41Dirk41 wrote:BliscoSantos wrote:ozwizard8 wrote:The problem is not resigning Powell and Maxi.
The problem is spending assets on Kyrie. And resigning him to a max contract.
At this point it should be very easy to trade Powell. Maxi is earning bench money anyway.
What assets did they really give up for Kyrie??one first,and two rotational Players...I Love Dodo ,but he's a complementary piece,a bench Player on a contender,unless you have 4 better players in the starting five...Maxi on 11 mio a year terrible,since he can't stay healthy and even when he is ,is affraid to shoot the three...they shouldn't have resigned him with one year left on his old deal...it was a big mistakes,cause he ain't young no more
I told him a thousand times... It's useless.
Mavs lose because Irving not because they have the worst bigs package in the league... Yes of course
Are you 7 years old?
Follow the argument. Kyrie costs too much of money and assets but he only improves the offense marginally.
Kyrie is not worth it. Look at last 7 years!!!
Imagine your parent gives you $20 for lunch and they tell you eat balanced/healthy.
- You spent $13.99 for a fancy ‘healthy’ water brand. Then buy mcdonalds with rest of your money.
what did you do? You did not eat a healthy meal. Defending Kyrie is like defending the purchase of fancy water for health while eating **** food.
Investing in Kyrie is same ****. Considering you have Luka, you should’ve invested in a frontcourt. Dont try to explain me why a fancy water brand is more healthy while it forces you to eat mcdonalds.
If there were no salary, trade asset limitations, then you could’ve buy fancy water and fancy main meal (Kyrie+Luka+ elite frontcourt is not possible in NBA)