Reply With QuoteIf Cassell is gone, I think Payton is a near lock as possible to stay with the Bucks- especially if MJ comes in and woos Payton into a false sense of hope for the franchise.
More difficult now, MI21.
Jimmy, Cassell in a grade below both Kidd and Payton.
If Cassell is gone, I think Payton is a near lock as possible to stay with the Bucks- especially if MJ comes in and woos Payton into a false sense of hope for the franchise.
Ghost.
Cassell = 2 rings
Kidd and Payton= 0 rings
As far as what the Spurs need, Cassell fills the bill. He can breakdown the defese with either pentrations or shooting with a high FG %. When he is hot, he is unstopable, Kidd is never hot, and Payton is getting long in the tooth and is not the defender he once was. I say Cassell is now on par with Payton and Kidd.
Steve Kerr = 5 Rings
that doesn't mean I'll take Kerr over Payton. Get a grip, Jim.
Awesome comeback, scott. You took the words off of my keyboard.
I like the little Jimmy vs. scott rivalry brewing here. Very reminiscent of Archie and myself.
I'm disappointed that Cassell is being moved. Either the Bucks know they are re-signing Payton or they have b@lls of brass.
Scott, why do you keep taking my posts out of context???
Check these numbers out:
YEAR G GS MIN FG FG% 3P 3P% FT FT% STL BLK TO PF OFF DEF TOT AST PTS
2002-2003 78 77 34.6 7.0-14.9 .470 0.8-2.1 .362 4.9-5.7 .861 1.13 0.2 2.3 2.8 0.7 3.7 4.4 5.8 19.7
This is not a player who is a step down from any pointguard.
47% shooting from that position is great, and he does not get the layups that Kidd gets so that makes his % even better considering that he shoots from outside more. The man can flat out shoot the rock.
Ghost, that comeback was not a good one at all, because Kerr was not the cog in his championships that Cassell was, by in any way shape of form. Cassell is and was then a great guard and was instrumental in Houston's championships.Awesome comeback, scott. You took the words off of my keyboard.
I like the little Jimmy vs. scott rivalry brewing here. Very reminiscent of Archie and myself.
For the record, Jim, you seriously would want Cassell over Payton or Kidd, all things being equal?
Question.
Intriguing.
For the money, yes. You will get 3 more assists from Kidd and maybe 2 more from Gary and the points will be a wash, but Kidd will take 5 more shots to get the same amt of points that Sam can get. Gary shoots a high %, but is too old to give more than a 3 yr deal. And Sam is best FTer of the bunch, so might be able to teach the Spurs how to shoot a freakin FT.
Since you guys are so interested in savingmoney then Sam would make more sense....More bang for your buck I say.
Cassell is a nice player- but he isn't half the defender the Glove is.
Payton > Cassell
And lucky us we get to see Alien Head feeding off KG 4 times next year.
I dont think Sam would save you any money over Payton at this point.
I see Gary being a 2 year guy as a positive. In two years, Parker will be better than both Gary and Kidd.
Payton is not the defender he once was...not even close. TP schooled him last year and Kidd schooled him this year. Also his steals are down .5 a game from his career average.
I love O'Neal as much as the next guy and I think we have a better shot at him since he's an UFA but you are way off base about Brand. Brand is a better shotblocker and rebounder than O'Neal and he's been putting up 20/10 numbers in the west since he entered the league, even with having to share the ball will a brain dead Kandiman. How is he less of a stud than O'Neal who plays in the east and has the offensive run exclusively through him yet puts up lesser numbers?Scott, you are wrong. O'Neal is much better than Brand. I did not say Rose was a good, but he is the same type of player, an over-achiever, he was in college and he is now. I want a grade A stud and that is O"neal.
Indeed, THJ.
Also notice my relationship was:
Brand >= O'Neal >>> Payton > Kidd
While I like Brand over O'Neal for some specific things he brings to the table, namly his offensive rebounding and ability to score without having a lot of plays run for him, I don't put him very far ahead of O'Neal. Both play different games and are very good at those games. I look at is as Brand = 1 O'Neal = 1a.
If we get either one, it will be the greatest offseason we've ever had.
It's what I dream about.If we get either one, it will be the greatest offseason we've ever had.
*salivate*
If O'Neal was on Clippers, his numbers would be 25 pts/game and 15 rebs. In Indy, O'Neal has to share scoring with 5 other players and renbounding with 3 other players and he has to win. Brand can play for stats only, he does not have to win games.It is much easier to have stats when you do not have to win games, that is a fact. O'Neal scores more points/game and Brand has 1 more reb/game , but plays 2 more mins/game. Their blks are even. Did you watch the Allstar game? O'Neal was playing great defense, swatting two of TD's shots right back in his face.
Brand is a nice player, but can not carry a team on his shoulders into the playoffs like O'Neal can. (Not that he will have to, unless Tim goes down)
I think Payton has run his course. He doesn't have too much left.
He'd work as like a Terry Porter on steroids, but I wouldn't expect too much from him.
If he signed with the Spurs, I'd be surprised if he averaged over 14 points or over 5 assists.
Brand doesn't have to share scoring? He has your man Maggette, Odom, Andre Miller, Q Richardson and Olowosuckass on his team.
You are just being a fool now, Jim.
And Brand sucks at FTs...we have enough 60 something % shooters on this team already...O'Neal is in mid 70% Brand in high 60%....
Scott, does Brand have to win??????????????????????????????????????????????? ??? **** no. Is it not true that your stats are better when you do not have to, or are expected to win games??????????????????????????????????
Nuff said!
Everyone HAS TO WIN GAMES- that's the point of the game, genius.
Just because Brand plays with a buch of clowns doesn't take away from his skills.
Brand does what he does out west.
Give it a rest Jim. It's one thing to like O'Neal over Brand. That is understandable. You don't have to BS to do it though.
Ask any GM who they would rather have on their team, Brand or O'Neal....I will bet you any amt of money that O'Neal would be the choice by 80% of them.
You can not get enough 6'11" post players that play great D and O who are athletic and can jump out of the gym. You can not coach hieght.
There are a plethora of 6'7 inch players who can can play Brand's game with hard work.
Either one is a coo.
Jermaine O'Neal and Elton Brand would both be all stars in the western and eastern conference.
Second superstars.
A guy to help ease the scoring load off Duncan.
Someone to help back up Duncan on D.
Someone that will help win back to back rings.
Scott, it is a bball fact that you can pad your stats on a losing team.
Put that player on a winning team and the stats drop off.
Brand does not have any pressure on him, he is a loser, his team is a loser, he does not need to win games to keep his stature on the Clippers....He has ZERO pressure on his shoulders, anyone can play better with nothing to lose.
Of you do not know that, then you are ignorant.
Great argument. Very easy to disprove.Ask any GM who they would rather have on their team, Brand or O'Neal....I will bet you any amt of money that O'Neal would be the choice by 80% of them.
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Name me one player who puts up numbers like Brand does with his height right now.There are a plethora of 6'7 inch players who can can play Brand's game with hard work.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions