Artest. In a S&T of some sort. He comes in, gives us more grit and toughness. Could be. Can you imagine him really feeling comfortable playing all those home games in Indy? He needs a "reset button" move, and I'm sure would actually respect the discipline of JVG and the 3rd or 4th option status he'd get on offense with Tmac and Yao as strong 1st and 2nd options. Artest would be a rebounder we need too. Could happen. Right?
I can certianly see a Sura + Padgett for dooling and filler Dooling wants more minutes so it seems logical for us and them to deal.
... That's just a joke that I'm not really understanding, right? Assuming that it isn't, why would we want a garbage player like Dooling?
Maggette scores 22 pts per game. If the Clips want to let him go, then I can't imagine a deal that I wouldn't like that the Rockets would consider pulling. We haven't got a guy on the roster (minus yao/tracy) that isn't worth this much.
Hey, Keyon's got a 2:1 career assist-to-turnover ratio, averages slightly over 1 rebound a game, for the last two seasons has hit from the 3-point line at a blistering 22% clip, and only worked his way into the Clippers starting lineup when someone else was injured. What's there not to like?
That 3rd-4th quarter performance of his where he tried to go Dwyane Wade on the Pistons but fell miserably short
No thanks on Dooling. I really don't like Dooling's game and his demeanor. There way too many times I saw him make terrible mistakes down the stretch of games, especially game 7. We need to get rid of Sura, but I'd take him over Dooling anyday.
I definitely agree. Ike might be the best choice for the 4. We would have to move higher than 18 to have a shot at Ike. Boston doesn't want their pick. The biggest question marks are NJ and Toronto. Nets need a PF (Rahim coul be very good on the Nets). Toronto would love a center, but they may play Bosh at the 5. However, the Raptors need help at many positions. Phoenix may also grab him at 21. We all agree that the Rockets need to make moves.
If someone is bashing away, mindlessy, it's you, at adeelsiddiqui's post. Look at your first response to him, you ask if he's even watched any games, just because, in his opinion, Mike James brings too many negatives to the team. I don't see what was so bad about his opinion. I like Mike James, but later in the season he was dribbling too much and taking bad shots. He didn't run the offense very well and didn't penetrate consistently. This isn't being negative, that's just the truth about James. If we want to resign him, we have to consider that. (At this point I do want to resign him)>
Beyond a doubt, Mike James is a good reserve PG. He brings defensive quickness and intensity plus he can sometimes offer a hot hand on offense. I think he will benefit from a full training camp with the team. Because he came during a midseason trade, he didn't really have a chance to learn and buy into our offense. That all said, he isn't very good at making others better on offense. It seemed like he only passed the ball after he first determined he wasn't going to shoot or drive. Even with his shortcomings as a PG, I want him back next year as a backup unless we trade him to get a better player. He has two years left on his contract. To me he is a prototype role player off the bench that can give us a boost at both ends of the floor by playing 15-20 minutes a game. I still laugh at all those who wanted to make him our starter after his first couple of games, even though the offense was clearly out of kilter because of James' "me first" attitude. I know he scored well but it was clearly an unsustainable pace for a player like him. Like most very good reserves, he is capable of starting a couple of games and doing very well, but after a while it just doesn't work.
This is his first post: I didn't read in the measured judgment that you did. I also didn't see him doing much to address anything that James did over the course of the season other than oblique references to him being a ballhog. He's under contract through 2006 with a player option, so I'm not sure why you're talking about re-signing him unless you are talking about offseason 2006 or 2007.
So he hates Mike James, so what? I hate some players that other people like. He's not a troll, I see his point. Wasn't aware he was under contract, that's good.
Mike James is not so important that we cannot trade him. Yes, he's our best offensive weapon after the big two, but if he's the only thing teams want off of our roster? I'd let him go if we're getting back something better.
