BREAKING: Matt Barnes to Lakers (PG. 16)

[BMP 424]

quote:

How is is that the most powerful big man in the whole league is not as attracting to the other players as for example Wade or Kobe? Cant it be that it has to do with the job of the Magic organization, or is it just that the city is not as appealing to them? Dont tell me about Shaq, because Shaq is not the only one who left us in the search for stardom.

 

 

When has this organization ever had the chance to get either Wade or Kobe? Demanding a trade isn't enough. Management from those teams don't have to trade their players to where the players want to go. Not every player is T-MAC/Carter/Jackson, they can't just demand a trade somewhere and magically go.

 

 

When did we have the money to sign those guys when they were FAs? We certainly didn't have it this year and the year we did have the money, we got Lewis, who at that time was the best player available (granted he wasn't a max contract guy, no one in that FA was).

[ManuGinobili 0]

quote:

When has this organization ever had the chance to get either Wade or Kobe?

 

I compared Howard's attractiveness with Kobe's and Wade's. I didnt say he did not attract THEM. We can be talking about any superstar now, you name it.

[BMP 424]

Okay, how about you name one superstar that we could've signed through FA. Demanding trades do not count because, as mentioned before, they have no say on where they go.

 

 

Oh, and don't forget about Wade publicly saying Dwight Howard would be his #1 choice to play with.

[Miller4Prez64 1]

The only big name I remember us missing out on was Tim Duncan. We almost had our own big three in FA before he decided to stay with the Spurs.

 

No reason to cry and ***** about though.

[BMP 424]

quote:

Originally posted by Miller4Prez64:

The only big name I remember us missing out on was Tim Duncan. We almost had our own big three in FA before he decided to stay with the Spurs.

 

No reason to cry and ***** about though.

 

Yeah, but Duncan was more of a question of loyalty than anything else. It wasn't that the city sucked or wasn't appealing enough, it was that he decided to stick with Robinson and stay with the team that drafted him.

[ManuGinobili 0]

quote:

Yeah, but Duncan was more of a question of loyalty than anything else. It wasn't that the city sucked or wasn't appealing enough, it was that he decided to stick with Robinson and stay with the team that drafted him.

 

Dont you think it is a credit also at how the Spurs organization is built and how they assemble their rosters and how everyone does their job?

[Captain Hi-Top 791]

quote:

Originally posted by ManuGinobili:

quote:

Temper temper. Your list was an abhorent attempt to paint the Magic organization in a negative light. Get over it.

 

I did not intend to put the organization in a negative light. I wanted to point a recurrent flaw I have seen in this team. I do it because I would like my team to continue progressing, instead of making the same bull mistakes from the past.

 

You could also stop with your theory and try to answer my points, since I have not seen your explanation.

 

You missed the point of my reply and proceeded to attack me instead.

 

The whole point about the Lakers and their legacy was to give you a frame of reference when you read the sentece directly after. In other words, Shaq growing up wanting to play for the Lakers meant that, as soon as he got that chance, he was gone. It was not a reflection on the Magic as an organization in any way shape or form.

 

You listed T-Mac on your list of team "failures". He didn't leave the Magic, he was traded, and the Magic going out to get him in free agency was a HUGE plus for this team. He didn't want to be part of a "rebuilding" effort when we drafted Dwight. That is not a reflection on the teams inability to retain talent. He didn't play out his contract and bolt. Not sure how you can list T-mac there either.

 

Again, and this is the same exact point I made before, but you some how have refused to acknowledge these points, isntead attacking me and then claiming I haven't responded to your arguments, Chris Paul is NOT A FREE AGENT. He is under contract with NO. There is a RUMOR that he wants out. There is a RUMOR we have made inquiries. There is also a RUMOR that we are on his short list of teams he would like to play for. Seems to me that would suggest we are doing pretty well as far as ATTRACTING talent. So, again, why is he on this list?

 

Matt Barnes is a career journeyman. He does not belong on a list with Shaq, T-Mac, Paul, Duncan, and Hill unless you saw them all eating dinner together and wanted to make a list of the guys you saw sitting at the table. Besides the fact that he is a career role player, and he wanted to "get paid" (funny now that he found out he WAS getting paid what he was worth). Orlando found another career role player that they thought fit better with this team. That's what happens to top tier teams. They tend to swap out role players from time to time. Not a knock on the Magic.

 

Ariza doesn't belong on this list either. Nothing to see here but a bad trade.

 

Duncan was a shot at signing three max free agents. Ultimately, he showed his loyalty by staying with the Spurs, but ****, man, aren't you *****ing because Miami signed three top tier guys? Orlando signed two, and almost had three in Duncan. The guy is loyal to a fault, and Orlando couldn't pull him away from the Spurs. Does that mean Orlando has trouble luring free agents into town? I would think not, but then, I didn't make the argument, you did.

 

Hill was a great signing at the time. I'm not sure if you put him on the list because of his injuries, or because he left the team after his contract was up. Again, like I explained earlier, his leaving was a good thing for both parties. It would have been great if he stuck around to come off the bench, but he wanted to start. Can't blame him (even though I did at the time), and you can't blame Otis for then letting him go.

 

How is it a trend that we don't lure free agents? We lured 'Shard here didn't we? We lured Hill and T-Mac. You keep saying Paul is an example, but he is not a free agent. how the hell do you think it's rational at all to hold Orlando responsible for not luring a player here who is not and has never been a free agent in this league? Not only that, but the guy has openly stated he would like to play for Orlando, which pretty much goes against your argument to begin with. Stop adding him to your little list, he's making you look bad.

 

You say the only good news for this teams history is by way of the draft, but I would remind you that we did not draft Horace Grant. We did not draft T-Mac. We did not draft G. Hill (which, regardless of what you think, was a great signing at the time, especially to lure him away from Detroit).

 

Miami got lucky. Wade and LeBron got all chummy during the Olympics, and Bosh wants to tag along. That had more to do with those three guys than anything Riley did. All Riley did was make sure his team had the room financially when it came time. It's not like he decided that Miami needed LeBron and Bosh and he pushed everything to make it happen. The opportunity presented itself, and he made sure to take advantage. How often has something like that happened in this league? Almost never, and yet you want to hold it up to this team as some sort of measuring stick for success and intimate that our team is failing because they haven't made any sort of NBA history making moves like Miami just did. Well, guess what, if that's your measure of a successful team, then pretty much no one measures up. We almost had three top guys in T-Mac, Hill, and Duncan. Boston picked up three great guys, but they were on the decline. Lakers picked up one when they already had one (that makes two, not three). So, really, it's just Miami.

 

Garnett was a horrible trade made possible by the buddy system. Gasol was a steal as well. LeBron was a free agent. No one EVER takes a paycut like LeBron/Bosh/Wade just did. Again, you are looking at one ground breaking event and using it to compare our team. Any other team measuring themselves to that one event comes out on the short end.

 

Also, your little rant about the exact detailings of who we traded for Hill ignores the fact that we had to let those guys go in order to make room for Hill and T-Mac, and still have enough left to sign Duncan if he agreed. If you read what I said, I was not suggesting we traded Wallace and Billups to pick up T-mac and Hill, I was reminding you that yes, we gave up some talent (since you were *****ing about it like a little school girl), but we had to do that in order to get Hill, T-Mac, and Duncan, which was the goal that summer. Much like what Miami did this summer.

 

So, take your petty insults, your minimal IQ, your inability to comprehend written communication, and your pathetic attempts to "destroy me", and re-evaluate your position. Come back if you can properly support your argument, and try doing so without all the rage and insulting and maybe we can keep this civil, schmuck.

 

Also, you need to readjust your expectations.

[Captain Hi-Top 791]

quote:

Originally posted by ManuGinobili:

quote:

Your reading comprehension is so bad that its almost like you are a kid.

 

1- Your whole "Lakers are traditional team" vanishes when you look what the Miami Heat have accomplished in such a short existence.

2- I said "The one time we DID HIT IT, the player left after 4 seasons", that was McGrady. So dont tell me I didnt mark it as an accomplishment or a positive. Actually, it was precisely what I meant there.

3- I never said we gave up McGrady for Billups and Wallace. I said "we gave away some amazing talent without knowing it" after the sentece that put a positive note on the McGrady thing. If you haven't learned it already, a COMMA can be used to separate statements from each other. I dont have to get anything right there.

4- We gave up Wallace and ATKINS for Hill on that trade. YOU get that right, schmuk.

 

If you dare showing up trying to highlight your minimal IQ, then at least get your fact rights, or learn how to read. Therefore, I won't have to DESTROY you again.

 

THESE are the statements I wanted you to refute, Echo. The other questions were for BMP. Are you sleepwalking today?

 

Already covered, but what the heck...

 

Redickulous insult. I could answer directly and turn this into a flame war, but that would be both silly and pointless. You aren't worth the time.

 

1-Adddressed above, but apparently you missed the entire meaning of mentioning the Lakers followed by mentioning Shaq's desire to play for them. Do you deny that he left because he wanted to play for them, and really no other reason at all?

 

2-You put McGrady on your ***** list. There is no reason for him to be there as a knock against this organization. We attracted him here as a free agent. Something you complain that we aren't able to do, and we traded him away when his "superstar attitude" made him unwilling to be a team player. That has more to do with him than with management, and I think it was a needed step. That's a plus in my book. You don't see Dwight acting like that, you don't see Wade or Duncan acting like that either. LeBron? yeah, and what did he just do? Left his team in free agency. What did they get in return? Pretty much nothing. Glad the Magic was smart enough to not let that happen.

 

3-4 Again, missing the point. I wasn't detailing a trade, I was pointing out that we had to let some talent go in order to brign in our free agents that we targeted that summer. The biggest up and comming talents we let go? Wallace and Billups. The biggest free agenst we brought in? T-Mac and Hill. We had to make room for those two guys and the potential for Duncan. Does that not make sense?

 

Please do not direct any more comments to me unless you come back with something worthy of discussion.

[ManuGinobili 0]

I liked that answer. Its better when you explain your posts.

 

I do not think there is one particular flaw. I think the management was not savvy when it came to offseason decisions. I do think giving away Wallace when we signed Hill was a big mistake (I am sure you think the same). I do think that not holding on Billups was bad judgement from the basketball operations. I do think that T-Mac was not a top free agent when we got him. That was a big YES for the GM or whoever took the decision, because they gambled on a young kid with upside and he surprised us all.

 

And what about saying we LURED Lewis? Are you kidding me? We were the only ones in the world who could have give him 126M!!!!

 

How come Duncan stays "out of loyalty", and we havent had any player staying here "out of loyalty"?

[thejuice 0]

matt is gonna be on the scott van pelt show in a couple minutes.

[Captain Hi-Top 791]

quote:

Originally posted by ManuGinobili:

I liked that answer. Its better when you explain your posts.

 

I do not think there is one particular flaw. I think the management was not savvy when it came to offseason decisions. I do think giving away Wallace when we signed Hill was a big mistake (I am sure you think the same). I do think that not holding on Billups was bad judgement from the basketball operations. I do think that T-Mac was not a top free agent when we got him. That was a big YES for the GM or whoever took the decision, because they gambled on a young kid with upside and he surprised us all.

 

And what about saying we LURED Lewis? Are you kidding me? We were the only ones in the world who could have give him 126M!!!!

 

How come Duncan stays "out of loyalty", and we havent had any player staying here "out of loyalty"?

 

At the time, letting Wallace and Billups go was the right move. Wallace was a good up and coming talent but we were getting Grant Hill, T-Mac, and possibly Duncan as well. Billups was not the Billups that you saw in Detroit yet either mind you, don't kid yourself into thinking he was all-star talent at the time.

 

And yes, we lured Lewis, lured him with some serious cash. His choices were to stay with his current team (what seems to happen more often than not) and Houston who also wanted him, and happens to be his home town. Maybe it took that extra year to make sure he came here, maybe it didn't, but that's really all that's in contention here, right, the final year on his contract? And, just to make sure you understand, the only team that could pay him 126M was Seattle, that's why we did the sign and trade for him.

 

You say we haven't had anyone stay out of loyalty, and I remind you that Dwight signed an extension instead of looking forward to testing the waters of free agency. Not to mention the fact that teams are willing to trade players in order to get better, I think it's a bit much to expect "loyalty from the players" to be the norm.

[JRam027 26]

quote:

Originally posted by thejuice:

matt is gonna be on the scott van pelt show in a couple minutes.

 

He's been making appearances everywhere the last two days. Petros and Money, Jim Rome, a couple LA radio shows and now SVP.