NardDogNation wrote:I'm just curious, considering his recent play and all. For most of Melo's tenure here, we've struggled to produce a consistent and reliable sidekick. Given Johnson's versatility, he could've been that guy. What are your thoughts?

I hate Joe Johnson and he is/was also a Salbatross.

Did you want him instead of Melo or did you want us to trade for him?

knickstorrents wrote:nah, he blows. almost as bad as melo

Almost as bad? He is not even close. He is worse in every stat - probably why Melo's WS48 is at .170 and Joe Johnson's as a Net is 0.92 (avg is .100)

mreinman wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:I'm just curious, considering his recent play and all. For most of Melo's tenure here, we've struggled to produce a consistent and reliable sidekick. Given Johnson's versatility, he could've been that guy. What are your thoughts?

I hate Joe Johnson and he is/was also a Salbatross.

Did you want him instead of Melo or did you want us to trade for him?

I see Johnson as being an excellent sidekick for Melo. Yes, his contract sucks but at least he is able to perform on his $20 million/yr contract (unlike A'mare). The idea of trading for him back during the 2012-2013 season was floated about briefly on the board, which I hated at the time. In retrospect, I would've given it more thought given our need for talent and an individual that could create for others.

NardDogNation wrote:

knickstorrents wrote:nah, he blows. almost as bad as melo

Melo, the same dude that aspiring contenders (with impeccable reputations) are trying to get him?

We don't that until it happens. We don't know what chicago does nor Houston does. Looks like Rockets are in a bit of a hole down 0-2 at home to POrtland. While its not Dwight, and its not just Harden but if you looking at one and done disappointments maybe bringing in Melo, who knows plenty about that is a good idea?

Thats not fair, nor slaming McHale who was instumental in getting Dwight to come to Houstan. Sometimes its not how bad you play, but how good the other team plays.

Im sure we can just blame Lin!

gunsnewing wrote:I think we definitely would've been much better off had we signed Johnson instead of Amare than added Melo

At least we're not discussing trading for PP and KG...

gunsnewing wrote:I think we definitely would've been much better off had we signed Johnson instead of Amare than added Melo

I actually think Joe and amare would have been a better pairing.. not great, but better.. at least not oil and water.... joe can actually play some PG..

tkf wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:I think we definitely would've been much better off had we signed Johnson instead of Amare than added Melo

I actually think Joe and amare would have been a better pairing.. not great, but better.. at least not oil and water.... joe can actually play some PG..

Amare is damaged goods. Talent level goes up with Melo & Joe. There games would compliment better than Amare. As it turned out this Melo/Amare era has been a HUGE disappointment.

gunsnewing wrote:

tkf wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:I think we definitely would've been much better off had we signed Johnson instead of Amare than added Melo

I actually think Joe and amare would have been a better pairing.. not great, but better.. at least not oil and water.... joe can actually play some PG..

Amare is damaged goods. Talent level goes up with Melo & Joe. There games would compliment better than Amare. As it turned out this Melo/Amare era has been a HUGE disappointment.

well I am assuming a healthy amare, as we would have acquired both in the same year.. a damaged goods amare would not be good with anyone pretty much..

Joe and carmelo are both ball stoppers, maybe joe to a lesser extent.. but there is no compliment there.. I am sorry guns, but i have yet to find a player that plays well with carmelo outside of billups, maybe that is why GM's have had such a hard time building around this guy.... the next route would be to try a different approach... joe is playing a role now that fits him, just makes way too much.. carmelo should be playing a similar role, but good luck getting that to happen...

tkf wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

tkf wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:I think we definitely would've been much better off had we signed Johnson instead of Amare than added Melo

I actually think Joe and amare would have been a better pairing.. not great, but better.. at least not oil and water.... joe can actually play some PG..

Amare is damaged goods. Talent level goes up with Melo & Joe. There games would compliment better than Amare. As it turned out this Melo/Amare era has been a HUGE disappointment.

well I am assuming a healthy amare, as we would have acquired both in the same year.. a damaged goods amare would not be good with anyone pretty much..

Joe and carmelo are both ball stoppers, maybe joe to a lesser extent.. but there is no compliment there.. I am sorry guns, but i have yet to find a player that plays well with carmelo outside of billups, maybe that is why GM's have had such a hard time building around this guy.... the next route would be to try a different approach... joe is playing a role now that fits him, just makes way too much.. carmelo should be playing a similar role, but good luck getting that to happen...

Ok ... so now you are getting used to the fact that Billups played well with Melo (slowly lying a kicking child you are learning, I can see that in your posts. Now you are even (though wrongly) talk about efficiency. Kudo to you, and I respect you trying to grow.

Let me give you another piece of info. DYK that your boy Iverson had his most efficient years in Denver?

There are many players that played well with Melo even though he has Koby-Chuck-Itis.

You can't just say things that other people say and just corrupt their meaning and intent.