I'm actually kinda of sad about changes

enigmatics · Post #1 » by **enigmatics** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 5:19 pm

...............I think this team in the last 1/4th of the season finally found its chemistry on the court......and they legitimately like each other..........kind of shades of a 3 or 4 years ago.

Ming Kong! · Post #2 » by **Ming Kong!** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 5:45 pm

I can understand that Shaq wants another role, since Amare will likely eat into his production, plus he probably wants a better shot at a title, but what's with that wiretap headline of possibly being dealt for Chandler? Shaq was probably the 3rd best center in the league, WTF would they trade him straight up for Chandler, who's gotten worse each of the last 3yrs. Maybe he'd hate the climate/area, but Utah would throw Okur or Boozer for Shaq.

Post #3 » by **Miklo** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 5:51 pm

enigmatics wrote:...............I think this team in the last 1/4th of the season finally found its chemistry on the court......and they legitimately like each other..........kind of shades of a 3 or 4 years ago.

I agree, I don't want to rebuild per se at this point. The only change I would be okay with as far as our main rotation goes WOULD be Shaq for Tyson. Which brings me to my next point...

Ming Kong! wrote:Shaq was probably the 3rd best center in the league, WTF would they trade him straight up for Chandler, who's gotten worse each of the last 3yrs. Maybe he'd hate the climate/area, but Utah would throw Okur or Boozer for Shaq.

I would be alright with this deal; Tyson is younger and would thrive in our system. I don't want Okur, we already have enough offense, and I seriously doubt we get Booz straight up for Shaq.

jazzy_jeff · Post #4 » by **jazzy_jeff** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 8:40 pm

I also like this team as is. Under Gentry, minus Stoudamire and giving more PT to the young guys, things worked. The chemistry seemed to be great, and the results on the court -- while not championship caliber -- were good. And most of all they were fun to watch and root for.

With that in mind, I would keep the nucleus of the veterans, continue to develop the young guys, and trade off Stoudamire for some young talent capable of meshing with this lineup. I realize that's kind of counterproductive, giving it's not doing enough to contend for a title, nor is it blowing things up and just starting over, but as a fan I would be quite happy to watch that team for a season.

Post #5 » by **lilfishi22** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:17 am

Yeah, I think this team was like one injury and coaching change away from being a top 5 team in the league this season. Offensively we'd be unstoppable and with a training camp working on our team defense, we'd have passable defense ie during the prime of SSOL.

I'd be OK without a Chandler for Shaq trade and keep this team for one more season, but I'd also be OK with the trade.

TXSun · Post #6 » by **TXSun** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:25 am

I too like this team as is. I've said it all along, "we needed one full season with Gentry". But the idea of Shaq for Chandler makes you wonder what it could be with a young talented yet injure-prone Chandler. It's one of those deals, where it could go either way.

Post #7 » by **lilfishi22** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 3:03 pm

TXSun wrote:I too like this team as is. I've said it all along, "we needed one full season with Gentry". But the idea of Shaq for Chandler makes you wonder what it could be with a young talented yet injure-prone Chandler. It's one of those deals, where it could go either way.

Yeah but this was the exact same conversation everybody here was having when the Shaq trade was being discussed (few days before the actual deal). Shaq was suppose to be injury prone, fat and lazy but we got him into shape, healthy, rejuvenated and motivated. I think we could do the same for Chandler. So as far as the injury factor is concerned, I'm not really worried.