What's new
By:

Beverley to Lakers for THT and Stanley Johnson

People lol'd me when I told yall NAW was a salary dump too... its fine.
 
NUMBERICA said:
And/or:
-That he's irrationally high on THT (which he can do) and bit on a "deal"
-This is a down payment
Click to expand...
Oh I'm sure he is higher on THT (or Utah's evaluation team as a whole is). The reports are that DL/Zanick really liked him during the pre-draft process.

This is not a down payment at all. That I'm 100% certain of.
 
And Patrick Beverly was 100% going to bitch and complain if he was left on a tanking team that was in limbo with their super-star.
 
NUMBERICA said:
And/or:
-That he's irrationally high on THT (which he can do) and bit on a "deal"
-This is a down payment
Click to expand...
Its just wild to me that people think I got a tinfoil hat for laying out a situation where two parties got together and discussed a much bigger deal that isn't possible right now... so to show real interest and intent they did part of a deal and will hopefully complete the rest of the deal later... but if not both parties are satisfied with the part of the deal they did.

If this is a deal they liked they could do it in a month... why do it while talking with NY on Don? Why burn a contract on a guy you could use in a Don deal to another team... Cleveland for example was a team that had Bev interest and has registered Don interest. Why now when you aren't getting a pick of any sort?
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
And Patrick Beverly was 100% going to bitch and complain if he was left on a tanking team that was in limbo with their super-star.
Click to expand...
He was gonna be gone. I don't think that's really in question by anyone. Jazz had no reason to keep him, the issue is that what the Jazz facilitated for the Lakers (the best player in the deal, the exact type of player they need, AND a salary dump) vastly outweighs what the Jazz got for a rebuild. We took Stanley Johnson so the Lakers saved that much more money on the deal, but sure, maybe he's finally turned a corner. Not a great bet. Maybe a guy who just had his worst season at year 3 (and immediately after he got paid) and has an awful contract (UFA when it's convenient for him while on a tanking team) is... what? That's what I'm hung up on. I don't get the upside. He plays well and leaves or he sucks and the Jazz just spent $22 million in opportunity cost. Furthermore, his contract structure and general range of basketball value makes his Bird Rights not very useful, so even if he plays well, I'm not sure what he nets in a mid-season trade.
 
The entire problem with this deal is his player option.

He doesn’t improve much and we’re paying 11M for someone who we traded an expiring contract for.

He improves a lot and opts out to get a new contract. He then has the option to go somewhere else.
 
I have more thoughts than I have time but there can’t be any discussion of Stanley Johnson being anything of value in the trade as he was a guy floating around there on 10-days that many people here suggested we sign when we weren’t doing anything. I won’t dispute what he can or can’t do as that’s beyond the point. The point is if we thought he had value, why hadn’t we tendered any offers during the season when we, you know, needed a guy like that? They don’t get to play both sides of the fence on this one.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
Its just wild to me that people think I got a tinfoil hat for laying out a situation where two parties got together and discussed a much bigger deal that isn't possible right now... so to show real interest and intent they did part of a deal and will hopefully complete the rest of the deal later... but if not both parties are satisfied with the part of the deal they did.

If this is a deal they liked they could do it in a month... why do it while talking with NY on Don? Why burn a contract on a guy you could use in a Don deal to another team... Cleveland for example was a team that had Bev interest and has registered Don interest. Why now when you aren't getting a pick of any sort?
Click to expand...
So not a down payment.

I must be missing something because if they did a deal they both like regardless of future dealings with each other, that sounds like a symbiotic deal that is separate from anything else.
 
Elizah Huge said:
The entire problem with this deal is his player option.

He doesn’t improve much and we’re paying 11M for someone who we traded an expiring contract for.

He improves a lot and opts out to get a new contract. He then has the option to go somewhere else.
Click to expand...
And we could've been the somewhere else and done something different right now instead. I have no doubts he simply signs to the highest bidder but I'm not sure he's gonna get bigger than the MLE again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top