@CBSsports NBA reporter. Contact at samquinn1092@gmail.com
New York
Joined August 2013
- Tweets54.6K
- Following732
- Followers24.7K
- Likes18.4K
Jaylen Brown is probably a bad contract on merit but his presence seemingly led to the Sixers landing LeBron James for the minimum, and I would argue that the surplus value generated by LeBron on a minimum exceeds the difference between Jaylen's salary and his fair market value.
It might just wind up being a win-win trade. Celtics might've gotten a player they preferred anyway plus two picks. Sixers turned a 36-year-old into a 30-year-old... plus LeBron James on the minimum. Too early to say anything definitively but both teams seem happy for now.
If pg is gonna be healthy and in this kind of form, i dont think its a stretch at all to say he’s at least brown’s equal if not better even in a vacuum not specific to boston’s system
4
18
3,693
It’s too early to say know much about Boston’s plans right now. I could also certainly see them just letting the PG contract run its course, or using the $56 million expiring to trade for a longer term Tatum co-star. But the relationship has been mutually beneficial thus far.
The premise of a PG opt out and new deal would essentially be “Boston wants to open up the full MLE and/or needs wiggle room for trade X, PG lowers his 27-28 salary to help them do that, but gets a second year at a healthy rate in exchange.”
Why would PG do this? He’s essentially committing to a two-year, $19 million extension at that point.
I could see PG opting out for a multi-year number, but it would have to be way bigger to get him to give up $56 million next year. I’d guess like 2x80-90 instead of 1x56.
Memphis gets the most favorable of UTA/CLE/MIN no matter what… but if Utah winds up as the highest of those picks (seems likely as of now), it cannot land 1-5 because the Jazz picked in the top five two drafts in a row.
It’s still grossly unfair to the Grizzlies.
This is why I’m a big supporter of the proposed credit system.
If we’re not going to give the worst teams the top picks like every other league than we can at least turn the draft order into a matter of skill instead of a matter of chance.
It's tough to look at the NBA landscape and remember the Spurs (who already had Wemby and Castle) lucked into Harper, and the Mavs (who had just made the dumbest trade in NBA history) lucked into Cooper.
Luck plays a bigger role in NBA team-building than in any other sport. Not even close.
And the league just made luck an even bigger factor with the lottery reform. It just feels too random.
This makes no sense to me. The whole world knows we're drafting a quarterback in six months. Why would we turn down picks for a player we know isn't the future?
Yossi and I are podding! Starting with the Nique Clifford trade, then getting into some Lakers, some Celtics, some Nuggets, maybe some other things.
xitter.twitterapi.xyz/i/broadcasts/2ybAzmQoE…
Yossi and I are podding! Starting with the Nique Clifford trade, then getting into some Lakers, some Celtics, some Nuggets, maybe some other things.
youtube.com/live/xykAYwZOzLM
2
3,105
I thought Nique Clifford showed real promise last year, but had clearly fallen out of favor on the all Acuff, all the time version of the team. Nice buy low for OKC, who obviously has a real history of doing that on former first-round picks.
The Sacramento Kings are trading Nique Clifford to the Oklahoma City Thunder for two second-round picks, sources tell ESPN.
81
4,440
I'm just not sure why the Kings would give up on Nique eight games into this new era. Like... I get they have to play the older guys, but LaVine likely isn't long for the team and Monk may not be either. Injuries will come up. Nique could've had more chances down the line.
I thought Nique Clifford showed real promise last year, but had clearly fallen out of favor on the all Acuff, all the time version of the team. Nice but low for OKC, who obviously has a real history of doing that on former first-round picks.
There's a new version of this post
1
4
1,148
I think it's a testament to the original Ocarina of Time that my experience with the remake is "fantastic, but adds little to my OOT experience." I'm glad it exists. The quality of life upgrades are big. But I still find the original so playable I don't feel like I NEEDED this.
If you haven't played either, I'd tell you to play the remake. It's an incredible standalone game. But my immersion with the original over almost 30 years is so total that I barely feel any differences and would have liked them to take some bigger swings just so each game could feel distinct. I did a 64 play through maybe eight months ago that just felt almost exactly like this one has thus far.