why cant they look at the way the sl team played and get a clue? ron artest is a guy who wants 15+ shots and while he can have a great game hes also likely to go 4-17 and be a problem. why not intergate what we have move the ball use the length we have on defense run when we can and play good team ball? were going to regret it if thye do something in a panic

i agree.

but I don't think Isiah is gonna be able to sit still after the KG trade.

I would trade for Jack though. Only way this knicks team is going to work is with a pass first point guard like Jack. Collins is a little to slow and uncreative getting people the ball.

Jack isn't either........ you should already be able to tell who is better and going to be abetter point guard.

Posted by BRIGGS:

why cant they look at the way the sl team played and get a clue? ron artest is a guy who wants 15+ shots and while he can have a great game hes also likely to go 4-17 and be a problem. why not intergate what we have move the ball use the length we have on defense run when we can and play good team ball? were going to regret it if thye do something in a panic

Ditto

I essentially said the same thing last night but got lambasted. I was called a constant Hater and told I don't like anything about this team while giving props to Balkman and his hustling D, Lee's tenacious rebounding. I did take a shot at Jeffries but then again who doesn't.

briggs you make a good case on touches. the suns league leading offense starting 5 total 60 touches (approx)
if you do the math, touches for our starting lineup with artest look something like this:

star 13
craw 15/q-11
ron ron 15
z-bo 19
curry 13

that means our starting 1/2 court 5 gets 15 more touches than full court running suns........not this century

ron would be an extremely difficult fit or the new and improved ron artest turns into a bruce bowen model player......you really think that's going to happen ?

Yeah, I'm about as torn down the middle as you can be on this Artest thing. Look, he's a really good player and would be an instant upgrade over what we have in place at the SF position here now. Although, if Q's completely healthy and can play 70-75 games (big if), along with Balkman's defense, energy and hustle backing him up, then there's Chandler and Nichols' potential further down on the depth chart - you know what, we might have enough firepower at the 3 already.

I know I said let's go get Ron for Lee the other day but I'm starting to reconsider this thing a little bit.

Posted by COSSUCKS:

Posted by Solace:

Posted by TrueBlue:

Ditto

I essentially said the same thing last night but got lambasted. I was called a constant Hater and told I don't like anything about this team while giving props to Balkman and his hustling D, Lee's tenacious rebounding. I did take a shot at Jeffries but then again who doesn't.

You and I both know that the moment Balkman is traded, the same people who keep telling us how awesome Balkman is are going to downplay his abilities to being "average" or "an okay player". When you see that, I called it first.

You should goon record right now then as to Balkmans skill level.

Bench warmer, role player, starter, or all star?

That way after a trade we will know where you stood before a hand on Balk

I say starter. I don't think he's going to be a team's #1 or #2, though. He'll be on a team with a well-defined role, perhaps with a Bruce Bowen-like role, but better stats.

Posted by Solace:

Posted by COSSUCKS:

Posted by Solace:

Posted by TrueBlue:

Ditto

I essentially said the same thing last night but got lambasted. I was called a constant Hater and told I don't like anything about this team while giving props to Balkman and his hustling D, Lee's tenacious rebounding. I did take a shot at Jeffries but then again who doesn't.

You and I both know that the moment Balkman is traded, the same people who keep telling us how awesome Balkman is are going to downplay his abilities to being "average" or "an okay player". When you see that, I called it first.

You should goon record right now then as to Balkmans skill level.

Bench warmer, role player, starter, or all star?

That way after a trade we will know where you stood before a hand on Balk

I say starter. I don't think he's going to be a team's #1 or #2, though. He'll be on a team with a well-defined role, perhaps with a Bruce Bowen-like role, but better stats.

So then would you say Ron Artest would have a bigger impact on a team or less of an impact?

Posted by Pharzeone:

LOL, that's a far cry from him being a CBA player as he described last year.

That's a blatant lie. I said he would have a Shandon Anderson role. But everyone was so filled with hate about Shandon Anderson, that they took my comment the wrong way. I continued to elaborate and people called me a hater. So, whatever. I no longer use the word Shandon Anderson when describing Balkman, because everyone thinks Shandon was the worst player in the NBA... so point taken, I've changed my phrasing to a way that people could be better understand.

Posted by COSSUCKS:

By the way I dont see Balkman as much like Bowen. Balkman is a thin shot blocking rebounder but he isnt a great preimeter defender nor 3 point shooter like Bowen.

I see Balk more like a smaller poor mans Ak47 or a Jerome Williams.

Skillset is somewhat different, but I'm talking about role more than skillset. In other words, as far as importance to a team, I think Bowen gets a lot of credit when the numbers don't always show it, and yet, he's a supporting player. I feel Balkman will have the same importance.