|
Post by eja117 on Jul 27, 2006 8:43:51 GMT -5
First of all let me say that dating Pamela Anderson over kathy Griffin would be just nuts. It has nothing to do with red hair. It's cause Griffin would be a better girlfriend. She is funnier with a better personality, isn't a bimbo but is just bimbo enough to be funny, and most important of all is that Kathy doesn't have any STDs. pam does.
PP has his own disease. It's called swing man's disease. It's when a swing who is good gets paid way too much, and cripples his team and can never lead it to a championship. Cleveland is way way way closer to a championship than us, and not cause of Bron and their swings. It's cause they actually have bigs who can play and Z is an important part of that.
yes I would much rather have this MUCH
Z Perk GG Huges Rondo
than this PP Wally Perk Al J Rondo
You can't possibly say the first roster isn't better and far closer to a championship.
Also Z's fg% was .506 Better than Jermaine O'Neal, .001 worse than Krstic, .003 worse than Amare Stoudamire's career percentage, .003 worse than Ben Wallace, .14 worse than Perk, .13 worse than Brendan haywood, .004 worse than Chris Bosh, a lot better than PJ Brown, a lot better than Camby, better than Dampier, a lot better than Channing Frye, and a lot better than Jammal Magloire, way better than Al Harrington, .007 worse than Udonis haslem, and better than AL J. If he is an unnaceptably bad shooter than so are these guys
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2006 11:56:45 GMT -5
There was never a question about Ilgausas shooting percentage. Or, his array of shots he takes. The only problem I have with him is his horrendous defense. Yeah, He'll give you 15 pts 7 boards but he'll give up 20 pts 10 boards at the same time. Not to mention when it comes to playoff times, he'll disappear when this team would need him the most.
So, you rather have a volume shooter in Hughes over Wally? I rather have my SF shoot 50% from the field shooting roughly 12-15 times a game while Hughes needs 17-20 shots so he can give you 20 pts per game. Not to mention he's not a good defender as his steals indicate. He gambles way too much just like Ricky Dazvis. In fact, Hughes is only a richer form of Ricky Davis. We're basically giving away 1 and 2 options for two 2nd options players.
Basically, you're lineup tells me we'll be the Boston Celtics in search for a Paul Pierce. That's the way I see it.
We'll be no closer with a championship than we're before your trade. Unless you really think Gerald Green will be the next tracy McGrady.
|
|
|
Post by eja117 on Jul 27, 2006 13:01:31 GMT -5
First of all you have god points. i would never say i think Larry Hughes is better than Wally cause he's not. I mostly included them for salary reasons. The main thrust of my trade was a way over paid wing who never won anything (PP) for an absolutely needed all star center if we ever want to win a championship (Z).
Second you are absolutely right that the most important stat that is not easy to find is opponents field goal % which is why I showed Z gets good steals and blocks/game, but definitely not good rebounds compared to what you expect.
Yes. I do think GG can be a very good wing in this league. So good that it absolutely does not justify paying a 30 year old wing max contract money for 5 years when we could just keep a much younger GG and pay an all star big man.
Also it was said here that Z "isn't much of a paint presence" so I got fg% stats.
Also in relation to the Pam Anderson vs Kathy Griffin scenario. Let's say that a typical guy needed a team of girlfriends to win the girlfriend championship and you absolutley must have a red head to win. In the mean time Pam anderson blondes are sexy and fun, but easy to find, then yes it would make sense to trade TWO Pam Andersons for a Kathy griffin. That is what is going on here. It would especially make sense if you had a young Paris Hilton in the pipeline, which we do. Pam Anderson is washed up and overpaid. A movie with kathy griffin and Paris Hilton would be way better than a movie with Pam Anderson. There is just more talent between Griffin and Paris than Pam. Seriously, Baywatch was never good. Simple life was way better, as is My life on the D list with Griffin. Plus at this point who would you rather have in Playboy? Pam who we've all seen a million times or Griffin? See?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2006 13:24:51 GMT -5
I agree we need to win a championship by acquiring an all-star big man. I'm just saying Ilgauskas isn't the guy that'll give us that unless we're able to keep Paul Pierce in the process.
Unless we can get Ilgauskas with our other pieces then I don't see us trying to get him. Gooden on the other hand can be obtain and at a smaller scale. BUT, we'll still need one of our young kids to step up as a everyday starter and possibly be an all-star in this league.
If I had to choose between having sex with Pam Anderson or Kathy Griffin I would go with Pam. Yes, he is a beautiful blonde but she's like the ultimate Blonde. Like Pierce, yes you have girls who might resembles her (Hughes, Michael Redd) but they aren't Pam Anderson. You got your good swingman and you got your all-around swingman. Pierce is top 3 in his position while Z is probably top 10 but more likely top 15 at his position. I rather keep the better player because you aren't going to find anyone better than Paul while Ilgauskas, 15pts 7 rebs isn't an hard achievement especially when you have raef lafrentz whose capable putting up those numbers.
|
|
|
Post by freshnthehouse on Jul 27, 2006 13:34:56 GMT -5
Cleveland is way way way closer to a championship than us, and not cause of Bron and their swings. It's cause they actually have bigs who can play and Z is an important part of that. Youve got to be kidding. I know you dont believe this. You take Lebron of this team it wins 15 games. You take Z off of this team and it still wins 45 games. Did you watch the play-offs? Lebron carried that team on his back. Yes I can. I doubt that the first team wins 25 games this year. Who are you gonna run plays for? GG isnt near starting material on a good team yet. Rondo hasnt played a game yet. I'll def. take the team that has a player that can carry my team. Im not saying that the second team is a sure fire contender, but it looks a lot better t han the first one. A good FG% doesnt equal being a pressence in the paint. He has a good field goal % because he gets a lot of wide open looks thanks to lebron's driving and dishing. He has a high% the same way that Mark Blount has a high %. They can both nail a mid-range jumper. THis is not to say that Z isnt a good player. He is(THough I would still take Perk's upside over him). However, he is not even close to leading a team anywhere except the lottory.
|
|
|
Post by freshnthehouse on Jul 27, 2006 13:43:40 GMT -5
The main thrust of my trade was a way over paid wing who never won anything (PP) for an absolutely needed all star center if we ever want to win a championship (Z). I wouldnt say that Pierce is way overpaid. Im not exactly thrilled with a guy getting the max when hes not a top 5 player, but the guy is good. I'd say top 10-12 good. If the market for swinmen like Larry Hughes and Wally are 12-15 mill a year, Id gladly take Paul over them at max money. Also, Paul may not have won a championship, but hes been further in the play-offs than Z. PP isnt 30, Hes 28. So by the time His contract is over, he'll be 33. So, barring injury, he's going to be very productive the entire length of the contract. Also it was said here that Z "isn't much of a paint presence" so I got fg% stats. Man, what a monster i started with this pan and kathy nonsense. But while were on the subject, let me say that id rather pop my eyes out with a spoon than see kathy griffen naked. Kathy Griffen looks like a middle aged man in drag.
|
|
|
Post by eja117 on Jul 27, 2006 14:32:18 GMT -5
I disagree that GG isn't ready to be a starter on a good team. Most good teams have good big men. If GG had started for Miami instead of Walker last year, they still win the championship. I admit PP and Wally would destroy GG and Hughes THIS year, but not in two years. They would beat them that year. The year after that I could easily see GG and Hughes winning. In the mean time Al j would want a raise. Of course by the time GG and Hughes could handle PP Z would be like 34, so I admit we need a younger center than that, which means I lose the aargument. But the good thing about what I accomplished is getting a max contract guy off the team to make room for GG. I should have also tried to figure out a way to get cap room for an all star big guy instead of bringing in a 31 year old. Really it wouldn't have been PP getting replaced by GG. It was Hughes replacing him and GG replacing Wally. Then in a year GG overtakes Hughes and suddenly it doesn't seem so bad. The basic gist of what I am saying is that if you have all star big men (good ones mind you) you could win with shoe string wings. That's why New jersey went nowhere in the playoffs. No bigs. Carter, Kidd, jefferson. Doesn't matter. Completely worthless with no bigs. I also would take Perk's upside to Z. When I was a sophomore who had just turned 20 PP was drafted as a junior. The guy has got to be 29ish. And for the record I think kathy g is cute and funny. Pam looks like she comes from the planet of Plastosilicon with a big head. I'm not saying I'd take kathy over Pam in an STD free world, but Pam has one so I think that means kathy wins. Just for you Fresh www.tvsquad.com/images/2005/09/kathy.jpgwww.glitterguru.com/suzette/portfolio/images/kafter2.jpg
|
|
|
Post by freshnthehouse on Jul 27, 2006 16:26:04 GMT -5
I disagree that GG isn't ready to be a starter on a good team. Most good teams have good big men. If GG had started for Miami instead of Walker last year, they still win the championship. He wouldnt have started for Heat. Posey wouldve gotten all of the minutes at the 3 if walker wasnt there. Green was completely lost last year on D. Stackhouse wouldve averaged 60 a game against him in the finals. A 30 year old Pierce is still going to be better than a 22 year old Green. Why not just keep things the way they are and resign Green with the money we free up from letting Wally walk? Id much rather have a combo of Green/Pierce than than Green/Hughes. And, in the time it takes for Green to become a star(IF he ever does), my guess is that perk would be getting a lions share of the minutes over Z anyhow. I'll agree with that, but I completely disagree that Z is that kind of big. You need a hall of fame big man like shaq or duncan that can handle the lions share of the scoring and dominate the boards. Z is far from that guy. And the more i think of it, I can think of one championship team that didnt have at least one all-star caliber swingman. Hes 28. I was surprised as well. He turns 29 sometime in the fall.
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Jul 27, 2006 23:09:58 GMT -5
Z is more of a complimentary player, than an all-star. W/ the all-star voting rules as they are, some years some players are all-stars who shouldn't be.
|
|