twslam07
All-Star
In a macro sense…yes, I do think Vivek is making the personnel decisions from the standpoint that he has a general direction/path that he wants his team to take (compete now). I don’t think he is going to green lit a rebuild (which I think we should do at this point).
And I would consider your offseason idea a rebuild. You’re sending out Sabonis, DeRozan, & Monk and taking back young-ish role players and a couple 1sts. Personally, I’d prefer expirings and heavier pick packages and rely on our scouting department to find some diamonds in the rough and some star talent we can build around while also using that newly found cap space to acquire more assets.
Well not trading Sabonis on our terms is a Vivek issue not a twslam07 issue, right? I’ve already said this is not what I would do if I had complete control over the decisions. Vivek’s mandate is what is leading to this being a potential outcome. I can of course choose to ignore that mandate for the sake of the discussion board, but that doesn’t seem like a realistic conversation at this point in time.
Why does a star need to be “disgruntled” for us to trade for him? Stars can simply become available if teams want to begin a rebuild (for example). They don’t have to be “disgruntled” so that point doesn’t really hold water for me. I mean let’s take your own advice here…you want to trade Sabonis on our terms (e.g., don’t let him get disgruntled and publicly ask out). So you can see how it’s a bid odd to say we’re only limited to disgruntled stars when trading while at the same proposing to trade a non-disgruntled star from our team.
Without the option of rebuilding, how do you expect to bring a star talent here? We’re either trading for him or getting lucky and drafting one in the middle of the first round. I don’t see why that reality of the situation is perceived as a negative in the idea proposed.
Don’t mistake not mentioning Murray, Ellis, and Carter as me assuming they won’t improve. The focus of the post is about what we’re changing, who we’re bringing in/sending out, and how to navigate the upcoming years with our cap situation.
Also, why do I need to disclose today who the player we’d target years from now with LaVine or Holiday’s salary? Come on now…you’re more reasonable than that. We both know how quickly things can change in the NBA and how someone that seemed untouchable just last year is not all of a sudden available.
The overall point of the trade is that it keeps us flexible and in a position to strike when a player of a certain caliber and fit become available.
Perhaps you think Devin Vassell, Keldon Johnson, Isaiah Stewart, and Ron Holland can become stars, but I certainly don’t. And maybe that’s a point of contention for us because I see your idea as us trading for youngish role players and you see it as trading for players that can develop into stars. That’s a huge chasm between us.
It might be a low bar to reach but you’re failing to recognize how much tougher and physical he really is (that matters). I’d also say that Marshall plays with more physicality and toughness than Murray too.
I wouldn’t say the goal is to win 55 games with my proposed roster. The goal is to be better next year without sacrificing the future. Then you pop your head up and see if a Lavine + assets type of trade for a star is available and you have the same opportunity to do that again with Holiday the following season.
We’re not jumping to winning 55 games without landing someone that is better than Sabonis. And if that’s the case (and you still have a win now mandate from Vivek), how can you potentially do that? You put yourself in a position to be able to make a trade for that type of player which requires flexibility and retaining your young assets/picks. My proposed offer does just that.
They Fill the Three Exact Gaps You Cannot Solve Internally
