Merit wrote:mdenny wrote:Scase wrote:A lot of people talking about how bad the Siakam trade is compared to this, and while I agree that it definitely makes it worse, the real star of this?
How much worse that Luka trade looks knowing that THIS is what Bane pulled from ORL. Insanity.
There's a rational explanation for the Luka trade that Noone seems to want to listen to:
The mavs wanted to trade luka but he was NEVER GONNA LET THAT HAPPEN because it costs him 100 million dollars.
So if they put him on the market....Luka's agent would have simply said: if you trade for luka...he will not resign for your team. Which means all trade offers for luka on an open market would have been 18 month rental packages. Even if Dallas had asked luka for a preferential destination....he would've refused to give them one. Players and player agents don't just give up on 100 million dollars.
So the trade had to be made in secrecy so that luka couldn't do that. But the only way to maintain the secrecy is to pick ONE team and only deal with them (which also lowers the value of the package).
But AD plus a FRP is more than they would've got from a team looking to rent luka for 18 months. In addition....they'd be renting that player after being specifically told by him that he doesn't want to play for you. So it's a reluctant and unmotivated 18 month rental with a massive chip on his shoulder directed at your front office.
I am extremely interested in luka's extension talks this summer. Because if I was agent...who just lost his commission on the 100 million dollars too....I'd be saying to him "y'know the Lakers betrayed your interests just as much as the mavericks did here. The Lakers made out like bandits at YOUR expense by conducting these secret negotiations. Play out the contract and then sign wherever you want to go. Teach them a lesson".
The Lakers can't pay him anything more than the other teams. And the other teams didn't betray his interests.
Man it would be such sweet justice to watch the Lakers lose doncic for nothing. If he doesn't sign an extension....watch for him to have "back pain" next season so that the Lakers can't even flip him as a deadline rental.
I think it’s just as likely that their corporate overlords were pissed that they didn’t get to build a casino or move the team to Vegas.
Luka also bears some responsibility for the trade since he has been a poorly conditioned player who relies on his otherworldly skill.
Other than that, I can buy into the vengeful narrative on Niko’s behalf. In most business contexts, if a company had a primadonna who was pissing the owners off and could be moved for a comparable talent who is a better fit for company culture he’d be cut in a second. Then again, sports is part business/part religion so it doesn’t always add up that way.
Agree with you that the first condition of the whole scenario is that Dallas deciding to move on from luka is a business decision, not a basketball decision. And from where I stand....I think they were nuts. But that supermax thing is like 400 million or something like that? If you have doubts about a guy's personal life....it's VERY bad business to pay them close to half a billion dollars.
Might also be that nico is a health nut or one of those clean-living tea-totallers that doesn't understand functional recreational drug use. We've all met ppl who are inexperienced with booze/drugs and don't understand the difference between functional and problematic use.
But we can't really know what that decision was based on. So it's a worthy exercise to say "OK they know some dirt about luka and they need to get off that train".
Assuming they do or they have some reason that need to get rid of him....they really didn't have the options that ppl think they did.
The progressive chess moves are clear: Dallas puts out word that luka is available. Luka immediately warns every team "don't trade for me, I won't resign with you". Then the market folds in. No team is trading 4 picks/3 swaps (the max)+ salary + prospects for a guy saying "don't trade for me, I won't resign with you".
In that light....AD plus a first isn't even that bad. Anycase...the point here is that if we were playing a video game or thinking of these trades as pure BASKETBALL trades then the disparities seem crazy. But the reason these disparities exist are because of the business end of the dynamics.
This IS and will be a fabulous trade for the grizzlies. Whether it's a good or horrible trade for the magic will come down to how the chemistry works. But I agree with others that I think Paulo and Franz have limited ceilings that will become evident in the coming years. So it's kinda like they have 4 core players and none of them are even top 20 or top 30 players. And I'm not sure that formula works.
Plus...it reminds me of the Knicks moves....if it DOES turn out that they have 4 solid players but none in the top 25...they now don't have the assets to get the top 25 guy they will need.
