Cavs were on verge of cutting him, there were not a lot of teams interested in giving up any assets for a kid with so many off court issues. Lottery pick talent but fell to end of the 1st. Cavs purchased a pick to take him late in first. Cavs essentially did cut Porter because the SRP they received from Rockets is top 50 protected. It will never convey.
I am under no illusions that our organization is "ultra competent and elite" lol. (A truly competent organization would have found a way to make Harden happy and keep him on the team). However, even incompetent organizations operate based on perceived incentives, and generally have a reason for making moves (even if that reason is flawed). It doesn't really matter whether this quid pro quo is true or not, it is just a possible explanation for two otherwise curious decisions on both sides.
I wasn’t intending to push it as fact except for the timing. I think it’s a fact the outburst expedited it. Maybe it was inevitable but that was 100% the final straw. There’s no other way to interpret it. Maybe a final straw came a day later instead but the locker lead to the outburst. I don’t buy the quid pro quo theory or the secret trade but I do think Lucas and Silas are why KPJ is a Rocket. Regardless, I wouldn’t trade KPJ for a FRP at this point. If it was luck? So be it. The team deserves some luck
I never said anything is a "fact." I specifically said "Obviously no way to know for sure." It is speculation, just like 95% of the other content on CF. Take a chill pill, Robocop.
If you look back on this very thread, you will see that this very theory was being pushed as truth by multiple posters. Robocop or not, I'm just tired of false narratives being advanced as fact. Whether motive was innocent or not, we need to learn from the bigger lesson here. Repeating false narratives has serious consequences. Just because you believe something to be true does not automatically make it true.
I said I didn't but it was possible seeing how we got him for nothing. There are 29 other teams who CLE could have gotten a little more nothing but didn't. But we did for nothing, Quid Pro Quo that's why.
post hoc ergo proctor hoc Your conclusion is perfect example of questionable-cause logical fallacy. Correlation does not imply causation.
