What's new
By:

*Breaking News* Kawhi Wants Out

oneye said:
SA is not going to send him to LA unless either of those teams give them everything they want and more. SA isn't going to facilitate a super team in the Western Conference. SA is a more competent organization than that. Kawhi can say he wants to go wherever he wants, the Spurs get to trade him. I imagine they will take the best they can to send him east tbh. If the Spurs don't trade him to LA, he won't be able to sign their next season if Lebron and PG are both there, they wouldn't have the cap space. SA isn't going to straight out facilitate another super team in the west when they can prevent it.
Click to expand...

Good post. I hope you are right
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
True, I still find that weird. If you are going to be an old rich guy who remarries a much younger women, you might as well go really young. Get a 30 year old, go for the full 40 year age gap instead of the 20 Sloan did.
Click to expand...

Good thing Sloan made the choice he did. If he would have married a woman 40 years younger, she probably would have bailed (with a big alimony package) at the first sign of Altzheimer's.
 
JazzGal said:
Good thing Sloan made the choice he did. If he would have married a woman 40 years younger, she probably would have bailed (with a big alimony package) at the first sign of Altzheimer's.
Click to expand...

Can you just bail on someone when they're sick and get all the money?
 
ONE LOVE said:
Kawhi's camp is VERY smart in this.

By making it known that he only wants to go to the Lakers, no other team will be willing to give up major assets for him. It's like Kawhi is forcing the Spurs hand. If the Spurs don't trade him? He'll just wait out 1 more year and sign with the Lakers in Free Agency.

I see 2 scenarios:

Either the Spurs trade Kawhi to a team other than the Lakers and get less assets in return. Or trade Kawhi to the Lakers knowing they could form a super team later.

The ball's in the Spurs court now.
Click to expand...

What if the lakers don’t have the cap space to sign him in free agency though?
 
JazzGal said:
Good thing Sloan made the choice he did. If he would have married a woman 40 years younger, she probably would have bailed (with a big alimony package) at the first sign of Altzheimer's.
Click to expand...

Uhh, why would you bail when that's just a sign the big payoff is about to come? None of them ever bail before death. They wait.
 
fishonjazz said:
What if the lakers don’t have the cap space to sign him in free agency though?
Click to expand...

If Kawhi doesn't get traded to the Lakers, then it's unlikely that LeBron would come... so the best the Lakers could hope for would probably be signing Paul George... therefore they should still have enough cap space.
 
JazzGal said:
Good thing Sloan made the choice he did. If he would have married a woman 40 years younger, she probably would have bailed (with a big alimony package) at the first sign of Altzheimer's.
Click to expand...

Actually, the younger the girl is, the more incentive there is for her to wait it out? The younger you are, the longer you're gonna live, the more money you're gonna need.
 
ONE LOVE said:
if I were BOS I'd trade Tatum. It's the chance at Kawhi, you've gotta do it.
Click to expand...

They don’t need to use Tatum. Irving, Hayward, brown are all better than any kuzma, ball, Ingram crap. Plus doesn’t Boston have a good pick next year again? (Or this year)

Point is, Celtics have TONS of better assets than the lakers even if the keep Tatum
 
ONE LOVE said:
If Kawhi doesn't get traded to the Lakers, then it's unlikely that LeBron would come... so the best the Lakers could hope for would probably be signing Paul George... therefore they should still have enough cap space.
Click to expand...

Lebron was rumored to be going to the lakers before any of this came out about Leonard. Leonard staying in San Antonio doesn’t change Lebron decision.
 
fishonjazz said:
They don’t need to use Tatum. Irving, Hayward, brown are all better than any kuzma, ball, Ingram crap. Plus doesn’t Boston have a good pick next year again? (Or this year)

Point is, Celtics have TONS of better assets than the lakers even if the keep Tatum
Click to expand...

Bos won't trade Kyrie. Brown or Hayward won't get it done from the Spurs side of things.

Ingram is better than Brown as a prospect and better than Hayward in that they can keep him long term.

So I think the Spurs would hold out for Tatum.
 
ONE LOVE said:
Can you just bail on someone when they're sick and get all the money?
Click to expand...

Guess it depends on the prenup.

I suppose one could dump him into the best facility you can find, and then go on her merry way spending all his money.
 
i also think it's a little crazy that this news was "leaked" to like 8 different sources prior to their face to face meeting with pop. This tells me that leonard's camp wants him to team up with bron. They leaked it so the proccess speeds up and give hints to other FA who were potentially looking to sign with the lakers(bron , pg13)
 
Lakers are going to look an entirely different team next year. Basically every player is coming off the books and they have room to sign these guys to max contracts.

I could see guys like Joe Johnson signing for the vet minimum just to fill out the cheap aspects of the bench.

I'd love to snag Kuzma in a three way, but don't see how that would benefit any other team.
 
ONE LOVE said:
Bos won't trade Kyrie. Brown or Hayward won't get it done from the Spurs side of things.

Ingram is better than Brown as a prospect and better than Hayward in that they can keep him long term.

So I think the Spurs would hold out for Tatum.
Click to expand...

Why wouldn’t they trade kyrie? They did pretty good without him iirc.
Also, couldn’t they do brown and Hayward (rather than brown or Hayward) and can’t they include draft picks? Boston’s assists are way better assets than the lakers and Boston has more of them as well.
 
fishonjazz said:
Why wouldn’t they trade kyrie? They did pretty good without him iirc.
Also, couldn’t they do brown and Hayward (rather than brown or Hayward) and can’t they include draft picks? Boston’s assists are way better assets than the lakers and Boston has more of them as well.
Click to expand...


This!

Jesus, this logic is so flawed. There is ZERO chance they trade Tatum. None.

Secondly, I think they would very much trade Kyrie. He has a year left and will very much test free agency. Beyond that they have a very capable kid on a rookie deal behind him. They could also re-sign Smart to help bolster they backcourt if they lose Kyrie.

That said, the deal to do is Hayward and a good pick for Kawhi. Very solid for both teams.
 
fishonjazz said:
Why wouldn’t they trade kyrie? They did pretty good without him iirc.
Also, couldn’t they do brown and Hayward (rather than brown or Hayward) and can’t they include draft picks? Boston’s assists are way better assets than the lakers and Boston has more of them as well.
Click to expand...

Well who would play the PG if they trade Kyrie?

They can do Brown and Hayward + picks, but if I'm the Spurs I'd rather have Tatum + picks. Brown just isn't a good as prospect as Tatum.
 
Honestly SA isn't going to get market value simply because they feel they may be renting him. If I'm Cleveland, I go all in K.Love, their #8 draft pick, something else? As an NBA fan I actually want Cleveland to do what they can to get him even if it's unlikely. If they can get him in Cleveland, it may keep Lebron in a Cavs jersey. The Cavs probably don't have enough to get him, but I'd rather see him go there than anywhere almost. It would make for a much more competitive league, and not another super team. If Cleveland loses Lebron they're done anyway, they should throw whatever they can in a package and try to land him even if for one season.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top