950, KJR'S Locked on Sports reports that according to sources inside the NBA, the Sonics have come to a one-year agreement with Rick Brunson. Brunson, 32, is a 8 year veteran in the NBA. Brunson will be the back-up to Luke Ridnour.
Last season the Sonics played a three-guard rotation, however in the 2005-06 season the Sonics are anticipating that they will have a 4-guard rotation. Brunson stand at 6 foot 4 inches tall and weighs 190 pounds. His size is a nice compliment to Ridnour.
Last season, Brunson played 80 games, starting 39, with the LA Clippers averaging 24 minutes a game. He scored 5 points per game and averaged 5 assists. In his 39 starts last season he averaged 7 points, 7 assists and 3 rebounds.
His assist to turnover ratio was an impressive 5.1 to 1.56. This is very similar to what Daniels brought to the floor for the Sonics.
His shooting is not a strong point. He is a career 38% from the field. On the positive side he should be able to stretch the defense as a career 36% three point shooter. Over the past two seasons, Brunson has really added the three to his game and has hit 206 of 547 attempts for 38%
This will be the Temple graduates 7th team in the NBA. He started his career as an undrafted free agent with the Portland Trailblazers. Since he has bounced around, but a great sign of what type of player and person Brunson is that three teams have had him back for a second run.
According to sources the contract is a 1 year deal for the minimum contract. That will not count against the Sonics mid-level exception.
LOCKE’S TAKE –
This isn’t going to wow anyone but it makes a lot of sense. The Sonics have decided to play a 4 guard line-up next season with Brunson backing-up of Ridnour. Brunson is the ultimate back-up point guard. He doesn’t turn the ball over. He is just good enough that he can hurt the other team. He has been through so much as a player that you know he isn’t going to rock the boat wanted more time or more shots. His performance this last year with the Clippers was strong enough that if Ridnour gets hurt he could run the team for a short period of time.The real issue is with Ridnour’s development and the likelihood that he will be playing 34 minutes a night next season the Sonics have moved into a realm where the back-up point guard becomes an interchangeable part every two years or so. Therefore, Brunson is a very good answer at the back-up position.
Interesting comparison to who AD was when the Sonics acquired him. Daniels last year in Portland he average 3.7 points and 1 assist in 13 minutes a night. I doubt Bronson will be able to what AD did last year for the Sonics, but you would have never imagined AD would have done that when he came to Seattle.
Seed Newsvine
190 comments:
brunson turned 33 last month. but i'm ok with him for a year.
The Sonics signing of Rick Brunson, 33, is a good deal. As it is, Brunson (5.5 ppg, 5.1 apg, 1.03 spg, & 3.28 apt ratio) brings a lot to the table as a solid ball-handling defensive-minded point guard who can put in 16 minutes per game backing up Luke Ridnour.
In other news, in regards to the MLE: The Sonics are under the salary cap, which thereby means they don't have the MLE.
At any rate, resigning Ronald Murray is still a BAD idea! While I'm not sure who is willing to sign with the Sonics, I do know that a guy like Jon Barry (6.6 ppg, 2.4 apg, 43.8% 3pfg%, & +8.22 eff.) would better complement the Sonics reserves at backup shooting guard than Ronald Murray (+4.88 eff.) can.
Here is a link that provides information regarding the NBA Collective Bargaining Agreement: http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2120167
Lastly, this is somewhat off-topic, but it is known that due to the lease that the Sonics have with the City of Seattle concerning Key Arena, Howard Schultz has made it apparent that he wants to cut back on salary. In any event, the minimum salary that an organization is allowed to have is $37,125,000.
Anyhow, other than Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis, there is no need to have anyone on the squad who is paid an inordinate amount of money -- unless there is a sign-&-trade deal involving Vladimir Radmanovic and a post-player from another team, for that would justify increased spending -- since the Sonics can pick up cheap, serviceable players via free-agency.
In addition, the Sonics management should consider trying to move power forward Danny Fortson (2005-2006: $6,415,584 & 2006-2007: $6,909,901), since he is vastly overpaid. Anyhow, prior to point guard Damon Stoudamire signing with Memphis (4 years, $17 million), the Houston Rockets had tried to set up a sign-&-trade with the Portland Trailblazers that would've sent Stoudamire to Houston and either power forward Juwan Howard or power forward Clarence Weatherspoon back to Portland.
Anyways, at this moment in time, the Trailblazers are still in need of a power forward who can backup the oft-troubled Zach Randolph; thus, the Sonics should inquire as to whether or not they'd be interested in Fortson. For what it's worth, the Trailblazers still have point guard Nick Van Exel and his non-guarenteed contract ($12,731,150) on their roster; thus, the Sonics -- who are under the salary cap. which thereby exempts them from the trade rules (125% & +/- $100,000) -- could send Fortson to Portland for Van Exel; the Sonics would also receive a trade-exception worth $6,315,566 in the deal. Immediately after acquiring Van Exel, the Sonics could subsequently refuse his team-option and waive him, which would thereby clear a large sum of salary off of management's books.
last year was career high for brunson on minutes, shots per game, threes made, points, assists, rebounds.
one stat that was not good for brunson is that he only shoots 40% inside. on that part, he doesnt give what antonio daniels did, who shot an incredible 63% on iside shots according to 82games.com.
One thing to keep in mind is that we're talking about 12 minutes available at PG backing up Luke in a 4-guard rotation. Earl Watson wants to start. Marko Jaric wants to start. You aren't going to sign a good point guard who is willing to only play 12 minutes per game (and it would be crazy to pay him anything more than they are paying Brunson). You need someone who will come in, get the ball to our scorers, hit the open 3 when it is available and not make mistakes. Feels like they made a smart move here.
The Blazers would never take Fortson, even if Nate pulled for him. Nate's talked a lot about Patterson playing the 4 while Randolph rests, as well as having Ratlif play the PF, so don't expect them to be eager to take on a Fortson like contract for a back-up. The Sonics could do a lot worse than Brunson.
Diezel my man you are sadly misguided. 1st off Duhon is exactly what Brunson is, 3in. shorter and you want to sign him for how much more? C'mon man get real. I would also say that Brunson is a better defender and a better ballhandler.
As far as the Sonics being on the cheap. That's not their fault. Blame the city for not giving them a better lease.
Let me ask you something Diezel. If everyday you are losing $100 out of your wallet and you need to buy a car, are you going to buy a Lexus knowing that you cannot afford it or are you going to buy a ride that gets you from A to B is effecient and gets the job done. C'mon think about it man.
JAMAL CRAWFORD! c'mon what's his shooting percentage? What's his assist to turnover ration. HOW WAS HE W/STEPHON MARBURY? There's a reason why Chicage picked Kirk Heinrich over MR 206. Are you going to tell me he's going to make the team better when he plays no D and is a ballhog? You need to get your head checked? And by the way....once Crawford left, didn't the baby bulls make the playoffs? Where did the knicks end up? Enough said about that issue.
Brunson has the fourth-best Pure Point Rating (7.6) - a modified A/T ratio for point guards - in the league, behind only Steve Nash (12.8), Brevin Knight (12.7) and Jason Kidd (8.1). Better than Daniels (6.3), better than Ridnour (6.7), WAY better than Earl Watson (4.0). He just doesn't shoot the ball much, which is probably a good thing. We have plenty of firepower on this team so we don't need a scoring backup guard - just need someone who can get the ball to the shooters when they're open.
This is Moneyball in action here - inexpensive performance. Spend the big money on your core and get good value on the guys you surround them with.
Interesting that Oakland beats the **** out of the Mariners year in and year out with about half the payroll.
I would argue they could win a world series with a merely average payroll.
Moneyball techniques brought us Antonio Daniels and Danny Fortson. I would say those were some pretty key pieces to our success last year. There are more like them out there currently being undervalued.
Obviously spending money doesn't win championships as the teams with the highest payrolls inevitably have some of the worst records in the league.
I think Brunson will turn out to be a great pickup.
How many big $$$ signings have brought their teams to the championships? T-Mac don't think so, Steve Nash didn't, Look at the Dallas Mavericks how many dollars have they spent? The New York Knicks nope. Shaq didn't win anything until Kobe matured. Right now it's all about team ball. San Antonio their top 3 guys are players they drafted. The Piston's who thought that Ben Wallace, Chauncey Billups and Rip Hamilton were superstar individual players? Tayshaun Prince is what got them over the hump and he was drafted. The Phoenix Suns, Amare and Marion were drafted. Miami Heat, Dwyane Wade was drafted and Udonis Haslem was an undrafted Free Agent. You cannot tell me that spending money wins championships in the NBA it does not happen.
You do not sign FA's to change the face of your team, you sign FA's to fill a specific role. We have our two horses. Luke, Nick and Vlady are what you hope will fill in as a third option from one night to the other and everybody else fills a role on the team. You need people who will accept a role and play it to their best abilities. (Robert Horry, Bruce Bowen, Lindsey Hunter, Tayshaun Prince, Nazr Mohammed, Antonio McDyess) They all play a significant ROLE on both the Spurs and Pisttons to get them to the Championship.
I would argue that in 2 years, the Sonics will have the best PG/SG/SF/PF lineup in the league (who knows what is going to happen with the center position).
Ridnour is going to break through in a major way next year, as is Nick Collison. If Allen loses a step or needs to play reduced minutes - he won't have to pick up nearly the slack he did this past year on the offensive end. In two years, Luke will be 26, Nick will be 27 and Rashard will be 28. These guys will be lighting it up. This leads me to the point that the Sonics not only have to worry about signings for this year, but also have to plan to keep those other three around when their contracts come up. You're telling me other teams won't throw money at Luke if he turns into a Steve Nash-type player? What about when Rashard's contract comes back up? What about if Collison turns into a 20-10 kind of guy? He's already a 12-10 guy at a 36-minute pace as a rookie and we don't even run any offensive plays for him.
The bottom line is you need to keep those four guys together. We can win a championship around those guys and some key role players. Focus on that core and be smart with your money on the rest of the team.
If the Sonics make smart choices with their FA, then I wouldn't call them cheap. Look at Dallas, they're spending like crazy but has it brought them a championship? Spending a lot of money doesn't guarantee you anything? It still comes down to chemistry.
Let's stop Diezel's myth
They did not have the same cap room as the Cavs. The only way they had the same cap room was to renounce the rights to Allen, Vlady and all of their other free agents. Once they signed Ray they were at about 10 million and that is only if they renounce the rights to every other free agent.
I almost spit milk through my nose when I read sonic70's comment. The Sonics will not have the best PG/SG/SF/PF tandem in two years. Duncan, Manu, Bowen, and Parker? Kidd, Carter, Jefferson, Rahim? Billups, Hamilton, Prince, Wallace/Wallace? Even with PHX losing Johnson, I'd take a line-up of Nash, Marion, Amare and any SG in the league over what the Sonics have, even in two years. Don't get me wrong, the Sonics have good young talent, but so do a lot of other teams.
As far as Rick Sund is concerned, what has he done to make you not have faith in him? He traded G-ME (the glove) and Dez for Allen, Murray and Ridnour. Pretty good trade i would think. Drafted Collison (Allen Iverson predicted he was going to be rookie of the year before Collison got hurt. Check the records) He signed AD. Traded Calvin Booth for Fortson. What has he done to make you question him?
Sonic EJ you have 4/5 of your starting lineup set. You have your 6th man / scorer off the bench in Vlade. You got your bruiser off the bench in Fortson. You have your backup point in Brunson. I'm not sold on Murray but we'll see about that. Swift can give you what James did in 16 minutes that James played. You need a center and I think a shooter off the bench (Tre Simmons). Not too many teams around the NBA can say they have 6 of your 8 man rotation set
Sonic EJ - 8 mil on a big brings you KWAME BROWN!
jamal crawford is great and all, but i agree with this dude. he just doesnt play enough defense or pass the ball enough to fit in our system. Brunson wasn't near the top of my list either but i think he's costeffective. he'd do fine with 15 minutes agame for us.
sonic ej needs to sharpen up on his knowledge of the game. let me be the one to re-educate you.
" philthy, so it's ok that the sonics have not signed anyone because phoenix lost joe johnson and got 2 first round picks?
If my team traded Q for Kurt Thomas I would be happy as hell!
My problem is the sonics are not getting better. All I want is for my team to win the title or get closer to winning the title every year untill they do."
i wouldn't be so excited giving up Q AND nate robinson for a 31 year old undersized center. sure kurt thomas provides them toughness but he's aging and might not fit their run and gun.
joe johnson was like their radmanovic, his ability to be the 4th capable shooter on the court allowed their team to spread the floor and allowed the team to run the nash to amare pick and roll so efficiently. I think that Philthy was just comparing the two teams. and about those draft picks, they are lottery protected, meaning they will probably be not in the top 13.
The sonics are getting better by subtraction. they get rid of an inconsistant 7 footer and they let go of an aging backup pg that wanted money. this allows the team more flexibility in their cap to satisfy radmanovic and potentially lure some other costeffective players to plug into their core.
her's another quote from sonic ej:
"Now can we please trade Vlade "I just want to start" Radman for Antoine Walker or Al Harrington."
please, those two players you just mentioned would not fit our team. walker for obvious reasons. Al harrington will also want to start. which is something you seem to not want. Al Harrington just doesn't seem like he's worth trading a potentially potent european player that causes ruckus for other team's defense. i bet you didn't even read Mr. Locke's post about how important Radmanovic is to our team. if he's that important to the players on our roster you'd think the team would try to retain him.
another one from sonic ej:
"Are you telling me that we have to win with the guys Rick Sund is drafting?"
are you saying that vlad, luke and nick are bad draft picks? hmmm... the only year we didnt do so well was 2002 when we didn't have a 1st rounder. the verdict is still up on our two 19year old 7 footers but if the develop into anything like what they potentially can be... just watch out. oh did i mention that numerous 2nd rounders that we traded away are also nba quality players? (watson, simmons, willie green) hmmm...
one more for the road:
"I think the sonics have a 2 year window to win a title before they no longer have a legitimate superstar in his prime."
actually their window is a tad bit longer than that. you see if nick and luke can develop into all star quality players, you won't need to have a super star, because you you'd have 3 all stars in luke, nick and rashard PLUS Ray in his early 30s. oh did i mention that we might already have that superstar in the wainting on our team? he's just been restricted by coming off the bench and being under the strict control of our old coach. he has the abilities to become a superstar if the front office and coachingstaff allow him to be. i think that radmanovic has star written all over him and if he was on a different team not behind ray allen and rashard then we would have another euro star. oh and also IF those two 19 year old 7 footers pant out, or even just one of them... i think our window is more like a sliding doors big.
thats all i have on sonic ej, i'm pretty sure i can find more stuff that i can argue about.
I think the sonics had a poor man's 90's chicago bulls roster
pg: luke = bj armstrong
sg: allen = mj(well about half)
sf: lewis = pippen (minus defense)
rebounder: evans = rodman
6th man gunner: Radmanovic = kukoc
stiff@center: jjames = luc longly
combo gaurd: daniels = harper
the difference was that MJ was just that damn good and pippen provided defense at the 3 position constantly.
Other reactions --
If they had signed Duhon they would have had to use their mid-level space.
The Sonics are not under the cap unless they release all of their players.
Jamal is a totally one dimensional player who can score and nothing else. He makes no one around him better, and he gets beat for every point he scores.
those of you who understand they can only get a back-up are onto the real issue. Teh Jazz used to change back-ups to Stockton every year. One year John Crotty then next Howard Eisley. No different then what the Sonics did with Payton.
You are exactly right that this is moneyball.
Lance,
Got a good laugh from your comparisons (except for the Spurs). The Nets? C'mon man...let's be realistic here. Let's see...Kidd at 34, Carter at 31, Rahim at 31 and Jefferson at 27. I wouldn't even put that lineup in the top 5, assuming they keep all those guys - Carter is up in 2006-2007 and Kidd is up in 2007-2008.
The Pistons are going to have two guys out of that lineup aged 33 and one aged 31. They ain't winning 50+ games with three guys over 30. By the way, Ben W. comes up next year on his contract and Billups comes up the year after that. They are likely to want to cash in on their championship runs for their last career contracts.
The Spurs will still be tough except Bowen is done at age 36 - sorry. Duncan is going to be 31 and Manu 30. Parker is the only young one of the group at age 23. The benefit here is that they are all locked up for awhile now.
I'm not hearing any compelling arguments here - Sonics still look like the best 4 to me in two years.
Yes, why did we pick two stiffs in the first round when we could have used it for NBA ready rookies.
Again the Sonics failed to address their need for a backup point guard knowing full well they weren't going to match A. D. They could have traded up to pick a guard like Nate Robinson who would have surprised a lot of people who doubted him. Yes, I was the one who kept telling the Sonics they should have drafted Nate. They will be sorry that they didn't or try to.
How many times do the Sonics have to try and draft a 7 footer knowing that there aren't that many dominant 7 footers in the league. Last time I checked Hakeem, Patrick, Moses, are no longer playing. The only real big threats out there are Shaq and Duncan. The Sonics need to find a banging and inside the key presence. Are they even going to bury the hatchet and give Kemp a look? If he were truly in shape he would bring more to the table than some of those stiffs.
Let's stop Diezel's myth
They did not have the same cap room as the Cavs. The only way they had the same cap room was to renounce the rights to Allen, Vlady and all of their other free agents. Once they signed Ray they were at about 10 million and that is only if they renounce the rights to every other free agent.
Rick Brunson good ballhandler, but a liablity in scoring. Do they (Sonics) think teams will even put a man on him? We needed a guard who could create and score not someone who can't draw defenders to guard him. That's what A.D. did and the Sonics are going to suffer because of it.
Nate isn't going to want to play 13 a game for the next five years behind Ridnour. We need a guy who is completely fine with those minutes - sometimes hard to do in this league. Plus he turns the ball over alot right now...not something we can afford.
Swift is going to surprise people this season. Summer league is a guard's league - they threw the ball to him in decent post position about 10 times over six games. He blocked shots, played excellent on-ball and off-ball defense and rebounded. The refs were calling stuff that they never would have during the season - with refs like that Fortson wouldn't last 2 minutes. I think Swift is going to be pretty solid next year. He can't give us starter minutes, that's for sure.
The only negative marks on Rick Sund, Rich Cho, and David Pendergraft's resume so far during their tenure with the Sonics include the signing of Calvin Booth (6 years, $34,042,500), the drafting of Robert Swift over Al Jefferson, the drafting of Johan Petro (a.k.a., Jerome James, Jr.) over more proven, experienced players (e.g., Wayne Simien & Chris Taft), and the drafting foreign players who have little upside and don't come over to Seattle (i.e., Peter Fehse, Paccelis Morlende, & Mickael Gelabale).
Of course, with that noted, the Sonics are in position to make another bad move, with that being the purportedly imminent re-signing of Vladimir Radmanovic to a long-term deal. As it is, the Sonics need to either set-up a sign-&-trade deal wherein the acquire a legitimate center in return (e.g., Jamaal Magloire), or else they ought to sign him to the one-year tender, which is worth $3,166,155. Yet, even though the one-year tender is cost-efficient and practical, the problems with it include the fact that he'll most likely be unhappy with his role on the team, and he'll probably leave Seattle as an unrestricted free-agent at the end of the 2005-2006 season.
Another poor move that the Sonics might soon make regards the situation concerning Ronald Murray. At the price of $695,046, which is what Murray earned last year, he's an okay guy to have at the end of the bench; however, if the Sonics give him a deal similar to that of Juan Dixion (3 years, $8 million), then they've shot themselves in the foot. Murray is an undersized, defensively inept, passing deficient shooting guard who can easily be replaced.
Lastly, in regards to Danny Fortson and the Portland Trailblazers: Theo Ratliff is not going to see time at the four, since he'll log in whatever minutes he'll get backing up Joel Przybilla at the five; in addition, Ruben Patterson and Travis Outlaw are way too undersized -- as Patterson is too short (6'5") and Outlaw is too thin (210lbs.) -- to be effective at the four. As it was, the Trailblazers tried to use Stoudamire as a bargaining chip in acquiring help at the power forward spot from Houston, but were unable to get either Juwan Howard or Clarence Weatherspoon once Stoudamire outright signed with Memphis; thus, the 'blazers may, perhaps, use the Nick Van Exel -- who has a non-guaranteed salary of $12,731,125 for next season, and is going to be waived sometime during the next month by whatever team he's with -- as a pawn in getting post help, with Fortson being a guy that they could consider bringing down to Portland.
We're in serious trouble if we think Murray or Brunson can run the floor.
Nate wouldn't start many games but he can come in and play right away. The man plays bigger than his height and people keep doubting him . sonics70 do you really trust the guys we have backing up Luke. ( Luke had trouble keeping up with Parker and other quicker points during the season).
Thank god (black) is not blogging tonight!!!!!!!
In addition, the Sonics are UNDER the salary cap, which is set at $49.5 million, as they've only got approximately $35 million dollars allotted to signed players (i.e., Ray Allen, Rashard Lewis, Danny Fortson, Nick Collison, Luke Ridnour, Rick Brunson, & Johan Petro) and tendered players (i.e., Vladimir Radmanovic, Reggie Evans, Ronald Murray, & Damien Wilkins). Now, with that said, if they soon sign Radmanovic, Evans, Murray, and Wilkins, then that'll skyrocket the team's salary to around roughly $49.5 million, which will put the organization at the cap and force them to use their MLE -- which they'd receive upon reaching $49.5 million -- if they were to make anyomre free-agent signings.
How many teams can afford to lose a starting player? Backups are supposed to be just that...guys who can come in and keep things going until the starter can return. Few backups in the league are capable of replacing the starter - if you lose a starter it is a huge setback to the team, bottom line. Brunson ran the point as a starter in LA almost all of last season and did a passable job at it - seems like he could survive if Luke went down. It would hurt but we would get by.
I know Luke had trouble against Parker defensively but also scored 20 against him in game 4. I would argue that Ridnour is as good of a defender as Nash, the MVP last year. Luke is an offensive PG (like Nash), no question about it. His goal in his career should be to become an average defender - his offensive skills will outweigh his defensive liabilities in the long run.
Luke will jump to a new level next year because 1) he will ramp up his FG% to an acceptable level as his confidence increases and 2) he will drive more to the rack and get fouled (shoots 90% from the line) and 3) in an up-tempo game will dish out more assists.
I like the signing if RB can do what he did last year. He's better than Flip and Cleaves, but not as good offensively as AD. If the Sonics can retain Wilkins then it makes even more sense. This would bring a better balance to the team.
However, RB played nearly half of his total career minutes, of eight years, just last year. Was it a fluke year?
I would disagree with those that say the Sonics are cheap. But, they don't show the willingness to sign or trade for an impact player to take it to the next level. The Sonics, Cavs, Bucks, and Rockets signed FA impact players. But the biggest difference is that the Cavs, Bucks, and Rockets improved their teams.
The Lakers signed Shaq as a FA which lead to championships.
The Pistons made a great trade to bring in Wallace which lead to a chamionship.
The Spurs and Rockets built their organization around two number one draft picks.
Championship teams these days don't grow out of draft picks. Often many trades take place to build a team. The Sonics need one more impact/core player to contend. Where is he going to come from?
Collison, Ridnour, and Wilkins have potential to be good players. But they haven't proven themselves, yet.
If the Sonics are building a championship contending team around Allen and Lewis, then now is the time to take the next move. If they wait they could easily turn into the Mariners.
Can't argue about Luke. He does need to drive more often to create the double team so that he can kick it out to the shooters though. He also has to bury his outside shots more often because most guys guarding him were daring him to shoot the outside so that they could cheat a little on helping with a double team. I just wished the Sonics were concentrating on building a strong bench.
Sonic EJ,
You were probably one of those guys yelling for Sund's head after last year's quiet FA season. Still yelling...
If you don't like the team we have, how about some suggestions on how to improve? I'm talking names and numbers here, not just "sign some good free agents".
Although Brunson isn't known for his scoring, I like that fact that he is 6'4" and was at Temple when Demopolous coached there so he understands some of the responsiblities of the Sonics defensive schemes. I hope that he will be able to take pressure off Luke when he has to guard the bigger guards.
Are the Sonics really interested in antoine Walker or Eddy Curry as ESPN reports? Walker is a good back to the basket player but his attitude rubs me the wrong way. Curry is still young and has a good game inside and is a good rebounder.
If Lebron decides to leave Cleveland do the Sonics have a chance at getting him? Ray on the outside and Lebron on the inside would be spectacular. I would even trade Shard and Radman to get him.
Hey myk! Isn't Ray Allen like a top 10 pick or big free agent signing even tough the Sonics traded to get him?
Lebron would be the rebounder/scorer that Shard and Vlad would never be. Trade them for Lebron when Cleveland starts to realize that Lebron would like to bolt.
Summer league isn't just for guards!
Dwight Howard: 19 pts/ 7.5 rbs / 1.5 blks in 25 min
Chris Kaman: 20 / 8.5 / 1.5 in 32
May and Diogu played well, too. The problem exists when the big men that are present are offensively inept. They should at least show some rebounding or shot blocking ability. Swift may turn out to be a decent player, but the odds are highly against it.
How can people compare Ridnour to Stockton or any other good to great PG? His FG % actually went down last year from his rookie season. Very, very few PG's rarely improve their FG % more than marginally over their careers. One example would be J.Kidd. Still he's not a very good shooter. But, he's one of the best ever at distribution. In addition, he rebounds well for a guard. Of course, he has other intangibles that set him apart from other PG's. IMHO, the 05-06 season will be the make or break season for Ridnour.
----------
Thanks EJ. It's one thing to have an opinion. But when people start spewing their opinions, false knowledge, and lies as facts, it gets to be frustrating.
Hey y'all, I miscalculated the Sonics' team salary in my earlier post, as Seattle actually has approximately $43 million allotted in signed players (i.e., Ray Allen {~$15,000,000}, Rashard Lewis {$8,571,429}, Danny Fortson {$6,415,584}, Nick Collison {$1,815,000}, Robert Swift {$1,764,480}, Luke Ridnour {$1,638,000}, Rick Brunson {~$1,000,000}, & Johan Petro {~$1,000,000}) and tendered players (i.e., Vladimir Radmanovic {$3,166,155}, Reggie Evans {~$1,000,000}, Ronald Murray {~$800,000}, & Damien Wilkins {~$700,000}).
Anyhow, as it is, the Supersonics are still under the salary cap, albeit by only about $6.5 million. In any event, though, Danny Fortson's contract is an albatross; it needs to be rid off.
Finally, as has been previously mentioned, Vladimir Radmanovic is NOT deserving of a six year, $48 million contract -- no matter what he and his agent think!
Locke,
Any word as to who Weiss will hire to be his assistants along with Sikma and Rock?
ak1984,
I thought Locke was the only basketball nerd on the planet but I guess you are the other.
AK, thanks for the numbers.
---------
Myk-
Are you implying that the Sonics were a great team last year?
"Most great teams either need a big FA signing (LA with Shaq) or luck in the lotto (SA with Duncan)"
Also, I was confused by your other comments.
"As for the Sonics drafts...someone please show me another suceessful young team where 6 of their top 8 in the rotation:"
What do you consider rotation?
-Swift wasn't in the rotation.
-Evans was a FA.
-I would agree that Ridnour, Lewis, and Collison were good picks. But, Collison was actually ninth in minutes played.
-Radmanovic was an okay draft pick, but there were several players passed by that are better.
There were at least a few playoff teams that had at least four players in rotation and that had originated with that team.
If you're saying the Sonics have drafted well over the last few years, then I agree. But, free agency and trades are nearly just as important to win a championship.
It's true that the players orginally selected by the Sonics weren't drafted in the top ten. But if you discount Allen(drafted fifth) and GP(drafted second by the Sonics), then this team wouldn't even be in the playoffs. Point being the Sonics wouldn't be nearly the team they were last year without a top ten, more importantly, a top five draft pick.
Jack W,
Nash's FG went down almost 10% his third year. He eventually improved his shooting 8% over his career.
Stockton improved 10% over his first four years.
Marbury improved 6%. Kidd improved 6%.
Why don't you let me handle the facts here...you're embarrassing yourself.
As for the summer league, I can guarantee that the players you mentioned were touching the ball more than 4-5 times a game - I know the Bobcats made a point of looking for May every time down the floor. I don't think our guys looked for Swift much at all after the first game. That's more Sikma's fault than Swifty's fault - letting Kaniel Dickens take 12 shots per game is ridiculous.
Also, with the exception of Howard, these guys are all 2-3 years older than Swift at this point and haven't been sitting on the bench for the last 12 months. This is the most playing time the guy's gotten in a long time. And by the way he did rebound and did block shots - you must have missed the games.
Plus we don't need the guy to score...we'll have plenty of offense from our super starting 4 next year.
Sonic70, Ray will be a 31 year-old jump-shooter in 2 years. I stand by my statement that all of those teams will be better than the Sonics in 2 years, knowing that they will be somewhat older, but still more effective IMO. Who plays D on a line-up of Luke/Ray/Rashard/Collison? I also think that, as much as I love Luke, that some people are drastically overestimating how mych better he is going to get, same with Collison. Expecting either of those guys to be in the top 5 (or even 10 regarding Collison, lots of great PF out thier) at thier positions is foolish. Time will tell.
Lance,
Agreed, time will tell what happens. I feel like both Luke and Nick were good enough in college that they have lots of upside.
You could argue that Nick has more upside than Luke due to his limited role last year - don't forget he average 20-10 in a tough college conference and dropped 33 points and 19 rebounds on Duke in the NCAA tournament his senior year. He is a guy that finds a way to consistently excel (and win) at every level he's played. Definitely interested to see what happens with those two next year.
Dude, you can make paragraphs on this blog.
I heard we are one of three teams (along with Cleveland and San Antonio) with an actual offer on the table to SG Marcus Brown of CSKA Moscow who just won the Euroleague championship. He is 6-3 and 185, super quick/athletic, gets about 30% of his points from the line (like AD), plays good defense (like AD) and sounds like he may be willing to sign for around $1M a year for 2-3 years.
He played 4 years at Murray State and put up some pretty good numbers there. He had a run of bad luck with NBA teams but is currently the highest paid player in Europe and would be a heck of a combo backup - great slasher complement to Ray's outside shooting. He says he is willing to take a pay cut to get guaranteed minutes in the NBA. I don't know how our offer stacks up to the other teams but sounds like it would be a great pickup if they can pull it off.
Okay Sonics70, lets talk about some facts and REVIEW what I wrote.
"How can people compare Ridnour to Stockton or any other good to great PG? His FG % actually went down last year from his rookie season. Very, very few PG's rarely improve their FG % more than marginally over their careers. One example would be J.Kidd. Still he's not a very good shooter."
- Compare LR to JS?
- FG % went down?
- Very,very few PG's rarely improve their FG%?
- E.G. J.Kidd?
Statistically Ridnour doesn't compare to Stockton.
Ridnour's field goal percentage decreased from year one to year two.
Do you know how many point guards come into the league each year? About how many new point guards start each year? I don't know the answer, but it's a lot. Especially when you take in account over a period of ten years. In short, I said very few PG's improve their FG % more than marginally. The good ones typically improve, while the others fade away. Percentage wise very, very few PG's improve their FG % more than marginally over their careers. I DIDN'T say nor imply some of the best PG's in NBA history never improve their FG %.
One example of a good point guard, that DIDN'T improve his FG % more than marginally over his career is J.Kidd. His first two years he shot 38.5 % and 38.1 %. Throughout his career he has shot 40.2 %. A 1.7 % point improvement is what I would call a marginal increase. While, I like the play of J.Kidd, he's still not a good shooter.
Lets talk about more facts regarding:
S.Nash, S.Marbury, J.Stockton, J.Kidd, and L.Ridnour in their first two years and career totals.
SN- FG%:42.3 / 10.5 min / 2.7 FGA
- FG%:45.9 / 21.9 min / 7.7 FGA
- FG%:47 / 29 min / 10 FGA
SM- FG%:40.8 / 35 min / 13 FGA
- FG%:41.5 / 38 min / 15 FGA
- FG%:43.5 / 39 min / 17 FGA
JS- FG%:47.1 / 18 min / 4 FGA
- FG%:48.9 / 24 min / 6 FGA
- FG%:51.5 / 32 min / 9 FGA
JK- FG%:38.5 / 34 min / 11 FGA
- FG%:38.1 / 38 min / 16 FGA
- FG%:40.2 / 38 min / 13 FGA
LR- FG%:41.4 / 16 min / 5 FGA
- FG%:40.5 / 31 min / 9 FGA
- FG%:40.8 / 24 min / 7 FGA
SN had an increase of 5.3 % points from his first year to his career total. SM had an increase of 2.7 % points from his first year to his career total. JS had an increase of 4.4 % points from his first year to his career total. JK had an increase of 1.7 percentage points from his first year to his career total.
Nash and Stockton are/were good shooters. At least by the time they reached their second year, you could tell they could shoot the ball. Marbury is okay, but not good. Kidd is still not good.
It's not exactly fair to compare Ridnour's numbers to the other players because he's only had two years of data. Nevertheless, it's highly improbable that Ridnour increases his % to anywhere near a Stockton or Nash.
I'm not embarrassed, nor should I be. If anyone should be embarrassed it might be you. If you're going to present facts, please don't skew them to your lame arguement. In addition, if you're going to take the time to rip my post, try actually reading it first.
---------------------
"Summer league isn't just for guards!"
Again, that was my premise because many people write/say that it's a guard league or dominated by guards. Then I backed it up with fair examples.
"The problem exists when the big men that are present are offensively inept. They should at least show some rebounding or shot blocking ability. Swift may turn out to be a decent player, but the odds are highly against it."
I didn't comment on how Swift performed. He's only been in a handful of games in the NBA. He's only played in dozen or so exhibition games. My GUESS is that he'll be somewhere between D.Mutumbo and C.Booth as a player. What I would like to see is a center that can play post defense, rebound, and block shots for 30 minutes a night. Will Swift be able to do that?
Furthermore, I hope Collison can be a decent threat on the post. The Sonics need an effective/low post threat if they want to win the championship.
I like Allen, Lewis, Ridnour, and Collison. But his team needs one more impact/core player. Could Ridnour, Collison, Radmanovic, or Wilkins be him? Maybe, but probably not. This teams needs more defense. IMHO, the two biggest components this team is missing are defense and easy shot attempts. They need to be effective in executing both to win the championship.
Myk-
"As for the Sonics drafts...someone please show me another suceessful young team where 6 of their top 8 in the rotation:
Luke
Rashard
Nick
Reggie
Vlade
Swift"
1)I thought you were saying these players were drafted by the Sonics and were part of the rotation.
I was just saying that Swift and Evans didn't fit in both categories.
2) Chicago. There are other playoff teams, that have at least four players in their 8/9 man rotation, that have only played for that one team.
3) Great trade by the Sonics...
4) "THERE AREN'T MANY OF THEM OUT THERE" ... I agree
Diezel-
You make some good points.
Myk-
"1) You are taking your stats and looking at them only so they will help your argument. Anyone else notice that Luke's Mins doubled to 31 mins, Nash was still only playing 21 mins a game after year two and wasn't even a starter until much later in their career."
Please read my orginal post. The post you're commenting on was in response to S70.
Please stop putting words into my mouth.
I wasn't saying the defining characteristic is FG %. I compared the two only because S70 brought it up. In addition, his facts were wrong or skewed at best.
What I did was compare the four guards he brought up to LR. LR has only played two seasons.Therefore, I took the first two seasons from each player that S70 brought up. Then I showed the total career shooting percentage of each PG.
How did I:
"You are taking your stats and looking at them only so they will help your argument." ???
Don't you think it's fair to compare players stats over the length of his career?
Then I said:
"It's not exactly fair to compare Ridnour's numbers to the other players because he's only had two years of data. Nevertheless, it's highly improbable that Ridnour increases his % to anywhere near a Stockton or Nash." .
Myk, how is that fair?
You wrote:
"...Nash was still only playing 21 mins a game after year two and wasn't even a starter until much later in their career."
Nash was a starter his third year.
Sorry...
Please read my orginal post. The post you're commenting on was in response to S70.
I meant to say...The post was in response to S70. Meaning it might not make a lot of sense unless you read the first post I wrote.
Myk-
"3) Like the other poster said, don't you have to take into account that Nash's numbers dropped to: .363 his third year (and that was the first year he became a full time starter..)"
Yes, I agree, you should take into account every year. Hence, I included his career number.
I think is is fair to say that no one knows whether Ridnour will become all-star material or whether he'll compare to Nash or Stockton over the course of a career. I do feel he can improve his shooting - he shot as high as 46% from the field in college (Nash's highest at Santa Clara was 44% - Stockton admittedly was a freak at 58% at Gonzaga!)
Billups is a great example of a PG who didn't break 40% from the field until his fifth year. He's now shooting 44% from the field.
My opinion is that Luke is going to be an all-star point guard sometime over the next few years. Certainly possible he could fail miserably or be average but I don't think it will happen. We can agree to disagree.
I am totally on board that we need a good center to compete for a title. I don't feel, however, that we need lots of points from our center. Blocks and boards are what we need - an intimidating shot blocking presence to shore up the defensive liabilities of Ridnour, Allen and Lewis (Collison can hold his own).
I feel like Swift can give us 15-20 minutes of defense and boards next year and 30 minutes the year after that. What he isn't is an athletic, run the floor center. If we want that, we should try and land Hunter. Petro isn't going to help us much over the next year or two.
Myk-
"4) You are right the Sonics ARE one more core impact player away but amazingly enough they can't just go out and sign whomever they please. Simply put, there aren't any core impact players out there that we have a legitmate chance of signing and you should thank the Sonics management that they realized this and didn't go and get all stupid and throw a ton of money at an average player like Larry Hughes."
I would disagree that Hughes was an average player. But, would agree that it's good that the Sonics don't throw money at just anyone.
But in WW 11 years, how many impact/core free agents, from other
NBA teams, has he signed?
The Sonics are in the best position to win a championship in a long time. I would hate to see it blown waiting on players that don't develop.
Plus, I would like to see a step in improvement from this upcoming year's roster. As of right NOW, I'm just saying it's not looking good.
Black-
A.Houston signed for the league min. would be a good signing for any team.
Crawford is not a goof fit for the Sonics just for his salary.
S70-
Can SG Marcus Brown of CSKA Moscow play the 2 and 3?
I would think the Sonics would prefer a guy that could play the 2/3 position after signing RB.
Reaction to comments
The idea of signing Ray and dropping all others the Sonics still could do and the idea was to get a big. What big would you get. Chandler? The Bulls would have matched. Dalembert? the Sixers would have matched. That player just doesn't exist. Kwame Brown? Is that worth the gamble.
Potapenko is okay, but he's only played in 50 % of his games in the last three years. Would he really be a good signing for the starting 5 position?
Also, I thought the Sonics said they wanted to get a vet center.
Jack W,
He is pretty small at 6-3 so I can't see him getting any time at SF. He would basically be a Flip replacement. I guess the question for him in choosing a team is who can give him the most PT?
If he's backing up Allen, he can expect to get a max of 13 mins a game, maybe more if he occasionally plays PG. I would think the Sonics want to get Ray down to maybe 35 a game (what Duncan plays) to reduce wear and tear.
He would be buried on the Spurs behind Ginobili, Parker, Udrih and Barry. Cavs might have the most PT to offer since they haven't worked out their PG situation yet -Hughes plays 39 a game at SG so not much there either. I know the Cavs really want Jaric so if they get him, not much for Brown there.
His A/T ratio is about 1.3/1 so not really PG material in the Sonics mold. He is a pure SG, a scorer.
As some earlier posters pointed out, a heck of a lot depends on what happens with Vlade and Damien. If we lose those guys we have a big hole to fill at the 3. I get the feeling they are focusing on current holes by pursuing a backup at the 2 in a 4-guard rotation and worry about any other holes as they come up.
Huh huh. He said "holes".
I'm a self-loathing black man.
Hey black! Tag you're it!!!
Why are you guys saying racist things?? I'll bet you wouldn't say them to anyones face. That's pretty chicken stuff.
Black that's "your" not "you're" as in you are. I knew you lacked some education.
It's o.k. to blog on this site black, but use proper english and don't blackify everything you say.
Otay?
black,have you ever looked in the mirror and didn't like what you saw?
I can almost guarantee that "black" is a white kid having some fun with us. I can imagine him at his little IKEA computer desk at his folks' house with his cap pointed sideways, wearing his oversized Iverson jersey, munching on some delicious cookies and refreshing milk that mom just brought to him.
You're right anonymous 2. I think that black is really a white kid in Mercer Island trying to be black because he wants to be black. Black is really white. I'm convinced.
Black, I'm the one who said the Sonics should have drafted Nate Robinson and you wanted them to draft the French black center Johan!!!!!Like I said the Sonics will be sorry they didn't try to trade up to draft Nate!!
Black quit pretending you're black when we all know you are a rich white kid in Mercer Island trying to be black. Just because you couldn't get into the 50 cent concert don't be a hater!!
All of you are being racist. So is the one guy going to accept blacks meeting, I would love to see it.
Yeah...Rainier Beach...let's meet there. Tell you what...you come at me and I'll hold out my arm, plant it on your forehead, and hold you away while you pinwheel your arms helplessly...how's that sound?
Sorry I didn't know the exact location of your residence black ( I mean white kid pretending to be black)
black look at the Franklin blog!
Diezel,
Good point about the coaching. We're all talking player moves but a huge unknown is whether Weiss can keep things moving next year.
It sounds like he has some plans to simplify the defense (always a good idea when your team is 25th in the league - better to master 1-2 schemes than be clueless about 4-5 schemes).
I just hope the guy can be tough and fiery when we're down - sometimes the gentle approach doesn't always cut it. That transition from good cop to bad cop can be rough.
I like the idea of speeding up the tempo - I think we have the personnel to make it work. The only time we were effective against SA was when we were pushing it and keeping them from setting their defense. Interestingly that was also when Luke played his best basketball.
all you have to do is look between your crack black, remember?
is that because Casey is black? or are you an equal opportunity kind of guy?
The sonics should have drafted Nate!!!!!!!!
You wanted Johan black, I guess he's the next Tim Duncan right????
I knew you were white if you said my mom was callin and you responded.
That's calling black not callin. Remember not to blackify the English.
black, if you can't take it don't cry about it!!
I didn't see any black bicylists come near Lance Armstong. Who really needs to take steroids?? And you talk about competing!! LOL
This kid black is so white its scary. Going out of his way to sound like a homey. The more you try and sound black, the more we know you're a white kid.
You're a lonely, pathetic kid. Go ahead, give me a homey response...keep it coming...
But black it's true that there weren't any black riders there but you had seven years to train for it!!!! black men may have the size but white guys have endurance!!!!!!
Myk-
Obviously, you're reading my comments out of context.
I was responding part to S70 and others...this is from S70:
"I would argue that Ridnour is as good of a defender as Nash, the MVP last year. Luke is an offensive PG (like Nash), no question about it. His goal in his career should be to become an average defender - his offensive skills will outweigh his defensive liabilities in the long run.
Luke will jump to a new level next year because 1) he will ramp up his FG% to an acceptable level as his confidence increases and 2) he will drive more to the rack and get fouled (shoots 90% from the line) and 3) in an up-tempo game will dish out more assists."
I hope Luke improves. In fact, I believe he has the potential to be a better player.
Here was my response to S70(regarding Ridnour) and statement to others(regarding comparisons between Rid and Stockton+).
"How can people compare Ridnour to Stockton or any other good to great PG? His FG % actually went down last year from his rookie season. Very, very few PG's rarely improve their FG % more than marginally over their careers. One example would be J.Kidd. Still he's not a very good shooter. But, he's one of the best ever at distribution. In addition, he rebounds well for a guard. Of course, he has other intangibles that set him apart from other PG's. IMHO, the 05-06 season will be the make or break season for Ridnour."
-Like I said to you before FG % doesn't make a PG. Regardless, I was commenting SPECIFICALLY to what S70 said:
"1) he will ramp up his FG% to an acceptable level as his confidence increases"
This is all I orginally said:
"His FG % actually went down last year from his rookie season. Very, very few PG's rarely improve their FG % more than marginally over their careers."
-(ALL)PG's rarely improve their FG % more than marginally
- Ridnour's % decreased from year one to year two.
Those two points are facts.
Then S70 started in on various players that I did NOT bring up. He was spewing false numbers.
I corrected him. I included the players first two years ONLY to compare to Ridnour's first two years. Just for comparison.
Then I included the career numbers and improvements of those other players only to put out the facts.
You said:
"...saying that after two years there is no way he could improve to be as good as Nash"
NO! I'm not saying that. Again, you're putting words into my mouth. I don't think he could be as good as a SHOOTER as SN/JS.
SN PROVED in 20 min/gm, of his second season, that he could shoot. Yes, we could compare his second to third season. In which he didn't shoot well at all in that third season. In addition, he played for a new team.
Nevertheless, the previous season he did PROVE he could shoot in the NBA. Specifically, the first two years, he played 2348 minutes and successfully made 45 % of his shots(359/759)
Luke Ridnour in 3685 of NBA minutes completed 444 out of 1089 attempts(40.8%).
Does that mean LR can't improve his FG %? No, but after 1000 shots I think we have a good idea of how Ridnour can shoot. There's a very, very high probability that he will never shoot 47.5 - 51.5 % as his career shooting percentage.
In addition, if you would have read my post(s) you would have seen:
"It's not exactly fair to compare Ridnour's numbers to the other players because he's only had two years of data."
You said:
" Luke started in year two (Nash year 3)
- Luke had a higher Assist to TO ratio in year two than Nash
- Nash's FG% plummeted the first year he started and played real minutes.
All three of those points prove that your arugment is not logically correct..."
Again, if you're going to rip my post at least read it(try to understand them).
Just to make sure I understand, you think my two out of three points regarding Rid and (all)NBA point guards are logically incorrect?
Just to review since you may have missed it the first few times:
"-(ALL)PG's rarely improve their FG % more than marginally
- Ridnour's % decreased from year one to year two."
Also, you said:
"but you can't use only certain stats to prove your point when there are many more out there that prove your point wrong."
Yes, I totally agree. But if you had read my posts thoroughly these posts wouldn't even be necessary.
Homie is someone who is really white and pretends to be black and sits at her computer typing crap from between her crack
i knew you were white all along, I take back all the racial stuff I said about you black (I mean white kid pretending to be black)
ridnour's future is a tough one to judge- at least for me. he doubled his minutes, points and more than doubled his assists and generally looked better out there compared to last year. he upped his 3pt% by 5%. but per minute his scoring was down 1 point per 48 minutes and his raw FG% is still
a little weak. and his +/- rating has been the worst on the team for two straight years among regular rotation players. it will be interesting to him and the sonics without daniels and see how much was lost by his departure. i assume ridnour will continue to improve but i dont know how much.
Isn't posting under black just as generic as posting under anonymous?
And that's Bitch not Biatch, you have too many typos black.
And about the genital myth, I didn't know it was true for the women as well.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ha ha ha ha ha ha
That's with not wit. Wit is what I'm gifted with. With is I'm with your momma. Width is what i'm going use on her.
LOL!!!!!!
Not to nit-pick, but the Hawks team that Weiss coached was actually pretty decent. Here's a link to a posting on the fabulous SuperSonicSoul website that discusses that team in some detail:
http://www.supersonicsoul.com/2005/07/weiss.html
Good guys do finish first
Lance isn't the greatest athlete ever. I said HE IS ONE OF THE BEST. Go back and read it black to get your facts straight.
Jack W,
Let's reel you back in here, buddy...you're way out there.
Here is your statement:
"How can people compare Ridnour to Stockton or any other good to great PG? His FG % actually went down last year from his rookie season. Very, very few PG's rarely improve their FG % more than marginally over their careers."
If you were going to prove your point here, you would have given me a list of PGs with similar numbers to Ridnour's in their second year that didn't improve over their career - not give me stats for the best PGs in the game and what they did. You're making generalized statements and then not backing them up with numbers. Then you claim we're not reading your posts when it is obvious you're the one who isn't catching your own drift.
I clearly made the logical point that those top notch PGs did in fact make improvements over their career - no reason Luke can't do the same thing. I'm not talking the improvement between their first year and their career average, I'm talking progression over time - i.e. first year and best year. Nash had a 14% increase between his 3rd year and his current year. Stockton had a 10% increase from his first year to his fourth year. Show me all the guys with Luke's numbers who made no significant improvements between their first year and their best year. Then, I might be interested. You might be close to proving your point.
I also cleared up your irrelevant statement about Luke's FG% going down this past year by pointing out that Nash had a similar decrease himself. Stands to reason if Nash has a decrease and becomes the MVP that Luke's decrease doesn't necessarily mean a thing. I think you need to read more closely to understand the finer points I'm making here. You are dead set in your opinion that Luke is an average point guard and are desperately attempting to craft statistics to support your emotional attachment to that idea.
My opinion is that Luke is going to be a hell of a player - you can't prove me wrong. You haven't shown a statistic yet that has any relevance to what kind of player Luke is going to be in 2 years.
If you're going to state that PGs rarely improve their shooting, best thing would be to lay down some numbers to back that claim.
Here's a hyperlink that article, sorry.
Weiss
Hey Black! You said Muhammad Ali, MJ and Jerry rice were the greatest athletes ever. They were great, but at least Lance didn't hang on to a career that was all washed up. He retired on top and is the best ever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Face it your heroes were old and washed up. Ali (brain damage), MJ (never should have tried to be like Bo and retired as a Bull ) and Jerry (should have retired as a Niner) Lance still the best and no one will beat his record)
You worship a boy who has an elementary education. That's a great start black, maybe he can inspire you to educate yourself and lose your ignorance!!!!!
Black,
We know you're white. Tough black dudes don't sit around on blogger.com trading insults with Sonics fans all freaking day. You sound like a jobless white teenager to me.
Still want to meet behind Rainier Beach? I thought not...
And that's H E R O E S, not H E R O S!!!!!!!! TOO MANY TYPOS BLACK!!!!
LET YOUR SON TEACH YOU HOW TO SPELL
hey Black.
Not HOWS (HOW IS IT) BUT HOW ABOUT BLACK. USE PROPER OLD ENGLISH
I'M COMPLEMENTING YOUR SON ON HIS EDUCATION IT IS YOU WHO I AM MAKING FUN OF
I'm serious. If you continue to write typos, how can anyone take you seriously? You make many points but little facts to back them up and committing errors only reveals your inner faults.
I go to school with your son black. He told me that you are really a white guy who is pretending hard to be black, even having to put black face in public to hide your shame.
Locke, this has been entertaining bantering with black. Didn't know you had listeners that were so serious!
Bye, black I hope you don't take life quite as serious. LOL
AMERICA THE BEAUTIFUL!!!
FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS GREAT!!!
THANKS LOCKE!!! GREAT SHOW!!!!
I agree. You make me ashamed to say that i'm white.
I am Native American black. So as far as I'm concerned the only reason why you're here is because the white guys brought you here. You should move your black ass back to Africa and the White Guys should go back to Europe. My people were robbed of their homeland and don't tell me this is your country black because it is not. Navajo Power!!!!!!
Saturday 2am sounds great - behind the Whole Foods near your house on Mercer. The window is your best bet cause Mom can hear your feet on the stairs when you try to sneak out late.
You're a real tough guy, black. Never heard so much smack talking from a little white kid in my life.
I am Native American and when people try to lay claim to what is rightfully ours it is painful. I did not mean to offend anyone as we all have our struggles but when one group puts another down it is not what I was told as a young child. My ancestors were peaceful and loved mother Earth. We were only defending our homeland when the settlers came and that is what made us hate and almost destroyed our whole nation. Peace brothers.
Way to run from a fight, Beaver. June and Ward would be proud of you.
S70-
"If you were going to prove your point here, you would have given me a list of PGs..."
I didn't think that the two points I listed needed any support. I would think anyone who has followed the NBA for several years would recognize how many players don't improve their FG% more than marginally. My apologies for the assumption. I expected more intelligence and experience.
Anyway, I was just talking about his field goal percentage? Then you and Myk when off on tangents from there. I apologize if my statements weren't clear regarding my issue regarding his field goal %, as opposed to his overall play.
I'm not sure on the confusion unless you didn't read my post correctly or I didn't explain it well enough.
Please answer the following question.
Are the two below points true? Yes or no only please.
-(ALL)PG's rarely improve their FG % more than marginally
- Ridnour's % decreased from year one to year two.
"You are dead set in your opinion that Luke is an average point guard..."
Where did I say this?
You're putting words in my mouth AGAIN!
"I also cleared up your irrelevant statement about Luke's FG% going down this past year..."
Actually, it's relevant because it proves thus far, that he's not a good shooter. It doesn't necessarily mean he'll never be one, but it does demonstrate his past abilities.
"My opinion is that Luke is going to be a hell of a player - you can't prove me wrong."
Obviously, I can't prove something that may or may not happen. What I can prove is that he's not a good shooter. If you can't realize that then there's something wrong with you.
In regards to your opinion, I hope you're right.
Will he be a good shooter? No, but he doesn't have to be for the Sonics to win. He just has to be good enough.
Please just answer the two questions I asked before trying to disprove any more points that I never tried to make.
JW,
Context, my friend, context. I don't want to have to educate you to the concept of context but you can't sit there and say that your only purpose was to make those two statements independent of each other. You were using those statements to suggest that we had no business comparing Luke to Nash/Stockton at the same point in their careers - those questions weren't sitting off by themselves with a yes/no checkbox next to them in your post.
Take reponsibility for challenging that I was comparing Luke to those players. You're now backing down, acting as if you're a huge Ridnour fan, asking me to give yes/no answers without any regard for context.
Yes Ridnour's percentage went down and yes that doesn't mean anything.
Possibly PGs don't improve their FG% noticeably over a career - I have yet to see you give me anything decent to support that statement. In fact I think it is highly likely that after a few years in the league most point guards take better shots and make more of the shots they take - i.e. their percentage goes up. This garbage about "following the NBA" is ridiculous. You're making a global assumption based on games you've watched without actually doing any research on whether what you've seen from an anecdotal perspective has any basis in the numbers. In fact the two often diverge much more than you think.
Do some research, get back to me with numbers to support your claims and we can have an intelligent discussion. Until then, let's move on.
S70-
As requested... In 2000, there were 8 point guards selected in the draft. I was trying to be as fair as possible. Therefore, instead of going year by year(many players just played in a few games some years) I tried to take FGA from the first two or three years then compared them to their career totals. Is that fair enough?
Jamal Crawford: 530-1299(40.8%) / career 3714 FGA(39.7%)
Keyon dooling: 435-1100(39.5%) / career 1445 FGA(39.7%)
Speedy Claxton: 472-1121(42%) / career 1732 FGA(42.1%)
Erick Barkley: 00/01- 36.4%(8g) / 01/02- 35.3%(19g)
AJ Guyton: 40.6%(192 attempts) / total 3 years 37.7 %(440 FGA)
Khalid El-Amin: 37%(311 attempts)
Jason Hart: year 1-3:(82-179)45.8% / 4th yr: (257-573) 44.9%
Igor Rakocevic: 37.9 % in 58 FGA
S70-
"Context"
It's funny that you bring that up. Because you were taking my statements out of context. Therefore, I had to simplify it for you.
"Take reponsibility for challenging that I was comparing Luke to those players. You're now backing down, acting as if you're a huge Ridnour fan..."
Right YOU were comparing, I was NOT.
I'm backing down??? Backing down from what? No, you fail to see my simple points. Look they're right in front of you. Do you have problems reading?
As far as acting like I'm a huge Ridnour fan. Again, please show me where I'm acting. Right, you can't because I've been consistent. If you had read my posts you would have realized that in the beginning.
You continue to make these false claims. How can we have an intelligent discussion when you keep lying?
Are you there black? Hello? Hello? Hey it's me the anonymous one, your own worst nightmare!!!!LOL!!!!!
dudes lets think about it we want a dominant PF right? sign vlad this year to a 6 year incentive deal. wait out the year and see where we are. next off season maybe amare wants out of phoenix just like JJ and we offer them Lewis and possibly Evans or Collison in a sign and trade. plug in Vlad at the 3 and bam you got what you wanted.
pg: luke
sg: allen
sf: vlad
pf: Amare
c: swift
our bench will be plug and play and that would be our new core. it's far fetched but it is a possibility. it's insane but i've read worse... who posted possibly getting allan houston? that's insane.
hey idiot i said it was a possibilty go **** yourself you ignorant piece of ****. maybe learn to read it was just a suggestion. Joe johnson decided he didn't want to be there, what makes your concieded ass think that amare won't do the same if the suns aren't going to go anywhere after they dismantled their run and gun? it's ignorant bastards like you MYK, that aren't up for the possibilities that are out there. it's just an open way of thinking and i think it was a possibility. don't go off thinking you're the shit around here because you are jsut some overweight M******** wasting my time reading such a lame ass reply.
you suck
i concur, it's idiots like myk you think like conservative pricks that don't think of vast possibilities. don't shoot down an idea before you can proove your shit. please don't waste people's time being a dick myk, just because amare's in phoenix now doesn't mean he's gonna stay. there's a possibility that team might get old real fast real soon. when they traded away Q and are about to lose JJ, their core has become older. nash = 30+, thomas = 30 + and if they get finley 30+. and they dont have the young legs at starters to run only 6 guys a night anymore. they might implode in a year or two, you jsut don't know. Amare might not be up for it if the suns aren't what they can be. like anonymous said, it's just a possibility, deal with it. it wouldn't be too farfetched because a lewis+collison package can get you amare if he wants out of phoneix. i think that lineup would be awesome and i think it's just a possibility, not that he's smoking crack. you are an imbecile myk.
Locke please ban Black and dissallow ananymous comments. This is riducolous. This board should be about sports not idiot kids spouting racism from both sides.
Hey, Amare Stoudemire is NOT going to sign with the Seattle Supersonics when he is a restricted free-agent come next off-season. There are numerous, numerous reasons for this; yet, I'm not going to waste my time explaining that to someone who was imbecilic enough to come up with such a asinine idea in the first place.
As it is, the main reason that Phoenix will not lose Stoudemire is because the Suns will have the right-to-first-refusal. Moreover, they will also have the ability to offer him a contract that is one more year in length (six versus five), and that is worth a lot more than any other team will be able to offer him.
In other news, here is a link to important information regarding the collective bargaining agreement: http://draftexpress.com/viewarticle.php?a=1065
Anyhow, last but certainly not least, ENOUGH WITH THE BIGOTED ETHNOCENTRICSM! Not only is it annoying as all hell, it's also flat-out lame. Besides, that notwithstanding, the fact that some of y'all are debating with one another on this blog about whether or not bigotry and ethnocentricism exists in the NBA and at Clear Channel is GODDAMN POINTLESS!
Joe Johnson wanted to leave PHX BECAUSE of Amare. He thought he dissed him too often. There is no way Amare is leaving PHX, settle down man. All myk said is that it wouldn't happen. No need for the insults.
There's a lot of people on this blog who can't spell and don't use proper English. Go back to school people!!!!!
AND BAN BLACK TOO!!!!!!!!
Diezel,
Why would you trade two somewhat productive players for one who doesn't even bring it? Not a good idea.
Trade Shard and Vlad for Lebron when Cleveland starts to tank it in January and are desperate to unload Lebron knowing he will opt out of his contract.
275 freaking posts? and only like a dozen of them really matter. dude we're not going to get amare because at this point there is no reason for him to leave. why would he? if he does, then go for him if you have the cap space or the tradable parts. i just think you're thinking too much in fantasy basketball ways. brunson will be a decent backup point gaurd, atleast we now know that we have apure point as back up to DISTRIBUTE the ball. now let's sign Vlad to mroe than that single year tender.
Damn straight, diezel, as you've correctly pointed out that thinking guys like LeBron James and Amare Stoudemire will ever play for the Seattle Supersonics is completely futile and absolutely stupid.
However, with that said, the T-wolves only have one post-player, with that being Michael Olowokandi, which is why they are not going to trade the underachieving stiff; besides, why do would the Sonics want to replace Jerome James with his close-to-identical counterpart? At any rate, if the Sonics want to seriously solve their problem in the middle, and are willing to spend some money to get that accomplished, then they should attempt to obtain Jamaal Magloire via a trade involving Vladimir Radmanovic.
Yet, if the Sonics still had a lot of money at their disposal -- which they don't, due in part to the re-signing of Ray Allen -- then I would like have to seen them offer Tyson Chandler a five-year deal worth the maximum, and hope that the Chicago Bulls wouldn't match; Chandler is currently the best young center in the league.
Oh yeah, and by the way, the Miami Heat may have just shot themselves in the foot. Antoine Walker and Jason Williams are going to cause problems being on the same team; they're ball-hogging, shoot first type play who don't defend worth a damn. As of this moment, the Detroit Pistons and Indiana Pacers have a better chance of winning the Easter Conference than Miami.
magloire had one good year. lets not waste effort on that discussion. let me kill it right now and right here. at his stage of his career/age he's had less stellar numbers compared to a one vin baker. i think they are of the same mold, height size and abilities. he's not a stellar defender/blocker as vin baker accumulated more blocks than magloire did at the same stage. also noted, why would we want an overpriced baby sitter for swift and petro? not neccessary. pleasse don't give up on vlad just yet. he will surprise you if you are patient. there was a reason why we passed up on maglor in the 2000 draft and that because he reminded the sonics brass of a young vin baker.
man i didn't ever want to say vin baker again, but it had to be done.
Diezel,
thanks for responding anyway. I don't agree with your assessment of Kandi man. He has size, but no heart. The man is like Jerome all over again, good one night, bad for another 35 games. If you were Cleveland, and knew that Lebron wanted to opt out of contract next year regardless of the situation and you would get nothing for him, wouldn't you try and get something for him? You do the math.
I hope that you wouldn't let him go for nothing or your head would be on a plate in Cleveland.
Jamaal Magloire (2003-2004): 33.9 mpg , 13.3 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 1.23 bpg, NBA All-Star.
Vin Baker (1996-1997): 40.5 mpg , 21.0 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 1.44 bpg, NBA All-Star.
Look, Vin Baker and Jamaal Magloire are totally different players. Anyhow, if you look at the stats for both players during their respective fourth seasons in the NBA, then you'd notice that Baker put in approximately seven more minutes per game than did Magloire; therefore, the statistical comparison between the two of 'em is skewed.
At any rate, Baker was noted in Milwaukee as a soft power forward who didn't like to put his back to the basket and was only mediocre on defense, while Magloire is a solid post player who has the all-around skill set to be a productive center.
And Diezel,
If you would settle for a Magloire or Kandi, I think that you were the one who signed Jim Mcilvane to that stupid contract years ago.
Ak1984,
You don't think Lebron would play next to a real All Star like Ray Allen? The Sonics would be perfect for him. He is young, like Luke and Nick. He would play the 3 or 4 spot. Ray and Lebron would be the perfect balance playing the inside/outside game. Who would you double team if you were the opponent? Don't write this one off please. Cleveland will deal if they can't keep him.
Again people, we don't need any 7 footers. The only legitimate 7 foot threats out there are Shaq, Tim and maybe Yao. Everybody else has big guys who don't dominate. remember, Patrick, Hakeem, Kareem, are retired and Wilt is dead. Out.
Again people, we don't need any 7 footers. The only legitimate 7 foot threats out there are Shaq, Tim and maybe Yao. Everybody else has big guys who don't dominate. remember, Patrick, Hakeem, Kareem, are retired and Wilt is dead. Out.
Ban the black too!!!!!!!
Again, if LeBron James is hell bent on leaving Cleveland as a restricted free-agent two years from now, then he'll either force a sign-&-trade to either Chicago, Los Angeles, or New York, or else he'll just sign the one-year tender and leave as an unrestricted free-agent . . . in any event, there is NO F****** WAY that he'll ever want to come to Seattle, which is the outpost of the sports world!
Now, with that said, if Hell freezes over and #23 makes his way to the Pacific Northwest, then you can say that you called it way in advance. I, however, am going to take the practical approach and presume that 'Bron will only step foot in the Evergreen State on business, with that business involving him layin' it down on the Sonics.
I say let Cleveland trade him to us and see how he does here. Has he said he didn't want to play here? NO!!! You can't just assume he doesn't want to play here. Remember if you assume it makes an ASS out of U and ME!!!!
If you are seriously comparing Jim McIlvaine to either All-Stars like Jamaal Magloire or serviceable guys like Michael Olowokandi, then you're an idiot.
As it is, one of the best trades the Sonics ever made was in 1999, which was when the team dealt McIlvaine to New Jersey for Michael Cage & Don MacLean. Ultimately, for all the grief management gets from the fans, y'all must give some credit to Wally Walker, as he's been able to get out from under bad contracts (e.g., McIlvaine, Vin Baker, & Calvin Booth), which is a positive.
Uh, actually, it's you who is making doltish assumptions regarding LeBron James.
Myk,
you just wasted key strokes saying the Sonics should trade two decent young players for a big stiff who can't get any better than he is today!!!!!!!!!
Throw in our next draft picks for 5 years with Shard and Vlade. Look who we picked with our last drafts. It can only get better.We waste every draft we have
Ak1984,
I'm sorry, I didn't know you were Lebron's mother knowing where her son would and would not play.
Ak1984,
Dolt means someone who makes things up without any facts to back up their assumptions. You assume Lebron does not want to play here without any quotes from him to back it up. Thank God you aren't in the Sonics front office you probably would have assumed that Ray Allen wouldn't want to play in Seattle in the trade for GP and we would have ended up with NOTHING. Bak at ya!!!!!
That's Back not Bak sorry for the typo.
Ak1984,
if you decide to use big words like doltish then you better know what it means and look very hard in the mirror before you start typing. Better yet think before you act.
Myk,
If you think that Robert Swift, Petro, Peter Fehse (Ger), Valdimir Stepania were or great draft picks then I guess you know basketball talent then. sorry
And don't forget the French point guard who never played here.
Myk,
are you on the Sonics dance team.
You sure can't take criticism well.
Ban the black!!!!!!!!!
Yeah, even though Jamaal Magloire has had health issues -- especially last season -- his contract only has two years left on it; thus, if he completely falls apart, then the investment wasn't that big of a deal. However, the health issues notwithstanding, Magloire is a banger and is the best center who can, pragmatically, be acquired by the Sonics.
Tyson Chandler, unfortunately, will not be a Sonic for numerous reasons, with some of those reasons including the Sonics dwindling cap space and Chicago's intent of re-signing him at any and all costs; however, the reason that I mentioned him was because the fact that he's the best free-agent center on the market, and that he'd be a great addition to Seattle.
Throughout this decade, the Sonics drafts have been neither good nor bad, but rather average.
2000: #17 Desmond Mason, #42 Olumide Oyedeji, & #47 Josip Sesar (traded to Boston for a 2001 second-round draft pick & a 2002 second-round draft pick);
2001: #12 Vladimir Radmanovic, #40 Earl Watson, & #42 Bobby Simmons (traded to Washington for the draft rights of Predrag Drobnjak);
2002: #49 Peter Fehse
2003: #12 Nick Collison, #14 Luke Ridnour, & #41 Willie Green (traded to Philadelphia for the draft rights of Paccelis Morlende & cash considerations);
2004: #12 Robert Swift, #35 Andre Emmett (traded to Memphis for a 2005 second-round draft pick & cash considerations), & #41 David Young;
2005: #25 Johan Petro, #48 Mickael Gelabale, & #55 Lawrence Roberts (traded to Memphis for a 2006 second-round draft pick, a 2007 second-round draft pick, & cash considerations).
Ak1984
Thanks for backing up what I was trying to convey to Myk. The Sonics got lucky with Nick and Luke. Vlade wants to start but can't rebound. Shard is one dimentional, and Desmond got traded because Milwaukee knew they couldn't keep GP. Swift a question mark, Petro a question mark, great draft picks I say.
Myk you backed up your statement with alot of question marks and palyers that have been talked about being traded.
That;s players not palyers, sorry
Myk,
you would rather think small and settle for a Kandi or Magloire. Too bad that you can't think bigger. It's people like you who settle for second rate rather than strive to go for better. I told you we don't need another seven footer who has no skills. Maybe you work for the Mariners as the ballgirl while moonlighting on the Sonics dance team too?
Myk,
Yes the Sonics got lucky with Nick and Luke because they could have drafted a Jarvis Hayes, a player that was slotted to go to them or a Marcus Banks or Reece Gaines someone that McMillan rated higher than Luke. Very lucky I must say.
Myk,
let me spell it out for you:
THE BUCKS HAD TO GET DESMOND MASON BECAUSE IF THEY LOST GP THEN THEY WOULD HAVE NOTHING TO SHOW FOR. IT DO YOU UNDERSTAND B BALL EXPERT?
DESMOND WAS A MARGINAL PLAYER WHO KNEW HOW TO DUNK WHEN HE PLAYED FOR THE SONICS NOTHING SPECIAL. EVEN LOCKE SAID THAT HE DIDN'T THINK THAT MASE WOULD NEVER GET ANY BETTER THAN WHAT HE WAS. MAYBE YOU COULD TELL DAVID TO WATCH MORE BASKETBALL AND TO QUIT HIS SHOW!!!!!
Hey, myk, you're right about needing to be grounded in reality. As it is, who do you think should start at center for Seattle next year? Personally, I wish Wally Walker and Rick Sund would look at acquiring some big guys through trades (e.g, Jamaal Magloire for Vladimir Radmanovic & Lorenzen Wright for Danny Fortson), while allowing Robert Swift and Johan Petro to get experience by playing in the NBDL.
Now, undoubtedly, I realize that those aforementioned trades won't likely be done due to the fact that the both New Orleans and Memphis, respectively, would not be interested -- unless, perhaps, there were second-round draft picks or draft rights to foreigners included -- in completing such deals.
Myk,
I SUPPOSE THAT YOU WERE CLAPPING AND CHEERING WHEN THEY PICKED A EURO NAMED RADMANOVIC, A HIGH SCHOOLER NAMED LEWIS, AND D MASE. YOU WERE PROBABLY WISHING THEY COULD HAVE DRAFTED THE MISSING LINK 7 FOOTER!!!!
WHERE IS BLACK TODAY??????
MYK,
CAN YOU READ? i SAID THAT THE SONICS WERE PRECICTED TO DRAFT THE OTHER GUYS AND NOT NICK OR LUKE BEACUSE THEY WERE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE AVAILABLE AT THAT PICK YOU IDIOT!!!!!!
PREDICTED NOT PRECICTED SORRY
MYK,
MAYBE YOU AND BLACK WERE BORN AT THE MORONS ARE US HOSPITAL!!!!
"IT DO YOU UNDERSTAND B BALL EXPERT?" I'm sorry, but that's hilarious. It's like a mix of Yoda and Mike Tyson. Diezel, I'm not sure what you mean when you say "legit centers." Since you state that Shaq and Yao are the only legit centers, I would assume you mean "great centers." There are quite a few decent centers, though definatley fewer than any other position, and hard to come by. I would say that Shaq and Yao are the only legit scoring centers. Lots of pretty good defensive centers though.
I know one of the big men the Sonics are pursuing is unknown right now. I thought they might be trying to make a play for Dikembe. I think it would be a good fit:
- The guy is probably the most dominant shot blocker since Bill Russell. When he was in the game for Houston last year their opponents shot 5.5% worse from the field as a team (and that is with Ming as the other guy - think what he could do for us)
- He is still a damn good rebounder - I think he had the 4th best rebound rate in the league last year - just ahead of Fortson.
- He has a great EFG% and doesn't take many shots, which would fit in great with our offense.
- He is a veteran who would be great to mentor Swifty and teach him how to dominate the paint.
- I think we could get him for the 3 year, $15M-$18M deal we have on the table.
- He should be able to give us 20 minutes a game as a starter, with Swift giving us 15 and Collison/Fortson picking up the rest.
The downside is obviously that he is 38 but as far as I can tell he is very durable and takes great care of himself. Good for a few years until Swift/Petro can develop.
The other downside is that he can't run the floor in an up-tempo game - sounds like they want to play that next year. He also sounds like he may not want to leave Houston.
In any case - I think it would be a perfect fit for us right now - veteran, great defense, rebounding and garbage points for James/Potapenko money over 3 years.
Thoughts?
I agree, centers are vastly overpaid, which only proves the elementary tenets of economics i.e supply and demand. I think Maglore would be a great pick-up for any team needing a decent center, that is if Shaq or the ghost of Wilt Chamberlain isn't available, eh anonymous?
Myk,
Ever seen Vitaly or Dale Davis run the floor? It ain't pretty.
Plus, missed shots, blocks and defensive rebounds are what enable an up-tempo game - ever remember Kareem running the break? Its because his defense kicked it off and the other four guys took off down the floor.
The only guy that is athletic and plays defense out there is Steven Hunter. Hard to know with him how much of his improvement was Nash-related though. He is likely going to want 5 years though and lots of minutes.
Magloire is no good because he'll also want lots of minutes (we only have about 20 if we want to develop Swift and still run a small-ball lineup sometimes). He also can't anchor the defense, which is what we really need. Also not sure whether we can realistically land him via S&T.
Who else is out there?
DeSagana Diop, Steven Hunter, and Vitaly Potapenko should not be signed by the Sonics, since they all suck.
1. Diop = A Talentless Version Benoit Benjamin (Yeah, he's that awful!)
2. Hunter = Calvin Booth/Jelani McCoy/Olden Polynice
3. Potapenko = Potapenko
By the way, the Sonics can't use the amnesty clause, because the luxury tax doesn't kick in until a team's salary reaches $61,700,000.
As it is, Danny Fortson could be used in a trade to net a decent center, such as Lorenzen Wright (9.6 ppg, 7.7 rpg, & .86 bpg; $7,700,000), who is in the final year of his contract with the Memphis Grizzlies. The Grizzlies have openly been trying to move Wright, and the Sonics are in dire need of a legitimate post presence.
Anyhow, if the Sonics could net Wright and Jamaal Magloire -- who I still believe could be had for a package of Vladimir Radmanovic and any grouping of the following entities: the draft rights of Peter Fehse, the draft rights of Paccelis Morlende, the draft rights of Mickael Gelabale, a 2006 second-round draft pick, a 2006 second-round draft pick [via Memphis], a 2007 second-round draft pick, and/or a 2007 second-round draft pick [via Memphis] -- then they'd be in great shape.
With Magloire starting and playing 32 minutes a night, while Wright puts in 16 minutes off of the bench, the Sonics could place both Robert Swift and Johan Petro on the inactive list, so that they can get some valuable experience playing in the NBDL.
MYK,
I'LL START WATCHING NBA GAMES IF YOU GO BACK TO SCHOOL AND LEARN TO R E A D. (SOME BOOKS THAT IS)
magloire is injury prone. he was when he was at kentucky and he' just came of fa major injury that kept him out for a portion of last year. If he's so stellar why was it that his ONLY good year it was only 13p/10r when he was the second option on that team which means that he should be scoring more. not the case. I just hope you guys who like this guy realize ONE fucking good season shouldn't excite everyone. because vin baker had one fucking good season with us, enough to make larry bird say he was lieka top 10 player. oh by the way vin baker was able to put up those numbers as the 3rd option behing ray allen and glenn robinson. no matter how sof you say baker was in the post he still got it done at the same stages as Magloire, if not even better. magloire doesn't bring the D that i'd want to even think of trading vlad. tyson chandler is the only center on the market that I would go for in a sign and trade with vlad. if you're gonna go for it, don't get second rata. magloire had one good year, don't expect greatness, he's reached his ceiling.
tyson chandler or bust. no other exceptions when it comes to trading vlad.
Most New Orleans fans wouldn't trade Magloire for 'Only' a package of Radmanovic Gelable and some sort of combination of picks.
Would you be willing to part with Rashard in order to get Magloire? We could resign Vlad to play the SF and use the lineup of:
Ridnour / Brunson
Allen / Murray (or other SG)
Vlad / Wilkins
Collison / Fortson
Magloire / Swift
With Evans probably walking and Petro going to the NBDL. The salaries are about the same and picks could be added if need be.
- Patton
It's my understanding that Lewis can opt out of his contract next year. Can anyone else confirm this?
i can confirm lewis can opt out, but in summer 2007
Thanks anon. I think the sonics should re-sign Vlade now, in case they decide not to re-sign Lewis in a couple of years.
Yeah, Rashard Lewis has an early termination option that he can exercise at the end of the fifth year in his deal, which would be after the 2006-2007 season.
Anyways, it's too bad that Danny Fortson wasn't stupid enough to exercise his early termination option at the beginning of this off-season. As it is, sadly, the Sonics are going to pay for his decision.
Pachulia got a 4 year, $16M deal and the rumor is that the Sonics were in it up to the last minute. I think the guy probably saw we had two 7-footers waiting in the wings and figured he would get less PT over time rather than more. He'll get plenty of time to play in Atlanta.
HEY PIMPIA,
YOU ARE DAMN FINE. "I'D BUY THAT FOR A DOLLAR", COME GET THESE DOGGYNUTZ BABY.
Myk,
I find it funny that you would rather have Magloire than Lebron.
Watch some NBA games maybe you might learn something about the players. S T U P I D !!!! lol
The thing is, we would have to trade Vlade + picks. Or Rashard straight up for him. His contract is also up in 2007, which is right when Swift/Petro should be able to step up.
- Patton
Hey Myk,
Why don't you trade Ray and Vlade for Sue Bird and Lauren Jackson? LOL stupid!!
I bet you thought it was stupid that we traded gary for Ray too stupid!!!
Hey Myk!!
I heard Kandi man is the Tim Duncan Stopper!!!! Trade for him too!!!!LOL
Hee Haw!!!!
Post a Comment