Marc J. Spears ✔ @SpearsNBAYahoo Follow Suns interested in Love deal w/best assets Dragic, Bledsoe & picks.NBA sources say it will take full max deal to control free agent Bledsoe.
If they traded Dragic, Bledsoe and picks, then who is he supposed to play with in Phoenix?
Really not trying to be so bias here but the Bulls are the best destination for any of these players. We're seriously the only team that has the assets that hold enough value to acquire a star player while also being a contender with talent, and coaching--while in a big market. Its seriously a no brainer.
Magilla_Gorilla wrote:1. You weren't quoted or mentioned in my post.
2. My jokes are hilarious.
1. That is a public forum. If you don't want that someone specific comments on your posts, write PMs.
2. That may be true. But there is always variance.
KingCuban wrote:Being arrogant and condescending is also useless, which you've been warned about on many occasions. Address your fellow posters accordingly, or don't post.
This is a public warning.
EDIT - Yeah that's not going to fly.
- MJ
Spoiler:
Michael Scott wrote:Few things. 1) you're still giving up WAY more if you part with future assets. Who cares if they're the future? You're still giving them up. God forbid, rose has another injury and never plays a meaningful minute again, while noah slowly ages, and all our future assets are invested in Love- so were in the same boat as the Knicks and Nets- we went all out and now have nothing to rebuild with when we will be destined for mediocrity with Love at the helm. Of course it all Depends how much we give up, but I'm still apprehensive.
2) I do understand defensive schemes. How about the fact that in The Thibs Era, rarely, if ever, do we see him play a small lineup. There is always 2 true bigs out there- so I highly doubt Melo would play the 4 here, when we could have Taj and Noah play the 4 and 5 and assure Thibs that he still has one of the deadliest defensive 4+5 combo in the game standing behind out perimeter guys when they get beat. And I think melo would be just fine as a 3. He's done it for the majority of his career. He likes the post up/ ISO from the right wing at about 19 feet- not your traditional PF placement.
3) Love is not replacing Boozer anymore; he'd be replacing Taj in that scenario, since Taj is the starting4 as of right now. So I stand by my argument that Melo's superiority to jimmy and dun heavily outweigh Love's to Taj.
Regardless, thanks for clarifying your stance on the Jimmy thing. If we got Love while keeping jimmy taj and noah, and some future assets, and adding some perimeter help, you won't hear complaints from me. Unfortunately, that seems far- fetched.
1. Love is also a future asset. Having such player for his prime is really valuable. That's why a team should give up other future assets for him. I also don't see the Bulls being able to just simply add Anthony, in fact most of that is cheap talk and the most likely scenario will be him signing a new 5yr max with the Knicks. Anthony didn't care that the Knicks gave up a lot for him, he wanted to be in NY, that's where he comes, that's where his friends&family live, that's what his wife wanted. And in the end, the Knicks don't need to make a S&T, they may simple call the bluff and see what happens.
2. Not being "traditional" is the reason for the higher impact. If you let Anthony play SF, you take that impact away. The impact by a "Stretch 4" comes from the fact that the defense can choose between staying with him and sacrificing help defense or don't give up the spacing inside while likely have to deal with open perimeter shots. When you use someone like Anthony as your PF, spread out the two wings and the lead guard on the perimeter, the double either have to come from the C or from one of the wings, while the spacing will allow the offensive teams all kinds of offensive actions. That's what Love does too, just that Love more often attacks the rim from that position or makes the proper pass while Anthony is looking for a shot. What do you want more? Love's offensive approach leads to better overall offensive efficiency. When you play such player as SF, the defense inside can simply stay put, not need to expose the interior in such a scenario by simply sending the PF for the help, like they usually do. That gives no further positive impact. You can see the same effect for Durant, where his impact offensively when playing PF is bigger than as SF.
3. Love would replace Boozer, Boozer would be the one gone. Gibson would be the backup PF/C like he played before. Again, 96 minutes to give out to bigs, then we add minor injuries which will always happen, and each of Noah, Gibson and Love can play 33 mpg; the Bulls can choose the right combination based on matchups, while giving each necessary rest. In that way you can maximize the individual per poss impact, while getting the most out it to help the team win more games. Really, having 3 quality bigs is such a huge advantage over other teams, which struggle to even have two. That is a bigger advantage than having such quality on the wings.
coldfish wrote:There is a sense of honor in the nba. The bulls could agree to the deal on draft day and pick the people minnesota wNts and then make the trade complete after july 1. I believe its relatively common. The boozer in cleveland story was huge news because it violated that handshake honor.
Between teams? Yes, but in that case a player is involved, who would need to agree to that extension. That makes is virtually impossible to get an agreement on this in principal on draft day.
And I also don't think that the Bulls should persue that matter at all costs. If they have Love while keeping Butler+Gibson, they will be competitive and at that I can't see them not being a contender (whether Rose is fully healthy or not!). And then I want to see Love walking away from a 5yr max on a contending team in the summer of 2015. I seriously doubt that this will happen. Also, I think an included extension will costs something extra in a trade.
coldfish wrote:There is a sense of honor in the nba. The bulls could agree to the deal on draft day and pick the people minnesota wNts and then make the trade complete after july 1. I believe its relatively common. The boozer in cleveland story was huge news because it violated that handshake honor.
Between teams? Yes, but in that case a player is involved, who would need to agree to that extension. That makes is virtually impossible to get an agreement on this in principal on draft day.
And I also don't think that the Bulls should persue that matter at all costs. If they have Love while keeping Butler+Gibson, they will be competitive and at that I can't see them not being a contender (whether Rose is fully healthy or not!). And then I want to see Love walking away from a 5yr max on a contending team in the summer of 2015. I seriously doubt that this will happen. Also, I think an included extension will costs something extra in a trade.
Since Love is under contract, the Bulls would be free to talk to him with Minnesota's permission before draft day.
A 5 year extension is not on the table for Love unless he wants to stay in Minnesota. Only the team where he is currently playing can give that to him after he becomes a free agent. Even if he leaves next year, the most he can get is 4 years via free agency or s&t, just like Melo. The only way he can get a 5 year is if he is traded to a team and then opts out and re-signs with them next year. The problem is that the only teams that would be doing that are teams that he wouldn't want to play on like Sacramento. Like I said, for all intents and purposes, 5 year deal and Love are not worth discussing.
As far as an extension costing more in trade: All of the discussion here is assuming an extension. Only the stupid teams would consider giving up assets for a 1 year rental.
Also, when Garnett left Minnesota, he had about 1 year left on his deal and he signed an extension as part of the trade. Boston wouldn't have made the deal without it: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/b ... tics_N.htm
coldfish wrote:Since Love is under contract, the Bulls would be free to talk to him with Minnesota's permission before draft day.
I did not say that they wouldn't be, but we aren't dealing with just one other party here, but the player and his agent as well. I would not put much of anything into the thought of a possible extend-and-trade deal reached on draft day.
coldfish wrote:A 5 year extension is not on the table for Love unless he wants to stay in Minnesota.
There is no 5yr extension anyway, not in Minnesota nor anywhere else. 5yr max referred to the ability to become FA and then sign a 5yr max via Bird rights. If Love gets traded to the Bulls, he can then sign a new 5yr max contract in the summer of 2015!
An extension can at max get the total count of years under contract to 4. Meaning, Love would need to opt-in, then sign a 2yr extension of that contract in order to be under contract for 4 years total.
Also, in an extend-and-trade, the max raise will be limited to 4.5%, while in an "normal" extension it can be up to 7.5%. Another point, which makes an extend-and-trade less likely.
coldfish wrote:As far as an extension costing more in trade: All of the discussion here is assuming an extension. Only the stupid teams would consider giving up assets for a 1 year rental.
EVERY team would give up assets for Love on a virtual 1yr contract, just the amount of assets will be different.
coldfish wrote:Fun fact, the owners wanted to get rid of "extend and trade" because of the Melo situation in Denver. They gave up on it, so the option is still there: http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/21 ... le_Dropped
Also, when Garnett left Minnesota, he had about 1 year left on his deal and he signed an extension as part of the trade. Boston wouldn't have made the deal without it: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/b ... tics_N.htm
Different CBA with different ruleset for extend-and-trade. Right now an extend-and-trade makes way less sense for a player than before. Chris Paul was traded under the current ruleset and only opt-in for his final year. Howard was traded without being extended. That's the reference you can use here. Trading for Love on his current contract will also costs less assets than when he is extended. And sure as hell should a good team not worry much about that extension. If Love is here in a reasonable deal, the Bulls will be competitive and then they can offer a new 5yr max deal in 2015. Really, if a team is worried about Love leaving, they shouldn't even attempt to trade for him under the current CBA.
coldfish wrote:Since Love is under contract, the Bulls would be free to talk to him with Minnesota's permission before draft day.
I did not say that they wouldn't be, but we aren't dealing with just one other party here, but the player and his agent as well. I would not put much of anything into the thought of a possible extend-and-trade deal reached on draft day.
coldfish wrote:A 5 year extension is not on the table for Love unless he wants to stay in Minnesota.
There is no 5yr extension anyway, not in Minnesota nor anywhere else. 5yr max referred to the ability to become FA and then sign a 5yr max via Bird rights. If Love gets traded to the Bulls, he can then sign a new 5yr max contract in the summer of 2015!
An extension can at max get the total count of years under contract to 4. Meaning, Love would need to opt-in, then sign a 2yr extension of that contract in order to be under contract for 4 years total.
Also, in an extend-and-trade, the max raise will be limited to 4.5%, while in an "normal" extension it can be up to 7.5%. Another point, which makes an extend-and-trade less likely.
coldfish wrote:As far as an extension costing more in trade: All of the discussion here is assuming an extension. Only the stupid teams would consider giving up assets for a 1 year rental.
EVERY team would give up assets for Love on a virtual 1yr contract, just the amount of assets will be different.
coldfish wrote:Fun fact, the owners wanted to get rid of "extend and trade" because of the Melo situation in Denver. They gave up on it, so the option is still there: http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/21 ... le_Dropped
Also, when Garnett left Minnesota, he had about 1 year left on his deal and he signed an extension as part of the trade. Boston wouldn't have made the deal without it: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/b ... tics_N.htm
Different CBA with different ruleset for extend-and-trade. Right now an extend-and-trade makes way less sense for a player than before. Chris Paul was traded under the current ruleset and only opt-in for his final year. Howard was traded without being extended. That's the reference you can use here. Trading for Love on his current contract will also costs less assets than when he is extended. And sure as hell should a good team not worry much about that extension. If Love is here in a reasonable deal, the Bulls will be competitive and then they can offer a new 5yr max deal in 2015. Really, if a team is worried about Love leaving, they shouldn't even attempt to trade for him under the current CBA.
The reason why Love is unhappy in Minnesota is team performance. If Love wants to play on a good team next year, he will have to sign an extension. He knows that. There was no point in him even complaining if he had no intention of signing an extension.
Sure maybe he will get traded from a bad team to a bad team and he will become a free agent next year. That is certainly possible and people are discussing the possibility of Boston or Phoenix or Sacramento trading for him without an extension and comparing it to Chicago's "with an extension" trade offer.
GS certainly isn't trading Klay Thompson for Love without Love signing an extension.
Note: If Phoenix trades Dragic and Bledsoe and picks for Love, they will be a bad team. I'm not saying they are bad now.
KingCuban wrote:Being arrogant and condescending is also useless, which you've been warned about on many occasions. Address your fellow posters accordingly, or don't post.
Mattchoo wrote:I want Love, but I feel unwilling to give up all assets. I especially don't want to see a package that is Taj, Butler AND all 2014 picks traded together for just Love. Thibs is a great D coach, but losing 2 of our best 3 defenders will be scary.
I hope MINN is looking at maybe a Taj, Mirotic, unguaranteed filler, Sac pick, and a future bulls pick package.
Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums
I'm sorry but if the Bulls were given the opportunity to get Love for Butler, Taj and 2 firsts, they would be beyond idiotic to say no. They'd be idiots for not immediately saying yes and hanging up before Saunders could change his mind. The defense would be fine. Thibs defense worked just fine with guys like Ray, House, and other mediocre/average defensive players. Whats important in the Thibs defense is your bigs are smart enough to know when to rotate.
Why in the world would PHX give up Dragic or Bledsoe? That could potentially be the best back court in the league. I'd rather keep those 2 together than sacrifice one for Love.
They should just wait until Love opts out next year and go after him in free agency.
Mattchoo wrote:I want Love, but I feel unwilling to give up all assets. I especially don't want to see a package that is Taj, Butler AND all 2014 picks traded together for just Love. Thibs is a great D coach, but losing 2 of our best 3 defenders will be scary.
I hope MINN is looking at maybe a Taj, Mirotic, unguaranteed filler, Sac pick, and a future bulls pick package.
Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums
I'm sorry but if the Bulls were given the opportunity to get Love for Butler, Taj and 2 firsts, they would be beyond idiotic to say no. They'd be idiots for not immediately saying yes and hanging up before Saunders could change his mind. The defense would be fine. Thibs defense worked just fine with guys like Ray, House, and other mediocre/average defensive players. Whats important in the Thibs defense is your bigs are smart enough to know when to rotate.
tony36 wrote:
jfs1000d wrote:Bulls won't get love. There package is not better. If twolves want a better player, they can trade the draft picks they get . Or, we do the deal in a 3 way. Gibson and butler and two mid picks isn't better.
Sent from my iPad using RealGM Forums
Bulls won't get Love because their management is cheap and their fanbase is stupid.
If you check out their forum, some of them actually believe Taj Gibson and 2 mid round firsts is enough. "Taj is a really good role player though!!!..."
I'm curious why you bother wasting your time on this forum.
Mattchoo wrote:I want Love, but I feel unwilling to give up all assets. I especially don't want to see a package that is Taj, Butler AND all 2014 picks traded together for just Love. Thibs is a great D coach, but losing 2 of our best 3 defenders will be scary.
I hope MINN is looking at maybe a Taj, Mirotic, unguaranteed filler, Sac pick, and a future bulls pick package.
Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums
I'm sorry but if the Bulls were given the opportunity to get Love for Butler, Taj and 2 firsts, they would be beyond idiotic to say no. They'd be idiots for not immediately saying yes and hanging up before Saunders could change his mind. The defense would be fine. Thibs defense worked just fine with guys like Ray, House, and other mediocre/average defensive players. Whats important in the Thibs defense is your bigs are smart enough to know when to rotate.
tony36 wrote:
jfs1000d wrote:Bulls won't get love. There package is not better. If twolves want a better player, they can trade the draft picks they get . Or, we do the deal in a 3 way. Gibson and butler and two mid picks isn't better.
Sent from my iPad using RealGM Forums
Bulls won't get Love because their management is cheap and their fanbase is stupid.
If you check out their forum, some of them actually believe Taj Gibson and 2 mid round firsts is enough. "Taj is a really good role player though!!!..."
I'm curious why you bother wasting your time on this forum.
Just because he disagrees with you?
Taj has never averaged more than 30mpg. Taj is a good 6th man who can start when needed. Taj is a bad rebounder, and bad passer. Actually awful passer. Does he ever pass once he gets the ball. Teams will catch in quick when he starts. Butler is a 6-8th man. If Minny wants those 2 plus 2 late first rounders, you make the trade. Taj and Butler with Noah are not winning anything.
The pieces will fall together with a Noah, Love Rose lineup.
tony36 wrote:I'm sorry but if the Bulls were given the opportunity to get Love for Butler, Taj and 2 firsts, they would be beyond idiotic to say no. They'd be idiots for not immediately saying yes and hanging up before Saunders could change his mind. The defense would be fine. Thibs defense worked just fine with guys like Ray, House, and other mediocre/average defensive players. Whats important in the Thibs defense is your bigs are smart enough to know when to rotate.
tony36 wrote: Bulls won't get Love because their management is cheap and their fanbase is stupid.
If you check out their forum, some of them actually believe Taj Gibson and 2 mid round firsts is enough. "Taj is a really good role player though!!!..."
I'm curious why you bother wasting your time on this forum.
Just because he disagrees with you?
Taj has never averaged more than 30mpg. Taj is a good 6th man who can start when needed. Taj is a bad rebounder, and bad passer. Actually awful passer. Does he ever pass once he gets the ball. Teams will catch in quick when he starts. Butler is a 6-8th man. If Minny wants those 2 plus 2 late first rounders, you make the trade. Taj and Butler with Noah are not winning anything.
The pieces will fall together with a Noah, Love Rose lineup.
This is a an insult to Taj who finished all games for Chicago while taking a back seat to Boozer for the team. He should have been the starter for the last two years.
I'm curious why you bother wasting your time on this forum.
Just because he disagrees with you?
Taj has never averaged more than 30mpg. Taj is a good 6th man who can start when needed. Taj is a bad rebounder, and bad passer. Actually awful passer. Does he ever pass once he gets the ball. Teams will catch in quick when he starts. Butler is a 6-8th man. If Minny wants those 2 plus 2 late first rounders, you make the trade. Taj and Butler with Noah are not winning anything.
The pieces will fall together with a Noah, Love Rose lineup.
This is a an insult to Taj who finished all games for Chicago while taking a back seat to Boozer for the team. He should have been the starter for the last two years.
Noah, Taj and Jimmy = 48 wins
Love Pekovich, K Mart and Rubio = 40 wins.
Tell me again who "isn't winning anything"
Did Minny play Milwaukee, Detroit 4 times? What about Boston, Cleveland, Philly? Minnesota in the East would have the same amount of wins. What about the rest of the weak East? Please, all you did with this post is prove how good Love dis do in the West. You are putting down an All Star PF who is 25. Rose, Love and Noah wins more games and will go further in the playoffs. You can continue to overvalue Taj all you want. He will NEVER be anywhere near the level of Love. Let's not forget Love is 25. Rose and Love can grow and gel together. Taj and Butler can be found elsewhere, 26 and 14 can't.
tony36 wrote:I'm sorry but if the Bulls were given the opportunity to get Love for Butler, Taj and 2 firsts, they would be beyond idiotic to say no. They'd be idiots for not immediately saying yes and hanging up before Saunders could change his mind. The defense would be fine. Thibs defense worked just fine with guys like Ray, House, and other mediocre/average defensive players. Whats important in the Thibs defense is your bigs are smart enough to know when to rotate.
tony36 wrote: Bulls won't get Love because their management is cheap and their fanbase is stupid.
If you check out their forum, some of them actually believe Taj Gibson and 2 mid round firsts is enough. "Taj is a really good role player though!!!..."
I'm curious why you bother wasting your time on this forum.
Just because he disagrees with you?
Magilla wondered why tony36 spends time on our forum because tony36 apparently stressed to other people, on a different board, that our fanbase and our posters are stupid. Are you somehow missing that point?
I'm curious why you bother wasting your time on this forum.
Just because he disagrees with you?
Magilla wondered why tony36 spends time on our forum because tony36 apparently stressed to other people, on a different board, that our fanbase and our posters are stupid. Are you somehow missing that point?
I know what you're saying-- I like Taj & Butler a ton, too-- but it seems to me that you're framing the issue very selectively. You're implying that Taj & Jimmy were significantly responsible for a big part of our 48 wins and that Love was significantly responsible for a big part of Minnesota's lower win total, and you're using those implications to suggest that the Bulls would have won--and would win in the future-- fewer games with Love than with Taj & Jimmy. Or wit Taj, Jimmy, and our #16 and #19 draft picks.
But that logic is flawed. You could use it to imply that DJ Augustin is more valuable than Ricky Rubio, or that a team featuring a combo of Hinrich, Boozer, and Snell would have a better future than a team featuring Love. You could use it to imply that prime (mid-20s) Charles Barkley wasn't a very valuable player, because his teams never made the finals and often were right around .500. The system matters a great deal.
What's more, the Bulls with Love would presumably attract free agent guards--guys looking for a title shot-- and there's no way of knowing in advance whether any of those players would be worse or better than Butler in Thib's system. How much better or worse would Wes Johnson be? How much better or worse would Vince Carter be?
For that matter, how good would Butler have been in Minny's system? After all, DJ was way better for the Bulls than he was in other, recent situations. Deng was much better for the Bulls than he was for Cleveland. You're overlooking all of those factors.
coldfish wrote:Since Love is under contract, the Bulls would be free to talk to him with Minnesota's permission before draft day.
I did not say that they wouldn't be, but we aren't dealing with just one other party here, but the player and his agent as well. I would not put much of anything into the thought of a possible extend-and-trade deal reached on draft day.
coldfish wrote:A 5 year extension is not on the table for Love unless he wants to stay in Minnesota.
There is no 5yr extension anyway, not in Minnesota nor anywhere else. 5yr max referred to the ability to become FA and then sign a 5yr max via Bird rights. If Love gets traded to the Bulls, he can then sign a new 5yr max contract in the summer of 2015!
An extension can at max get the total count of years under contract to 4. Meaning, Love would need to opt-in, then sign a 2yr extension of that contract in order to be under contract for 4 years total.
Also, in an extend-and-trade, the max raise will be limited to 4.5%, while in an "normal" extension it can be up to 7.5%. Another point, which makes an extend-and-trade less likely.
coldfish wrote:As far as an extension costing more in trade: All of the discussion here is assuming an extension. Only the stupid teams would consider giving up assets for a 1 year rental.
EVERY team would give up assets for Love on a virtual 1yr contract, just the amount of assets will be different.
coldfish wrote:Fun fact, the owners wanted to get rid of "extend and trade" because of the Melo situation in Denver. They gave up on it, so the option is still there: http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/21 ... le_Dropped
Also, when Garnett left Minnesota, he had about 1 year left on his deal and he signed an extension as part of the trade. Boston wouldn't have made the deal without it: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/b ... tics_N.htm
Different CBA with different ruleset for extend-and-trade. Right now an extend-and-trade makes way less sense for a player than before. Chris Paul was traded under the current ruleset and only opt-in for his final year. Howard was traded without being extended. That's the reference you can use here. Trading for Love on his current contract will also costs less assets than when he is extended. And sure as hell should a good team not worry much about that extension. If Love is here in a reasonable deal, the Bulls will be competitive and then they can offer a new 5yr max deal in 2015. Really, if a team is worried about Love leaving, they shouldn't even attempt to trade for him under the current CBA.
The reason why Love is unhappy in Minnesota is team performance. If Love wants to play on a good team next year, he will have to sign an extension. He knows that. There was no point in him even complaining if he had no intention of signing an extension.
Sure maybe he will get traded from a bad team to a bad team and he will become a free agent next year. That is certainly possible and people are discussing the possibility of Boston or Phoenix or Sacramento trading for him without an extension and comparing it to Chicago's "with an extension" trade offer.
GS certainly isn't trading Klay Thompson for Love without Love signing an extension.
Note: If Phoenix trades Dragic and Bledsoe and picks for Love, they will be a bad team. I'm not saying they are bad now.
It's unlikely he'll agree to an extension as part of the trade, though, just because he gets more money by re-signing when he hits free agency (5 year deal instead of a 4 year deal, and 7.5% raises instead of 4.5%). What he probably would do would be to opt in as part of the deal, so that the team would be acquiring him for two years. It's possible though he verbally commits to an extension, and then signs an extension after the trade, so that he can get the full 7.5% raises (ignoring the extra year he'd get if he waits until free agency).
I know what you're saying-- I like Taj & Butler a ton, too-- but it seems to me that you're framing the issue very selectively. You're implying that Taj & Jimmy were significantly responsible for a big part of our 48 wins and that Love was significantly responsible for a big part of Minnesota's lower win total, and you're using those implications to suggest that the Bulls would have won--and would win in the future-- fewer games with Love than with Taj & Jimmy. Or wit Taj, Jimmy, and our #16 and #19 draft picks.
But that logic is flawed. You could use it to imply that DJ Augustin is more valuable than Ricky Rubio, or that a team featuring a combo of Hinrich, Boozer, and Snell would have a better future than a team featuring Love. You could use it to imply that prime (mid-20s) Charles Barkley wasn't a very valuable player, because his teams never made the finals and often were right around .500. The system matters a great deal.
What's more, the Bulls with Love would presumably attract free agent guards--guys looking for a title shot-- and there's no way of knowing in advance whether any of those players would be worse or better than Butler in Thib's system. How much better or worse would Wes Johnson be? How much better or worse would Vince Carter be?
For that matter, how good would Butler have been in Minny's system? After all, DJ was way better for the Bulls than he was in other, recent situations. Deng was much better for the Bulls than he was for Cleveland. You're overlooking all of those factors.
I agree the system does matter a great deal. But more than that, team identity. We are not the same team without Jimmy and Taj being replaced by Love. Our system will not function the same way. Our team identity will also change significantly. I do not see that as a good change. I see that as turning into Minny who gives up 104 points a game. What I'm saying is I think we'll be a worse team for it.
I like Love as a player. he's great offensively, but I don't think he fits with this team's identity of defense first. He reminds me of Boozer in that regard. However, I would say if it were just Taj going out and us keeping Jimmy, I'd probably be more inclined to do it.
It's interesting that you mention the issue of responsibility for losing and/or winning in the context of what Flip Saunders said in a statement about Love. He was recalling the same convo he had with KG before he was traded telling KG he shouldn't complian about the lesser players because of them losing. He should blame himself. He's the one getting paid.
Finally, I'm more inclined to try for Melo here. I think he fits much better and allows us to utilize our assets more judicially.
