vincecarter4pres wrote:DarkXaero wrote:MrDollarBills wrote:
I think we could get away with this if we stagger LeVert in the starting line up and have him lead the 2nd unit.
Let's not forget, KD didn't come here to have to do heavy lifting. Irving is not going to want to have to score 50 points every time he plays to get wins. I think LeVert will end up getting more usage next season than we may think.
But that takes away from Dinwiddie's effectiveness, if we have Levert leading the 2nd unit, and also starting. I think ultimately we have to make a decision, and one of them need to be traded for a better fit. We all have our opinions here, and disagreements on which player can stay, but I think we should be able to agree on that much. Having four high usage guys on the team next year is not good when we could improve another position or area. And that can be either making us defensively stronger, or getting in a better fit for the offense.
This is where I'm at as well. And honestly I almost always suggest keeping LeVert over Dinwiddie because:
A. LeVert is my 1b favorite player on this roster to Kyrie's 1a.
B. LeVert is on a very team friendly, longer term contract.
C. Although almost the same age, I still see LeVert having better remaining potential, even though Dinwiddie is the currently better player.
D. It will be hard to retain Dinwiddie.
E. Dinwiddie's ego/attitude seems to clash with others here often.
As mentioned, E seems to be contradicted by the information we have readily available, and the main issues seem to have been when there was question between him and Levert, not if Dinwiddie was 3rd fiddle to Kyrie and Durant. Don't think he would ever cop an attitude in that situation.
I can respect A. I never wanted to get rid of Kenyon Martin or Richard Jefferson back in the day, because they were my favorite players. But it's ultimately not an objective opinion, so it shouldn't affect what's right for the team.
B is potentially true, but as of right now, that contract extension is an overpay. Levert is currently a low efficiency, high usage scorer who doesn't shoot well from the 3pt line or the FT line, is awful as a catch and shoot player, and has extremely questionable fit next to our two stars. His best role for us would be as a 6th man. We could pay less than $16-19 million a year for a solid 6th man or a solid 3 and D player that would fit well next to our two healthy stars. So I don't agree that it's a team-friendly, long-term contract, not unless he significantly improves. Not to mention the injuries and that his durability is certainly a concern.
Even if point D is true, we should still try, at least see what Dinwiddie's price tag is. Tying into point C...I don't know, I think Dinwiddie is honestly one of the absolute best dribble penetration guards in the league, and kind of does everything at a higher level than Levert, other than shoot the 3 ball. Better ball handler, better passer, better vision, better overall decision-maker, better finisher around the rim, craftier scorer...I think he has better defensive potential too given his length and IQ, but neither of them are that good anyway. I think Dinwiddie certainly deserved All-Star consideration for what he did this year, and the main thing holding him back at this point would be his outside shooting. But in terms of potential for improvement, I mean, I think given everything that Dinwiddie does better than Levert as is, I think there's a better chance of Dinwiddie developing a more reliable outside shot than Levert catching up to Dinwiddie in terms of everything else. And if it comes down to paying Dinwiddie $25 million a year to keep him long term vs paying Levert $16-19 million a year...since we're gonna be way over the cap anyway, why not overpay Dinwiddie to keep him as Kyrie insurance and as the best 6th man in the league and go all in for winning now? I mean, we wouldn't even be overpaying him that much at that price tag. I think he's worth something like $18-20 million a year on the open market.
