LMAO Lakers

[Goran Dragic]

There is a reason Phx was considering trading Stoudemire for him.

[Muser]

Phoenix wanted to trade Amare for Hickson

[Goran Dragic]

Those cash considerations Boston had in 2006 were valuable. There's a reason Phoenix traded Rajon Rondo for them.

[Muser]

Watching the highlights... @ the Spurs FO for not trading for Tyrus Thomas. The guy would've been huge here..

[j.dizzle]

Watching the highlights... @ the Spurs FO for not trading for Tyrus Thomas. The guy would've been huge here..

Son, I dont understand why SA never made a move for a legit big when their best big after Duncan is 6 foot 6 hahaa makes no sense..Especially after Dallas picked up another big. I guess you guys will get to see POP use small ball the rest of the year

[picc84]

Hickson would have brought a championship to Phoenix.

[JoeTait75]

Including guys like Daniel Gibson who is absolutely terrible along with a guy like Hickson who won't play does not change the fact that it is all about the best 5-6 players. The percentage of weight of responsibility that lies on those players is far greater than the next 2-3 guys.

Not for nothing, but Daniel Gibson is a long way from terrible. He's one of the better three-point shooters in the league and moreover he's a tough, clutch player. A little one-dimensional, yeah, but that one dimension is pretty damn good. I think he should play more. I also think if he played for L.A. he'd be in their rotation. I don't think he gives anything away to Farmar or Brown.

[picc84]

I disagree with pretty much everything you say on the subject, but I am tired of debating it.

JJ Hickson was behind Big Z who is old and slow and that was before the Jamison trade. There is no minutes for him. He will be a non factor. You are overrating him badly and the Suns did not trade Amare for him because they are not idiots.

How am I overrating him? I didnt say he was as good as Amare or anywhere near it. The thing about Phoenix was just to illustrate that other teams see he has talent.

The point is he's a decent player and part of a second unit thats way better than ours. You haven't proved some wide chasm between the top 5 of each team, and you cant even come close to proving the rest of LA is anywhere near as good as the rest of Cleveland. Your theory about LA being clearly the most stacked team in the league is crackpot and doesn't have a leg to stand on in todays NBA.

Now we end debate./

[DPG21920]

SAS has been beaten by much worse teams than LA minus Kobe, Utah was on a back to back, and Portland was playing without pretty much everybody. I would actually love to see Cleveland play a few games without Lebron so everyone could see that its not 2007 anymore and they are a ing fantastic team.

Well, well, well.

[DPG21920]

Nothing Picc?

[badfish22]

kobefan

[DPG21920]

I mean sweet mother of getting what you ask for

[DPG21920]

I mean sweet mother of getting what you ask for

JJ Hickson, it was your time to shine.

0-2, 1 point & 5 boards. 4 TO's.

[turiaf for president]

Isn't it ironic that Charlotte drafted Kobe, and they still own him?

[picc84]

Nothing Picc?

And to think, you're dead serious about this too. And the night after LA gets blown out against a team 3 seeds behind Milwaukee on a back to back, at full strength.

[DAF86]

And to think, you're dead serious about this too. And the night after LA gets blown out against a team 3 seeds behind Milwaukee on a back to back, at full strength.

Just concede defeat and move on.

[picc84]

Ok, I concede that losing in Mil on a b2b without Shaq and Z by 6 points proves LA is better than Cleveland. If a fully healthy Cavs team was more stacked than the Lakers, they would have won last nights game.

[DAF86]

Ok, I concede that losing in Mil on a b2b without Shaq and Z by 6 points proves LA is better than Cleveland. If a fully healthy Cavs team was more stacked than the Lakers, they would have won last nights game.

They were doing just fine without Shaq and Z, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Lebron not playing yesterday was the reason Cleveland lost. Also: Utah, San Antonio, Portland and all the teams that LA beat without Kobe are all better than the fricking Milwaukee Bucks.

[picc84]

They were doing just fine without Shaq and Z

LA was doing just fine without Kobe. Kobe = inconsequential.

Ok, I concede that losing in Mil on a b2b without Shaq and Z by 6 points proves LA is better than Cleveland.

[DPG21920]

Picc, you clearly said you would like to see the Cavs without Bron because it would "end the stupid argument".

They lost. Not only did they not blow out 3 western conference playoff teams in a row, but they lost to the Bucks.

[DPG21920]

You also said JJ Hickson will have an impact. Do I need to quote his line?

[picc84]

I want to know if you think Cleveland losing in Milwaukee by 6 on a b2b, without Shaq and Z, proves that the Lakers are more stacked than Cleveland top to bottom. Please answer this question "yes" or "no".

I didn't say Cleveland playing without Lebron would prove they are better than the Lakers. I said they would prove they are a fantastic team even without him. And they are. How about giving them more than a single game on a b2b before you start gloating?

[picc84]

You also said JJ Hickson will have an impact. Do I need to quote his line?

Was this his first game this season?

[DPG21920]

So losing to the Bucks without Lebron proves they are fantastic team without Lebron? While at the same time, LA destroying SAS, UTA & POR without Kobe shows the Cavs are more stacked?

Also, what about Hickson?

[DPG21920]

Was this his first game this season?

Why was he behind Shaq/Z/Anderson in the rotation before the trade and now behind Shaq/Z/Anderson/Jamison afterward?

Where will his impact playoff minutes come from?