even though we have probably the deepest roster in the nba there is the problem of the role guys not getting playing time why dont we package a few together and offer them to a team that needs deapth in exchange for a better talent. this would add a skill to the team aswell as let more guys have playing time. eg. pollard,johnson to minnesota for hudson. give me your best scenarios.
Paul Pierce (and Perkins?) to Pacers for Ron Artest and Scot Pollard? C Foster PF O'Neal SF Jackson (Granger) SG Pierce PG Tinsley What about?
I would like to see some trade that involved Ron Artest and a center. A sign and trade with Eddy Curry plus a filler would be nice for the Pacers. PG - Tinsley SG - Jackson SF - Granger PF - O'Neal C - Curry That looks like a nice well rounded lineup going into 2006 with an amazing front court of O'Neal and Curry. Any trade with Artest involving a decent center would float my boat, I can almost guarentee he won't put on a Pacers uniform next season because of the brawl.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting C.K.:</div><div class="quote_post">I would like to see some trade that involved Ron Artest and a center. A sign and trade with Eddy Curry plus a filler would be nice for the Pacers. PG - Tinsley SG - Granger SF - Jackson PF - O'Neal C - Curry </div> Indeed that would be a good trade for the Pacers; not for the Bulls though. With rising star Luol Deng, and Andre Nocioni logging minutes at the SF spot, what's the point in acquiring Artest? BTW, I figure Jackson would play the 2 guard and Granger at the 3.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Banks:</div><div class="quote_post">Indeed that would be a good trade for the Pacers; not for the Bulls though. With rising star Luol Deng, and Andre Nocioni logging minutes at the SF spot, what's the point in acquiring Artest? BTW, I figure Jackson would play the 2 guard and Granger at the 3.</div> That makes sense, maybe there would have to be a third team involved that would have to supply the Bulls with a big man. The Bulls would have to find a way to trade Nocioni or Deng as well though, and if they do I would pull the trigger if I were the Bulls. Say they trade Nocioni for a center, then you have three players (Artest, Gordon, and Deng) that will all be playing the two or the three spot at some point in the game. Together there will be 96 minutes played by the two and the three the whole game, if you divide that into thirds everybody gets 32 minutes a game. I'll stay on the Bulls-Pacers trade topic, maybe a deal that includes Tyson Chandler and Stephen Jackson will do the trick. I mention this because it's going to be very easy for Indiana to pull the trigger on deals this off-season Why? Because they picked Danny Granger, a player who is ready to contribute right now. If they trade Artest or Jackson they will be able to start Granger, which means there would only be a slight drop off between Artest or Jackson and Granger, plus they now have a decent center.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Indeed that would be a good trade for the Pacers; not for the Bulls though. With rising star Luol Deng, and Andre Nocioni logging minutes at the SF spot, what's the point in acquiring Artest? BTW, I figure Jackson would play the 2 guard and Granger at the 3.</div> artest is one of the top 10 players in the league, and you want to trade him for EDDIE CURRY!? do you remember what artest was doing before the brawl? if i recall, he was putting up 24 PPG and playing defensive player of the year defense. do yourself a favor, and keep him.
