HotelVitale wrote:Pickled Prunes wrote:HotelVitale wrote:
Feels like you're doing a lot of mental gymnastics here to make this trade a good ideas. AD is going to make roughly the same as Luka in his next extension so they're not going to have significantly more money to play around with than they would have had with Luka.
Also the point about no one wanting to play with Luka seems pretty strained. For one we have no idea if that's true, and it also doesn't really matter if Luka's not the most beloved star. The Mavs won't have huge cap space at any point in the next couple years so they'd have to bring players in via trade, and I don't see any evidence to support the idea that players were aggressively barring any trades to Dallas. In your examples Fox was cool with going to SA because they have no real point guard and are a promising team willing to pay him, but the Spurs also gave up a good package for him. I don't see any reason to think that a similar player who was a wing or big wouldn't want to pair up with Luka as long as the Mavs could pay the price. (Also Butler didn't end up in PHX...he ended up with the team who gave the best offer for him). Harden was seen as at least as ball dominant as Luka and he still got paired up with various second stars for years.
I'm not a Mavs or Lakers fan so have no stake in this. I just don't think these justifications hold up at all, you keep pointing out flaws with Luka without saying how having a 31 year-old AD instead of a 25 year-old Luka provides an advantage anywhere. That's the actual thing we're talking about, not 'is Luka a totally dominant and flawless player who will deliver you titles without any issue or complication.'
I didn't say it was a good idea. I don't know Luka or have to deal with him day to day. I don't think I would have done it. All I'm saying is I can see reasons why DAL thought it was a good idea.
Kuzma asked not to be traded to DAL last season, and if a player at his level feels that way, I can imagine he isn't the only one. We also saw Brunson walk away and know that he would have never reached this potential in DAL. But I didn't actually say that players didn't want to play with Luka; I said free agents rarely go to DAL and Luka wasn't enough of a draw to change that.
I think players genuinely like Harden and enjoy playing with him. I think fans and players have opposite takes on these two guys. Harden's career USG% is high, but still 5.9% lower than Luka's.
It sounds like maybe you’re giving bad arguments and saying ‘they’re not good arguments but maybe a fool would make them?’ It doesn’t feel like this to me but no need to argue if all you’re trying to do is say how the Mavs FO talked themselves into a bad idea.
To that end, the point on FA is a red herring. Star free agents almost never go anywhere in FA, and good teams almost never have cap space for them. It’s just not how contenders get built around a star now, so it’s pretty irrelevant. (There have been like two examples of franchise-changing FA moves in the last 15 years, and both of them involved lebron james.) I also don’t think there’s anything to players avoiding Dallas more than other teams in FA— all other things being equal I would list it as maybe the 6-10th beat FA destination, it’s not LA but it’s a huge market and has good weather and no state taxes.
Kuzma thing is one player a year ago and he didn’t want to go for other reasons. Many many other players have been traded to Dallas since Luka established himself, and we haven’t heard any consistent refrain about not wanting to play there.
Not what I'm saying at all. Here's my point in a nutshell:
Luka is better and younger than AD.
Both have had a history of injuries.
AD's struggles to stay on the court began when he was older than Luka.
AD has always kept himself in dramatically better shape than Luka.
Luka has a lot of miles on him already.
Luka is clearly a pain in the butt, but how big of a pain in the butt we have no way of knowing.
AD has been elite for the past two seasons, putting up 26/12 and 2.2 BLK this season.
DAL was not a realistic contender as constructed, they are not a FA destination and they are asset poor.
If DAL thought they could build a contender around Luka they would have kept him.
DAL could flip AD and increase their haul, which might be part of their plan.
I probably would not have done this deal, but I definitely understand it. It isn't as one-sided as media/fans are making it out to be. If I was in DAL, watching him be a diva, and witnessing his lack of work ethic first hand, I could be swayed.
I am just discussing the deal from both sides. It is hard to remain objective if you come into it with the predetermined notion that one side out and out won a deal. We likely won't know who won for several years. How many (if any) rings Luka win? Does DAL build around AD or do they flip him for parts? What do Max Christie, that pick and the potential return in an AD trade develop into.
