chickenstanly

Why would T-Mac come here, but not Kobe ? Why would Doc (or any big-name coach) come here without a legitimate team in place ? One with a legitimate star ? Especially when teams making the conferance finals are firing coaches these days ? Why would T-Mac come here if Doc were here ? They've been there/done that and didn't care for it the first time ? Why would Kobe want to play for the Clippers ? Why would anyone want T-Mac over Kobe ? While we don't know that Kobe can carry a team, we do know that T-Mac cannot for sure. T-Mac is injury prone and seems to have a chronic back condition at a very young age. And T-Mac whines to the point of threatening retirement earlier in the year based on his not "liking the rules". Whoever lands Kobe will win a Championship within 5 years. He will win one before the Lakers will win one without him. Just my prediction.

Don't be so overly impressed with Ford. Kobe may come here. I don't believe "nucleus" means any more to Kobe than big men meant to Jordan. Kobe wants to mimick what Jordan did. Start with abolutely nothing and single-handedly win championships by hmself. That is the ONLY way, in his mind, that he could possibly surpass Jordan's legacy. And that is all he cares about. Kobe doesn't care if fans have traditionally supported the team. He wants to be the one who changes everything. Kobe would never want success to possibly be attributed to anyone other than himself. Thus, a good "nucleus" would not be a drawing card. Kobe isn't from LA. He has no reason to want to remain there with the Clippers. He doesn't care about winning unless he is the sole responsability for it. Some of you don't seem to understand what he's after. He wants to be EVERYTHING. Not a piece. Atlanta is the only place that he can do this for certain. If he can do it at all, that is. But he seems to think he can, so............. Kobe is hands-down the best player in the league other than Shaq. Nobody else is even close. Any of you who find some reason to no want him need to have your heads examined. He just may come. Don't count it out. Knight did what he did for a reason. It could be Kobe and he knows something everyone else doesn't.

Hotlanta, Don't you know anything ?? You should know by now that the entire Hawk strategy should ALWAYS hinge on whether we get Kwame or not !!

Diesel seems to have interpreted the question different that I do. I would agree with him if you want players ever making up a single team. If you are looking for an all-time hypothethical line-up: G - Pistol Pete G - Eddie Jonnson SF - 'Nique PF - Dan Roundfield C - Deke (as Moses was far out of his prime as a Hawk) What was Pete ? a PG ? SG ? I remember that he handled the ball constantly, yet scored like a SG. Was there really much distinction back then ? What was "Clyde" Frazier ? They were simple "guards" in my memory.

"2. He doesn't think that he needs to establish Reef or the post early, or lean on anything late. He believe in the motion of the offense getting points, and if that leads to the post, so be it." ______________________________________ This was an almost comical response from Stotts. What league does he think he's coaching in ? That's not worked since the Lakers and Celtics of the 80's. And even then you would usually be looking at a sky-hook when nothing else was working or in crunch time. This guy is completely incompetent. He cannot coach offense or defense. And obviously cannot motivate either. With the obscene sums being made by the players, $5 million for a good coach like Fratello would seem like a protection of the investment to me. A no-brainer. Let SAR shoot 20-25 times per game and let's see what happens. He has more help than T-Mac, so I don't see the same result. If it doesn't work, break the team up and never suit up another guy who doesn't play strong defense. I would rather lose 75-68 than 106-98. At least the team would be considered good at something !! Have an identity. I wonder if the management believes that SAR would be a complete failure if put into the "superstar" role and be asked to carry the team ?? And therefore lose his value beyond the shadow of any doubt ?? As it stands now, it could be speculated that he is only a product of a poor coaching system.

"I'm curious to find out if Mississippi State hiring an African American head football coach will change anyone's thoughts on the State of Mississippi." ********************************************* I didn't know anyone had any thoughts on the state of Mississippi --- period.

"I honestly think we'd be better off with Gasol, Wright, and Knight." _____________________ As long as Kwame isn't still available, that is......

OK Diesel, Tell us. Would continue to dislike Kobe if he became a Hawk ? What if he didn't carry the Hawks to a title. Would that mean he had been carried by Shaq in LA ? But what if LA didn't win either ? A thrid scenario would ask, "what if LA did win ?" Could they have won without GP and Malone carrying Shaq ? Certainly Kobe would not have the supporting cast here that Shaq had in LA.

Well you must have found a reason to be optomistic while advising the rest of us to be realistic ?? Share it. Hope you're right, though ! In past years, people have been too high on the team. This year people are, I feel, being far too negative going into the season. But you know me, I always head for the lightest side of the boat.

From an LA Times article today..... "That was when Kobe came of age. He managed to mesh scoring with leadership and winning. Not always the easiest thing to do (Ask Dominique Wilkins)'

This is just plain silly and likely posted as something to intentionally provoke argument. How can you claim that someone who was arguably the main component of three championships and countless conference titles was "overrated" ? If he was overrated, what the [censored] were the people he consistently whipped every year ? On the other hand, you have made the claim that McHale was overrated because he had Bird ! What now, so both were overrated ? Well, now I guess you win three championships and lose 3-4 more in the Finals with only 3 "properly" rated basketball players. Parrish, Ainge, Max, DJ, ETC. Yep, those guys were carrying Bird and Mchale alright Again, according to Jordan, Bird and Mchale would be in his "all-time" starting five. Not Worthy. Not Dr J. Not Dominique. Get the picture ? This is Jordan talking. He played against them. He doesn't care about statistic sheets. He knows who "can play". Stop making excuses for bums like "Nique who could not win anything. They are a dime as dozen --- both black and white. Diesel, you are fixated on attempting to determine "who carries who" in a given team sport situation. And further, you attempt to judge players based on this assesment. To say that Bird or Mchale were overrated because they were white could not be valid because they simply kicked ass waaaaay to much. It ain't easy to win like they did. It may be valid in some cases, but couldn't possibly be in the case of these guys. Wins speak for themselves. And these two guys were not simply passive pieces of the puzzle. The were the main pieces !

I believe some owners do so for the fun of it. Sometimes I don't believe some of you grasp the difference in the net worth of the various owners. For example, Paul Allen -vs- Mark Cuban. There is no comparison here. Cuban may be "involved" in his team and spend a lot of money, but in no way is his wealth comparable to Allen's. Neither is Arthus Blank's. In fact, you could put the two together and multiply times 10 and not have as much as Allen. Just keep this in mind. Jerry Buss, OTOH, is forced to be a businessman because his worth is not great. Neither is the guy in Salt Lake. Corporations run teams like businesses. This is because those in charge are high-priced working stiffs whose jobs are on the line. Bottom line is that all owners are NOT equal and it's just not a case of one being more "willing" to do things than another. Some have MUCH more than others. Think of the difference in pay between Shaq and Ira. That's aproximately the gap between Allen and Cuban.

I agree. Hyping white players has been done. It was certainly not done the case with Mchale or Bird. I believe it was done with Maravich to a great extent. The Hawks have always attempted to "push" white players. Koncak was a good example. CC another. Clyde Frazier used to embarass Pete when they would play. On the issue of Wilkins, he was over-hyped as much as any white player. Nothing of substance --- only "highlights" as his nickname indicated. Much like maravich, "Nique put up good numbers for a team that never really contended year in and year out. Walton has more of a reputation than he would if he had been black. Although one year he WAS great and outplayed Kareem decisively while Kareem was in his prime. But still that is not enough to warrant his present reputation. At least not as an NBA player. Stockton was/is overhyped because he is white. Yes, he put up good assist numbers, But is hardly comparable to Magic and Oscar. Dr. J was overhyped. Much like "Nique. But he was also much better. He was highlight material, but fundamentally sound. Jerry West was not overhyped because he was white, imo. Laimbeer was nothing more than a part of a scheme that produced two championships. I don't believe he got much hype --- at least not positive. The old Celtic's, Cowens, Havlacek were better than most of the black players in so much as they WON. Great talents they were not. Not like McHale. Don't forget that Bird lit up both Dr. J and "Nique for 60+ ! This isn't mere white hype. But Diesel's illogical BS about someone carrying a team means to automatically assume you can identify who is carrying who ? In a great team concept, that produces many championships, this is next to impossible to speculate on. The one exception would be the Jordan Bulls. And we all see that Pippin was a bit overhyped as well. Overhyping happens in both colors. In fact, it may be more dependent on "style of play" than on race. Maybe not........... But of all the white players you want to take down or accuse of such overhype --- Kevin Mchale is one of the most ridiculous targets imaginable !!! This guy had the BEST low post moves in the history of the game ! Won championships, was annointed as one of the greatest players that others ever had to face or attempt to coach against. This comes from Barkley, Jordan, Sixer coach Billy C. etc.

"Why should I? I love that I'm a passionate person. Why would I want to change? And be some old boring dude like yourself." _______________________________________ Passionate ? No, that's unstable. Me, boring ? You don't know me. That was another ignorant comment. ************************* "Well, whatever you want to call those wacked out opinions..... They still make you come off as a complete nut." _________________________________________ Again, you are saying nothing here. Only using school yard adjectives to describe nothing. ********************************** "You think the fact that your so worried about my dating perference shows your great intelligence? Talking to you is about as fun as the feeling I get as my wisdom tooth is coming in." ______________________________________________ Here again, you have said nothing. Simply using "cute" sayings without saying anything is the signature of a lightweight. **************************** "Get the picture?" _________________________ No. You haven't painted one --- except that all you are capable of doing is childish name-calling. Either say something of substance, or shut-up.

Thank You. Diesel knows this. I've told him of the accolades bestowed on Mchale by his opponents on other occasions. There can be no greater compliment. McHale was better than Bird. If anyone was overrated between the two, it was Bird. Dominique doesn't belong anywhere in the same universe as Mchale. Diesel is emotionally bonded to 'Nique", therefore he will make an attempt to rationalize that "Nique" was a comparable player. Numbers don't tell the story in this debate, so don't attempt to use them.

'Maybe you should get back to your theories because to me you are nothing more than a lighweight" ______________________________________ I have never posted any "theories", kid. That was an uninformed [if not unintelligent] comment. If you're going to judge people "lightweights', you'd better learn to pay attention better. You have come to the point where you can debate basketball related topics very well --- but don't make the mistake of thinking you can carry this over to areas where you have no competence whatsoever. You have never made an intelligent criticism of anything I have written. You'e only attempts have come across as something that a 3rd grader may offer another in a spat during recess. I have posted opinions on various on-topic [basketball related] threads and made an observation about the behavior of this group as a whole in one memorable situation. [Kwame] I happen to agree with you on Dickau, FWIW. But any "fixation" --- be it a religious one, a devotion to an entity such as a country, school, blood relations, etc, more often than not clouds peoples objectivity. [They'll swear it doesn't, however] They only entertain answers that will fit within or allow their "fixation" to remain intact. You are the most emotionally driven poster here. From one day to the next, you can change very drastically. You are the first to admit this. Yet you make no atempt to correct this about yourself. This is quite immature. On Topic --- I believe the Hawkd should match the JT offer. The JT/Theo/SAR nucleus is more talented that we could hope to achieve for years by starting over. Starting over is hit or miss as we have seen the first time we tried it via JR and co. The Hawks need a coach who will put in a defensive scheme that works. There's no excuse in the world for such a poor defense considering zones are allowed.

"Not to mention white players are boring and have no charisma." ______________________________________ Sorta' the same opinion you have of white girls, huh, ARR ? But what if Dickau was black, but looked too "white boyish" ? Or played too "white boyish" ? I know, I know. We all know. You don't have to answer. I've never seen white person as "fixated" on whites as you are on blacks. Never seen a black as "fixated" on whites as you are on blacks. Or a black as "fixated' on blacks..... as you are on blacks.

You could also say that "needless" deaths come in many forms. Drunk drivers cause "needless" deaths. Some Christians would claim that abortion causes "needless" deaths. Drug overdoses cause "needless" deaths. Do I need to go on? Deaths due to war and conflict are part of the history of recorded civilization. This is "how things have worked" to get civilization to where it is today. A sucessful attempt to alter this natural phenomenon would likely result in a quicker destruction of civilization than would naturally happen. It goes against human nature. Understand that when you are dealing with loss of military life, you are not losing quality people. In fact, the volunteer military is made up largely of the lower echelon from within our society. These people "signed-up to die", you might say. Since the military contains a large population of alchoholics, spouse abusers, adulterers, etc, any attempts to whine over losing 138 of them is beyond nuts. If Washington DC has a population of, say, 2 Million and there are 8 sniper deaths ---- my calculator tells me that my chances of being a victim are 1 in 250,000. Again, it would be nuts to fear filling ones tank up with those odds ON YOUR SIDE. Again, the press will make you believe that there is a spook around every corner and that "YOU COULD NEXT". Sort of the same pitch they use to entice fools to buy lottery tickets, isn't it ? "Well someone's gotta' win". "Well, it's only a dollar and I could win". "Well, I'd better watch out for the sniper and crazed middle-eastern hijackers" All of these have something in common. Can anyone guess what that is ?

"If you learn that, less people would die in this world OVER NOTHING. The count is up to 138. That's 138 Americans who didn't have to die." ---------------------------------------------------- What is the average death toll in the USA minus a war for a similar period? Adding 138 people to it would have no statistical significance. It has emotional significance because of gullability to the press. But that number of people is not meaningful. On the other hand, the death toll that won them approval to fight the war [joke] was far greater. But while 9/11 cost many lives, 3000 people is not meaningful to a population of 260 million. Again, this is emotion and gullability getting in the way of logical thought.

This lineup would likely implode much like the Hawks w/Theus, etc a few years ago. Looks great on paper, but it's highly doubtful it would work. The Lakers could not find shots for Rice in his prime. Where are the shots for two ego-maniacs like Malone and Payton going to come from ? Phil Jackson seems to have the ability to win with two superstars bearing the offensive load surrounded by role players. Remember how Mitch Richmond[admittedly not in his prime -- but neither is Malone] was cast to the bench ?

Well, Worthy was on Every Laker championship team. There's really no distinction? _________________________________________ I don't believe Worthy was on every Magic/Kareem championship team. The Jamaal Wilkes/Norm Nixon Lakers [don't remember the year] team that destroyed the 76ers was before Worthy's time ?? Correct me if I'm wrong. Anyway, that above mentioned team was, in my, opinion, the best TEAM [not collection of superstars] I ever remember. The fast break was NEVER as good after Nixon left as it was with him. That being said, it was still awsome in the Scott years.

Lakers --- Magic, Scott, Kareem ????? Shouldn't that be Magic, Kareem, Worthy ? That one would be best. But Scott getting a mention over Worthy ?? You must be joking ! Better said than that would be Kareem/Magic/Cooper.

what do you think about my last question about the possibility of trading some players for a superstar but having enough talent left to help the superstar go into the playoffs? ----------------------------------------------------------------- If the team wins, one of our present players will likely become recognized as a "superstar".

Kareem wants to coach in the NBA. He coached last year in the CBA [i believe] Wherever it was, he won the Championship and promptly resigned. In reading an article about the season, the players had nothing but praise for him and his ability and willingness to work with them and teach. What gives here ? Diesel's right about the mysterious "shut-out" status that these two seem to have. Both are brilliant, thinking individuals. Both are former NBA champions and MVP's. Both want to coach badly. I don't understand it.......

Just out of curiosity, why do you believe that Rick Barry has yet to land a coaching or upper management position ? The guy is a true basketball brain and probably enough of a perfectionist and jackass to stand up to today's players and their ego's. [His may be larger than theirs Maybe the same problem as Kareem is having ? It's amazing that in this era of hiring former players to coaching and management positions that two guys of such legendary status cannot get a shot. Instead, guys like Doc Rivers, Nate McMillian, Byron Scott, John Lucas --- all good players but hardly on the level of Abdul-Jabbar or Barry --- all get pushed along instantly. I mean, when Bird wanted to coach -- Bird got a job. Same with Zeke. And Magic. I'd like to see these two get a decent shot whether here or elsewhere. Any thoughts ?