the day of reckoning will come for green/gs, and i'm guessing it won't be pretty. such a tough road to navigate, as they simply don't win a title without him--his skillset is near irreplaceable and a perfect fit with the rest of their personnel. on the other hand, he's only a star in his role--he doesn't carry that value for anyone else. so once he's signed, he's yours.
Curry seems to be vouching for him too. It's a tough one. You'll basically pay him based on history and past success and not in the future and what he'll contribute moving forward. I would never give him 4y nor the max, but would gladly give him 2y more
what's hard to read is whether he's asking for a max extension. i *think* that's it, and it matters because he doesn't make max money, and a max extension helps you avoid a circumstance wherein you actually have to pay him THE max to keep him from jumping ship in FA. but it also pays him a ton of money into his mid-thirties, which...doesn't seem like a safe bet. i suppose it's a good problem to have (how much to pay to keep my dynastic core in place?), but it could be explosive, particularly given the personality involved.
I watched all these guys play. Oscar was great too. I talk about West because he was a Laker and I have always been a Laker fan. I saw West play his whole career, what I did not see on broadcast, I listened to on the radio. I guarantee you that the top dogs then could easily compete now. Reddick and Reaves may be stars today and they may have been stars back then, nobody can tell you that. While I agree with the concept that todays average guys, may of who spend most of the time on the bench, were way better than the average guys back then, the star players, the very best back then would be great today. It is really a joke to say otherwise and only young guys who never saw these older guys compete would say that. Chamberlain, West, Baylor, Russell, etc would be great today, I have no doubt. West might even be better today than he was back then because he was a great outside shooter with a super quick shot and handle. I have no doubt he would have been more than able to develop his 3 point shot. Honestly go watch more film.
Are we at least going to give the best top 20 or whatever old guys modern skills coaching, weight training and nutritioned meals for a year … year and a half abeer and then let them compete? Only way at all this type of conversation is fair.
I don't think GSW will be keen to drop max on Draymond, they are way over budget. Operating costs at negative -44 million right now (compared to the Lakers +63 million), Joe Lacob literally propped them up financially during these down seasons for Klay as if they were winning it all still. They have a valuation like the Lakers and Knicks but in a much smaller market so it's a valuation based upon success and investment rather than actual market size. Not sustainable. However, that could factor in well for Dray as they could view it as losing it all without him. I just don't see him leaving anywhere else as other teams will see him as the 7/7/7 guy and do not have a Curry/Thompson/Wiggins cast for him to support and be that wild card on D and as a facilitator. But there is no way they give him max if they just don't have to. Where are the competing offers Dray? I doubt anyone would give him 20 mil per let alone max.
he's quietly three years past his prime already, but he's still a positive on both ends and has had a couple of his best defensive seasons recently (the offense has dropped off over time). the issue is risking pissing him off and having him bolt in FA with no compensation. maybe the competing offer isn't even a max. he's got a player option after this year. say he has a standard draymond year and opts out and just walks. the warriors are screwed. you think nobody would give him 25 per for 4 years, just planning on eating the last one for sure? isn't he a klutch guy? don't we have cap space? so the threat for gs is pretty real, imo. he walks for nothing and their window is slammed shot. sorry, jonathan kuminga ain't bringing that, especially not before curry's out to pasture. if i were them, i'd bite the bullet and give him the extension. and i'd trade wiggins while his value is at an absolute maximum. i know that's an extremely unpopular take, though.
I think all time greats would probably find a way to succeed in any era. What the greatest athletes say is the game is 95% mental, so apparently they had that going for them. well I’m sure there are exceptions, this is what I would believe to be true.
Zion can’t get too FAT. https://sports.yahoo.com/zion-willi...s-him-to-stay-below-295-pounds-215538783.html
Sure it is. All other things being somewhat equal, mental aspect can be the difference. When you are outmatched to begin with? Nah.
I'd really like to milk that Klutch tie to get Draymond at some point. The problem is, whatever you pay him he's going to be overpaid. I think he's a $12m a year player. Because of who he is, his resumé and the personality he brings to the court and locker room he'll get easily double that somewhere.
maybe here, given the klutch connection. it's an incredibly awkward fit, but as it stands, we could bring him in next year at the cost he's asking as an extension from gs. it would be a fun way to spite gs, though i don't know that it does much for us. in other news: https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id...red-james-harden-pj-tucker-danuel-house-deals i mean, this obviously stinks to high heaven. but a) i don't think they can prove anything and b) the timing seems arbitrary. yes, it was a particularly egregious case: i mean, pj tucker agreeing to a full MLE with a team that didn't have one a full ten days prior to the opening of FA is some messed up stuff. but still, teams have done this many times over without an investigation, and now you're going to fuss? i actually wonder if teams are starting to worry that if lebron did this for us next year, everyone could be screwed, so some small-market owners pushed for some scrutiny as a way to ward off the evil spirits.
