Harkless resolves after Crabbe decision?

That's what I'm saying

 

Never heard of a Morning News USA site in my life. Why are they the only site in the world (that I can find) that is reporting this number? My personal feeling is because it is bogus and every legitimate site out there is ignoring posting something similar because they don't believe it for a second.

 

He can't possibly think he's worth max money.... that's just absurd. If he's really seeking max, his agent is a moron. He's not going to get that.

I can only imagine how that conversation went between his agent and Neil.

Neil: "We'd really like to get this done. We like Mo a lot and we think he has a bright future with the team.

Agent: "We want a max contract."

Neil: "Excuse me?"

Agent: "Max. Money."

Neil: "You can't be serious...."

Agent: "Max or we take the QO."

Neil: "What makes you think your client is worth the max?"

Agent: "Allen Crabbe got 17.5 million a year."

Neil: "Mo isn't Allen Crabbe. The Nets signed Crabbe to that contract. Who is offering your client anything near max?"

Agent: "Show me da monayyyyyy!"

 

Here's a little context for you: Mo Harkless is not on our current roster. How can someone who is not on our roster be part of our starting line up? He wasn't on our roster at the time Turner was signed, and neither was Crabbe. So, when Neil was speaking at the press conference the only other viable starting SF on our roster was Aminu, and as Neil said, he expects Turner to see a lot of time at the 3 next to Aminu at the 4.

Turner didn't take Harkless' job, because right now Harkless doesn't have a job. At this time, he is not under contract to play here, or anywhere else, in the NBA. If we re-sign Harkless, like I said, he'll have a chance to earn the starting job he held for 14 games last season. Its funny you call Harkless a starter and Turner a Boston substitute when Harkless started a total of two more games than Turner last year and Turner has 241 career starts compared to Harkless' 118. In the last two seasons, Turner has started 69 games and Harkless has started 18.

But, whatever. We both know Stotts isn't an idiot. He's great at figuring out how to get the most out of the players he's given. If we re-sign Harkless, he'll have a chance to earn playing time, like everyone else on the roster.

BNM

 

Exclusive footage of the negotiations!

 

Nonsense. You're playing with words and definitions. Semantic tricks won't suddenly blow motivation into Harkless to return here to sit on the bench.
If you want to waste time arguing over how many angels can fit on a pinhead, being picky about the definition of starter, then think about how Harkless would have signed by now if Olshey hadn't uttered some stupid words, defining our new starter to be Turner.

Too bad Turner isn't held to the same standard. The hypocrisy is costing us Harkless.

 

Something to point out, who does have money to spend on Hark at this point? And if they do have money to spend at what point do we not match?

As near as I can tell only Brooklyn and Philly have "Max" space and gonna go on a limb here and guess neither of those teams is going to throw a max deal at Harkless. Even in the new economics, which in reality was a 4 day event that settled down, Hark is a stretch at say 12. I like his potential I like his game but he didn't last in Orlando and his showing in Portland while encouraging didn't earn him Allen Crabbe money.

My gut feeling is he's sitting on a 3 year offer from the Blazers starting around $8mil per. He's hoping to get a larger deal elsewhere which is very unlikely IMO. Also a 3 year deal around 27mil is a lot of money to turn down compare to a 1 year $3mil qo.

 

This.

This is a fair deal.

 

Do you have a link to those "stupid words, defining our new starter to be Turner"? I just went back and re-watched the entire press conference and not once did Neil (or Terry) say that Turner would start. The only thing even remotely related was when Olshey said that the team projected much better (53 - 54 wins) when Aminu played the 4, compared to projections in the mid-40s with Aminu at the 3. He said that adding Turner would allow Aminu to spend more time at the 4, but did not say one damn thing about Turner starting. He could, just as well, have meant that Turner would be the back up 3, so that Aminu would no longer have to fill that role, allowing him to play more minutes at the 4. He even said he'd leave it up to Terry to comment on rotations, at which point Terry said he wasn't even going to talk about rotations until October. And that was the end of the press conference. No one, at any point, said ANYTHING about Turner starting.

You keep harping on this whole, Neil-said-Turner-would-start-and-that's-why-Harkless-hasn't-re-signed spiel, but haven't presented any evidence to back up your speculation. As usual, you just expect us to accept your version of the truth. Well, I did most of your homework for you and watched the entire press conference again to see if I missed something the first time. I did not. So, if Neil did say some "stupid words" proclaiming Turner as a starter, it wasn't during the press conference. If he said that during a different interview, please provide a link.

BNM

 

There was this initial report:

http://www.cbssports.com/fantasy/ba...rs-evan-turner-set-to-start-at-small-forward/

Followed by this correction:

http://www.cbssports.com/fantasy/ba...urner-starting-job-apparently-not-guaranteed/

 

Thanks. Olshey wasn't even mentioned in either article, let alone quoted as saying Turner would start.

BNM

 

There is also an article out there somewhere where Turner makes it clear that he was in no way promised the starting job.