Reply With Quote
duncan for him
[/spursdone]
...that Paul Pierce is on the block.
How about Parker, draft picks, and cash for Pierce?
duncan for him
[/spursdone]
if the spurs could get him without giving up tp or manu i'd be up for it.
And Who Would Run Point?
Barry Or Beno?
SPEEDY IS UNDER CONTRACT HOW WOULD YOU GET HIM?
HE IS MAKING 3.6 MILLION AND IS A FA NEXT YEAR
Actually, move Ginobili to the point (he'd actually be a like parker was, a scoring pg), and Beno and Barry back them up.And Who Would Run Point?
Barry Or Beno?
Actually, with Scola coming in, how about Parker, Rasho, and a future pick for Pierce.
That would work, right?
Word is that Boston isn't sold on Pierce's commitment. He's partying to all hours...every night.
I don't think they'd tak anyone not named Duncan or Manu + other stuff for him, but enjoy your fantasies.
Fantasy League Forum
I thought the Celtics said that they wanted to keep Pierce, especially after his best season in the league last year.
Sorry, not enough ball to go around with tim, manu and pierce. Pierce is not exactly a team player, I frankly wouldn't bring him on board. The current Spurs know that everything revolves around tim. I don't know if PP would go along with that. And he's not much of a defender either. Great scorer though. I just don't see him being a secondary player anywhere.
Okay, well, who here thinks that Pierce is a better player than Manu?
(Don't take that question out of context; it's a simple question)
I honostly think that Manu is a better player than Pierce.
MANU>>> pp
not a team player that guy let him stay in boston
lebron could run the point since we just traded wilks for him
I'd swap Manu for Pierce. Pierce is a true star.
I also want ducks, Sequ and rascal to be happy.
I honestly think Manu is the better player: better defensively,sneakier (more steals), and if he was the #1 option on a club like Pierce is, he'd have Pierce's points too. Manu's more of an all-around team player; Pierce is more of a go-to guy. And he's a good one, don't get me wrong--he's not a one-dimensional ballhog like Marbury or Francis, I just don't think he'd fit the Spurs chemistry all that well.
I want to see a rested Manu next year before I answer that question. Manu has bigger huevos, but his endurance is in question. Pierce would rather shoot jumpers.
Just so you know, Paul Pierce makes $14M.
So this trade should read something like
"How about Manu and Parker for Paul Pierce?" to have any sense of working.
Just so you know, Paul Pierce makes $14M.
So this trade should read something like
"How about Manu and Parker for Paul Pierce?" to have any sense of working.
The Rasho, Parker, and future pick wouldn't work?
The pick probably doesn't need to be in there, but why don't you be somewhat realistic. The Spurs would need to give up a swingman to get a swingman of Pierce's caliber.The Rasho, Parker, and future pick wouldn't work?
So, if anything, the reasonable trade would be Manu and Rasho for Pierce.
Yeah, but I think Manu is pretty untouchable.
Well Parker isn't anywhere close to getting traded either.
But the only real untouchable guy is probably Duncan.
You set me up to say this. PP>>Manu
Do they pay you to troll in this board?
the spurs do not need to make this trade.
this is the type of trade you make if you can get him for nothing. that means a combination of talent that doesn't include td, manu or tp.
also, if you move parker then you have to find a point guard to replace him and despite what some in this forum seem to think, it wouldn't be easy.
if this was 1995 and the starting 2 was still vinny del negro i'd be begging for such a trade. but it's not and hey, the spurs have an all-star swing.
and !#$%, pierce is one of my favorite players in the game.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
