Jump to content

Official '07-'08 NBA Discussion


Passion
 Share

Recommended Posts


I'd be surprised if those guys have more then 3 or 4 combined All Star appearances when they retire. I don't see the absurd potential. I see a few nice players who aren't ever going to be able play in the same tier as Kobe.

:lol :lol :lol :lol

 

Its too bad we won't be around to see the conclusion of that because I'd take that bet in a second.

 

Thats a flawed stance to take. I don't think any of them will reach Kobe's individual level (thats a once in a decade type talent) all three are more valuable than him.

 

I just don't see the absurd talent there. Sure, Deng's the best player going back to the Lakers, but I don't think he should be enough to make the Bulls pull out of it. I think all three are pretty overrated by Bulls fans. I think they'll range from above average (Nocioni) to good with no defense (Gordon) to possibly great (Deng). Kobe is the best player in the NBA.

 

I actually don't think the talent disparity is that great between what the Bulls might be giving up and what the Heat gave up (not including Grant, obviously). I'd say Odom is a pretty good comparison to Deng, and Butler's better than either one of Gordon or Nocioni. I'm not worried about giving up "potential" unknown quantities for the best player in the game, especially in Basketball where one player can tip the scales more than any other sport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a Lakers-Bulls trade, why/how would the Bulls not have the upper hand?

 

I was only addressing the trade from the Bulls perspective since that is what the article was talking about.

 

Um, how about simple economic theory that a limited resource with inelastic supply is of significantly enhanced value?

 

Last I checked, there's only one Kobe Bryant and about 20 teams that'll do whatever it takes to get him. So who's in the position of strength, the 1/1 or the 1/20?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, wasnt there someone around these parts that HATED Darius Washington (claimed he didnt hate him but laughed at his misfortune) and told Darius to enjoy Europe?

 

Well, Darius is getting playing time for the defending world champs.

 

 

he also earned a roster spot on a team that didnt have an open roster spot.

 

 

that says something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason the Bulls have the upper hand is because Kobe has a No Trade clause and he's said he only wants to go to the Bulls. Now I guess the Lakers can flip it on him by saying "pick another team or your stuck with us."

 

I do agree with Swift that there are other teams who will want Kobe and can offer good talent in return. For example, the Washington rumor with Gilbert being mentioned in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He averaged 19 and 7 last year at 21. I'd say there is an absurd amount of potential there.

 

He has a fantastic body for the NBA.

 

:lol @ him not creating his own shot. The hell?

 

MB.com has to have some of the most off-beat NBA opinions I've read on the internet.

Yeah, real funny claim that most of his shots did not come off his own creation. I watched the series, and living where I do, I have a ton of friends that are Bulls fans. They would be the first to tell you what I did. Most of his points came in transition or in the form of a mid-range jumper off someone else's creation.

 

Off the top of my head, there are at least 5 players at his position alone that are 22/23 or younger that I would rather have and think have more potential. Durant, Josh Smith, Igoudala, Melo & LBJ. Great, he has an 'NBA body,' but he isn't overly athletic and I really question how effective he would be if he had to carry the load of a team like LeBron did last year (and that's not a comparison to LeBron). But I forgot, he has 'absurd' potential.

 

I guess if we don't kiss the ass of a Duke player turned Bull, then our opinions are automatically 'off-beat.' I forgot, only your opinion counts as fact.

 

The Deng for Lebron thing is just pointless as well. No one is comparing him to LBJ and they aren't similar situations. The mark of a player now is how they stake up to James?

 

Since I'm a Duke ass kisser I'll just let people who get paid talk for me instead of the Law Student/internet stalker mastermind who talks crap behind a computer screen:

 

starting with small forward Luol Deng"]

http://slamonline.com/online/2007/10/at_le...e_not_the_heat/

 

Luol Deng's becoming a superstar.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2007/...Experts-Central

 

I'll await your ad hominem attack though. :thumbup

So now I'm supposed to take Slam Online (LOL :lol ) and Jon Barry's opinion as fact? I'm sorry I ever said that I don't see Luol's 'absurd' potential. I didn't know that those two sources saying Deng has the potential to be an all-star (which I have never disagreed with, btw) meant that I was wrong in anything I said. :lol :lol

 

Also, maybe your reading comprehension isn't too strong, so I will not only paste what I previously said down here, but I will also bold the other post where I said, "and that's not a comparison to LeBron". I'm sure you're smart enough to know what that meant. It was a situational analogy, not a player analogy.

 

P.S. I love how you talk about how everyone runs their mouth from behind a computer screen....would you like everyone to come to NC to run their mouth to your face? Do you think anyone cares? What a 'tough guy' you are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I never debated that there are other suitors out there.

Your right that the Bulls have the upper hand though. Until Kobe picks another team they should try and force LA's hand and ones gotta think Kobe will do or say something in the next couple of days that will make the Lakers expedite this trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a Lakers-Bulls trade, why/how would the Bulls not have the upper hand?

 

I was only addressing the trade from the Bulls perspective since that is what the article was talking about.

 

Um, how about simple economic theory that a limited resource with inelastic supply is of significantly enhanced value?

 

Last I checked, there's only one Kobe Bryant and about 20 teams that'll do whatever it takes to get him. So who's in the position of strength, the 1/1 or the 1/20?

Again, the Bulls don't need Kobe as much as the Lakers need what the Bulls have to offer.

 

Thus, in a deal between the two, the Lakers have no leverage.

 

I don't understand what is so hard to grasp. I don't expect you to back down though, just as you wouldn't after I explained Antoine Walker's contract extension to you. :rolleyes:

 

So then your theory is the Bulls are the only team that the Bulls will deal with?

 

If that's it, fine. It's stupid, but fine, it at least justifies your stance.

 

If you ever want to come into the real world of logical reasoning, a unique one of a kind item that has multiple suitors leaves the seller in a position of strength. Go to an auction, try to buy an original Matisse and say you're offering $500,000 and you have a fantastic gallery that'll flatter the painting, far better than any the other bidders can offer, and see what the seller says when bidding reaches $600,000.

:banghead :banghead :banghead :banghead :banghead :banghead

 

This whole time I've been talking about the BULLS.

 

Lets look at the progression of this.

 

1. Article posted talking about a trade between the LAKERS and BULLS.

 

2. I posted saying I wouldn't do the deal.

 

3. I later posted saying the BULLS have all the leverage IN THAT SINGULAR DISCUSSION BETWEEN TWO TEAMS, THE BULLS AND LAKERS (refer to point 1).

 

4. YOU bring up leverage in regards to other teams, something I was never talking about.

 

Do you understand?

 

Good lord dude, you will make a back and forth out of anything even things that don't exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a Lakers-Bulls trade, why/how would the Bulls not have the upper hand?

 

I was only addressing the trade from the Bulls perspective since that is what the article was talking about.

 

Um, how about simple economic theory that a limited resource with inelastic supply is of significantly enhanced value?

 

Last I checked, there's only one Kobe Bryant and about 20 teams that'll do whatever it takes to get him. So who's in the position of strength, the 1/1 or the 1/20?

Again, the Bulls don't need Kobe as much as the Lakers need what the Bulls have to offer.

 

Thus, in a deal between the two, the Lakers have no leverage.

 

I don't understand what is so hard to grasp. I don't expect you to back down though, just as you wouldn't after I explained Antoine Walker's contract extension to you. :rolleyes:

 

So then your theory is the Bulls are the only team that the Bulls will deal with?

 

If that's it, fine. It's stupid, but fine, it at least justifies your stance.

 

If you ever want to come into the real world of logical reasoning, a unique one of a kind item that has multiple suitors leaves the seller in a position of strength. Go to an auction, try to buy an original Matisse and say you're offering $500,000 and you have a fantastic gallery that'll flatter the painting, far better than any the other bidders can offer, and see what the seller says when bidding reaches $600,000.

:banghead :banghead :banghead :banghead :banghead :banghead

 

This whole time I've been talking about the BULLS.

 

Lets look at the progression of this.

 

1. Article posted talking about a trade between the LAKERS and BULLS.

 

2. I posted saying I wouldn't do the deal.

 

3. I later posted saying the BULLS have all the leverage IN THAT SINGULAR DISCUSSION BETWEEN TWO TEAMS, THE BULLS AND LAKERS (refer to point 1).

 

4. YOU bring up leverage in regards to other teams, something I was never talking about.

 

Do you understand?

 

Good lord dude, you will make a back and forth out of anything even things that don't exist.

 

So then we'll just suspend all logic and assume that this is all in a vacuum and that talks are ONLY between Lakers and Bulls. :lol

 

Just like when we're talking free agency we'll pretend that the value of a contract is established only by talks between Team A and Player B. That the threat of Team C has no bearing on value. That this wonderful thing called competition doesn't exist at all. Ditto limited resources.

 

Fantastic. Honestly some of the most over simplified logic I've ever heard. :lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't say take it as fact but you accused me as being a Duke ass kisser which affected my opinion on Deng. I gave you two examples (Slam Magazine, and a guy who played the actual game) who think along the same lines as me. Maybe they are Duke ass kissers too. Who knows.

 

Anyone who doesn't agree with you gets an ad hominem attack. You couldn't even converse with me for one post before turning in to a douche. I've come to expect it though.

 

Is it time for your annual banning for trolling me yet? If it isn't yet, how this thread has started it sure as hell will be.

 

You gave two opinions of that stated Deng had all-star potential. Where did I disagree with that? Better yet, where did those opinions state that he has some 'absurd potential' or anything even REMOTELY close? I guess you could stretch the Slam to meet your opinion, although with the hype they give every single person to ever grace their magazine on any level, I would take that with a grain of salt.

 

On to your second point, I think you need to re-check the thread. I wrote a pretty straightforward opinion to a post, no antagonistic message in it. I don't see where it could be considered douchey at all, but that changed once your typical dbag response came to that post. I also find it funny that you talk about trolling. Weren't you the one who lost the moderator privilege you so greatly wanted for trolling me?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weren't you the one who lost the moderator privilege you so greatly wanted for trolling me?

In no way shape or form, I left the board for personal reasons and thus lost my modship because of my extended absence. You didn't factor in, in any way shape or form. Don't flatter yourself.

 

I've never once been reprimanded or told to not troll you by any of the mods.Whatever you say. I know otherwise, but unlike you, I really don't care. I also don't care to continue on this thread with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, wasnt there someone around these parts that HATED Darius Washington (claimed he didnt hate him but laughed at his misfortune) and told Darius to enjoy Europe?

 

Well, Darius is getting playing time for the defending world champs.

 

 

I didn't laugh at his misfortune, I said I've never felt worse for a kid. Seriously, when he crumbled to the floor was one of the most emotionally powerful sports moments ever. I don't particularly like him as a player (By no means hate, I don't really understand how people can hate sport players), but I did find it funny with, how arrogant he was and all the talking he did, that he left early for the NBA and didn't get drafted nor made a team out of camp. I really don't care if people go to the NBA early if you're actually talented and know you'll make it...Shawn Livingston is prime example of what can happen. Or Greg Oden's knees. But I think it's stupid to leave early when you can't make the NBA. I don't hate it in the "it's bad for the game" bulls*** or w/e it is people say, but because it's a complete idiotic buisness decision. Stay, get your degree, and raise your draft status for the next year. That was the Europe comment, because of that decision, not because it was him. Same goes for anyone else.

 

But it's obviously worked out for him in the end. Good for him that he's in the NBA :thumbup

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and yes i totally did fudge up but not having the magic in the playoff mix at all. good spot.

 

now my predictions are perfect.

Nobody's talking about the Magic this year, especially not after all the big signings in Boston. Dan Sileo says there's nothing to get excited about.

 

I say we're going to be flying under the radar.

 

BTW: I love Darius. He went to my high school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree that the Bulls have a huge advantage over dealing with the Lakers, even when including other teams.

 

1. The Lakers probably want nothing to do with trading Kobe to a western conference team, as most teams try to avoid that. Why would they trade him to the Mavericks so that they can subsequently get pounded by the Mavericks?

 

2. Kobe's no trade clause is going to prevent them from picking the team they want to deal with.

 

3. Most eastern teams, the Wiz included with Arenas, would be vetoed by Kobe because they would be giving up their top talent to get him, thereby leaving him in the same position. Really only the Bulls, and perhaps the Bucks, can put together a package that appeases all three parties.

 

The Magic were in a similiar position with Tmac. He basically said he wouldn't resign with teams he didn't want to go with. I'm positive this had a lot to do with our taking a crappy package from Houston.

 

Oh, and Deng definitely isn't overrated. I absolutely would avoid involving him in any deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



×
×
  • Create New...