2753815, Let's look at what I actually said about Porter.|
Posted by Frank Longo, Wed Dec-29-21 02:02 PM
"They think Jokic/Murray/MPJ is good enough to win a title going forward. Are they right? Time will tell, I guess. But in a league where so many teams shy away from spending unless they're already presently in title contention, I respect Denver for saying, "For better or worse, this is where we wanna be for the next 5 years.""
I wasn't even sayIng I agreed with the Porter deal. I said I respected Denver, a team that historically isn't a marquee destination for free agents, putting all their chips on the table to try to keep what they had.
Should go without saying that there's a big difference between Denver committing to keeping their core together by paying their third best player and Chicago committing to keeping their best young player-- especially when their other best player is 32 and needs to try to win now.
(Also goes without saying that, if Murray comes back healthy, Denver absolutely isn't stuck. Murray is 24, Jokic and Gordon both 26. Their money situation won't be optimal if Porter literally never plays again, sure, but Jokic/Murray/Gordon is a Top 4-5 seed in the West annually for the next few years, and for the games they can get Porter in there, all the better. Denver's good at drafting too, generally, fwiw.)
Funny that this post painted me as some Porter defender, when I've gotten some heat in the past on this site for being a Porter skeptic.