. Murray has a "perceived" value too, and it's way higher than you suggest, hence the Hawks wanting him to move up in the draft and the Spurs refusing. That's all we've heard on Murray. For Levert, what we saw is that Houston didn't value him at all. So, yeah, I don't think CL wins there. And in terms of real value, it's not close either.
I'll see you concede the rest of the package is better, though, and considering that Houston didn't want Levert and the Spurs could've easily subs uted someone like Mills in place of Murray, and it's even clearer than the Spurs could've offered more.
Come on, man. I assumed you weren't going to rebut this because of how you usually format your responses, but this isn't a strong counter. Murray and his archetype are both valued highly right now. Just look at Smart apparently being worth more than the second-overall pick and cap space. DJM isn't worth that much, but he doesn't have to be to be worth more than Levert. There's no reason to believe the Nets picks, back-end or otherwise, are more valuable than the ones SA would be offering. Depending on what else SA offered, they might be a lotto team even after this deal.
No, it's not. I said they had the firepower to make an offer to a superstar. Talking about teams with less firepower getting stars and it being considered an overpay doesn't contradict that. And I'm basically conceding the point about stars just because I think it's an irrelevant distinction.
But again, you can't go more than one line of expansion without finding a way to criticize the Spurs or their fans. This has nothing to do with how much STers would offer for Simmons.