NomarFachix

Gabby has been magic

Yeah, but if he plays the loyal card and then leaves in the offseason with no return, is that really better? Not saying this is what Deron will do, but if his mind was already made up, wouldn't that be preferred?

I doubt CP3 ends up in NY, there is just too much to overcome for it to make sense for me right now. But if it works out.. raging boner. Nice core 3, use the MLE and vet minimums for 2-3 years, draft well, and you have a contender.

If Amar'e had one year left on his deal and was preparing to leave, I'd very much prefer this situation to him merely walking out the door at the end of the year. Some compensation is always preferred over no compensation. They could just allow Paul to play his ass off for them for the rest of the season, which I'm sure he'd be happy to do. Doesn't seem like a pouter to me, and it keeps fans in the seats.

Thoughts? http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=aw-wojnarowski_kyle_singler_pistons_112911

Also, not picking a side on which deal is better, but here are some numbers if you want to compare that to the Knicks deal from last year: 14.48 PER, 4 Players Chandler 15.3/5.7 14.68 Gallinari 15.6/4.9 15.71 Felton 15.5/8.3 16.68 Mozgov 3.6/2.7 10.85 '14 1st '12 2nd '13 2nd Cash for 20.30 PER, 2 Players (a touch skewed, didn't want to add PER's for Carter/Landlord/Balkman, didn't play much) Melo 25.6/7.3 21.82 Billups 16.8/5.4 18.78 ___________________________________________________ 19.88 PER, 2 Players Paul 15.9/9.8 23.76 Okafor 10.3/9.5 16.00 for 13.49 PER, 3 Players Bledsoe 6.7/3.6 10.81 Kaman 12.4/7.0 15.72 Williams 14.0/6.6 13.93 '12 1st

I heard they loveddddddddddddddddddd him.. serious depression going on right now

So he's young, didn't play well, but might get better. I guess you see something that I don't. I am not saying that, but I am saying that this is something any team can offer to the Hornets. So you think he'll revert to '09/'10 form? Because career-wise, it was an anomaly. I am not saying it is not better than letting him walk for nothing. The Nets could offer Marshon Brooks and it would be better than letting him walk for nothing. But it's not a good offer for Paul, it's not the best offer they'll get, and it's not enough for the NBA owned Hornets to give him away. In this deal, the Hornets would get a maybe player in Bledsoe, a downgrade at center from Okafor to Kaman (while saving cash), an expiring contract, and a crapshoot draft pick that will likely be very early in the draft. Is that worth Chris Paul? Is that better than what other teams will offer? I think there is 0 chance a deal for Paul looks like this.

It's ok, we got Shelden Williams

He was referring to both of us. I didn't appreciate my comment and stance being swept aside and being responded to like a dolt. For my hand in derailing the thread, I apologize.

Bledsoe rocked a 42%/27% last year with 2.4 TO's against 3.6 APG. Where is the upside? He's speedy? I don't like him. The pick is valuable. It is still only one, uncertain pick. Is the expiring super valuable? Everyone in the league is going to have valuable expirings, if they aren't amnestied. Kaman looked terrible last year. Slow, hurt, ineffective, 12 and 7. If this is the best the Hornets can do, I expect them to pass and let him go in FA. Especially for a league owned team who, as Chris Mannix points out, won't want to deal with the PR mess fresh off a lockout.

Yes, it is all of those things.

Very big of you to accept this.

That is fine, it is still a bad offer and one that an NBA owned franchise wouldn't accept.

You won't threaten to leave the thread unless a particular thing happens, and then proceed to stay in the thread and make smarmy comments when that thing doesn't happen? Promise?

I can start talking to you like you're a [expletive]ing idiot and overusing bold and underline to make simple minded points, if you'd like :glasses:

You have Jordan Hill. Don't be so meager.

RIP, Patrice

He didn't say anything overly negative about the team. My point was that the Knicks are traditionally talked up because of the history of the franchise, not their success. It's hard to overrate a team that isn't known for success in the first place. But what I had to say was swept aside by lots of repeated points/lines, bolding, and underlining, as though I was incapable of understanding what he was saying. It's whatever, I try not to talk too much basketball on here anyway.

Yikes that's a bad trade proposal

Dwight absolutely wants LA.. if not the Lakers, why not the Clippers?

Jeff Foster, Kwame Brown, Marquis Daniels, Reggie Evans.. kick tires on centers like Przybilla/Ratliff/Battie/etc. With the ability to trade and sign another superstar this upcoming season/offseason, I can't imagine them giving out much more than 1 year deals to a few role players.

Or the 300 word, 12 paragraph response with 5 bolds and 2 underlines, none of which addressing my point that you don't need to be extremely successful to have a rich history. People talk up their history because of the history, not because of the success.

lol look at how cute he is when he's upset