Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Nov 18 2006, 01:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Look guys, KG is much better than JO.On a good night here's what they'll get youJO: 22 points 10 rebounds 2 assists 3 blocks 1 stealKG: 22 points 13 rebounds 5 assists 2 blocks 2 stealsThe stats don't tell the whole story, but it's obvious KG is better.Add in that we haveF - HarringtonSF - GrangerSG - DanielsPG - Armstrong/Sarunas/GreeneWe'd be greatSo would Minnesota:C - BlountPF -JOSF - DavisSG - JacksonPG - Tinsley6 - FoyeJackson is not a great shooter, and has an attitude/off-court problemHe'd probably flourish in a new start (in Minnesota)Tinsley can do whatever he wants to. He will have the high-flying Davis. The "shooter" Steven Jackson. The scorer JO. The role player Blount. And the do-it-all-energy guy Foye.In Indy Garnett would flourish with a great sidekick post player (Harrington), three all-around/athletic/versatile players (Granger and Daniels and Marshall), a couple of shooters/role players/leaders (Armstrong and Sarunas), and a point guard of the future (Orien Greene).This trade would be perfect for both teams. It would be a win-win situation.</div>you were the one that said stats don't matter earlier, then you give a projected statline? AT BEST, this is a lateral move for indy, they have absolutely no incentive whatsoever to do this. they lose a whole lot of depth and kg is not that far ahead of jermaine O'Neal to begin with.
Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Add in that we haveF - HarringtonSF - GrangerSG - DanielsPG - Armstrong/Sarunas/Greene</div> PG is awful, you have a 37 year old manning the spot with an inconsistent Sarunas and a third string pg. Daniels again, another inconsistent player plagued with injuries so far. Garnett/Granger/Harrington is a great frontcourt but that's hardly going to deliver a championship. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Look guys, KG is much better than JO.On a good night here's what they'll get youJO: 22 points 10 rebounds 2 assists 3 blocks 1 stealKG: 22 points 13 rebounds 5 assists 2 blocks 2 stealsThe stats don't tell the whole story, but it's obvious KG is better.</div> No one is arguing that, it's simply there's not enough dropoff between the 2 to make up for the fact your giving up 2 starters along with O'Neal. Bash them all you want, but their not bad players and your basically giving them up for that little difference between KG and O'Neal. Neither team would improve drastically and you would be in the same position. Playoff spot but not much else.
Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (nba dogmatist @ Nov 18 2006, 02:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>you were the one that said stats don't matter earlier, then you give a projected statline? AT BEST, this is a lateral move for indy, they have absolutely no incentive whatsoever to do this. they lose a whole lot of depth and kg is not that far ahead of jermaine O'Neal to begin with.</div>I also said underneath that the stats don't tell the whole story. I could see us improving by 10-15 wins with KG.I don't see anything wrong with handing the reigns to Armstrong (at pg) for a year. If he gets tired or we need a shooter put Sarunas in. We wouldn't need Armstrong to play over 30 minutes. Probably we would only need him for the 1st and 4th quarter and 5 minutes in between. The remainder of the pg minutes can be used for Greene to give him experience for the future. Over next offseason we can either sign/trade for another pg or focus on developing Greene to the best of his ability.If you guys remember the thread about the greatest frontcourt players in the NBA most of you put JO 9th or 10th and Garnet 1st or 2nd. That says alot about how much KG is better than JO.The loss of Tinsley and Jackson wouldn't hurt us. Right now they're our third or fourth best options. We're not even over .500 right now so they can't be helping us that much. I disagree with the statement of us loosing depth by trading Tinsley and Jackson.Here would be our lineup:C - Garnett/Foster/Harrison/BasteonPF - Harrington/Garnett/Foster/Williams/Basteon/Powell/GrangerSF- Granger/Harrington/Daniels/Rawle Marshall/WilliamsSG -Daniels/Sarunas/Rawle Marshall/GrangerPG - Armstong/Sarunas/Greene/DanielsAs you can see we have alot of players at several posistions. That would give us the options of toying with the lineup to give us the right lineup. It would also give us one of the most versatile lineups in the league.As for the depth, well, as you can see we have a whole bunch of diversity between our player's abilities and styles. If that isn't called depth, I don't know what is. I could see this team winning 54 - 60 games and making at least the conference finals.In Minnesota's case they would win about 45-50 games and finally make the playoffs. JO has never missed the playoffs since his trade here to Indiana (which is also his years of being an all-star). With a better team (than ours right now) in Minnesota he wouldn't miss the playoffs, guarenteed.This trade would be a win-win situation, guarenteed. A perfect trade for both teams.
Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett lolyou're so biased..he isnt going to go to the f*cking Pacers...he would be going to a team just as bad as the team hes on now if they get rid of Jermaine AND Stephenshut the hell up
Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (playaofthegame @ Nov 18 2006, 04:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>lolyou're so biased..he isnt going to go to the f*cking Pacers...he would be going to a team just as bad as the team hes on now if they get rid of Jermaine AND Stephenshut the hell up</div>like we're not bad 3 years ago we made the conference finals. Now we're 4-5. How am I biased. We have the tools to trade for KG. Most teams don't have as good players to trade as we do.I will never shut up.Besides read the post before this one and you'll see all my points on the trade.
Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Nov 18 2006, 01:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>like we're not bad 3 years ago we made the conference finals. Now we're 4-5. How am I biased. We have the tools to trade for KG. Most teams don't have as good players to trade as we do.I will never shut up.Besides read the post before this one and you'll see all my points on the trade.</div>4-5 isn't a good record man, especially considering the teams they've played. They're a mediocre team, and if Garnett came there would be no guarantee that they'd even be contenders. Besides that, I doubt the T Wolves would want Jackson and O'neal with some of the other offers on the table.
Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Nov 18 2006, 03:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I will never shut up.</div> Damnit.
Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Nov 18 2006, 04:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>like we're not bad 3 years ago we made the conference finals. Now we're 4-5. How am I biased. We have the tools to trade for KG. Most teams don't have as good players to trade as we do.I will never shut up.Besides read the post before this one and you'll see all my points on the trade.</div>Who does the Pacers have that would be worthy trade material? They have Jermaine O'neal, but trading him would mean that Kevin Garnett would have to play center for the Pacers, where he would get eaten up at. Plus, you guys would take a step back defensively loosing O'neal. You have Jackson, and some throw in's, like Marquis Daniels and them but I think that would hurt the Pacers more than help them as well as the T'Wolves would likely reject that trade. If Garnett gets there, Harrington would move to the 3 spot, which isn't bad, but he has much more of an impact at the four than the 3 in my opinion. He is much more of a matchup problem playing that position.
Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lakaboy42 @ Nov 18 2006, 04:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>4-5 isn't a good record man, especially considering the teams they've played.</div>That's exactly what I'm saying. What doesyour post mean?You tryin to change my words or something? :wtf1:<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Nov 18 2006, 04:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I also said underneath that the stats don't tell the whole story. I could see us improving by 10-15 wins with KG.I don't see anything wrong with handing the reigns to Armstrong (at pg) for a year. If he gets tired or we need a shooter put Sarunas in. We wouldn't need Armstrong to play over 30 minutes. Probably we would only need him for the 1st and 4th quarter and 5 minutes in between. The remainder of the pg minutes can be used for Greene to give him experience for the future. Over next offseason we can either sign/trade for another pg or focus on developing Greene to the best of his ability.If you guys remember the thread about the greatest frontcourt players in the NBA most of you put JO 9th or 10th and Garnet 1st or 2nd. That says alot about how much KG is better than JO.The loss of Tinsley and Jackson wouldn't hurt us. Right now they're our third or fourth best options. We're not even over .500 right now so they can't be helping us that much. I disagree with the statement of us loosing depth by trading Tinsley and Jackson.Here would be our lineup:C - Garnett/Foster/Harrison/BasteonPF - Harrington/Garnett/Foster/Williams/Basteon/Powell/GrangerSF- Granger/Harrington/Daniels/Rawle Marshall/WilliamsSG -Daniels/Sarunas/Rawle Marshall/GrangerPG - Armstong/Sarunas/Greene/DanielsAs you can see we have alot of players at several posistions. That would give us the options of toying with the lineup to give us the right lineup. It would also give us one of the most versatile lineups in the league.As for the depth, well, as you can see we have a whole bunch of diversity between our player's abilities and styles. If that isn't called depth, I don't know what is. I could see this team winning 54 - 60 games and making at least the conference finals.In Minnesota's case they would win about 45-50 games and finally make the playoffs. JO has never missed the playoffs since his trade here to Indiana (which is also his years of being an all-star). With a better team (than ours right now) in Minnesota he wouldn't miss the playoffs, guarenteed.This trade would be a win-win situation, guarenteed. A perfect trade for both teams.</div>Guys this is the officail post of why the Pacers should trade for KG.If you don't like it, fine.But it does makes sense.
Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett While that might sound like a good trade to you, I think it would be a terrible trade, Tinsley and Jackson for Garnett. The t'wolves sunk alot of money into James over the next four years, and going out and getting Tinsley would make that signing completly stupid, they are not going to do that. So that would pretty much turn into a Garnett for Jackson, which is a complete rip off for the T'wolves. Add to that, they get no one down low, which is their biggest need right now, the T'wovles would never go for that trade.
Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (valo35 @ Nov 18 2006, 08:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>While that might sound like a good trade to you, I think it would be a terrible trade, Tinsley and Jackson for Garnett. The t'wolves sunk alot of money into James over the next four years, and going out and getting Tinsley would make that signing completly stupid, they are not going to do that. So that would pretty much turn into a Garnett for Jackson, which is a complete rip off for the T'wolves. Add to that, they get no one down low, which is their biggest need right now, the T'wovles would never go for that trade.</div>What abut JO?The trade is Tinsley, Jackson, and JO for KG.
Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Nov 18 2006, 08:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>What abut JO?The trade is Tinsley, Jackson, and JO for KG.</div>Oh my bad, I read that wrong. That would be horrible for the Pacers, and hurt you guys alot. If I was the T'wolves I would take that because of the defense JO would bring my team down low, something the T'wolves are desperately missing. While I do feel that Garnett is better than Jermaine O'neal, I feel that Jermaine O'neal is better suited to play center than Garnett is, mainly because of the defense he can play down low compared to Kevin Garnett.
Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett I could see us improving by 10-15 wins with KG.I don't see anything wrong with handing the reigns to Armstrong (at pg) for a year. If he gets tired or we need a shooter put Sarunas in. We wouldn't need Armstrong to play over 30 minutes. Probably we would only need him for the 1st and 4th quarter and 5 minutes in between. The remainder of the pg minutes can be used for Greene to give him experience for the future. Over next offseason we can either sign/trade for another pg or focus on developing Greene to the best of his ability.If you guys remember the thread about the greatest frontcourt players in the NBA most of you put JO 9th or 10th and Garnet 1st or 2nd. That says alot about how much KG is better than JO.The loss of Tinsley and Jackson wouldn't hurt us. Right now they're our third or fourth best options. We're not even over .500 right now so they can't be helping us that much. I disagree with the statement of us loosing depth by trading Tinsley and Jackson.Here would be our lineup:C - Garnett/Foster/Harrison/BasteonPF - Harrington/Garnett/Foster/Williams/Basteon/Powell/GrangerSF- Granger/Harrington/Daniels/Rawle Marshall/WilliamsSG -Daniels/Sarunas/Rawle Marshall/GrangerPG - Armstong/Sarunas/Greene/DanielsAs you can see we have alot of players at several posistions. That would give us the options of toying with the lineup to give us the right lineup. It would also give us one of the most versatile lineups in the league.As for the depth, well, as you can see we have a whole bunch of diversity between our player's abilities and styles. If that isn't called depth, I don't know what is. I could see this team winning 54 - 60 games and making at least the conference finals.In Minnesota's case they would win about 45-50 games and finally make the playoffs. JO has never missed the playoffs since his trade here to Indiana (which is also his years of being an all-star). With a better team (than ours right now) in Minnesota he wouldn't miss the playoffs, guarenteed.True, Garnett may hurt us defensively, but we can always do this:C - FosterPF - GarnettSF - HarringtonSG - Granger (Yes, he can play the 2)PG - Armstrong6 - DanielsAlthough KG isn't as good on man to man defense and shot blocking as JO, he's a much better defensive rebounder.This trade would be a win-win situation, guarenteed. A perfect trade for both teams.
Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett About the whole "Jermaine O'Neal has never missed the playoffs since he came to Indiana, therefore he will without a doubt take the T'Wolves to the playoffs" argument, it makes no sense. Why? Well, here are a few reasons:1. Indiana plays in the East, while Minnesota plays in the tougher Western conference. If a guy like KG (who we all agree is better than JO) can't take that squad to the playoffs, why would Jermaine?2. Look at the players Jermaine has/had around him throughout his years in Indiana, and then take a look at the roster in Minnesota. JO definitely had a better supporting cast with the Pacers, and I really don't see him being the kind of guy who can go out and dominate night in and night out like he would need to in order to take Minnesota to the playoffs.Now, this is why I don't think it would work out for Indiana... if KG can't take Minnesota's supporting cast to the playoffs, how could he take Indiana's deep into the playoffs? I mean, we all know KG is an unselfish player, and sometimes he is too unselfish, which ultimately has hurt him throughout his career. He has a reputation of not stepping up to take the big shot. Even in the year they went to the WCF Cassell was primarily taking the clutch shots. I just can't see KG taking Indiana deep into the playoffs... especially with players like Armstrong, Jackson, Granger around him (no disrespect to them).
Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigMo763 @ Nov 18 2006, 10:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>About the whole "Jermaine O'Neal has never missed the playoffs since he came to Indiana, therefore he will without a doubt take the T'Wolves to the playoffs" argument, it makes no sense. Why? Well, here are a few reasons:1. Indiana plays in the East, while Minnesota plays in the tougher Western conference. If a guy like KG (who we all agree is better than JO) can't take that squad to the playoffs, why would Jermaine?2. Look at the players Jermaine has/had around him throughout his years in Indiana, and then take a look at the roster in Minnesota. JO definitely had a better supporting cast with the Pacers, and I really don't see him being the kind of guy who can go out and dominate night in and night out like he would need to in order to take Minnesota to the playoffs.Now, this is why I don't think it would work out for Indiana... if KG can't take Minnesota's supporting cast to the playoffs, how could he take Indiana's deep into the playoffs? I mean, we all know KG is an unselfish player, and sometimes he is too unselfish, which ultimately has hurt him throughout his career. He has a reputation of not stepping up to take the big shot. Even in the year they went to the WCF Cassell was primarily taking the clutch shots. I just can't see KG taking Indiana deep into the playoffs... especially with players like Armstrong, Jackson, Granger around him (no disrespect to them).</div>Jermaine O'neal has had a better supporting cast than KG. But that doesn't mean alot. Ron Artest was a distraction and a ballhog. Jackson is a gunner. Tinsley is eratic. Brad Miller played half a year for us. Jalen Rose was a ball-hog. Reggie Milelr was getting old (although he was still good). Antonio Davis was past his prime. The only problem KG had was Spreewell.JO won't dominate in the west?With Mike James, Ricky Davis, Randy Foye, Steven Jackson, and Jamal Tinsley - JO would have all the supporting cast he would need. Although the Western Conference is tough, power forwards have no trouble dominating in it (dirk, elton brand, tim duncan, KG...).With a new start in Indy I think Garnett would change his attitude and start trying to dominate.
Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Nov 18 2006, 09:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Jermaine O'neal has had a better supporting cast than KG. But that doesn't mean alot. Ron Artest was a distraction and a ballhog. Jackson is a gunner. Tinsley is eratic. Brad Miller played half a year for us. Jalen Rose was a ball-hog. Reggie Milelr was getting old (although he was still good). Antonio Davis was past his prime. The only problem KG had was Spreewell.</div>Funny to see that you're naming all the negatives about those players, but don't really name the positives that those players brought to the team. The bottom line remains that Jermaine O'Neal had better supporting casts (overall) than KG did. So, if JO goes from playing with a better supporting cast in a weaker conference to playing with a worse supporting cast in a tougher conference, how is it guaranteed that he will take Minnesota to the playoffs?<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>JO won't dominate in the west?With Mike James, Ricky Davis, Randy Foye, Steven Jackson, and Jamal Tinsley - JO would have all the supporting cast he would need. Although the Western Conference is tough, power forwards have no trouble dominating in it (dirk, elton brand, tim duncan, KG...).</div>So that supporting cast would rival that of teams such as the Spurs, Mavericks, Suns, etc.? Nope, it wouldn't, and Jermaine O'Neal would not dominate the West. Minnesota would be in the same boat they are now, or possibly worse, with Jermaine.Yes, the better power forwards in the West do dominate the league, but compare them to Jermaine O'Neal. Dirk is a SF in a PF's body, is better than Jermaine O'Neal, and has a better supporting cast, thus making it easier for him to dominate. Tim Duncan is just a great player, and JO is nowhere close to being on his level. Duncan's supporting cast in SA also makes his job easier. KG doesn't dominate the league anymore... yeah, he puts up his stats, but where does his team go? Nowhere... <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>With a new start in Indy I think Garnett would change his attitude and start trying to dominate.</div>Kevin Garnett is not the type of player who looks to take over games when his team needs him to, and that has been the knock on him his whole career. A change in scenery won't do him any good in that aspect either, because he naturally just doesn't look to take over games. He's an unselfish player, but is a little too unselfish come crunch time. At this point in his career, he can't/won't change that.The bottom line remains that I just don't see this trade vastly improving/benefiting either one of these teams. Sure, they might win a few more games, but it doesn't do anything else for either of them, in my honest opinion.
Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett Kevin Garnett is still one of the best players in the league. He can score, rebound, defend, and pass as well or better than any player in the league. In my opinion, he needs to be traded to a team that is contending for a championship. Then, Garnett can once again be one of the most dominant players in the league and be a candidate for the Most Valuable Player award.
Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>In my opinion, he needs to be traded to a team that is contending for a championship. Then, Garnett can once again be one of the most dominant players in the league and be a candidate for the Most Valuable Player award.</div> Man, I honestly do not get this crappy logic regarding KG and other talented players. Not everyone with talent is going to be contending for a championship. You can make an argument for every team's number one option. The fact I keep hearing about KG needs to win or compete for a championship is crazy. What makes him so special over everyone else, like I said if KG is not a Maverick. I could not care one bit if he never wins one. He won't be the first great player to not win one. To say he should be placed on a championship for being KG, is being biased towards Garnett over the whole league.
Re: It's time to trade Kevin Garnett I know I wouldnt mind trading Noc sweet PJ Tyurs Duhon and knicks pickWhich would leave us withKirk/Thabo/ Barrett Ben/thabo/GriffenDeng/Khryapa/giffKG/Allenwallace/allen/KG
