Dula just clarified his point below by declaring that "If Kawhi had been offered the SuperMax - he definitely would've taken it."
^There's *really* no way to verify that, but I don't see you as butthurt over that declaration.
Not only is there no way to verify that, there's also no credible evidence leading one to make that conclusion. The contrary, all of the credible evidence points to Kawhi not wanting to be in San Antonio *regardless* SuperMax money being factored into the equation.
>>(or do I need to track down the reports for you of Pop >meeting >>w/ him and the org being prepared to give him the SuperMax). > >Jeff Flake is prepared to not vote for Kavanaugh, but we all >know he still will.
Not sure how that analogy works here. Flake (and Collins) fancy themselves as independent-thinking republicans, but they usually do conform to party dogma eventually (as you point out). Flake wants an FBI investigation before he makes his decision. The Spurs made their decision and made it public: they wanted Kawhi - and the org put out statements corroborated by insiders that confirm that the Spurs did their best to retain Kawhi by dangling the Supermax $ out there for him - he just didn't bite.
Sure - they never *formally* extended the offer - but everybody cogno scenti knew that the offer was informally (and probably personally) extended to him in-person, face-to-face during the Pop meeting in California.
But the statement that "Kawhi wasn't interested in SuperMax money *with the Spurs*" is a logical statement backed up mountains of evidence, whereas the statement "Kawhi definitely would've taken a SuperMax offer from the Spurs" has zippy evidence to substantiate it.