BTW, for next year, the Pelicans have 92M sunk in contracts. For 2018/19, they have 64M without Cousins. If they want to keep him, it's probably going to cost 25-30M, so they could have 94M sunk with only Davis, Cousins, Hill, Asik, Moore, Ajinca, and Diallo. That's a team in need some of cheap guards.
I really feel time is on our side. We have to be patient and let things run its course. The last thing I want is for us to become the western version of the New York Knicks, where for nearly 20 years they've brought in big names with no clear direction. They're a mess. Let the kids develop (particularly Ingram) and systematically and methodically add pieces to our young core. I think by 2020 we'll be right where we want to be. Heck, that's only three seasons away. By then the Lebrons, KDs and even Currys will be slowing down and our kids will be hitting their peak. Patience is the key.
Indiana is screwed either way (just like Sacto is/was). Invest 200mil in a player, who is a star but... not a tier 1 (we had this conversation, i know. But still). Or trade him/let him walk and look for a star thru the draft (no big name is signing with Indiana anytime soon, let's be real).
That's fair. 2 quick counters: Minny is an ascending team that will likely be in the playoffs (& possibly beyond) for the next decade. Also, look at Golden State. They built a championship & 73-win team primarily through the draft by playing the long game. I thought they should've moved Thompson for Kevin Love 5 years ago when that was the big Summer rumor. The lesson as always is Jerry West knows WAAAAAAAY more than I do about building a winning basketball team.
Ive heard those assement bout minn for yrs now...the klove/jefferson era, then klove/rubio....even with the core now they are flawed, the late season surge they had has happened before too and they dont build on it for the next season. If we have players turn out like any of gsw 3 of klay, steph and draymond, then i could see saying build around the youth, only one i see that has one of those 3 gsw main stay is Ingram for now Utah could be a good example of what happens with good long term rebuild but not with an actual elite lvl star....they're gona be treadmilling between 4-6th seed and losing 1st/2nd rd till they do get that elite star
How has this not been posted yet? Aside from the anti-George-to-Lakers headline it contains this nugget http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/new...acers-magic-johnson/zvl28kvs3msi17p0sd5eot406
That particular nugget hasn't been touched on a lot, but that article was posted a couple pages back. It's definitely ringing alarm bells from that quote right?
the article is sort of poorly written. but anyway, he suggests that george isn't worth the hassle, then says it would take russell (who, in his opinion, sucks) and randle to get him. but george would be great in boston. because...isiah thomas is a great leader or something. and hayward is better, but not really...or something. btw, jumping on george for not wanting to move to pf is lame. he said that prior to them trying to build the team that way; that's on them for going forward with a plan with which your most important player was not on board. anyway, the basic premise is never defined: what's "all in"? trading russell, randle, and ingram for george? yeah, i'm out. but if the idea is that george--at any price--isn't worth it...dumb. i'd even entertain those arguments regarding cousins, but not george. hopefully the whole league feels like that anonymous gm, and the lakers can steal him.
I would trade for pg but obviously not include zu/ingram at all. Im confident that pg13 wont be on any all nba team this yr but if he plays like the last 1/3rd of this past season he will make it for sure next yr and then we're screwed
Does Eric know something we don't know? Unless Larry Bird has a better option, Paul George is their best building block for the future.
I think the logic is somewhat similar to what Sacramento faced: in a small market is George good enough to take them all the way? He's sort of proven that he's not right? And they can't afford to just pay a King's ransom to Myles Turner and the FAs they'll need to improve dramatically. If the answer to that question is "no", then it may be in their best interest to proceed with him. It may be better to just get the value out of him you can. If they could turn George into Russell, Hou 1st, + fillers would it be worth it? You have at least one piece you can reasonably start to build with. No more "dark clouds hanging over the team" (Paul George's words) and just a fresh start. If the answer to the question is "yes" then you're absolutely right. Throw the big money at him and try to find a way to rebuild around him. Most of their contracts come off in a couple years and they'll have a chance to retool then. Of course, Paul might leave... but you can tackle that in February.
With or without, what Free Agent wants to play in Indiana. At the very least, having PG on your roster gives your organization something to sell, IMO. Their in the same exact situation Memphis was in last year with Conley; I think the Pacers would be foolish not to offer him 5 years and the full max he is eligible for...
I'm not disagreeing, but it's a tough call. Memphis is an interesting comp, but it's really Sacramento that comes to mind first. With Memphis you at least have Gasol already and some good competitors. They decided they would rather be a middling team for 4 more years than shut it down and rebuild. I respect that for a small market. If I'm them, I may decide to rebuild anyway. George is clearly uncomfortable, even unhappy maybe, and is it worth it to make him stay there? I don't know. I guess it would depend on the return. I'd definitely come back to this in February though if George hasn't signed an extension.
Chicago has made it known they're uninterested in projects. They want decent players in any trade that involves Butler. You'd likely have to give them a couple of our kids, the more productive ones and a pick for good measure.
