Omer Asik

rambo_ortega · Post #1 » by **rambo_ortega** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 3:33 am

I really like him! I think he is a legitimate starting Center in the NBA and i feel sorry with him being stuck in houston behind Howard. Look at his numbers in howard's absence. He's a beast on the boards which is one of our biggest need. He also knows how to position himself and is a hard worker.

I think this season showed how good we are with the right complimentary players even with the loss of our Brook Lopez. So if we plan to move in this direction without brook, we can get asik and another young, athletic complimentary player for brook.

What do you guys think? Any suggestions?

rambo_ortega · Post #2 » by **rambo_ortega** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 3:38 am

I'm proposing this:

Brooklyn Get:
Omer Asik
Al Farouq Aminu

Houston Get:
Ryan Anderson

New Orleans Get:
Brook Lopez

Prokorov · Post #3 » by **Prokorov** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 2:26 pm

we tried to get asik and houston wasnt interested. and if the rockets wanted anderson they would just trade asik to them for anderson without involving the nets

if we could deal lopez for asik, i do that in a split second

Agnostifarian · Post #4 » by **Agnostifarian** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 4:23 pm

Asik is good enough that Houston should trade Dwight "HO hum" Howard and bring in some guys who care more about winning than being cute.

jeff1624 · Post #5 » by **jeff1624** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 5:10 pm

Prokorov wrote:we tried to get asik and houston wasnt interested. and if the rockets wanted anderson they would just trade asik to them for anderson without involving the nets

if we could deal lopez for asik, i do that in a split second

You're assuming New Orleans would actually do an Anderson for Asik deal, which they wouldn't or it would have happened already.

Prokorov · Post #6 » by **Prokorov** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 5:25 pm

jeff1624 wrote:
Prokorov wrote:we tried to get asik and houston wasnt interested. and if the rockets wanted anderson they would just trade asik to them for anderson without involving the nets

if we could deal lopez for asik, i do that in a split second

You're assuming New Orleans would actually do an Anderson for Asik deal, which they wouldn't or it would have happened already.

they would do it for asik much sooner then they would do it for lopez. also, i think the rockets would be the one unwilling to do it, with andersons injury and them (over) valuing asik so highly

jeff1624 · Post #7 » by **jeff1624** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 5:29 pm

Prokorov wrote:
jeff1624 wrote:
Prokorov wrote:we tried to get asik and houston wasnt interested. and if the rockets wanted anderson they would just trade asik to them for anderson without involving the nets

if we could deal lopez for asik, i do that in a split second

You're assuming New Orleans would actually do an Anderson for Asik deal, which they wouldn't or it would have happened already.

they would do it for asik much sooner then they would do it for lopez.

Not my point. I don't have an opinion regarding the trade proposal one way or the other.

also, i think the rockets would be the one unwilling to do it, with andersons injury and them (over) valuing asik so highly

He's an expiring next year. The Rockets would do it without thinking it twice, especially with the way Anderson played this year before getting hurt. You also have to factor in Asik's terrible attitude. Not sure NO would want any part of that.

Prokorov · Post #8 » by **Prokorov** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 5:40 pm

jeff1624 wrote:
He's an expiring next year. The Rockets would do it without thinking it twice, especially with the way Anderson played this year before getting hurt. You also have to factor in Asik's terrible attitude. Not sure NO would want any part of that.

yeah not a chance. if the rockets wanted expiring money for Asik he would have been traded already. any hold up on an asik/anderson deal would be on houston's part. Asik also doesnt have a terrible attitude. he just wants playing time. which is certainly fair with the work he has put in on the floor and this being his second situation as a backup.

jeff1624 · Post #9 » by **jeff1624** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 5:42 pm

Prokorov wrote:
jeff1624 wrote:
He's an expiring next year. The Rockets would do it without thinking it twice, especially with the way Anderson played this year before getting hurt. You also have to factor in Asik's terrible attitude. Not sure NO would want any part of that.

yeah not a chance. if the rockets wanted expiring money for Asik he would have been traded already. any hold up on an asik/anderson deal would be on houston's part. Asik also doesnt have a terrible attitude. he just wants playing time. which is certainly fair with the work he has put in on the floor and this being his second situation as a backup.

Asik is the expiring. Not Anderson.

Prokorov · Post #10 » by **Prokorov** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 6:01 pm

jeff1624 wrote:
Prokorov wrote:
jeff1624 wrote:
He's an expiring next year. The Rockets would do it without thinking it twice, especially with the way Anderson played this year before getting hurt. You also have to factor in Asik's terrible attitude. Not sure NO would want any part of that.

yeah not a chance. if the rockets wanted expiring money for Asik he would have been traded already. any hold up on an asik/anderson deal would be on houston's part. Asik also doesnt have a terrible attitude. he just wants playing time. which is certainly fair with the work he has put in on the floor and this being his second situation as a backup.

Asik is the expiring. Not Anderson.

well then that is even less of an issue for NO then

DarkXaero · Post #11 » by **DarkXaero** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 6:21 pm

We don't need a center, especially if KG doesn't retire.

Prokorov · Post #12 » by **Prokorov** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 6:52 pm

DarkXaero wrote:We don't need a center, especially if KG doesn't retire.

well, id say its 50/50 he retires. and a 50/50 or better chance blatche isnt retained. leaving us with plumlee and lopez coming off injury

DarkXaero · Post #13 » by **DarkXaero** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 8:27 pm

Prokorov wrote:
DarkXaero wrote:We don't need a center, especially if KG doesn't retire.

well, id say its 50/50 he retires. and a 50/50 or better chance blatche isnt retained. leaving us with plumlee and lopez coming off injury

Depends on how we do this post season. I think we can convince KG to stay another year, if we get past the first round. Money is a factor too, he gets all of it if he doesn't retire. Blatche can gtfo.

Post #14 » by **NyCeEvO** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 8:34 pm

DarkXaero wrote:
Prokorov wrote:
DarkXaero wrote:We don't need a center, especially if KG doesn't retire.

well, id say its 50/50 he retires. and a 50/50 or better chance blatche isnt retained. leaving us with plumlee and lopez coming off injury
Depends on how we do this post season. I think we can convince KG to stay another year, if we get past the first round. Money is a factor too, he gets all of it if he doesn't retire. Blatche can gtfo.

I don't think KG would be swayed by money. He's got too much pride to take money but be unable to perform.

If he stays, I think it's only because he thinks he can give it one more shot. He's been thinking about retiring for the last 2-3 seasons and Father Time's call gets louder and louder each year.

If we lose KG and Blatche this offseason, we definitely need big men to help out. I don't trust Brook's foot at all.

Prokorov · Post #15 » by **Prokorov** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 8:45 pm

DarkXaero wrote:
Prokorov wrote:
DarkXaero wrote:We don't need a center, especially if KG doesn't retire.

well, id say its 50/50 he retires. and a 50/50 or better chance blatche isnt retained. leaving us with plumlee and lopez coming off injury
Depends on how we do this post season. I think we can convince KG to stay another year, if we get past the first round. Money is a factor too, he gets all of it if he doesn't retire. Blatche can gtfo.

lets say KG doesnt come back, and blatche retires. dont we still need a center? KG is good for 55-60 games at 20 minutes. asik would have a big role

DarkXaero · Post #16 » by **DarkXaero** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 9:54 pm

NyCeEvO wrote:
DarkXaero wrote:
Prokorov wrote:
well, id say its 50/50 he retires. and a 50/50 or better chance blatche isnt retained. leaving us with plumlee and lopez coming off injury
Depends on how we do this post season. I think we can convince KG to stay another year, if we get past the first round. Money is a factor too, he gets all of it if he doesn't retire. Blatche can gtfo.

I don't think KG would be swayed by money. He's got too much pride to take money but be unable to perform.

If he stays, I think it's only because he thinks he can give it one more shot. He's been thinking about retiring for the last 2-3 seasons and Father Time's call gets louder and louder each year.

If we lose KG and Blatche this offseason, we definitely need big men to help out. I don't trust Brook's foot at all.

KG is greedy as hell, there's a reason why he's made the most money out of all the NBA players. Before he waived his no trade clause, he wanted the Nets to guarantee that they'll pay his final year money (I think even if he retires, there'll be a good buyout). He can still play, I think we know that.

If we lose KG and Blatche this offseason, we need a third string center. If we were to get Asik, what does that mean for Brook and Plumlee? If Brook is getting 28-30 minutes per game, Plumlee is his backup, how many minutes is Asik getting? Of course, Asik is better than Plumlee but even if Asik is our backup C, this is the guy who handed a trade request because he wasn't happy being Dwight's backup. What makes you think he would be happy being a backup here?

Post #17 » by **NyCeEvO** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 11:25 pm

DarkXaero wrote:KG is greedy as hell, there's a reason why he's made the most money out of all the NBA players. Before he waived his no trade clause, he wanted the Nets to guarantee that they'll pay his final year money (I think even if he retires, there'll be a good buyout).

ust because KG has made the most money doesn't mean that he's super greedy.

KG did not and could not force anyone to give him the contracts he received. The fact that he's made the most money doesn't mean he's greedy. It means that owners felt that he deserved to make a lot of money over his career.

Even if it turned out that he actually was greedy, I believe that the pride he has for himself is just as high (if not higher) than his desire to make as much money as possible.

I don't think the waiving of his no-trade clause was a clear cut sign of greed either. Paul Pierce has said time and time again that he had to convince KG to not retire, to waive his no-trade clause, and to come to Brooklyn.

The reason why he has a no-trade clause in his contract isn't because he's greedy. It's because he's loyal to a fault. He didn't want to be traded unless he could decide on the circumstances and he was only going to pick a place where Doc was or Pierce was.

And why are we assuming that KG was the one who came up with the idea of a $6mil buyout? Given the way King gives away assets and Proky doesn't care about money, I put a higher likelihood that they offered the money as an additional incentive to sway KG to come to Brooklyn. With Pierce already here, the money could have just made the decision easier for him.

He can still play, I think we know that.

KG can still play if he's basically given senior citizen like position on a team. What other team would cater to a vet so much that they would make sure he doesn't play back-to-backs, keep his minutes under 26mpg no matter what, and take an extended leave of absence that was almost certainly more than necessary.

I know KG can still play in the minutes he's given but we've seen him blow layups that the old KG would've smashed into the basket. We've seen PFs burn by him with ease because he just can't keep up with a lot of them.

I'm sure it must eat at him that he can't stop some scrubs who he would've destroyed 10 years ago. Only he can say whether he's willing and ready to go through another full year of training, practice, ice baths, road trips away from his family, and intense conditioning. That's not an easy decision.

If we lose KG and Blatche this offseason, we need a third string center. If we were to get Asik, what does that mean for Brook and Plumlee? If Brook is getting 28-30 minutes per game, Plumlee is his backup, how many minutes is Asik getting? Of course, Asik is better than Plumlee but even if Asik is our backup C, this is the guy who handed a trade request because he wasn't happy being Dwight's backup. What makes you think he would be happy being a backup here?

Well, I never argued that Asik would want to come here. My comments were only about KG.

With that said, the OP started the thread with a proposal that would send Brook Lopez elsewhere.

I personally don't think Brook Lopez will be here next year if Kidd gets his way. So this all could be a moot point if Brook is traded sometime before the beginning of next season.

MrDollarBills · Post #18 » by **MrDollarBills** » Tue Apr 8, 2014 2:09 am

I'd trade for Asik in a heartbeat

thebigfour · Post #19 » by **thebigfour** » Tue Apr 8, 2014 3:29 am

Asik is not a championship caliber center. His free throw issues out weigh his rebounding positives. He is a liability on offense. Hands are not good. I think plumlee will end up better then asik. Brook is a scoring center his skills are much more unique. While asik is kg without the offense, shooting and passing. Brook could be is an essential piece to a championship team. Playoffs are where pace slows to a half court offense brook gives us the ability to score in that scenario. no other center has his skills right now. I say keep him until next year to see his condition. If his foot improves then he is more valuable then asik. Besides it wiuld be foolish to trade low on a good asset.

Prokorov · Post #20 » by **Prokorov** » Tue Apr 8, 2014 4:10 am

thebigfour wrote:Asik is not a championship caliber center. His free throw issues out weigh his rebounding positives. He is a liability on offense. Hands are not good. I think plumlee will end up better then asik. Brook is a scoring center his skills are much more unique. While asik is kg without the offense, shooting and passing. Brook could be is an essential piece to a championship team. Playoffs are where pace slows to a half court offense brook gives us the ability to score in that scenario. no other center has his skills right now. I say keep him until next year to see his condition. If his foot improves then he is more valuable then asik. Besides it wiuld be foolish to trade low on a good asset.

lol... you say asik inst a championship calibur center but brook is?

Lopez is the exact opposite if what you want... someone who doesnt defend or rebound, who is incredibly soft and easily intmimidated by physical players, and who is a ball stopper on offense who you cant count on to stay healthy

ill take asik 101 times out of 100 over lopez. id trade lopez for pure expirings, let alone asik. brook lopez going down was the best thing to happen to this team since trading for jason kidd