|| LocK Dis Up ||
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by licensed to ball,
- Start date
- Status
MVP
Supporter
- 81,689
- 82,504
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2008
Mitch shouldn't be fired for taking Ingram #1, come on.
Didn't you learn anything from DLo/Oak this year?
This isn't that though. This would have been him taking D'Lo over KAT in my opinion.
- 36,135
- 10,979
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
Why I'd rather go with Ingram over Simmons because you then have to think of all these damn scenarios to make him fit. Not to mention, I don't think that talent gap is much.
Clarkson loses on getting the ball, so you have to limit his role, or trade him. Granted he could end up playing himself to a 6th man role anyway, but Simmons doesn't help the matter.
You hope he & Russell can co-exist because they've been teammates before.. But you don't know how Russell's game is impacted to having to share facilitating duties. You hope it works, but he could end up being a placeholder out there when he has to stand around.
Then you have to choose between Randle & Nance, a guy who has the raw skill versus a guy who will never be more than a really good glue guy. No knock on Nance, he's a great piece off the bench. A guy any team can use, but there's no scenario in his ceiling that he's more than that level of player. And I really like Nance.
So if you choose Randle to be traded, you're not getting $1.00 on the $1.00, you're selling lower than his asset, and his current production should garner. Even if it's production that is very raw.
So you are doing all this shuffling around, for a guy who is very talented.. But currently has the shot chart of DeAndre Jordan. I know he can get to the hoop. But that also depends on if he can start to get that shot to fall.. The same damn thing as Randle. He can take pretty much any 4 off the dribble and to the hoop, but because he doesn't have a consistent shot. Guys can play off, and keep him from getting to the hoop easily.
If we take him # 1, that's fine... He's either 1 or 2, but there are legitimate and real concerns about the guy.
Last edited:
Mitch shouldn't be fired for taking Ingram #1, come on.
Didn't you learn anything from DLo/Oak this year?
This isn't that though. This would have been him taking D'Lo over KAT in my opinion.
This isn't the same gap at all. Ingram is easily #1 material.
Wiggins/Jabari is more apt.
- 11,025
- 11,906
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2012
Draft Simmons and keep Randle.
Sign KD and Whiteside
Not that difficult [emoji]128526[/emoji]
Sign KD and Whiteside
Not that difficult [emoji]128526[/emoji]
Last edited:
MVP
Supporter
- 81,689
- 82,504
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2008
Cool that's your take. I have mine.
- 36,135
- 10,979
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
Anywho... Suns are on a 2nd night of a back-to-back when they play us Friday.. Scheduled win
The 2nd matchup we're on a back-to-back.
The 2nd matchup we're on a back-to-back.
Last edited:
MVP
Supporter
- 81,689
- 82,504
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2008
We should be ok even if we drop both to them now, that's likely the only 2 games we can win the rest of the year, along with @NO. Still only gets us to 17. Plus they have the T'wolves again this month. We have the tank commander on our side.
Last edited:
- 36,135
- 10,979
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
We got lucky that the Suns finally stopped looking like the Sixers in the past 2 weeks by getting 3 wins.. Really helped us out.
From December 20th - March 3rd... They went 3-30.... 3-3 in last 6.
Last edited:
MVP
Supporter
- 81,689
- 82,504
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2008
Well you were so sure we'd pass them, and Brooklyn before that. We're right where we should be with the talent we have.
- 36,135
- 10,979
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
Every time I said... If current trends hold up..
3 weeks ago
Suns are annoying me. They're too big of a threat to our tank now.
Earl Watson's Wack *** coaching ain't going to help us
We won't pass the Nets. They've been able to figure a bit out with Lopez and occasional JJ game winners to get a few wins.
But based on current trends. Unless something changes, we sure as hell are passing the Suns.
Brandon Knight comes back soon, so hopefully that helps, but still they are really bad. For the past two months, they have been the worst team in the NBA.
And Nets were when Jack went out, who was a big reason for most of their "success." If you want to call it that. They got enough out of Brook & JJ for a few weeks to create that separation
Last edited:
MVP
Supporter
- 81,689
- 82,504
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2008
They still sucK and so do we. We just have less talent and they have had injuries.
- 44,168
- 65,491
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2001
I think mamba just gave Ingram the seal of approval 
- 8,790
- 1,989
- Joined
- May 3, 2013
I think mamba just gave Ingram the seal of approval
Zo gif
- 2,433
- 1,128
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2011
I think mamba just gave Ingram the seal of approval
As far as trading Randle or Nance it's a tough call. Nance is the perfect glue guy for this team and the only young player that looks like a plus defender at this point. ( a little concerned about that knee also.)
Randle is clearly more talented and I would love to give him another year or two to develop his defensive awareness, shooting and screening/rolling. But I don't see all of those happening and we could definitely get more for him.
Also, Ben is nowhere near KAT or Davis. They are do it all big men- score, defend, pass and can shoot. Basically unicorns.
To me, Ben/Brandon is much closer to Oak/Russel and Wiggins/Parker. The number one prospect coming in got exposed/under performed and the talent gap isn't that wide or the other prospect's skills match better with the current NBA.
- 22,904
- 26,767
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2010
i'm not a college b ball fan at all so excuse the ?
But does it draw concern that a player who's suppose to be this monumental game changer couldn't get his team into the tournament, and got DEMOLISHED in the final game?
Clearly in the NBA you can't exactly carry a team to wins, but if we are gonna say dude is such a game changer & he couldn't change the game even in college ball..... wouldn't that give some credence to what some reports have stated about simmons not really having that drive?
Also guys were all up in arms about giving up young assets for Boogie (who we KNOW is a top 10 talent and is still only 25) , yet we are okay giving up an Asset for for an unproven kid who has a skillset that doesn't compliment any of our pieces ?
But does it draw concern that a player who's suppose to be this monumental game changer couldn't get his team into the tournament, and got DEMOLISHED in the final game?
Clearly in the NBA you can't exactly carry a team to wins, but if we are gonna say dude is such a game changer & he couldn't change the game even in college ball..... wouldn't that give some credence to what some reports have stated about simmons not really having that drive?
Also guys were all up in arms about giving up young assets for Boogie (who we KNOW is a top 10 talent and is still only 25) , yet we are okay giving up an Asset for for an unproven kid who has a skillset that doesn't compliment any of our pieces ?
- 4,526
- 4,446
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2007
Ben really isn't THAT sweet. His comparisons have been outright ridiculous. If he were really the generational talent some have labeled him we'd know at this point. Nowhere near a slam dunk as ant or KAT. Even with Towns it took the entire year before people smartened up and he's clearly the best player in a very good draft.
- 7,560
- 596
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2007
thats why losing the pick this year in a 2 man draft wouldn't be sooooo devastating
- 8,790
- 1,989
- Joined
- May 3, 2013
You're kidding right?
- 4,526
- 4,446
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2007
- 36,135
- 10,979
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
I'm thinking what he's saying and what I can mostly agree with...
Of course it would suck if we lost our pick. No one wants to actually lose it.
BUT it would not be the end of the world if we did.
We have 2-3 guys who could start for a long time. At least 1 of them will be a Multiple Time All Star. And 2-3 really quality bench players.
Whereas in comparison if we lost the pick last year. We'd be losing it in a deep draft, and have a lot more uncertainty. And not enough cap to fill needs even with cap increases.
Whereas now if we lose the pick, we could still recover over the short term. And regroup adding a late lottery pick in 2017 assuming the unexpected doesn't happen.
He's not saying it'd be good to lose it. He's saying it isn't the death nail on the coffin that last year losing it would have been.
The only thing that is more frustrating about losing the pick if it happens this year is that we had to put up with that miserable, horrible, ridiculous doofus Byron Scott as coach.
Of course it would suck if we lost our pick. No one wants to actually lose it.
BUT it would not be the end of the world if we did.
We have 2-3 guys who could start for a long time. At least 1 of them will be a Multiple Time All Star. And 2-3 really quality bench players.
Whereas in comparison if we lost the pick last year. We'd be losing it in a deep draft, and have a lot more uncertainty. And not enough cap to fill needs even with cap increases.
Whereas now if we lose the pick, we could still recover over the short term. And regroup adding a late lottery pick in 2017 assuming the unexpected doesn't happen.
He's not saying it'd be good to lose it. He's saying it isn't the death nail on the coffin that last year losing it would have been.
The only thing that is more frustrating about losing the pick if it happens this year is that we had to put up with that miserable, horrible, ridiculous doofus Byron Scott as coach.
Last edited:
MVP
Supporter
- 81,689
- 82,504
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2008
The ramifications of losing this pick are devastating. Not only will wet we not add a piece, which could be that other all star talent to maybe go along with D'Lo. The FA effect will be real as well.
Last edited:
- 31,699
- 18,254
- Joined
- May 10, 2009
Ingram looking good today 
- Status