Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:nate33 wrote:I like Gortat and appreciated him while he was here. But I also recognize that he had lost a step and there were significant chemistry issues going forward. We weren't going to trade Wall and keep Gortat, so the alternative was to trade Gortat.
This is not some unfair insult to Gortat. His skills had declined to the point where he as no longer a full time starter. It was reasonable to try and trade him and replace him. I thought the Dwight gambit was a pretty good gamble that could have worked out nicely. When Dwight actually played, he played well. I would have even been okay with just 50-60 games of Dwight instead of 82 of Gortat. Obviously, the gamble didn't pay off.
It turns out Gortat has found a nice home in LA and they have the luxury of playing him just 17 minutes a game where he can provide maximum energy. That's great for Gortat.
IT WAS NOT reasonable to trade him...FOR AUSTIN R. That's the point.
I looked at all of the available players on expiring contracts with a salary that would match Gortat's. Rivers was honestly the only one who was available (and it made sense for the other team). I agree that Gortat for Rivers is a terrible trade in terms of on-the-court talent. I just think they concluded that Gortat was not going to play so better to trade him for a warm body with a slightly smaller contract and reap the luxtax savings.
