(05-22-2023, 04:19 AM)omahen Wrote: This is now the second time you have called me out in last couple of days. What kind of board do you want to have here? A bubble, where everyone creates homer deals and there is no discussion?Because the Lakers have 0 salary matching for a contract as big as Kyrie’s (unless we’re putting LBJ or AD in the deal). The deal you proposed? How was that for salary matching? Are you signing Reaves to a $35M deal (if you could)? It’s easy to throw out 2 names and say, this is the best we can get. Don’t forget the Mavs can say no and then what are the Lakers gonna do? It’s a delicate balance both ways. Mavs just paid a cheap bounty to get him on the team. There’s no reason to work with anyone if they don’t get more than that back. Teams with no capspace are not in the driver’s seat of this deal (we aren’t exactly either, but we don’t have to give in to a beating of an offer). Kyrie wants that team? Fine, we’ll sign him to his accepted deal, then trade him at earliest convenience. We still will not, however, give him away. That’s not disrespecting Kyrie, it’s just not disrespecting ourselves.
I am sorry, if my opinion doesn't match yours. Not sure, why you take it personally. I always provide arguments, why I think differently. I would love this kind of deal, its great for Mavs considering they still lose their star. Unfortunately, there is not a single SnT deal in last couple of years (too lazy to check further back in history) that would support thinking, that Mavs could get a huge bag for a player that wants out. Check Lowry, Butler and other SnT deals. This is of course assuming, Kyrie wants out. But if he doesn't want, not sure why Mavs would even look to trade him, as it is still better to have him than a couple of role players and 2 picks. They are just moving back to where they were before the trade.
But if Kyrie wants out, what you are basically "offering" to Lakers is - you give up all the players you have to give up if you want to go the cap space way plus the two picks. I am sorry, but that is just not realistic imho. In my opinion, you either eat bad salary like Russel and you can demand pick(s), or you take the good salaries and Lakers take care how to send the remaining salaries to a third team. In my opinion, Lakers easily say no to this kind of deal. Also, for this deal to happen, Rui would need to want to go to Mavs, meaning Mavs are the team offering him more than anyone else is willing on FA market. Are you sure, that would still be a great contract to have? I don't have a feeling, what his market value is.
I am really eager to see examples and arguments, why you think this deal you proposed is realistic to happen.
Edit: there is a difference between an echo chamber and every single thought getting shut down immediately. I have to give a dissertation on why the trade makes sense every single time making the post a wall of text just to appease the limited thinking mind of Omahen. It gets tiresome and has gone on for as long as I can remember. Sometimes a person gets tired of it.