Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by tkf:
briggs, why would you keep curry, and then trade for a guy to make up for his deficiencies at the expense of david lee? My ideal situation would be to start lee at PF, get a guy like okafor to play center, and then get some very competent wing players. Lets chandler and balkman fight for the SF position, the loser will be the backup, but that position would now be strong... Get a legit SG in here and hope we win derrick rose in the lottery...
A few things with Curry. I know what he can do and what he can't. Curry is a *lock* to get me 20-25[and that should be 25-28] points at nearly 60% and should rip me down 7-8 rebounds per 35 minutes. He's still ONLY 24 and it takes big men much more *time* than smaller players. If he lost 20 pounds I think he would be in optimum shape and be able to increase productivity on the D and rebounds. In this league where it is so hard to find a good big man--you dont throw a guy like Curry away at 24 years old--you just don't. You need to bring in guys to compliment his superior offensive skills and help his defeciencies[and make sure he works hard within to imporove]. Zach Randolph and David Lee are NOT 5's. I DO NOT want to trade David Lee--it would have to take one heckuva package to even get me to listen but I would listen. Everyone else is crp at this point until proven otherwise and it isnt happening with guys like marbury JC q malik--they are done they are dead weight to the franchise.
Zach Randolph was a STUPID trade I said it when he was traded and I say it now because he is a chemistry breaker. We DID have some chemsitry on this team last year and WE WOULDVE made the playoffs IF JC did not get hurt. I know Channing Frye wasnt very good[although they are playing to his strengths in Portland and he is playing WELL in his role] but could we have gone another route when we wanted to trade him? Zach is better BUT DOES NOT make the team better--we are WORSE because of Zach. He takes away from what Curry and the team was building on. The Knicks would have been better off using Channing and our pick to move up to take Sean Williams. We were not risking very much. We didnt want Frye anymore and pick 19? We already have David Lee and Jefferies who can play next to Curry.. We needed a shot blocking compliment and a whole new set of guards and a 3--and while we did draft a true 3 we dont even play him.I think he can do better than what q did and has done this year NOTHING.
I agree. There are only like 3-4 players in the NBA who can score in the post like Curry. He is virtually unguardable one-on-one. He obviously needs to rebound more and play better defense, but I would rather keep him and get a young Ben Wallace type to put next to him than try to find a new center. Curry is not the main problem on the team. It is our 1,2,3 positions that are the main problem. Our guards cannot defend and cannot run our plays and cannot stop turning the ball over and cannot make wise decisions. You repalce Marbury and Crawford with Billups and Hamilton and we win 50 games easily. So I agree with BRIGGS.
I actually would try to trade Randolph and keep lee. The primary reason Randolph's value was so low was because of the off the court problems, but he has been a total professional here. For a team like the Sixers, who have a defensive center but need lowpost scoring, he would be a good fit. I would try to move him to them for a protected 1st round pick and a prospect. I think they would bite. I would then try to move Crawford to the Lakers for a second round pick and Jarvis C. I would then Penny Hardaway Marbury and try to trade him this summer. Let Nate and Mardy and Jarvis C. run the point and go with the younger players like Chandler and Balkman.
[Edited by - thegame on 11-22-2007 7:12 PM]
