Hornets Sign Lance Stephenson 3y/27.5 mil (p67)

[mrknowitall215]

Not trying to backdoor moderate, but there shouldn't be any name calling or slander when we're just discussing/debating/arguing basketball. There's no place for personal attacks in this forum

[Vanderbilt_Grad]

I'm on the record as anti-Lance, and I think that the team HAS addressed upgrading SG already ... by drafting PJ. Even if Hendo still starts this year, the team still has a much better ability to sub him out when he's not performing with PJ & Neal on the roster. Also, even if Hendo opts in next year, PJ is potentially the long term answer for SG if he develops.

And do you REALLY want Lance in PJ and Noah's ears, teaching them all of his "good" habits? Really?

And for the pro-Lance folks, I do get it. SG was a weakness last year. I don't really care for either Hendo or Neal either. I have doubts about PJ. But with all that, it's currently the team's most stacked position bar none in terms of guys under contract.

The lack of depth at SF (and writers doubts about MKG as a starter) is why the national media keeps linking the team to small forwards.

[BeesWax]

Not trying to backdoor moderate, but there shouldn't be any name calling or slander when we're just discussing/debating/arguing basketball. There's no place for personal attacks in this forum

There were no personal attacks though. Nobody called anyone names they just insulted an abstract idea which is basically what these boards are for. If you are going to intentionally prod people for no reason without being able to back anything then you should not get offended when they shoot down your idea or call it dumb. If you want to say the same thing 100 times without any sort of proof to back you case that is the prime example of deserving the monicur.

[MasterIchiro]

Not trying to backdoor moderate, but there shouldn't be any name calling or slander when we're just discussing/debating/arguing basketball. There's no place for personal attacks in this forum

There were no personal attacks though. Nobody called anyone names they just insulted an abstract idea which is basically what these boards are for. If you are going to intentionally prod people for no reason without being able to back anything then you should not get offended when they shoot down your idea or call it dumb. If you want to say the same thing 100 times without any sort of proof to back you case that is the prime example of deserving the monicur.

Moderators here already said calling an idea dumb vs. a poster dumb are virtually the same thing. You can challenge an idea without calling it dumb. You can point out the details of why you disagree but to just dismiss the idea on the whole with a generalization 'dumb' is lazy and counterproductive. You can shoot down an idea with a well-presented case and that's more effective then labeling it 'dumb'. That just antagonizes people and makes them upset. It becomes personal when you insult someone's intelligence either directly or through a personal attack on their ideas. Ideas are part of thinking. Thinking is a personal exercise. So it's personal.

[BeesWax]

Not trying to backdoor moderate, but there shouldn't be any name calling or slander when we're just discussing/debating/arguing basketball. There's no place for personal attacks in this forum

There were no personal attacks though. Nobody called anyone names they just insulted an abstract idea which is basically what these boards are for. If you are going to intentionally prod people for no reason without being able to back anything then you should not get offended when they shoot down your idea or call it dumb. If you want to say the same thing 100 times without any sort of proof to back you case that is the prime example of deserving the monicur.

Moderators here already said calling an idea dumb vs. a poster dumb are virtually the same thing. You can challenge an idea without calling it dumb. You can point out the details of why you disagree but to just dismiss the idea on the whole with a generalization 'dumb' is lazy and counterproductive. You can shoot down an idea with a well-presented case and that's more effective then labeling it 'dumb'. That just antagonizes people and makes them upset. It becomes personal when you insult someone's intelligence either directly or through a personal attack on their ideas. Ideas are part of thinking. Thinking is a personal exercise. So it's personal.

We have all done it many many many times. The only one who can't back up anything they say is your side. What he said was correct and needed to be said. You have been trying your hardest to antagonize then like to whine when people call you out for it. What was said was correct and needed to be said and I will stand by that all day long. Bad ideas are bad ideas and if they are not backed by anything, shown to be wrong by multiple people then stated unbacked again it is dumb. It is a simple way to put it but it fits better than most any other way.

[MasterIchiro]

There were no personal attacks though. Nobody called anyone names they just insulted an abstract idea which is basically what these boards are for. If you are going to intentionally prod people for no reason without being able to back anything then you should not get offended when they shoot down your idea or call it dumb. If you want to say the same thing 100 times without any sort of proof to back you case that is the prime example of deserving the monicur.

Moderators here already said calling an idea dumb vs. a poster dumb are virtually the same thing. You can challenge an idea without calling it dumb. You can point out the details of why you disagree but to just dismiss the idea on the whole with a generalization 'dumb' is lazy and counterproductive. You can shoot down an idea with a well-presented case and that's more effective then labeling it 'dumb'. That just antagonizes people and makes them upset. It becomes personal when you insult someone's intelligence either directly or through a personal attack on their ideas. Ideas are part of thinking. Thinking is a personal exercise. So it's personal.

We have all done it many many many times.

I don't give a ****. When you do it with me I'm going to speak up that it's inappropriate and I won't want to talk basketball with the offending poster. Just like in real life, when someone directly or indirectly insults your intelligence, the conversation pretty much ends or a conflict escalates. Message boards should not be places to wage anonymous personal attacks. If you want to whine when someone pokes fun at your player, you're too emotionally invested in the player if you take it personally. A player is not a part of you like an idea is or a statement is. A player is separate from you.

[BeesWax]

Moderators here already said calling an idea dumb vs. a poster dumb are virtually the same thing. You can challenge an idea without calling it dumb. You can point out the details of why you disagree but to just dismiss the idea on the whole with a generalization 'dumb' is lazy and counterproductive. You can shoot down an idea with a well-presented case and that's more effective then labeling it 'dumb'. That just antagonizes people and makes them upset. It becomes personal when you insult someone's intelligence either directly or through a personal attack on their ideas. Ideas are part of thinking. Thinking is a personal exercise. So it's personal.

We have all done it many many many times.

I don't give a ****. When you do it with me I'm going to speak up that it's inappropriate and I won't want to talk basketball with the offending poster. Just like in real life, when someone directly or indirectly insults your intelligence, the conversation pretty much ends or a conflict escalates. Message boards should not be places to wage anonymous personal attacks. If you want to whine when someone pokes fun at your player, you're too emotionally invested in the player if you take it personally. A player is not a part of you like an idea is or a statement is. A player is separate from you.

Fine if you don't want to talk to us because we think that way don't talk. I am going to post responses to stuff on here no matter who posts what. If you don't want us to respond then don't post. I completely agree with what was said and thought it was well deserved. That is my opinion just like you have yours about other things. I am sorry you are to sensitive to handle the response but I am not going to change my opinion because you can't take it.

[MasterIchiro]

Back to Lance Stephenson. I think he's target #2. Target #1 is Gordon Hayward imo.

I'd be happy with either.

[yosemiteben]

[BeesWax]

I don't like Lance as an option here if only because of how much he will cost both with money and chemistry.

My top choice is Parsons right now but I would not mind Hayward if the price is similar. Main thing for me is I want to find a way to land these guys while moving Henderson if at all possible.

[fatlever]

Moderators here already said calling an idea dumb vs. a poster dumb are virtually the same thing. You can challenge an idea without calling it dumb. You can point out the details of why you disagree but to just dismiss the idea on the whole with a generalization 'dumb' is lazy and counterproductive. You can shoot down an idea with a well-presented case and that's more effective then labeling it 'dumb'. That just antagonizes people and makes them upset. It becomes personal when you insult someone's intelligence either directly or through a personal attack on their ideas. Ideas are part of thinking. Thinking is a personal exercise. So it's personal.

MasterIchiro is 100% correct.

That being said, some of you guys who take these ridiculously one sided opinions on players/subjects are asking for trouble when it comes to discussions like this. I have said numerous times that I just don't understand how someone can develop such a strong opinion to a future scenario where nobody knows the exact outcome. I have a hard time reading, let alone discussing, anything from someone who is so stubborn and opinionated. Some of you guys make reading this board a chore some days and I hate that.

Secondly, re-stating the same opinion over and over and over is not likely to get others to change their opinions. It is better to state your opinion and move on until new evidence is presented.

[Vanderbilt_Grad]

http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/rainbo ... 1592575661

[MasterIchiro]

"I think at the end of the day, if I'm a GM, if I'm a coach, if I'm a team president, a decision maker, a policy maker, it's OK for me to have to rein in a guy. I don't want a guy who I have to beg to get after (it)," Ebanks said. "You don't ever have to worry about whether Lance Stephenson is getting on the plane or whether he's showing up. Lance Stephenson shows up every single night and if he's on the court against you, regardless of the relationship you may enjoy off the court, he's in a zone. He's a unique guy. He wants to win and if he can beat you by 100, that's OK with him too."

Clifford when asked if character will come into play this offseason stressed the team when they talk about character they really mean 'basketball character'. He mentioned how they look at if the guy plays hard, does he work hard, does he make sacrifices on the court, does he show up to practice and show up on time.

So there's that.

Here's more from Lance's agent...

"You can find a lot of guys that can give you 20 points. You can find a lot of guys that will give you 10 rebounds every night. You can find a lot of guys that will give you six or seven assists every night. But when you find that player who can give you all those things any given night and who could make his club better … that's hard to find," Ebanks said. "Plus, he's 23 and young players get a little bit more mature."

[mrknowitall215]

Back to Lance Stephenson. I think he's target #2. Target #1 is Gordon Hayward imo.

I'd be happy with either.

I think the total opposite. I think the reason why we didn't hear much noise about the Hornets in free agency last night is because their #1 priority, Lance Stephenson, was at the movies

[Joest2003]

I don't like Lance as an option here if only because of how much he will cost both with money and chemistry.

My top choice is Parsons right now but I would not mind Hayward if the price is similar. Main thing for me is I want to find a way to land these guys while moving Henderson if at all possible.

Do you not want to win games? The jazz were an embarrassment and parsons was on a team with harden and dwight snd couldnt even make the western finals. Lance led the most disfuntional basketball team i ever saw to the eastern finals. Id rather go with the proven winner.

[MasterIchiro]

Back to Lance Stephenson. I think he's target #2. Target #1 is Gordon Hayward imo.

I'd be happy with either.

I think the total opposite. I think the reason why we didn't hear much noise about the Hornets in free agency last night is because their #1 priority, Lance Stephenson, was at the movies

I would be curious if they bring in Lance if a sign & trade is still in play for Parsons or Hayward. I believe Lance provides more immediate impact than any player available to us but if we can get 2 of those 3 then we will be the team NBA fans lean on to beat the Heat.

[Vanderbilt_Grad]

So who would you trade for Lance?

[mrknowitall215]

Back to Lance Stephenson. I think he's target #2. Target #1 is Gordon Hayward imo.

I'd be happy with either.

I think the total opposite. I think the reason why we didn't hear much noise about the Hornets in free agency last night is because their #1 priority, Lance Stephenson, was at the movies

I would be curious if they bring in Lance if a sign & trade is still in play for Parsons or Hayward. I believe Lance provides more immediate impact than any player available to us but if we can get 2 of those 3 then we will be the team NBA fans lean on to beat the Heat.

What makes you think that there's not a possible sign-and-trade for Lance Stephenson? The state of Indiana appear to be the type of blue collar place to value a player like Gerald Henderson

[Joest2003]

I love how people keep saying lance will cost to much completely disregarding the fact that we will be getting production for that extra money. Sure we can offer Hayward or Parsons a deal for less money but they will be producing less as well. We sat through a 7 win season a fews years back its time to stop being cheap and do what we gotta do to win games. And by the way hayward or parsons can't guard LeBron either and since were in eastern conference that's pretty dam valuable.

[mrknowitall215]

So who would you trade for Lance?

I would do a sign-and-trade with the Pacers for Lance Stephenson by trading them Gerald Henderson + two 2nd rounders