Official 2016 Free Agency Thread

https://theringer.com/kevin-durant-thunder-conundrum-4b1689d4002c#.cyvfabpkr

Nike wants Durant out of OKC.

 

i'll reiterate from other threads about this:

i don't think boston is actually much closer to contention than the lakers. if durant wants to go there, they need to grab two other allstar level players, imo. and--again, imo--they're LESS equipped (not more) than the lakers to do that. la has the space to sign a second one outright (horford?) and the assets to trade for another one, no problem (two of russell/randle/#2 pick should net an allstar, imo). boston has a pick lower, less cap space, and a bunch of bench quality players that overacheived. now that byron's gone, i'm not sure there's some huge coaching advantage there, either.

in short, i don't get why boston is considered a legit threat for durant while the lakers aren't. i think that in reality, neither is. the main reason for my belief is that the FA/trade market isn't quite ripe for a superfriends type team to be built. well, that and the fact that okc is already among the league's best (and youngest) teams.

 

Lakers aren't even a wisp of a thought to Durant unless, he and Westbrook made a pact to come over here after next summer if all else fails in OKC. Leaving together though bespeaks of a premeditated plan and betrayal a'la LBJ-style and I just can't see it in those two.

 

fine. but if the lakers have no chance, then boston has no chance. i think each has about a 3% chance.

 

Agreed about Boston. I was listening to the show with Rachael Nichols on ESPN (can't remember the name) and Brian Windhorst was on the show. They were talking about KD and privately OKC isn't concerned with GS; he said that people who know KD have privately expressed he has too much of an ego and need to be the man to ever team up with Curry, Green, Klay, etc. I think if that's the case, and winning is his number 1 priority, I think the Spurs make the most sense, IMO.

However, I think if he signs a 1+1 with OKC, which most insiders think he will, it gives us the chance to improve this offseason, and give ourselves a fighting chance to acquire him. The 2017 is loaded; the cap is going up to a reportedly $108 million, and I'm more than certain we can put something together to put a contending team in place for him by that time if he decides to come here. We'd have the assets, the salary cap flexbility, and most importantly, the market that his agent and Nike want him in.

 

The conspiracy theorist in me feels like Nike and Adidas have more power than we think. All the talk about free agents not wanting to come here because of Kobe, feels to me like it's actually just Nike not wanting competition in the LA market while their cash cow Kobe was still here. Now that there's a vacuum, I really do feel like they're going to incentivize some of their stars to take over the largest market in the industry.

 

This plan still seems plausible, even with us drafting Ingram. Barnes will soon have two NBA titles by the age of 24. Golden State would likely not match us if we put a decent pricetag out there. It also gives Luke a familiar face to jumpstart our franchise. Only thing I'd change is getting a better option at center (Noah, Horford, Whiteside). Our small ball lineup would be ridiculous.

Small ball:
Russell
Clarkson
Ingram
Barnes
Randle

Absolute nightmare for opposing teams

 

1. my assumption was that if durant goes to boston or la, either team would have to have another allstar in place at the time of his signing. thus, this isn't simply a matter of adding durant to the existing roster. it's durant plus others. i think that puts the lakers on even ground, if not in a better spot than boston. sorry, avery bradley and jae crowder just aren't huge draws.

2. all the doomsdaying about what other teams have doesn't make sense to me. curry could blow a knee out tomorrow, and gs becomes VERY beatable, as we've seen. eventually, duncan and ginobili will not be able to take the floor, and kyle anderson isn't replacing that impact. this could happen as soon as next year. hell, okc beat them this year, fairly handily. no one was predicting that, even one game into the series. plus, if we're playing that game, the east has cleveland. so, unless conference finals is your ultimate career goal, i'm not sure we should be discussing who's where.

larger point is that you can't plan based on what other people have. that's like all the teams that loaded up to beat shaq, and then the introduction of the zone and his eating habits changed it all over night.


the real limiting factors are that a) the FA/trade market is weak this year, so super team construction is unlikely, b) okc is currently very good and still young, and c) the financial sense of the 1+1 is staggering.

another thing no one mentions is that kd is best pals with harden, and houston could fairly easily clear the space for two maxes this summer. so, even if durant didn't make the obvious move and sign the 1+1 in okc, it's not like there won't be at least five legit possible destinations.

again, though, i give all of those others an equally small chance. the purpose of my initial post is to question boston's pole position in that group.

 

i don't think he's actually rated that high. after the playoffs, most think he's not any good. i agree with realdeal, though. he's the best fit for this team on the market (that's not named durant). i'd throw a big contract his way. like, near max big. because that's what it will take, and i'm tired of re-treads like lin and hibbert as the offseason acquisitions. i also offer that much cash because to me, the only way a deal is really bad is if the guy can't play. barnes can play. so you overpay by 5 million per--that's not a franchise crippler. rolling over cap space year after year with a losing culture and very few pieces in place to entice other FAs is a losing proposition, imo.

and yes, i know not spending on barnes doesn't mean rolling over space. but the logic behind it is tantamount to that. because if barnes isn't worth it, than neither are most on the market.

 

Barnes for < 15 million per = yes
Barnes for > 15 million per = no

I'd be willing to overspend on Deng to fill the Iguodala role. Iggy is more important to that Warriors team than Barnes imo.

 

So it's a no then, Warriors are matching anything under 15mil per in my opinion.

Edit - Well unless Durant signs there.