Re: NBA thread 2011 : Thu Dec 08, 2011 9:15 pm  

Mark wrote:

If rumours are to be believed, this will be our starting 5 in two weeks time. Defence could be back in the garden, back to the days of Harper, Starks, Oakley, Mason, Ewing etc. New York Basketball.

C - Tyson Chandler
PF- Stoudemire
SF- Melo
SG- Grant Hill
PG- Jamaal Tinsley

bench -
Jeffries
Williams
Fields
Douglas
Shumpert

Chandler alone would make a big difference, not sure on Hill, decent player but would still have to pay a sizeable amount for a seasoned vet, when you already have a lot of experience on the roster.

I'd use the cap space to get a better PG than Tinsley, and sacrifice a bit of experience in the SG position. Fields still has potential, he lacked consistency and fell away towards the end of last year but I have faith in him to improve now he's not a rookie.

Re: NBA thread 2011 : Fri Dec 09, 2011 7:11 am  

Hill would provide leadership and great perimeter defence. Great addition. You may be too young to remember the early 90's knicks teams but we had loads of old vets whi could play D. Teams were scared.

Re: NBA thread 2011 : Fri Dec 09, 2011 10:46 am  

Stern vetoed a trade that would have sent CP3 to the Lakers.

Re: NBA thread 2011 : Fri Dec 09, 2011 12:16 pm  

Mark wrote:

Stern vetoed a trade that would have sent CP3 to the Lakers.

What a joke.

If anything, the team coming out of that trade worst would have been the Lakers (obviously before any trade for Howard).

NO would have got the best deal they could out of that, especially when the scenario now is that Paul is going to leave and they'll get nothing in return.

And Houston got Pau, would have given them some sort of presence where its massively needed.

And the claim it's for "basketball" reasons, all 3 would have been stronger!

Re: NBA thread 2011 : Fri Dec 09, 2011 2:50 pm  

inside_man wrote:

What a joke.

If anything, the team coming out of that trade worst would have been the Lakers (obviously before any trade for Howard).

NO would have got the best deal they could out of that, especially when the scenario now is that Paul is going to leave and they'll get nothing in return.

And Houston got Pau, would have given them some sort of presence where its massively needed.

And the claim it's for "basketball" reasons, all 3 would have been stronger!

Although I agree that the Hornets would be getting the best deal they possibly could, I fully understand the reason for Stearn blocking this trade. I agree that the Rockets and Hornets would be getting some talent, but I have to disagree about the "Lakers coming out of the trade worst". Over the 3 years that deal would save the Lakers roughly $20mil in salaries and a similar amount in luxury tax and still get the best player in the trade whilst preserving draft pick to potentially use as bait for Howard.

If the NBA were to allow this deal, the vast majority of owners, especially of smaller market teams, would be wondering why the feck they ever bothered with the lockout.

Re: NBA thread 2011 : Fri Dec 09, 2011 3:40 pm  

chico's nose wrote:

If the NBA were to allow this deal, the vast majority of owners, especially of smaller market teams, would be wondering why the feck they ever bothered with the lockout.

But Lakers have had to lose 2 big players to get 1. Odom still played a big role and Gasol was the 2nd star behind Kobe. As it stands, if the trade were to go through, they would be weaker.

NO getting Odom, as well as the 3 very solid players from Houston was fantastic when faced with the prospect of getting nothing for Paul in a years time (which is now likely to happen).

Same for Houston, they've shed some players they didn't need, and were getting a bonafide superstar in Pau Gasol to replace Ying.

New Orleans were going to be no weaker after the trade, if anything a tad stronger across the park, Houston were definately getting stronger as well as getting that franchise player, and the Lakers were left with only Bynum that is any good around the basket.

As for the "small owners" getting their way, New Orleans and probably Houston also are definately in that category, this deal made them bigger, but yet it was blocked. New Orleans in particular are now going to lose out so much more.

Whats the alternative though? Paul is ONLY likely to go to the Lakers, Boston or NY. This is the best deal that NO could have got, as well as strengthening another small market team in Houston.

Absolutely ludicrous decision. And whats worse, Dan Gilbert was one of those to complain, so now he's just created a situation where another franchies is going to be LeBron'd.

Re: NBA thread 2011 : Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:51 pm  

Thing is, NO wanted the deal to go through, but because the league owns them, for whatever reason, they overruled the GM.

I can see why LA want Paul, a lot of teams are taking the PG route and there aren't many better than Paul. With Kobe aging and a 1st overall pick massively unlikely, they may as well look for a new franchise player and get rid of some players that were partly blamed for the humiliation against Dallas.

I just can't believe that three teams were able to work out a trade that worked for all of them, only for the league to turn around and say no, it defies the point of the trade market and it's extremely unfair on teams and players. What is the LA coach supposed to say to Odom and Gasol now? Likewise with Houston.

Re: NBA thread 2011 : Fri Dec 09, 2011 5:16 pm  

Roddy B wrote:

I just can't believe that three teams were able to work out a trade that worked for all of them, only for the league to turn around and say no, it defies the point of the trade market and it's extremely unfair on teams and players. What is the LA coach supposed to say to Odom and Gasol now? Likewise with Houston.

Exactly.

No one was a loser in this deal. As I've mentioned, if anything the two "smaller market" teams which the new deal was supposed to protect, and the reason why the league overrules it, came out better than the big market team.

LA would still need to make further deals to stay at the same level as before, the other two already were stronger.

Re: NBA thread 2011 : Fri Dec 09, 2011 7:26 pm  

inside_man wrote:

But Lakers have had to lose 2 big players to get 1. Odom still played a big role and Gasol was the 2nd star behind Kobe. As it stands, if the trade were to go through, they would be weaker.

NO getting Odom, as well as the 3 very solid players from Houston was fantastic when faced with the prospect of getting nothing for Paul in a years time (which is now likely to happen).

Same for Houston, they've shed some players they didn't need, and were getting a bonafide superstar in Pau Gasol to replace Ying.

New Orleans were going to be no weaker after the trade, if anything a tad stronger across the park, Houston were definately getting stronger as well as getting that franchise player, and the Lakers were left with only Bynum that is any good around the basket.

As for the "small owners" getting their way, New Orleans and probably Houston also are definately in that category, this deal made them bigger, but yet it was blocked. New Orleans in particular are now going to lose out so much more.

Whats the alternative though? Paul is ONLY likely to go to the Lakers, Boston or NY. This is the best deal that NO could have got, as well as strengthening another small market team in Houston.

Absolutely ludicrous decision. And whats worse, Dan Gilbert was one of those to complain, so now he's just created a situation where another franchies is going to be LeBron'd.

I understand that this trade was the best deal that NO will more than likely get, and the fact that both they and the rockets would have got better. However I have to stress that everybody knows that the lakers would have only been weaker for the few day before they went and got Howard, and this is the real stumbling block.

This whole lock out has been about the league losing millions of dollars every year. The easiest way to stop the wrot is to make the league more competative instead of having a league where only around half a dozen teams (usually the same half dozen) have a real shot at winning the championship. If this deal had been allowed to go through it would have been another example of the "rich getting richer". It the short term it mat seem a strange decision, but for the long term I 100% believe that this is the best decision for the NBA going forward.

Re: NBA thread 2011 : Fri Dec 09, 2011 8:03 pm  

Chandler to knicks almost done.
Hill resigns with Suns, due to Knicks losing mdi-level exception
Brandon Roy retires
Arenas amnesty
D12 to Nets expected soon
Billups expected to be released(amnesty)


I expect the CP3 trade to go through after D12 is traded, albeit with a slight tweak.