I'm not saying they are the same quality player (obviously not even close). But going from complete outrage for Durant to not a word mentioned for Rose is crazy.
But that's the market for Rose! It's not like he's turning down mega bucks elsewhere - the MLE from a good team was the best case scenario for him.
Turns out he couldn't even get that - he's getting the same deal as Tyreke Evans in essence, give or take a million.
At the end of the day Durant is getting 25M. A lot of money. Still a Top 10 paid player in the league. Rose is still a 15M quality player, and signs for 2M.
Durant is a supermax player in his prime who switched to the best team in the league and then re-negotiated his contract after one year.
Rose is a one-time star coming off multiple injuries, a rape case, bizarre life choices and in a tepid market. He's signing a one year deal, no more no less. If he plays well and the Cavs want to keep him, it's going to cost them a lot of luxury tax dollars.
The two situations are not even remotely alike.
If the Warriors don't exist, Cavs would be paying $1.80 for the chip.
Tell me what the boards reaction would have been if Rose signs with the Warriors for minimum?
It'd probably be harsher for the Dubs than the Cavs, a product of being the reigning champs.
But in reality, Rose has more in common with Brian Williams aka Bison Dele joining the Bulls for their '97 run than Durant. He jumped aboard, contributed OK and parlayed it into a big pay deal in Detroit a few months later.
I should add that I'm not someone who has a problem with a guy like David West joining the Dubs. He spent his entire prime in small markets trying to win a championship, then left money on the table for a chance to win one in his final years. No problem with those kinds of deals at all IMO.