I feel that many are criticizing the move without providing a better path forward. Was the status quo (letting IT walk after this year and drafting with BKN's pick) better than this? Danny wasn't going to pay IT what he wanted- I think this is obvious at this point.
In my eyes, Danny consolidated and improved the roster, opening up more room to add valuable role players down the road. I think that Danny realized this team had gone as far as they could, and needed to shake it up to get to the next level.
I certainly think this is more important than trying to bring back a similar team next year.
Why is it obvious? Danny would've paid IT if it came to it. What we can say is he clearly had reservations about it and when an opportunity to improve came along he did it. That's all. If the Irving trade hadn't happened we may have found another one that worked or we may have stayed the course on the original path of re-signing IT and waiting out GS.
Danny just paid full price for a player that is not remarkably different than the PG that he had on the team. Why give up BKN 18 if Danny wanted to resign IT?
Is this serious?
Irving is healthy, he is not an expiring, he's 25, he's got a lot of experience in the Finals and he's like 5 inches taller (so that the rival team doesn't isolate their PG with yours in every play).
Topic: What would you have done? (Kyrie trade or otherwise) (Read 6136 times)