Honestly, with the way the warriors are built this is the time, as Morey put it to "up our risk profile". You have to take some home run shots and going after Paul and or Griffin would certainly fit the bill. I mean why not? We aren't going to beat GS with what we have so we have to roll the dice when we can.
I think Paul saw the rigged/fixed/shut it down game 6 against the Spurs and knows that Leslie Alexander often gives this executive order when he doesn't want to continue with the season. You think Chris Paul wants to play with an organization that operates like that?
Apart from that, but on the subject of CP3, this Mike Wise interview about how LeBron will NEVER go to the Clippers is very interesting to me: http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/new...-paul-blake-griffin/7edw9ttdp4901otuenz2ylz2u Intriguing on a number of levels. First, Mike Wise is pretty plugged in, so I do think he hears things. Beyond that, the potential of LeBron in 2018 is about the only scenario I can come up with where Chris Paul would even have a prayer of contending in LA over the remainder of his prime years. Any Clipper rebuild not involving LeBron is likely more of a longer-term play. Not saying it makes it easy for Chris Paul to walk away from the guaranteed 5th year at his age, but if there's no LeBron, it truly is an either/or proposition for Chris when it comes to a chance to contend or the 5th year. Not like he can have both. Secondly... we all know LeBron and CP3 are very close. If LeBron is this turned off by the Clippers as an organization, it's fair to wonder if CP3 could be the source for some of the things he's heard. Just a thought.
Lulz. Paul isn't Anderson. But I can see why many fans would turn down Paul if he asked for a 4th year, then blame Morey for letting Spurs get him, all to take solace in being able to say how much they hate Rynos contract.
How nice of you to leave out Steph and klay. You know, 2 elite guards. Or Parker and manu who are both guards. It doesn't matter if it's 2 guards and one forward or 2 forwards and one guard. It's always typically 3 elite talents. Which 2 of them being elite playmakers and facilitators. So again, quit running in circles with your logic
Lulz... What about Parker and manu? It's adorable how much your running around and discrediting your own points.
Ok dude, right just ignore the overwhelming weight of evidence where the recent champs have all had elite forwards... where exactly do we get the money to sign an elite forward if we have 30 million dollar players at SG and PG? Yea, I'll wait. It's totally a brilliant idea to spend all your money on a back court. EVERY recent champion has had at least one elite forward and most of them multiple while having 1 elite guard. Bosh/Bron Love/Bron KD/Green/Iggy Leonard/Duncan Green/Iggy But continue to look like an idiot and ignore the overwhelming facts.
What about them their last championship was clearly driven by forwards with Leonard and Duncan. You're completely ignoring the facts.
The fact the you want to ignore it takes 3 elite talents regardless of position is asinine and idiotic. The recent evidence is what? Your arbitrarily gonna cut it off to deny the Parker manu Spurs? Your gonna ignore Steph and klay? And when you don't ignore Steph and klay you leave klay off? And then when you recognize him you add Iggy? Your trying to support your claim of "it has to be forwards" when that isn't fact. What is fact. Is it takes 3 elite talents with at least 2 being very good playmakers. But keep ignoring that. If we have cp3 and Harden we would absolutely need something in the front court. But you don't not add elite talent just because you have one in the backcourt already. You get as many elites as possible regardless of position. But keep pretending it has to be forward. And keep thinking any player available is better than cp3
This is so dumb. It's laughable. It's not just about adding talent. It's about adding talent in the necessary areas. So if they are available we should sign 3 max guards? because that is what you're saying. If you spend all your resources in one area you won't be able to properly fill out the other areas... I know that is a hard concept for you. The Parker Manu Spurs? From when? 2007? Yea, I wasn't going back that far. Iggy was a Finals MVP bruh... he was pretty important. It's adorable you ignoring the OVERWHELMING ( you understand that word?) weight of evidence from recent champions have multiple elite forwards ALL of Brons teams... 1 elite guard... two elite forwards... the GSW team... 1 elite guard (Klay is good) and MULTIPLE elite forwards... Spurs 2014 old Parker and Manu (wouldn't call them elite at that point) and Kawhi and Duncan... It takes elite forwards.... they have ALL had that... but yet lets fill our bucket entirely with guards. 3 elites with two being playmakers...yes one being a guard and the other being a forward...that has been the case for every recent champion.... not two play making guards.
I guess inside this decade is out of the question? Ok And yes I would Max out 3 guards if that's who would actually agree. None the less I said with 2 guarsanyou would need to balance it with an elite frontcourt presence. But your strawman argument doesn't hold water if you acknowledge that. Overwhelming evidence is it takes 3 elite talents. Doesn't matter if it's 2 guards or 2 forwards. But keep looking at the last 4-5 years only in which LeBron has dominated the league as the best SF ever. I'm done arguing with ignorance. You have a stance of forwards rule the world and are too blind to accept a different rationale. I'm arguing with a brick wall and I'm over it
