Reply With Quote
Me saying your argument doesn't make sense isn't "taking a shot". Me asking you support your assertions isn't either. You calling folks naive is closer to a shot than any thing I've said. But if you want to drop this part of the conversation, I'm not against it.
You "following the NBA closely" isn't some point we all take as a given. These comments I guess imply you have some special insight that means we should defer to you, but you've never demonstrated that. You're just another fan as far as I can tell. While I'm sure some Spurs fans follow the league less than you, you seem to put too much weight into how much you think others follow the NBA compared to you. Somehow, that has led to you rarely providing support for you takes because you dismiss disagreeing opinions as less informed or naive.Says the guy telling me, who actually follows the league closely, to "look into Portis" without actually saying anything specific to counter what I said.
Yeah and they're still as shady as ever. Instead of your preconceived notion of why I don't like them, maybe you and others who have some issue with it should be asking yourself how I have some of the information I do instead of questioning virtually everything I say.
You can actually just Google Portis, watch his interviews and read his Wiki article to find out what kind of player he seems to be. It's hard to justify defaulting to believe he is "too black" without making the extreme icky assumption that him punching a dude somehow adds to his blackness.
No. The reason why you can't claim is because basically everyone this side of Bod wants the Spurs to bring in starting caliber players. We're debating what level of starting-caliber players the team should go for and at what cost. You can't meaningfully back into the "starting caliber" hole and maintain a disagreement. That position would be completely compatible with what I've said I hold, and you know you don't agree with that. Me specifically talking about "Young-esque" players is taking the argument you're making seriously and actually trying to discuss the merits of that level of commitment rather than trying to play word games.Again, starting caliber is what I meant, so I'm "claiming" it despite your desire to make it about Young again.
Not every player spends their last years winning les. The Warriors may not win another le with Curry, but I don't know how many people expect him to demand out. Durant has rings. What he seemed to realize is that he cares about his legacy more than championships. Durant has been chasing winning "his own ring" for the past few years. While there are situations where Durant would still be the best player on his team, the time and places are running out. So how can Kevin wrap up his story to rebuild the broken parts of his legacy? OKC might be able to fix it, though him joining the 1-seed would sour the home-coming somewhat. I don't know that the returning to the New York media to play second-fiddle to Brunson is all that appealing.Yeah, within' a perceived championship context. The notion that he'd be fine spending his twilight here is ludicrous for so many reasons.
San Antonio is one of the rare locations where he would get a legacy boost no matter what. If he carries the Spurs to a le, he gets "his own ring". If Wemby carries him to a ring, he gets to be the David Robinson to Victor's Duncan. If they don't win anything, he gets to be a mentor on a team that wasn't seriously expecting to win a le anyway. That a team would get to slowly grow around him is arguably the best counter to the rising narrative of Durant going from team to team demanding changes to get his guys and than leave them in shambles after failing to capitalize on the roster he helped build.
Unlike the Spurs, the Knicks have to add salary to a Durant trade on top of Randle. Ishiba may be willing to miss out on massive savings and have no interest in letting his FO maintain flexibility. My guess is the Suns would want that ballast to be more worthwhile than Bogdanovic. I'm not sure the Knicks would want to eat into their defensive core by trading Hart or DiVencenzo though. Maybe a third team could be pursuaded to give up a better fit for Bogs and a pick, but then you're playing a balancing game between how many assets the Knicks are willing to part with to get Durant and how many assets the Suns need to have after paying the third team to make moving KD worthwhile.Yeah, within' a perceived championship context. The notion that he'd be fine spending his twilight here is ludicrous for so many reasons.
You seem to be conflating what OKC could offer if they aren't attached to conserving their roster with what they would offer practically. We don't know how much if at all they want Durant. I'm sure the Suns would love Dort. I'm not sure they'd love him over Murray, and Giddy's a contract needing an extension as much as he's a young player with potential at this point.Giddey, possibly Dort for salary/value and a portion of their unprecedented draft capital would be far better than Murray and ?
