|
On December 13 2011 08:46 cLutZ wrote:
How is CP3 worth EG + anything good? Gordon's contract is awesome, he's younger, has huge upside (that he has started to come into). Insanity.
Well Chris Paul is worth Eric Gordon alone  But Eric Gordon, Eric Bledsoe, Aminu, Kaman + Minny's first rounder is way too much. They'd be taking all of the Clipper's depth and that prized future pick. The Clippers should turn that down and keep EJ at all costs.
|
On December 13 2011 08:47 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 07:03 slyboogie wrote:On December 13 2011 06:40 andrewlt wrote:
From what I read, the Clippers didn't want to trade Gordon away. Stern's insistence that he be included killed the trade because the Clips balked at the high asking price. I heard it was Eric Bledsoe that was the last problem. EJ was basically the centerpiece along with the Minny pick. Ridiculous. The owners are so stupid. Just contract the league to what it should be - 22 teams and that'll solve the problem. It won't. The NBA is like college football in a sense. Fans watch the great teams but we "know" the great teams are "great" because they are able to pad their records against the cupcakes of the league. The paid cupcakes are just as integral a part of the league as the great teams. 22 teams won't leave enough cupcakes for top teams to feast on.
Ohhh an argument with andrewIt. My favorite thing on teamliquid.
But what you said doesn't make any sense. 22 teams provides for a much more optimized distribution of talent than 30. I don't think your assertion that good teams are good because there are bad teams is very sound. That's almost ridiculous to hear. I know the Lakers are good because the Bobcats are bad? And this "knowledge" is what makes me crave the NBA? I know that Oklahoma State is good because...Syracuse is bad? Are you sure?
With respect, I think you can do much better >_>
|
On December 13 2011 08:41 slyboogie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 08:30 RowdierBob wrote:
It's created an immense amount of hype and publicity.
It has been great for the league. Remember the lockout? I doubt anyone else does either. By that token, the Brawl at the Palace and Tim Donaghy did the same thing. So...I mean, I could care less how the league is perceived but I don't think it's been good for the league.
Well, apples and oranges really. Each situation has to be looked at in context.
The Donaghy scandal was terrible. Goes towards the direct credibility of the league (and no, this Paul drama isn't comparable).
Brawl in the Palace is debateable. People publicly denounce violence, but secretly we're all cheering for Artest to pop some obnoxious fan in the jaw.
I think this trade drama has been great for the league because it's creating hype and interest again following the antipathy created towards the NBA by the lockout.
Everyone's talking about basketball again and not if they're going to bother following the lockout fiasco.
|
Anyone interested in a casual/semi hardcore fantasy H2H league? if you are please pm me, i got a few slots to fill draft is next monday.
|
Ok, so the Clippers have according to Yahoo Sports signed Billups, I guess that takes them out of the race for CP3! To be honest it's a really nice move for LAC - they get to keep their young players, get a better PG than Mo Williams and they won't have to compose a completely new team two weeks before tip-off!
..and I'm guessing they'll be able to afford DeAndre Jordan quite easily now too!
|
Hmmm, I would've kept the trade with Paul open.
Billups is a nice signing but he doesn't make the Clips good enough.
Paul's going to the Lakers. If not this year then def in FA.
|
On December 13 2011 08:59 RowdierBob wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 08:41 slyboogie wrote:On December 13 2011 08:30 RowdierBob wrote:
It's created an immense amount of hype and publicity.
It has been great for the league. Remember the lockout? I doubt anyone else does either. By that token, the Brawl at the Palace and Tim Donaghy did the same thing. So...I mean, I could care less how the league is perceived but I don't think it's been good for the league. Well, apples and oranges really. Each situation has to be looked at in context. The Donaghy scandal was terrible. Goes towards the direct credibility of the league (and no, this Paul drama isn't comparable). Brawl in the Palace is debateable. People publicly denounce violence, but secretly we're all cheering for Artest to pop some obnoxious fan in the jaw. I think this trade drama has been great for the league because it's creating hype and interest again following the antipathy created towards the NBA by the lockout. Everyone's talking about basketball again and not if they're going to bother following the lockout fiasco.
The Chris Paul issue does speak to the credibility of the league. The Donaghy scandal could have but evidence seems to say that it was just one rogue referee. But to have an independent "franchise' under the control of its 29 competitors is a huge conflict of interest. And for these 29 owners to constrict player movement in such a way is even worse.
I suppose that this does not intrinsically hurt the product on the court. But it does make the product appeared manufactured and inauthentic. This is a systemic issue in regards to labor and power and how a multinational corporation handles its shit. Donaghy was an employee but these sins, or wrongs or crimes or mistakes, whatever, are being committed by owners and the upperest of upper management.
I don't really care either way. I just don't think this makes the NBA look good because it continues to rile feelings in regards to NBA owners created by the lockout. They are meddling, they are out to screw their employees, they are greedy and they are plantation owners. I don't think any person who wasn't an NBA fan is an NBA fan now because David Stern blocked a trade. But I do think that there is some fan out there, maybe only one, who isn't a fan anymore.
|
On December 13 2011 09:17 RowdierBob wrote:
Hmmm, I would've kept the trade with Paul open.
Billups is a nice signing but he doesn't make the Clips good enough.
Paul's going to the Lakers. If not this year then def in FA.
Don't forget that Sam Cassell year when the Clips made it to the second round and almost took out Phoenix. And Chauncey Billups is basically younger Sam Cassell, it's scary how similar they are. Oh shit! Promised land!
|
|
|
I like the Billups signing too. Clippers have added two experience and solid players with Butler as well. Plus leave themselves the possibility to sign a FA if possible as well, along with Griffin. Almost too smart for a Clippers move.
edit: and they still have kaman's expiring contract still.
|
On December 13 2011 08:53 Ace wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 08:46 cLutZ wrote:
How is CP3 worth EG + anything good? Gordon's contract is awesome, he's younger, has huge upside (that he has started to come into). Insanity. Well Chris Paul is worth Eric Gordon alone But Eric Gordon, Eric Bledsoe, Aminu, Kaman + Minny's first rounder is way too much. They'd be taking all of the Clipper's depth and that prized future pick. The Clippers should turn that down and keep EJ at all costs.
Yea, I would trade Gordon for Paul straight up (even though said trade is banned by the league rules I think), but their value is not that different. Gordon is less than $4million on the cap this year and slightly more than 5 next year when he becomes a RFA. Paul is 16 Million + this year, 17 + next year, he would likely expect another max deal at the conclusion of the contract. Injury-wise I think Paul's is more worrisome for the future, wrist issues are not that bad.
Paul is worth like EG + Aminu + Kaman. Honestly, it is really tough for me to justify giving up an elite young talent who is underpaid, a guaranteed rotation guy (probably a 6th man) in Bledsoe, another solid rotation guy in Aminu, and a solid big man in Kaman, and that doesn't even include a likely top 5 pick in what is expected to be an outstanding draft class.
|
hahahaha
the clippers did two things:
1. they matched that crazy deandre offer
2. they actually put in an amnesty waiver claim for chauncey after he told teams not to claim him off amnesty
hahahaha
|
On December 13 2011 09:39 zeehar wrote:
hahahaha
the clippers did two things:
1. they matched that crazy deandre offer
2. they actually put in an amnesty waiver claim for chauncey after he told teams not to claim him off amnesty
hahahaha
It might not seem like much..but this is the Clippers, they could have done way worse for their future.
lol
|
On December 13 2011 09:43 MassHysteria wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 09:39 zeehar wrote:
hahahaha
the clippers did two things:
1. they matched that crazy deandre offer
2. they actually put in an amnesty waiver claim for chauncey after he told teams not to claim him off amnesty
hahahaha It might not seem like much..but this is the Clippers, they could have done way worse for their future. lol
god bless the clippers hahaha
in other news, the pacers have a deal for oj mayo ready to go if jamal crawford doesn't sign for them by tomorrow.
|
4 years $43 million dollars. That's painful because he basically eats Kaman's cap space. But if he can bump his FT% to...65%? Then he will be a very productive player. If he can pick up ONE SINGLE move, and I mean it. He will be hugely productive.
Chauncey off waivers if fine. It depends on the bid put in no? I'm not sure how the new amnesty-waivers work.
|
On December 13 2011 08:56 slyboogie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 08:47 andrewlt wrote:On December 13 2011 07:03 slyboogie wrote:On December 13 2011 06:40 andrewlt wrote:
From what I read, the Clippers didn't want to trade Gordon away. Stern's insistence that he be included killed the trade because the Clips balked at the high asking price. I heard it was Eric Bledsoe that was the last problem. EJ was basically the centerpiece along with the Minny pick. Ridiculous. The owners are so stupid. Just contract the league to what it should be - 22 teams and that'll solve the problem. It won't. The NBA is like college football in a sense. Fans watch the great teams but we "know" the great teams are "great" because they are able to pad their records against the cupcakes of the league. The paid cupcakes are just as integral a part of the league as the great teams. 22 teams won't leave enough cupcakes for top teams to feast on. Ohhh an argument with andrewIt. My favorite thing on teamliquid. But what you said doesn't make any sense. 22 teams provides for a much more optimized distribution of talent than 30. I don't think your assertion that good teams are good because there are bad teams is very sound. That's almost ridiculous to hear. I know the Lakers are good because the Bobcats are bad? And this "knowledge" is what makes me crave the NBA? I know that Oklahoma State is good because...Syracuse is bad? Are you sure? With respect, I think you can do much better >_>
Oh, was that you I had an argument with something lockout related? I normally don't pay attention to names unless the other poster is terrible.
Think about the SEC in college football. They usually have extremely easy out of conference games. By the time conference play starts, there's a bunch of very hyped up games between 4-0 teams. And the winners of those 4-0 vs 4-0 games become hyped up even more.
The NBA usually thrives when there are multiple teams with 60+ wins. People are hyped up while anticipating those battles in the playoffs, or even in the regular season. With a more even distribution of talent, it's harder to get 60+ wins.
|
On December 13 2011 09:47 slyboogie wrote:
4 years $43 million dollars. That's painful because he basically eats Kaman's cap space. But if he can bump his FT% to...65%? Then he will be a very productive player. If he can pick up ONE SINGLE move, and I mean it. He will be hugely productive.
Chauncey off waivers if fine. It depends on the bid put in no? I'm not sure how the new amnesty-waivers work.
deandre still has time to grow, so maybe he will develop some semblance of an offensive game. right now he's not a 11M per year player, the same way tyson chandler isn't a 15~6M per year player.
re: chauncey - it does, it's a good deal on paper, but i was more referring to chauncey stating that he is not willing to play for a team that he is not interested in... he got really fucked off after the knicks amnestied him (i'd be mad too if i was forced to move two years in a row, despite being a known and respected quantity in the league)
|
On December 13 2011 09:47 slyboogie wrote:
4 years $43 million dollars. That's painful because he basically eats Kaman's cap space. But if he can bump his FT% to...65%? Then he will be a very productive player. If he can pick up ONE SINGLE move, and I mean it. He will be hugely productive.
Chauncey off waivers if fine. It depends on the bid put in no? I'm not sure how the new amnesty-waivers work.
Thank god they decided to match the Warriors offer. DeAndre Jordan is not worth 43 mill and the Warriors already overpaid on a player (Lee), I don't want them to continue to cripple their future.
|
On December 13 2011 09:50 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 08:56 slyboogie wrote:On December 13 2011 08:47 andrewlt wrote:On December 13 2011 07:03 slyboogie wrote:On December 13 2011 06:40 andrewlt wrote:
From what I read, the Clippers didn't want to trade Gordon away. Stern's insistence that he be included killed the trade because the Clips balked at the high asking price. I heard it was Eric Bledsoe that was the last problem. EJ was basically the centerpiece along with the Minny pick. Ridiculous. The owners are so stupid. Just contract the league to what it should be - 22 teams and that'll solve the problem. It won't. The NBA is like college football in a sense. Fans watch the great teams but we "know" the great teams are "great" because they are able to pad their records against the cupcakes of the league. The paid cupcakes are just as integral a part of the league as the great teams. 22 teams won't leave enough cupcakes for top teams to feast on. Ohhh an argument with andrewIt. My favorite thing on teamliquid. But what you said doesn't make any sense. 22 teams provides for a much more optimized distribution of talent than 30. I don't think your assertion that good teams are good because there are bad teams is very sound. That's almost ridiculous to hear. I know the Lakers are good because the Bobcats are bad? And this "knowledge" is what makes me crave the NBA? I know that Oklahoma State is good because...Syracuse is bad? Are you sure? With respect, I think you can do much better >_> Oh, was that you I had an argument with something lockout related? I normally don't pay attention to names unless the other poster is terrible. Think about the SEC in college football. They usually have extremely easy out of conference games. By the time conference play starts, there's a bunch of very hyped up games between 4-0 teams. And the winners of those 4-0 vs 4-0 games become hyped up even more. The NBA usually thrives when there are multiple teams with 60+ wins. People are hyped up while anticipating those battles in the playoffs, or even in the regular season. With a more even distribution of talent, it's harder to get 60+ wins.
See, I don't think that's true. I think individual fanbases get excited over their team making the playoffs or going from 42 wins to 56 wins. 60 win teams are basically Finals or bust teams. The regular season is pretty unimportant in the NBA. And LSU played Oregon. That's pretty tough. Georgia played Boise. But I get your point.
Also with 22 teams there wouldn't even be 82 games. It's never going to happen but I think it would be much better.
Concerning Chauncey, I won't really be able to judge till I see what we bid. It could be be $2 million, it could be $7.5? Depends.
|
The regular season is actually pretty damned important if you aren't the undisputed best team in the conference. Match-ups and seeding matter a lot more in the NBA than the number of games you've won.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
