07-09-2023, 03:39 AM
(07-09-2023, 03:31 AM)Dundalis Wrote: If a team puts in a good offer for him (I could see a team like the Clippers doing just that), I think he's out of here. The reason I was against any 4 or 5 year deal from the start, is because you need Kyrie Irving to be tradeable. Pretending like he's not an injury prone 31 year old with genuine and team distracting off court issues is sticking your head in the sand. This team has tanked it's average age, when simply didn't have to. They will hopefully continue to with the next trade they make. The Mavs could have very easily offloaded the assets they had this offseason for true win now pieces in their prime years, but did not. They risked their biggest tradeable asset primarily on youth. If they had real (any) interest in Kyrie's specific timeline, they would not have done this IMO.
They have now put the bulk of the team's core assets on the same timeline as Luka which has rarely been the case so far. That doesn't mean Kyrie is an auto trade, but what it clearly indicates is Kyrie is expendable. You want Kyrie here long term, you sign him to 4/5 years and go get win now pieces with your best assets, not invest in youth, and sign him to a shorter term contract that will become very tradeable within 6-12 months if Kyrie performs well.
Totally agree.
And acknowledging this isn’t the same as suggesting the Mavs didn’t want Kyrie here or don’t think the team can work, short term. They have artfully set themselves up to have options and flexibility moving forward, imho. We’re all sick of that “flexibility” word, but in this case it seems smart in a real way.