Quote:
Originally Posted by FINtastic
How does it make sense if you can't build a roster around it? For example, how is that going to put you above the Heat, who if we want to play the fantasy basketball game you've seem to prey to, already have 2 of the best 3 players in the NBA, and a much better 3rd player than you're going to hope to find with that roster already hamstrung financially?
Is Kidd coming back for a veteran minimum? Because he's making 8 million/year on his current deal, and I don't see why I should automatically assume he would go all the way to a $1 million contract (otherwise I would have put him in there, but the whole purpose of that previous post was to strip the roster to the bare minimum and see where that left you in terms of the cap).
And why are all the veterans lining up to play with Dirk and Howard, and not Wade and Lebron? Or Paul and Kobe? Or Amare, Melo, and Chandler? Or whatever the next "Super Team" is that gets assembled? Or maybe that just want to play for a team like the Thunder. The assumption that we get our pick of the "cheap veteran" litter is a tenuous one.
I never said I'd turn down this deal (because I wouldn't due to the seeming lack of better options at this point), I'm just saying I don't really see it putting us over the top and like you argued in the Chandler thread, it's going to kill your chances to improve much beyond that because you're financially tied down. And you're going to be much moreso than you ever would be paying $15 mil/year for Chandler.
And this is all pinning on our hopes on the very, very long shot that Orlando accepts that deal. And let's be honest here, they're going to get offered better deals. I can't see why this deal makes more sense than a straight up trade for Andrew Bynum.
So again we're pinning our odds on a very, very long shot that doesn't quite seem to put us over the top.
|
First of all, we're not "pinning our odds" on anything.
Secondly, no one is disputing the unlikeliness of this happening.
Third, I think you're missing a few points.
1. I was worried about being financially tied down because of Chandler. I'll take the opportunity to be tied down with Dwight Howard any time you want. If you have Dwight Howard, you've accomplished what you needed the financial flexibility for. Now you need complimentary pieces, which are easier to obtain.
2. Why are you trying to strip the roster? If you have Dwight Howard you want to retain Kidd. You have bird rights on him, give him what he wants. The point of possibly stripping the roster is to lure a superstar. If you HAVE the super star, no need to strip anything.
You wanted us to retain Chandler because you wanted us to stay competitive, and yet you're not sure how you'd feel about us adding Howard to this mix? I'm again very confused.