MagicMatic wrote:Not really. I'm saying that the cost benefit of the players you are talking about matters in the grand scheme of things.
People are talking about re-inventing the wheel for a team that has a few missing ingredients and not another main course. I'm not opposed to Monk. I just disagree with the reasoning behind acquiring him if it means not solving the point guard issue. Tyus Jones is just an example of a point guard at that value level, rather than suggesting he's the better player 1:1.
In terms of Monk specifically, I think you have to believe his skillset translates to him being on the basketball for 30 MPG in a starting role as a lead guard in order to be willing to commit 20M AAV or more to get him out of Sacramento.
If you don't believe that to be the case for him, which is perfectly reasonable because I'm not sure it is either, then I just wouldn't sign him.
Paul George is different story. He's still a tremendously good basketball player and should be able to keep playing at his current all-star caliber level for at least the next two years.
I just think on ability alone you'd have to bring him in if it would cost nothing more than cap space. It's incredibly rare to be able to just outright sign a guy in free agency who made an all-star team the previous two years.