Thursday Bolts – 7.7.16
Berry Tramel in an interview with Slate: “He’s changed agents two or three times, he’s got
a business manager really in his ear, he’s got his family much more involved in expressing themselves. It became clear to me in the last few days that those people were pushing Durant to make a change. I don’t think it’s anything against Oklahoma City. I think there’s just a bias for change. When you’re dealing with money, doing something different is always impactful. I think those things conspired to produce the advice that he ought to move. No. 2, of course, would be the championship possibilities. I think he believed he could win one in Oklahoma City, but I think he came to believe that it was going to be much more of an opportunity at Golden State. I think that’s what happened. I think the feelings and the things he said about Oklahoma City were genuine, but I don’t know that they were to the extent that we wanted to believe.”
Reggie Miller: “Durant would have been a god if he stayed in Oklahoma City. People always say to me, “I’m so glad you stayed with us”—that I stayed for 18 years with a small-market (Pacers) team in Indiana. But the media, of which I am a part, always says, “Well, he never won a championship.” And I get that; I understand that. Not winning a championship burns me to this day. After reaching six Eastern Conference Finals and an NBA Finals only to finish without a title, I sympathize with Durant’s dilemma. A rebound, loose ball, free throw, missed assignment, missed box-out can change everything. Being so close and ultimately losing sucks. Nevertheless, it was the fight to put Indiana on the map that, in my mind, is my greatest accomplishment.”
Charles Barkley: Your life won’t suck if you don’t win a title.
Bethlehem Shoals for GQ: “All this KD flaying is temporary anyway, because the combination of him and Stephen Curry will be so freakishly entertaining that—as if this were even possible—both will see their respective stocks rise even higher. The modern-day athlete has ambitions that go well beyond rings; as however much of a PR blight this decision might be in the short term, Durant—who has been sort of lost in the shuffle since his MVP season—has to know that the Warriors will create a world-historic buzz. His overall popularity will soar, and ultimately the story of this Warriors team will be his to share with Curry.”
Andrew Sharp of SI.com on what Russ should do: “The Warriors may go down in history, but if he stays, Russell Westbrook on the Thunder becomes an urban legend that will be passed down through generations. So, f**k the Warriors, and f**k rings. Go average 36–18–12. Win the MVP. Stay in OKC. Be the legend.”
Tim Bontemps of the WaPo: “Oklahoma City could also try to convince Westbrook to renegotiate and extend his contract for at least a year or two, which would allow him to get a several million dollar raise this season and allow the Thunder to know he’d be around for more than just this coming season. Westbrook, however, has reportedly said he’s not interested in doing this – not that it’s much of a surprise. He’d make more by hitting the open market than any raise he’d earn via an extension signed this year.”
Erik Horne: “Franchises rarely get so close to that risk, but it happened with LaMarcus Aldridge. He played out his final season in Portland, then the Blazers reportedly balked at the idea of a sign and trade with other teams. Aldridge left in free agency for San Antonio the next summer and the Blazers had no assets to show for it. It happened with Durant, who made it clear he’d explore free agency before his final season in Oklahoma City even started. The Thunder was never going to trade Durant unless there was assurance he was leaving. Will the Thunder run the risk with Westbrook? Will he give the franchise any indication it should?”
