Reply With Quote
You pretty much said it, so allow me to restate it: The Spurs paid RJ 10 million a year. There's no deciding you can't pay Parker the max once you've done that.
A six year max contract for parker might not sound to good to the spurs front office because after timmy the team will have a significant drop. A two year 14 mil contract is just what the doctor ordered. Like I said we could then get a trade exception and Hill will be a much better point guard to take over.
You pretty much said it, so allow me to restate it: The Spurs paid RJ 10 million a year. There's no deciding you can't pay Parker the max once you've done that.
It all depends at what year will Parker have. He already pass on WC, so he wants to show that he deserves max. I hope he will have great year.
I`ll trade Parker for Paul, but a motivated player in contract year is all that you want
I dont see any way we keep Tony if he wants max money. We have to much money tied up and Duncan coming around for an extension. And with Hill and Blair as our future...I dont see how we give Tony a 100 mil contract.
This post is for those people who think that the trade of Parker for Paul would not result in much improvement of the spurs team overall. Although some people think Paul would make us contenders, others think that Paul is only slightly better than Parker and therefore would no make us much better. So lets breakdown some of the attributes that both players have.
Quickness-maybe a slight edge to Parker but it is real close
Passing/Assisting-Paul is much better in this area even if he were on the spurs
Shooting fg%/ft%/3pt%-Paul is better in all of these areas
Rebounding-Paul gets two more per game
Defense/steals-Paul is better at defense and he gets averages two more steals per game over Parker
The breakdown clearly show that Paul is much better than Parker. It seem like a slight difference though because they are both top six point guards in the nba.
The gist of why Paul would improve us so much is in the attributes but that is to vague. The biggest improvement will come because he will be able to bring the best out of R.Jefferson on the offensive end. This will increase rj's confidence. That confidence should improve his shooting% and increase his defensive involvement. With Parker and rj we almost always have two bad shooters on the court, sometimes three if bonner/dice are on the bench. With Paul the defense can't space rj/parker making it difficult for tim to opperate and manu to penetrate without getting another defender on him instantly.
Paul would significantly increase the spurs chance of winning a.
Your breakdown clearly shows you're on crack.
Is Paul a better assist man? Almost certainly, but the Spurs' offense doesn't require a point guard to create shots for other people. The offense either has the ball swinging around the perimeter set up from the post, or uses kickouts. Parker's assists come from pick and rolls a lot because he has two teammates who are two of the better players in the league at getting their own shots, so Paul's numbers would suffer. Parker is so good at breaking down defenses and the pick and roll that I don't know if Paul would be an improvement.
Parker's field goal percentage has been better than Paul's every year. Paul's been over fifty percent shooting once since he's been in the league. Parker has averaged more than that since Paul was drafted.
Paul's better at steals. Parker's a far better defender. Pop wouldn't like a guy gambling in passing lanes to get stats for himself, and we all know that.
why spurs paid a very paid player last year a new contract worth 40
tp is atleast work 60 million more then him
1. I am not on crack and I never even tried it.
2. Paul's assist numbers will definitely suffer in the spurs system but he would still get 2 more per game. This would happen because Paul is a better passer than Parker. Expect rj to get a lot more alleys. Shooters will get the ball right where they want it. Tim would not get the alley but the when fronted he will get ball passed to him in the perfect spot. Slashers will get the ball in the right spot at the right time.
3. I would argue that Paul is just as good if not better than Parker at breaking down the defense. Paul can also run the pick and roll. Why would he not be able to do these things? He can pass,dribble(great handles), and he is quick. That is all needs to be able to run the pick n' roll.
4. Paul has a really high fg% and he is the focus of every defense he goes up against. So if he played with the spurs the fg% will increase. Paul's ft% is also better than Parker's, so we will have less wasted points.
5. Parker being a better defender than Paul is debatable but he is definitely not far better than him. I would say Paul is better than Parker at defense. Paul makes calculated gambles on defense to get steals. He does not get all of them in passing lanes either he is just a pest on defense. He comes from behind on a big man and other situation that Parker does not capitalize on.
Bonus. I noticed that you didn't want to criticize Paul's ability to shoot threes and mid range shots. This is important because the opponent will not be able to leave rj and parker to help on defense. They will not sit in Duncan's lap either. Making everybodies life easier on the court. Thus, boosting everyones confidence.
lol -15 wins
is straight-up legit in this thread.
Hollinger's never, and I mean NEVER, wrong.
Word. He is 2 legit 2 quit.
Like this thread.
Post from the future.
Blazers-Roy,Aldridge,Parker-Three very nice pieces to build around, plus they would not have to give away all of their young talent.
Spurs-Get Chris Paul for the remainder of the Duncan era.
Hornets-Get to rebuild with a bunch of nice young pieces from both the Spurs and Blazers.
You are wrong.. If Paul comes to SA, Spurs will not win it all and have to give in to all the bull- that is Paul's ego
Paul is a better three point shooter. Parker's a a far better midrange shooter. That's why Parker's better at the pick and roll than Paul is.
Apparently the Knicks will "trade anyone except Amar'e" for CP3.
Any chance Demps does his old team a favor and pull this trade?
NOH: send CP3 to NY/receive Eddy Curry, Malik Hairston, Alonzo Gee, Curtis Jerrels
NY: send Eddy Curry to NOH and Anthony Randolph to SA/receive CP3
SA: send Malik Hairston, Alonzo Gee, and Curtis Jerrels to NOH and draft picks to NY/receive Anthony Randolph
NOH gets a trade chip in Curry and three young talents (all with no or partial guarantees) that they can choose to waive or give them an extended try out
SA gets a young athletic big with huge upside to help matchup with LA and help Duncan ease out of his career a la The Admiral
NY gets Chris Paul
I think the OP qualifies as type 7 among the obnoxious fans categories:
"7. The Trade Machine Maniac – Ever played with ESPN’s NBA Trade Machine? It’s a fun little tool that allows you to try out various configurations of trades and see if they work under the NBA’s complicated salary cap rules. It’s so fun that it can become quite addictive to a certain type of fan who can’t stop posting ridiculous trade scenarios that somehow manage to bring a player like Chris Paul to the fan’s favorite team without giving up any of that team’s valuable assets. For example, I bet you a Knicks fan somewhere has proposed trading Eddy Curry and Wilson Chandler for Chris Paul because it works in the Trade Machine and the Hornets would be happy with Chandler’s “potential” and Curry’s $11 million expiring contract. If you run a message board, you should give these fans their own thread or section where they can make their insane proposals without bothering everyone else."
http://blogs.thescore.com/tbj/2010/0...-the-internet/
Chris Paul would never go to the Spurs. Why is anyone even bothering?
So Portland gets a lot of salary and Parker.
Spurs exchange Parker with Paul
Hornets get Rudy in' Fernandez, Batum, Miller + Scrubs?
This trade makes no sense for either team.
The Hornets would only listen to that if they get either Roy + Filler or Aldrige + Oden + Picks + Filler for Paul and Okafor.
There are virtually no teams who have the assets to get Paul via a trade without parting with their franchise players. And most teams would look worse if the traded for Paul giving up those players.
Anything else than another Star + Filler or Young, proven, promising players + Fillers for Paul is redundant.
If I am NO and we are talking with Portland about Paul the first player of interest will be Aldridge. The young players of Portland have thinned out a bit and do not look that interesting.
I don't think CP3 is better than TP for the Spurs at this point. End of story.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
