Around the nba part 6

ibraheim718 · Post #401 » by **ibraheim718** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 2:34 am

HakeemKnicks wrote:impressive win for denver. still can't see them beating the spurs or memphis but they match up good with okc.

Memphis will give them trouble.. because Memphis can muck up the game.. San Antonio they can beat because the way they run can expose Duncan, Splitter, Jackson, Ginobilli.. their older players... Pop would have to go heavy with the young guys. Why do you think San Antonio matches up well?

Shemy · Post #402 » by **Shemy** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 2:34 am

even if they are best team in the west their not representing the west in the finals unless Gallo goes on one of his tears which by looking at his recent crappy shooting perfomances he may be due for soon, but as Ibraheim said if they can nab the 4th seed they can really advance to the WCF depending on who they draw in the second round despite beating OKC they are not a great match-up for em at all in a best of seven series, drawing Memphis at home with HC and getting SA in the second round would be the best case scenario for em imo

ibraheim718 · Post #403 » by **ibraheim718** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 2:35 am

ijag23 wrote:30-7 in 2013. Probably looking at 16 straight going into San Antonio next week. They got screwed by that ridiculous road heavy start, otherwise they'd be right there going for that top seed.

Yeah the start of their schedule was tough.

Tron Carter · Post #404 » by **Tron Carter** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 2:41 am

ibraheim718 wrote:
HakeemKnicks wrote:impressive win for denver. still can't see them beating the spurs or memphis but they match up good with okc.

Memphis will give them trouble.. because Memphis can muck up the game.. San Antonio they can beat because the way they run can expose Duncan, Splitter, Jackson, Ginobilli.. their older players... Pop would have to go heavy with the young guys. Why do you think San Antonio matches up well?

i don't think they can run on SA's frontcourt, i think they can slow down denver. home court advantage will also help.

knicks94 · Post #405 » by **knicks94** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 2:42 am

The Knicks could have always been what Denver is today had they managed to acquire the right pieces and not traded their entire roster for an easy path to success.

ibraheim718 · Post #406 » by **ibraheim718** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 2:45 am

HakeemKnicks wrote:
ibraheim718 wrote:
HakeemKnicks wrote:impressive win for denver. still can't see them beating the spurs or memphis but they match up good with okc.

Memphis will give them trouble.. because Memphis can muck up the game.. San Antonio they can beat because the way they run can expose Duncan, Splitter, Jackson, Ginobilli.. their older players... Pop would have to go heavy with the young guys. Why do you think San Antonio matches up well?

i don't think they can run on SA's frontcourt, i think they can slow down denver. home court advantage will also help.

Home court definitely helps.. they'd have to steal a game. I just don't trust San Antonio in the playoffs anymore.

Bran Fast Hands · Post #407 » by **Bran Fast Hands** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 2:49 am

Annoying how badly Denver took us to the cleaners in that trade.

Tron Carter · Post #408 » by **Tron Carter** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:03 am

Bran Fast Hands wrote:Annoying how badly Denver took us to the cleaners in that trade.

denver is winning games without any significant contribution from the pieces we gave up.

this game is a prime example. imo lawson, faried, and dre are their most important players in that order.

the draft picks might end up hurting us more then the personel given away.

Post #409 » by **GONYK** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:04 am

Bran Fast Hands wrote:Annoying how badly Denver took us to the cleaners in that trade.

Did they acquire Faried and Lawson from us?

Tron Carter · Post #410 » by **Tron Carter** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:05 am

GONYK wrote:
Bran Fast Hands wrote:Annoying how badly Denver took us to the cleaners in that trade.

Did they acquire Faried and Lawson from us?

no but mozgov is putting the league on notice :lol:

Bran Fast Hands · Post #411 » by **Bran Fast Hands** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:07 am

HakeemKnicks wrote:
Bran Fast Hands wrote:Annoying how badly Denver took us to the cleaners in that trade.

denver is winning games without any significant contribution from the pieces we gave up.

this game is a prime example. imo lawson, faried, and dre are their most important players in that order.

the draft picks might end up hurting us more then the personel given away.

The trade got rid of Chauncey Billups of their books, giving Lawson the reigns and allowed him to develop quicker to where he is now. Raymond Felton got them Andre Miller who does a great job as the vet of the bench to compliment Lawson.

Post #412 » by **kane2021** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:08 am

Its Lawson. Not gallo chandlet felton and mozgov.

Post #413 » by **GONYK** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:09 am

Bran Fast Hands wrote:
HakeemKnicks wrote:
Bran Fast Hands wrote:Annoying how badly Denver took us to the cleaners in that trade.

denver is winning games without any significant contribution from the pieces we gave up.

this game is a prime example. imo lawson, faried, and dre are their most important players in that order.

the draft picks might end up hurting us more then the personel given away.

The trade got rid of Chauncey Billups of their books, giving Lawson the reigns and allowed him to develop quicker to where he is now. Raymond Felton got them Andre Miller who does a great job as the vet of the bench to compliment Lawson.

This is some blatant reaching

Bran Fast Hands · Post #414 » by **Bran Fast Hands** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:10 am

Why do people overlook the fact that Lawson would have had a limited role (compared to now) for another season if Billups was still there? Or that Felton got them Andre Miller?

Post #415 » by **GONYK** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:12 am

Bran Fast Hands wrote:Why do people overlook the fact that Lawson would have had a limited role (compared to now) for another season if Billups was still there? Or that Felton got them Andre Miller?

Why are you overlooking the fact that they could have just not picked up Billups' option, and got the same result?

Drun53 · Post #416 » by **Drun53** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:12 am

Gallo can't throw the ball in the ocean right now, but he won them a lot of games earlier in the season. Wilson Chandler is also settling into a nice role as well. And getting rid of Melo allowed their other pieces to shine.

That being said, how can you say that the Knicks got fleeced in a trade that they got better from? The trade benefited both teams. It's allowed to happen.

Bran Fast Hands · Post #417 » by **Bran Fast Hands** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:14 am

GONYK wrote:
This is some blatant reaching

Really? Because Andre Miller for Raymond Felton is pretty obvisous. And Ty Lawson would have been behind Chauncey in their backcourt last season. They trade helped give him the keys in the back court and now look how he is going. Just because you're a Knicks fan doesn't mean that you can;t admit that Denver got a really good deal that has worked out very well for them in that trade. And I understand it's worked out well for the Knicks as well, from a marketing and money making front.

ibraheim718 · Post #418 » by **ibraheim718** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:14 am

You guys can't act like Gallinari and Chandler don't contribute.. that's not fair.. besides in my eyes since Melo was walking anyway they pretty much got those guys and the draft pick for free.. we also cut Brewer who they picked up... and if you want to be fair we had a draft pick ahead of those guys and as of right now they made better use of their pick by drafting Faried.. we had the chance to take Faried but we passed. The guys they got may be role players but they're good role players they got in return for a guy who was going to bounce.. it was either that or a trade exception and a pick or two similar to what Cleveland got or Toronto.

Post #419 » by **GONYK** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:17 am

Bran Fast Hands wrote:
GONYK wrote:
This is some blatant reaching

Really? Because Andre Miller for Raymond Felton is pretty obvisous. And Ty Lawson would have been behind Chauncey in their backcourt last season. They trade helped give him the keys in the back court and now look how he is going. Just because you're a Knicks fan doesn't mean that you can;t admit that Denver got a really good deal that has worked out very well for them in that trade. And I understand it's worked out well for the Knicks as well, from a marketing and money making front.

Both teams got what they needed out of the trade. It wasn't a fleecing.

How can it be a fleecing when we definitely improved? Isn't that the end result that both teams had in mind?

Tron Carter · Post #420 » by **Tron Carter** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:18 am

GONYK wrote:
Bran Fast Hands wrote:Why do people overlook the fact that Lawson would have had a limited role (compared to now) for another season if Billups was still there? Or that Felton got them Andre Miller?

Why are you overlooking the fact that they could have just not picked up Billups' option, and got the same result?

even if they picked up his option he's been a walking injury ever since leaving denver. lawson was gonna develop just fine.