Our banger PF dreams may be answered...Richard Hendrix likely to be waived today...

[NJ_MagicFan 0]

Wow. So many pro-Jameer guys here haha. I'm offering to make peace with you guys -- we just have to agree to disagree about our current PG situation.

 

JAMEER IS GOOD. But I guess since I'm a basketball player, and come from an organized background, I've always had a guard who created more, that's all.

 

I hope we win tonight!

[Secretly Space Jesus 670]

You've yet to respond to my long form post.

[CoachTsurfing 0]

quote:

Originally posted by Marc Acres 3:16:

As soon as I saw your thread title I knew who you were talking about. I can't think of any good reason to not pick up the guy and make him a project.

 

I can, Otis Smith. Why would he. He thinks the team is perfect. Again, makes too much sense.

[NJ_MagicFan 0]

quote:

Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:

You've yet to respond to my long form post.

 

Just a few points:

 

a- I NEVER said Jameer should have 10 dimes BECAUSE OF DWIGHT. I said he should get at least 7 each night easy, but I doubt that'll happen because he shoots all the time and turns the ball over too much.

 

b- I never pulled up Devin Harris' stats, I merely gave a single showing he had a few nights ago of dropping 11 dimes, so please get your information right before attacking on the rebuddle.

 

c- About your defense statement, I didn't "ignore" it, I just didn't talk about it because it wasn't part of my main argument.

 

My main point is Jameer shoots too much, turns the ball over too much, and doesn't create ENOUGH for a point guard.

 

I hope none of my comments have been taken as anything but a neutral tone -- I just think we can get someone better that's all. And I know I'm not alone.

[Secretly Space Jesus 670]

Well you actually said 8(rtillaree said 10), but that's still nonsense.

 

Jameer takes fewer shots than Paul, Davis, Harris, or Parker.

 

So you're using one game from Harris as the basis of your argument? Do you need me to tell you why no one is taking you seriously?

 

Nelson is also 19th among point guards in TOs per game. So that point is too stupid for me to ever address again.

 

Seriously, who is available that you think is so much better?

[NJ_MagicFan 0]

Well, it's very obvious you will not let up on this until you hear me say you're right so YOU'RE RIGHT DRUNK. YOU'RE 100% CORRECT. Jameer is a great point guard, and we don't need to make any changes to our rotation. Forgive me for not being on the "Jameer is playing great for a string of games" bandwagon.

 

Satisfied?

[Secretly Space Jesus 670]

quote:

Originally posted by NJ_MagicFan:

Well, it's very obvious you will not let up on this until you hear me say you're right so YOU'RE RIGHT DRUNK. YOU'RE 100% CORRECT. Jameer is a great point guard, and we don't need to make any changes to our rotation. Forgive me for not being on the "Jameer is playing great for a string of games" bandwagon.

 

Satisfied?

 

No need to act juvenile.

 

You're welcome to whatever opinion you want.

 

But if your justification for your opinion is complete BS, don't be surprised when people who disagree with your opinion call BS on you.

 

Throughout this thread you've presented an opinion: that Jameer was an inadequate point guard. You then justified this opinion with a series of increasingly untrue and ridiculous pieces of "evidence" that were either factually incorrect or based on huge misrepresentations of what a point guard does.

 

If you don't believe Jameer's a good point guard, that's fine. A lot of people on this board don't and have done well to argue why they don't. Your arguments, by comparison, are roughly on par with arguing that a green car is better than other cars because green is your favorite color.

[NJ_MagicFan 0]

The other people on this forum, what was their reasoning for disliking Jameer Nelson as our starting PG? I'm just curious, because I have a feeling it revolves around all of the issues I stated.

 

And while you probably have a point with me presenting my argument wrong, the basis for it was not.

 

And with all due respect, I've played this game for 16 years, and currently play in college -- I KNOW what the role of a Point Guard is, and I won't be told that my knowledge of that is a "misinterpretation."

 

So honestly, I really don't feel like continuing to go at this with you forever Drunk. So can we let bygons be bygons?

 

Orlando won tonight, and a big part of it was from Jameer. I give him credit, absolutely -- he had a high-scoring game, and really looked a LOT better than Tony tonight. I think Jameer is a good PG, but I just think he can improve areas, THAT'S ALL IM TRYING TO SAY.

 

I just don't want to get off the main goal of this forum: to celebrate Magic, and all they encompass.

 

If i have taken part in anything that has de-railed that train of this forum in this thread, than I truly do apologize. I didn't mean for anything I've said to be taken offensive at all -- I was just trying to state my opinion.

[ball junkie 277]

So much for Hendrix...from Kyler:

 

quote:

The Warriors decided to cut Richard Hendrix yesterday as their roster move to make room for the return of Monta Ellis who completed his 30-game suspension and now counts against the 15-man roster. There has been speculation that the Magic may make a run at Hendrix when he clears waivers, however Magic sources said his addition would be unlikely, mainly because of the vast amount of practice and prep time required to get minutes in Stan Van Gundy's system. While GM Otis Smith was said to have a lot of interest in Hendrix during the draft process, it does not seem as though the Magic will bite on him when he hits free agency later this week.

 

http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=10979

[KillingInTheNameOf 63]

quote:

Originally posted by ball junkie:

So much for Hendrix...from Kyler:

 

quote:

The Warriors decided to cut Richard Hendrix yesterday as their roster move to make room for the return of Monta Ellis who completed his 30-game suspension and now counts against the 15-man roster. There has been speculation that the Magic may make a run at Hendrix when he clears waivers, however Magic sources said his addition would be unlikely, mainly because of the vast amount of practice and prep time required to get minutes in Stan Van Gundy's system. While GM Otis Smith was said to have a lot of interest in Hendrix during the draft process, it does not seem as though the Magic will bite on him when he hits free agency later this week.

 

http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=10979

 

W/a 440k contract, I really don't understand the harm, or why they wouldn't just put a waiver claim in for him IF Otis is indeed interested.

 

In addition, isn't this theory bunked by the fact Evans & Cook received immediate PT after being traded for last season?

[Jareth Cutestory 678]

So much optimism and then I have to go and read something like this.

 

It's not so much that I'm upset we won't sign Hendrix, but I'm upset at the fact that we can't sign someone to develop in practice, especially a promising big body.

[SmackDaddy 30]

Very little that our management does ever makes sense to me.

 

We were high on him during the draft process, but now that he will be available for a song, we are not interested because it would take too much time for him to acclimate to SVGs system?

 

W T F!

 

The guy wouldn't do anything but practice anyway.

 

***

 

The only explanation that would make sense to me is that the Magic don't want to fill that roster spot because it could encumber future trades/acquisitions.