Kyrie Irving to ATL - ESPN Trade Ideas

[TheFuzz]

Go for him. Rolling into next year with Kyrie, Prince, Collins, a pick or 2 and a ton of cap space? Yes please.

[capstone21]

Just now, TheFuzz said:

Go for him. Rolling into next year with Kyrie, Prince, Collins, a pick or 2 and a ton of cap space? Yes please.

You are prob not going to have Collins and/or the pick or 2

[TheFuzz]

1 minute ago, capstone21 said:

You are prob not going to have Collins and/or the pick or 2

We got 5 picks in the next 2 years. How expensive do you think he'll be? Dennis is probably the best asset they can hope for. Dennis + 2 picks leaves us with 3 picks in the next 2 years...

[Sothron]

4 minutes ago, capstone21 said:

I don't see Kyrie as anything other then a get mine kind of player.  He is not about winning or team play... he is actually pretty selfish.  He is about getting his stats.  He isn't a good point guard but yes he is an excellent scorer and probably one of the best penetrators(sp) in the league.  He is really a very undersized shooting guards that doesn't play a lick of d.  I don't know if he is a guy you come out for.  I don't put him in that type of player who people got to go see.  He is also going to cost a lot to get.  The cost for the return ... I just don't think it is to our advantage to pursue a guy like that.

I'm glad to find a kindred spirit on this. Irving is like if Starbury got on a team with Jordan or Kobe and road them to a title.

[TheFuzz]

2 minutes ago, Sothron said:

I'm glad to find a kindred spirit on this. Irving is like if Starbury got on a team with Jordan or Kobe and road them to a title.

Irving is vastly more talented than Starbury. A 40% shooter that can finish like him? In a structured offense I think he'll be a more than fine facilitator. He's better than prime Tony Parker, we saw what he did under Bud.

[Sothron]

1 minute ago, TheFuzz said:

Irving is vastly more talented than Starbury. A 40% shooter that can finish like him? In a structured offense I think he'll be a more than fine facilitator. He's better than prime Tony Parker, we saw what he did under Bud.

No, he's not. Starbury was a good player that ruined himself with his ego and let's be honest a not too stable grip on sanity. Ppl forget Starbury was an AS player. Irving is a good scorer, absolutely, but that's literally all he does. He kills you on defense, he doesn't pass well and he wants to be THE MAN.

Doesn't sound like pass friendly get everyone involved Bud ball to me.

[Flight]

I understand Kyrie not having a great rep for passing but let's not overlook the fact that LeBron pretty much diminishes that role from any point guard he plays with. If you play with LeBron, he will do all the facilitating regardless of how good you are.  

[Sothron]

Just now, Flight said:

I understand Kyrie not having a great rep for passing but let's not overlook the fact that LeBron pretty much diminishes that role from any point guard he plays with. If you play with LeBron, he will do all the facilitating regardless of how good you are.  

But the counter to that is how Kyrie played before Lebron and in the games without him. His numbers go down and not up.

[Vol4ever]

6 hours ago, capstone21 said:

I couldn't have less interest in having Irving in a Hawks uni.

delusions of grandeur along with 0 defense and the fact that he doesn't pass is not appealing at all.

he is a me first guy ... he is not a team player

Sounds just like Dennis.  

[sturt]

47 minutes ago, Flight said:

Without him are we really any closer to winning won?

The premise supposes we're trying.

We aren't.

And even if we had him, we shouldn't be... by any measure, we're at best 2-3 years away from being in the position to contend.

I don't get why this is so hard to fathom, except that there seems to be some star-struck-ness going on here, obliterating any sense for where this roster stands.

[TheFuzz]

31 minutes ago, Sothron said:

No, he's not. Starbury was a good player that ruined himself with his ego and let's be honest a not too stable grip on sanity. Ppl forget Starbury was an AS player. Irving is a good scorer, absolutely, but that's literally all he does. He kills you on defense, he doesn't pass well and he wants to be THE MAN.

Doesn't sound like pass friendly get everyone involved Bud ball to me.

That's what they said about Harden. I don't like me first players, I'm a big believer in Irving. He's been coached by who exactly? He's every bit the passer Dennis is anyway! Agree to disagree I suppose.

[Flight]

4 minutes ago, Sothron said:

But the counter to that is how Kyrie played before Lebron and in the games without him. His numbers go down and not up.

I mean, when you play with a player that your entire system is based off of, I'd imagine the game plans without him probably aren't the easiest to adjust to given the personnel of those teams lol.

[Flight]

5 minutes ago, sturt said:

The premise supposes we're trying.

We aren't.

And even if we had him, we shouldn't be... by any measure, we're at best 2-3 years away from being in the position to contend.

I don't get why this is so hard to fathom, except that there seems to be some star-struck-ness going on here, obliterating any sense for where this roster stands.

I'd rather not try with an All-Star Point Guard with championship experience leading the way, than not try with a PG that hasn't earned have as much respect around the league.

[sturt]

1 minute ago, Flight said:

I'd rather not try with an All-Star Point Guard with championship experience leading the way, than not try with a PG that hasn't earned have as much respect around the league.

Except with "a", you have to give up some assets that otherwise might help you 3-4 seasons from now to contend.

With "b," you actually HAVE an asset, in addition to preserving others, that otherwise might help you 3-4 seasons from now to contend.

Now c'mon. No one's Dennis-hate should be this bad that you can't see the long-term ramifications of some short-term high you want to have.

[capstone21]

14 minutes ago, Vol4ever said:

Sounds just like Dennis.  

So you want to give up a bunch of assets to get a better scoring version of Dennis?  

[JTB]

27 minutes ago, capstone21 said:

So you want to give up a bunch of assets to get a better scoring version of Dennis?  

lol you guys act like players that can drop 40 on any given night are just floating around! Lol

to answer your question yes! That's been the Hawks biggest issue of not having a guy that can score among the elite. We haven't had that since nique! You aren't serious about winning an NBA championship if you don't have a player that can score a surplus amount of points when needed. 

Teams that haven't needed that all time great scorer like the 04 Pistons and Duncan's Spurs are rare for reason in the 50 plus years the NBA has been around.

 

we need a scorer...not a joe Johnson scorer but a nique scorer. Someone that can really put the team on his back and score at will. We can cover kyrie on defense as that's a team effort anyways.

and I don't think it'd be a tonic assets but yes some assets will need to be moved 

Edited July 25, 2017 by JTB

[Diesel]

2 hours ago, EazyRoc said:

This is what makes me believe this trade isn't about his future, winning, or losing. It's about attention and being the man. Which is why I wouldn't really want him here even if he did want to come. If this is his logic, then it shows a gross lack of maturity.

Kobe wanted to be the man.

Kareem wanted to be the man. 

Kidd wanted to be the man. 

Harden wanted to be the man. 

 

A player looking out for his own future is what this is about.  He will always be in Lebron's Shawdow as long as Lebron is there AND when Lebron Leaves, he will leave Kyrie with nothing built for him.  Cleveland is collecting OLD players who are past their prime for one more ride with the King.  What happens when the King Leaves??  Nobody wants to play in Cleveland.   Yeah, Kyrie wants to be the man... but let's not question his maturity in that... there's a lot of business sense in wanting to move too.   Kyrie doesn't get considered as one of the best in the game... even though his stats and his play says he should.

[Sothron]

I am glad this is a moot discussion. He's not coming here.

[Flight]

11 minutes ago, sturt said:

Except with "a", you have to give up some assets that otherwise might help you 3-4 seasons from now to contend.

With "b," you actually HAVE an asset, in addition to preserving others, that otherwise might help you 3-4 seasons from now to contend.

Now c'mon. No one's Dennis-hate should be this bad that you can't see the long-term ramifications of some short-term high you want to have.

I don't hate Dennis at all, but I understand the value of having a player like Kyrie. It's literally the same situation as we already have just with a proven and more talented player. 

Kyrie IS an asset. He alone attracts other players, draft picks don't attract players. Nor do they guarantee that you'll get a star player. Kyrie is a sure thing. 

[sturt]

14 minutes ago, Flight said:

Kyrie IS an asset. He alone attracts other players, draft picks don't attract players. Nor do they guarantee that you'll get a star player. Kyrie is a sure thing. 

Again.

Yes, he is. Present tense.

For this year.

And next year.

That's your window of opportunity.

And at that, you only have next off-season for him to attract this bevy of other players who you imagine will be thrilled to play beside him... this FA season basically being drained of any significant players a week or two ago.

But it still makes sense to you to trade off Dennis + other assets for two years of Kyrie.

*sigh*

Well, that's your choice. Free country.