It becomes a $10m un-guaranteed contract tomorrow. As of today it's worth around $2m. I think we could use it in a S&T for LMA. Not sure though.
Just a reminder: <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/ZachLowe_NBA">@ZachLowe_NBA</a> Haywood deal can only bring back a max of $15.5M. If Spurs want to use it to get Aldridge via S&T, can't pay him more next yr.</p>— David Weiner (@BimaThug) <a href="https://twitter.com/BimaThug/status/615966183855140865">June 30, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> In other words, while the Haywood deal could help someone dump salary, it's not going to be this huge masterstroke in getting Aldridge. I'd bet anything he starts above $15.5M.
Stein was on the Zach Lowe podcast today, the first 12 or so minutes were only about Aldridge. No mention of Houston or the Lakers.
Stein is almost surprised/angry Houston is getting a meeting with Aldridge. How can they get a meeting?! They have no cap room? Why should they get a meeting!?
Sure would be nice if there was an "ESPNhouston" outlet that could push "HOUSTON agenda" like NY/LA/Miami/Dallas/Boston have right now. Not to mention all those writers in the "bay area" pushing GS agenda (strauss, amick, spears) that work for major outlets ESPN/USA Today/Yahoo. But, Houston, you got Calvin Watkins!
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Charlotte's expected to be aggressive with Spurs shooter Marco Belinelli on Day 1 of free agency. Hornets can offer mid-level exception.</p>— Adrian Wojnarowski (@WojYahooNBA) <a href="https://twitter.com/WojYahooNBA/status/615983138901078016">June 30, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Except they would still have plenty of space to add 2 other max players by the start of 2016/17 season.
More rambling thoughts: there's definitely a group-think that goes on among national NBA media in free agency. Few actually want to go out on a limb, so they instead each stroke each other's egos and find reasons to agree about why "Destination X" seems to make the most sense for a given player. Then the story takes on a life of its own from readers unable to tell the difference between news and opinion. We saw this last year with Carmelo Anthony and the Bulls and Chris Bosh and the Rockets -- the media collectively seemed to just decide that those two destinations (assuming LeBron's departure for Cleveland) made the most sense, and it was mostly based on their own conjecture rather than sourced intel. In the end, both of those guys had different priorities than the ones bestowed upon them by the media. In Carmelo's case, it was the glamour and branding potential of NYC, and in Bosh's case, it was the money/not wanting to uproot his family. Not saying that's definitely going on with Aldridge/San Antonio, since there certainly are some folks citing sources close to Aldridge as saying SA is the frontrunner. But it feels like a big handful of media are also sort of wishing it to be the case because it's what makes the most sense to them, and that's not always how it plays out.
ESPN LA has 40k followers, ESPN Boston has 83k... I wonder where Houston would fall.. probably pretty low. Not a big sports town from my experience (outside of football)
