RingColluder wrote:og15 wrote:RingColluder wrote:
LOL @ calling Paul George's game solid. The game was nearly over because of his 1st quarter without Kawhi stepping up.
If we miraculously are able to trade PG it'd be a deal on par if not worse than the Blake trade. Nothing for anything of legitimate value. Didn't know the literal word of "untradable" was being LOLed without having to spell it out.
Why does it matter what the game "nearly was" when what it nearly was didn't happen? Might as well say the Clippers "nearly won" if Kawhi didn't have a bad 4th and start "blaming" him too. There a reason it's a 48 minute game.
Yea, sometimes one star has to carry certain stretches because another star or their teammates in general aren't doing as well, nothing new.
You have little to no objectivity in regards to Paul George, your narratives on his play are generally pretty useless, sorry.
Blake trade = just below star level player, two rotation players and a lottery pick. That's a package a team can use to retool. Looks like lots of value the, including the value of cap space. What's the problem exactly?
Untradeable means the a player can't be moved for value or needs assets attached to them to be moved. That's only the reality in a fantasy world when it comes to Paul George, not in the actual real life 30 team NBA.
If your idea of untradeable means that George can't be traded for a superstar / better player, well, yeah, how many stars are traded for other stars? Kawhi the Spurs DeRozan, Poeltl and a top 20 protected pick.
If we get to that point, there will be lots of teams lining up to give up some young players or a tier 2-3 star plus assets for Paul George if he was on the block. Not because he's the best, but because he's better than what many, many teams have in that same position.
If you're really trying to equivocate Kawhi's 4th quarter with Paul George's 1st quarter (and not even factoring in Paul George's multiple boneheaded low IQ shot selection in the 4th AND defensive issues which has barely been discussed in the thread) that's absolute malarkey. Paul George clearly played significantly worse than Kawhi if we're looking at the total output of their performance, and frankly the fact that virtually everyone in the media and online other than a few people on this board can see it is EXTREMELY bizarre. Unless you want to come across extremely biased, I wouldn't go down this path whatsoever if I were you.
You're right it IS nothing new for Kawhi Leonard just like in the Mavs and Nuggets series last year to have to CARRY THE TEAM ON HIS BACK bc Paul George was shooting awfully or got into early foul trouble.
That's an absolutely awful deal when we had goals of winning a CHAMPIONSHIP to trade for that little value. If we're not getting a legitimate All star player back (not just below star player) AND solid draft pieces it's a mess. Who is "just below star player"? Tobias Harris?? Really???
Trading Paul George = throwing in the flag on any hopes of a championship. The far more likely scenario if we lose round 1 (or even round 2) is that Kawhi does not re-sign and we are STUCK with Paul George bc management needs to sell tickets for the new stadium and does not want to be rebuilding. Is this clear to you?
It's amazing the flip from "Paul George is such a great player the criticism for him is unwarranted" to "Well we can easily trade him if he performs poorly this offseason". Ballmer and Co especially if Kawhi leaves NEED TO SELL TICKETS. Not to mention if he continues to perform this way, no sane team will take a guy who has flopped in the last 5 or 6 playoffs in a row for anything of value. No young guys, no first round picks. Absolutely not. This delusion that still stems from the idea that "Paul George is a very good player" and that if we end up trading him "He'll have plenty of people who want him" is just so off base I don't know how else to explain it.
At this stage of his career, Paul George is way closer to "washed up Carmelo Anthony" who absolutely no team wanted despite his great supposed accolades and stats (Horrible playoff player) than a Chris Paul who contending teams constantly want to be the final piece to their puzzle OR a great model for a rebuilding team (OKC).
1)
If you're really trying to equivocate Kawhi's 4th quarter with Paul George's 1st quarter
I'm telling you that your logic is inconsistent and faulty and I'm giving an example of using the same flawed logic back at you. Whatever words and narrative you want to add there to make whatever point you want to make is your own decision.
2) Okay, so we've moved the goalposts, it was that he was untradeable with no specific context, then it was that he couldn't get good assets, now it's that he can't bring back an immediate star that you deem worthy enough for a championship. Well...lol.
3) Last year George had 27 points in game 1, he then scored 14 pts or less in the next three games. He had 15 pts or less in 4/6 games, so no, George having a poor first half and picking it up in the second half is NOTHING like last season vs Dallas because last season vs Dallas his whole games were like the first half.
Again, this happens ALL the time, teams have multiple stars and one picks up the slack when another is having a hard time, even crappy playoff George last season did it in the 2nd half of game 3 vs Denver after both had good first halves and Kawhi was off in the 2nd half.
4) I am about consistency with takes, but I've seen enough of this type of posting to not expect any consistency. If it flipped and George had a nice first half and carried the team, Kawhi struggled, but came out in the 2nd half, the inconsistent type of person would flip it and say "George didn't show up in crunch time, he only performed when there was no pressure in the first half" or some narrative like that. So if the take changes depending on the player, then it's useless.
5) Carmelo was traded at 33 years old, 3 years older than George to OKC after averaging 22/6/3 on below average scoring efficiency while playing poor defense. Yeah that's the value of Paul George around the league
. Like I said, your takes on George are generally pretty useless.
6)
It's amazing the flip from "Paul George is such a great player the criticism for him is unwarranted" to "Well we can easily trade him if he performs poorly this offseaso
Strawman, this isn't what was being said, the issue was the constant criticism about any and everything, not criticizing him in general, and people are only talking about how he can be traded because YOU are crying that he's untradeable, lol.
If the management was just interested in selling tickets, they wouldn't have trade Blake Griffin when they did. It's all conjecture at this point. I'd hypothesize that the could look to keep him more as a star to draw another or in order to not be so bad to give up good picks to OKC than for selling tickets if this scenario was to happen. Who knows though, acting like I know exactly what they would do is dumb.
