Alex_84 wrote:Pickled Prunes wrote:Alex_84 wrote:
Every NBA team that means business has 1 or 2 supermax players on the roster. They were losing room for improvement? Ok, than they trade Kyrie or Gafford or both. You don't trade the best shooting/combo guard in the world, only entering his prime. Boston is not trading injured-to-miss-entire season Tatum. Nor Jalen Brown. Indiana is not trading to-miss-entire-season Hali. And Luka is better player than both.
No matter how you wanna spin this, you're objectively wrong.
Nico did the most idiotic move and the only ssving grace is the FACT he did it because NBA forced his/owners hand to trade the superstar to LAL. Lottery rig is the clear proof of that.
Yes, Luka is theoretically better than Tatum or Hali and light years better than Brown... but look at those rosters compared to DAL. DAL was only able to get Kyrie because he was damaged goods. He had rehabilitated his reputation by making it to the Finals with Luka, but it's still tarnished. There is no way to trade him and get back a better player. Acquiring Gafford cost DAL a 1st. It's doubtful that they could trade him for a better player or a 1st now. And if they still had Luka, why would they trade him; he's a perfect fit with Luka. They only want to trade him because AD makes him redundant.
I'm not really sure why you are comparing Luka to injured players. Do you think BOS or IND would get value back for a max player on a long-term deal, that may never fully recover? I think my Giannis comp was way better: an MVP level player on a non-destination team that is running out of tradable assets. Seems pretty on point. Add to that that both Lillard and Kyrie, the only other stars on either team, both went down with torn Achilles. The only difference is that DAL got out front with a trade and MIL is still trying desperately to hang on.
Sorry, I'm not wrong on this one. DAL was clearly running out of assets and Luka's work ethic was proving to be questionable at best. As I said, I am not a fan of the specific trade, but I totally get "why" he was traded. And your consiracy theories lost you a little credibility in my eyes.
It's not exactly my conspiracy theory, rather majority of the world thinks the same. Wherever you click, whatever you read, it's close to consensus.
It certainly makes way more sense than Dallas suddenly being unhappy with the work ethic of a player carrying them to the NBA finals (while injured), not even 8 months prior to the trade.
And it's not the 1st time this is happening. For NBA's rep and pockets full, Lakers need to matter constantly. Lebron is singing the swan song and NBA went ahead. Not Dallas.
Besides, one fact is tearing down your pov - Dallas got injury prone Davis. So, by your logic Dallas went ahead and made "space" for improvement by....getting injury heavy prone Anthony Davis? Sure.
It is a very common conspiracy believed and perpetuated by a very small minority of fans that buy into such malarkey.
Quick story: I have a very close friend that owns a Bigfoot museum. To the subset of the population that believes in such things, it is chalk full of "evidence". But when I brought my 5yo to see the museum for the first time he said, "That looks like a man in a suit."
My point: If you come in wanting to believe the NBA is rigged you are going to find "evidence", but if you come in without a preconceived notion, even a child can see that there is none. People can't keep secrets and an NBA scam on this level would have hundreds of moving parts. It's not just unlikely or illogical... it's impossible.
You are assuming that DAL was suddenly unhappy. It makes more sense that they felt this way for years and Luka's health, the lack of tradable assets and Luka's upcoming supermax put their backs against a wall. And yes, DAL did find a path to the finals two seasons ago... where they were outclassed and thoroughly dismantled. They were not nearly good enough and had no means of improving.
I grew up in LA... the Lakers have not always been relevant. In fact, the NBA rescinded the CP3 to the Lakers trade, and at that time the theory was that the NBA was trying to keep the Lakers down. And it doesn't appear that the NBA pulled any levers to stop last seasons all Midwest Finals. No smoke, no fire.
The trade specifics don't affect my pov. I'm talking about understanding why DAL moved Luka. I am not attempting to justify the return package in the deal.
Here's my take on the specifics of the trade: It's hard to know for sure what Nico was thinking, but at the time I expected DAL to show off AD for a bit and then flip him at the deadline or the following summer. In the the two seasons before the trade, AD's playoff averages were 28/16/4 and 23/13/3. Just like Luka, if AD was put out in the trade market people would say he was worth 4-5 1sts. DAL got AD plus Max Christy, a 1st and a 2nd. If Nico could have flipped AD for four more 1sts and a couple more young players the trade would have made more sense. And when you look at the haul teams got for Bridges and Gobert, you can see that as a potential outcome. I think they were trying to get cute with the trade and double dip... and then AD went down... and then Kyrie went down... opportunity lost.
