Scola just falls in line with the other marquee PF's in the league?

Signed EVERY NBA Champion from the last 20+ years. They all had inside players with dominant skill.

Your only argument would be Detroit & Chicago. But even they had (Pistons- the Wallaces, Okur, E.Campbell-- Bulls had Jordan and a HOF PF in Rodman & at least 2 7'0 Centers to give fouls & clog the lane.)

 

First of all, what the hell do you mean "even" Detroit, Wallace is one of the best defensive big men of all time.

Secondly, you said a big man who blocks shots "cures all ills" when it's pretty obvious that even with two big men like Griffin/Jordan, their lineups are worse defensively (and offensively obviously) than Scola/Hayes lineups. That's all I said, and it's a fact.

 

If Scola goes, I go. Scola, Lowry, and Hayes are pretty much the only reason this team is worth watching.

 

Scola is the most replaceable person on the roster. He has his successor on the roster. He plays better defense than Scola and it is arguable we playd better as a team while Patterson played. Scola has the highest trade value. Scola is the only person who you could upgrade another position in a trade for someone else at another position like Small forward. Therfore trading Scola makes the most sense sense we do not have a good enough team to reach the playoffs. Even if they did? They are not good enough to compete as built. You trade Scola the oldest starter on the roster and most valuable to get what you want.

 

First of all I said a big shotblocking/rebounding center.
Second, the Clippers have been bad waaaay before Griffin/Jordan got there. Their problems go way beyond the court.

Ask yourself would you trade Hayes (age 27) and Scola (age 30) for Griffin (age 22) & Jordan (age 22)?

I bet a lot of GMs would. Griffin & Jordan with the Rox supporting cast would be nice.

Only on clucthfans would anyone turn down Griffin & Jordan for Scola & Hayes.

BTW, I said even Detroit because Wallace was only dominant on one end of the floor, every other NBA Champion had bigs who impacted both ends of the floor.

 

By the way? Just because we are not the Clippers of the league? Does not mean we are the cream of the crop either.

Griffen and his shot blocking counterpart do not have our supporting cast either. They dont have Lowry, Lee, Budinger, Martin, Dragic, Patterson, and Brad Miller.

Not thats Griffen or Jordan are options but having Jordan here would be great progress towards competing against those teams who go over Hayes back for rebounds and start layup drills on us some nights. Those nights could possibly turn into wins if he and Hayes had split minutes between the two. Then we would have size. I would trade Hayes for Jordan in a second. Pair him with Patterson and have a brutally defensive and shot blocking athletic front court. Of which is about matchups in the NBA. Alot of teams could not match Patterson and Jordans athletic and defensive prowess. As well as size to boot.

 

You're not very good at staying on topic are you? Now were talking age lol? I would trade away Garnett for Griffin too but that doesn't mean Griffin is a better defender or player lol.

Btw games are decided on the court. The Clippers' defense with Griffin and Jordan doesn't suck because of off the court issues or low morale, it sucks because they suck at defense.

Fact: Scola/Hayes is RIGHT NOW a better defensive frontcourt than Griffin/Jordan. Stats prove this, ESPN highlight reels don't but I don't care.

 

Griffen is a worst defender than Scola is the reason why. Also a worst player I would argue.

 

Which is what makes Scola so valuable to other teams. He is our best bargaining chip now. Without breaking up our team chemistry we could flip Scola and keep Patterson starting for a new center or SF who is top of the line. That new SF would be somewhat elite almost like Scola. Then you have this lineup possibly.

Chuck Hayes/sign a new 7ft center in offseason/Miller
Patterson/Chuck Hayes
Granger????/Budinger
Martin/Lee
Lowry/Dragic

Thats a real good team^^

 

Jordan and Griffin are two of the most overrated players in the league and are evidence that size and athleticism don't = winning.

I'm not against adding a prime KG or a prime Duncan or a Howard but to suggest that adding any old big body who can rebound and block shots will magically make us a good defensive team is a joke.

 

You Morey clones kill me. Keep your stats because the games are played on the court and it looks like we're going to the lottery, just like the Clippers. So your case for our substance over their highlight reels is WEAK.

 

I didnt suggest that. I suggested adding Jordan who is talented and big. Maybe some othertalkented big like Mark Gasol or some other talented big guy. To suggest we can win with Chuck Hayes anything is also a joke.

Now lets get to who we could replace by trade and look at the lineup shall we?

Trade Scola and first round pick for Danny Granger. Sign Jordan.

Size and defense and didnt lose Chuck Hayes either.

Lineup:
Jordan or Hayes on some nights
Patterson or Hayes if it makes you happy on some nights
Granger/Budinger
Martin/Lee
Lowry/Dragic


Looks like Western Conference finals contenders to me possibly???

 

You're really slow... We, unlike the Clippers, have had tons of injuries and roster makeover this season. I choose to look at the current Rockets team that's 37-21 for the season and say that's damn good, even ignoring the circumstances.

I find it funny how national media even recognize how well we've done (saw an ESPN article about who's done the most given bad circumstances and two guys picked us) and you low self-esteem types are relating us to the Clippers.

Hilarious.

 

We are definately not the Bulls or Lakers. Call it low self eseteem but its reality. I call it reality for the over confident barely 500 and and not in the playoffs bunch. We may be fans but we have to be realistic about our roster and not fan favorites and all gushy about one particular player over winning. Gushy and cute gets you first round exit and no playoffs everytime. Reality will get you rebuilt quick enough to not remember any of these fan favorites when they are gone in favor of our new Championship contending team and players on that team. They will always be more popular than the adorable fan favorites of these losing teams.

 

I think you're the slow one, We used to compete for titles. No you azzclowns are trying to tell everybody to cling to these moral victories. Injuries, Yao, T-Mac, these stats prove this, these stats prove that, & blah, blah, blah!

Save it, this is another year without the playoffs. I'll be glad when Yao is gone so there will be no more excuses. Hell you rattle them off like a pro! Congrats!

 

What fan favorites? Fans are not showing up to see these so called fan favorites because they arent winning enough. They are losing just enough to not make the playoffs. The stands are empty.

Get better players and fill the stands again. Real fan favorites become that way from winning. Lets move who we have to. Bulls did it for years until they found the right combination of players. Even when they did? Even then? They still wanted to trade for Courtney Lee to make sure they could win the Championship without a doubt. Even after signing Carlos Boozer they are not satisfied. Thats what Morey is doing and he needs to finish it and not listen to you nervous nellies who would have stopped him from trading Brooks and Battier. Keep on trading Morey until the ends justifies the means.

 

This.

 

I'm sorry you aren't bright enough to realize that losing a star player sets you back a bit and is a great excuse for not winning 50 games. No team has ever won anything with injured stars. Ever.

You can't analyze a team past the win column, even my dog could analyze a team based solely on wins, congratulations. You would have probably traded Kobe when the Lakers kept failing to win in the playoffs because "first round fodder is first round fodder" and they were "stuck on mediocrity's windmill".

 

Again and again, until one of the Scola traders answer directly, why nobody coment this FACT?

In the current NBA market, young players are a better trade bait than an older guy, no matter how reliable the older guy is.

Said that, Ppat, Hill, Budinger or Lowry would make better trade assets right now that a player labeled as 'old'like Scola (no matter how players relying on fundamentals rather than athleticism, like Nash, can play until 37).

So, if a true defensive C is to be gotten, it's more likely that a young desired player would have to go, not Scola.

 

Does not mean he does not have great value for alot of teams. Very high value these days for any proven 19 to 20 point scorers and Scola is proven in that category.