Reply With Quote
According to Cleveland Steamer, based simply on the fact that they won the championship, they are a great team.
It doesn't matter if KG winds up in Phoenix. Duncan has owned him for his entire career, and a change of address won't change that.
KG's game is on the decline even if the numbers don't seem to show it. He's no longer the playmaker whose skills can energize his teammates and his knees aren't as strong as they were even if his durability is still there. I just don't think he'll have enough left in the tank once the playoffs roll around, unless by some miracle, his PT can decrease to about 30-35 minutes a game.
Besides he's so used to the ball going through him that it will take some time to adjust to having it go through someone else.
According to Cleveland Steamer, based simply on the fact that they won the championship, they are a great team.
Duncan has owned everyone his entire career but KG can at least handle him better than any of our other alternatives.
I agree that there would be some chemistry issues however I don't think that KG skills and durablity are on the decline that much, if at all, to really have a huge effect for say the next 2years.
According to me, the S0ns deserve a consolatory place next to the champions of NBA past although they haven't come close to winning the championship. If you disagree with me I'll put you on ignore and give you some of this:
If it wasn't so costly financially, then I don't think an Amare for KG trade would be an issue. In fact, I know it wouldn't.
If the Suns could somehow package Amare/Diaw/Banks#24/#29 for Garnett/#7, then I think they'd do it. I don't, however, see the Timberwolves going for that. The reason the Suns throw in Diaw is, per 1st-year extension from rookie-scale pay guidelines, he's a base-year compensation player, so the Suns could actually trade him with only 4.5 million of his 9 million salary for next season counting in trade. This allows them to clear more salary, thus clearing up their financial issues, while adding top flight talent now, and for the future.
Like I said, I don't think Minny would go for it, though they are certainly getting two very good prospects to build around.
History remembers the winners, even people that didnt get to see the Heat play will think they were a great team when looking back in videos and books. Losers arent remembered for anything except being losers.According to Cleveland Steamer, based simply on the fact that they won the championship, they are a great team.
And the Heat were a much greater team last year then the Suns
You're a post or two away from being introduced to KPS001's ignore list.
So do ty teams in weak conferences.......
They were not great in history'e eyes. Say San Diego wins last year, Marty stays on is a great coach, NE retools (as they have done) and SD/NE fight over it with B'more the next 3-4 years while Peyton starts to decline. In 20 years, would anyone give a rat's ass how many times the Colts got to the playoffs, or just remember how actually won the Super Bowl.
Atlanta Braves. Great run? No. Most people see what they did as a failure - they win all those division les and are in the post season every year and can't break thru for a couple more WS Rings?
Buffalo Bills? How many teams in history would LOVE to get to 4 SBs in a row? Still, the team is seen as a failure, because they didn't win any of them.
Vikings?
Cleveland Indians/Browns/Cavs when they were on their runs? Great teams, almost there, but fell just short. No one remembers how good they were, just that they found a way to lose - a failure.
History remembers the victors and the losers that go down in flames. Not the really nice teams that were almost there every year but found a way to lose each time.
You can make it personal and argue and while and prove your points and show cute facts... but there is no getting around the perception of history. Thurman's Bills, Tark's Vikings, Marty's Browns/Chiefs/Chargers, Mark Price's Cavs, Dan Marino's Fins, Jazz, Chicago Cubs; no matter how good these teams are, history doesn't see them as champions - they are the ones that could never break thru. No one cares how good they were, only that they weren't the best.
Is it unfair? Prolly. However, the fact remains, Dallas and Phx could win 60 games for the next 10 years, but history will always record them as the one's that couldn't get it done. The best win it all. Everyone else is just everyone else.
Most people, casual or non fans, do only remember the winners, I agree. But that isn't what I was really blabbering about.
I never said the Heat weren't a greater team last year than the Suns.
How can you say all that but then claim "Cleveland Indians/Browns/Cavs....great teams"?
That is my point. All those teams were great teams but didn't win it all. Obviously the ultimate goal is to be the champion. But if you can't be considered great or to have had a great season by not winning it all then it is a depressing life to live, I would imagine. Sure you can be disappointed at the end result but part of growing and improving is to recognize what you do well/great and what you do poorly.
Again, yes history does remember the victors. Obviously they also remember the really great teams that you mentioned above, the losers, if you will. The Braves, Bills, Dolphins, etc will always be remembered for their accomplishments because they were great teams that, yes, fell short of being the best but accomplished amazing things. Things that may never happen again and for that, they will be remembered and thought of as "great". Will they also be thought of a failure or disappointing? Certainly in the respect to a championship season. Why can't those terms, thoughts, feelings, whatever, coexist?
I really don't know what point you are trying to prove with your 1)contradictory post and 2) the fact you keep bringing up history and teams only being remembered as champions.
dude, capt. for brains is always right an he never gives credit where credit is due....just want to give you the heads up.
...in other words, he's a bag.
I don't know why Minney would want Banks back; they didn't want him last summer when the let him go.
jgw is just a troll who does a daily search for what I've posted and follows me around to talk smack. As other have noticed as evidenced in my sig.
It's not about them wanting him back, but getting Amare. They have to make the salaries match. Banks fills the role. Plus, there's no way the Suns unload Amare without attaching Banks with.
i never follow you around...you must have me confused with some ass t.u. fan.
...if you're in a thread i happen to read, and acting like a , i am going to call you out on it.
you're a bag.
Do you girls need a time out?
what does capt. mike being a bag have to do with him and you taking a time out?
Clever chap.
They need to teach you a new word during recess, this one was old when you used it up around a year ago.
as soon as you learn how not to be a bag.....
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
