Nitro

It's a bad trade for NJ because they give up the #3. If it was Granger for Harris/Yi straight up, then it'd be a wash IMO. But giving up the chance to get Turner/Favors/Cousins/Johnson...eh.

The difference is Arenas gives you the flexibility of being able to play PG, giving Lewis the chance to get more time at SF (his natural position) and Gortat/Bass more minutes. Offensively, at this stage of his career, there is no question he will give the Magic a lot more than Carter did last season. And sure, the Celtics abused Carter defensively, but defense was not the issue in that series...Orlando not being able to find offense was. In that series the Celtics never scored over 96pts and never shot above 46.5% from the field. Where the Magic lost the series was not having a reliable go-to scorer. Even though Arenas had a down year last season from what we'are accustomed to seeing, but he still showed he can score. He started off the season horribly, but in his last 17 games he averaged 24.5PPG, dished 8APG and shot 43% from the floor, 36% from 3. Magic could use that firepower.

It's his only legit shot at winning a ring unless the Magic make some big moves. Eh, remember a few things, 1) Last year Carter had to go from being "the guy" in NJ to basically a glorified role player in a brand new system. After the ASG he shot 49% from the field and 43% from 3, showing his percentages were a bit of a fluke . And that was also in an offense that basically encourages players to get trigger happy with jumpers from mid-long range. In the triangle, I think he'd be able to get better looks and more oppertunities to attack the rim. 2) Carter wouldn't have to play 31MPG like he had to last year with the Magic, and his role would be much more managable. 3) Is he really, honestly worse than Farmar/Brown/Vujacic? Heck no, all are chuckers without a quarter of VC's talent. None of them give you as much flexibility and versatility as Carter gives you. 3) Key- He's an expiring contract.

Every year he plays this game, using his health as the primary fuel for retirement. I know he's had his health issues, and I'm sure they've only gotten worse over the years, but I think it'll take a LOT for Jackson to give up this new Lakers dynasty. And considering we've all heard this song and dance before, I'm assuming it'd be more likely for him to come back than call it quits.

Who cares if Carter chokes? You don't play Luke or Mbenga in clutch situations (maybe Luke on rare occasion), and you wouldn't need to play Carter either with the game on the line. Off the bench he could offer a few of the things the Lakers could really use...a player who can create his own shot extremely well, unlike Odom will shoulder the offensive responsibility when his team needs it, and he's also an exception jumpshooter from all ranges and has impressive court vision. Really, except for PG the Lakers don't NEED anything. And I know it might seem risky to add a player like Carter to the Lakers because many see him as a stat stuffer who doesn't have the intangibles that the Lakers could use (which is why Bell would be perfect), but watching him play here in NJ for a few seasons, I do think he could offer the Lakers a lot. Off the bench he'd be the offensive firepower the Lakers could definitely use.

Celtics aren't dumping Rondo. He's too young with too much potential. And if that trade did somehow happen, it certainly won't be for only 2 1st round picks.

I actually agree with STL10...from a basketball standpoint, Arenas would thrive in that offense. The nature of their offense would allow it so that Arenas' ill-timed jacks and 30ft 3's be acceptable, and his ability to create his own shot and carry the team if Howard's having a tough time would be so valuable. If he could tone things down just a bit and learn how to play a little better team ball, he'd be a near-perfect fit for the Magic. It would also help alleviate a lot of the chaos surrounding the Wizards right now. Getting rid of Arenas' contract and getting a nice expiring contract in Carter, along with giving Wall more freedom...I like it on the Wizard end as well.

Eh. If the Magic didn't want to take on Turk's oversized contract BEFORE last season, I highly doubt they will now. And Carter going back to Toronto? Yikes.

Assuming it's a girl (which I really think it is), I'd smash. And who the hell cares if she smokes? About 25% of the adult US population are smokers, and I'm sure that number is even higher from 16-25 year olds. If some of you are going to be really picky about things like that, you'll never get laid.

Skip doesn't play street-ball in the NBA. Trust me, I watched almost every game of his for 2.5 years...he's Derek Fisher with better defense, better handles, better passing, but is far worse in the clutch and equally disastrous FG%. He's a great backup because he's low TO prone and is very good at setting an offense up, but he'd give them too much of the same from what they get out of Fisher. Sp unless they got a 3rd PG with a entirely different style of play from those two, it wouldn't work out too well.

Are you KIDDING me? For a 6'7'', 210lbs player to average over 16RPG 5x in his career you have to outhustle every single player in the league. Rodman was one of the hardest working, hyper-active players on the defensive end and on the glass that the NBA has ever seen. As for the debate, give me Noah. Just a much better defender and slightly better rebounder. Neither will be primary offensive options, and neither are liabilities either, so defense/rebounding is the only area that really means a lot here.

The Celtics sure could have used Rondo's ability to score in the Finals but he was nowhere to be found. Do you honestly think Kobe would be able to play center-field against Chris Paul? Paul would have eaten him alive. Last year Paul shot 49% from the field (was over 50% pre-injury), 41% from 3 and 85% from the line, and his AST:TO ratio was a ridiculous 10.7:2.5 (Rondo was 9.8:3.0). Basically my point was just countering how highly some people think of Rondo, and how quickly people forget how incredible Paul is just because the Hornets had a down year and he was injured.

Because Paul is a top 5 player in the league who every year will give you over 20PPG, 11APG, nearly 3SPG and shoot over 50% from the field and almost never turn the ball over. I've been saying it since he came into the league, he's a once in a generation PG.

Spend some time when you get the chance to really listen to and absorb the lyrics. Recovery certainly is not at the level of either of Em's first 4 albums lyrically (by that I mean from Infinite-TES), and he has more songs on Recovery that are duds as opposed to those classics. However, a good portion of Recovery is very solid lyrically, a huge upgrade from most of Encore and Relapse. I agree with people when they say Em's songwriting skills have fallen off big, but his MC skills are still elite.

Bosh will never be able to be the centerpiece of a championship team...the last 20 years have been dominated basically by 5 players- Jordan (6 rings), Kobe (5), Shaq (4), Duncan (4), Hakeem (2). Only 2 seasons since '91 has the championship trophy not been raised by 1 of those 4. One was a perfect-storm type team in the '04 Pistons, and the other was a Celtics team with arguably 3 HoF players all in their prime. Shaq wasn't the best player of that '06 Heat team, but Wade played like an all-timer that Finals, and regardless you get my point. Knowing the history of the NBA's last 20 years (and we could go back even further, same pattern), is it realistic to believe that anyone BUT the top 3-4 players in the league have ANY shot of being the centerpiece of a championship team? No. Could Bosh be the centerpiece of a fringe contender over the next few seasons? Sure, and that is really the ceiling of 98% of NBA players. To him, that'd probably be an accomplishment, and when he enters his 30's then he can worry about winning a ring.

Relapse was trash. But lyrically Eminem is TIGHT on Recovery. What kind of kills the album for me is the production and guest appearances, and some also don't like the subject matter. But in terms of MC skills Em is still among the elite. I'd certainly put his rapping skills at this stage of his career above Jay's, but from an all-around musical standpoint Jay has his style on lock right now, Em does not. But if you listen to various freestyles and guest appearances on other songs, Em's skills are still sharp. It's his inability to mesh the tight lyrics from his verses with a great hook and beat that is the problem...IMO.

Eh that's not true. With Houston he was a very, very solid defensive player, and those Rockets' were always among the elite defensive teams in the league. The biggest issue with Rafer is the same issue as with Fisher...low percentage shooter except behind the 3pt line. He is terrific at setting offenses up, though, and would be a solid backup PG. Anyway, as for Bell, I think he'd be perfect for LA. Everyone knows how big he'd be for LA in the 3pt shooting department, but where I think he'd also help out is taking on offensive players that are too quick for Artest to handle. Artest has trouble with quicker players and fighting through screens, but Bell is terrific in both scenarios. Together they'd be a nightmare tandem (along with Kobe) for any of the elite offensive wings in the league.

Jackson plays this game every year. Everyone wants him back, the Lakers have a great shot at yet another three-peat, the roster will remain intact (if not upgraded)...I just have a gut feeling he knows deep down that it'd be a huge mistake for him to pass up possibly the last chance he'll ever get at winning another ring.

Assuming Salmon's is gone for sure, I don't mind this for the Bucks. I understand he's not the ideal player to add from a chemistry/balance standpoint, but without Salmons they desperately need a wing player that can create his own shot and score. Maggette certainly gives them that. The success of this trade will be determined by Michael Redd's health IMO. If he's healthy, the Bucks will have someone that can space the floor and unclog the lane for Maggette and Bogut. They would actually have a pretty dangerous starting lineup offensively, and Scott Skiles will find a way to make Maggette at least a solid body on defense. But if Redd's not healthy, this trade won't mean much for the Bucks.

Doesn't make sense on so many levels. What also doesn't make sense to me is people forgetting just how good Paul is when he's healthy. IMO he's the best PG in the league and top 5 overall. Rondo is great, but people are riding his dick wayyyy too much because of Boston's surprising run to the Finals. Except for rebounding, there really isn't an area I'd say he's surely better than Paul in (and Paul is a MUCH better scorer and leader).

6ft is a decent PG size when you're a freak athlete, and aren't 170lbs like Taurasi is. 6'4'' is slightly undersized for SG, and Parker is only 180lbs, which is WAY undersized for the SG position. And Parker is in no way, shape or form as athletically gifted as the average bench wingman. And you keep saying that because they'd be perimeter players in the NBA they'd be able to withstand the physicality...it doesn't work like that. There's a lot more to playing in the NBA than when you have the ball in your hands or taking a shot. Either of those two players would get leveled by screens, seriously hurt if they tried to attempt to take a charge on a player 60-100 pounds larger than them (and a woman's body will react a lot different than your body, like you tried to use as an example), they'd get abused in the post, abused trying to defend far more athletic men in iso situations, would have trouble getting shots up over NBA players who are taller with greater wingspans and vertical jumps, etc... Also, to touch on a point you brought up before- The zone defense is a gimmick. Some teams like the Celtics will utilize zone defense principles, but still play man-to-man defense. If you are forced to play a zone to hide a woman defensively, you're already at a major disadvantage. And offensively, I don't care how quick a trigger Taurasi has...if she won't be a threat to slash to the basket, then NBA players will hound her and not let her even get a shot attempt off. A 6'3'' PG with NBA level jumping ability will give Taurasi FITS on the release.

http://www.otrbasketball.com/forums/topic/12590-michael-jordan-vs-kobe-bryant/

No it is not. Well, it is the same action of course, but how a woman's body reacts would be different than a man's. A woman's body is simply not genetically strong as a male's, and they would not be able to take the punishment an NBA player takes over an 82 games season (as opposed to a 36 game WNBA season against far weaker competition from all aspects). I doubt they wouldn't be able to take a few bumps now and then, but they're bodies just wouldn't be able to take the punishment of a full NBA season. The best WNBA players would have no chance beating the worst NBA players off the dribble and actually be able to finish in the lane. Candace Parker is a WNBA forward but is only 6'4'' and 175lbs...that's the kind of size that most PG's/undersized SG's in the NBA are, and players that size can't finish near the rim even when they are lightning quick (think Brandon Jennings). And for the smaller WNBA players like Taurasi, who don't have NBA speed/size/wingspan? Absolutely 0 chance to be remotely effective on both ends of the floor.

First off the Sonics were also the 2nd best defensive team in the league when the Bulls beat them in the Finals...2nd only to guess who? The Bulls. Secondly, give me those teams over Miller's Pacers (who Jordan also beat), AI's Sixers (one of the worst Finals teams ever), or Kidd's Nets (same as Sixers), who account for 3 of the 5 teams the Lakers had to beat to win the championship. The only GREAT teams Kobe's had to go through is the Spurs of the early '00's and the Celtics. Any way you cut it, I really don't think the fact that MJ played in an expansion era should meaning anything to the arguement. The difference in talent of teams both MJ and Kobe had to go through is minimal.

Agree and disagree. Agree that people overblow the importance of championships/accolades in the Kobe/MJ debate because they are two of the most accomplished players in NBA history. However, accomplishments are a direct coorelation to dominance. If you don't dominate your era, then you can't really be compared to the all-time greats. At least IMO. KObe and MJ have both dominated their eras, so the accomplishments don't hold much weight. First off, in the 5 year spans I was comparing each player (when both players were in their prime), MJ had a TS% of over 60% 3x. Kobe has never been over 58%. Using their career numbers is pointless in any aspect of the Kobe vs. Jordan debate because Kobe wasn't the best player in the league his first 6-7 seasons, and MJ was 40 years old shaking off 3 years of rust when he was with the Wizards. When comparing who's the better player, you have to use when each was in their absolute prime. Secondly, the fact that Kobe takes 5-6 3's per game and takes tougher shots is exactly why I prefer MJ as a scorer. How exactly is Kobe's less efficient shot selection supposed to be an advantage in this arguement? If they're playing H-O-R-S-E it would make a difference, but in the NBA it doesn't. If we were comparing say...Dwyane Wade to Kobe, then you could say, "Kobe's versatility and consistent midrange game gives him an edge and ability to score if a defense clogs up the paint, whereas Wade will tend to struggle in that situation." However, as opposed to Wade, MJ had an amazing midrange and post game, and was able to beat teams and score efficiently even if he wasn't getting to the rim. Like Kobe, MJ had all the tools to counter whatever the defense threw at him. Lastly, as for the defense/coaching, it's really a wash IMO. Zone defense is a gimmick, and all the great defenses still play man-to-man. The coaches will teach zone defense principles, but the actually schemes are man-to-man. And while teams are allowed to utilize zone defense nowadays, individual players cannot be 1/10 as physical as they were back in Jordan's playing days. They were able to handcheck on face-up's, and hit you hard on slashing attempts and finishes at the rim. That is why despite MJ getting to the rim more than Kobe, he averaged over 8.8 FTA's in a season only once, while Kobe's done it 3x. As I said, it goes beyond the numbers, and I explained why I felt MJ was the better playmaker/ballhandler from an x's and o's perspective. Simply put, he was less TO prone, and MJ's ability to get to the rim so well helped collapse defenses better, allowing for a greater amount of open shots for his teammates. Kobe's inability to get to the rim against the Celtics is why in only two games did he dish out more than 4 assists. The mixture of TO's and style of play is why I'd take MJ in the playmaking despartment. As for rebounding, from '88-'98, Jordan averaged 5.8RPG or better each and every year, including 5 years of 6.5RPG or better. Kobe's had only 5 years with 5.8RPG or better, and only one with more than 6.5RPG. Might I mention that back in the late '80's/early '90's, teams were grabbing about 200-300 rebounds less per year than they do today due to the emergence of the 3pt shot. And he even averaged 6.6RPG during a season with Dennis Rodman grabbing 15 boards and his team outrebounding their opponents by 6 per game. And besides, like I mentioned, MJ was stronger, quicker, a higher vertical leap and bigger hands...he was without a doubt the better rebounder from all aspects. You made a case for Kobe being more versatile than MJ, but haven't made a case as to why Kobe's versatility beats out MJ's advantages in overall productivity and efficiency. Do that and then you got yourself a decent arguement.