I KNOW stats are not everything and we are not playing fantasy basketball, but I just want to show these without further comment. Webber 27.1pts/11.1 rebs/4.2 asts/1.3 stls/1.7 blks Taylor 13.0 pts/05.5 rebs/1.5. asts/0.4 stls/0.6 blks Please take these stats into consideration. Would you pay Taylor more than half of what Webber would get? Thanks. ------------------ Rockets' offseason tasks in order of priority: Get rid of Cato under any circumstances. Sign Chris Webber. Re-Sign Hakeem. Re-Sign Moochie and AirBullard. Pick up the Langhi option for another year. Trade for Bo Outlaw and Raef LaFrentz. .....-'-. ../`.....|__ /`....--`-,-` '-|`...o.'<-....[] ..\....._\__).\=` ...C_..`....,_/ .....|.;----' come back with your original name...now that everyone is changing their screen names anyway
I'd give Mo exactly half. ------------------ Protrolls.com! "I want to be like Olajon." -Sagana Diop has the right idea...
Does anyone remember what the three types of lies are? Its lies, damned lies and I just cannot remember the third one . . . ------------------ "So, is there still a big rivalry between North Carolina and Duke?" Craig Sager - Proving the only thing bright about him is his shirt.
You left out the fact that Taylor's minutes are significantly less than Webber's, the fact that one plays in an offense catered to him, and to mention that both play in different situations. Who's to say Webber would've put up those stats in Houston? And, considering team chemistry, potential for growth, playoff performance, desire, and other intangibles, I'll take Mo and a good center over Webber alone. ------------------ EDDIE, EDDIE, EDDIE!!! Draftsource.net-- the premier source for draft info. Profiles, rankings, mock drafts, and more! The Mo Taylor Fan Site
I'll take Webber and Hakeem over Mo and Hakeem. I will not be sad if it ends up to be Mo and Hakeem. Potential for growth: Obviously, there is more potential for growth for Mo simply because he can still double his statistical output in theory, whereas that is less probable for Webber (but also less necessary...). Playoff performance: It remains to be seen whether Mo can perform better than Webber, plus, Webber was usually on relatively bad overall teams, so you cannot blame it all on him. Chemistry, desire and other intangibles: I guess we have to agree to disagree here. You might be right that we are better off there with Mo, but what I don't accept is that you state it almost as a fact that we would be better off with Mo and seem to value that ASSUMPTION higher than getting the clearly better player.
I'll take Webber and Hakeem over Mo and Hakeem. I will not be sad if it ends up to be Mo and Hakeem. You figure out how to make those finances work (signing Webber and Hakeem) and perhaps you have a case. As much as we would like for it to happen, I'm pretty sure Hakeem won't come for that 2.5 million that you were proposing earlier. ------------------ EDDIE, EDDIE, EDDIE!!! Draftsource.net-- the premier source for draft info. Profiles, rankings, mock drafts, and more! The Mo Taylor Fan Site
double post ------------------ EDDIE, EDDIE, EDDIE!!! Draftsource.net-- the premier source for draft info. Profiles, rankings, mock drafts, and more! The Mo Taylor Fan Site [This message has been edited by The Cat (edited July 01, 2001).]
You might have a point there . If it doesn't work financially at all, then all my arguing is moot...I'm just still hoping for Hakeem to be reasonable...
