2024-25 Season Discussion and Speculation Part IV

[Ghost of Kleine]

Read on Twitter

[lilfishi22]

Yea that’s an interesting point. Just can’t see KD wanting that as his final chance to win a title. I would expect there to be better options.

I think there's good reason to believe he'll prioritise going to a team that gives him the best opportunity to win again before he retires. But within that group, there is potentially scope to also add in a couple of wildcards that includes teams he's connected to for reasons outside of pure competitiveness e.g Dallas with Kyrie or Minny with Ant. So while Minny (and less so Dallas) might not be an obvious contender even with KD, I think playing with people he wants to play with is a consideration you couldn't put past him. He's done that before.

Another consideration might be that OKC don't want to mess with their core by breaking it up to bring in KD.

Wait!! So now you're actually considering the possibility that a player in KDs' position could choose a destination based upon actual "connections" for reasons outside of competitiveness?? but not too long ago, you were vehemently arguing against such a possibility in our Washington discussion. So just to be clear here, man, are you now finally acknowledging that a player, even a great player, may actually not be restricted to only one dynamic in how they make decisions and that multiple factors might be legitimate in influencing outcome. Acknowledging the very real human dynamic at play in situations too.

Actually, I fully stand by my position here. When I mentioned wildcards like Minnesota and Dallas, I was specifically referring to teams that have the foundations of playoff-level rosters and potential to be better with KD, even if they're not current contenders. These teams have strong foundational pieces, and while they might not be top-tier title favorites, they still have the existing framework to be competitive.

What I originally suggested is that, if pure competitiveness were the only consideration, Durant would likely focus on teams that are already championship contenders, like OKC, Cleveland, or Boston. However, that doesn't mean competitiveness is not a factor in his decision-making. It's still very likely to be a major consideration, possibly the most important one. But the key point is that other factors might also influence his choice, particularly personal connections to players like Kyrie in Dallas or Ant in Minny, much like his bond with Booker in Phoenix. What is pretty clearly absent with Washington is any semblance of a competitive roster, recent history of playoff experience/success, a star/stars that is ready to compete right now, an experienced and proven head coach or even a clear pathway to build a contender within the short term. The only straw your clutching onto is that KD is from Washington which flies in the face of any reasonable argument that he'd bet his last few years of elite basketball on an 11 win team.

What I suggested in my post is that there may be other considerations in addition to the key priority of competitiveness like personal connections that could open up more candidates beyond the ones which are already contenders. But again, there is zero suggestion that an uncompetitive tanking team is a serious consideration which is perfectly in line with my prior post.

[lilfishi22]

I get what you're saying about poor fit, but again as I stated in my previous post, my thought process on this wasn't as a long term option, but rather a mechanism for cap reduction and getting two 1sts in the process as sweeteners that they could obviously use in other trades or simply because they only have 4 picks left that they can't use because of the Stepien rules.

Now 30 million may not make them major players in 26' free agency, but they could still do 1-2 things around that and those picks.

1- While that 30 million doesn't give them huge cap flexibility for 26, it still would give them upwards of $ 39 million (up to right under the 2nd apron) to add a key player or pieces in free agency.

And a few such players likely available in that range (unrestricted free agency) would be:

McCollum, Middleton, Harris, Simon's, Smart, Bridges, Robinson, Powell, Barnes, Rui Hachimura, Huerter, DFinney Smith, Coby White, Simone Fontecchio, Kelly Oubre, etc.

So obviously they could find value in being able to upgrade a singular position or possibly multiple more cost effective positions?

2- They could look to trade Randles' expiring around the deadline with those picks for players, etc. In trades? Perhaps they look to add another SG/ Small Forward to make up for losing KCP? Or a point Guard like Smart to replace what they lost in Brown? The point being that ita possible to utilize Randle in multiple ways to address needs and interests.

Potters a great shooter at 20 points a game. With size and good efficiency. But for his contract, maybe just maybe they look to break that up into multiple positions? Or a singular two way upgrade as MPJr is not a good defender despite his offensive value?

Ultimately it only " doesn't make any sense whatsoever" if you're choosing to look at it from a very limited range/ POV. Most teams look beyond one singular possibility in order to remain adaptable to current trends.

When you're over the cap, you're over the cap, you can't play in free agency with no cap space. Doesn't matter how far under the apron you are, you just can't go out and sign someone in free agency into cap space when you don't have any. You COULD trade for a player or a package of players that brings back more salary (up to 125% +100k) or they COULD use exceptions to make use of their space under the aprons but that's a $13-14m player at most. I think they'd probably rather have MPJ than any of the players you've listed.

Sure they're over the cap line (by about 70 million) BUT................with the cap increases changing the Luxury tax to around 187.9 million and the 2nd apron raising to 208 million, Randles' expiring could put them up to $39 million under the 2nd apron. So Denver could still trade for another player making 39 million or less, or multiple pieces in a trade that meets their needs/ interests, up to 39 million.

For example, IF they really wanted to add defense after losing KCP and Brown, they could explore trading for Marcus Smart, maybe Bridges (IF New York really wants to get more cap reduction)? Or they could look to trade Randles' expiring to Orlando for KCP/ Harris 7 million expiring back? Or maybe to Dallas for Thompson/ Martin or Marshall perhaps? since they currently have no legit frontcourt size or post presence? But without any long-term commitment, also helping their cap situation too.

I mean who really knows what players they might target? I get it's your opinion that they'd prefer MPJr over another player or addressing multiple depth positions possibly. And you're absolutely entitled to your opinions as we all are. But truthfully none of us know or can accurately speak to their plans/ intentions under this new CBA. And also objectively taking into consideration............ however they finish out this season, could also make reassessing and pivoting to a different or unexpected strategy absolutely viable. Making some of these suggested moves could also help set them up to get closer to actual cap flexibility in moving MPJr's contract for cumulative salaries with shorter or possibly unguaranteed years, etc. And maybe that could be a partial goal the Nuggeeets front office might see value in going forward man?

The problem with many of your posts is that your arguments very often suggest a false equivalency. Because we don't know/can't know, then in your mind anything is possible. You give equal weighting to arguments regardless of how likely or unlikely they are because your argument hides behinds the notion of "no one knows, so anything is possible". Like with the KD to Washington argument.

Likelihood =/= Possibility. I am not debating possibility. Anything is possible. They could trade Jokic away for fillers and picks because it's possible under the CBA. But we can both comfortable agree it's not very likely.

[Ghost of Kleine]

I think there's good reason to believe he'll prioritise going to a team that gives him the best opportunity to win again before he retires. But within that group, there is potentially scope to also add in a couple of wildcards that includes teams he's connected to for reasons outside of pure competitiveness e.g Dallas with Kyrie or Minny with Ant. So while Minny (and less so Dallas) might not be an obvious contender even with KD, I think playing with people he wants to play with is a consideration you couldn't put past him. He's done that before.

Another consideration might be that OKC don't want to mess with their core by breaking it up to bring in KD.

Wait!! So now you're actually considering the possibility that a player in KDs' position could choose a destination based upon actual "connections" for reasons outside of competitiveness?? but not too long ago, you were vehemently arguing against such a possibility in our Washington discussion. So just to be clear here, man, are you now finally acknowledging that a player, even a great player, may actually not be restricted to only one dynamic in how they make decisions and that multiple factors might be legitimate in influencing outcome. Acknowledging the very real human dynamic at play in situations too.

Actually, I fully stand by my position here. When I mentioned wildcards like Minnesota and Dallas, I was specifically referring to teams that have the foundations of playoff-level rosters and potential to be better with KD, even if they're not current contenders. These teams have strong foundational pieces, and while they might not be top-tier title favorites, they still have the existing framework to be competitive.

- So adding KD to Washington's roster wouldn't make them better or more competitive? Also revisiting the context of this argument, currently in the east, you can sneak into the playoffs or play in tournament with only 26-30 wins. Washington even though currently intentionally tanking, has still managed 13 wins. Now considering it only taking 30 wins to be the 8th seed(still a playoff level team) or only 26 wins to reach the play-in tournament, there well within half way there while not trying to win! So as I previously premised, IF KD chose to go there, and Washington obviously shifted their competitive trajectory with him, you don't really believe they could manage 15-20 more wins with KD on their roster? Also, you don't think having players like Marcus Smart, Khris Middleton, Richaun Holmes, Bilal Coulilaby and Alex Sarr are good enough foundational pieces to achieve those 15-20 more wins in a full season with KD?? Not even considering what other pieces they could also add as well! from the position you're taking, man, this becomes an illogical fallacy argument for your position.

What I originally suggested is that, if pure competitiveness were the only consideration, Durant would likely focus on teams that are already championship contenders, like OKC, Cleveland, or Boston. However, that doesn't mean competitiveness is not a factor in his decision-making. It's still very likely to be a major consideration, possibly the most important one. But the key point is that other factors might also influence his choice, particularly personal connections to players like Kyrie in Dallas or Ant in Minny, much like his bond with Booker in Phoenix. What is pretty clearly absent with Washington is any semblance of a competitive roster, recent history of playoff experience/success, a star/stars that is ready to compete right now, an experienced and proven head coach or even a clear pathway to build a contender within the short term. The only straw your clutching onto is that KD is from Washington which flies in the face of any reasonable argument that he'd bet his last few years of elite basketball on an 11 win team.

- But can you say with any legitimate certainty or referenced evidence that for KD, competitiveness is the only consideration? You claiming that it's the most important factor in his decision at this stage of his career is subjective conjecture at best, man. Again, per the bolded statement you made above, you acknowledge the possibility and likelihood of other contributory factors. And clearly these multiple factors can scale in importance depending upon individual situation or priorities. You claim what is absent with Washington is any semblance of a competitive roster, yet again, despite deliberately tanking, they're still competitive enough to already have 13 wins. Now in thee East, if the threshold to be a legit playoff team is only 30 wins, and Washington already has 13 without really trying, there at a 43.3 % winning percentage.

Now compare that to ours with our already having our big three of KD, Booker, and Beal. And we only have a 46% winning percentage and Washington actually has a slightly better winning percentage than Portland, who might overtake us too. And obviously by these standards/ thresholds, Washington, even without any stars, isn't really that far off from us right now with vastly more depth and star talent. So clearly claiming they lack any semblance of a competitive roster is contextually wrong when taking both situations into objective consideration for the purposes of a contextual comparison.

Lastly, you really can't make an accurate assessment to their ability to create a clear pathway to building a contender because there's simply too many variables that can affect this premise and they clearly have multiple mechanisms (assets) for rapid short term improvement! Lastly, I'm not clutching to any straws here as I've listed multiple considerations in addition to KD being from Washington. You just choose to actively dismiss them based upon your subjective opinions. And honestly, claiming that I'm clutching to a "straw man" position is really just an "appeal to ignorance" claim to promote your opinion. And again, a 13-win team, even while deliberately trying to tank, while we're only a 30-win team despite trying to win, having the highest payroll in NBA history, and loads more star talent and depth pieces. So obviously equity of outcome is subjective and situationally scalable.

What I suggested in my post is that there may be other considerations in addition to the key priority of competitiveness like personal connections that could open up more candidates beyond the ones which are already contenders. But again, there is zero suggestion that an uncompetitive tanking team is a serious consideration which is perfectly in line with my prior post.

- So you only admit that there may be other considerations, IN ADDITION TO the key priority of competitiveness. such as "personal connections" (isn't family, close friends, and home in that grouping for most people though)?? But you then go on to promote your subjective opinion against Washington being a serious consideration on the premise that they're currently tanking. Yet we all know how quickly a position or strategy can change now, don't we, depending upon individual circumstances. There's a bunch of really bad non-playoff or lottery range teams that have turned things around quickly and made the playoffs, man. Most in the East ironically. But clearly it happens and has happened historically. So that premise is absolutely a valid possibility. The circumstances only need a change of KDs' willingness to go there as a trigger to pivot competitively.

[Ghost of Kleine]

When you're over the cap, you're over the cap, you can't play in free agency with no cap space. Doesn't matter how far under the apron you are, you just can't go out and sign someone in free agency into cap space when you don't have any. You COULD trade for a player or a package of players that brings back more salary (up to 125% +100k) or they COULD use exceptions to make use of their space under the aprons but that's a $13-14m player at most. I think they'd probably rather have MPJ than any of the players you've listed.

Sure they're over the cap line (by about 70 million) BUT................with the cap increases changing the Luxury tax to around 187.9 million and the 2nd apron raising to 208 million, Randles' expiring could put them up to $39 million under the 2nd apron. So Denver could still trade for another player making 39 million or less, or multiple pieces in a trade that meets their needs/ interests, up to 39 million.

For example, IF they really wanted to add defense after losing KCP and Brown, they could explore trading for Marcus Smart, maybe Bridges (IF New York really wants to get more cap reduction)? Or they could look to trade Randles' expiring to Orlando for KCP/ Harris 7 million expiring back? Or maybe to Dallas for Thompson/ Martin or Marshall perhaps? since they currently have no legit frontcourt size or post presence? But without any long-term commitment, also helping their cap situation too.

I mean who really knows what players they might target? I get it's your opinion that they'd prefer MPJr over another player or addressing multiple depth positions possibly. And you're absolutely entitled to your opinions as we all are. But truthfully none of us know or can accurately speak to their plans/ intentions under this new CBA. And also objectively taking into consideration............ however they finish out this season, could also make reassessing and pivoting to a different or unexpected strategy absolutely viable. Making some of these suggested moves could also help set them up to get closer to actual cap flexibility in moving MPJr's contract for cumulative salaries with shorter or possibly unguaranteed years, etc. And maybe that could be a partial goal the Nuggeeets front office might see value in going forward man?

The problem with many of your posts is that your arguments very often suggest a false equivalency. Because we don't know/can't know, then in your mind anything is possible. You give equal weighting to arguments regardless of how likely or unlikely they are because your argument hides behinds the notion of "no one knows, so anything is possible". Like with the KD to Washington argument.

Likelihood =/= Possibility. I am not debating possibility. Anything is possible. They could trade Jokic away for fillers and picks because it's possible under the CBA. But we can both comfortable agree it's not very likely.

But then by the very same standard, your argument is also a false equivalency with basis on appeal to ignorance because you also can present no evidence to the contrary besides your own subjective interpretation of someone else's hypothetical values and priorities that you only promote as valid if it fits your narrative or perspective so your view is not legitimately objective in such a discussion but subjective to your own implicit biases on how you yourself would value the implied considerations being discussed but at no time removing your own subjective feelings or views on the premise to take a more detached and objective view on the premise.

Of course anything is possible. But regardless of which side of this premise you perspectively personally fall on, this is still only a hypothetical premise absent of any credentialed or vetted evidence in support of or to substantiate either position beyond refute or contestation. So in that, you can really only argue from a position of subjective opinion or reasonable plausibility dependent and scalable by indeterminate variables. Thusly just leaving logical assessment of human nature in varying situational outcomes. And if you admit that any outcome is possible, separate from likelihood, then even that possibility is largely scalable in range of likelihood depending upon individual and situational context. So just as likelihood may not equal possibility, individual opinion exterior to the premise doesn't inhibit or diminish the likelihood of outcome being possible and then increasing in likelihood due to individual situational/ contextual variables.

[Frank Lee]

Ghost is from the ‘Wonka’ school of trading. Graduating with honors, he earned his top hat and cane.

Watch on YouTube

Come with me and you'll be
In a world of pure imagination
Reach out, touch what was once
Just in your imagination
Don't be shy, it's alright
If you feel a little trepidation
Sometimes these things don't need
Explanation

[sunsbum]

Y'all are too much this morning

[Ghost of Kleine]

To piggyback off the Randle Premise a bit, I wonder if Chicago would do a Randle/ CLE 27' 1st for Ball/Collins trade? Considering they have a ton of guards already, and a floor spacing center in Vucevic that'd complement Randles' inside power game fairly well? And we would be a long-term commitment either, so they could pivot if they chose to?

Or else maybe to Portland (along with Milicic or Martins' 8 million expiring and two 1sts) for Jrami Grants' contract and Camara. I say this because Portland has been really trying to get off of Grants' money (viewed as 2nd worst value contract behind Beals') and reduce their cap line significantly. The two 1sts would primarily be for Camaras' escalating value.


Or maybe New York would take him back (along with 2 1sts) to create cap space/ flexibility and get some draft assets back in a deal for Bridges? I mean sure, he's been good and they gave up a bunch of picks for him. But they have a logjam at SF and not great depth at PF. And the potential cap reduction might be very appealing to them too.

Or lastly, maybe really look at Utah, putting together a package around Randle (30 million)/ Milicic (8 million expiring) and 2-3 1sts for Markannen?? IF Pincus' reports are correct that Utah might be looking to get off of Markannen's long-term money seeing as they're still rebuilding and nowhere near competitive! Then you load up on defensive players around a big 3 core of Booker/ Markannen/ Beal (plus whatever vet pieces you might get back from a KD trade? For example, IF KD goes to Dallas, then maybe a lineup of:

Booker/ Beal/ Marshall/ Markannen/ Gafford.
Paul/ Thompson/ Washington/ Bol Bol/ Richards.
Gillespie / FA / Dunn / DRAFT / Plumlee.

POR sees Camara as a long term piece.

Dumping Grant would be great but better to hope he can improve his value back to somewhere near neutral.

For sure! And I can appreciate that. But if he were to for whatever reason become available, what value would you put on him in a trade?

[Ghost of Kleine]

Read on Twitter

[Ghost of Kleine]

Ghost is from the ‘Wonka’ school of trading. Graduating with honors, he earned his top hat and cane.

Watch on YouTube

Come with me and you'll be
In a world of pure imagination
Reach out, touch what was once
Just in your imagination
Don't be shy, it's alright
If you feel a little trepidation
Sometimes these things don't need
Explanation

Lol! Very funny and clever as always man.

[Ghost of Kleine]

Read on Twitter

[Ghost of Kleine]

Read on Twitter

So three firsts is definitely aiming high, which is what you should do in preliminary negotiations to root out most illegitimate low ball offers. You should always start high and negotiate on an equitable compromise outcome based on the variables involved.

Ultimately it depends upon the players and value of the picks involved. Though the mention of 3 1sts also leads me to believe that OKC or Houston is definitely in consideration??

[JRoy]

To piggyback off the Randle Premise a bit, I wonder if Chicago would do a Randle/ CLE 27' 1st for Ball/Collins trade? Considering they have a ton of guards already, and a floor spacing center in Vucevic that'd complement Randles' inside power game fairly well? And we would be a long-term commitment either, so they could pivot if they chose to?

Or else maybe to Portland (along with Milicic or Martins' 8 million expiring and two 1sts) for Jrami Grants' contract and Camara. I say this because Portland has been really trying to get off of Grants' money (viewed as 2nd worst value contract behind Beals') and reduce their cap line significantly. The two 1sts would primarily be for Camaras' escalating value.


Or maybe New York would take him back (along with 2 1sts) to create cap space/ flexibility and get some draft assets back in a deal for Bridges? I mean sure, he's been good and they gave up a bunch of picks for him. But they have a logjam at SF and not great depth at PF. And the potential cap reduction might be very appealing to them too.

Or lastly, maybe really look at Utah, putting together a package around Randle (30 million)/ Milicic (8 million expiring) and 2-3 1sts for Markannen?? IF Pincus' reports are correct that Utah might be looking to get off of Markannen's long-term money seeing as they're still rebuilding and nowhere near competitive! Then you load up on defensive players around a big 3 core of Booker/ Markannen/ Beal (plus whatever vet pieces you might get back from a KD trade? For example, IF KD goes to Dallas, then maybe a lineup of:

Booker/ Beal/ Marshall/ Markannen/ Gafford.
Paul/ Thompson/ Washington/ Bol Bol/ Richards.
Gillespie / FA / Dunn / DRAFT / Plumlee.

POR sees Camara as a long term piece.

Dumping Grant would be great but better to hope he can improve his value back to somewhere near neutral.

For sure! And I can appreciate that. But if he were to for whatever reason become available, what value would you put on him in a trade?

POR would want more for him than any team could be reasonably expected to offer.

[SunsRback4Good]

POR sees Camara as a long term piece.

Dumping Grant would be great but better to hope he can improve his value back to somewhere near neutral.

For sure! And I can appreciate that. But if he were to for whatever reason become available, what value would you put on him in a trade?

POR would want more for him than any team could be reasonably expected to offer.

We’ll give you Royce & Allen for Camara and not a penny more. Anything short of that trade and Suns laugh.

[thamadkant]

Doubt Ainge will trade Markannen.

My take on Ainge is that he was brought in to build a culture for Utah Jazz. It's a long term thing and bringing in young urban-oriented players who love the night life and the spotlight aren't good targets for Utah Jazz. They want country kids, or international players who likes raising horses and living at farms rather than going clubs, parties or celebrity events.

[JRoy]

For sure! And I can appreciate that. But if he were to for whatever reason become available, what value would you put on him in a trade?

POR would want more for him than any team could be reasonably expected to offer.

We’ll give you Royce & Allen for Camara and not a penny more. Anything short of that trade and Suns laugh.

Laugh away while we keep Camara.

[Ghost of Kleine]

POR sees Camara as a long term piece.

Dumping Grant would be great but better to hope he can improve his value back to somewhere near neutral.

For sure! And I can appreciate that. But if he were to for whatever reason become available, what value would you put on him in a trade?

POR would want more for him than any team could be reasonably expected to offer.

Man! I can understand that! What a coup you guys pulled off from the Aygon deal! You guys have such an exciting young team and great front office/ GM. I'm not sure we'd ever get to live this decision down.

But tis the life of a suns fan I guess! Lol I've followed this team for close to 50 yrs now. And damn do they find the most creative ways to implode and RIP fans hearts out.

What's the consensus on Ayton recently?

[lilfishi22]

Sure they're over the cap line (by about 70 million) BUT................with the cap increases changing the Luxury tax to around 187.9 million and the 2nd apron raising to 208 million, Randles' expiring could put them up to $39 million under the 2nd apron. So Denver could still trade for another player making 39 million or less, or multiple pieces in a trade that meets their needs/ interests, up to 39 million.

For example, IF they really wanted to add defense after losing KCP and Brown, they could explore trading for Marcus Smart, maybe Bridges (IF New York really wants to get more cap reduction)? Or they could look to trade Randles' expiring to Orlando for KCP/ Harris 7 million expiring back? Or maybe to Dallas for Thompson/ Martin or Marshall perhaps? since they currently have no legit frontcourt size or post presence? But without any long-term commitment, also helping their cap situation too.

I mean who really knows what players they might target? I get it's your opinion that they'd prefer MPJr over another player or addressing multiple depth positions possibly. And you're absolutely entitled to your opinions as we all are. But truthfully none of us know or can accurately speak to their plans/ intentions under this new CBA. And also objectively taking into consideration............ however they finish out this season, could also make reassessing and pivoting to a different or unexpected strategy absolutely viable. Making some of these suggested moves could also help set them up to get closer to actual cap flexibility in moving MPJr's contract for cumulative salaries with shorter or possibly unguaranteed years, etc. And maybe that could be a partial goal the Nuggeeets front office might see value in going forward man?

The problem with many of your posts is that your arguments very often suggest a false equivalency. Because we don't know/can't know, then in your mind anything is possible. You give equal weighting to arguments regardless of how likely or unlikely they are because your argument hides behinds the notion of "no one knows, so anything is possible". Like with the KD to Washington argument.

Likelihood =/= Possibility. I am not debating possibility. Anything is possible. They could trade Jokic away for fillers and picks because it's possible under the CBA. But we can both comfortable agree it's not very likely.

But then by the very same standard, your argument is also a false equivalency with basis on appeal to ignorance because you also can present no evidence to the contrary besides your own subjective interpretation of someone else's hypothetical values and priorities that you only promote as valid if it fits your narrative or perspective so your view is not legitimately objective in such a discussion but subjective to your own implicit biases on how you yourself would value the implied considerations being discussed but at no time removing your own subjective feelings or views on the premise to take a more detached and objective view on the premise.

Of course anything is possible. But regardless of which side of this premise you perspectively personally fall on, this is still only a hypothetical premise absent of any credentialed or vetted evidence in support of or to substantiate either position beyond refute or contestation. So in that, you can really only argue from a position of subjective opinion or reasonable plausibility dependent and scalable by indeterminate variables. Thusly just leaving logical assessment of human nature in varying situational outcomes. And if you admit that any outcome is possible, separate from likelihood, then even that possibility is largely scalable in range of likelihood depending upon individual and situational context. So just as likelihood may not equal possibility, individual opinion exterior to the premise doesn't inhibit or diminish the likelihood of outcome being possible and then increasing in likelihood due to individual situational/ contextual variables.

I test my arguments on the basis on reasonableness. Is it reasonable that Kevin Durant would seriously consider Washington. The answer is no. Does that mean, he won't or that he can't? Of course not. The CBA allows a trade to happen so it's possible. But I'm again not debating possibility because then you're opening a massive can of worms by considering all possibilities. But that's what you do and when you do it, you assign equal likelihood to unlikely possibilities. That's the problem I have with your arguments.

Arguing for something that is highly unlikely is your prerogative but at the very least recognise that not all possibilities have the same probabilities.

Of course anything is possible. But regardless of which side of this premise you perspectively personally fall on, this is still only a hypothetical premise absent of any credentialed or vetted evidence in support of or to substantiate either position beyond refute or contestation.

This is the issue that you're still not comprehending with your arguments. I'm also 99% sure your using a chatgpt to write your posts

[lilfishi22]

Wait!! So now you're actually considering the possibility that a player in KDs' position could choose a destination based upon actual "connections" for reasons outside of competitiveness?? but not too long ago, you were vehemently arguing against such a possibility in our Washington discussion. So just to be clear here, man, are you now finally acknowledging that a player, even a great player, may actually not be restricted to only one dynamic in how they make decisions and that multiple factors might be legitimate in influencing outcome. Acknowledging the very real human dynamic at play in situations too.

Actually, I fully stand by my position here. When I mentioned wildcards like Minnesota and Dallas, I was specifically referring to teams that have the foundations of playoff-level rosters and potential to be better with KD, even if they're not current contenders. These teams have strong foundational pieces, and while they might not be top-tier title favorites, they still have the existing framework to be competitive.

- So adding KD to Washington's roster wouldn't make them better or more competitive? Also revisiting the context of this argument, currently in the east, you can sneak into the playoffs or play in tournament with only 26-30 wins. Washington even though currently intentionally tanking, has still managed 13 wins. Now considering it only taking 30 wins to be the 8th seed(still a playoff level team) or only 26 wins to reach the play-in tournament, there well within half way there while not trying to win! So as I previously premised, IF KD chose to go there, and Washington obviously shifted their competitive trajectory with him, you don't really believe they could manage 15-20 more wins with KD on their roster? Also, you don't think having players like Marcus Smart, Khris Middleton, Richaun Holmes, Bilal Coulilaby and Alex Sarr are good enough foundational pieces to achieve those 15-20 more wins in a full season with KD?? Not even considering what other pieces they could also add as well! from the position you're taking, man, this becomes an illogical fallacy argument for your position.

What I originally suggested is that, if pure competitiveness were the only consideration, Durant would likely focus on teams that are already championship contenders, like OKC, Cleveland, or Boston. However, that doesn't mean competitiveness is not a factor in his decision-making. It's still very likely to be a major consideration, possibly the most important one. But the key point is that other factors might also influence his choice, particularly personal connections to players like Kyrie in Dallas or Ant in Minny, much like his bond with Booker in Phoenix. What is pretty clearly absent with Washington is any semblance of a competitive roster, recent history of playoff experience/success, a star/stars that is ready to compete right now, an experienced and proven head coach or even a clear pathway to build a contender within the short term. The only straw your clutching onto is that KD is from Washington which flies in the face of any reasonable argument that he'd bet his last few years of elite basketball on an 11 win team.

- But can you say with any legitimate certainty or referenced evidence that for KD, competitiveness is the only consideration? You claiming that it's the most important factor in his decision at this stage of his career is subjective conjecture at best, man. Again, per the bolded statement you made above, you acknowledge the possibility and likelihood of other contributory factors. And clearly these multiple factors can scale in importance depending upon individual situation or priorities. You claim what is absent with Washington is any semblance of a competitive roster, yet again, despite deliberately tanking, they're still competitive enough to already have 13 wins. Now in thee East, if the threshold to be a legit playoff team is only 30 wins, and Washington already has 13 without really trying, there at a 43.3 % winning percentage.

Now compare that to ours with our already having our big three of KD, Booker, and Beal. And we only have a 46% winning percentage and Washington actually has a slightly better winning percentage than Portland, who might overtake us too. And obviously by these standards/ thresholds, Washington, even without any stars, isn't really that far off from us right now with vastly more depth and star talent. So clearly claiming they lack any semblance of a competitive roster is contextually wrong when taking both situations into objective consideration for the purposes of a contextual comparison.

Lastly, you really can't make an accurate assessment to their ability to create a clear pathway to building a contender because there's simply too many variables that can affect this premise and they clearly have multiple mechanisms (assets) for rapid short term improvement! Lastly, I'm not clutching to any straws here as I've listed multiple considerations in addition to KD being from Washington. You just choose to actively dismiss them based upon your subjective opinions. And honestly, claiming that I'm clutching to a "straw man" position is really just an "appeal to ignorance" claim to promote your opinion. And again, a 13-win team, even while deliberately trying to tank, while we're only a 30-win team despite trying to win, having the highest payroll in NBA history, and loads more star talent and depth pieces. So obviously equity of outcome is subjective and situationally scalable.

What I suggested in my post is that there may be other considerations in addition to the key priority of competitiveness like personal connections that could open up more candidates beyond the ones which are already contenders. But again, there is zero suggestion that an uncompetitive tanking team is a serious consideration which is perfectly in line with my prior post.

- So you only admit that there may be other considerations, IN ADDITION TO the key priority of competitiveness. such as "personal connections" (isn't family, close friends, and home in that grouping for most people though)?? But you then go on to promote your subjective opinion against Washington being a serious consideration on the premise that they're currently tanking. Yet we all know how quickly a position or strategy can change now, don't we, depending upon individual circumstances. There's a bunch of really bad non-playoff or lottery range teams that have turned things around quickly and made the playoffs, man. Most in the East ironically. But clearly it happens and has happened historically. So that premise is absolutely a valid possibility. The circumstances only need a change of KDs' willingness to go there as a trigger to pivot competitively.

You're picking up keywords in my argument to substantiate yours and you're not even picking up the keywords I literally bolded because those are the keywords I want to emphasis

[Ghost of Kleine]

Doubt Ainge will trade Markannen.

My take on Ainge is that he was brought in to build a culture for Utah Jazz. It's a long term thing and bringing in young urban-oriented players who love the night life and the spotlight aren't good targets for Utah Jazz. They want country kids, or international players who likes raising horses and living at farms rather than going clubs, parties or celebrity events.

Sure! I lived in utah for a decade in the 90s and the environment is a fair amount what you described. Lol! Pretty spot on with maybe a splash of the " pleasantville" movie too.

But Pincus' article on the premised KD 3 way Phoenix/ Houston/ Utah trade did have me wondering on the idea of Utah because they're trying to bottom out and tank, maybe getting out from under Markkanens' long term big salary deal could have value to them towards fully bottoming out for high lottery picks?

And I'd have to wonder if Markannen would be cool with staying through a potential long term rebuild rather than competing elsewhere? Not that I'd full on want Markannen for the money yet makes, but I guess if KD is gone and we need frontcourt scoring compliment for Beal if Ishbia refuses to tank or rebuild, then under those conditions, maybe Markannen wouldn't be such a bad fit overall?

Would they take KD as a huge expiring to get off of Markannens' long term money? Under the premise of fully bottoming out? What if we did replace KD with Markannen and then were able to trade Beal to Orlando for Orlando for isaac/ Suggs, etc?

Suggs/ Booker/ Issac/ Markannen/ Richards?

Would that he an enticing and competitive reload (around Booker option)?? If we did that, should we also consider trading Allen to Orlando for Bidatze? Or keep him. Would that be a potential playoff lineup?