Why would Cleveland replace Love with Melo? Melo only makes sense if they are getting him on top of Love. That's why they haven't really been in the discussion imo.
If the Cavs were willing to trade Kevin Love for Carmelo, don't you think the Knicks would make that trade themselves? Why involve the Blazers at all?
Because Love presents the same problem. Porzingis is the future and he plays the same position as Love. Plus Love is 28 years old (almost 29).
Sure, that's better. But I still think I'd rather hold our assets for a better trade that hasn't become available yet. Love, while better than Melo, poses a lot of the same problems: Strengthens PF offense but... Weakens PF defense. Weakens SF defense. Weakens SF offense. And he actually makes the SF/PF balance worse than Melo would. Ideally I'd play Melo at PF, but he can at least slide between SF/PF - Love can't play any SF. By trading Harkless+ for Love we now have the following at SF: Tuner - undersized, underskilled Aminu - underskilled Meanwhile, assuming it's Harkless/Meyers that we trade out, we now have the following capable of playing PF: Love - no defense Vonleh - good defense, decent offense when left wide open but otherwise nonexistent Aminu - mediocre defense, awful offense except sometimes when left wide open Collins - needs minutes Swanigan - needs minutes Davis - needs to be traded Because NYK aren't getting any offers of substance for Melo, and because of what I've just outlined, our out-going trade pieces should only consist of: Turner or Crabbe Aminu or Davis 2nd round picks
True, but 28 is much younger than Carmelo and Love has more trade value for a future move than Harkless.
We have to give up more than that, because NYK would be better off keeping him than taking that package.
If that's true, then NYK will keep him. Because they aren't getting a better offer. Why should we outbid ourselves?
The logic applies to THIS trade because what we're getting back sucks. If what you're getting back is good, then obviously you make a better offer.
As far as age, potential, team control, offensive efficiency, and contributions to his team's success this past year--as compared with Harkless (whom @blue9 is basically saying we shouldn't be willing to give up in exchange for him), yes, he does.
A past-his-prime player, who was never great defensively, who is on the last year of his deal and doesn't want to be here is what sucks. It's not just about the player - there are other things that must be taken into consideration.
