By bundling #8/filler for Kawhi Leonard and trying to move K-Love for an upgrade elsewhere?Lebron can do all the recruiting he wants. How are the Cavs supposed to acquire these players?
By bundling #8/filler for Kawhi Leonard and trying to move K-Love for an upgrade elsewhere?Lebron can do all the recruiting he wants. How are the Cavs supposed to acquire these players?
Do you really think that #8 + Filler gets them Kawhi? I think that could only happen if a player the Spurs want is sitting there are 8. They won't be doing that move if they don't know who will be there to draft.By bundling #8/filler for Kawhi Leonard and trying to move K-Love for an upgrade elsewhere?
Then how do they get Kawhi?Love + #8 pick could get them something.
I think his source is Jake Wesley.He looks like Jake Wesley's little brother
Good, because he'll be facing one in Boston.They don’t. I think Lebron will settle for an improved roster.
I don't think Love + #8 gets them a player that much better than Love himself. Maybe you can get a guy like Blake Griffin, Demar Derozan, Bradley Beal...I dunno. Doesn't seem to move the needle much.Love + #8 pick could get them something.
But how is trading Love and the #8 improving the roster? What do they get that's better than Love and whoever they grab at #8?They don’t. I think Lebron will settle for an improved roster.
The Spurs have a rental player. No one is mortgaging the house for one year of Kawhi. Their options are to let themselves be bent over by the Lakers or take the best deal they can find.Do you really think that #8 + Filler gets them Kawhi? I think that could only happen if a player the Spurs want is sitting there are 8. They won't be doing that move if they don't know who will be there to draft.
Agreed. I still think that if Memphis is willing to trade #4 if someone eats the Parsons contract that Cleveland could work a deal where Love goes to Memphis; Hill, #4 and #8 go to San Antonio; and Cleveland gets Kawhi and Parsons.Love + #8 pick could get them something.
SA gets #4 / #8 / filler for a guy everyone knows wants to leave?Agreed. I still think that if Memphis is willing to trade #4 if someone eats the Parsons contract that Cleveland could work a deal where Love goes to Memphis; Hill, #4 and #8 go to San Antonio; and Cleveland gets Kawhi and Parsons.
There are other deals out there too. You could potentially deal #8 for Kemba or Derozan. Maybe Portland bites on Love for McCollum. It just depends on what kind of commitment you think you're getting from Lebron.
I agree that #8/bad contract might get them DeRozan if the rumors out of Toronto are true, which leaves the Cavs Love to deal for another player. That might be enough to allow them to hold on to LBJ (especially if it was a three team deal that landed them Leonard).There are other deals out there too. You could potentially deal #8 for Kemba or Derozan. Maybe Portland bites on Love for McCollum. It just depends on what kind of commitment you think you're getting from Lebron.
Probably? I see no reason why San Antonio would trade him unless they're getting back another star and/or several good draft assets. A year of Kawhi plus his Bird rights (and potential to offer a Super Max) are more valuable than flotsam, even if he is destined to leave. You take that chance for a top five player. For Cleveland it's not just one year of Kawhi; it's one year or Kawhi and Lebron and everything has to be on the table if that's an option. They have to be bold or else they are looking at purgatory for the next half decade.SA gets #4 / #8 / filler for a guy everyone knows wants to leave?
Sorry if I was unclear. He's still eligible for the super max if he stays in San Antonio. That's why I am saying the Spurs wouldn't trade him for a mediocre return. You take one year of Kawhi and hope things go well enough so you can pitch him on the extension next summer (provided he makes All-NBA again). There's no sense in sending him out for a garbage return just because he could leave in a year.One, Leonard is no longer eligible for a DPVE contract if he's traded (that's why Irving demanded a trade last summer after Phoenix leaked word of the trade talks). Two, no one is giving up that much for a guy that's leaving at the end of the season. San Antonio is going to end up getting a mediocre return. If Love for Parsons landed the Cavs #4, they're likely to use the pick on someone like Mo Bamba.
They already have the potential to offer him a super max, and it's abundantly clear that a) they aren't willing to offer it or b) he doesn't want it.Probably? I see no reason why San Antonio would trade him unless they're getting back another star and/or several good draft assets. A year of Kawhi plus his Bird rights (and potential to offer a Super Max) are more valuable than flotsam, even if he is destined to leave. You take that chance for a top five player. For Cleveland it's not just one year of Kawhi; it's one year or Kawhi and Lebron and everything has to be on the table if that's an option. They have to be bold or else they are looking at purgatory for the next half decade.
It's the NBA. If you can't keep a star happy the year before he leaves, you either lose him for nothing, or get 25-50 cents on the dollar. Very, very few of these situations end with a reconciliation.Sorry if I was unclear. He's still eligible for the super max if he stays in San Antonio. That's why I am saying the Spurs wouldn't trade him for a mediocre return. You take one year of Kawhi and hope things go well enough so you can pitch him on the extension next summer (provided he makes All-NBA again). There's no sense in sending him out for a garbage return just because he could leave in a year.
And from the other side, if the calculus is #8 and Love, or one year of Kawhi and Lebron I take the latter every time.
Who cares? If you're Cleveland you're acquiring a rental that isn't staying, and you're stripmining the roster only to see your two stars can walk next summer. That's how you become the 2014-2018 Brooklyn Nets.Sorry if I was unclear. He's still eligible for the super max if he stays in San Antonio. That's why I am saying the Spurs wouldn't trade him for a mediocre return. You take one year of Kawhi and hope things go well enough so you can pitch him on the extension next summer (provided he makes All-NBA again). There's no sense in sending him out for a garbage return just because he could leave in a year.
If I'm Cleveland I take another shot at a title and five years of being the Nets over six years of being some mediocre team with a couple assets and no shot at contending (like say, Detroit or Charlotte). The no. 8 pick in a so-so draft and whatever you can get for one year of Kevin Love aren't changing the future of your franchise either way.Who cares? If you're Cleveland you're acquiring a rental that isn't staying, and you're stripmining the roster only to see your two stars can walk next summer. That's how you become the 2014-2018 Brooklyn Nets.
If San Antonio is demanding full price then they're going to have to hope that he signs the DPVE deal, because no one's giving them an all star for a rental.
The last All Star picked number 8 was Vin Baker.I mean aside from the fact that #8 this year might net you Al Horford v2.0 ...
Definitely not trying to pick on you specifically because I've read that a lot, but I wish this never became a "stat". It's totally coincidental that the last All Star picked at 8 was Vin Baker. It isn't like there haven't been plenty of All Stars picked after 8 since Vin Baker.The last All Star picked number 8 was Vin Baker.
Fair. It is a fluky stat, but the odds of getting an Al Horford quality player at 8 or below are still very low.Definitely not trying to pick on you specifically because I've read that a lot, but I wish this never became a "stat". It's totally coincidental that the last All Star picked at 8 was Vin Baker. It isn't like there haven't been plenty of All Stars picked after 8 since Vin Baker.
This is too unequivocal. We don’t have a lot of experience with the new “supermax” provision.It's the NBA. If you can't keep a star happy the year before he leaves, you either lose him for nothing, or get 25-50 cents on the dollar. Very, very few of these situations end with a reconciliation.
I agree with all of this. We are putting too much emphasis on the last few years where flight risk was enhanced due to an unprecedented cap spike that: a) gave nearly every team max cap space; and b) minimized the value of Bird rights. The new CBA is intended to be a course correction.This is too unequivocal. We don’t have a lot of experience with the new “supermax” provision.
Maybe I’m forgetting someone, but I don’t think there is any precedent in professional sports for an athlete turning his back on as much guaranteed money as Kawhi would be turning down if he snubbed a supermax offer from the Spurs to sign elsewhere. It could certainly happen, but it’s far from a sure thing.
Edit: Maybe LeBron signing a 1+1 with the Cavs instead of a 5-year max extension with Miami, but he’s a unique case.
To be clear, you're saying that you think that the Spurs weren't willing to offer Kawhi the supermax, and he is now bluffing with a trade request in order to get it?This is too unequivocal. We don’t have a lot of experience with the new “supermax” provision.
Maybe I’m forgetting someone, but I don’t think there is any precedent in professional sports for an athlete turning his back on as much guaranteed money as Kawhi would be turning down if he snubbed a supermax offer from the Spurs to sign elsewhere. It could certainly happen, but it’s far from a sure thing.
Edit: Maybe LeBron signing a 1+1 with the Cavs instead of a 5-year max extension with Miami, but he’s a unique case.
As far as I know, every report from a credible source (including Woj) has stated that the Spurs haven't put a super max offer on the table and that the lack of an offer has been a primary source of contention from Kawhi's camp. The Spurs want to repair the relationship and get an idea of Kawhi's health before extending that kind of financial commitment.To be clear, you're saying that you think that the Spurs weren't willing to offer Kawhi the supermax, and he is now bluffing with a trade request in order to get it?
If they've already indicated to him that they'll offer it, and he wants it, he never would have gone public with the trade request.
When I say that Kawhi wants out, I'm saying that with the assumption that the supermax was on the table from the Spurs. If they were hesitant in offering it, that's a completely different story. However, if that were the case, I would also expect Kawhi's camp to have leaked that the Spurs weren't willing to pay him, since it helps Kawhi's optics.
You sir are onto something scary. I think part one of the equation would be very agreeable from the SAS and Memphis perspective, but that CLE would want to keep the #8. I still think SAS would do that deal if Dontic is there (looking less likely). Then, CLE flips #8, Thompson, Osman, and J.R. for Kemba and Batum. Saves another $3MM for CHA and J.R. only has $4MM guaranteed after next season. CLE would have a lineup of Kemba/Batum/Kawhi/Lebron/Nance. Very thin bench, but Howard could fit there (on the court at least) and they’d still have Parsons/Korver. That’s way better than last years team.Agreed. I still think that if Memphis is willing to trade #4 if someone eats the Parsons contract that Cleveland could work a deal where Love goes to Memphis; Hill, #4 and #8 go to San Antonio; and Cleveland gets Kawhi and Parsons.
There are other deals out there too. You could potentially deal #8 for Kemba or Derozan. Maybe Portland bites on Love for McCollum. It just depends on what kind of commitment you think you're getting from Lebron.
Yeah, but they’ve already traded him with Kyrie for Mo Bamba.Is LeBron on the Celtics yet?
Did they send Jaylen too for filler?Yeah, but they’ve already traded him with Kyrie for Mo Bamba.
Moved him in separate deal for Kawhi.Did they send Jaylen too for filler?
No, Jaylen went to the Warriors for JaVale.Did they send Jaylen too for filler?
Health is always the wild card but as it is, I'm ready for any of these possibilities.
I really want to see LeBron in LA. ESPN will be completely focused with daily coverage on the Lakers/Warriors "rivalry" and then will be like, oh yeah, and the Celtics are 60-10. Kind of like 2014 when all the coverage was on LeBron and Miami and then the Spurs came in and methodically dismantled the mini-dynasty.Health is always the wild card but as it is, I'm ready for any of these possibilities.
I really feel like Ainge has a 2004 Patriots style all-terrain all-situation assault vehicle to hit the league with. Get used to one style yo and they might switch.
I want to see them get down.
Since it’s Windhorst, probably worth a lot. We’re basically down to a 2 or 3 team race as expected.Windhorst on Zach Lowe’s podcast today with two LeBron notes:
1) In Windhorst’s “informed opinion,” LeBron is not opting in. Said repeatedly this isn’t “fact” or “a report,” it was an “opinion,” but an “informed” one.
2) Windhorst handicaps LeBron’s destinations as 51% Lakers, 40% staying in Cleveland, 9% Philly. Said his choice isn’t necessarily linked to where Kwahi or Paul George winds up.
Take all that for whatever it’s worth.
It is no worse than the current Cavs situation and his options are kinda limited for what he's looking for in a move. He'll take that Laker team as is and they are instantly a 50-win team maybe more.....of course that won't be the finished product either.I disagree with the part about it not being tied to Leonard or George though. Can you see him going to Lakers as the team is presently constructed? No way.
Maybe, but all things equal I think he'd stay in Cleveland *if* the bit about family being involved in the decision isn't just blowing smoke.It is no worse than the current Cavs situation and his options are kinda limited for what he's looking for in a move. He'll take that Laker team as is and they are instantly a 50-win team maybe more.....of course that won't be the finished product either.
The “not necessarily” is the massive caveat that makes the statement true.I disagree with the part about it not being tied to Leonard or George though. Can you see him going to Lakers as the team is presently constructed? No way.
He's tantalized by the prospect of teaming up with them, however.The “not necessarily” is the massive caveat that makes the statement true.
I wonder if there's any way to trade for Kawhi and kinda hold him hostage with LAL next year to extract assets. For example, LBJ and PG13 go to the Lakers this year as straight free agents. In the same offseason, we trade Rozier/picks/salary for Kawhi. Next year, the Lakers and Kawhi have strong mutual interest, but the Lakers won't have cap room to straight sign Kawhi to a max (I think?) due to LBJ and PG13, and would need the originating team to facilitate the sign and trade. We work it for them in exchange for some combination, or all, of Ingram/Kuzma/Ball/etc. and restock the younger assets we sent out for Kawhi.I disagree with the part about it not being tied to Leonard or George though. Can you see him going to Lakers as the team is presently constructed? No way.