PDA

View Full Version : Jay's dream trade



ChicagoJ
12-16-2005, 10:24 AM
With the Vince Carter replaced by a defensive player rumor,

I'd love to see Ron + whatever it took to work $$ wise to NJ, Carter to San Antonio, and Ginobolli to the Pacers.

I know it'll never, ever happen.

But the longer this progresses, the more I wonder if its going to be a multi-team deal?

Harmonica
12-16-2005, 11:22 AM
We ain't gettin' Manu. Might as well banish that thought from yer head now.

Naptown Seth
12-16-2005, 11:30 AM
Manu is a Duncan jock sniffer. Without Duncan, Manu's just a greasy flopper. If any deal with the Nets goes down, I'd much rather have Vince Carter, who's a much better talent.

Hicks
12-16-2005, 11:41 AM
Manu is a Duncan jock sniffer. Without Duncan, Manu's just a greasy flopper. If any deal with the Nets goes down, I'd much rather have Vince Carter, who's a much better talent.

What do the stats tell us?

Naptown Seth
12-16-2005, 11:53 AM
What do the stats tell us?
Stats (which by the way measure PRODUCTION - the single most important aspect of basketball) tell me that Vince Carter is the better player. My near-genuis level basketball IQ also tells me Vince Carter is the better player.
Vince Carter's the better player.

And by the way, J.O. and our supporting cast aren't good enough to win a championship with Manu. They are however good enough to win a championship with a motivated Vince Carter.

sweabs
12-16-2005, 11:58 AM
Here's a good stat:

Manu Ginobili: 2 Rings.
Vince Carter: 0 Rings.

Naptown Seth
12-16-2005, 12:06 PM
Here's a good stat:

Manu Ginobili: 2 Rings.
Vince Carter: 0 Rings.
And ofcourse the fact that Manu plays with arguably the MVP of the league and a great supporting cast has nothing to do with that...

Harmonica
12-16-2005, 12:16 PM
Manu is a Duncan jock sniffer. Without Duncan, Manu's just a greasy flopper. If any deal with the Nets goes down, I'd much rather have Vince Carter, who's a much better talent.
A "greasy" flopper? Is that in reference to his hispanic ethnicity?

ChicagoJ
12-16-2005, 12:16 PM
Manu sure looked to me like the best player at the World Championships, and he held his own at the Olympics.

I'd be careful about underestimating him when - if nothing else - his stats show just how much he is willing to sacrifice for the team.

He's a winner, and he's a heckuva basketball player, and he raises his game at crunch time. You can't come up with any stat that disproves it. And anybody that's actually taken the time to watch him play ball knows it.

Naptown Seth
12-16-2005, 12:44 PM
Manu sure looked to me like the best player at the World Championships, and he held his own at the Olympics.

I'd be careful about underestimating him when - if nothing else - his stats show just how much he is willing to sacrifice for the team.

He's a winner, and he's a heckuva basketball player, and he raises his game at crunch time. You can't come up with any stat that disproves it. And anybody that's actually taken the time to watch him play ball knows it.
I never said Manu wasn't a good player - he is. But he's not a great player, and he and J.O. aren't good enough to bring us a championship anytime soon. Say what you will about Carter, but if he's playing up to his ability, he and J.O. have what it takes to bring the title to Indy. The question is, would he play up to his ability? I know there's been times he hasn't in the past, however that was on a team going nowhere in a hurry in which the fans all turned on him. Put him in a winning enviorment with supportive fans, and I have a strong hunch we'd get the non-slacking Vince Carter.
High risk, high reward.

Naptown Seth
12-16-2005, 12:46 PM
A "greasy" flopper? Is that in reference to his hispanic ethnicity?
Actually, it's in reference to his hair. Steve Nash has greasy hair too btw.

DEEman
12-16-2005, 12:54 PM
And ofcourse the fact that Manu plays with arguably the MVP of the league and a great supporting cast has nothing to do with that...
In other words, facts/statistics alone are almost useless, because even i can score 25 points in the paint when Allen, Peja and Croshere are standing around the arc ;)

Naptown Seth
12-16-2005, 01:00 PM
In other words, facts/statistics alone are almost useless, because even i can score 25 points in the paint when Allen, Peja and Croshere are standing around the arc ;)
I'm not seeing the corelation.

ChicagoJ
12-16-2005, 02:56 PM
Probably because you're being mocked again, in a sly yet humerous way.

Lord Helmet
12-16-2005, 05:03 PM
I'd like to see Manu here, too.

But it won't happen.

Peck
12-16-2005, 05:10 PM
Here's a good stat:

Manu Ginobili: 2 Rings.
Vince Carter: 0 Rings.


I'm not trying to downplay Manu or anything, however the stat you just produced isn't really a very good stat because

Judd Beuchler: 3 rings
Reggie Miller: 0 rings

sweabs
12-16-2005, 05:14 PM
I'm not trying to downplay Manu or anything, however the stat you just produced isn't really a very good stat because

Judd Beuchler: 3 rings
Reggie Miller: 0 rings

Darko Milicic: 1 ring.
Reggie Miller: 0 rings.

:D I know, it can be misconstrued...but I still think the point gets across.

SoupIsGood
12-16-2005, 05:23 PM
Could you imagine a Saras/Ginobili backcourt? Ohhhh man I hate myself for even thinking of that, that backcourt would be talented, fun to watch, and most importantly, would consist of two guys that are flat out winners.

And I like Manu's hair when it is long, that's some awesome stuff.

http://www.nba.com/media/rewind2005_ginobili.jpg

Slick Pinkham
12-16-2005, 05:55 PM
tip: don't tell your wife that you are searching the internet to find the best 3-way you can find.

:blush:

ChicagoJ
12-16-2005, 06:00 PM
Don't make me move that post to the shout box.

:D

Ultimate Frisbee
12-16-2005, 06:10 PM
Would be uber sweet... but it'll never happen.

Naptown Seth
12-16-2005, 06:48 PM
Probably because you're being mocked again, in a sly yet humerous way.
Oh no! I'm being mocked by people who don't even have 1/10th my basketball knowledge! Im so badly hurt!

Here's the average Jay@Section204 post - "Let's trade Ron for Earl Watson!!! Sure, Earl couldnt even start over Jason Williams but I watched him play 6 minutes when the Grizzlies were on TNT back in March of 2003 and he was awesome!! That must mean he's great even though his measured production for his entire career, not to mention the fact thats hes never been given a starting position anywhere, says otherwise!!!"

Production > Everything Else

Period.

Naptown Seth
12-16-2005, 07:00 PM
Darko Milicic: 1 ring.
Reggie Miller: 0 rings.

:D I know, it can be misconstrued...but I still think the point gets across.

Yeah, the point that Tim Duncan is the best player in the league and can carry anyone to a championship.

Remember boys and girls, Duncan won a championship when Manu was still a greasy haired little punk playing in Europe. Duncan also won another championship when Manu was nothing more than Stephen Jackson's seat warmer.

Duncan won the championship, Manu was just lucky enough to be his sidekick. Manu could be replaced with atleast 15 perimeter players in the NBA and the Spurs would've still won the championship last year.
Take your pick: Paul Pierce, LeBron James, Tracy McGrady, Ron Artest, Kobe Bryant, Dwyane Wade, Allen Iverson, Shawn Marion, Andrei Kirilenko, Joe Johnson, Ricky Davis, Larry Hughes, Carmelo Anthony, Rip Hamilton, Jason Richardson, Corey Maggette, Lamar Odom, Michael Redd, Vince Carter, Richard Jefferson, Peja Stojakovic

Manu is the new Kenyon Martin. A good - but not great - player who get's massively overrated because his team wins, due almost entirely to a superior teammate. (Jason Kidd and Tim Duncan)

I was saying the same thing about Martin back then and people were saying the same thing you all are now - that I'm an idiot. But I was right then, and I'm right now. Just give it a year or two, Duncan's already declining a good deal. Soon the Spurs entire team will decline, and you all will see just how unspecial Manu Ginobili is.

ChicagoJ
12-16-2005, 07:34 PM
You're a funny guy.

Manu was easily the best player on the court for three of the Spurs four wins in The Finals last spring.

What can't Manu do well? Nothing. Well, maybe he doesn't rebound especially well even for a guard, but that's minor.

He handles the ball well with either hand, is an excellent finisher, had a nice touch from the outside (he's a bit streaky from three point range but he's also smart enough to step in, too), has a great stop-and-pop move, is good at finding the open man, willing to defer to Duncan and even Parker (and Horry in the fourth quarter), plays hard on defense to overcome his average footspeed, and as mentioned he's won other stuff without Duncan (and I believe *against* Duncan for that matter) and he's reportedly a great locker-room guy.

The only people that don't put Manu in the top-fifteen (he's easily in my top-ten) in the league are the ones who just can't comprehend how much he *sacrifices* his individual game because he is playing alongside the best individual player in the league.

But if people are saying you're an idiot, its because your methodology to evaluate players is woefully inadequate.

And, by the way, if you put Manu alongside either KG or JO, that team would probably beat a team of Duncan and any possible sidekick.

ChicagoJ
12-17-2005, 10:51 AM
No, you're being mocked by people with 10x your basketball knowledge, but you don't even have enough basketball knowledge to understand it.

I'm smart enough to say that if I haven't seen a player enough, that I don't have an opinion of him.

Too bad you're apparently not...

I was trying to help you out. If you're too foolish/ stubborn to accept it, then that's your problem. Good luck.

indygeezer
12-17-2005, 11:03 AM
So then, based upon this years stats, there are 16 people better suited to trade for (17 but we already have JO)

Allen Iverson, PHI 23 44.1 34.0 11.7-26.1 45.000 1.1-3.5 .325 9.3-11.8 79.336
2 Kobe Bryant, LAL 22 40.4 31.2 11.6-26.6 43.515 1.0-3.5 .289 7.0-8.6 81.053
3 LeBron James, CLE 21 41.5 30.5 10.6-21.5 49.446 1.6-4.5 .347 7.7-9.9 77.778
4 G. Arenas, WAS 19 41.4 27.7 8.8-20.8 42.532 2.8-7.4 .379 7.2-8.9 80.588
5 Dwyane Wade, MIA 23 39.4 26.7 9.3-20.3 45.708 0.1-1.1 .077 8.1-10.6 76.955
6 Paul Pierce, BOS 21 39.2 26.5 8.6-17.7 48.656 1.3-3.0 .444 8.0-9.9 80.676
7 Dirk Nowitzki, DAL 22 38.3 26.2 9.2-20.2 45.393 1.7-4.0 .416 6.1-7.0 87.662
8 Elton Brand, LAC 22 39.8 25.3 9.5-17.6 54.124 0.0-0.0 .000 6.2-8.0 77.273
9 Michael Redd, MIL 19 37.8 25.3 8.3-18.5 45.014 2.4-4.8 .495 6.3-7.6 82.069
10 Ray Allen, SEA 21 39.8 24.6 8.5-20.5 41.395 3.1-9.0 .342 4.5-5.1 88.785
11 C. Anthony, DEN 22 34.2 22.9 7.9-17.1 45.889 0.3-1.4 .226 6.8-8.5 80.214
12 J. Richardson, GSW 22 39.2 22.8 8.8-19.6 44.780 1.8-5.8 .307 3.5-5.1 68.142
13 R. Hamilton, DET 19 36.8 22.3 8.8-17.3 50.760 0.7-1.5 .464 4.0-4.6 86.364
14 Chris Bosh, TOR 22 39.0 22.2 7.5-15.8 47.550 0.0-0.1 .000 7.2-8.7 82.813
15 Kevin Garnett, MIN 21 39.9 22.0 8.8-16.5 53.179 0.1-0.3 .429 4.3-5.7 75.630
16 J. O'Neal, IND 20 36.7 21.7 8.2-17.2 47.384 0.1-0.2 .333 5.4-7.3 73.793
17 Vince Carter, NJN 20 36.1 21.5 8.0-17.6 45.170 1.3-3.7 .351 4.3-5.3 81.132

aceace
12-17-2005, 11:46 AM
If we trade for VC, you might as well plan on trading Jax before the deadline. Jax cannot accept being no.3

Naptown Seth
12-17-2005, 03:13 PM
No, you're being mocked by people with 10x your basketball knowledge, but you don't even have enough basketball knowledge to understand it.

I'm smart enough to say that if I haven't seen a player enough, that I don't have an opinion of him.

Too bad you're apparently not...

I was trying to help you out. If you're too foolish/ stubborn to accept it, then that's your problem. Good luck.
If a player is a good scorer, it will show up in his measured production. (ppg, fg%, ft%, 3p%)
If a player is a good rebounder, it will show up in his measured production. (rpg)
If a player is a good passer, it will show up in his measured production. (apg)
If a player is a good shooter, it will show up in his measured production. (ft%, fg%, 3p%)
If a player is a good shot blocker, it will show up in his measured production. (bpg)

Now obviously, you can't go by stats alone. There are other factors that can sway stats: ie, a player who plays with weak rebounders will have inflated rebounding numbers (Ben Wallace 2002-2003), a player who plays in a well structured offense will get better looks and thus have an inflated fg% and 3p% (Joe Johnson 2004), a player who dominates posesion of the ball for his team on offense will have inflated apg (Stephon Marbury) however it will be countered with more topg, etc. Also minutes per game can play a big part in stats.

However, the bottom line is, stats measure production, Good production is the key to success. Therefor, good stats = good production = success. It make sense. And the teams with the most overall productive players are the winninest teams (San Antonio, Detroit, Clippers, Phoenix etc.)

You can watch a player all you want, but you're not gonna get the same level on a players abilities as you will with measured production. Because believe it or not, stats don't lie, it's peoples perception of players that do.

Now, let me ask you some questions...
What do you think determines whether or not a player is a great scorer?
What do you think determines whether or not a player is a great rebounder?
What do you think determines whether or not a player is a great passer?
What do you think determines whether or not a player is a great shooter?
What do you think determines whether or not a player is a great shot blocker?
What do you think determines whether or not a player is a great overall player?

shags
12-17-2005, 03:30 PM
Seth,

Would the Detroit Pistons be a better team with Rasheed Wallace starting at PF or with Mehmet Okur starting at PF? In your opinion.

ChicagoJ
12-17-2005, 04:38 PM
I can't believe how dense you're being.

The answer to most of your questions is to answer the questions I've been asking you.

You can't use stats to answer any of these questions, by the way. That's circular reasoning. You can't say, "I think player A is a great passer because he has a high ATO." That's backwards logic. The player has a high ATO because he does x, y, and z well. But there are still guys with a high ATO that nobody in their right mind would call a good passer - guys like AJ that can only make the safe pass, for example, and never even try to throw it into the paint.


Now, let me ask you some questions...
What do you think determines whether or not a player is a great scorer?

Can they create their own shot or do they have to rely on a team setting to get shots?
How many 'pet' moves? How good are each of the pet moves? How much of a dropoff to moves B, C, and D?
Do they have 'pet' moves on each side of the basket? From different spots on the court?
How easy is it for the defender to predict which move is coming?
How good are they at drawing fouls, continuing the shot, and hitting FTs?


What do you think determines whether or not a player is a great rebounder?

Playing in a quicker-paced game with more missed shots from both teams would serve to inflate rebounding numbers, so you certainly just can't look at rebounds from guys on two different teams and make any reasonable conclusions. Wilt averaged like 25+ rebounds per game for his career, but I'm not about to say that Ben Wallace is a lousy rebounder because he averages ten (or more) rebounds less per game.

When I'm evaluating a player's rebounding, I'll look for

A nose for the ball.
Ability to block out, keep other players away from the ball.
Hustle.
Playing closer to the basket (e.g. Pacers guards are supposed to get back on defense and will almost never have offensive rebounds, other teams - different approach and different results.)


What do you think determines whether or not a player is a great passer?

As a former PG, I've got a pretty good sense for whether or not the passer can find the open man and a passing lane, so that's the first thing I look for. If I can see somebody open, and know how I'd get the ball to him, then I expect NBA players to be able to do that as well. Although Travis could not and AJ struggles with that as well.

The second thing I look for is where the guy at the receiving end of the pass gets the ball. Does he have to reach for it? Does he have to give up post position? Mark Jackson always put the ball in Reggie's hands with the seems already lined up so that Reggie was ready to go right into his shooting motion. Is the pass to a moving player caught in stride, or does the player have to stop. That may not be recorded as a turnover, but its a bad pass that can kill a possession.

Derrick McKey was tall enough to throw a post entry pass that could not be intercepted. Jackson (or Workman) would have to lob the ball and it was easy for the defender to break contact with Rik, get in front of him, and steal it. But Derrick could put zip on it.


What do you think determines whether or not a player is a great shooter?

Technique is helpful, but we've seen flat-footed guys with a hitch in their stroke that can light it up, so its not everything.
Actually, the best answer is confidence.
The second most important thing is how well they get their legs into the shot, therefore, conditioning is vital.


What do you think determines whether or not a player is a great shot blocker?

Defensive schemes help a bunch here. The same defensive player, depending on matchups, may be either defending the post or playing the weakside. The easy example is Detroit, where 'Sheed and Ben can both play either position. But if 'Sheed is defending JO in the paint, and Ben is guarding Foster, he's just going to play goalie and wait until a little guy comes at him.

Further, let me just say that I don't think shot blocking is very important overall in terms of evaluating a player's defensive abilities. A large % of blocked shots are rebounded by the offensive team and converted into layups - especially if the shot blocker's momentum carries him away from the rim, leaving a big gaping seam for the offense to fill.


What do you think determines whether or not a player is a great overall player?

The first thing I look for is, how well do they play in the fourth quarter? That tells me two things - are they conditioned?, and how to they handle pressure? Next I'd look for their balance between their offensive and defensive games. I hate calling one-dimensional players "great". Thirdly, I'd look for diversity in their offensive game - how many different ways can a player 'hurt you'? Shooting, driving, passing, offensive rebounds, good-quality screens, etc.

Lastly, I'd just look for whether a player "makes plays" or not.

+ + + + +

I'm not saying that stats have no meaning, but (1) they can be misleading, (2) stats never, ever, ever, ever explain why a player is good or bad or anything, and (3) unless you're the player's agent or playing fantasy basketball (and you can ask the guys around here, I'm absolutely awful at fantasy basketball because I'd rather watch real basketball than read boxscores), individual stats don't mean anything. The most important stat is whether or not a player is contributing to wins and losses. But you can't even measure that by individual plus/minus, because that can be influenced by the other players on the court, too.

As Mark Twain said, there are lies, damned lies, and statistics.

One of my basketball coaches, who was a math teacher, used to say, "Stats are numbers that are only good for telling lies."

And one of my stats professors in college would say, "Give me a set of data, and I can make it say anything I want." Matter of fact, one of our Managing Directors here is a former stats professer and he's, of course, got a great reputation nationally for his ability to take large volumes of data and manipulate it in ways to help our clients win key litigation cases. I don't think he's working today but I could get him to chime in if you're still overly smitten with stats.

abington
12-17-2005, 08:19 PM
I can't believe how dense you're being.

The answer to most of your questions is to answer the questions I've been asking you.

You can't use stats to answer any of these questions, by the way. That's circular reasoning. You can't say, "I think player A is a great passer because he has a high ATO." That's backwards logic. The player has a high ATO because he does x, y, and z well. But there are still guys with a high ATO that nobody in their right mind would call a good passer - guys like AJ that can only make the safe pass, for example, and never even try to throw it into the paint.



Can they create their own shot or do they have to rely on a team setting to get shots?
How many 'pet' moves? How good are each of the pet moves? How much of a dropoff to moves B, C, and D?
Do they have 'pet' moves on each side of the basket? From different spots on the court?
How easy is it for the defender to predict which move is coming?
How good are they at drawing fouls, continuing the shot, and hitting FTs?



Playing in a quicker-paced game with more missed shots from both teams would serve to inflate rebounding numbers, so you certainly just can't look at rebounds from guys on two different teams and make any reasonable conclusions. Wilt averaged like 25+ rebounds per game for his career, but I'm not about to say that Ben Wallace is a lousy rebounder because he averages ten (or more) rebounds less per game.

When I'm evaluating a player's rebounding, I'll look for

A nose for the ball.
Ability to block out, keep other players away from the ball.
Hustle.
Playing closer to the basket (e.g. Pacers guards are supposed to get back on defense and will almost never have offensive rebounds, other teams - different approach and different results.)



As a former PG, I've got a pretty good sense for whether or not the passer can find the open man and a passing lane, so that's the first thing I look for. If I can see somebody open, and know how I'd get the ball to him, then I expect NBA players to be able to do that as well. Although Travis could not and AJ struggles with that as well.

The second thing I look for is where the guy at the receiving end of the pass gets the ball. Does he have to reach for it? Does he have to give up post position? Mark Jackson always put the ball in Reggie's hands with the seems already lined up so that Reggie was ready to go right into his shooting motion. Is the pass to a moving player caught in stride, or does the player have to stop. That may not be recorded as a turnover, but its a bad pass that can kill a possession.

Derrick McKey was tall enough to throw a post entry pass that could not be intercepted. Jackson (or Workman) would have to lob the ball and it was easy for the defender to break contact with Rik, get in front of him, and steal it. But Derrick could put zip on it.



Technique is helpful, but we've seen flat-footed guys with a hitch in their stroke that can light it up, so its not everything.
Actually, the best answer is confidence.
The second most important thing is how well they get their legs into the shot, therefore, conditioning is vital.



Defensive schemes help a bunch here. The same defensive player, depending on matchups, may be either defending the post or playing the weakside. The easy example is Detroit, where 'Sheed and Ben can both play either position. But if 'Sheed is defending JO in the paint, and Ben is guarding Foster, he's just going to play goalie and wait until a little guy comes at him.

Further, let me just say that I don't think shot blocking is very important overall in terms of evaluating a player's defensive abilities. A large % of blocked shots are rebounded by the offensive team and converted into layups - especially if the shot blocker's momentum carries him away from the rim, leaving a big gaping seam for the offense to fill.



The first thing I look for is, how well do they play in the fourth quarter? That tells me two things - are they conditioned?, and how to they handle pressure? Next I'd look for their balance between their offensive and defensive games. I hate calling one-dimensional players "great". Thirdly, I'd look for diversity in their offensive game - how many different ways can a player 'hurt you'? Shooting, driving, passing, offensive rebounds, good-quality screens, etc.

Lastly, I'd just look for whether a player "makes plays" or not.

+ + + + +

I'm not saying that stats have no meaning, but (1) they can be misleading, (2) stats never, ever, ever, ever explain why a player is good or bad or anything, and (3) unless you're the player's agent or playing fantasy basketball (and you can ask the guys around here, I'm absolutely awful at fantasy basketball because I'd rather watch real basketball than read boxscores), individual stats don't mean anything. The most important stat is whether or not a player is contributing to wins and losses. But you can't even measure that by individual plus/minus, because that can be influenced by the other players on the court, too.

As Mark Twain said, there are lies, damned lies, and statistics.

One of my basketball coaches, who was a math teacher, used to say, "Stats are numbers that are only good for telling lies."

And one of my stats professors in college would say, "Give me a set of data, and I can make it say anything I want." Matter of fact, one of our Managing Directors here is a former stats professer and he's, of course, got a great reputation nationally for his ability to take large volumes of data and manipulate it in ways to help our clients win key litigation cases. I don't think he's working today but I could get him to chime in if you're still overly smitten with stats.

Now this my friends...this is a POST!

Ultimate Frisbee
12-17-2005, 11:36 PM
By the way, this trade works:

Indiana:

Outgoing: Artest, Harrison
Incoming: Ginobili


New Jersey:

Outgoing: Carter
Incoming: Ron Artest, Nazr Mohammed


San Antonio:

Outgoing: Nazr Mohammed, Manu Ginobili
Incoming: Vince Carter, David Harrison

Overall, not a bad trade, I just don't see why San Antonio would mess with a good thing.

SycamoreKen
12-18-2005, 05:03 PM
Manu has more basketball smarts between his ears and more heart in his chest than Vince Carter that it isn't even funny. Filling stat lines on losing teams that are going nowhere means nothing. Carter couldn't play for the Spurs because he won't/can't play defense worth a crap.

Ultimate Frisbee
12-19-2005, 03:00 PM
Wait for it...

Mourning
12-19-2005, 03:26 PM
In other words, facts/statistics alone are almost useless, because even i can score 25 points in the paint when Allen, Peja and Croshere are standing around the arc ;)

:-o!!! IF you can get 25 then surely I should be able to get 30 :drool:

:D :D :D

Believe_in_blue
12-19-2005, 10:53 PM
Oh no! I'm being mocked by people who don't even have 1/10th my basketball knowledge! Im so badly hurt!

Here's the average Jay@Section204 post - "Let's trade Ron for Earl Watson!!! Sure, Earl couldnt even start over Jason Williams but I watched him play 6 minutes when the Grizzlies were on TNT back in March of 2003 and he was awesome!! That must mean he's great even though his measured production for his entire career, not to mention the fact thats hes never been given a starting position anywhere, says otherwise!!!"

Production > Everything Else

Period.

Naptown Seth > everybody else

Someone of your brilliance should not be discussing basketball on a message board with those of us who only have 10% of your basketball knowledge. I think you need to quit wasting your time here and start sending your résumé to every NBA who is struggling. Good luck!

SoupIsGood
12-19-2005, 11:05 PM
Oh! I lost count but snap!

Slick Pinkham
12-20-2005, 09:04 AM
San Antonio:

Outgoing: Nazr Mohammed, Manu Ginobili
Incoming: Vince Carter, David Harrison



Hmmm..

Nazr >> David in every single phase of the game
Manu >>> Vince in every way but scoring and taking bad shots

San Antonio would never even think aboout this.

Shade
12-20-2005, 10:46 AM
Manu was easily the best player on the court for three of the Spurs four wins in The Finals last spring.

Quoted for truth.

Shade
12-20-2005, 11:28 AM
Sextuple snap!

Mmm...sextuple snap... :drool:

Ultimate Frisbee
12-20-2005, 03:31 PM
Hmmm..

Nazr >> David in every single phase of the game
Manu >>> Vince in every way but scoring and taking bad shots

San Antonio would never even think aboout this.


Very true. Unless Ginobili were for some reason unhappy... Just finding a scenario that works to some extent...

SoupIsGood
12-20-2005, 04:33 PM
Nazr is now a third string center also...... just so ya know......


we don't want another lazy and apathetic guy..... if ya know what I mean....

Ultimate Frisbee
12-20-2005, 04:59 PM
Septuple snap!

What comes next? :-o

larry
12-20-2005, 08:40 PM
u need 2.
duncan & robinson
duncan & manu
didn't manu hang up over 50 in the playoffs? just cause carter can jump & dunk? he does not win at this level. never has.how deep has carter gone in the playoffs? and yes manu's play would look lesser w/o duncan...

ChicagoJ
01-04-2006, 01:10 PM
Both.