User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.8767 seconds
54 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Heard on TV: "Shaq and Kobe just got beat by some guy named Chauncey. Way to go, Chauncey!"
Maybe I am remembering incorrectly, but I thought in the Minn. days, they were running Brandon and Chauncey on the same unit often. Chauncey was being used almost as a combo guard giving Peeler a break. Likewise for D'Antonio, they would use him with Nick the Quick. Pitino poisoned him so bad, teams were seeing if he was a 2. It wasn't till Brandon had injury issues that Chauncey started playing the point as more a full time position. Of course, everything came together in Detroit.
RE: Fortson
As previously mentioned, Fortson had a rep as a head case. He could get buried on the bench for Nellie at the prime of his career. He was definately the type of player that was an asset for Nellie ball.
Blair hit the boards in college the way Barkley hit the boards in college. He also has Barkley's ass. I don't think he has his shot, ball handling or passing ability though.
Do you think he has Barkley's explosiveness? I don't. I remember Barkley could get up like few people, and could get up and down quicker than most. He was an incredible athlete for such a heavy dude.
I think that is about right. Chauncey was more or less the 6th man on the Wolves, at least until Brandon got hurt. He could shoot, and was playing some at the 2 as well as the 1. If he had strictly been backing up Brandon, he wouldn't have got on the court very much, as Brandon was a 30-35 min/game guy.
Chauncey was pretty popular with the local fans in those days (I was living in Minneapolis at the time). He was a pretty good player at that point, but wasn't quite getting starter's minutes. It is interesting that Minnesota saw him as a player that they could let go. They could have had him for a reasonable salary. After letting Billups go, with Brandon's career basically done and William Avery turning out to be a total bust, it was Troy Hudson time. Not pretty days. Troy's game was at least better than his album was.
......
That said, Chauncey would have helped the Wolves, but it is not like he was the missing piece that would have guaranteed them a title. The West was stacked in those days, with the Lakers, Spurs, and Kings all at the top of their game. Dallas was also very strong. There was really only one year where the Wolves were legitimately in the hunt. In 2003-04 when they had KG, Sam, and Spree and Wally could still contribute, the Wolves were arguably the best team in the NBA over the course of the season. 2004 turned out to be a pretty good year for Chauncey's team, so we shouldn't feel to bad for him.
No. Barkley was a unique player.
Pretty much. I'm a huge Big East fan, I've watched Blair plenty of times. He's a wide body, very strong, with tremendous hands and good timing, but he's a below the rim kind of player. I think he's a great value pick where he went, but he's no Barkley. Barkley was a freakish athlete.
I can't find numbers, but Pritchard called him at 12:01 am last night. There's a few things that worry me. 1) Hedo is the exact same type of player as Roy. Guys who have the ball at the end and create. I don't know how they can have both of them. 2) Hedo just had his best season and averaged 16 points a game, 6-7 boards, 4 assists or so. He's 30 and he isn't getting better than now. In year 3, he's not going to be worth it.
I just don't think it's a good deal long term. I don't think he's near good enough to push them over, and I think long-term it hampers them.
I think this is a great point. I think you consider splashing the cash on Boozer or Okur, had they opted out (though Boozer will certainly command 10+ per year), but Hedo doesn't give you anything you don't already have.
I'm glad Pritchard called Hedo instead.
They really need a point guard that doesn't need the ball and can knock down threes. They can always play Rudy, Webster, or Outlaw at the 3.
But Hedo's not that guy. And spending money just because you have it is dumb. Kidd would be good, Ben Gordon would be good, trading for Hinrich would be good. I just don't see how Hedo fits.
Kidd does make sense for Portland. Turkoglu can fit in any scheme, I think--and he provides some things they don't have. That said, getting Kidd on a two-year would be better than giving a huge contract to Turkoglu.
Maybe, but I think if this is even true that it is mostly in the past. Odom is pushing 30 and has played a lot of minutes; he is not the Miami Odom anymore. I think one reason Odom likes playing for the Lakers is he does not really have a "top dog" mentality. He seems comforatble as the #3, and I don't think he would want to be the "missing piece" expected to provide leadership for a different team (not that he won't do it if the money is really good elsewhere).
If Odom does walk, Bill Simmons will write a columm talking about how Kobe's overbearing personality was the reason, no matter what the money issues are.
That's what it is for me. Hedo's a good player, no doubt, but he's not great. Due to how weak this free agent class is, and the playoffs he just had, he's going to command far more than he's worth. Basketball wise, it would probably help the Blazers - although I'm not 100% sold on that - but financial and salary cap wise it could really hurt them. Although, by year five, "Hedo Turkoglu's Expiring Contract" could have a ton of trade value.
And every Laker fan here will feel the need to comment on it.
This reminds me, I heard a rumor on one of the ESPN radio syndications that Miller wants to come to the Lakers. Any truth to that? Anyone else hear that anywhere?
I think a guy like Odom makes sense - he fits in well, he's a 3rd banana that doesn't need a lot of shots, and he can play some 4 when Aldridge is in foul trouble or they want to go small.
That's been around for years, and there's truth to it. Miller's from LA (or around there) and loves it. He loved living in LA, he just hated the Clippers. I could easily see him signing there.
You must have Rifkin on ignore, then.
Well, I think Jimmy P is just against the Blazers in particular signing him for big money long-term. I would assume that Pritchard sees Hedo as one of two outside pieces he needs, along with internal improvement from Oden and Aldridge, to get the Blazers to the finals.
I hope most GMs see it the way you do, since that would mean he will be back in LA. Odom is an unusual player in many ways, with some unique plusses and some big flaws, and I think his value is very context-dependent. Citing his scoring average as a putdown is an oversimplification. I did say earlier in the thread that I do not think there will be massive interest in him as a FA, though.
And so will you, apparently.
I can see Celtic fans trying for some triangulation/gratification by using Simmons (ha ha ha you are talking about him instead of "enjoying your title") but actually his bizarre mental gymnastics to deal with the Lakers/Kobe winning it (and his numerous really bad predictions about other aspects of the playoffs) have added a nice, if petty, piece of enjoyment to #15.
Odom is just such a non-issue in my mind. His lack of effort, inconsistent play, total softness around the basket for a big guy (and he's also not a good outside shooter), no defense... I mean, honestly, is there any doubt that about 50 players in the league could have filled his 3rd/4th banana role this year for a lot cheaper? If he wasn't Lamar Odom: Former Lottery Pick/HS Stud, no one would spend this much time talking about him. His winning a ring with the Lakers doesn't make him a good long-term investment for anyone else.
I think they're pretty close, and he is an upgrade for that position and for the next 3 years he'll be worth it (to them). If they can upgrade PG too, I really think they're a title contender immediately. When you have an owner like Allen, the long term ramifications aren't going to hurt them. When the resign Roy and Aldridge, they're going to have cap issues anyway.
The guy Portland should really be going hard after is Odom. His skillset would be unique on the Blazers, a big man who can also handle the ball, and a willing sidekick who would defer to a star player (Roy). Plus, Odom is younger than Hedo, and the signing would deal the Lakers a wicked blow to the gut.
Disagree on Odom fitting better there. You've described Hedo, to an extent, but Hedo's more of a creator. I don't think having both Roy and Hedo who can both handle the ball and create is a bad thing, it probably helps the wear and tear on both of them. Odom is only 8 months younger, but he's played a lot more minutes than Hedo. If I had to bet on one of them staying effective longer, I'd bet on Hedo. The negative impact to the Lakers is a decent point though.
But Hedo's not that guy. And spending money just because you have it is dumb. Kidd would be good, Ben Gordon would be good, trading for Hinrich would be good. I just don't see how Hedo fits.
Now this is just insanity. A 36 year old PG who can't shoot and a severely undersized SG who can't do anything but shoot are better fits? Sure, Kidd could help. But how much? And while I could see Gordon working there, there isn't any scenario I can imagine where I'd prefer giving him $9mil a year than Hedo.
I think Hinrich is a much better fit than Kidd, for Portland. I only bring this up since Moses (or someone) suggested a possible trade. Kidd loses a lot of value with the ball not in his hands - and Roy is a better creater at this point, and he needs the ball to be in his hands.
Portland's wanted Hinrich for a while now. On draft night, Hinrich was supposedly telling people he expected to get traded to Portland.
I think a guy like Odom makes sense - he fits in well, he's a 3rd banana that doesn't need a lot of shots, and he can play some 4 when Aldridge is in foul trouble or they want to go small.
But Hedo makes more sense, because he's better and will cost about the same amount.
Completely agree. Sore losers (Bill Simmons) feeling the need to spend 800 words explaining why winning a NBA Championship isn't that big of a deal says more about him than it does about the winner (Lakers/Kobe).
I think that your underestimating Lamar's impact and you are WAY wrong about his defensive ability. Lamar is one of the most versatile big-man defenders in the game. He's shown the ability to guard anyone from Centers to SF's. You can't find that type of versatility. Lamar can do things on the court that only a few can replicate, but of course he is maddeningly inconsistent which is his real problem. But I do agree that I wouldn't want to sign him for a long-term contract at this point, but that's not the same thing as saying that he wouldn't greatly help any of the elite teams in the NBA.
Disagree. Both had good defensive playoffs - Odom moreso - but neither are usually considered *good* defensive players. Odom has been getting bigger (not fat, but muscle) and is drifting towards becoming a 4. He can defend some 4s, and Hedo has defended some 1s and 2s. The Blazers are trying to upgrade SF, and Hedo is much more likely to be able to stay at that position over the next 4 years. The Blazers don't need the option to play either guy at the 4, although Odom can do that for longer stretches.
In fact, 7.6% of the population of Minneapolis was Hispanic in 2000, and it has some fairly large Mexican neighborhoods (which I have visited).
Although Rubio choosing where to play based on the size of the Hispanic population would be like me choosing which European city to live in based on which had the largest number of Australians.
And when it comes to all things Lakers-related, you are 100% objective and 100% money. These are direct quotes from you, from this thread:
"Nuggets in 6."
"The Lakers have no chance." (against Cleveland)
Like I always say to the Red Sox guys on the Red Sox fan culture threads, people bithcing about the behavior of your fan base usually means your team has been and is kicking ass.
That noted, as I said weeks ago, there are many, many Laker fans who are overprotective of and irrational about Kobe. But they are no more irrational about him than Beantown Bill is, and none of them has an ESPN column.
As to Odom: I can see why a Celtics fan would say the stuff you did; Garnett, a somewhat similar but superior player, has always given Odom a lot of problems and made him look bad in June 2008. But when Odom plays well, as we saw in G5 and G6 of the Denver series, in the Finals, and in some key regular season games, (his best game of the year was the win in Cleveland, and that is one reason I thought they could beat Cle had they played them) he brings enough different elements to the table that the Lakers almost always win (I said this weeks ago as well).
So, while Odom would help a lot of teams, I think he is more valuable to the Lakers than he is to anyone else, and I think Pritchard's offer to Hedo (which Moses makes some good points about) reflects this reality.
I got to 10, but then the other five were obscured by the letters "MPLS". Do you know what that's about?
And so will you, apparently.
Hey, you brought it up. In fact, as far as I can recall, the only time Bill Simmons perspective on the Lakers has been discussed in this thread is when it was brought up by a Laker fan.
Bitter Celtics fan rantings aside, in all seriousness, I'm glad to see this thread still going strong since I've been away.
I am with you in spirit here, but I don't know if we want to get into a ring-counting contest with C's fans. The Lakers are up 9-4 during Bill Simmons' life span, though (a guy at a Laker blog wrote that, and I thought it was funny).
I wonder who the Celtics will get. Rasheed? House is staying.
Right, because being wrong obviously means the person was biased.
That's a fair offer, and ideally I wouldn't want to go above that. So we know he'll probably get something bigger. 5/$45 is what I'm thinking, and outside of Portland I think that's a bad contract.
ESPN's Marc Stein reports that the Dallas Mavericks have made a three-year offer to Jason Kidd in the $21-25 million range.
This is just dumb.
According to a report today by the Daily News, a team source claims the Knicks will offer Lee a four-year deal worth $32M.
At least they made an offer, I guess. I'm surprised it's that big (just because of the FA stuff for next year).
In passing, and you decided to bite. Also you are a self-described "Simmons apologist" and have lived up to that title. The guy does have some plusses as a writer, though, and I may buy his book.
I have actually said several times in other threads that it doesn't. But in this case, well...
I don't mind doing that. Half of them weren't even alive when Russell won his last one. If there's any defensiveness, it's on the part of Celtic fans (like Simmons) desperate to defend a legacy they themselves don't even remember.
Wow. No. Bad idea.
I don't know how you say something in passing on a message board, and saying "you decided to bite" suggests you're baiting people and then complaining when they bite. Can we just take the discussions back to basketball, where they've been quite good.
I guess I don't really care about anyone's bias in this group, and I especially don't care about the bias of national sportswriters. If I don't like what they say, I just don't read it.
ESPN's Marc Stein reports that the Dallas Mavericks have made a three-year offer to Jason Kidd in the $21-25 million range.
Cuban feels that he can't live without Kidd. Kidd had a nice year last year, but the Mavs are still a guy away.
Apparently, Rudy Fernandez is rather angry that Hedo is being pursued by the Blazers. So much so that he's talking about going back to Spain. Can't say I blame him, he played great last year, and adding Hedo would be a big decrease in Rudy's PT. Plus, they just traded one of his best friends away. Quick, Gar Forman, offer Hinrich for Rudy!
According to a report today by the Daily News, a team source claims the Knicks will offer Lee a four-year deal worth $32M.
Supposedly the Grizzlies are offering 5/$60. Ha!
If that's true, Jordan Hill's gonna get a lot of playing time.
Sure, after you scold me a little first.
I think two or three, actually. I suppose we could specualte that Cuban cannot adnit that he made mistake with the Kidd deal and so has to go all-in.
You're right. I shouldn't have.
All true.
I don't mind doing that. Half of them weren't even alive when Russell won his last one. If there's any defensiveness, it's on the part of Celtic fans (like Simmons) desperate to defend a legacy they themselves don't even remember.
How many times did you watch Jerry West play?
Can we just take the discussions back to basketball, where they've been quite good.
I hope the Lakers fans who I'm prodding and being prodded by know that I'm just having a little fun with all this oneupsmanship, nothing more. However, the Meta-Simmons conversation isn't interesting really, from either perspective.
So, consider this an olive branch, Lakers fans - I'll refrain from calling you a bunch of paranoid, front-running, soulless, tacit supporters of sexual misconduct, you guys don't call us ugly, racist, injury faking, Simmons-fellating, unrepentant Massholes, and we'll just talk draft and free agency. Deal? :-)
At least they made an offer, I guess. I'm surprised it's that big (just because of the FA stuff for next year).
Hey, they have to have someone decent under contract if they want a shot at signing Lebron.
No, I'll give him more credit than that. The big mistake was the draft picks. Really, Kidd had a nice year last year. If he can keep it up, and they add another piece, they'll be pretty good.
Ugh, why is Joe Dumars after Charlie Villanueva?
Because he's just like Rasheed? Who knows, but if anything shows how screwed up the free agent market is this year, Charlie Villanueva is it.
Avery Johnson and Doug Collins are the two names popping up right now.
Well, Kidd had a pretty good year. You have to take a look at that year though. He was spending all his time guarding two's, with Barea and Terry guarding the 1's. Also, Devin Harris had a great year. It was a terrible trade at that time, and today. 3 years at 21-25 is compounding the mistake. If the Mavs' internal numbers are leading them that direction, they need to get new numbers.
I would love the Lakers to get in on the Rudy Fernandez or Kirk Heinrich action. Unfortunately, they probably both cost too much. Kirk Heinrich is pretty much the ideal point guard for the Lakers next year.
Will you admit that Kevin McHale is a dangerous criminal who should be locked up?
You're one of the reasons this thread rocks. Even if you do root for Evil.
I think the draft picks were okay, but right now the Mavs are moving towards the future while they've got as much as $56 million on the books for 2010-2010 even without Kidd's new contract. If they don't bring Kidd back and more or less slink out of the playoff picture, then Dirk'll may opt out, and you've pretty much got a bare cupboard. They're on the bad end of the success cycle, and it's hard for me to see how they can turn it around quickly.
Hinrich makes more than $10 million a season. Thank you, John Paxson. That's why the Bulls want to trade him. Rudy's a bargain, he's in the 2nd year of his rookie deal, so he makes $1 million.
They're on the bad end of the success cycle, and it's hard for me to see how they can turn it around quickly.
Which is pretty much why they're still going for it with this group. You don't try and win this year, then it's guaranteed Dirk leaves, and then you've got no good players and an empty building. With Dirk and Kidd, you'll be in the mix in the West, and sell tickets. Considering they couldn't get a better option for Kidd, it's a good basketball and business decision.
Whatever, Rambis had it coming.
As Bill would probably say "done and done". Seriously, I am a big Bill Simmons fan but if say Leonardo DiCaprio (Laker fan) had an ESPN column writing a post after the Celtics championship highlighting the theft of Ray Allen and Garnett from other teams, saying that they showed no heart by being taken to 7 games by the Hawks, and that they got lucky that Bynum had gotten hurt, Celtics fans wouldn't have been too happy. Plus, Bill and Chuck Klosterman dared question my reverence for the Motown 25th Anniversary special and Michael Jackson yesterday on the podcast, which were truly fighting words. Bill and I are currently in a timeout.
Yeah, they don't have a lot of options. Three years seems a bit nutty, but what the heck. They have basically no chance in the Wade/Lebron sweepstakes anyway, unless Cuban goes absolutely nuts. Plus, I can pull out my "vintage" 1995 Kidd/Mavs jersey at pick up games for another couple of years.
Thinking about the Mavs cap space/potential moves - I still can't believe Erick Dampier's contract. He makes $13 million in 2010-11! !!!!!! But Steve Nash was too expensive to extend.
Once again, Hinrich has 3 years and $26.5mil left on his deal. Not great, but not as bad as you make it sound. That's decent starter money for an average to above average PG (factoring in defense). Yeah, he's overpaid as the 3rd guard on the Bulls, but that deal wasn't signed after the 1.7% lottery jackpot that was Rose.
Thinking about the Mavs cap space/potential moves - I still can't believe Erick Dampier's contract. He makes $13 million in 2010-11! !!!!!! But Steve Nash was too expensive to extend.
Heh, yeah. Not only is signing Kidd to that extension expounding on the badness of that trade, that's still a direct result of letting Nash walk.
I'm not a Cuban fan so take this with a grain of salt, but that is still maybe the single worst move by a "good" NBA franchise in the last 10 years. Who just gives up a good/great point guard near their prime, without a real good reason? The Shaq move at least had a personal compenant, and the Suns decision to waste draft picks was more about a greedy owner, but at least their are good explanations. And in the end as you allude, Nash wasn't that expensive. Not re-signing Nash just seems so strange in retrospect.
Not like he was going anywhere, but if he had opted out, he would have made something like a million less in 2009-2010, which would have helped with the salary cap. A few dollars less to sign Ariza and Odom with.
In retrospect, it sure does. At the time, though, the Nash contract seemed nutty - five years of second banana money to a 30 year old PG with defensive issues and a history of back injuries coming off a season in which he averaged 15/9? In a vacuum, at the time, this made sense. If I recall correctly, the consensus at the time was that, while Nash was going to make the Suns a fun (and improved) team, this was a crazy overpay.
Of course, giving Erick Freaking Dampier SEVEN (7!) years and $73 million made Cuban's initial restraint moot. That was truly Isiah-esque.
Where did you hear that his number would come down if he opted out- I've not heard that before.
From ESPN.com, 8/25/2004:I guess Dampier was going to be the Mavs' man to guard Shaq, Duncan, etc. Insane then, insane now.
No kidding. The Mavs went from being a 52 win team to a 42 win team after the Nash move. Nash may not have been worth all 10 of these wins, but the Mavs dumped Nash just as the Western conference was becoming significantly weaker than it had previously been. Of course, with Nash (and a full season of D'Antoni) the Suns went from 29 wins to 62 wins, and could have won the title with a few better breaks. That was a pretty high impact move. The Mavs just outsmarted themselves, thinking that Nash a wouldn't age well.
.......
This is why this sort of reasoning is dangerous; while a guy very well might be at the height of his value, there is no guarantee that you will get equivalent value in a trade.
The Mavs went from being a 52 win team to a 42 win team after the Nash move.
Heh.
Crap. I can't read. (I don't want to count the games with Avery Johnson. Is that OK?)
It seems totally out of character for that team which has made a lot of good decisions the last few years.
I'm still willing to donate to Portland to make that offer- I did hear they were looking at Hedo. I hope it's true.
I don't get any credit for (rightly) pointing out how many of you guys were overrating Rafer Alston? (Also, some things you missed: I had Boston over Orlando, Cleveland over Orlando, and LA over Orlando. I guess I have an anti-Magic bias, too.)
Other than that: good god man, way to offer yourself as an illustration of my point. Yikes.
Exactly.
But no one even knew that. D'Antoni hadn't coached yet, and the Suns were horrible the year before.
IIRC, D'Antoni coached for much of the previous (03-04) season.
This is the NBA. Its where stupidity happens.
Also, I bet the Raptors think they can ship any bad contract out in two years if they want to, and they'd be right since that is how the NBA works.
I can be very annoying WRT the Lakers. And JC is right on another count--we should talk 'ball.
Softball,
The Rasheed-to-Boston thing was not an idea of mine--I actually heard it from a C's fan who'd seen it floated on-line, he said. But unless Wallace has really lost it,I don't see it as a bad idea for the Green. They could use a 4/5 to spell KG?Perkins, and Rasheed's penchant for camping out at the 3-line would seem to be Ok on a team with Perkins at the 5 and Rondo at the 1. Wallace also provides long arms around the hoop if not great activity on D.
Of course, we don't know about Powe's status, but Boston does need to add a vet off the pine who can help--that is clear.
You have me all wrong, jmurph. Read my posts about Kobe's legacy and my predictions etc. And, as a Red Sox fan (as I would guess you are) should know, nasty generalizing about fanbases is not the way to go.
For those of you unfamiliar with the NHL, Hossa is 30. At least he's an excellent player.
Rick DiPietro, a 27 year old roughly league average goalie, is under contract with the Islanders until 2021.
If Powe was released, maybe his knee is officially an issue going forward?
Powe was released? When?
edit...ah, I saw.
edit: He's out until the all star break, most likely.
As I understand it, no one expects him to play before the All-Star break. I love the guy, but it's hard to give him a roster spot in that situation, especially given his history of knee troubles. I'll be rooting for him.
And I'm not crazy about these moves by Dumars. Villanueva might be a good signing, but I wouldn't have spent that much on Ben Gordon, especially with Hamilton on the roster. Is Rip going to be traded? Otherwise, the Pistons are going to have a very well-paid sixth man.
I think you can look at it in two ways in addition to just saying "mistake": I remember going to celticsblog after the Celtics added Ray Allen. Some guys were saying wait, there, is another move coming, but a lot were pissed--WTF is Ainge doing, etc. The nature of basketball is such that at times, except for obvious stuff, moves cannot be viewed in isolation. Second, long-term overpays often of course suck massive balls (Dampier)--but they can work, too. Many people mocked the Rashard Lewis contract when it was signed. And if the Mavs had won in 2006 or 2007--they didn't, but it was a championship-caliber club on which Dampier played a role.
Edit: This applies to what Joe D just did, too.
Nash/Kidd/Dallas: I agree with the "outsmarted themselves" line. Point guards often age fast and drop off quickly--but Nash's game does not depend all that much on hops and quickness, and he is very well-conditioned. He may last like Stockton did. And even though Kidd played pretty well last year, once they bailed on Nash, they should have kept Harris. Getting Kidd to replace Nash while losing Harris is high-quality tail-chasing--but it is still tail-chasing.
I think it is actually, but this thread is not the right place for it, with a bunch of guys who want to talk about the league as a whole at this party who don't give a rat's ass about the mouthy rich kids slap-fighting on the patio and just want them to shut up.
I'm not rich!
Nice move for a young team in need of a positive veteran lockerroom presence.
His contract is fairly tradeable, I think, and they have a lot of needs. Adding a point guard to Gordon, Prince, and Charlie V. would certainly make for an interesting start.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main