PhillyArena Forums
PhillyArena Community => NBA Discussion => Topic started by: Reality on July 22, 2005, 12:03:56 PM
-
SAR could have joined Miami, Spurs, Heat, Pistons.....
Ray Allen
on and on.
It's getting old and tired.
So it's possible that the Nets could shock and make the Finals. How much you wanna put down on that? I'm giving 10-1 odds. Lets see your money.
-
I think you ought to chill a little on SAR's opinion to go to the Nets.
Why did Malone choose the Lakers over SA? A lot of it had to do with the fact that he wanted the STARTING PF job.
SAR could have joined Miami, Spurs, Heat, Pistons.....
That's only three teams -- would Pop guarantee SAR a starting PF job? I think Pop is pretty happy with the team he has -- and he LIKES having two 7' playing together. Pop wouldn't guarantee Malone a starting position -- why would he guarantee SAR? Miami and the Heat are actually the same team but they resigned Haslem and while SAR is a better player (at least offensively), the Heat don't need to mess with the chemistry (and Haslem is one of Shaq's favs -- don't want to make Shaq mad). We all know that SAR isn't going to start for Detroit -- so who CAN he start for?
NJ has a great PG (if Kidd can get healthy again) and they have a great SF (Jefferson) -- they NEED a post player and that need is something that SAR can fulfill.
If SAR was all about money, he would have taken the sign-and-trade that Portland was scrambling to put together but he was more interested in going to a team that he thought had a chance in the playoffs (it certainly helps that he moved to the EC) and that needed a PF where he could start.
Most great players actually want to earn a ring rather than watching others earn it. I don't find it too surprising that SAR didn't go to the Spurs, Heat, Pistons -- I think he could have helped some other teams (SacTown would have been a better fit, IMO) who had a better shot but I don't see SacTown (even with SAR) beating Phoenix or San Antonio. I think that SAR went to the team that he thought he could help the most!
As for Ray Allen, why are you surprised? First, the guy loves Seattle -- is there anything wrong with staying put? Second, if he is happy staying where he is (umm, Seattle did pretty well last year) -- why berate him for his decision? If EVERY great player decided to jump to a team they thought that had a legit shot at a championship, the NBA wouldn't be a lot of fun during the regular season. Besides, how many of us (you included) would reject an offer to make twice the money doing the same thing?
Players who go for a ring rather than big bucks are going to continue to be the exception in the NBA -- just like it is everywhere else in the world. I actually know people who have turned down making more money elsewhere because of having to move family, relocating, etc. I think there are a lot of factors and I don't have a problem with a guy who decides to stay put! Now if he stays put and whines about never winning a championship -- that's a different subject.
-
Not to mention the nba is filled with ego's. I think a lot of people would love to be the person to put a team over the top. He goes to the Spurs, congrats, you just rode in on a horse that won the year before. Whoopty doo. However if he wins with NJ, and they win, he's the piece that put them there.
-
IMO, The Sixers would love to have him in Philly. Too bad they can't afford him.
Dabods: Don' t the Sixers get some more space now? Didn't they have money counting agaist the cap that was going to Coleman, MacCullough and Gieger?
-
Geiger's been off the cap for 2+ years. Coleman was traded to Detroit, so he hasn't been on our cap since. MacCulloch came off last February, and we're still well over the cap, so it gives is no extra room.
-
Okay, folks - how many players have signed with a team "just to get a ring" and actually GOTTEN a ring? Mitch Richmond is the only one I can think of.
The idea of signing somewhere "just to get a ring" is laughable, just because of how unsuccessful people are when they try it.
-
Miami and the Heat are actually the same team
Randy,
First this proves you actually read posts, so kudo's for that. Second Reality gave you one great big opening and you were much to easy on him :bash: , but a nice sedated jab :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: .
In any case on Shareef, the guy has never been in the playoffs, and he took $3 to $4 million less than the market value of similar players so he could play for a team that has a chance to go fairly deep in the playoffs. No one can predict the future, so you go to a situation that fits you well, and gives you a good shot at being successful and competing for a trip to the finals. I think Shareef did that. The Nets have a real shot at ho,me court in the first round, and the East will be very competitive 1-5 (Heat, Pistons, Pacers, Cavs, Nets) with at least 3 other teams (Philly, Washington, and Chicago) very much in the mix.
-
I think I would rather have Abdur-Rahim than Cwebb. Sixers would have been better off not making the trade with Sactown and working something out with Portland for Shareef.
It's bad that NJ gets a decent player at a positon where the Sixers are lacking.
-
How about NJ. They told Kenyon Martin, "NO WAY ARE YOU A MAX PLAYER", got 3 draft picks and a trade exception for him, used 2 of those draft picks and the Alonzo Mourning Albatross to get Vince Carter, kept the Clippers pick that was not lottery protected, and added Shareef Abdur Rahim for half of the money Kenyon Martin got, using the trade exception that they got for Martin.
The Nets may not win an NBA title, but Rod Thorn deserves Executive of the Year, just for that series of moves.
-
why?
One second, they're saying they're not interested in a max contract. Bruce Rattner completely guts a team, trading 2/5 of the starting lineup for picks. Then half a season later finds another max contract player to play a position they don't need.
IMO they would have been better off with KMart and Kittles (although in retrospect with the injury...but he may not have gotten injured in NJ) than VC. Their lack of a postgame, on either side of the ball, was their downfall last year. And SAR only fixes that problem on one end of the court.
That team had a proven track record. 2 straigth finals. Breaking it up, IMO, was a mistake.
-
Okay, folks - how many players have signed with a team "just to get a ring" and actually GOTTEN a ring? Mitch Richmond is the only one I can think of.
The idea of signing somewhere "just to get a ring" is laughable, just because of how unsuccessful people are when they try it.
Billy Walton leaving Flamerville and coming out to Boston to muscle up with one of if not the top NBA team of All Time, the '86 Celts. 50-1 Home record will never be touched.
Clyde the Glyde on the Hou Rockets '95.
I'm moving fwd chronologically.
Pause for commercial break.
-
Yeah, but those guys that got the rings were the exception and not the rule. Malone, Payton, Barkley, Pippen, Kidd, Walker...
The only guy who's good at it is Robert Horry. Whatever team he's on, you have to watch in the playoffs.
-
why?
One second, they're saying they're not interested in a max contract. Bruce Rattner completely guts a team, trading 2/5 of the starting lineup for picks. Then half a season later finds another max contract player to play a position they don't need.
IMO they would have been better off with KMart and Kittles (although in retrospect with the injury...but he may not have gotten injured in NJ) than VC. Their lack of a postgame, on either side of the ball, was their downfall last year. And SAR only fixes that problem on one end of the court.
That team had a proven track record. 2 straigth finals. Breaking it up, IMO, was a mistake.
At the end of 03-04 they had Kittles and KMart, plus their own pick the next 3 years. Kittles was to make $9.6 million, and KMart was wanting $9.5 million, and they had Mourning, A Williams, and Eric Williams making a combined $12.9 million. That is $32 million to these 5 players and 3 draft picks. They finished the season 47-35, and lost in the second round of the playoffs
They now have Vince Carter making $13.8 million, Shareef Abdur Rahim making $5 million, got $3 million in cash for their #1 last year, added Antoine Wright in the draft this year, and will have an almost guaranteed lottery pick next with the Clippers pick. That is $18.8 million less the $3 million in cash they got for last years #1 pick, and highly probable lottery pick next year.
The franchise is in far better shape today than last year, and they have as good if not a better chance of competing for a trip to the finals than they had after 03-04. After a couple of successful seasons they will leave NJ for NYC, as the Knicks continue to struggle to get out of salary cap hell.
If I was NJ I would much rather be where they are today, than where they would be if they had kept KMArt, and not made any of the other moves they have made.
-
Okay, folks - how many players have signed with a team "just to get a ring" and actually GOTTEN a ring? Mitch Richmond is the only one I can think of.
The idea of signing somewhere "just to get a ring" is laughable, just because of how unsuccessful people are when they try it.
Billy Walton leaving Flamerville and coming out to Boston to muscle up with one of if not the top NBA team of All Time, the '86 Celts. 50-1 Home record will never be touched.
Clyde the Glyde on the Hou Rockets '95.
I'm moving fwd chronologically.
Pause for commercial break.
Clyde was traded by Portland to Houston for Otis Thorpe and a #1 pick. He didn't sign as a FA with Houston.
-
Clyde was traded by Portland to Houston for Otis Thorpe and a #1 pick. He didn't sign as a FA with Houston. [/quote]
Clyde was clearly in "trade me or I wont play" mode. In fact he sat out the last 6-7 Blazer games before the trade, didn't he? I was frying at Looooser Wally Walker turning down the 1st shot at Clyde. Clyde for Kendall Gill -straight across. :eek2: :nod: Sonics would have titled IMO.
Anywho I was taking it as players who have been in the league for a while, played well but playing on teams that either did not make the playoffs for some time or putzed around with 1st round and outs or just flat didn't have a title. Now granted, Clydes Blazer teams were fantastic, in fact a couple years I thought they had the best squad but the Rick Adleman syndrome.
Pippen did the right thing coming to the Blazers. They chocked away a title shot.
Randolph, Malone coming to L.A. just soley he could "start as a PF". :rolleyes:
He had visions of sugar plumbs, more cheapshots, fairys and and an NBA title 100%.
-
Randolph, Malone coming to L.A. just soley he could "start as a PF".
He had visions of sugar plumbs, more cheapshots, fairys and and an NBA title 100%.
Malone was considering several teams and one of them was SA -- but he wanted to start (and play starter minutes) for whatever team he went to and that wasn't going to happen in SA, was it? That was a VERY high factor in him going to SA rather than a couple of other teams he was considering.
Why do you fail to realize that -- it's not enough for most players to get a ring -- they actually want to earn it by starting and playing major minutes (therefore stating that they did earn it). SAR didn't just want to go somewhere (like SA) and ride the pine -- he wanted to go somewhere where he thought he had a serious shot at going deep into the playoffs. If NJ had a center that was even serviceable and VC and Jefferson could play together effectively on the same floor and Kidd was healthy -- I'd say NJ had a shot -- but that's WAYYY too many "if's."
Malone had a very short list -- if I remember right it was Lakers, Kings, Mavs and Spurs. He wasn't getting the guarantees he wanted (starting and playing starter minutes) with anyone other than the Lakers, was he? Of course, he thought he could earn a title in LA -- but he also thought he was the player to tip the scales in the Lakers favor. Who knows, he might have been if he had been healthy!
PS - let's go back and read the post rather than translating it into whatever you want it to be:
Pop wouldn't guarantee Malone a starting position -- why would he guarantee SAR?
How does that translate into:
Randolph, Malone coming to L.A. just soley he could "start as a PF".
He had visions of sugar plumbs, more cheapshots, fairys and and an NBA title 100%.
Can you refute what I said? Pop wouldn't guarantee Malone a starting position and that WAS something Malone was insisting on wherever he went. The fact is that he wasn't going to get that with the Spurs or the Kings and it was doubtful that he would start for the Mavs (who also wouldn't make any guarantees). The Lakers had ZERO problem making that guarantee because we didn't have anyone at PF.
You might actually read the post and actually state what I said rather than making up what you wanted me to say!
-
Now we have yet another one, Keyon Dooling leaving The Heat to get minutes for the Magic. Don't say he was insignifigant for the Heats 2005 Playoff run. He made 20 of 26 shots during one four-game stretch this past postseason, helping the Heat win each of those games.
Similiar move? Speedy Claxton leaving SA so he could go and start for Golden State. Yeah that sure worked out well.
-
So players are now supposed to NOT want to start?
-
Now we have yet another one, Keyon Dooling leaving The Heat to get minutes for the Magic. Don't say he was insignifigant for the Heats 2005 Playoff run. He made 20 of 26 shots during one four-game stretch this past postseason, helping the Heat win each of those games.
Similiar move? Speedy Claxton leaving SA so he could go and start for Golden State. Yeah that sure worked out well.
Okay, Reality, want to make sure I get this right -- you think that stars (or anyone?) in the league should: 1) play for little money in order to join a team that has a legit shot at the title; and 2) be willing to sit the bench just in order to get a ring?
I just can't agree with that -- for many reasons:
1) That would make a couple of teams in the NBA GREAT -- and the rest pathetic -- I really don't want to watch 82 games when more than half of them are pathetic blow-outs. That would KILL the NBA!
2) Why would fans of the Hornets, etc. even want to go to a game if they weren't going to be entertaining? People want to see star power -- and it's just not on the same team.
3) Why should players not have the right to choose money and starting over rings -- isn't it their choice? Most of us have had that option -- and most of us (if the situation was right) would probably choose more money! There have been times that I haven't gone for more money or even more prestige but it had a lot more to do with the situation (and how it affected my family) then it did the fact that it was more money.
I just can't agree -- I don't think less of players because they don't all join the SA Spurs -- or even the LA Lakers. Hey, I look forward to what SAR can do with the Nets this season -- hopefully, it will mean a lot better, more competitive basketball -- esp. in the EC.
-
So players are now supposed to NOT want to start?
Given the choice between playing very meaningful minutes that make a difference on a title team vs starting for a .500 team, yes.
-
Reality,
I totally disagree -- this is your perspective and an NBA player wants to PLAY, not sit and watch others play. I don't think you can insult him because he would rather start for a team than "play meaningful minutes." However, I totally disagree that SAR would get meaningful minutes in SA or Detroit. There's simply not enough of them to go around.
But the Nets did much better than .500 after the VC trade -- and they have a great line-up in the backcourt (Kidd, VC and Jefferson). Jefferson was hurt and so was Kidd for most of the season. SAR is factoring in those items, you can be sure of that -- and he is also noting that their glaring weakness is one he can fill. He thinks he can make the difference and take the Nets deep into the playoffs. I don't necessarily agree with him -- but if they can do what I mentioned earlier -- have a healthy Kidd, find a way for VC to play SG and for VC and Jefferson to coexist on the floor -- I think they do have a strong shot at the playoffs although I don't think they can beat Indy, Miami or Detroit.
Still don't agree with you -- I would HATE for all NBA players to adopt your philosophy -- it would make for some horribly lousy teams in the NBA and make for a horrible NBA product night in and night out of the regular season.
-
You're asking players to be completely selfless.
Let me ask you, Reality. When you go into work, is it all about the company? Do you turn down payraises because it would hurt the company? Do you turn down job offers from other employers offering you to be a CIO to stick with your cubicle data entry job because you're thinking about the company? I mean, you could be the best data entrist in the land, give your company a real competitive advantage. If other qualified CIO's would just take your stance, your company would be stocked with talent. Sure, they may make less. And they may be performing mind numbing work far under what they're capable of doing, but, it's all about the company!
Just like every other profession/hobby/activity, a player has goals. And they're not 100% about the company.
-
You're asking players to be completely selfless.
Let me ask you, Reality. When you go into work, is it all about the company? Do you turn down payraises because it would hurt the company? Do you turn down job offers from other employers offering you to be a CIO to stick with your cubicle data entry job because you're thinking about the company? I mean, you could be the best data entrist in the land, give your company a real competitive advantage. If other qualified CIO's would just take your stance, your company would be stocked with talent. Sure, they may make less. And they may be performing mind numbing work far under what they're capable of doing, but, it's all about the company!
Just like every other profession/hobby/activity, a player has goals. And they're not 100% about the company.
I am the company. :rolleyes:
Don't understand the illustration. When i was a cube rat, and i hated it, how could another company be related to winning a title? For one thing, the NBA players I'm talking about have made so much money that I dont want to hear their b.s. about feeding their family. 5 mil 10 mil is there really that big a difference in lifestyle? Now if some NBA players are using their money to help others, they may really want and "need" to go to a team that will pay them a lot more cash. But thats not what I'm talking about. A cube rat of 500 employees making a huge difference? Now if you are talking about a company with 8 employees and a cube rat could be much much happier working for the small company he loves and they love him, i would say the same thing. Stay at your small loving firm instead of going to Corporate City for 2 more bucks per hour. Absolutely, stay where loved and where you can get a "title".
Speedy Claxton for example. I stand by my stance in summer '03. I dont think he gained squat by bailing to GState. So he started on a sub 500 non playoff team. Vs playing vital playoff minutes on a potential SAS repeat team.
Jerry Schichting did just the opposite. Left a starting role on the Pacers to become backup pg on the mighty '86 Celts. Ask Schichting what his best memories are.
Ask Speedy now what his best memorie is.
Randolph SAR and for that matter Malone the year before is going to "ride the pine" on SA? I don't buy that at all. I will say NJ is not bad at all. 2nd half finish last year showed lots of promise. Still you yourself say all the "ifs" will not happen.
Malone was looking for a title 1st and foremost. That is why SA and LA were his only 03-04 choices. During the '04 season when he drama queened his decision notice it was ONLY the Spurs who he was considering?
Brent Barry. Could get more minutes by going to a scrub NBA team. Why should he? Stay on SAS on continue being a role player. I actually think Barry can get more minutes as IMO he has tons more potential on O.
Randolph and all who would NOT like the NBA if players would pursue a title instead of self. HA!
KG slidin over to the Spurs.
Ray Allen, A Stoudamire to the Heat. (Randy since you cant grasp this, imagine these two becoming Glitter Marketers. Pick a point guard since RA is no where near Kobadiah in your mind)
A.I. taking minimal for the Pistons. (Okay 'bods BenWa, Prince and 'Sheed to Philly for salaries that fit.)
Indy picking up Lebron and Z.
Whooo baby bring on those playoffs.
Oh there would be some boring regular season games. And some kick arse Playoffs and finals.
I want all you whippersnappers that can to check out the Classic channel when they play some of the 80s Celts-76ers playoff battles. NBAs two best teams going at it. Superb lineup on both sides. I'll even throw in one of those Laker teams.
Billy W and Bob Parish going at it in practice was said to be unreal. Those of you who think Billy W did not do the right thing by coming to the Celts in '86 :nonono:
He did the right thing 100%.
Malone coming over to the Flakers. Fine with me. They were great for 25 games. Only thing i want to see is when that happens, another player stepping to the plate and joining the Spurs for minimal.
We need to see much more, not much less of this.
-
I could maybe see your point Reality in the case of an aging veteran, (e.g. Barkley, Ewing, Malone, Payton, Drexler) after a storied career adding the missing piece of their legacy and joining a team and accepting a reduced role for a shot at the ring. Four of the five I mentioned did just that. But a person like Chris Bosh to sign with SA to play 18 meaningful minutes behind T. Duncan this early in a budding career would be absolutely horrible for the NBA.
-
I want all you whippersnappers that can to check out the Classic channel when they play some of the 80s Celts-76ers playoff battles. NBAs two best teams going at it. Superb lineup on both sides. I'll even throw in one of those Laker teams.
Reality, you can't compare teams in that era with teams in this era -- there were some GREAT teams but how many less teams were there in the league then?
KG slidin over to the Spurs.
Ray Allen, A Stoudamire to the Heat. (Randy since you cant grasp this, imagine these two becoming Glitter Marketers. Pick a point guard since RA is no where near Kobadiah in your mind)
A.I. taking minimal for the Pistons. (Okay 'bods BenWa, Prince and 'Sheed to Philly for salaries that fit.)
Indy picking up Lebron and Z.
Whooo baby bring on those playoffs.
Oh there would be some boring regular season games. And some kick arse Playoffs and finals.
And you just brought the product of the NBA to the same status of MLB. Based on your proposal, you have just CONDEMNED all the teams that are on the bottom to stay on the bottom!!! In MLB, it's money that does it -- the Kansas City Royals can't afford to spend the money that the Yankees do and so they are basically a farm club for the better teams in the league (i.e. the teams that can afford to spend the money required to be at the top year after year). Except, you are doing it a different way -- the best players in the league (KG, AI, Ray Allen, Amare, etc.) are to bolt for the best teams in the league today and leave their present teams to sink to the bottom of the NBA well. So you have incredible playoff games and you ensure that a few teams will be great for eternity (because the best players in the league give up money and playing time to continue making those teams great for the playoffs) but you condemn the rest of the league to mediocrity! This is a HORRIBLE proposal -- and I can't believe any true fan of the NBA would even make this proposal! You want to basically say the same thing that people criticized the Lakers for -- the regular season doesn't mean anything -- we are only concerned with the playoffs. Do you NOT see what that is going to do to the product of the NBA? Fans will lose their desire to watch games during the regular season and just show up to watch the playoffs!
I don't like your proposal and I want to see the talent of the NBA spread out throughout the league -- there are a few teams that in their present position (in the NBA basement so to speak) because of their organization (see the Clippers and Golden State) but I love the fact that the NBA is a sport that CHANGES who is dominant in the league -- even if it's NOT my team!!! I like the fact that the Nets might make a run this year -- I like the fact that Cleveland and Chicago are trying to build themselves out of the bottom of the league. I like the fact that while the Spurs, Heat, Detroit, Indy and Phoenix are on top now -- that there are teams that are nipping at their heels and looking for weaknesses to attack and exploit. I like the fact that when a Shaq or TD retires, if their team can't replace them that another team moves up to take their place. It's what excites me about the NBA! I LOVE the fact that there are going to be great series and while the playoffs might be more exciting if we take the best players and create two teams for them to play against each other, I love the fact that it's not money or a specific town or team that is guaranteed to be in it year after year after year! And I say that after MY favorite team missed the playoffs for the first time in many many years! I love watching the Lakers win -- but I would rather see the NBA be determined by great GM's, coaches and players putting together teams than a few teams be predetermined to be the best in the league! I HATE that proposal and it's just one of the many reasons that I hate baseball!
-
Sarunas Jasikevicius, widely considered the top point guard in Europe, signed a three-year, 12 million deal with the Pacers, his agent Doug Neustadt told ESPN.com.
Jasikevicius also had offers from the Jazz and Cavs, but decided to take less money and fewer minutes to have a shot at an NBA title.
"It really came down to who he could win a championship with next year," Neustadt told ESPN.com. "He saw a chance to contribute and win and couldn't pass it up." :rofl:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2115697 (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2115697)
-
Reality,
Do you not see the difference? I have ZERO problem with Jasikevicius' decision -- in fact, I applaud it! However, I don't berate Ray Allen for deciding to stay in Seattle and giving Seattle fans someone exciting to watch night in and night out. THAT'S the difference!
Your philosophy will create exciting ball in a few cities and condemn the rest of NBA teams and fans to dismal basketball -- I just can't understand why you would want that!
-
So where is the line drawn? Ray Allen should not go for a title. Euro rookie should. SAR should not. Karl Malone and GP should.
How about Speedy Claxton? He should have stayed put and been the backup pt grd (or became starter?) on the Spurs 2-3. You think he should not.
Historical precedent for another pt guard? Jerry Sichting leaving Pacers starters minutes to play meaningful minutes on the greatest team of all time. You think Sichting should have stayed on Pacers.
I get it that in my scenario 1/2 the NBA teams would be awesome and very good, half would pretty much suck with some of them being abysmal. Oh like they are now. :rofl:
So maybe "everybody" should not change teams. However i think my "line" is much broader then the boards line.
Bottom line I continue to believe many, and certainly many more then currently do should pursue playing meaningful minutes on a title team. That may be 40, 30, 20 or 10 min per playoff game. Conversly, losers who are hogging up cap space and costing their fellow players a shot at the title should get out. Chris Webber etc.
-
So where is the line drawn? Ray Allen should not go for a title. Euro rookie should. SAR should not. Karl Malone and GP should.
I think we should let it be THEIR decisions -- I don't think they are less of a player because every player doesn't join a team that has a legit shot at the championship. I can think of a LOT of great players that never won a championship -- and just because they didn't win one doesn't make them less of a player and it doesn't make less of their accomplishments.
I get it that in my scenario 1/2 the NBA teams would be awesome and very good, half would pretty much suck with some of them being abysmal. Oh like they are now.
Nope, you are going to make ALL of those teams go from being lottery picks to being incredibly abysmal:
Okay, let's try these scenarios:
Cavs minus LeBron
Lakers minus Kobe
SacTown minus Peja and Miller
Seattle minus Ray Allen
Phoenix minus Stoudamire and Nash
Mavs minus Dirk
Utah minus AK57
Do you begin to see the picture? What will the Cavs be like without LeBron? What would the Lakers be like without Kobe? What would Seattle be like with Ray?
With these players, these teams can be fun to watch even IF they lose! But without them, they are going to get blown out every night -- that's not fun for players or for fans. So congrats, you just KILLED an NBA team, a NBA city and it's fan base. Why? Just so the best teams can get better?
I remember watching the original dream team play -- wow, they were phenomenal! Magic, Jordan, Bird, Malone and Robinson -- man, that was SOME kind of basketball to watch -- the offense, defense, passing, shooting -- it was incredible! It was great to watch them but they weren't great basketball games -- they blew away their competition by an average of 40 points per game (or something like that). I enjoyed watching those guys play together -- but I didn't enjoy watching other teams getting blown out.
I DON'T want to see the NBA become MLB -- as long as players choose their own destiny, MOST will not assume a lesser role for a championship -- which keeps balance in the NBA. It allows teams to have a CHANCE one day at the title based on their management, development of players and coaching. What you are stating is declaring that some teams will NEVER have a chance. And I just think that is WRONG!
-
If they stay on a team just to be a stat hound/salary grabber it does lessen their accomplishments IMO.
Ray Allen wants to stay in Seattle. Fine. But at least make a run at the title. He doesn't need 15 mil* a year. I'm sure he could feed his extended family on 10, thereby freeing up some cap space to give the Sonics a chance at some other players.
*Maybe he is donating heavily to a charity. If so, kudos.
Dream Team is a silly comparison. The world offered no competition at that time.
In my league you only mention the teams that would suck. How about the upper half? What a kick arse playoffs that would be.
Okay so i stated maybe everyone should not jump teams. But a whole lot more could and should. And dont tell me players arent "ruining" teams now. Zo Mouring sucking down 20 mil a year from the Nets to sit on his arse. Then going to Miami for mimimal. Grant Hill for 3 years. Chriss Webber coming up?
Lakers would be better without Kobe. Jomal is dead on. The correct sign n trade for Kobe would have had the Lakers in much better shape then now. Wanna argue? Don't. Cause Kobe is sub .500 lifetime without Shaq.
-
Lakers would be better without Kobe. Jomal is dead on. The correct sign n trade for Kobe would have had the Lakers in much better shape then now. Wanna argue? Don't. Cause Kobe is sub .500 lifetime without Shaq.
Oh, please! Tell me who the Lakers are going to trade Kobe for that is going to help the Lakers be a better team than they currently are? There isn't anyone! There are only a handful of players better than Kobe -- TD, KG, Dirk perhaps, Amare (umm, mainly because it's a big man's league). That means unless you can't trade for one of these guys, it's not a good trade. Otherwise, you have to trade for SEVERAL stars -- and that just never pans out, does it?
You can say that Kobe is a sub .500 lifetime without Shaq -- but you have to wait until the Lakers can clear cap room to actually begin to negotiate with the FA. The Lakers traded Shaq and had to take Grant's salary (which gives us no room to operate in the free agency). It is going to be a couple of more years before you can begin to argue this point with Kobe. Kobe hasn't had the personell to work with to get the Lakers into the playoffs in the WC -- you certainly can't argue that point.
Dream Team is a silly comparison. The world offered no competition at that time. In my league you only mention the teams that would suck. How about the upper half? What a kick arse playoffs that would be.
You still seem to be missing half of the equation -- not only are you killing half of the leagues present -- you are also condemning them for their entire future. Do you not see that? Because what you are suggesting not only puts them in the bottom half of the league but it KEEPS them there! Look at the dominant teams presently in the league: SA, Detroit, Indy, Miami, Phoenix -- okay, all of the best players go to those teams (and according to your philosophy as players gain superstar status, they have to move to those teams) -- where are LA, Boston and Philly? LA and Boston, historically, are the best organizations in the game but you want to keep them down by making the best players go to your predestined teams. How much history does Indy, Miami, Phoenix -- how many years did SA suck?
What you are proposing is ridiculous!
-
Rubbish. We don't have the bandwidth to hold the players that would have been better for the Lakers then Kobadiah. Top 5 my ass. His sub .500 career includes over 100 games when Shaq was still a member of the Lakers.
Enough Lakerbabble.
My untwisted proposal is that more players play for a title instead of bucks and stats. What Euro guard did is good. Clyde, Malone, Sichting, Billy W, what Speedy should have done, it's all good. Would result in much better playoffs, not the downfall of the NBA. :rofl:
-
Didn't Jordan have some sub .500 years? Didn't TMac have some sub .500 years? The list goes on and on and on, doesn't it? But it ONLY fits in Kobe's case? It took MORE than just Shaq and Kobe to win a championship -- it took role players like Grant, AC Green, Fox, Shaw, Harper, Fisher -- now look at the Lakers role players, wow, not in the same league, IMO. Kobe can only do soo much.
However, only time will tell who is right and who is wrong. The Lakers don't have solid role players to help Kobe -- it's up to PJ to find a way to clear room for Kobe to work so if your "sub .500" comments are true when the Lakers actually clear room to assemble a team, I will agree with you but currently your comments are purely conjecture (and based on an extreme dislike for Kobe and anything in purple and gold).
-
Remember now if a player comes over for less to help the Kobadiah cause, Randy you as GM have to turn this player down so as not to ruin the NBA.
Or is it okay when they come over to the Purple n Gold? :rolleyes:
-
Reality, you can't compare teams in that era with teams in this era -- there were some GREAT teams but how many less teams were there in the league then?
Not to mention a SALARY CAP.
This argument by reality is just ridiculous. The Chris Bosh comparison is spot on. The NBA would be crap.
Of course, it makes sense coming from someone who himself jumps to the title contenders.
-
Reality, you've gone off the deep end with this one. First off the Salary Cap prevents teams from dominating for years like the Yankees in baseball. Even teams that are willing to overspend and over pamper their players like the Mavericks can only get so far up the ladder.
What wins championships in the NBA is individual talent. There are some players that are simply that much better night in and out on thr court. Their ego's demand that they do their best in games, and they like the responsibility and the pressure. They also have a good deal of pride and want to proove that they are the best. It's a lot harder to do that on your own, which is why players like Kareem Abdul Jabbar stand out. He brought the Milwaukee Bucks a championship as a rookie, along with a mature, Oscar Roberston.
A player like AI wouldn't dream of sacrificing 50% of his salary to play with Shaq. He would rather win the chamionship and BEAT Shaq with his own squad and him as the star. It's that ego and pride that makes these games in the regualr season worth watching. And it's the best of these teams that make the playoffs so good to watch.
The free agency rules and the draft are aimed at making the entire NBA competitive, the worst teams get the first crack at the best talent, the teams that overspend have to shed players or pay a fine. I want a league where the difference between teams comes down to the coaching and strategy, not simply the talent.
Concentratating the best players for the sake of winning a championship would ruin the league and destroy the game.
-
Reality, you can't compare teams in that era with teams in this era -- there were some GREAT teams but how many less teams were there in the league then?
Not to mention a SALARY CAP.
This argument by reality is just ridiculous. The Chris Bosh comparison is spot on. The NBA would be crap.
Of course, it makes sense coming from someone who himself jumps to the title contenders.
Whiny butt.
If a player came over to the Sixers for less you would welcome him with open arms.
-
If a player came over to the Sixers for less you would welcome him with open arms.
Well, DUH.
That's completely different than attacking players who don't.
-
Hold on a second.
I can agree with Reality on one thing - the 80's teams were deeper, with star level role-players. And it made for great match-ups.
In the '80's, only Boston, Philadelphia, and Detroit went to the Finals from the East.
In the 80's, only the Los Angeles Lakers and Houston Rockets went to the Finals from the West.
Life was good - provided you cheered for Boston, Philadelphia, Detroit, LA Lakers, or Houston.
Compare that to JUST the 2000's - in 6 short years.
Los Angeles and San Antonio have gone from the West.
From the East, you have Indiana, Philadelphia, New Jersey, and Detroit.
In the '00's - SO FAR - we've ALREADY had more teams go the the Finals than in the entire decade of the '80's.
And look at the '90's! 11 Teams!
East: Detroit, Chicago, New York, Orlando.
West: Portland, LA Lakers, Phoenix, Houston, Seattle, Utah, San Antonio.
If you want us to go back to your way of looking at things, Reality, then we need to contract the league. Eliminate those 8 teams that weren't playing in 1980 (Dallas, Minnesota, Orlando, Miami, Toronto, Memphis(Vancouver), Charlotte, New Orleans (Charlotte)). After all - only 3 of these teams made the playoffs this past season.
Of course, you reduce league revenue by a lot - those teams actually do bring in money when they play their games. 164 games lost is a LOT of money.
The reason the 80's teams and all seem so much more talent is because THEY WERE. All-Stars took roles on great teams because there were more All-Stars than teams! Consider this - if every NBA roster had one All-Star, and only those players were allowed to go to the All-Star Game, 3 All-Stars from each conference would be left at home. In 1980, you'd have to take 1 more All Star from two different teams to fill out the roster.
The league has expanded faster than the talent pool, and as a result, we've got a Darko Milicic on pretty much every bench - waiting for them to be ready.
Joe
-
I simply don't understand it, I know all of you are intelligent, all of you have thoughtful, intuitive basketball minds, why do you let inane ramblings and baitings draw you into a vortech of sheer stupidity? Have you ever read anything but hatefilled namecalling, bandwagon chest thumping, and delerium driven blather as a way of reply to your sensible and level headed postings? Ever? I simply don't understand why anyone would waste their time, look at me, I've already wasted 5 minutes on this that I will never get back.
One more thing, to whomever it was that said Dirk was perhaps better than Kobe, nonsense, let's see him develop a defensive or post game anywhere near the level of Kobe, and than maybe he gets mentioned in the same breath, Amare is a better argument, and Garnett has yet to prove he can strap a team on his back.
-
Reality, you can't compare teams in that era with teams in this era -- there were some GREAT teams but how many less teams were there in the league then?
Not to mention a SALARY CAP.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
Brownose away all you want, Rock Springs.
They love me.
-
Okay, let's try these scenarios:
Cavs minus LeBron
Lakers minus Kobe
SacTown minus Peja and Miller
Seattle minus Ray Allen
Phoenix minus Stoudamire and Nash
Mavs minus Dirk
Utah minus AK57
Umm...Randy, who is AK57?
Just Kidding, sorry for interrupting.
Brownose away all you want, Rock Springs.
They love me.
:huh:
-
If a player came over to the Sixers for less you would welcome him with open arms.
Well, DUH.
That's completely different than attacking players who don't.
So you are all for Chris Webber getting 18 mil a year and bringing down the 6ers.
Fine. Why disagee with my stance that he (and A.I.) could easily "live" on less and thereby greaten the 6ers chances of getting other good players to make a title run.
What's that got to do with me picking teams that become winners?
For you salary cappers.....
If they would agree to take less, it would lessen the cap now wouldn't it?
No amount of icons will change that. B)
-
So you are all for Chris Webber getting 18 mil a year and bringing down the 6ers.
Fine. Why disagee with my stance that he (and A.I.) could easily "live" on less and thereby greaten the 6ers chances of getting other good players to make a title run.
What does this scenario have to do with all the great players joining the elite teams to rekindle the playoff excitement of yore. And if you ask me, playoffs are plenty exciting today as they ever were.
Does Tim Duncan honestly need Ray Allen, Shareef, Webber, Kobe, T-Mac, AI, and Amare all on his team to win the championship. Obviously NOT! Would it make you happy to watch the Spurs win 1 out of every 4 championships for the next century (like the Yankees).........don't answer that. All you people out there who is for the idea of having only 3 organizations win all the championships from now until the end of your lives??
-
So you are all for Chris Webber getting 18 mil a year and bringing down the 6ers.
Fine. Why disagee with my stance that he (and A.I.) could easily "live" on less and thereby greaten the 6ers chances of getting other good players to make a title run.
What does this scenario have to do with all the great players joining the elite teams to rekindle the playoff excitement of yore. And if you ask me, playoffs are plenty exciting today as they ever were.
Glad you asked.
Lets say player Wants To Title is looking to hook up with the 76ers.
He can't because Webber and AI and now Dalembert have 40 zillion dollars tied up in cap.
Lets say the Earth stops, Webber decides his injury makes him no where near the player he was in the Kings championship year. AI decides he really never will get to the finals again. Dalembert realizes its unreal how much he is getting just because he is 7 feet tall in 2005 and has some center skills. All three of them decide a TEAM title would be really cool. They want to sign Skandery Skander, an upstart 3rd year point guard who lead the Missouri Valley Conference 4 years in a row in assists with zero turnovers for the entire 4 years. He also has mad jumps, snaps down 7 boards a game from the pg spot. He wants to become a 6er, but his paltry 4 million a year salary would put the Sixers over the cap.
So, in what appears to be an act of God but is not, Skander tells his agent he will take 3 million while the Big 3 overpaids say they will take a cut to get Skandery on the team. The Sixers lose in the Finals in 7 games to the Spurs, but Philly and all "real" NBA fans are treated to yet another fabulous Finals since Reality took over as commisioner in 2004.
-
Bandwagon all you want little boy, I've got grey hairs that have been in SoCal longer than you've been alive. BTW, nice use of profanity in your posts, and the challenge to gamble, nice touch as well, look your fly is down, now we see what you're all about.
-
No need to get into personal attacks laker fan. Calm down.
So you are all for Chris Webber getting 18 mil a year and bringing down the 6ers.
First of all, Chris Webber isn't bringing down the Sixers. Chris Webber could have a minimum contract and the Sixers would still be over the cap.
Allen Iverson AND Chris Webber could have a minimum salary and the Sixers would be over the cap.
Has Tim Duncan decided to cut his salary in half for the improvement of the team? Manu Gnobili giving back his salary?
That's an unrealistic expectation to have players give up their earnings because you want a title. I know we all like to think this is more than an employment, but it's not.
Well of people have a right to try to get rich. Rich people have a right to get wealthy. That's capitalism.
-
No need to get into personal attacks laker fan. Calm down.
So you are all for Chris Webber getting 18 mil a year and bringing down the 6ers.
First of all, Chris Webber isn't bringing down the Sixers. Chris Webber could have a minimum contract and the Sixers would still be over the cap.
Allen Iverson AND Chris Webber could have a minimum salary and the Sixers would be over the cap.
Has Tim Duncan decided to cut his salary in half for the improvement of the team? Manu Gnobili giving back his salary?
That's an unrealistic expectation to have players give up their earnings because you want a title. I know we all like to think this is more than an employment, but it's not.
Well of people have a right to try to get rich. Rich people have a right to get wealthy. That's capitalism.
dabods that they have the right to pursue money above title is no doubt. That most all choose to exercise that right in pursuit money over title is sad to me.
On the positive side, those few players who have taken less in pursuit of a title, my compliments and it shows it can be done. To what degree? Again, 1986 Celts perhaps the best team of all time with not one but two of what I am advocating/promoting. Billy W and Jerry Sichting. Payton and Malone certainly helped LA in 03-04. Alas no one stepped up to likewise help the Spurs that year.
Webber most certainly is a factor in the downing of Philly. 18 mil a year when realistically he is worth 5 in his present injured condition? If Dlmbrt and AI would get on the title board, resulting in more freed up money, they could land someone good. Like Skandery Skander from Missouri Valley to run the point. So that they could get a title, not just Joe Fan and I enjoying watching a great matchup.
Tim Dunker and Manu taking less to land a player? I certainly hope they will when it comes to that. But I agree, in todays NBA its going to continue to be the exception rather then the norm.
Joe V "I can agree with Reality on one thing - the 80's teams were deeper, with star level role-players. And it made for great match-ups." And Joe V made the one and only point i want everyone to get. Great match ups have been and might continue to be the result. With their megamillions in salary today, many players could pursue title over more excess bling. Hey the Euro guard just did it in signing with the Pacers.
Contraction to 18 teams would be oh so sweet, but we all know that will not happen.
Players using their free will to help win a title? That might happen some more.
-
Reality,
Just so you know, Skandery Skander is actually better suited at the 2 guard, and nowhere *NEAR* the leader in assists in ANY league. He is, however, a very proficient scorer.
Joe
-
Reality,
If they would agree to take less, it would lessen the cap now wouldn't it?
Nope. Wouldn't lessen the cap a single bit. The cap is 51% of BRI.
Wouldn't change overall player salaries, either. They're to be 58% of BRI. Escrow payments make sure they don't go over that amount.
And before you say, "Well, it means they would only make 57% of BRI," no, it doesn't. The players are guaranteed 58%. And even if they accepted 57%, that 1% simply goes into the owner's pockets.
-
I rest my case.
Any reason to think Phx with Stoudamire, Nash, Marion back will not make another Pacific run? But Joe Johnson wants to bail to the Hawks.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/stor...marc&id=2120105 (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=stein_marc&id=2120105)
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/stor...marc&id=2120960 (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=stein_marc&id=2120960)
Joe Johnson turning down 50 mil to instead sign with the Hawks for 70 mil.
The dollar numbers are staggering. Think he could feed his family on 50 mil? It aint about the title. Not one bit. :nonono:
-
Actually, Reality, this doesn't even support you case -- quite the opposite (of course, JJ has been quoted with contradictory statements so don't believe that he is still going to the Hawks). Read the entire article and you learn that JJ would rather be THE man on a team than play 4th wheel -- he would almost rather go to a horrible team ('cause I don't think he is going to pass up the extra money) and be "the man" than stay on a great team and be the 4th option. This is quite the opposite of what your philosophy.
Here, IMO, are what NBA stars are looking for:
1) Money
2) Playing time (status goes along with that too - like being a major option, etc.)
3) Winning a championship
Most stars aren't going to give up BOTH money and playing time (again, being a major option) to win a championship. Perfect examples in Malone and GP -- both came in giving up money but they both had guarantees that they would be major players for the Lakers (both would start, etc.). You aren't going to see many players like SAR give up both money and playing time -- and if they can't start and play starter minutes -- unless they are at the end of their career, you just won't see that kind of thing happening. And I don't blame them for it! I would jump on the bandwagon of some team just to be handed a championship ring -- although there are some who don't mind that sort of thing!
-
Someone please slap Joe Johnson.
He wants to go back to the "good ole days" of Phoenix 2003-4, rather than be seen as a key element to a title contending team...AT THE SAME PAY RATE?
Asking Phoenix not to match is STUPID. BEG AND PLEAD THEM TO MATCH! 1) It shows they want you, despite the fact that you felt they didn't, 2) Atlanta has more people show up at a game hoping to see Braves and Falcons players in the audience than they do showing up to watch the Hawks, 3) the fanchise is in tatters despite having all this "promise," while Phoenix may be on the verge of a championship!
If you ask me, he's still suffering from the effects of the hit to the head that damaged his eye socket. Either that, or that mask was treated with some sort of brain-deadening drug.
-
First off, a players motivation is his business, and they often change their minds about what matters. An NBA championship is a team accomplishment. You can be a great player but never win a championship because your team couldn't assemble enough complimentary players to render your team competitive.
In the 80's all teams were better, but some teams were able to dominate for years because of their ability to identify and lock up talent. The product was much better, but the league has expanded faster than the world's ability to produce high-quality players.
Why should Joe Johnson sacrifice money, playing time, endorsements and the opportunity for leadership by staying with the Suns? Why shouldn't he decide he can have a better career on his own with a new team, rather than playing second fiddle or even third to Amare and Nash? What Reality and Joe reguard as a virtue here is self-sacrifice for a team of other players. It seems to me the other players should be willing to share some of their salary to keep Joe Johnson in Phoenix, or for the team to have managed it's cap better to be able to afford to pay so much talent.
I can't blame Webber for signing that fat contract. I can blame the Sixers for making the trade and signing him. Chris should do whatever he can to make as much money as possible, irrespective of how well he produces on the court. Players with a bad attitude don't last long. Look at that asswipe Glen Robinson, who got beat out by a rookie, and refused to play. He got a ring, but how many minutes did he play? He sure wasn't an integral part of the Spurs championship. One might even say he didn't deserve a ring.
Dalembert clearly deserves what he got, as other teams were willing to pay him at that level. He should sacrifice his earnings potential for what? So Chris Webber and Allen Iverson can make more than their fair share? This is an idiotic argument. No one is or should be willing to sacrifice for their team more than anyone else. Malone and Payton went to LA, for less to take a shot at winning a ring. It didn't work, they weren't good enough, and it sure wasn't Shaq that was the problem, reguardless of what some bozo Laker fans might think.
-
Dalembert clearly deserves what he got, as other teams were willing to pay him at that level. He should sacrifice his earnings potential for what? So Chris Webber and Allen Iverson can make more than their fair share? This is an idiotic argument. No one is or should be willing to sacrifice for their team more than anyone else. Malone and Payton went to LA, for less to take a shot at winning a ring. It didn't work, they weren't good enough, and it sure wasn't Shaq that was the problem, reguardless of what some bozo Laker fans might think.
Just because other teams are willing to pay Dalembert that kind of money DOESN'T mean he clearly deserves what he got! That's pretty wierd logic, Rick. We have seen a TON of players paid more than they deserve -- and it can cripple an organization for years. Is Finley worth $16 million a year? Hey, someone was willing to pay them that so he's worth it? Nope, sometimes an organization has to say "hey, he's worth so much to us -- and even if it hurts us now, we aren't going to allow it to kill our future."
I do agree that Sam should sign for what he can get -- this idea that some players should sacrifice while others reap the benefits is whacko! There might be a few players who do this toward the end of their career but they will be few and far between and only superstars (and a few stars) can make that much difference anyway.
I do disagree that Malone and Payton weren't good enough -- if you think that then you obviously missed the SA/Laker series when Malone did a PHENOMENAL job for the Lakers. He went down and so did the Lakers chances at a title. As for Shaq not being good enough -- if Shaq had been in the shape he was in during the Lakers first title run, he would have been able to demand a double-team by the Pistons. The Pistons ability to guard Shaq one-on-one enabled the Pistons to focus on Kobe. No, the Pistons didn't stop Shaq -- but they held him to his average rather than the monster numbers he SHOULD have had if they were going to guard him one-on-one. That IS Shaq's fault -- not Kobe's, not Malones, not GP's, etc. You pay Shaq that kind of money ($25 million a YEAR) because he demands double teams -- but while Shaq put up his normal numbers, he allowed Ben Wallace to guard him all by himself and allowed Big Ben to beat him to position, hold him out from normal position, beat him down the court, beat him to the ball, etc. You CAN'T tell me that this is "Shaq doing his job." If that's your idea of Shaq doing his job, then we CLEARLY have different expectations of what Shaq is supposed to do. Shaq is SUPPOSED to dominate in the post -- and he didn't do that during the Detroit/Laker series.
I'm not saying that Shaq is the only Laker to blame -- in fact, I'd say that EVERY Laker in uniform was clearly to blame (other than Malone -- who exceeded my expectations of him). You have to give Larry Brown and the Pistons for coming up with a game plan and executing it to perfection -- but it's up to Shaq, Kobe, PJ and the Lakers to respond and they FAILED to do that! That, IMO, IS Shaq's fault -- no matter if he put up normal numbers in the post. Ben Wallace WAS the better center in that series -- and that DOES reflect on Shaq, doesn't it? And Shaq HAS to be the better center -- otherwise, he's not worth the money he is being paid. Shaq DOES have to accept responsibility for the failure of the championship series -- along with all the other Lakers.
-
It seems to me the other players should be willing to share some of their salary to keep Joe Johnson in Phoenix, or for the team to have managed it's cap better to be able to afford to pay so much talent.
That's a pointless statement, because no player has to sacrifice ANY salary for Phoenix to match Atlanta's offer.
So why is Johnson pleading for Phoenix not to match? That's just plain stupid, if you ask me. Phoenix made Johnson a "for the good of the organization" offer. They intended to match ANY offer. And Jackson isn't a 6-year, max salary, max raise kind of player - that should be reserved for the top-level elite. Phoenix considers him a step below that...and that's pretty darn good, if you ask me.
Johnson asking out of that situation is STUPID.
-
It seems to me the other players should be willing to share some of their salary to keep Joe Johnson in Phoenix, or for the team to have managed it's cap better to be able to afford to pay so much talent.
That's a pointless statement, because no player has to sacrifice ANY salary for Phoenix to match Atlanta's offer.
So why is Johnson pleading for Phoenix not to match? That's just plain stupid, if you ask me. Phoenix made Johnson a "for the good of the organization" offer. They intended to match ANY offer. And Jackson isn't a 6-year, max salary, max raise kind of player - that should be reserved for the top-level elite. Phoenix considers him a step below that...and that's pretty darn good, if you ask me.
Johnson asking out of that situation is STUPID.
Bottom-line is that it seems that JJ has stars in his eye (okay, only one -- himself). He seems to think that he is the best player on the Suns squad and therefore he should be the star (he doesn't like that Nash and Amare get more attention than he does). He also seems to have gotten upset at Amare when Amare screamed at him once during a game -- hmm, something about "why don't you play some ******* defense!" I'm really surprised that he took offense to that remark -- didn't realize that he knew what defense meant!
He also seems intrigued with Atlanta's idea of starting him at PG! Man, here we go AGAIN -- who do teams think that just because a guy can handle the ball somewhat, that he would make a good PG? I'm sure EVERY PG in the league is looking forward to JJ guarding them! :rofl:
I don't think this is a done deal yet -- I think there is enough time for the :ding: to come on in JJ's head and realize he is being not only incredibly selfish but very stupid!!! Of course, if the lights don't come on -- he will have years and years to enjoy his situation in Atlant!!! :crazy: