"Good morning Mr. Golliver. What would you like for breakfast?" "I'll have a bowl of Wheaties with skim milk and crow-berries on top." "Very good sir. Would you like to pre-order lunch and dinner?" "Certainly. For lunch I will have a crow sandwich on sourdough with swiss cheese, dijon mustard, lettuce, tomato, bacon and no mayo. For dinner I'd like crow-a l'orange with a side of grilled asparagus and a baked potato. For dessert I'd like the baked crow pie a la mode. By the way, did you see that I wrote the menu? I took the chef's recipe's and put 'By Ben' over the top of them. Quite ingenious wouldn't you say?"
Since the first game. Only not as good, and a little less ball hoggy. Mo actually tries to get assists. I absolutely hated Crawchuck, but I have no animosity for Mo, who seems like a genuinely good guy, who is trying his best to do what he thinks is best. I just don't like the execution or the result. His offense is what it is, hot or cold, mostly cold, the turnovers are bad, but he does get some assists. The worst part is he gives up so much on defense he's just too much of a liability for the times when he actually makes a clutch shot. I think if only his defense were better, and some of his decision making, we could hold a lead better, and I could live with the rest.
Crawchuck is a shooting guard though. He is a shooting guard that Nate tried to make into a point guard. Mo is supposedly a point guard, but he's not a very good one.
You did? I've called him that since the first week of the season. Come to think of it, I got called on it once, early. But mostly I think people just ignore me. You, my friend, are too big to miss!
22-5 and the team is apparently barely able to make the playoffs at this point. I wonder if you actually understand how trades work. to get Asik would deplete the team of the bench, so it'd be even worse than it is now. OR they'd have to trade a starter + bench players, again, depleting the team of players. So I'm not sure how Asik would win them anymore games if the bench is similar to last years anemic bench. Sure, he'd be better than what they potentially traded (NOW) but he's not the savior of a season. He's just this seasons overrated "must have".
We could easily grab a Hawes or Brass for young pieces. I truly think Philly is the team we can trade for. Possibly have a third team involved and young can be the piece for that team. I would love to do a three team with Toronto and Philly, sending wright, mo, claver, Barton and Leonard for Hawes and Lowry. Philly would get Mo, claver and Leonard. Toronto gets Young, Barton and Wright. Having a bench of T. Rob, Leonard, Hawes, CJ, Crabbe and Lowry would propel us into contention! Then this summer we would still have full MLE to grab another free agent.
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ljj979w 3-way between Philly/Portland/Toronto Why Philly does it? They are tanking and Hawes will be gone this season. Also, Young asked to be traded. The players they get back are all young and perfect for team "tank". Why does Toronto do it? Trading Lowry for Young is a lateral move in terms of talent, but they just traded for a good PG. It was rumored Lowry is on the block, so this swap looks good on paper. Why does Portland do it? It's actually a "no-brainer". Mo and Wright are the only players we have that get minutes. Lowry is a huge upgrade over Mo and Hawes is an upgrade over Wright. The scraps are players that don't even play many minutes, so there are no issues with chemistry.
