Why would the Rockets want to trade V-Span? They're not going to get anything for him so they might as well make him a project (if V-Span coincides) for the next couple of years. If it doesn't work then, then you make him a filler for a trade or so.
Really. You must have amnesia. Let me refresh your memory. Prior to their four year drought ( which was expected because two key pieces left ), the Jazz were a dominating force in the NBA in the late 90's and the early millenum. If not for the Bulls, they would have had two championships, and prior to that, if not for the Rockets ( yeah! ) they might've competed for more Finals apperances. Most teams, when they lose their key pieces, suffer a 7-10 year drought ( example: Milwaukee, Boston, Hawks ). The Jazz bounced back as near-title contenders this season with smart draft picks and savvy free-agent signings. Deron Williams, AK-47, Boozer, Okur...THESE ARE EXAMPLES OF GOOD MANAGEMENT DECISIONS.
That's not going to happen. JVG is a fine coach, but he's got a thing against V-Span. It's over. That's what I'm saying over and over again. Do people not read?
My preference would be Inspector Gadget, he could play all 5 positions and give us a major scoring boost off the bench.
Being the klutz that he is, Inspector Gadget would foul out rather quickly. You'd need Penny on the bench with him at all times to keep him stable. Plus, I think if we did sign Gadget, the Lakers would quickly sign Dr. Claw.
LOL, looks like you're the kid with amnesia. Say whatever happened to the brilliant GM of those late 90's runs, the architect of putting role players around Malone & Stockton? I bet if you give that young whippersnapper some money he could turn ANY team into a champion Wait....I'm thinking of something....I heard it at MSG.....sometimes during the NBA Draft....it rhymes with TIRE HATIN' .... what was it......SQUIRE MATIN'? DIRE SATAN? oh, wait...I remember what it was.... FIRE LAYDEN...clap clap clap clap clap FIRE LAYDEN...clap clap clap clap clap FIRE LAYDEN...clap clap clap clap clap FIRE LAYDEN...clap clap clap clap clap Mmmm...they did not lose their two key pieces at any point. And nobody you cited has suffered from a "10 year drought", let alone "most teams". Atlanta is in the midst of a 7 year drought, the longest in franchise history right now, but that is the kind of thing that only the clippers or other truly moribund teams do. The Bucks when through a seven season set of doldrums in the 90's, but that's it. It is not "most teams". It is the exception rather than the rule. I'll give you that they've bounced back - but "owning the league?" No. In fact their reclamation project is about two years off schedule. Boozer and Okur signings have thus far resulted in two straight Lotto seasons. And if you want AK-47's contract right now - you can have it the Jazz will GIVE it to you, if you have an extra $63 million to pay a role player through 2012. They hit on Deron Williams, but hey when you're drafting third, you need a PG, and the two best players on the board are Deron Williams and Chris Paul - it's hard to go wrong.
What are you smoking? Vspan's fans are as dellusional as Vspan. Yeah, trade him, so he can play. Dont prentend to be a Rocket fan.
Actually, Philly does want Andre Miller. I don't know where you get your info from but they like the way he runs the team and were unwilling to trade him at the deadline. There is no package that either team would be willing to put together that would satisfy either team. Hayes has some value, same as Head (bu his value is low now) , Sura has none now and that's more then VSPan has. Those 4 don't get us even close and that's if we toss in a #1 pick.
In year one Nachbar was bigger, more athletic and could shoot though he was streaky. This kid is short, can't dunk and can't shoot. His trade value is Andre Barret or Mike Wilkes or if we get lucky we can get Tyronn Liu if we throw in Steve Novak.
Sign Penny as an assistant coach. Could u imagine her playbook. Besides, Dr. Claw doesn't show his face, esp. on defense.
So if someone did something brilliant for most of career and then went to that blackhole they call the New York Knicks they suck? Brief recent history of the Knicks. They had Larry Brown. He failed there. Does that make him a bad coach? No. They had Lenny Wilkens. Bad coach? No. Don Nelson? Bad coach? No. Scott Layden? Bad GM? No. ( BTW, JVG, *our* coach had success with Layden's reign ). If you're going to judge the Jazz based on their GM's failure with another team, that makes a very weak argument. Who knows why Layden failed in NY? Who knows why anyone failed in NY? All I can tell you is a lot of good people went to NY and failed ( excluding Isiah, because he's a proven loser ). Maybe this has something to do with Dolan. But while Layden was GM of the Jazz, the Jazz constantly great, their pieces were always wisely invested, they even developed the NBA equivilant of a farm system with manufactured efficient guards like Eisley. In fact, I don't really recall one bad move ever made by the Jazz during the Malone years. So please don't say Scott Layden was a bad GM. He's proven to be good until he went to the Knicks. If you're going to say Layden was a bad GM, then I guess you can say Larry Brown, Don Nelson, and Lenny Wilkens also are failures because they had one bad year with the Knicks. Busted. Karl Malone and John Stockton are my references. In '03 and '04, they were rebuilding without any established good players. You can't consider Kirilenko a key player because he was a rookie. And even now, you wouldn't say he's a franchise player. So saying they " did not lose key players at any point " means you're either forgetting Malone and Stockton retired, or you consider Raja Bell and Carlos Arroyo " key franchise players ". Either one of those thoughts baffles me. What do you consider a drought? Just because a team makes it as an eighth seed in the Eastern playoffs doesn't mean they were out of a drought? Look at this year: Milwaukee and the Hawks might make the playoffs. So? That doesn't mean they don't suck. It doesn't mean squat to be a playoff team in the Eastern conference of the NBA. Since you like stats, here are some for you: - Atlanta, including this season, 8 years. Drought. - Washington, excluding these past two seasons, a series of 6 and 8 crud seasons. Just ended their drought. - Boston, in the Danny Ainge era ( not even counting the Rick Pitino era where they drought for 8 ) they're 4 and counting and I don't see it ending for them. Drought. - We all know the Clippers. Drought. - Our favorite, the Knicks, are into their sixth bad seasons. Drought. - Until their latest regime, Toronto suffered 8 really atrocious seasons of their previous 11 in existance. Drought with an occasional hint of merciful Vince Carter rain. - Milwaukee, okay, they are the eighth seed every now and then. So what? Six straight seasons without a winning record. Drought. - The CAVS! Yes, the Cavs. Pre-Lebron, 7 year drought. With Lebron? Still barely good, but enough for second place in the horrible East, a conference where the Rockets would fight for number one. I bring them up because Jim Paxson still stinks and has not proven to be any good except that he did what any GM would do, and draft Lebron. If he was any good as a GM, the Cavs should be title contenders by now the way Riley turned Miami into one with Shaq in a span of two years. - And here's the mother of poorly managed teams: Golden State. 13!!! That's not a drought. That's an evolutionary climate change. That's nine teams with consistantly bad eras in the past two decades. And if you want, Philly can go in there too, although thanks to Larry Brown, they didn't go in a drought and he made the most out of chump change pieces like Eric Snow, Aaron McKie, and Tyrone Hill. Larry Brown, in his Philly years, was a genius. The Sixers success had nothing to do with Billy King. Billy King seemed to do everything he could to mess it up. Jim Paxson is looking like Billy King and to some extent, Kevin McHale with Garnett except for that one magical season with Cassell and Sprewell. Those guys got hurt and even then nobody expected the Jazz to be fourth place in 2007. They're ahead of schedule thinking they'd get really good at 2009. But Devon Williams made the difference. Nobody expected the Jazz to be this good this soon. No one. AK-47 has been injured prone. Before that, he was one of the best all-around players in the NBA. I don't blame them for signing him long-term given what they knew back then. Do you fault the Magic for signing Grant Hill to a big contract back when they did it? Furthermore, who's to say he won't recover completely and come back in full strength the way he did in '03? If the Jazz grow into what the Spurs have become, with them contending year in and year out, and AK is a big part of that, isn't it worth it to sign him to that? Saying the Jazz would relinquish Kirilenko is short-sighted because he can come back. He's only 25. Bad GMs find ways to screw up high picks. Two names: Mario Williams. Charley Casserly. ( yeah, I know it's football ) But, if you want to keep this NBA and bad GM related, how about Atlanta. 2nd pick of the '05 draft. Needed a point guard. Got many small forwards. Drafted? A small forward with Paul and Deron on the board. Washington and Kwame in '01. Golden State and Mike Dunleavy, Jr. in '02. Detroit and Darko in '03. Luke Jackson in '04 ( who? Yeah ). Andrew Bogut being the number one pick in '05.
JazzDaddy - if you want lick the Jazz' nuts you're on the wrong BBS. On Layden in New York: The fact is he brought the exact same players in with him to NY that he had in Utah (Eisley, Anderson) and signed them to long term deals. The problem is he didn't have Stockton and Malone. Honestly, you put any collection around those guys in their prime and they are going to make the playoffs more often than not. Layden thought it was his role players that made the difference. Layden was proven wrong, rather it was the Jazz superstars that made the role players look good, and the Knicks are still paying for that mistake. On Layden not making any bad moves iwth the Jazz: Yeah he didn't make bad moves. IN fact he hardly made any moves worth remembering. The Jazz rarely took chances, and were content to tinker with what they had rather than try anything bold to win a championship (think: trading for Clyde Drexler in midseason, or acquiring Dennis Rodman even though he was crazy, or acquiring a tempermental Rasheed Wallace to put you over the top). Ultimately that is why arguably the greatest PF and PG to play the game went home ring-less. So...JazzDaddy this is why Layden does not have another GM job. On playoff droughts - JazzDaddy if you're going to count seasons in which a team had no chance to win anything even though they make the back end of the playoffs - the Jazz' drought goes at least one and arguably two years longer. So we are talking since 2000 since they've benn legit. And if we're counting expansion teams like Toronto and Vancouver- be aware that the Jazz went ten years without making the playoffs when they first started up. Anyway I want you to do this it's easy to count the droughts. Now go count all the times a team went 4 or fewer seasons without making the playoffs and then made the playoffs. That number is going to be a lot bigger - and include many of the same teams you just cited. on the jazz bouncing back You can't say "well injuries, it's not fair". Hey, life isn't fair. You didn't account for injuries when trying to explain other teams playoff droughts. I mean Boston wouldn't have gone on a playoff drought if Len Bias hadn't died, or Reggie Lewis. So I don't see why it excuses the Jazz. If you don't get a return on your investment, you don't get one. And the Jazz didn't get one the last two seasons (nor did they get one on Carlos Arroyo or Maurice Williams) On nobody expecting "the Jazz to be this good, this soon" LOLOLOLOL. I suggest you use the search function and go and read some of the posts from the Jazz fan posters like schwa. They were putting the Jazz in the WCF's the last two seasons early on, as were some pundits....in which they ended up in the lotto. on not messing up picks Hey if all it takes is being better than Atlanta to qualify as "owning the league", then there's a lot of teams out there that own the league.
RiceDaddy, Are you aware that basketball is a business? GM's have to make money too. If they get worse after a trade, was it always a bad decision? The thing that makes you an idiot is that you cannot see multiple sides to an issue. That takes imagination. Einstein, he was pretty smart, right? He said, "Imagination is more important than knowledge." I'll add to the quote. Non-dillusional imagination is more important than knowledge. I'm glad to see that you think you are better than those on top. Maybe you are, but prove it. Tell us who is going to be the next best thing, the diamond in the rough out there? And make the list very short. Anyone can throw a hundred darts and hit a bullseye. And don't tell me Kevin Durant... everyone on here already knows about him. I'm waiting.
Never trade potential for has-beens with little or no gas in their tank. It's like trading an unopened present for a box of staples. Yes, you never know what's in the box, and at the moment, some staples might be useful, and you know what you get for sure. But what are some staples going to really do for you other then hold a bunch of pieces of paper for a while until they run out. Who makes that trade? JVG does.
No. Carrol Dawson makes trades. Boki sucked. Still does. A couple good games don't constitute a good career. The guy has finally gotten his chance to play and he's doing it on a mediocre team. What is he doing with it? 8.7ppg. Wow. I. Am. Amazed. Don't forget that we went on a winning streak after that Boki trade and we seem to be doing fine without him. http://www.82games.com/0607/06NJN9D.HTM New Jersey can keep him.
If the Rockets get bounced in the first round, I wonder how many draft spots we can move up with a package of our #1 plus Luther -- enough to get us Acie Law or a decent PF?
