> The Golden State Warriors are signing guard Quinndary Weatherspoon to 10-day hardship deal, sources tell @TheAthletic @Stadium. Weatherspoon has played for the Warriors‘ G League affiliate in Santa Cruz after spending the past two seasons with the Spurs.
EDIT: Saw something last night about how Toupane didn't play in the G-League game, wonder if he picked up an injury and if the Warriors had plans to sign him otherwise.
One thing that is standing out for me on Wiggs. We all know he operates quietly, not flashy. Even when he is doing well, he can be hard to see sometimes. But I notice he is particularly good at nailing down early coffin shots. Curry tends to drive the coffin nail in, but Wiggs always seems to hit that shot, when the Warriors have a lead but the game still seems to be in reach, that feels like the first coffin nail. Like "If Wiggs is hitting that shot, we ain't got a shot." He may not be the guy on the team that will seal the deal, but he is shaping up to be a very reliable table-setter. Getting on base ahead of the big hitters. If that tendency plays out in the playoffs, that's great news for the Dubs.
Now figure out which one is the 6’-8” freak athlete who can guard 1-4 at a high level; which one thrives off the ball and fits in any offensive system; which one is arguably the most durable player in the NBA; and which one came with a #7 pick in a stacked draft attached to him.
The question to me is how much of that D’Lo/Wiggins comparison is based on who’s the better player vs. being helped/hurt by a dramatic change in scenery/circumstances. We know Wiggins was worse in MIN, but would D’Lo be more of a Jordan Poole on this version the Warriors?
He's playing really well. Really proving that a change a scenery is sometimes what a player needs to really succeed. Also really proving the value of coaching, culture, and organizational competence.
It's interesting taking a look back at the 2014 NBA draft; no draft class ever ends up having careers like you think they might on draft night, but this is a really interesting one.
Top performers:
-Andrew Wiggins (1)
-Joel Embiid (3)
-Julius Randle (7)
-Zach LaVine (13)
-Nikola Jokic (41)
Honorable Mention: Aaron Gordon (4), Marcus Smart (6), Jusuf Nurkić (16), Clint Capela (25), Joe Harris (33).
I'm sure there are other ones I'm missing as well. No real unique insights here, just an interesting class overall.
At this point, who in that class would we rather have on the Warriors than Wiggins? Embiid and Jokic, certainly, but I think it really ends there. I don't think Randle or LaVine would be great fits with the team.
Nah. Embiid is nothing like KD. We’d be closer to the 2019 Warriors sans KD — with Embiid in the role of a rich man’s Boogie Cousins.
Obviously Wiggs is not a better player than Embiid, but he fits beautifully into the HB-KD role in Kerrball (both offensively and defensively) in a way Embiid would not.
He's nothing like Durant stylistically so the team would be very different, but he's still an insanely good player. Calling him a rich man's Cousins vastly undersells his talent.
I fail to see how any defense guards Embiid and Steph together. The defense would be forced to play single coverage on Embiid which is not going to end well. Additionally, see how good the Reddick/Embiid and now Seth/Embiid combo is. Steph and Embiid would be ridiculous (not as much as KD and Steph, but close).
> Calling him a rich man's Cousins vastly undersells his talent.
...a rich man's 2019 injured Cousins who was a shell of his original self, absolutely. If we're talking earlier Cousins, the comparison gets more interesting, particularly given he was more durable than Embiid earlier in his career.
We’ve never really seen Kerrball work with a player like Embiid, so how good it might be (on either side of the floor) is conjecture.
We’ve seen it work with a player like Wiggins, to the tune of three titles, a 207-39 record over three seasons, and a 26-5 record this year with the best net rating in the league.
A Wiggins-Embiid swap would radically overhaul that formula — taking Draymond out of his best position by far — for a big question mark.
I don’t think “Rich man’s Cousins” is “vastly underselling” Embiid, fwiw. Peak Boogie put up 28-12-5 per 36 on solid efficiency, with excellent advanced stats. JoJo has better efficiency numbers (20-30 pts of TS, typically) but that’s quantitative. Qualitatively, they’re similar: super-skilled, lumbering true centers who dominate the ball on offense; are excellent passers, rebounders and interior defenders; and have issues switching and defending in space. And have issues staying healthy.
Steph and JoJo’s friendship would tempt me, but no, I’m not making that hypothetical swap (not that Philly would even consider it…)
Wiggins is much stylistically BETTER for the Warriors than Durant, in that he doesn't get emo if he doesn't get 10-15 iso sets every game.
As for Embiid, it'd be interesting to see how he'd fit on the Warriors. If Wiseman succeeds, we'll get a taste stylistically. Embiid is just such a different player than the Warriors have had during the dynasty run.
I doubt it. That was the GOAT (or close to it) team with a 10+ net rating against good teams in the regular season which increased in the playoffs (reminder, they lost 1 playoff game where the Cavs set the record for most 3s ever made and Klay wasn't even good offensively during that postseason run).
Not really. We're a different team and we might achieve at similar levels, but mostly because Steph and KD both took turns being injured and then the wheels fell off the third year.
Possibly. I don't necessarily agree that it would be a mild negative for this team, but I do agree that it's not an outrageous question to consider. Embiid (when healthy) is MVP level talent. I bet Kerr would have a lot of fun with him in the lineup. But yeah, a Wiggins for Embiid swap would leave a weird hole in the lineup at SF and probably wouldn't be great for spacing overall.
He's gone from a shot profile of a star (more self-created shots rather than assisted shots - think of Bradley Beal, Zach Lavine types) to the shot-profile of a role player (guys like Mikal Bridges etc). That's obviously a more optimal role for him, but it's an apples-to-oranges comparison.
I disagree with characterizing Wiggins' shot profile role to Bridges'. Bridges plays on a classical pick & roll team with one of the best ever pure PG orchestrating the offense, mostly using Bridges as a release valve when the defense rotates off him. Wiggins has plays run for him to use his advantage. Note Wiggins' usage is almost double Bridges.
That's fair, though I would say usage for Bridges is lower than usage for Wiggins mostly because the Suns have a lot more guys to take up the usage than the Warriors do (Paul, Booker, Ayton, Payne are all guys who have a lot of touches on court while the Warriors only have Steph/Poole in that vein).
I was more speaking about the types of buckets those guys get. In his last season in Minnesota, Wiggins was assisted on only 46.1% of his plays which is close to guys like Beal (45), Lavine (45.6) and Booker (45.5). This year (somewhat older numbers but they should be relatively close), Wiggins was assisted 69.9% of his plays which is close to guys like Bogdan Bogdanovic and Desmond Bane (guys who have some creation ability, but are not primary initiators). Source: https://twitter.com/samesfandiari/status/1468241298897440777
From a percentile look, Wiggins goes from a 91st % in self-creation usage to 50th percentile, hence why I said his shot profile has changed from a star to a role-player.
People expected him to be a superstar, but it turns out he’s simply the best role player imaginable, which is honestly kind of a superstar trait (reminiscent of Klay in some regards)
There's only one ball. The idea that superstars are the players who have the ball and create for themselves and others while having the ball is dumb. For the vast majority of a basketball game, there are 9 players who don't have possession of the ball. Being good at basketball while you don't have possession of the ball is a vastly important skill.
I was randomly drawn into watching some Steph at Davidson highlights and they are incredible. I have no idea how people looked at those highlights and thought he wouldn't make it in the league. Everyone knew about his shooting, but he showed incredible passing, handling, off-ball movement and finishing flashes too. From the highlights (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQN9hdPNVS4), look at the following plays:
- 0:39 - Circus lefty and-one finish
- 2:25 - ridiculous dribble move to make 2 defenders crash into each other (lol)
- 4:00 - ridiculously active and smart off-ball movement, the entire possession is a masterclass in probing the defense off-ball
- 5:12 - incredible handling and finishing
- 5:39 - pure Steph magic
- 7:18 - another high-level finish
- 8:06 - I don't know how anyone can look at that Magic Johnson bullet pass and say that this guy's not a point guard
- 8:37 - more ball-handling wizardry
- 9:02 - nice drive and finish
Reminder - all of these highlights are from 1 NCAA tournament run (4 games in total). Couple this with basically the greatest shooting profile in NBA history coming out of college consisting of:
- 41.2% on 12 3PAs per 40 on some really tough shots including self-created pullups (414/1004 for his college career)
- 87.6% from the line (479/547)
- A record 162 3PM in the 07-08 season which still stands till today (which is crazy considering how the game has completely changed)
Everything that made him legendary was right there in the highlights. I suppose it's a sign of how things have drastically changed post-Steph that someone with this profile/highlights wouldn't ever drop out of the top 3 in the draft. I still don't know how he did to be honest. He had everything, the flashy highlights, the ridiculous stats, the team success. And he showed up on the biggest stage in college and hit clutch shot after clutch shot.
Somebody HAS to do a documentary someday on the March Madness run. In the moment it was the funnest Cinderella runs I can remember. He was a magician, and it was the peak of Gus Johnson losing his mind in excitement.
Add in the very nice retrospect that it wasn't just a more fun version of a great college guard on a hot tourney run. The reason it was that much more fun was because it was our intro to one of the best players ever.
From what I recall, it basically came down to people saying he was a tweener SG. Shoots too much to be an NBA point guard and doesn't have the physicals to defend the 2.
Curry came into the league at a time when the belief was a contending team couldn't have their Point Guard be the lead scorer. You needed a pass first PG to get the ball to your bigs in the paint.
Still, even at the time I recall people making the Nash comparisons for Curry. I guess we got to thank Kahn for noy buying into that hype!
Started digging into the 2009 and following drafts. My idea was that draft picking is hard and even the top 10 had tons of examples of failure picks. I was pretty much wrong though. Yes there are Thabeet (2nd pick) and Flynn (6th) that year. But mostly what I see is the top 10-20 picks having somewhere between excellent and serviceable NBA careers. And the best players (career VORP choose your stat) are often not in the top 3.
My conclusion: draft picking is hard, but the overall methodology of evaluating players is reasonably sound. Most businesses as valuable as these don’t like taking tons of risk with their long term investments, so of course they’re going to be mostly conservative at these decisions.
Draft picking is hard no doubt, but a lot of FOs are rather terrible at it (though FOs have become significantly better these days, even Kahn who we all laugh about managed to get the 6th pick in the 2009 draft for Randy Foye).
For the NBA, I do not agree with conservatism being the strategically optimal choice - value in the NBA is so asymmetric (with a star or superstar providing significantly more value than 5 decent players) that hunting for stars in the optimal strategy (some FOs realize this and pursue this strategy, think of Sam Presti right now or Daryl Morey in Philly).
> I do not agree with conservatism being the strategically optimal choice
While I agree, this was probably one of the reasons why Flynn went before Curry. Flynn's athleticism at the PG position put him in the spectrum closer Derrick Rose and Russell Westbrook, and Steph was more Mike Bibby and JJ Reddick.
That wasn't the point. Name a 6'3" player since the Steph draft that had below average athleticism and can be considered top 5 in their draft class. It's probably just Steph... and maybe CJ?
Trae Young (went 5, would probably go 2 in a redraft) and Darius Garland (went 5, would probably go 2/3 in a redraft depending on what you think about Zion's health). It's rare because guys with that level of skill are super rare (I would argue that they are just as rare if not more rare than freak athletes).
I wrote that because I dispute stuff traditional draft thinking like Flynn is athletic (in the run and jump sense which is how most people tend to think of athleticism) so he has a high ceiling while Steph isn't (which is false, Steph is a freak athlete in non-traditional areas such as hand-eye coordination and endurance) so he has a lower ceiling. This lazy analysis is still prevalent today which you can see with last year's draft cycle and consensus opinions on prospects like Moody/Wagner and Kuminga (throw in Wiseman here too I suppose).
I think it was the 5th they traded for, and it included Mike Miller. But God, not completing the back end of that Foye and Miller for Steph Curry trade makes it somehow sound even worse!
I never said "conservatism" is "the strategically optimal choice".
How many top 20 picks are outside of the universally agreed upon top 20 as discussed endlessly in the media? Not many. Nobody is taking many high risk choices.
Yeah, in the NBA I've certainly come around to the notion that in the long run it's better to select the high ceiling/low floor guy over the low ceiling high floor guy (granted those sorts of analysis are never perfect).
This is how I see the Wagner vs. Kuminga picks. Sure, Wagner may have been more "ready" and I have no doubt would fit in really well with the Warriors, but Kuminga is the (potential) All-Star in the makings.
Sure, the comment is really moreso on how the players were discussed rather than necessarily the reality. All discussion around Kuminga was his "upside" whereas for Wagner is was being "NBA ready".
Wagner got labels like "solid secondary offensive option", "high IQ," and "mature," whereas his negatives were things like "lack of athleticism", and "slow."
Rightly or wrongly he wasn't projected as a high ceiling draft pick when compared with the other players in the draft.
Generally agreed … though I’m not sure I would give Franz Wagner a particularly low ceiling. He’s a 6’-10” versatile wing who’s a month younger than Scottie Barnes. Kinda think “low ceiling” gets thrown around as an easy synonym for “white”…
I wonder if they can blind the evaluations maybe use CGI to blind the videos. In other fields like professional classical music, I’ve heard blinded auditions have made a substantial difference.
Sure, I think that's definitely true as well. That does bring up an interesting question. We all know that (in all sports) race heavily impacts the way athletes are analyzed and described. Who was the last white NBA player who was considered to be a "high ceiling" player going into the draft?
Chet Holmgren in this draft is probably viewed as the highest upside white American that I can remember. (Previously probably Gordon Hayward or Kevin Love.)
This year Giddey went 6th, Wagner went 8th in a good draft. Giddey if anything was held back by his shooting numbers. I don't know if he would've gone higher because of the quality up top but that was more of a concern than the athleticism.
Go back a couple years and Tyler Herro dropped to 13. Was that because he was pigeon-holed as white spot up shooter vs a guy who could do stuff off the bounce? Maybe. Was that also maybe because that's how Kentucky used him? Probably. The same thing happened to Devin Booker.
Luka when he was drafted 3rd overall I think was stung by a view that his "lack of athleticism" would limit his ceiling. Maybe due as much to his skin color as his body type. Because it was absolutely insane at the time to have him go 3rd overall considering how dominant he was as an 18 year old.
I don't think Bob has explicitly hunted for stars like those guys yet (he's always had his stars already on the team). He may, I just don't know if he's been in that position to reliably say what he would do.
I was just going to say this... how much more "hunting for stars" can we get than with the Wiseman and Kuminga picks?
Bob could've followed the recipe for our current core and drafted 3/4-year guys (Steph & Klay 3-yr, Dray 4-yr) but went with three 19-year olds whose main draw is their potential.
I've looked back at the NBA draft sites and the primary concern was that he wasn't a "true" PG and didn't have the size to be a true SG (and lacked "athleticism" which loosely translates to doesn't jump very high). Which turned out to be true but irrelevant. Steph would have succeeded no matter what if he played as a traditional PG, but his greatness is in small part due to Kerr's system where he spends a lot of time looking for open shots without the ball.
Would MJ have been MJ without the triangle? Yes... and no -- a little as you say. Everyone needs a system to succeed. The difference with Steph is people grasping at straws to try and invent ridiculous dings against him, because it's hard to accept that a 6'3" guy can succeed to this extent where none has ever done so before.
Yes, and Curry had playoff success (2013) and had finished 6th in MVP voting under Mark Jackson in his age 25/26 season. He's the type of talent who would've had otherworldly impact regardless of system/coach/franchise like a Durant or a LeBron.
True, but Curry goes from 6th to off the charts once Kerr shows up. His eFG goes from .556 -> .594 -> .630 and his TS goes from .610 -> .638 -> .669. Those are huge jumps and while some of it is experience and surrounding personnel some of it is getting him into a system where he isn't handling the ball as much. In particular, his assists peak in Kerr's 1st year and start trending down.
He always seems to bring it against the Ws. Not sure what the deal is there. It's like Wiggins against Cleveland and Minnesota. Hey Jae -- Golden State DIDN'T trade you...
Man, LA Lakers.... the one time all season I'm rooting for you, and your opponent shoots 29% from three (12 for 41), yet you still manage to lose by nearly 20 points. Not lookin' great over there.
You rooted FOR the Lakers? Yeah, I know a LAL win would have been a Suns' loss. But I just... couldn't. Whoever suggested a 4 OT game had the right idea, IMO. LOL
Yeah, but being a "ball-dominant, athletic slasher" is not really a good thing, in my understanding of the modern NBA, unless you're otherworldly athletic like (young) LeBron or Giannis. But THT is just regular athletic by NBA standards. He seems decently quick and has those long arms, but doesn't look that smooth, his handle is only really good enough for straight line drives, and he is not really a leaper.
So, he's this young, long SG who can't shoot and isn't that useful off the ball, that isn't a superstar defender. He seems like this "jack of all trades" guy with nothing remarkable about him except being young, on LAL, and having a long wingspan (none of which are directly meaningful for winning basketball games).
As a Warriors fan, I love that he's getting all hyped up, since I think it hurts the Lakers to think he's the answer to much of anything. But 22 year old Poole >>> 21 year old Poole, so maybe THT can get in the lab and figure out a skill to get great at.
Said Russell Westbrook, in response to an AP reporter asking why he missed the triple double after posting only 5 assists:
"I actually tried to get a triple-double, but my teammates... they’re not giving me the Chris Paul treatment where they make the shots when I pass them the ball. So, might have to have a talk with them about that."
There's a reason he's a consensus #2 all time player and #1 on many people's leaderboards. The short answer is "no". You probably have to look at a different sport and Tom Brady (ugh, super ugh) to find a comparison, but the athletic requirements on a QB are so vastly lesser than an NBA player that it's not a great comp. Brady is older though so it washes out a bit.
Dunno if anyone's still been the #1 guy at age 37 like Lebron, but guys like Malone and Kareem still put up efficient 20+ points in their age 37 seasons.
Steve Nash still looked good in his last year in PHX at age 37.
No one has been able to single-handedly elevate an entire team as much as LeBron has since he entered the league. Freak of nature. But these days, he requires that any team he is on gut all their future resources for the present. Mission accomplished. Team gutted.
No, LeBron is a freak. If the question was "has anyone remained near their own peaks at age 37", then maybe you can make an argument for age-37 Malone/Stockton? But they had each other... and LeBron is doing what both those guys did by himself... haha
Dude needs to hand in a trade demand. Go back home to Cleveland, they'll be contenders with him + Garland + Mobley. It's sad watching him waste away his final years like this (though he did bring it upon himself by sanctioning the Westbrook trade).
Not saying I think this is likely, not even remotely. Crazier things have happened in the NBA. But much more probable is that LBJ stays in LA and takes his losing medicine.
The really sad thing is if LBJ actually decided he does want to get traded, he could make it happen. Just about every team would want him. He is the deliverer of rings as well as the destroyer of franchises. Desperation for the former means pretending the latter isn’t inevitable. Imagine how horrific the Lakers would be if he decamped to, I dunno, Atlanta or Dallas or Boston or some other bubble team.
"Destroyer of franchises" - a little overly dramatic lol. Competent franchises can rebuild after he leaves (see Miami in 2014 and Cleveland post 2018). Besides, if you would ask any team he has played for whether they would take that bargain again, they would take it 100%. In the modern NBA, teams basically align their assets to a single timeline. The past few championship winners/heavy contenders have done that (Bucks trading for Jrue giving up a boatload of picks, Lakers trading for AD giving up a boatload of picks + prospects, Nets giving up young players and all their picks for KD/Kyrie/Harden. Even what OKC, Orlando and Houston are doing right now are examples of this asset/timeline alignment, they're just doing it for the future). That's just how you need to do things to maximize chances of success in a specific time period. With regards to LeBron, he has delivered championships to every franchise he has played for, so it's usually a pretty safe investment.
As for the Lakers, they are in a bit of a tight spot as they don't own their own picks in the near future, so a total rebuild isn't an option for them (I'm not certain about the level of protections on those picks). In any case, they should be able to trade LeBron/AD for really good pieces (if they wanted to) and most importantly, they're the Lakers. Star FAs flock to them whenever they hit the market. So they'll be able to retool/rebuild without too many worries provided they have competent management (which they probably don't).
Will be really interesting to see if the Lakers choose to - or can - unload any of their elderly stars for draft picks. Or do they try ‘rebuilding’ with different FAs over the next few years? Or maybe all our nightmares come true and they win a ring with this motley crew.
Yes, star FAs over their prime. Lakers have become an old men's club. They've dug their own hole. Will they start firing some folks like the coach and GM? The split with Magic could have had some bad juju mixed about. These guys will need an IV soon.
Last time they had max space for FAs, they got LeBron (coming off one of the greatest individual postseason runs ever) and 25-26 year old AD (not technically a FA, but he forced his way there by scaring off all other suitors). Don't let this year's disaster mislead you about the long-term competitive advantage of being the Lakers. Unfortunately, future iterations of the Lakers will not be this incompetent.
They're the team with the anomalous strategy obviously (driven in large part by a superstar who is loyal and won't pout when he doesn't get his way, the rest of the league doesn't get that liberty). That's not how most of the league operates though.
Hypothetically, if LeBron could come to GSW and replace every single player with the 2019-20 Lakers and then GSW wins a bubble championship, would we take that deal?
No for me. I’m not a chip trumps all fan. I want to enjoy watching the style of play and rooting for core players. Because players can rightfully move on (shout out to Oscar Robertson) it is a great luxury to have a core group sticking around for a (relatively) long time doing some great things and providing a great show on the way.
We have Steph, Dray and Klay (so potential for more championships without drastic moves) and we've recently won 3 championships so no. The Lakers, Heat and Cavs didn't have that luxury when making that decision (basically, the only franchises in a similar position right now are the Suns and the Bucks with a championship worthy home-grown core).
New thread https://dubnationhq.com/p/explain-one-play-the-telepathic-teamwork/comments
-Joe Johnson to the Celtics
https://twitter.com/wojespn/status/1473685591208439817
-Mavericks are signing guard Carlik Jones, of NBA G League's Texas Legends, to a 10-day hardship deal
https://twitter.com/ShamsCharania/status/1473686047892586500
-Mavericks are planning to sign free agent guard Brandon Knight on a 10-day hardship deal
https://twitter.com/wojespn/status/1473715358108463114
Iso Joe???
Pick up the phone, Monta!
> The Golden State Warriors are signing guard Quinndary Weatherspoon to 10-day hardship deal, sources tell @TheAthletic @Stadium. Weatherspoon has played for the Warriors‘ G League affiliate in Santa Cruz after spending the past two seasons with the Spurs.
https://twitter.com/ShamsCharania/status/1473717269549170701
EDIT: Saw something last night about how Toupane didn't play in the G-League game, wonder if he picked up an injury and if the Warriors had plans to sign him otherwise.
Means Kuminga is probably a no go next game?
Not sure, Weatherspoon is 6'3 so without knowing anything about him it feels like more of a Poole replacement than a Wiggins replacement.
Didn't they also recall Dowtin?
Ws loading up on Guards.
Latest Shaqtin': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qL1cBaea8mc
Featuring not one, but two Lakers...
that lbj pass gotta hurt
One thing that is standing out for me on Wiggs. We all know he operates quietly, not flashy. Even when he is doing well, he can be hard to see sometimes. But I notice he is particularly good at nailing down early coffin shots. Curry tends to drive the coffin nail in, but Wiggs always seems to hit that shot, when the Warriors have a lead but the game still seems to be in reach, that feels like the first coffin nail. Like "If Wiggs is hitting that shot, we ain't got a shot." He may not be the guy on the team that will seal the deal, but he is shaping up to be a very reliable table-setter. Getting on base ahead of the big hitters. If that tendency plays out in the playoffs, that's great news for the Dubs.
I’m not sure if this has been been looked at recently, but Andrew Wiggins:
.521 TS% in 442 games with MIN
.571 TS% in 112 games with GSW
He’s played the equivalent of a season-and-a-half as a Warrior and added 50 percentage points, and this season he’s at .594!
Not even looking at his improved defense, the transformation is both real and dramatic.
Or this…
Andrew Wiggins 21.7 pts per 36 on .594 TS
D’Angelo Russell 20.5 pts per 36 on .510 TS
Now figure out which one is the 6’-8” freak athlete who can guard 1-4 at a high level; which one thrives off the ball and fits in any offensive system; which one is arguably the most durable player in the NBA; and which one came with a #7 pick in a stacked draft attached to him.
The question to me is how much of that D’Lo/Wiggins comparison is based on who’s the better player vs. being helped/hurt by a dramatic change in scenery/circumstances. We know Wiggins was worse in MIN, but would D’Lo be more of a Jordan Poole on this version the Warriors?
It is seriously unfair, the gifts the Timberwolves have bestowed upon our beloved franchise.
MIN front office, aka, the Timberfools. Are they our AAA affiliate?
To think that at one point we almost flipped Klay for Love!
That actually would have been the gentlemanly thing to do, lol.
The Wolves also helped us out by picking Derrick Williams over Klay (and Kawhi) in 2011.
He's playing really well. Really proving that a change a scenery is sometimes what a player needs to really succeed. Also really proving the value of coaching, culture, and organizational competence.
It's interesting taking a look back at the 2014 NBA draft; no draft class ever ends up having careers like you think they might on draft night, but this is a really interesting one.
Top performers:
-Andrew Wiggins (1)
-Joel Embiid (3)
-Julius Randle (7)
-Zach LaVine (13)
-Nikola Jokic (41)
Honorable Mention: Aaron Gordon (4), Marcus Smart (6), Jusuf Nurkić (16), Clint Capela (25), Joe Harris (33).
I'm sure there are other ones I'm missing as well. No real unique insights here, just an interesting class overall.
At this point, who in that class would we rather have on the Warriors than Wiggins? Embiid and Jokic, certainly, but I think it really ends there. I don't think Randle or LaVine would be great fits with the team.
LaVine is pretty great these days. I'm sure we could do something with him...
Totally. But would you swap Wiggins straight up for him? I'm not saying there's a right or wrong answer here.
I mean "straight up" LaVine is making $20 million a year, substantially less than Wiggins. So, yeah. For sure.
I was thinking purely from a player standpoint, not taking into account salaries, but of course it's impossible to truly separate the two completely.
Yes.
I’m not even sure flipping Wiggins for Embiid (his KU teammate) would not be a mild negative for this team.
You want to go for a few more "not's" just to take that double negative up a few not-ches? :)
Chill lol. If we had Embiid, we'd be close to the 2017 Warriors.
Nah. Embiid is nothing like KD. We’d be closer to the 2019 Warriors sans KD — with Embiid in the role of a rich man’s Boogie Cousins.
Obviously Wiggs is not a better player than Embiid, but he fits beautifully into the HB-KD role in Kerrball (both offensively and defensively) in a way Embiid would not.
He's nothing like Durant stylistically so the team would be very different, but he's still an insanely good player. Calling him a rich man's Cousins vastly undersells his talent.
I fail to see how any defense guards Embiid and Steph together. The defense would be forced to play single coverage on Embiid which is not going to end well. Additionally, see how good the Reddick/Embiid and now Seth/Embiid combo is. Steph and Embiid would be ridiculous (not as much as KD and Steph, but close).
> Calling him a rich man's Cousins vastly undersells his talent.
...a rich man's 2019 injured Cousins who was a shell of his original self, absolutely. If we're talking earlier Cousins, the comparison gets more interesting, particularly given he was more durable than Embiid earlier in his career.
We’ve never really seen Kerrball work with a player like Embiid, so how good it might be (on either side of the floor) is conjecture.
We’ve seen it work with a player like Wiggins, to the tune of three titles, a 207-39 record over three seasons, and a 26-5 record this year with the best net rating in the league.
A Wiggins-Embiid swap would radically overhaul that formula — taking Draymond out of his best position by far — for a big question mark.
I don’t think “Rich man’s Cousins” is “vastly underselling” Embiid, fwiw. Peak Boogie put up 28-12-5 per 36 on solid efficiency, with excellent advanced stats. JoJo has better efficiency numbers (20-30 pts of TS, typically) but that’s quantitative. Qualitatively, they’re similar: super-skilled, lumbering true centers who dominate the ball on offense; are excellent passers, rebounders and interior defenders; and have issues switching and defending in space. And have issues staying healthy.
Steph and JoJo’s friendship would tempt me, but no, I’m not making that hypothetical swap (not that Philly would even consider it…)
Wiggins is much stylistically BETTER for the Warriors than Durant, in that he doesn't get emo if he doesn't get 10-15 iso sets every game.
As for Embiid, it'd be interesting to see how he'd fit on the Warriors. If Wiseman succeeds, we'll get a taste stylistically. Embiid is just such a different player than the Warriors have had during the dynasty run.
I mean, we’re close to the 2017 Warriors once Klay and Wiseman are back
I doubt it. That was the GOAT (or close to it) team with a 10+ net rating against good teams in the regular season which increased in the playoffs (reminder, they lost 1 playoff game where the Cavs set the record for most 3s ever made and Klay wasn't even good offensively during that postseason run).
Not really. We're a different team and we might achieve at similar levels, but mostly because Steph and KD both took turns being injured and then the wheels fell off the third year.
Health permitting. That caveat aside... yeah. Given how durable Wiggins has been, though, it's a pretty big caveat.
Possibly. I don't necessarily agree that it would be a mild negative for this team, but I do agree that it's not an outrageous question to consider. Embiid (when healthy) is MVP level talent. I bet Kerr would have a lot of fun with him in the lineup. But yeah, a Wiggins for Embiid swap would leave a weird hole in the lineup at SF and probably wouldn't be great for spacing overall.
Klay is a 3 in today’s NBA.
He's gone from a shot profile of a star (more self-created shots rather than assisted shots - think of Bradley Beal, Zach Lavine types) to the shot-profile of a role player (guys like Mikal Bridges etc). That's obviously a more optimal role for him, but it's an apples-to-oranges comparison.
I disagree with characterizing Wiggins' shot profile role to Bridges'. Bridges plays on a classical pick & roll team with one of the best ever pure PG orchestrating the offense, mostly using Bridges as a release valve when the defense rotates off him. Wiggins has plays run for him to use his advantage. Note Wiggins' usage is almost double Bridges.
https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm_finder.cgi?player_id2=wiggian01&p1yrfrom=2022&player_id1=bridgmi01&p2yrfrom=2022&sum=0&request=1
Wiggins may not be the "primary option", but there's a lot of diversity in the "non-primary option" group.
That's fair, though I would say usage for Bridges is lower than usage for Wiggins mostly because the Suns have a lot more guys to take up the usage than the Warriors do (Paul, Booker, Ayton, Payne are all guys who have a lot of touches on court while the Warriors only have Steph/Poole in that vein).
I was more speaking about the types of buckets those guys get. In his last season in Minnesota, Wiggins was assisted on only 46.1% of his plays which is close to guys like Beal (45), Lavine (45.6) and Booker (45.5). This year (somewhat older numbers but they should be relatively close), Wiggins was assisted 69.9% of his plays which is close to guys like Bogdan Bogdanovic and Desmond Bane (guys who have some creation ability, but are not primary initiators). Source: https://twitter.com/samesfandiari/status/1468241298897440777
From a percentile look, Wiggins goes from a 91st % in self-creation usage to 50th percentile, hence why I said his shot profile has changed from a star to a role-player.
Yeah, he’s definitely not asked to create nearly as much. Just pointing out that Bridges is much more limited and not a representative comp.
People expected him to be a superstar, but it turns out he’s simply the best role player imaginable, which is honestly kind of a superstar trait (reminiscent of Klay in some regards)
There's only one ball. The idea that superstars are the players who have the ball and create for themselves and others while having the ball is dumb. For the vast majority of a basketball game, there are 9 players who don't have possession of the ball. Being good at basketball while you don't have possession of the ball is a vastly important skill.
I was randomly drawn into watching some Steph at Davidson highlights and they are incredible. I have no idea how people looked at those highlights and thought he wouldn't make it in the league. Everyone knew about his shooting, but he showed incredible passing, handling, off-ball movement and finishing flashes too. From the highlights (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQN9hdPNVS4), look at the following plays:
- 0:39 - Circus lefty and-one finish
- 2:25 - ridiculous dribble move to make 2 defenders crash into each other (lol)
- 4:00 - ridiculously active and smart off-ball movement, the entire possession is a masterclass in probing the defense off-ball
- 5:12 - incredible handling and finishing
- 5:39 - pure Steph magic
- 7:18 - another high-level finish
- 8:06 - I don't know how anyone can look at that Magic Johnson bullet pass and say that this guy's not a point guard
- 8:37 - more ball-handling wizardry
- 9:02 - nice drive and finish
Reminder - all of these highlights are from 1 NCAA tournament run (4 games in total). Couple this with basically the greatest shooting profile in NBA history coming out of college consisting of:
- 41.2% on 12 3PAs per 40 on some really tough shots including self-created pullups (414/1004 for his college career)
- 87.6% from the line (479/547)
- A record 162 3PM in the 07-08 season which still stands till today (which is crazy considering how the game has completely changed)
Everything that made him legendary was right there in the highlights. I suppose it's a sign of how things have drastically changed post-Steph that someone with this profile/highlights wouldn't ever drop out of the top 3 in the draft. I still don't know how he did to be honest. He had everything, the flashy highlights, the ridiculous stats, the team success. And he showed up on the biggest stage in college and hit clutch shot after clutch shot.
And he fell to #7. Thank you Minnesota.
The thing that stands out most to me in those highlights is how freaking huuuge Steph’s uniform looks on him.
I low key think that might be what kept people from seeing what he was ;-)
Heh, this just popped up on my Youtube recommended. Damn google always spying on me:
Chad Ford admits he was WRONG when Steph Curry was in the Draft | Sports 360
https://youtu.be/sFzvi8-fW0s
Alright, nothing breaking here.
Basically, boiled down to didn't like his physicals.
Somebody HAS to do a documentary someday on the March Madness run. In the moment it was the funnest Cinderella runs I can remember. He was a magician, and it was the peak of Gus Johnson losing his mind in excitement.
Add in the very nice retrospect that it wasn't just a more fun version of a great college guard on a hot tourney run. The reason it was that much more fun was because it was our intro to one of the best players ever.
From what I recall, it basically came down to people saying he was a tweener SG. Shoots too much to be an NBA point guard and doesn't have the physicals to defend the 2.
Curry came into the league at a time when the belief was a contending team couldn't have their Point Guard be the lead scorer. You needed a pass first PG to get the ball to your bigs in the paint.
Still, even at the time I recall people making the Nash comparisons for Curry. I guess we got to thank Kahn for noy buying into that hype!
Started digging into the 2009 and following drafts. My idea was that draft picking is hard and even the top 10 had tons of examples of failure picks. I was pretty much wrong though. Yes there are Thabeet (2nd pick) and Flynn (6th) that year. But mostly what I see is the top 10-20 picks having somewhere between excellent and serviceable NBA careers. And the best players (career VORP choose your stat) are often not in the top 3.
My conclusion: draft picking is hard, but the overall methodology of evaluating players is reasonably sound. Most businesses as valuable as these don’t like taking tons of risk with their long term investments, so of course they’re going to be mostly conservative at these decisions.
Draft picking is hard no doubt, but a lot of FOs are rather terrible at it (though FOs have become significantly better these days, even Kahn who we all laugh about managed to get the 6th pick in the 2009 draft for Randy Foye).
For the NBA, I do not agree with conservatism being the strategically optimal choice - value in the NBA is so asymmetric (with a star or superstar providing significantly more value than 5 decent players) that hunting for stars in the optimal strategy (some FOs realize this and pursue this strategy, think of Sam Presti right now or Daryl Morey in Philly).
> I do not agree with conservatism being the strategically optimal choice
While I agree, this was probably one of the reasons why Flynn went before Curry. Flynn's athleticism at the PG position put him in the spectrum closer Derrick Rose and Russell Westbrook, and Steph was more Mike Bibby and JJ Reddick.
Don't get me started on the high athleticism = high potential myth lol.
That wasn't the point. Name a 6'3" player since the Steph draft that had below average athleticism and can be considered top 5 in their draft class. It's probably just Steph... and maybe CJ?
Trae Young (went 5, would probably go 2 in a redraft) and Darius Garland (went 5, would probably go 2/3 in a redraft depending on what you think about Zion's health). It's rare because guys with that level of skill are super rare (I would argue that they are just as rare if not more rare than freak athletes).
I wrote that because I dispute stuff traditional draft thinking like Flynn is athletic (in the run and jump sense which is how most people tend to think of athleticism) so he has a high ceiling while Steph isn't (which is false, Steph is a freak athlete in non-traditional areas such as hand-eye coordination and endurance) so he has a lower ceiling. This lazy analysis is still prevalent today which you can see with last year's draft cycle and consensus opinions on prospects like Moody/Wagner and Kuminga (throw in Wiseman here too I suppose).
I think it was the 5th they traded for, and it included Mike Miller. But God, not completing the back end of that Foye and Miller for Steph Curry trade makes it somehow sound even worse!
I never said "conservatism" is "the strategically optimal choice".
How many top 20 picks are outside of the universally agreed upon top 20 as discussed endlessly in the media? Not many. Nobody is taking many high risk choices.
Yeah, in the NBA I've certainly come around to the notion that in the long run it's better to select the high ceiling/low floor guy over the low ceiling high floor guy (granted those sorts of analysis are never perfect).
This is how I see the Wagner vs. Kuminga picks. Sure, Wagner may have been more "ready" and I have no doubt would fit in really well with the Warriors, but Kuminga is the (potential) All-Star in the makings.
Wagner has a very high ceiling
EDIT: Consider how valuable Wagner's skillset is if he can play center, for instance.
Sure, the comment is really moreso on how the players were discussed rather than necessarily the reality. All discussion around Kuminga was his "upside" whereas for Wagner is was being "NBA ready".
Wagner got labels like "solid secondary offensive option", "high IQ," and "mature," whereas his negatives were things like "lack of athleticism", and "slow."
Rightly or wrongly he wasn't projected as a high ceiling draft pick when compared with the other players in the draft.
Generally agreed … though I’m not sure I would give Franz Wagner a particularly low ceiling. He’s a 6’-10” versatile wing who’s a month younger than Scottie Barnes. Kinda think “low ceiling” gets thrown around as an easy synonym for “white”…
I wonder if they can blind the evaluations maybe use CGI to blind the videos. In other fields like professional classical music, I’ve heard blinded auditions have made a substantial difference.
Yeah, but they can’t drive themselves to the auditions.
Sure, I think that's definitely true as well. That does bring up an interesting question. We all know that (in all sports) race heavily impacts the way athletes are analyzed and described. Who was the last white NBA player who was considered to be a "high ceiling" player going into the draft?
Chet Holmgren in this draft is probably viewed as the highest upside white American that I can remember. (Previously probably Gordon Hayward or Kevin Love.)
This year Giddey went 6th, Wagner went 8th in a good draft. Giddey if anything was held back by his shooting numbers. I don't know if he would've gone higher because of the quality up top but that was more of a concern than the athleticism.
Go back a couple years and Tyler Herro dropped to 13. Was that because he was pigeon-holed as white spot up shooter vs a guy who could do stuff off the bounce? Maybe. Was that also maybe because that's how Kentucky used him? Probably. The same thing happened to Devin Booker.
Luka when he was drafted 3rd overall I think was stung by a view that his "lack of athleticism" would limit his ceiling. Maybe due as much to his skin color as his body type. Because it was absolutely insane at the time to have him go 3rd overall considering how dominant he was as an 18 year old.
Wagner? Tough to say.
Sengun
…or that Bob Myers guy at Golden State
I don't think Bob has explicitly hunted for stars like those guys yet (he's always had his stars already on the team). He may, I just don't know if he's been in that position to reliably say what he would do.
He went high upside on Wiseman and Kuminga
I was just going to say this... how much more "hunting for stars" can we get than with the Wiseman and Kuminga picks?
Bob could've followed the recipe for our current core and drafted 3/4-year guys (Steph & Klay 3-yr, Dray 4-yr) but went with three 19-year olds whose main draw is their potential.
He was just on the Rusillo podcast and pretty explicitly stated that this was his philosophy.
Incredible.
>>> I have no idea how people looked at those highlights and thought he wouldn't make it in the league.
I mean, he was a lotto pick. Was the debate whether he’d make it, or just how far he could take team with such a small, slender frame?
The "small, slender frame" and "will his game translate to the NBA!?!?" are what I recall.
I've looked back at the NBA draft sites and the primary concern was that he wasn't a "true" PG and didn't have the size to be a true SG (and lacked "athleticism" which loosely translates to doesn't jump very high). Which turned out to be true but irrelevant. Steph would have succeeded no matter what if he played as a traditional PG, but his greatness is in small part due to Kerr's system where he spends a lot of time looking for open shots without the ball.
Would MJ have been MJ without the triangle? Yes... and no -- a little as you say. Everyone needs a system to succeed. The difference with Steph is people grasping at straws to try and invent ridiculous dings against him, because it's hard to accept that a 6'3" guy can succeed to this extent where none has ever done so before.
Yes, and Curry had playoff success (2013) and had finished 6th in MVP voting under Mark Jackson in his age 25/26 season. He's the type of talent who would've had otherworldly impact regardless of system/coach/franchise like a Durant or a LeBron.
True, but Curry goes from 6th to off the charts once Kerr shows up. His eFG goes from .556 -> .594 -> .630 and his TS goes from .610 -> .638 -> .669. Those are huge jumps and while some of it is experience and surrounding personnel some of it is getting him into a system where he isn't handling the ball as much. In particular, his assists peak in Kerr's 1st year and start trending down.
OT: https://sports.yahoo.com/davidson-holds-off-no-10-021048620.html
We beat Bama! (...in basketball)
Steph loved it.
Crazy stat line for Crowder tonight: 27 mins, 1-4 field, 1-4 threes, no FTs, NO REBOUNDS, no steals, 2 assists, 1 block, 3 fouls, and +12.
Hoping he will put up a similar line on Christmas day.
without the +12, I hope
He always seems to bring it against the Ws. Not sure what the deal is there. It's like Wiggins against Cleveland and Minnesota. Hey Jae -- Golden State DIDN'T trade you...
Man, LA Lakers.... the one time all season I'm rooting for you, and your opponent shoots 29% from three (12 for 41), yet you still manage to lose by nearly 20 points. Not lookin' great over there.
You rooted FOR the Lakers? Yeah, I know a LAL win would have been a Suns' loss. But I just... couldn't. Whoever suggested a 4 OT game had the right idea, IMO. LOL
Damn, THT not living up to LAL hype. Who’d have thunk it?!?!
He's a ball-dominant, athletic slasher. It's basically the worst possible roster construction for him.
Also though, he just turned 21 a few weeks ago. The hype was too much for him because he's on the Lakers, but the backlash might be as well.
Thank god he's not ready this season though, those first few games back worried me that the Lakers might not be completely cooked lol.
Yeah, but being a "ball-dominant, athletic slasher" is not really a good thing, in my understanding of the modern NBA, unless you're otherworldly athletic like (young) LeBron or Giannis. But THT is just regular athletic by NBA standards. He seems decently quick and has those long arms, but doesn't look that smooth, his handle is only really good enough for straight line drives, and he is not really a leaper.
So, he's this young, long SG who can't shoot and isn't that useful off the ball, that isn't a superstar defender. He seems like this "jack of all trades" guy with nothing remarkable about him except being young, on LAL, and having a long wingspan (none of which are directly meaningful for winning basketball games).
As a Warriors fan, I love that he's getting all hyped up, since I think it hurts the Lakers to think he's the answer to much of anything. But 22 year old Poole >>> 21 year old Poole, so maybe THT can get in the lab and figure out a skill to get great at.
3 pts / 1-13 FG / 0-8 3pt / 2 reb / 1 ast / 1 pf / 31:23 min
That's almost impressive.....
Now look at IT’s line 😜
So combined 2-24 FG, 0-14 3pt.
Impressive (but still 13 missed threes shy of the 2018 Rockets)
Said Russell Westbrook, in response to an AP reporter asking why he missed the triple double after posting only 5 assists:
"I actually tried to get a triple-double, but my teammates... they’re not giving me the Chris Paul treatment where they make the shots when I pass them the ball. So, might have to have a talk with them about that."
Wait is that a real quote?
Lakers with only 14 assists with 3 minutes remaining. Non-existent ball movement - just a lot of stand around hero ball.
When a good defense doesn’t have to worry about shooters, there’s no space to cut or pass
Lakers bring LBJ back in down 20 with 5 mins left. Serious case of reverse load management
Enjoying watching JaVale manage his role so well. Makes me really excited about when JW returns.
For the people who've been watching basketball way longer than me, does anyone come close to LeBron's level right now at 37?
It's ridiculous how much he's carrying the Lakers (and they're still so bad!).
In the 3rd, they were playing a lineup which included IT, Westbrook and Rondo. Microball without the shooting lol.
Edit: For context, LeBron shot 13-19 tonight. The rest of the team was 21-68.
37yo Lebron? Like, Giannis, KD, and Steph, for sure.
Young Lebron was nuts though, looking at the 2007 Cavs roster now, and I'm like, "This team went to the Finals?"
I meant players who have been anywhere near as good as LeBron at 36/37.
Not many. Kareem. Robert Parish was still an All Star at that age. Tim Duncan was an All Star at 36. CP3 is still a force.
There's a reason he's a consensus #2 all time player and #1 on many people's leaderboards. The short answer is "no". You probably have to look at a different sport and Tom Brady (ugh, super ugh) to find a comparison, but the athletic requirements on a QB are so vastly lesser than an NBA player that it's not a great comp. Brady is older though so it washes out a bit.
Ah I see.
Dunno if anyone's still been the #1 guy at age 37 like Lebron, but guys like Malone and Kareem still put up efficient 20+ points in their age 37 seasons.
Steve Nash still looked good in his last year in PHX at age 37.
No one has been able to single-handedly elevate an entire team as much as LeBron has since he entered the league. Freak of nature. But these days, he requires that any team he is on gut all their future resources for the present. Mission accomplished. Team gutted.
Giannes, Steph and KD.
No, LeBron is a freak. If the question was "has anyone remained near their own peaks at age 37", then maybe you can make an argument for age-37 Malone/Stockton? But they had each other... and LeBron is doing what both those guys did by himself... haha
Tonite - LBJ on the floor (32 minutes) - Lakers even. LBJ off the floor (11 minutes) - Lakers -20.
Dude needs to hand in a trade demand. Go back home to Cleveland, they'll be contenders with him + Garland + Mobley. It's sad watching him waste away his final years like this (though he did bring it upon himself by sanctioning the Westbrook trade).
Not saying I think this is likely, not even remotely. Crazier things have happened in the NBA. But much more probable is that LBJ stays in LA and takes his losing medicine.
The really sad thing is if LBJ actually decided he does want to get traded, he could make it happen. Just about every team would want him. He is the deliverer of rings as well as the destroyer of franchises. Desperation for the former means pretending the latter isn’t inevitable. Imagine how horrific the Lakers would be if he decamped to, I dunno, Atlanta or Dallas or Boston or some other bubble team.
"Destroyer of franchises" - a little overly dramatic lol. Competent franchises can rebuild after he leaves (see Miami in 2014 and Cleveland post 2018). Besides, if you would ask any team he has played for whether they would take that bargain again, they would take it 100%. In the modern NBA, teams basically align their assets to a single timeline. The past few championship winners/heavy contenders have done that (Bucks trading for Jrue giving up a boatload of picks, Lakers trading for AD giving up a boatload of picks + prospects, Nets giving up young players and all their picks for KD/Kyrie/Harden. Even what OKC, Orlando and Houston are doing right now are examples of this asset/timeline alignment, they're just doing it for the future). That's just how you need to do things to maximize chances of success in a specific time period. With regards to LeBron, he has delivered championships to every franchise he has played for, so it's usually a pretty safe investment.
As for the Lakers, they are in a bit of a tight spot as they don't own their own picks in the near future, so a total rebuild isn't an option for them (I'm not certain about the level of protections on those picks). In any case, they should be able to trade LeBron/AD for really good pieces (if they wanted to) and most importantly, they're the Lakers. Star FAs flock to them whenever they hit the market. So they'll be able to retool/rebuild without too many worries provided they have competent management (which they probably don't).
Will be really interesting to see if the Lakers choose to - or can - unload any of their elderly stars for draft picks. Or do they try ‘rebuilding’ with different FAs over the next few years? Or maybe all our nightmares come true and they win a ring with this motley crew.
Yes, star FAs over their prime. Lakers have become an old men's club. They've dug their own hole. Will they start firing some folks like the coach and GM? The split with Magic could have had some bad juju mixed about. These guys will need an IV soon.
Last time they had max space for FAs, they got LeBron (coming off one of the greatest individual postseason runs ever) and 25-26 year old AD (not technically a FA, but he forced his way there by scaring off all other suitors). Don't let this year's disaster mislead you about the long-term competitive advantage of being the Lakers. Unfortunately, future iterations of the Lakers will not be this incompetent.
It’s like you wrote this without even knowing Warriors even exist.
They're the team with the anomalous strategy obviously (driven in large part by a superstar who is loyal and won't pout when he doesn't get his way, the rest of the league doesn't get that liberty). That's not how most of the league operates though.
Well sure. But a little drama makes for a fun metaphor. Gotta get the blood flowing somehow on Dubs’ off days.
Hypothetically, if LeBron could come to GSW and replace every single player with the 2019-20 Lakers and then GSW wins a bubble championship, would we take that deal?
No. He’ll no. Eff no.
Half the fun of being a Dubs fan in this era is how much fun this team and their chemistry.
No for me. I’m not a chip trumps all fan. I want to enjoy watching the style of play and rooting for core players. Because players can rightfully move on (shout out to Oscar Robertson) it is a great luxury to have a core group sticking around for a (relatively) long time doing some great things and providing a great show on the way.
No. The bubble championship will be forever tainted in my mind.
We have Steph, Dray and Klay (so potential for more championships without drastic moves) and we've recently won 3 championships so no. The Lakers, Heat and Cavs didn't have that luxury when making that decision (basically, the only franchises in a similar position right now are the Suns and the Bucks with a championship worthy home-grown core).
I’ll drink the tears… what’s CLE giving LAL in that trade anyways, Love and Sexton?
If CLE finds Kyptonite for Sexton, they would have Love and Sextonite.
Sexton + Allen + picks + salary filler would be my guess. But obviously it'll never happen so it's a useless thought exercise.
Westbrook really sucks at basketball. It's actually painful to watch.
but...but...all the triple doubles!!