Posted by Solace:

Posted by Killa4luv:

Posted by Solace:

If you want my opinion, though, the first trade we should make should involve moving Crawford to PG and trading Marbury for the best package we can get.

I don't understand this logic and I guess its probably because its not logical. Trade your teams best player because.......?
Its really senseless, with that lineup, we win 50 games the first season they're together.

It's simple. Build around youth, build around height, build around potential and try to rid yourself of terrible contracts (yes, Marbury is one. His contract is worse than H20's). Come to the admission that we're not winning anything with a $110 MM team that's lacking a superstar.

This team goes in the right direction when we stop the old philosophies and start making moves that make sense.

Steph is at least a top 5 pg in the league, in his prime, and significanly younger than the #1 and #2 (Kidd, Nash).

H20 was non existant as a player this season, yet he is one of the highest paid players in the league. He is 50 jumpshots away from retiring and may not even get those 50 jumphots in before he retires. He played 20 games avging 11, 1, 2. Steph played 82 games avging 21, 8, 2, 1.5 stls.

So please explain how his contract is worse than H20's?
While you'ra at it, explain how his contract is horrible?

As a matter of fact, don't explain anything, there is 0 logic to your argument. It's ridiculous.

Posted by Killa4luv:

Posted by Solace:

Posted by Killa4luv:

Posted by Solace:

If you want my opinion, though, the first trade we should make should involve moving Crawford to PG and trading Marbury for the best package we can get.

I don't understand this logic and I guess its probably because its not logical. Trade your teams best player because.......?
Its really senseless, with that lineup, we win 50 games the first season they're together.

It's simple. Build around youth, build around height, build around potential and try to rid yourself of terrible contracts (yes, Marbury is one. His contract is worse than H20's). Come to the admission that we're not winning anything with a $110 MM team that's lacking a superstar.

This team goes in the right direction when we stop the old philosophies and start making moves that make sense.

Steph is at least a top 5 pg in the league, in his prime, and significanly younger than the #1 and #2 (Kidd, Nash).

H20 was non existant as a player this season, yet he is one of the highest paid players in the league. He is 50 jumpshots away from retiring and may not even get those 50 jumphots in before he retires. He played 20 games avging 11, 1, 2. Steph played 82 games avging 21, 8, 2, 1.5 stls.

So please explain how his contract is worse than H20's?
While you'ra at it, explain how his contract is horrible?

As a matter of fact, don't explain anything, there is 0 logic to your argument. It's ridiculous.

It all makes sense if you understnad that Marbury probably played a role in kicking KVH (Solace's favorite player) off the team. It was right around when reports of Marbury's role in the trade came out that Solace started the Marbury trade proposals. Maybe it's just a stunning coincidence!

[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 06/02/2005 11:02:11]

Posted by Killa4luv:

Posted by Solace:

If you want my opinion, though, the first trade we should make should involve moving Crawford to PG and trading Marbury for the best package we can get.

I don't understand this logic and I guess its probably because its not logical. Trade your teams best player because.......?
Its really senseless, with that lineup, we win 50 games the first season they're together.

The key would be to get a lot closer to being under the cap when Lebron and Wade become available especially after H20's and Taylor's contracts expire.

give me a 3 guard rotation of Lebron/Wade, Felton, Crawford any day over Stephon & Crawford!

[Edited by - gunsnewing on 06/02/2005 11:09:58]

Posted by TMS:

planning for a better future while making moves to give yourself better cap flexibility to make bigger moves down the road is hardly what i would call a bad idea...maybe that's just me...i guess that qualifies this post for a smart-ass reply from some of you who might disagree...either that or i'm a Keith Van Horn lover i guess.

Nah, you didn't start the Marbury trade rumors right after the story about Marbury wanting Keith traded. You didn't start calling Marbury a jerk right after the stories. It's apples and oranges.

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Solace:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Solace:

Tes made a great point. This is a great trade for any team, except the Knicks.

We're taking on a lot of payroll in this proposed deal and not getting our value, because we already have so many undersized power forwards.

As for the possibility of doing a Weatherspoon-for-Norris type deal, those situations were different, because Weatherspoon wasn't ridiculously overpaid. Kurt Thomas is overpaid (although more tradeable than our other scrubs). Maurice Taylor is overpaid and untradeable until he's expiring. Malik Rose is overpaid and untradeable. Jerome Williams would be difficult to trade. Sweetney is tradeable, but don't expect to get much in return.

We already have FIVE UNDERSIZED power forwards that are relatively similar in talent level. We don't need another that isn't head and shoulders better than the rest.

Now, if you trade Kurt Thomas and Mike Sweetney before you trade for Boozer, yes, I'm all for it. But, I'm against any trade that adds to our glut. At that point, instead of getting Boozer, I'd rather try to fill a need with that #30 pick that was mentioned in this proposal.

No way; Weatherspoon was actually *more* overpaid than Kurt or Mo Taylor or Malik Rose or JYD. Kurt's contract is 1 (just 1) year longer than Spoon's was when we traded him, but Kurt's 100 times better than Spoon. Mo and JYD have two years left on their contracts (just like Spoon had when we traded him) but are better players than Spoon. Malik is a better player than spoon and has one more year on his contract than Spoon had at the time. So, he'd be the hardest to trade. We keep Malik as a nice veteran role player.

Let's get this straight. Spoon was making around $5 MM and he was WAY more overpaid than Mo Taylor at $9 MM? Give me a break.

The difference in their salaries is $2.5 mil, not $4 mil. They're probably comparably overpaid. You didn't address the other three PFs I listed who would all be easier to move than Spoon (who was very easy to move).

[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 06/01/2005 20:24:41]

Just to prove you wrong, before I stop responding to you completely, Spoon was paid $4,991,000 in the year he was traded from the Knicks. Maurice Taylor is making $8,450,000. The difference is closer to $3.5 MM I admit, but it's certaintly larger than you're claiming. While I don't think either player is very good, I do give Spoon the slight edge. I can't possibly see us making a trade involving Taylor (or Rose for that matter) without taking back a terrible player and/or undesirable contract in return. You might think differently, but who are you kidding? Maybe if Howard Eisley hadn't been bought out, you'd have your "Moochie Norris-type trade", but I don't want another Eisley on this team, do you? Certainly not with a contract like he had.

Anyway, moving on... I stand by Rose and Taylor being unmovable, Jerome Williams and Kurt Thomas being somewhat difficult to move. Kurt Thomas isn't impossible, but he is a bit overpaid (not terribly), but you can't expect to get much in return for a 32 year old jump shooting power forward with no inside game.

Posted by Pharzeone:

Yeah like signing KVH to a max contract after we get rid of Marbury right.

Of course. Because I've always said I wanted to get under the cap to sign Keith Van Horn. I mean, why else would you want to get under the cap? Why would you want a shot at Wade, LeBron, Okafor, D. Howard, Bosh, etc... etc...? If you're going to get under the cap, you might as well go for Keith Van Horn. Brilliant logic.

If you honestly believe that, then I don't know what to say. However, I suspect that it's just a petty insult and you're trolling. In that case, piss off.