11-04-2019, 10:28 AM
(11-04-2019, 08:36 AM)Thukydides Wrote: Very interesting, how much we disagree on this point.
So there are three cases:
No1: HB stays on his PO: HE´d still be on the books, we´d have no Trade exception and no JJ (who in my eyes plays way to little right now). To me HB would be very detrimental to this No1 offense we´re running right now, as he showed throughout his time here that he is not capable of making quick decisions after receiving the ball. Even if he just stood in the corner being a shooting threat (even though his numbers this year don´t suggest, he´d be one, but granted he would be), him being fully incapable of making the second pass would be a huge, huge negative. This aside, even if he seems like a good dude, I wouldn´t have expected him to commit to this role being paid almost 17 millions per year: And that would mean more ISO-Barnes and I don´t have to explain to anyone around here, what that would mean for the offense we´re currently running.
No2: HB stays and commits to a longterm deal. This would mean he either left shitloads of money on the table to go elsewhere or we overpaid him for his service. As the former seems highly unlikely. Super meh to that option.
No3: HB walks in FA last summer after not opting into his PO. That´s the only case, in which the Mavs are anywhere close to the position they are in now. But this seems to me highly unlikely. Regardless we wouldn´t have JJ in this case. And as I write this, I realize that our disagreement is more about JJ than HB. I see him as a great, cheap, young piece, who understands his role and has tremendous room for improvement.
To me none of these cases is in any form better than our outcome. How the trade should be lopsided in direction of the Kings, as you said, is beyond me.
Not a single part of this explains a "fleecing" of the Kings. The trade itself needed more incoming to be even, IMO.
An established veteran who is proven to be able to score 18-19 ppg albeit on a contract that is a bit of an overpay, versus a player who has fallen out of favor from a team that is not all that good and the largest trade exception in the history of the NBA.
That was the trade you think is a fleecing. I don't think it was at all, and believe it was lopsided in favor of the Kings.
IMO it would be an even trade (not a fleecing, but even) if Harry Giles was included, which I don't think would have been that big of an ask seeing as though they didn't pick up his option this year.
We now know, they thought HB was the final piece that would put them over the top and into the playoffs as we see the commitment to him in the offseason and the comments made after the trade. For that piece, we got a trade exception and a player they didn't think was all that good.