PDA

View Full Version : ESPN Player Profiles are Good Reads...



docpaul
10-14-2008, 03:42 PM
During lunch today, I was going through the ESPN player profiles. Not sure if any of you have gone through these, but I think they're pretty darn good reads... for example, here's a tidbit or two from Danny Granger's that I hadn't put together on my own:

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=2760


He also needs to try going around people rather than through them. Granger committed 35 offensive fouls last season, the 10th-most in the league; among perimeter players only Denver's Carmelo Anthony had more, and he had the rock far more often than Granger.

He also needs to create a little more action for the others. While Granger's own scoring numbers were quite good, he was 52nd out 63 small forwards in Assist Ratio and 56th in Pure Point Rating. Part of being a go-to scorer is creating shots for guys who can't create their own, and he's fallen down on that part of the job.But then, at the end, they say he's most like *Tim Thomas* at his age? Ack! I hope that's purely based on statistics?!

Here's a quick link to the rest of them:

Baston - http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=44
Croshere - http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=167
Daniels - http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=2200
Davis - http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=2212
Diener - http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=2749
Dunleavy - http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=1708
Ford - http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=1979
Foster - http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=250
Graham - http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=2832
Granger - http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=2760
Hibbert - http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=3436
Jack - http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=2768
Jones - http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=402
McRoberts - http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=3220
Murphy - http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=1013
Nesterovic - http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=598
Rush - http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=3457
Tinsley - http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=1024

Pacers4Life
10-14-2008, 05:51 PM
good find, thanks for sharing

GrangerRanger
10-14-2008, 05:55 PM
I lost respect when they said he was like Tim Thomas at this point. Tim was averaging 8 points a go and has never averaged over 17.

How do some of these guys get there jobs?

Major Cold
10-14-2008, 06:10 PM
What about a glorified Tim Thomas?

Major Cold
10-14-2008, 06:12 PM
THey said Hibbert will fill in the backup void of DH. They suck, but some of the things are alright.

Swingman
10-14-2008, 06:25 PM
Is Hibbert really one of the slowest guys in the league?


I thought there were comments about how much weight he lost since his last game at UConn due to his daily workouts.

I have a hard time believing he's even close to being as slow as Shaq and he plays for Pheonix.

McKeyFan
10-14-2008, 07:07 PM
I have a hard time seeing Granger as our perrennial go to guy.

A second guy, sure. But unless he continues to add serious offensive skills this year and following, he just doesn't have the arsenal.

Then again, he didn't have much of an outside shot his first year, it seemed. That definitely turned around. So I will give him a chance to prove himself.

Anthem
10-14-2008, 07:58 PM
I have a hard time seeing Granger as our perrennial go to guy.

A second guy, sure. But unless he continues to add serious offensive skills this year and following, he just doesn't have the arsenal.

Then again, he didn't have much of an outside shot his first year, it seemed. That definitely turned around. So I will give him a chance to prove himself.
Nope, I'm with ya. He seems like the perfect #2 guy. That looks like Rush's ceiling as well, and Hibby looks great but not like Dwight Howard. So it seems like either we need Ford to become one of the best PGs in the NBA or we need to suddenly acquire a top-flight PF.

But we've got time.... at least we're headed in the right direction.

RandyWrinkles
10-14-2008, 08:20 PM
I agree about Granger being the number 2. He reminds me a bit of Iguodala (not the athleticism part). Great player but can't dominate a game. Well, maybe some games but not most of them. The 76ers did EXACTLY what we need to do by picking up Brand. Like others have said, we are a PF away from being pretty good.

McKeyFan
10-14-2008, 09:06 PM
I agree about Granger being the number 2. He reminds me a bit of Iguodala (not the athleticism part). Great player but can't dominate a game. Well, maybe some games but not most of them. The 76ers did EXACTLY what we need to do by picking up Brand. Like others have said, we are a PF away from being pretty good.

Brand was a great acquisition, but, in my opinion, Iggy is far better at being a primary offensive weapon than Danny.

Iggy can create, and he has a midrange game. Danny doesn't have much of either. Would you swap Iggy for Danny? I sure would.

Bball
10-14-2008, 10:31 PM
Nope, I'm with ya. He seems like the perfect #2 guy. That looks like Rush's ceiling as well, and Hibby looks great but not like Dwight Howard. So it seems like either we need Ford to become one of the best PGs in the NBA or we need to suddenly acquire a top-flight PF.

But we've got time.... at least we're headed in the right direction.

What if we develop a solid team and then use the team concept to beat people even in crunch time?

-Bball

MrSparko
10-14-2008, 10:46 PM
Even the Pistons and Spurs have/had all-stars.

(Quite a few between them actually)

Anthem
10-15-2008, 01:19 AM
Even the Pistons and Spurs have/had all-stars.

(Quite a few between them actually)
Zactly. You want a solid team like what? The Pistons? They had 4 all-stars a few years back, and all of those guys deserved to get in. The Spurs? Duncan, Manu, and Parker are all better than anyone on this team.

Playing together gets you into the playoffs. Winning it all takes talent.

Quis
10-15-2008, 02:44 AM
A nice write-up on Troy Murphy. For all the hate people like to spew about his FG%, he ranked 15th in the league in true shooting percentage amongst all power forwards, well above average. There's also some flattering remarks made regarding his rebounding, assists and low number of turnovers. Pretty much everything except for defense.

Mourning
10-15-2008, 03:08 AM
I didn't think the profile comments weren't as bad generally either, could just be me though.

Speed
10-15-2008, 07:31 AM
It basically says Jarret Jack isn't a point guard, but a shooting guard, interesting.

I hope TJ Ford starts to get some major assists here in the preseason. I love the penetrate at will, but it needs to be to set up other guys too. We'll see.

McKeyFan
10-15-2008, 11:10 AM
I hope TJ Ford starts to get some major assists here in the preseason. I love the penetrate at will, but it needs to be to set up other guys too. We'll see.

Take that complaint to Austin Croshere.

McKeyFan
10-15-2008, 11:14 AM
A nice write-up on Troy Murphy. For all the hate people like to spew about his FG%, he ranked 15th in the league in true shooting percentage amongst all power forwards, well above average. There's also some flattering remarks made regarding his rebounding, assists and low number of turnovers. Pretty much everything except for defense.

What is a "straight on" three point attempt?

spreedom
10-15-2008, 12:39 PM
What is a "straight on" three point attempt?

I believe it's just a bomb from the top of the key...

JayRedd
10-15-2008, 01:06 PM
All you need to know about Marquis Daniels.


Daniels dipped to 43.0 percent from the floor, aided in part by Jim O'Brien's emphasis on 3-pointers -- he's a career 25.2 percent marksman from downtown, but tried 102 last season, nearly as many as in the previous four years combined. And his percentage on 2-pointers also dipped, as did his free-throw tries -- continuing the steady decline since his breakout rookie year.

Putnam
10-15-2008, 01:27 PM
What if we develop a solid team and then use the team concept to beat people even in crunch time?

-Bball


:dance::pepper::dance2::fro::guitar::jump::love::t hankyou::jester::carrot::pineapple:cucumber:



You and John Wooden

croz24
10-15-2008, 02:27 PM
granger still needs to go in order for the pacers to have a chance at acquiring a top talent that could lead us deep in the playoffs and to championships. and he definitely needs to go before his value decreases tremendously with a highly overpaid contract.

Hicks
10-15-2008, 02:30 PM
You can't say Granger's not a top talent on one hand, then turn around and expect one of the 29 other teams to just give us one for him.....

croz24
10-15-2008, 03:06 PM
^

that's not what i said

McKeyFan
10-15-2008, 03:10 PM
granger still needs to go in order for the pacers to have a chance at acquiring a top talent that could lead us deep in the playoffs and to championships. and he definitely needs to go before his value decreases tremendously with a highly overpaid contract.

I agree with this.

I like Dun over Granger, and Danny's trade value is higher. We could score the low post threat piece we need to really contend. JMO.

Infinite MAN_force
10-15-2008, 11:08 PM
Im sick of abstract speculation about trading Granger. Please propose a trade that you think another team WOULD do that would make us a contender. Im dying to hear it.

Merz
10-16-2008, 03:01 AM
We are most likely not going to get someone as valuable to this team as Danny is by trading him. If Danny truly is a non all-star small forward (the easiest postion to fill in the league) no team will trade an all-star calibur low post threat power forward for him. It's not going to happen.

Danny has more value to the Pacers than any other team in the league.

Many of you seem to forget the type of team we had in the '90s. People made a big deal about Reggie not being able to create and being just a shooter. Rik Smits was flawed. Mark Jackson was too slow, etc. That was a team that fit together very well. It can happen again.

Yes the Pistons had all-stars on their team but that was after they had established themselves as a team. Richard Hamilton and Chauncey Billups may have never been all-stars if they stayed on their previous teams. Neither was considered a go to scorer or number one option at the age of 25.

Trading Granger or keeping Granger is not the only option this team is going to have over the next few seasons. They can improve in other ways.

Trading Granger now just makes no sense for a team trying to reastablish its fan base, because like it or not he is the face of the current franchise.

Infinite MAN_force
10-16-2008, 10:46 AM
Thats a good point about the pistons. Team success can often determine who makes the all star team. If your one of the top three teams in your conference your two best players are probably going to become all stars.

Hicks
10-16-2008, 10:51 AM
Thats a good point about the pistons. Team success can often determine who makes the all star team. If your one of the top three teams in your conference your two best players are probably going to become all stars.

Exactly. They weren't Kobe Bryant level all-stars, if you will. They were benefitting from the team success they helped each other create. Put those four on separate teams that aren't playoff contenders, and none of them are even considered all-stars with their numbers.

Remember Jalen Rose? 20-5-5..... didn't make the all-star team. Because, if I recall correctly, it was the 41-41 Pacers of 2000-2001.

Too often, people like to use the all-star label as this blanket endorsement of awesomeness, when it's much more subjective than that.

If our team came together and became a serious player in the east, guys like Granger and Ford and Dunleavy would get all-star considerations, too. But unless the TEAM makes that improvement, they won't. They're not the kind of guys who will DEMAND a place on the all-star team, but if they COLLECTIVELY lead the Pacers to success, they will get consideration.

McKeyFan
10-16-2008, 10:54 AM
I'm not all caught up in All-Star this and that. I just want a guy on our team we can throw it to, and he can find a way to score.

:whoknows:

Hicks
10-16-2008, 11:09 AM
I'm not all caught up in All-Star this and that. I just want a guy on our team we can throw it to, and he can find a way to score.

:whoknows:

Who in the NBA can do that and is NOT usually an all-star?

McKeyFan
10-16-2008, 01:16 PM
Who in the NBA can do that and is NOT usually an all-star?

An interesting way to look at it is by FG percentage, of which JO was abysmal.

Here's a list below of the top 50. (Sorry it's a bit choppy).

Of that list, I would entertain trades for these two that might be obtainable:

Diaw (12)
Deng (21)

There's a couple of 2 guards I'd look at as well, but I don't think that's what we need right now.

1 M. Moore, NJN 79 9.8 3.9 6.4 308 506 .609 308 505 .610 1.53 .609
2 D. Howard, ORL 82 17.6 6.4 10.6 526 873 .603 525 871 .603 1.65 .603
3 A. Biedrins, GSW 82 9.5 4.2 7.1 348 581 .599 348 581 .599 1.35 .599
4 E. Curry, NYK 81 19.5 7.2 12.5 585 1016 .576 584 1015 .575 1.55 .576
5 A. Stoudemire, PHO 82 20.4 7.4 12.9 607 1055 .575 607 1052 .577 1.58 .575
6 C. Boozer, UTH 74 20.9 8.7 15.6 647 1154 .561 647 1154 .561 1.34 .561
7 A. Bogut, MIL 66 12.3 5.3 9.5 348 629 .553 347 624 .556 1.29 .554
8 R. Patterson, MIL 81 14.7 5.9 10.7 475 867 .548 472 848 .557 1.38 .550
9 T. Duncan, SAS 80 20.0 7.7 14.1 618 1131 .546 617 1122 .550 1.41 .547
10 S. Dalembert, PHI 82 10.7 4.3 8.0 356 658 .541 356 656 .543 1.34 .541
11 P. Gasol, MEM 59 20.8 7.8 14.5 462 858 .538 459 847 .542 1.43 .540
12 B. Diaw, PHO 73 9.7 4.2 7.8 306 569 .538 291 524 .555 1.25 .551
13 E. Brand, LAC 80 20.5 8.1 15.1 645 1211 .533 644 1210 .532 1.36 .533
14 S. Nash, PHO 76 18.6 6.8 12.8 517 971 .532 361 628 .575 1.45 .613
15 E. Okafor, CHA 67 14.4 5.9 11.0 394 740 .532 394 740 .532 1.30 .532
16 C. Wilcox, SEA 82 13.5 5.3 10.0 433 819 .529 433 813 .533 1.35 .529
17 H. Warrick, MEM 82 12.7 4.5 8.7 373 712 .524 373 704 .530 1.47 .524
18 S. Marion, PHO 80 17.5 7.0 13.4 561 1071 .524 481 819 .587 1.31 .561
19 T. Parker, SAS 77 18.6 7.4 14.2 570 1096 .520 555 1058 .525 1.30 .527
20 G. Hill, ORL 65 14.4 5.3 10.2 342 660 .518 340 648 .525 1.42 .520
21 L. Deng, CHI 82 18.8 7.7 14.9 630 1218 .517 629 1211 .519 1.26 .518
22 M. Yao, HOU 48 25.0 8.8 17.1 423 819 .516 423 817 .518 1.47 .516
23 A. Jefferson, BOS 69 16.0 6.6 12.8 453 882 .514 453 881 .514 1.26 .514
24 M. Blount, MIN 82 12.3 5.2 10.2 427 839 .509 418 808 .517 1.20 .514
25 G. Wallace, CHA 72 18.1 6.6 13.2 478 952 .502 439 832 .528 1.37 .523
26 D. Nowitzki, DAL 78 24.6 8.6 17.2 673 1341 .502 601 1168 .515 1.43 .529
27 N. Collison, SEA 82 9.6 3.9 7.8 318 636 .500 318 634 .502 1.24 .500
28 C. Bosh, TOR 69 22.6 7.9 15.9 543 1094 .496 531 1059 .501 1.43 .502
29 U. Haslem, MIA 79 10.7 4.5 9.1 353 717 .492 353 713 .495 1.18 .492
30 M. Harpring, UTH 77 11.6 4.2 8.5 322 656 .491 309 617 .501 1.36 .501
31 D. Wade, MIA 51 27.4 9.3 18.9 472 962 .491 451 883 .511 1.45 .502
32 Z. Ilgauskas, CLE 78 11.9 4.9 10.2 385 793 .485 385 792 .486 1.17 .485
33 J. Terry, DAL 81 16.7 6.3 13.1 514 1063 .484 352 693 .508 1.27 .560
34 A. Parker, TOR 73 12.4 4.5 9.4 328 687 .477 213 426 .500 1.31 .561
35 L. James, CLE 78 27.3 9.9 20.8 772 1621 .476 673 1311 .513 1.32 .507
36 L. Barbosa, PHO 80 18.1 6.6 13.9 529 1111 .476 339 673 .504 1.30 .562
37 D. West, NOR 52 18.3 7.3 15.2 377 792 .476 369 767 .481 1.20 .481
38 K. Garnett, MIN 76 22.4 8.4 17.6 638 1341 .476 626 1285 .487 1.27 .480
39 C. Anthony, DEN 65 28.9 10.6 22.4 691 1453 .476 651 1304 .499 1.29 .489
40 M. Ellis, GSW 77 16.5 6.2 13.1 480 1010 .475 441 867 .509 1.26 .495
41 S. Abdur-Rahim, SAC 80 9.9 3.9 8.2 310 654 .474 307 634 .484 1.21 .476
42 M. Camby, DEN 70 11.2 4.5 9.4 312 659 .473 312 657 .475 1.19 .473
43 K. Martin, SAC 80 20.2 6.3 13.3 505 1067 .473 378 734 .515 1.52 .533
44 D. Gooden, CLE 80 11.1 4.6 9.8 371 784 .473 370 778 .476 1.13 .474
45 J. Johnson, ATL 57 25.0 9.4 20.0 536 1139 .471 417 827 .504 1.25 .523
46 L. Odom, LAL 56 15.9 5.7 12.2 319 681 .468 265 499 .531 1.31 .508
47 R. Hamilton, DET 75 19.8 7.3 15.6 547 1170 .468 503 1041 .483 1.27 .486
48 R. Gomes, BOS 73 12.1 4.6 9.9 338 723 .468 322 681 .473 1.22 .479
49 Z. Randolph, POR 68 23.6 8.8 18.9 600 1286 .467 586 1238 .473 1.25 .472
50 A. Miller, DEN/PHI

Mourning
10-16-2008, 01:34 PM
Hold on just to get this straight... you would trade Danny for a package centered around Boris Diaw?

Hicks
10-16-2008, 02:38 PM
Neither Diaw or Deng is going to be able to be handed the ball and create offense. Their %'s are high because they either feed off of other players who actually do create offense (and in turn, draw in defenses) or through the assistance of screens and set plays.

McKeyFan
10-16-2008, 04:24 PM
You know what's a real bummer. Ike Diogu was really, really good at scoring in the low post.

I guess he must have been as dumb as a rock.

JayRedd
10-16-2008, 04:36 PM
Neither Diaw or Deng is going to be able to be handed the ball and create offense. Their %'s are high because they either feed off of other players who actually do create offense (and in turn, draw in defenses) or through the assistance of screens and set plays.

Deng can certainly create a lot more offense than Danny.

Diaw is not very good at anything.

Hicks
10-16-2008, 06:15 PM
How do you see Deng creating?

ChicagoJ
10-16-2008, 06:29 PM
I'm not all caught up in All-Star this and that. I just want a guy on our team we can throw it to, and he can find a way to score.

:whoknows:

So you do want Jalen Rose?

JayRedd
10-16-2008, 06:56 PM
How do you see Deng creating?

Luol is a penetrator with a killer first step who pushes the issue off the bounce and gets to the rim with regularity. He's adept with both the crossover and spin dribble and uses those with a mix of quickness and deception to consistently beat defenders with the dribble and has the speed, power and ball control to split weak double teams and finish in traffic.

Danny remains primarily a jumpshooter who essentially finishes plays on the perimeter with either a catch-and-shoot release or using a head/ball fake and one or two repositioning dribbles to find space to get off the J. On the rare instances he does penetrate, it is usually set up by a shot-fake and occurs situationally when he catches his defender off balance or one a sloppy rotation. And if his first move is stymied, he generally doesn't follow it up with any secondary move and instead pulls up for the jumper or passes off. He lacks the ability -- or at least the desire -- to ever receive a pass, face up his man, knuckle up and go by him.

Luol, on the other hand, is very capable of being the guy you give the ball to at the top of key and run a four-down clear-out set at the end of the quarter and just say "score," ala Paul Pierce, Vince or Gilbert.

In terms of comparing their respective styles to other second tier perimeter guys, Luol plays more like, say, Richard Jefferson or Caron Butler, who like to force the issue and dribble into the paint, where as Danny plays more like Michael Redd or Rashard Lewis, who thrive in open space on the outside and focus on moving without the ball.

Luol is also fairly comfortable playing in the high or low post and has a few decent back-to-the-basket moves along with a good quick-reverse-pivot-face-up-and-go game.

McKeyFan
10-16-2008, 07:55 PM
So you do want Jalen Rose?

Yeah.

I wasn't crazy about lots of Jalen's game or his mouth. But without the option of going to him whenever necessary to let him create and score, that team achieves a lot less than they did.

McKeyFan
10-17-2008, 10:36 AM
Deng can certainly create a lot more offense than Danny.

Diaw is not very good at anything.

I think Diaw may have some real potential as a scorer.

I wouldn't trade Danny for him, but maybe someone else. The Suns need some vet backups on the perimeter. Maybe Marquis (an expiring) and filler might interest them?

This may be a risk worth looking at.

count55
10-17-2008, 11:26 AM
I think Diaw may have some real potential as a scorer.

I wouldn't trade Danny for him, but maybe someone else. The Suns need some vet backups on the perimeter. Maybe Marquis (an expiring) and filler might interest them?

This may be a risk worth looking at.

Boris Diaw...4 years at $9 million per year.

:ballchain:

McKeyFan
10-17-2008, 11:30 AM
Boris Diaw...4 years at $9 million per year.

:ballchain:

I hear ya.

But I'd like your opinion on a bball level apart from the contract.

Diaw has the ability to score from any area of the court (except three). He could become that go-to guy in terms of ability. To date, it seems he hasn't developed the mentality to be that guy.

JOB has a rep for bringing guys like that into their own (Dun, Granger, etc.)

Thoughts?

avoidingtheclowns
10-17-2008, 11:32 AM
I think Diaw may have some real potential as a scorer.

I wouldn't trade Danny for him, but maybe someone else. The Suns need some vet backups on the perimeter. Maybe Marquis (an expiring) and filler might interest them?

This may be a risk worth looking at.

Exhibit A. horrendous contract
Exhibit B. he's a 6'8" SF
Exhibit C. can't play defense - surrenders too easily

count55
10-17-2008, 12:08 PM
I hear ya.

But I'd like your opinion on a bball level apart from the contract.

Diaw has the ability to score from any area of the court (except three). He could become that go-to guy in terms of ability. To date, it seems he hasn't developed the mentality to be that guy.

JOB has a rep for bringing guys like that into their own (Dun, Granger, etc.)

Thoughts?

I think Diaw is kind of a facilitator-type guy. Jack of all trades, master of none.

When I had posted my "Bet I won't refuse an offer for Jamaal Tinsley" thread on RealGM, one of the deals I went back and forth on (along with CableKC) was the one (well, ones) involving Diaw.

Contractually, he extends the Tinsley misery, but it's possible that I could be talked into believing that he could return to his peak performance with the Suns. His problem there is that he blossomed when Amare was out, but was unnecessary (or, more accurately, "in the way") when Amare returned. With Amare back, there was no need or the space for him to do what he does.

However, I also have long suspected that he was a hothouse flower. He gained a disproportionate amount of benefit from the Suns, their system, and playing with Steve Nash. I saw him play repeatedly in Atlanta. I didn't think he was under-utilized, or mis-utilized there. I just thought he was horrible. I've always been concerned that, outside of Phoenix, the clock would strike midnight, and he'd turn back into a pumpkin.

As to him being a "go-to-guy", I've seen nothing, at all, to indicate that he would even remotely have that potential. He's a role player with an ugly contract.

PacerGuy
10-17-2008, 12:28 PM
I like any Diaw deal that includes Barbosa! :D
If we could just move Tinsley (somewhere - anywhere), & if J.Jack ends up playing himself into a higher price range, I could see a deal that Barbosa would "replace" Jack. (Talk about speed w/ a Ford/Barbosa PG combo!)
The other thing is while both are a year longer then Murph/Dun's deals, they do both expire just as Hibbert & Rush do, so provided they are not busts, it would not be the worst thing, & we could give PHX cap space for '10.
Of course, this only makes sense if you think Diaw can play the 4 in JOB's system. If Yes, I like it, as Diaw is a compliment to Murph. If Not, forget the whole darn thing.
Just thinking out loud.....

count55
10-17-2008, 12:43 PM
I like any Diaw deal that includes Barbosa! :D
If we could just move Tinsley (somewhere - anywhere), & if J.Jack ends up playing himself into a higher price range, I could see a deal that Barbosa would "replace" Jack. (Talk about speed w/ a Ford/Barbosa PG combo!)
The other thing is while both are a year longer then Murph/Dun's deals, they do both expire just as Hibbert & Rush do, so provided they are not busts, it would not be the worst thing, & we could give PHX cap space for '10.
Of course, this only makes sense if you think Diaw can play the 4 in JOB's system. If Yes, I like it, as Diaw is a compliment to Murph. If Not, forget the whole darn thing.
Just thinking out loud.....

Without speaking to any specific deal, I don't particularly like Barbosa. He is not a point guard. He is a better player than Jack, but he's basically an undersized scoring guard...a faster Ben Gordon.

He doesn't really excite me, nor does the idea of sinking $27mm over the next four years into a 'tweener without a clearly defined role.

PacerGuy
10-17-2008, 12:49 PM
Without speaking to any specific deal, I don't particularly like Barbosa. He is not a point guard. He is a better player than Jack, but he's basically an undersized scoring guard...a faster Ben Gordon.

He doesn't really excite me, nor does the idea of sinking $27mm over the next four years into a 'tweener without a clearly defined role.

I can go w/ that opinion too.
I have only seen parts of Barbosa & of Diaw's games, so I will trust you here.
As I said, just thinking out loud......

count55
10-17-2008, 01:24 PM
I can go w/ that opinion too.
I have only seen parts of Barbosa & of Diaw's games, so I will trust you here.
As I said, just thinking out loud......

As long as you remember that it's my opinion only.

I can, and have, been proven wrong before. I never expected Jalen or (to a lesser extent) JO to amount to anything. While they ultimately had expectations (and, arguably, pay) that exceeded their accomplishments, there's little argument that they were good, productive players that helped this franchise.

While we're on the record, I also thought (at the time of the trade), that Murph & Diogu would end up being the keepers, and that we'd desperately need to dump Junior's contract sooner, rather than later. Furthermore, I was convinced that JO was ready to play 70+ games last year, and that Shawne had an excellent opportunity to play a Detlef Schrempf-type sixth man role.

I have learned over the years that it is less important to be proven right than it is to actually find out what's right.

McKeyFan
10-17-2008, 01:50 PM
As long as you remember that it's my opinion only.

I can, and have, been proven wrong before. I never expected Jalen or (to a lesser extent) JO to amount to anything. While they ultimately had expectations (and, arguably, pay) that exceeded their accomplishments, there's little argument that they were good, productive players that helped this franchise.

While we're on the record, I also thought (at the time of the trade), that Murph & Diogu would end up being the keepers, and that we'd desperately need to dump Junior's contract sooner, rather than later. Furthermore, I was convinced that JO was ready to play 70+ games last year, and that Shawne had an excellent opportunity to play a Detlef Schrempf-type sixth man role.

I have learned over the years that it is less important to be proven right than it is to actually find out what's right.

Wow.

That kind of full disclosure is refreshing.