Posted by Solace:

Posted by deebo:

Well, I'm still glad we didn't get him. Dallas has definitely added a missing piece. We got back Vin, and I think he will be able to get 12 and 12 if he gets 30mins. So, Dal and NYK came out well. In fact, we got a play in Vin for half the price.

12 and 12 from Vin Baker? What??? Even in Vin Baker's prime, he never got more than 10.3 rpg in 41 mpg. Since 2000, Baker's high is 6.4 rpg, despite getting 31 mpg that year (2001-2002). I'll eat crow if Baker even comes close to 12-12, but he hasn't been that good a rebounder in a long time and was never in Dampier's class in rebounding. I think it's a safe bet that in 30 mpg, Baker's stats look more like 12 ppg, 6 rpg, 0.6 blk, 0.6 stl.

If Baker after heart surgery is the same player he was ten months ago, then he's a better offensive player than Dampier but not nearly the defensive player or rebounder Dampier is

Posted by Solace:

That wouldn't have bothered me at all. I always thought Dampier was worth it, and getting a center of his caliber is a very rare and difficult feat. The fact that we missed out is a major blunder. Despite the age difference, I'd take Dampier over Crawford in a heartbeat. If we desperately needed a SG, we could've always packaged Kurt with another player to fill that slot or found another way to get Crawford.

there was no other way to get Crawford...CHI only wanted ending contracts...we've been through every possible trade scenario w/Paxson, & he wasn't budging at all.

the other option was to trade for Dampier by giving up that package above, & then maybe trading KT for Stackhouse...that would have given you a team of:

C - Dampier / Baker
PF - Sweetney / Nazr
SF - TT / Penny / Shandon
SG - Houston / Stackhouse
PG - Marbury / Frank / Moochie
IR - Ariza / Trybanski / Eschmeyer

you'd have lost 2 future 1st rounders to put that team together...would it have been worth it?

Posted by Bonn1997:

If Baker after heart surgery is the same player he was ten months ago, then he's a better offensive player than Dampier but not nearly the defensive player or rebounder Dampier is

Yeah, it was a minor heart problem and not his alcohol abuse, which he'll be dealing with the rest of his life, that caused his play to suffer.

Given a choice, I take Dampier over Crawford without a second thought. However, we got Crawford, and I'm happy we got one player rather than none.

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by Bonn1997:

If Baker after heart surgery is the same player he was ten months ago, then he's a better offensive player than Dampier but not nearly the defensive player or rebounder Dampier is

Yeah, it was a minor heart problem and not his alcohol abuse, which he'll be dealing with the rest of his life, that caused his play to suffer.

Isles is right. Everything does factor in. However, I do think Baker's heartbeat had something to do with it as well. If he returns as an 18 and 8 player, that would be wonderful. Right now, I'll expect what he was capable of before, which is 12 and 6. Anything more he gives is a bonus, in my view.

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by Bonn1997:

If Baker after heart surgery is the same player he was ten months ago, then he's a better offensive player than Dampier but not nearly the defensive player or rebounder Dampier is

Yeah, it was a minor heart problem and not his alcohol abuse, which he'll be dealing with the rest of his life, that caused his play to suffer.

You're not seriously trying to say that playing with an irregular heart beat doesn't cause your play to suffer, are you?

I don't know, are you a cardiologist? Do you know that he didn't have the same irregular heartbeat when he was playing well? I'm betting that you don't know.

I do know that the quality of his play began to fade when his alcohol problems resurfaced in Boston. I do know that it's a problem that he's going to have to deal with for not only the rest of his career but the rest of his life.

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Solace:

Given a choice, I take Dampier over Crawford without a second thought. However, we got Crawford, and I'm happy we got one player rather than none.

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by Bonn1997:

If Baker after heart surgery is the same player he was ten months ago, then he's a better offensive player than Dampier but not nearly the defensive player or rebounder Dampier is

Yeah, it was a minor heart problem and not his alcohol abuse, which he'll be dealing with the rest of his life, that caused his play to suffer.

Isles is right. Everything does factor in. However, I do think Baker's heartbeat had something to do with it as well. If he returns as an 18 and 8 player, that would be wonderful. Right now, I'll expect what he was capable of before, which is 12 and 6.

Actually, it was 15/7 for the first two months of the season

14.8 pts, 6.7 rebs... over the course of 16 games (October & November)! I don't think that's a big enough sample to say he'd do that all the time. If he does, great, but again, I'm counting on the minimum, and anything else he gives is bonus.

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Solace:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Solace:

Given a choice, I take Dampier over Crawford without a second thought. However, we got Crawford, and I'm happy we got one player rather than none.

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by Bonn1997:

If Baker after heart surgery is the same player he was ten months ago, then he's a better offensive player than Dampier but not nearly the defensive player or rebounder Dampier is

Yeah, it was a minor heart problem and not his alcohol abuse, which he'll be dealing with the rest of his life, that caused his play to suffer.

Isles is right. Everything does factor in. However, I do think Baker's heartbeat had something to do with it as well. If he returns as an 18 and 8 player, that would be wonderful. Right now, I'll expect what he was capable of before, which is 12 and 6.

Actually, it was 15/7 for the first two months of the season

14.8 pts, 6.7 rebs... over the course of 16 games (October & November)! I don't think that's a big enough sample to say he'd do that all the time. If he does, great, but again, I'm counting on the minimum, and anything else he gives is bonus.

Sorry, I rounded off the #s.

It's okay. For some reason I felt compelled to double check, because I actually thought his Boston #'s were slightly lower. It's all good; didn't mean to present it as a challenge to your numbers.

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Solace:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Solace:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Solace:

Given a choice, I take Dampier over Crawford without a second thought. However, we got Crawford, and I'm happy we got one player rather than none.

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by Bonn1997:

If Baker after heart surgery is the same player he was ten months ago, then he's a better offensive player than Dampier but not nearly the defensive player or rebounder Dampier is

Yeah, it was a minor heart problem and not his alcohol abuse, which he'll be dealing with the rest of his life, that caused his play to suffer.

Isles is right. Everything does factor in. However, I do think Baker's heartbeat had something to do with it as well. If he returns as an 18 and 8 player, that would be wonderful. Right now, I'll expect what he was capable of before, which is 12 and 6.

Actually, it was 15/7 for the first two months of the season

14.8 pts, 6.7 rebs... over the course of 16 games (October & November)! I don't think that's a big enough sample to say he'd do that all the time. If he does, great, but again, I'm counting on the minimum, and anything else he gives is bonus.

Sorry, I rounded off the #s.

It's okay. For some reason I felt compelled to double check, because I actually thought his Boston #'s were slightly lower. It's all good; didn't mean to present it as a challenge to your numbers.

Well, in his first nineteen games, he averaged 14.95 Pts and 6.95 Rbs. That's pretty close to 15/7

Yeah. Well, buh.. fuh... duh.

Anyway, my main point was that it was a small sample, and likely too small to make a fair judgement. However, I'd certainly be happy with 15-7, but I can't possibly see him getting 15 ppg on the Knicks, with all the scorers we have.

Posted by islesfan:

You're not seriously trying to say that taking a players best 19 game stretch of the season while disregarding the fact that he relapsed from his alcohol rehab and perhaps suffered from an irregular heartbeat in projecting his numbers for next season is ok but per 48 minutes isn't that good of an indicator???

That's the silliest thing I ever heard. Please show me where I said those 19 games proved he would be a 15/7 player next year!

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by islesfan:

You're not seriously trying to say that taking a players best 19 game stretch of the season while disregarding the fact that he relapsed from his alcohol rehab and perhaps suffered from an irregular heartbeat in projecting his numbers for next season is ok but per 48 minutes isn't that good of an indicator???

That's the silliest thing I ever heard. Please show me where I said those 19 games proved he would be a 15/7 player next year!

I don't know, ask Solace, he was also wondering whether or not you were really that foolish to take that small of a sample and make any type of projection from it.

Posted by Bonn1997:

Show me where he said he was *wondering whether I* would take a small sample and make a projection. You can't just keep making these things up!

Solace: "Anyway, my main point was that it was a small sample, and likely too small to make a fair judgement."

Seems to me that he's saying that it's unreasonable to take such a small sample and make any type of judgement about how he would do next year, assuming he has his alcoholism under control. If that's not what Solace was saying there then I apologize to Solace for taking his words out of context.