Moderators: BullyKing, HartfordWhalers, sixers hoops, Foshan, Sixerscan
Arsenal wrote:ExplosionsInDaSky wrote:Bailey says he's added 15 pounds? Of muscle? Since the combine in May. I'm sorry, but NO FKIN WAY! Not a chance in hell he's done that.
Ace Bailey at a ROCKED UP 220 lbs. is a problem for any opposing D!
Arsenal wrote:Unlike Ace who has been hard at work improving his body... this guy continues to pound the Big Macs!
Covi_Marsh wrote:Arsenal wrote:Unlike Ace who has been hard at work improving his body... this guy continues to pound the Big Macs!
[x]?s=46[/x]
Mik317 wrote:the point being that it wasn't a bad trade.
There are plenty of bad moves to give to morey that we don't have to make up ones
MVP1992 wrote:Arsenal wrote:ExplosionsInDaSky wrote:Bailey says he's added 15 pounds? Of muscle? Since the combine in May. I'm sorry, but NO FKIN WAY! Not a chance in hell he's done that.
Ace Bailey at a ROCKED UP 220 lbs. is a problem for any opposing D!
If you squint, you can see hulking stretch marks.
Negrodamus wrote:Arsenal wrote:ExplosionsInDaSky wrote:Bailey says he's added 15 pounds? Of muscle? Since the combine in May. I'm sorry, but NO FKIN WAY! Not a chance in hell he's done that.
Ace Bailey at a ROCKED UP 220 lbs. is a problem for any opposing D!
It appears Ace isn’t the only one getting “rocked up”.
youngcrev wrote:MVP1992 wrote:Arsenal wrote:
Ace Bailey at a ROCKED UP 220 lbs. is a problem for any opposing D!
If you squint, you can see hulking stretch marks.
Great, now he's got a little pooch belly and he's skinny fat instead of just skinny.
MVP1992 wrote:Arsenal wrote:ExplosionsInDaSky wrote:Bailey says he's added 15 pounds? Of muscle? Since the combine in May. I'm sorry, but NO FKIN WAY! Not a chance in hell he's done that.
Ace Bailey at a ROCKED UP 220 lbs. is a problem for any opposing D!
If you squint, you can see hulking stretch marks.
The alternative of David Roddy, Tyler Bey, and Josh Richardson over Melton and Curry? Or the alternative of the Mystery Box?the_process wrote:Mik317 wrote:the point being that it wasn't a bad trade.
There are plenty of bad moves to give to morey that we don't have to make up ones
Seth and Melton were both bad trades IMO. The alternative in both scenarios was preferable.
Let's just hope Morey has a good trade coming tomorrow.
Iscull wrote:Are we one of the most active teams on the forum?
I went to go check the Nets post Porzingus trade and only 1 person had commented about it in their general off season thread.
If it was over here, the trade would have it's own thread with about 5 pages of responses lol
FireMorey wrote:I'd be ok taking Queen but only if it's paired with Bailey or Tre in a trade down. For him to be their first pick would be gross.
zaz102 wrote:The alternative of David Roddy, Tyler Bey, and Josh Richardson over Melton and Curry? Or the alternative of the Mystery Box?the_process wrote:Mik317 wrote:the point being that it wasn't a bad trade.
There are plenty of bad moves to give to morey that we don't have to make up ones
Seth and Melton were both bad trades IMO. The alternative in both scenarios was preferable.
Let's just hope Morey has a good trade coming tomorrow.
I can't rate a trade as bad when they got the best players out of everything traded in both deals.
Stanford wrote:Iscull wrote:Are we one of the most active teams on the forum?
I went to go check the Nets post Porzingus trade and only 1 person had commented about it in their general off season thread.
If it was over here, the trade would have it's own thread with about 5 pages of responses lol
We're probably near the bottom of the top half.
Iverson Armband wrote:Jovic, Nembhard, Christie or Watson would all look REALLY good on the Sixers right now.
MVP1992 wrote:Stanford wrote:Iscull wrote:Are we one of the most active teams on the forum?
I went to go check the Nets post Porzingus trade and only 1 person had commented about it in their general off season thread.
If it was over here, the trade would have it's own thread with about 5 pages of responses lol
We're probably near the bottom of the top half.
In volume or quality?
Stanford wrote:MVP1992 wrote:Stanford wrote:
We're probably near the bottom of the top half.
In volume or quality?
Quality is near the bottom