EvanZ wrote:vvoland wrote:EvanZ wrote:JK is a cyanide tablet for us. If we pay him what he wants or even close, then we will be forced to play him because otherwise that contract becomes…toxic asset. Don’t you people see it? And if we play him, then it’s almost guaranteed to be a disaster. I just don’t see how this ends well. At this point I think GS just has to get off him. Yes they burned an asset. It sucks. But don’t make it worse. Sunk cost fallacy and all.
Just a week ago you were fine with a 'goldilocks' contract in the low 20s. It's looking more and more like a 2 year deal starting at 23 or so. It's now a cyanide tablet? What changed? His unwillingness to give up the NTC in a TO 2nd year?
The whole point was to be able to trade him. His value is probably less than $20M and will get even worse when Kerr doesn’t play him.
That's fair. I don't think his value is less than 20 when, even in a super depressed RFA market he has two offers with an AAV in the low 20s. I think he'll be easily tradeable on a 2/45-50 type deal. It may get worse if Kerr doesn't play him but I don't think that will be much of an issue early in the season. Come April and the playoffs, Kerr may revert back to DNP-CDs but between Halloween and the deadline, I think Kerr plays him, if only because he knows it would be the best way to get him off the team.
I actually don't think it's anywhere near as bad as people think. The dubs have been consistent in taking these negotiations fairly late in the window and JK hasn't said anything negative about the team, or vice versa. The worst thing I've heard is JK's hesitation in trusting Kerr that he'll be a big piece of the rotation, if not a starter. From the team side, the attempt to get the TO and no trade clause dropped is pretty balsy. All in all, a fairly tame negotiation, albeit a tad too public for my tastes. That + the tight RFA market makes me think this is all much ado about nothing.