TripleThreat wrote:

fwk00 wrote:Now, along comes this subplot in which Durant NEVER wanted to join the Knicks - *THIS* after a few years of crazy speculation that escalated to the point that Dolan was convinced that the Knicks *had a chance*. And Durant never said, "Time out. Jim, nothing personal but NO."

This IS COLD. And you can be sure it wasn't a secret. So WTF was the point of all of that because it certainly wasn't just in fun. The Knicks entire roadmap was based on the pretense.

Lots of teams ORGANICALLY put themselves in position to sign Durant and/or Irving and/or many others.

Durant never made a verbal promise openly or privately that he was going to sign with the Knicks. No one inside the NBA, including Dolan, including the Nets, thought the Knicks had a realistic chance of signing Durant.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/executives/jacksph99x.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/executives/marksse99x.html

When Phil Jackson was hired, the Nets were in a worse position in terms of asset base. While that's hard to seem possible, Sean Marks walked onto a team that had been gutted. Phil Jackson also had a head start over the Nets in terms of time. In less time, with fewer resources and with more working against him, Marks put the Nets in a position to have the cap space and have the trade assets to sign and trade for Durant, getting his critical Bird Rights , and still sign Kyrie Irving while still having young useful players on the roster.

If the Knicks wanted Durant or anyone else, they should have hired Sean Marks. It's not like they were incapable of hiring him and giving him a chance.

Marks signed Jeremy Lin, Joe Harris and Spencer Dinwiddie for nothing. Knicks could have signed these guys.

Marks traded Thad Young for Caris LeVert

Marks converted cap space for Allen Crabbe then converted Crabbe in part for Taurean Prince

Marks turned a guy they couldn't keep in Brook Lopez and the 27th pick (Kuzma) for D. Russell, then flipped D. Russell and Napier, whom he signed for free, for Durant's Bird Rights

Marks made a trade NardYardDog called years ago, taking in DeMarre Carroll's contract and picking up a first round pick, and Carroll was wildly useful for that team.

Along the way, Marks sent out offer sheets that other teams matched, helping to **** up their caps.

If Dolan had hire Marks, where would they be now? Because Marks would have traded Melo the first week he was on the team. If Marks had Jeremy Lin, he wouldn't have let him go right after Linsanity. He wouldn't have settled for that "Go find an offer" bull****, he just would have signed him outright. He wouldn't have let D'Antoni nor Atkinson go.

The Knicks entire roadmap towards getting Kevin Durant was torched in 2014 when Phil Jackson was given control over personnel. There was no roadmap, Jackson ran this team into the ****ing ground. Noah's stretch is like a **** stain smeared on someone's underwear after they've finished taking a ****, and the smell follows you around the world.

Do you know what the Nets did right? They hired someone groomed and trained for the job. They hired someone with the youth left to build a real future with the team. They hired someone who was not going to saddle a team down with a complicated offense that he didn't have the personnel to run. They hired someone that they gave full operational control ( there was no "Don't Trade Melo/You Must Resign Melo With A NTC" bull****) They hired someone who understood the cap and market trends around the league. They hired someone who could actually pick up a phone and not just wander off and on vacations. They hired someone without the legions of preexisting enemies that Jackson carried over from his coaching days. They hired someone who didn't have Jackson's ego. Jackson made a ****load of bad moves when he knew his time was running out to save his job, many of those moves set the Knicks back for years after Jackson was gone.

It's Durant fault he wanted a team that started out with less hope and less assets than the Knicks but squeezed out every last bit of opportunity to get better? It's a surprise he trusted the Nets to give him a better shot?

Durant did not take anything from the Knicks. Dolan took plenty from the Knicks the day he hire Phil Jackson. Phil Jackson took plenty from the Knicks, took a lot of cash and beat their asset base and hope into the ground. But this is Durant's fault?

Since this board is probably 99.9999999 percent guys, here it is - If you want to go out and **** the hottest chicks and get their attention, you need to get your **** together. You need to get your career together, you need to get your money right, you need to invest and get a nice pad and a nice ride, you need to get into good shape, you need to dress sharp, you need to learn how to talk to people and be persuasive, you need to take your situation and maximize it. Sean Marks went full blown Hitch on the Nets. He took a jobless pudgy manlet and turn him into a thot slayer. Phil Jackson took that same jobless pudgy manlet and then made sure he turned into a convicted felon and a registered sex offender and a part time homeless motormouth. There's a reason the only play the Knicks will get are the 45 year old welfare single moms with ****ty credit, triple chins, Cheeto dust and rolls of fat who are still delusional enough to wear tight jeans and think it doesn't work like a toothpaste tube ( Portis, Gibson, Burke, Mudiay, Jack, and on and on)

The idea you carry that that the Knicks were owed something by Durant is the same as the idea that Kylie Jenner should go **** a homeless guy then bring him home and then marry him.

Nice 'it has everything to do with Phil' narrative but it has nothing to do with Phil.

What's next 'Dolan is a racist"?

Now that *everybody* is a racist that doesn't work either.

No this is on Durant.

TripleThreat wrote:

Nalod wrote:Why do we villify Durant so much?

I don't see any reason.

He gave Seattle/OKC a full 9 elite seasons. He didn't demand a trade, he didn't demand to take over the front office. He played hard and led that team for nearly a decade

When he went to the GSW, his stated goal was to win championships. He took less money to sign and left money on the table so the Warriors could have depth to better contend. He made it clear that since Curry, Thompson and Green were there a long time, it wouldn't be fair to ask them to give up money, if someone had to do it, it should be him for being new. He helped them win two rings in three seasons. I don't see him owing the GSW anything.

The Knicks had empty space because they drafted poorly for years and had no one to resign for big money and finally shed some bad contracts and avoided signing more bad contracts. They were going to have cleared space if Durant signed there or not. It's not like the Knicks dumped useful players attached with picks to clear that cap space. And I don't blame Dolan for having concerns wit the Achilles issue. It wouldn't have been a true max contract, it would have been a 2+1, with one year for full rehab. The Knicks also could not facilitate a functional sign and trade situation to get Durant's Bird Rights to NY.

The Nets were run better and in a better asset position. If the Knicks wanted Durant, then they should have done better in the five years prior to put themselves in a position to look as desirable as possible. I said it the day Phil Jackson was hired, it's not going to work and it will leave the Knicks in a position where they won't have the assets to strike if opportunity heads their way.

If Durant can be cited for anything, it's not shutting up. The media will twist his words and he doesn't do himself any favors, he takes the bait much of the time from the media.

The media will paint him the narrative that the league mandates, nothing he says will change that.

Bold is true but there's a lot more one can dislike

His leaving OKC with nothing so the GSW could be that much stronger was a bitch move. The stated reason that he was taking a pay cut because he didn't think it would be fair for STeph et al to take one is nuts. Only he would think it would be plausibly be fair or acceptable for the team that won 70 games without him should have their stars take a cut so they could be graced with his presence. It was a bad look when LBJ took his talents to Miami to load up with other stars, it was worse with KD because GSW was already super stacked

and yes the media may twist his words, but sometimes they don't need to do anything: his words/acts are bad enough on their own.

He made his decision, he got his rings. but the pursuit was far from noble

KnickDanger wrote:There's a lot of words in this thread -- too many for me to read. All I know is I am very pleased the Knicks did not sign Old One Leg and his crazy little bobo Kyrie.

Agree

Jimbo5 wrote:I think KD's chill statement will tarnish his legacy. I think by publicly refusing to take on a challenge how big or small it is should automatically take someone out of contention for the best player ever.

There is Mount Rushmore of top 5. Jordan, wilt, Russell, Jabbar, and Lebron. Best players who defined a generation. Then there are the MVP’s with rings. Its a crowded space.
Durant is George Gervin but has an MVP and a ring. But he did not define his team or his era. Durant is not better than Lebron. He is in Dirk Territory. Great career, MVP, HOF. Just not quite in that iconic space.

knicks1248 wrote:

Jimbo5 wrote:I think KD's chill statement will tarnish his legacy. I think by publicly refusing to take on a challenge how big or small it is should automatically take someone out of contention for the best player ever.

There's been 100's of players/FA that felt the same way.

Why didnt PG13 stay in Indiana, or lbj in cleveland, or jimmy butler, or westbrook, or love in Mini.

Amare took the challenge and broke down within 4 months. Who want the burden of carrying a sorry as franchise that cant get it right..

You seen what was happening to KP when he tried to be the savior, TOO MANY MINUTES, too many touches, too much work

Amare was late in his career (10 years in the league by then) and he had a lengthy injury history

Most nba superstars are self-obsessed narcissists who can’t handle criticism. It’s the millennial culture. If you have ever lived in a small market area or one of these cities in the west coast like LA that all the players are running to no one there cares about sports

Chandler wrote:And not everyone has to agree on what's a bitch move. For example, I look at Kawhi and I see an ocean of difference about the way he has handled things (and which i respect) and the way KD has handled things.

The saga of Kawhi Leonard's mysterious quad injury has been one of the strangest storylines in the NBA this season. Originally, Leonard was expected to just sit out the preseason, but his debut kept getting pushed back, with Gregg Popovich at one point saying he had never seen something like Leonard's injury.

Eventually, the Spurs star debuted on Dec. 12 against the Mavericks, but played sparingly in the following weeks, as the Spurs tried to work him back slowly. Leonard, however, could not get over the soreness in his quad, so last week the Spurs decided to shut him down once again. Then, on Monday, there was a big report from Adrian Wojnarowski, which said the lingering quad injury is causing discord between Leonard and the Spurs -- a report Leonard's camp denied.

Given all the drama, and the questions surrounding Leonard's injury, CBS Sports spoke with certified athletic trainer Jeff Stotts to get a better understanding of what Leonard is dealing with, and where things may go from here. In addition to his work in the field, Stotts runs his own website, InStreetClothes.com, and serves as an injury analyst for CBS Sports partner Rotowire.com.

CBS Sports: We hear about tendinitis or a torn tendon, but what do they mean by tendinopathy? That's one we don't hear about as much.

Jeff Stotts: Well, the problem with tendinopathy is it can kind of be a catch-all term. A lot of times it just refers to anything that's wrong with the tendon itself. It can be anything from tendinitis to an actual disease of the tendon, like a degenerative disease. It can be two extremes. It can be something mild like a tendinitis, or something a little bit more chronic, where it's more problematic. And even sometimes you can either reference tendon tears and include them in the tendinopathy category because they involve a tendon, though there's been no indication that Kawhi ruptured or tore his patella like Tony Parker did around the same time last season.

So that makes it hard in trying to figure out exactly what a timeline should be if we don't know exactly what he's dealing with, but are people correct in thinking that he should have been back already?

Stotts: I think the magnitude of the player -- top five player in the NBA -- the fact that it's taken so long, the fact that he had a teammate who had what appeared to be a more significant injury come back quicker in Parker, all those things are creating a situation for Kawhi that I think is a little bit unfair.

The big thing for me here, is San Antonio has historically the best medical staff in the NBA since 2005-06. They've lost the fewest number of games, and they have a long history of taking a conservative, proactive approach with their players. You can go back to 2000, Tim Duncan, when he tore his meniscus, they elected to shut him down rather than let him play through it. He elected for the surgery, and obviously went on to have a Hall of Fame career. Popovich and his staff, and the medical team in San Antonio, they were the precursors for the rest phenomenon, they were the first ones resting players for extended periods of times, targeting schedule rest days during the season for their players, with their eye on the postseason.

So I think we're basically seeing a prominent player placed in that protocol. It doesn't sound like he had any major setback, it sounds like he still has some lingering soreness that they weren't comfortable with. And they want him 100 percent. They want him to play on back-to-back games, they want him to be released, and not have to worry about "hey, how's your quadriceps doing." But the quotes I've seen suggest he still has some soreness on off days, and they want to make sure they can eliminate that, and eliminate the chance of something more significant happening.

Again, it's significant because it's an impact player, but I think it's a little blown out of proportion given Pop's success, the track record of the team, and how they've approached injuries from Day 1.

With one year left on his current contract, Leonard fulfilled a right of passage for many superstars: convey your intentions not to re-sign in order to force a trade to your preferred destination.

Leonard only played in nine games in the 2017-18 season and didn’t touch the court after Jan. 13. Charting his injury, which Popovich said he’d never seen before, was nerve-wracking: one week he was expected to return soon; the next, he was still out rehabbing his quad. He wasn’t even with the team during their five-game first-round loss to the Warriors.

March 22, 2018

With Leonard’s status still in limbo, Manu Ginobili raised some eyebrows with the following comment:

“He is not coming back. For me, he’s not coming back because it’s not helping [to think Leonard is returning]. We fell for it a week ago again. I guess you guys made us fall for it. But we have to think that he’s not coming back, that we are who we are, and that we got to fight without him. That shouldn’t be changing, at least until he is ready for the jump ball.”

The Spurs also began listing Leonard’s status as “return from injury management” on box scores.

The next day, Tony Parker, who recovered from a similar quad injury in less time, said his ailment was “a hundred time worse” than Leonard’s.

Tom Orsborn
@tom_orsborn
Tony Parker on his return from the career-threatening quad injury he suffered last May: I’ve been through it. It was a rehab for me for eight months. Same kind of injury (as Kawhi), but mine was a hundred times worse. But the same kind of injury. You just stay positive."
10:13 AM · Mar 23, 2018 from San Antonio, TX

The quote was taken out of context, as Parker was intending to use his experience as a rallying point for Leonard, not as a means to criticize him. But the proliferation of the “100 times worse” line was reportedly the last straw for Leonard. He knew he did not want to return after hearing that.

April 16, 2018

Leonard did not join the Spurs for any of their five playoff games, instead returning to New York to rehab the injury.

After a Game 2 loss in which LaMarcus Aldridge scored 34 points, Gregg Popovich raised eyebrows with the following postgame comment:

“LaMarcus has been a monster all year long,” Popovich said. “He’s led our team at both ends of the floor. He doesn’t complain about a darn thing out on the court. He just plays through everything. I can’t imagine being more proud of a player as far as playing through adversity and being there for his teammates night after night after night. He’s been fantastic.”

Aug. 13, 2018

Former Spur and Clippers TV commentator Bruce Bowen sharply criticized Leonard’s handling of his injury, saying there were “nothing but excuses going on” and suggesting Leonard got “bad advice.” He was immediately fired by the team, likely due to its desire to sign Leonard as a free agent in 2019.

Spurs legend David Robinson also had pointed words for Leonard, saying he’s “a hard guy to understand.” Robinson also revealed that he tried to reach out to Leonard, but Leonard didn’t reciprocate.

Nov. 26, 2018

In a pregame interview, Popovich dropped a surprisingly cold line about his former star. When asked about Patty Mills filling a leadership void left by Ginobili, Parker, and Leonard, Popovich made clear that Leonard didn’t belong in that conversation:

Kawhi was a great player, but he wasn’t a leader. Manu and Patty were the leaders. Kawhi’s talent will always be missed, but leadership wasn’t his deal at the time. That may come as progresses. Patty and Manu filled that role for us last year. LaMarcus Aldridge came a long way as a leader also.

TripleThreat wrote:

Chandler wrote:And not everyone has to agree on what's a bitch move. For example, I look at Kawhi and I see an ocean of difference about the way he has handled things (and which i respect) and the way KD has handled things.

The saga of Kawhi Leonard's mysterious quad injury has been one of the strangest storylines in the NBA this season. Originally, Leonard was expected to just sit out the preseason, but his debut kept getting pushed back, with Gregg Popovich at one point saying he had never seen something like Leonard's injury.

***

With one year left on his current contract, Leonard fulfilled a right of passage for many superstars: convey your intentions not to re-sign in order to force a trade to your preferred destination.

L***

All of this is true, yet somehow SA was able to trade him for an Allstar. He kept his mouth shut with the media. He led the Raptors to a championship and went to the Clips (where it was long rumored he always wanted to return home to LA) not a stacked GSW team, without the fanfare of The Decision, or the I'm so cool in the Hamptons Durant

I suspect he got sick and tired of Popovich -- maybe the same way Brady and Belicheat were

Popovich's comment about Kawhi not being a leader is not only wrong (see Raptors) but probably why Kawhi was sick of his bull****. Pop is an egomaniac and at least a very good coach. Based purely on speculation, I think Pop saw Tim Duncan, Parker, Manu, and Kawhi as pieces of clay that he somehow molded. And for what it's worth Nick Nurse did a much better job coaching a team post- Kawhi. And the Raptors and Toronto still love him

Durant at least was an elite talent but he has also been an insecure a-hole. There will be no Kevin Durant statues except perhaps in the front of his mansion

Nalod wrote:

Chandler wrote:

Nalod wrote:

Jimbo5 wrote:I think KD's chill statement will tarnish his legacy. I think by publicly refusing to take on a challenge how big or small it is should automatically take someone out of contention for the best player ever.

There is Mount Rushmore of top 5. Jordan, wilt, Russell, Jabbar, and Lebron. Best players who defined a generation. Then there are the MVP’s with rings. Its a crowded space.
Durant is George Gervin but has an MVP and a ring. But he did not define his team or his era. Durant is not better than Lebron. He is in Dirk Territory. Great career, MVP, HOF. Just not quite in that iconic space.

You forgot Magic and Larry

Magic and Larry are not on my Mount Rushmore. Room for just 5 players. I know Lebron will always bring an arguement but thats for another time. Magic and Larry were the alpha’s on great teams. I suppose one can also. Group MVP’s by how many they had and rings too. I left out a lot of players. Moses Malone has rings and Multiple MVPs. We can go on and one. Durant is an MVP with two rings. Its tarnished because he joined a great group by fans and Media. His numbers and playoff performances speak volumes.
Yes, he is a on the Mt Rushmore of SF’s.

Nalod how old are you? Wondering if you saw them much in real-time. I don't see how you leave those guys out. Larry and Magic not only were great but they had truly great competition. Lakers and Celts of course but there were a lot of great teams then (e.g., Sixers). And not only were they contemporaries but they defined a generation when the team's best player's greatest attribute was how much he elevated his teammates play. MJ was dominant but did he elevate teammates the same way (I would argue Pippen did a better job of elevating MJ than vice versa). ANd Lebron is amazingly talented and an awesome passer but still a tier below in terms of elevating teammates (who i suspect he like MJ refers to as his supporting case -- even now).

Query whether you can say the same level for MJ (who was also on a great team) or Lebron (where sorry teaming up with Dwayne and CHris is a negative -- and one of their rings has a big asterisk because the Celts honestly beat them in 6 except for NBA mandate that Lebron must get to finals)

Now re-do your homework; I'm giving you an incomplete. When you comeback i want an extra paragraph explaining that MJ and Lebron are as much a creature of Nike hegemony as they are of anything else.

Nalod wrote:

Chandler wrote:

Nalod wrote:

Chandler wrote:

Nalod wrote:

Jimbo5 wrote:I think KD's chill statement will tarnish his legacy. I think by publicly refusing to take on a challenge how big or small it is should automatically take someone out of contention for the best player ever.

There is Mount Rushmore of top 5. Jordan, wilt, Russell, Jabbar, and Lebron. Best players who defined a generation. Then there are the MVP’s with rings. Its a crowded space.
Durant is George Gervin but has an MVP and a ring. But he did not define his team or his era. Durant is not better than Lebron. He is in Dirk Territory. Great career, MVP, HOF. Just not quite in that iconic space.

You forgot Magic and Larry

Magic and Larry are not on my Mount Rushmore. Room for just 5 players. I know Lebron will always bring an arguement but thats for another time. Magic and Larry were the alpha’s on great teams. I suppose one can also. Group MVP’s by how many they had and rings too. I left out a lot of players. Moses Malone has rings and Multiple MVPs. We can go on and one. Durant is an MVP with two rings. Its tarnished because he joined a great group by fans and Media. His numbers and playoff performances speak volumes.
Yes, he is a on the Mt Rushmore of SF’s.

Nalod how old are you? Wondering if you saw them much in real-time. I don't see how you leave those guys out. Larry and Magic not only were great but they had truly great competition. Lakers and Celts of course but there were a lot of great teams then (e.g., Sixers). And not only were they contemporaries but they defined a generation when the team's best player's greatest attribute was how much he elevated his teammates play. MJ was dominant but did he elevate teammates the same way (I would argue Pippen did a better job of elevating MJ than vice versa). ANd Lebron is amazingly talented and an awesome passer but still a tier below in terms of elevating teammates (who i suspect he like MJ refers to as his supporting case -- even now).

Query whether you can say the same level for MJ (who was also on a great team) or Lebron (where sorry teaming up with Dwayne and CHris is a negative -- and one of their rings has a big asterisk because the Celts honestly beat them in 6 except for NBA mandate that Lebron must get to finals)

Now re-do your homework; I'm giving you an incomplete. When you comeback i want an extra paragraph explaining that MJ and Lebron are as much a creature of Nike hegemony as they are of anything else.

Everyone has their own Mt. Rushmore. I limit mine to 5 players. I’m in my late 50’s. You might have more than 5 on yours. Go for it.

Mine are the right 5! I don't buy into nike-ist dialectic of what makes a player great