Free Agent Fit: Luol Deng

[ImHeisenberg]

He turned down 3/30 from the Bulls.

Considering his age and injury history, he would definitely be charging way too much for what he will bring.

[Q00]

No way on Patty Mills. Its the system, not him. If you want George Hill 2.0, then he's your guy. If we're going for a new PG in FA though, we should be able to do a lot better than that with max money to spend. I'll take Chalmers over him every day of the week.

I'm not trying to be a homer, and I recognise that Patty isn't a great player, but he is great at his role. He's a terrific scorer/shooter and great at going out and getting 'his', he led the Olympics in scoring.

He'd basically be a spark plug coming off the bench. But I don't think that's a role that we specifically need to fill.

Bingo. He's great at his role off the bench for a contender. That's what he is. If we were signing him to a cheap deal to fill the same role here, I'm all for it. I thought people were talking about signing him to a starters contract to be our starting PG. That's what I'm saying no way to.

[Q00]

No way on Patty Mills. Its the system, not him. If you want George Hill 2.0, then he's your guy. If we're going for a new PG in FA though, we should be able to do a lot better than that with max money to spend. I'll take Chalmers over him every day of the week.

Granted the San Antonio system is a good one, but I don't see how you can dismiss a player by saying its the system.
It wasn't the system when he lit up at the olympics and it wasn't the system when he was at St Marys, he's just a good hard working player.

You say Chalmers over him any day?? Why?....... Shooting percenatage for this season: Mario FG 0.454% 3P 0.385%
Patty FG 0.464% 3P 0.425%

You want to spread the floor? Get Patty.

*Edit- Patty avg more points in less minutes and is 2 years younger, but yeah Chalmers over him every day of the week

One is the starting PG for a 2x championship team. The other is a backup PG for a team in the WCF.

That is why I'd take Chalmers over him every day of the week, if we're talking about signing one of them to be our starting PG.

I'm never for the idea of taking bench players off contenders and putting them into bigger roles on other teams expecting the same result. Players are in specific roles on contenders for a reason, because that's where they belong. Same reason why the team that signed Mike James to a big deal to be their starting PG after 2004 was a bad idea. He worked great as a backup on a contender, but that doesn't mean he could be a starter on a contender too. Same goes for Mills.

Chalmers is a proven starting PG on a championship team, in the NBA (twice) and NCAA (once). What has Patty Mills done?

[Minas]

I'd stay away from Stephenson. Him matched with any combination of Smith/Jennings, just wreaks of too much attitude.

There's Bad Boys, us against the world attitude, where they bonded as a team to prove everyone else wrong, that would be welcomed here in Detroit. Stephenson's attitude is more so, Me against everybody, and he is just as concerned with proving his own team wrong as he is the rest of the league. He has single-handedly screwed up Indy's team chemistry this season.

If you could get Deng for a 3 year deal, I think he would be a great veteran leader to lead this team to the next level. Sure, he's not the best 3pt shooter, and he's on the down swing of his career. But he brings 100% every single minute he is on the floor, and that's something that this team could really benefit from.

Paul George banging Hibbert's wife screwed up Indiana's chemistry.

Don't believe everything you read on the Internet

[Minas]

No way on Patty Mills. Its the system, not him. If you want George Hill 2.0, then he's your guy. If we're going for a new PG in FA though, we should be able to do a lot better than that with max money to spend. I'll take Chalmers over him every day of the week.

I'm not trying to be a homer, and I recognise that Patty isn't a great player, but he is great at his role. He's a terrific scorer/shooter and great at going out and getting 'his', he led the Olympics in scoring.

He'd basically be a spark plug coming off the bench. But I don't think that's a role that we specifically need to fill.

Bingo. He's great at his role off the bench for a contender. That's what he is. If we were signing him to a cheap deal to fill the same role here, I'm all for it. I thought people were talking about signing him to a starters contract to be our starting PG. That's what I'm saying no way to.

I agree 100%. I wouldn't be keen on signing Chalmers to be our starting PG either.

[GBanga3]

No way on Patty Mills. Its the system, not him. If you want George Hill 2.0, then he's your guy. If we're going for a new PG in FA though, we should be able to do a lot better than that with max money to spend. I'll take Chalmers over him every day of the week.

Granted the San Antonio system is a good one, but I don't see how you can dismiss a player by saying its the system.
It wasn't the system when he lit up at the olympics and it wasn't the system when he was at St Marys, he's just a good hard working player.

You say Chalmers over him any day?? Why?....... Shooting percenatage for this season: Mario FG 0.454% 3P 0.385%
Patty FG 0.464% 3P 0.425%

You want to spread the floor? Get Patty.

*Edit- Patty avg more points in less minutes and is 2 years younger, but yeah Chalmers over him every day of the week

One is the starting PG for a 2x championship team. The other is a backup PG for a team in the WCF.

That is why I'd take Chalmers over him every day of the week, if we're talking about signing one of them to be our starting PG.

I'm never for the idea of taking bench players off contenders and putting them into bigger roles on other teams expecting the same result. Players are in specific roles on contenders for a reason, because that's where they belong. Same reason why the team that signed Mike James to a big deal to be their starting PG after 2004 was a bad idea. He worked great as a backup on a contender, but that doesn't mean he could be a starter on a contender too. Same goes for Mills.

Chalmers is a proven starting PG on a championship team, in the NBA (twice) and NCAA (once). What has Patty Mills done?

Ohhh please don't act like Mario has anything to do with the heats success, if he didn't get drafted by the heat most people wouldn't even know his name. Isn't Cole getting most the minutes at the Point right now anyway.

I'm not saying Patty has to come here and start, he'd be great to have as a backup over Bynum but in saying that if Patty and Jennings were to compete over summer for a starting spot Patty would probably beat Jennings out, not sure if that would be because Jennnings is a douche or if Patty is actually better

I love how you went with this: "One is the starting PG for a 2x championship team. The other is a backup PG for a team in the WCF.

It should read: "One is a bit player, doing the job a chair could pull of on a stacked Miami team. The other is backup to Tony Parker for a team with the BEST record in the league.

[GBanga3]

No way on Patty Mills. Its the system, not him. If you want George Hill 2.0, then he's your guy. If we're going for a new PG in FA though, we should be able to do a lot better than that with max money to spend. I'll take Chalmers over him every day of the week.

Granted the San Antonio system is a good one, but I don't see how you can dismiss a player by saying its the system.
It wasn't the system when he lit up at the olympics and it wasn't the system when he was at St Marys, he's just a good hard working player.

You say Chalmers over him any day?? Why?....... Shooting percenatage for this season: Mario FG 0.454% 3P 0.385%
Patty FG 0.464% 3P 0.425%

You want to spread the floor? Get Patty.

*Edit- Patty avg more points in less minutes and is 2 years younger, but yeah Chalmers over him every day of the week

One is the starting PG for a 2x championship team. The other is a backup PG for a team in the WCF.

That is why I'd take Chalmers over him every day of the week, if we're talking about signing one of them to be our starting PG.

I'm never for the idea of taking bench players off contenders and putting them into bigger roles on other teams expecting the same result. Players are in specific roles on contenders for a reason, because that's where they belong. Same reason why the team that signed Mike James to a big deal to be their starting PG after 2004 was a bad idea. He worked great as a backup on a contender, but that doesn't mean he could be a starter on a contender too. Same goes for Mills.

Chalmers is a proven starting PG on a championship team, in the NBA (twice) and NCAA (once). What has Patty Mills done?

You want Patty yet or you still trying to convince yourself that Chalmers can play??

[DBC10]

Granted the San Antonio system is a good one, but I don't see how you can dismiss a player by saying its the system.
It wasn't the system when he lit up at the olympics and it wasn't the system when he was at St Marys, he's just a good hard working player.

You say Chalmers over him any day?? Why?....... Shooting percenatage for this season: Mario FG 0.454% 3P 0.385%
Patty FG 0.464% 3P 0.425%

You want to spread the floor? Get Patty.

*Edit- Patty avg more points in less minutes and is 2 years younger, but yeah Chalmers over him every day of the week

One is the starting PG for a 2x championship team. The other is a backup PG for a team in the WCF.

That is why I'd take Chalmers over him every day of the week, if we're talking about signing one of them to be our starting PG.

I'm never for the idea of taking bench players off contenders and putting them into bigger roles on other teams expecting the same result. Players are in specific roles on contenders for a reason, because that's where they belong. Same reason why the team that signed Mike James to a big deal to be their starting PG after 2004 was a bad idea. He worked great as a backup on a contender, but that doesn't mean he could be a starter on a contender too. Same goes for Mills.

Chalmers is a proven starting PG on a championship team, in the NBA (twice) and NCAA (once). What has Patty Mills done?

You want Patty yet or you still trying to convince yourself that Chalmers can play??

LOL. It's ok. Norris Cole took over him easily, Chalmers will probably beg Riley to give him a decent contract at this rate. He's not giving you wins outside of riding the coat tails of DWade and now Lebron.

The guy can't run a simple play as a PG and he can't even spot up for a 3 when that's all he literally has to do for Lebron. He also couldn't defend at all this series, opting for silly fouls and reach-ins. Cole will give you the same production and more hustle.

[GBanga3]

No way on Patty Mills. Its the system, not him. If you want George Hill 2.0, then he's your guy. If we're going for a new PG in FA though, we should be able to do a lot better than that with max money to spend. I'll take Chalmers over him every day of the week.

PATTY, PATTY, PATTY........ALLLL DAYY ERRRDAAYY!

[DBC10]

LOL taking Chalmers over Mills.

The eye test evaluation on this forum is so broken sometimes.

[Q00]

Granted the San Antonio system is a good one, but I don't see how you can dismiss a player by saying its the system.
It wasn't the system when he lit up at the olympics and it wasn't the system when he was at St Marys, he's just a good hard working player.

You say Chalmers over him any day?? Why?....... Shooting percenatage for this season: Mario FG 0.454% 3P 0.385%
Patty FG 0.464% 3P 0.425%

You want to spread the floor? Get Patty.

*Edit- Patty avg more points in less minutes and is 2 years younger, but yeah Chalmers over him every day of the week

One is the starting PG for a 2x championship team. The other is a backup PG for a team in the WCF.

That is why I'd take Chalmers over him every day of the week, if we're talking about signing one of them to be our starting PG.

I'm never for the idea of taking bench players off contenders and putting them into bigger roles on other teams expecting the same result. Players are in specific roles on contenders for a reason, because that's where they belong. Same reason why the team that signed Mike James to a big deal to be their starting PG after 2004 was a bad idea. He worked great as a backup on a contender, but that doesn't mean he could be a starter on a contender too. Same goes for Mills.

Chalmers is a proven starting PG on a championship team, in the NBA (twice) and NCAA (once). What has Patty Mills done?

You want Patty yet or you still trying to convince yourself that Chalmers can play??

No. I have no interest in Patty Mills for the hundrenth time. Are you his agent or something? lol

I said what I meant the first time. Chalmers > Mills. I don't change my mind on players over 5 game samples.

[Pharaoh]

I'd prefer neither Mills or Chalmers.

Vasquez? Yep, let's go there.

Collison? I could be talked into that

Mills? I'm as patriotic as the next Aussie but he's a spark plug bench player and I don't see him as a starter in the NBA. Nothing wrong with that - every team needs quality role players

Chalmers? I view him the way I view Mills...not a legit starter

Sent from my GT-I9300 using RealGM Forums mobile app

[GBanga3]

He doesn't have to start, just want some players that give a **** and work hard playing for the Pistons.

[GBanga3]

One is the starting PG for a 2x championship team. The other is a backup PG for a team in the WCF.

That is why I'd take Chalmers over him every day of the week, if we're talking about signing one of them to be our starting PG.

I'm never for the idea of taking bench players off contenders and putting them into bigger roles on other teams expecting the same result. Players are in specific roles on contenders for a reason, because that's where they belong. Same reason why the team that signed Mike James to a big deal to be their starting PG after 2004 was a bad idea. He worked great as a backup on a contender, but that doesn't mean he could be a starter on a contender too. Same goes for Mills.

Chalmers is a proven starting PG on a championship team, in the NBA (twice) and NCAA (once). What has Patty Mills done?

You want Patty yet or you still trying to convince yourself that Chalmers can play??

No. I have no interest in Patty Mills for the hundrenth time. Are you his agent or something? lol

I said what I meant the first time. Chalmers > Mills. I don't change my mind on players over 5 game samples.

Haha just stirring you man, nah defo not he's agent but played against him in high school years and just know the type of guy he is. Very happy for him today.

[ImHeisenberg]

LOL taking Chalmers over Mills.

The eye test evaluation on this forum is so broken sometimes.

Both of them were players who benefited from playing with some of the best players the league has ever seen, under very talented coaches. Put either of them in a situation where they have to the a top option and they aren't going to impress.

[GBanga3]

LOL taking Chalmers over Mills.

The eye test evaluation on this forum is so broken sometimes.

Both of them were players who benefited from playing with some of the best players the league has ever seen, under very talented coaches. Put either of them in a situation where they have to the a top option and they aren't going to impress.

I'll say it again: I don't want Patty to start, or be the number 1 option. I just want some freaking players on my team.

Also I'm Pretty sure every team plays on courts with the same dimensions, which means Patty will still be able to provide some spread, unlike the current knuckle heads on our roster.