dice wrote:arasu wrote:dice wrote:why do you continue to fixate on defense while ignoring that the large difference between the quality of the two players is their OFFENSIVE ability?
Let me be clear. I'm not trying to imply that Wiggins is equal to or better than KAT. I'm relating the fact that players that are overpaid still have trade value, and those players are not an "albatross". That word is thrown around as an exaggeration by most commenters. You are just taking it literally.
so it's your position that the word should pretty much not be used at all. which is ridiculous
albatross - something burdensome that impedes action or progress - the perfect description of andrew wiggins's contract
Some players are grossly overpaid, like Wiggins, Love, and Drummond, but they can probably still get an asset back in a trade from just the right team.
putting wiggins in the same category as productive players like love and drummond is utter nonsense. john wall is the better comparison. wall will likely return and be a somewhat productive player. wiggins gets paid less but has been a LIABILITY on the floor most of his career
the wolves didn't get back an "asset" for wiggins. and they were never going to. they had to DUMP an asset in the form of a very valuable draft pick in order to reduce their LIABILITY (russell's bad contract)
Wrong. The word 'albatross' isn't just some ordinary problem or difficulty. It's a curse. If you understand the origin of the word, then you'll realize that using such a word for some ordinary problem makes no sense. People may use that word as an exaggeration, just as something good will be called "awesome", but that isn't the actual meaning. So, yes, the word should be used only very rarely for players that can't be traded without giving away assets to get another team to take them. "Albatross" players are the type of player the Amnesty Clause was created for in past CBAs. It's not ridiculous for such a word to be used very rarely. It's literally meant to be used as such.
As for the trade, Russell was clearly highly coveted by the Timberwolves, and the Warriors and everyone else knew it. The fact that so little draft capital was sent by the T-Wolves makes it very clear that Wiggins was not considered to be an "albatross" by either team. It's totally absurd to claim that the pick that was sent was to move Wiggins, unless you are going to claim that the T-Wolves didn't desperately want Russell. If you are claiming that, then everyone full-well knows you are disconnected from NBA reality.
You clearly either have an extremely unrealistic view of Wiggins or an extremely unrealistic view of Love and Drummond. Love is one of the worst defenders in the game, and Drummond's mediocre defense in no way makes up for his lack of spacing on offense and his massive head spinning gaffes. Clearly you aren't paying attention. And Wall literally has played no games in over a year, after two previous seasons of injuries, off of a career threatening injury, and soon to be on the wrong side of 30, with a monstrous 40% larger contract than Wiggins. Comparing him to Wiggins is just ludicrous. Wall and the Wizards will be lucky if he can come back anywhere near starter level. And he will likely have to re-invent himself just to get starter's minutes.
I'm done entertaining your obviously ridiculous position in this discussion.
