Final_quest

The Knicks can only offer the MLE every other year. Which they signed Crawford last year. Is this correct or no?

I agree that there's no way the Magic would do this deal. Since this is just a discussion forum we must call the people who think the Hawk's would not do this deal insane, and leave it at that. Howard is a true worthy #1 overall pick. His production this year has shown that. This year's trio of possible #1 overalls is far behind him.

There have been a few trade proposals for the #1 overall pick, if we get it. Some people think that a package like the #4 pick and #15 pick is not enough. My point is that each year the #1 overall pick has different value. In the NFL the 49ers and Dolphins have both wanted to trade out of the top spots, but no teams feel like the top prospects are worth trading up for. What is a an appropriate package for the #1 overall pick in this draft?

I don't think this pick will be traded. The only time teams ante up to get the #1 pick is if there is a projected superstar at the #1 spot. Golden State traded 3 #1's because of Chris Webber. There is not a player of the same caliber in this draft. Remember, at the time Webber looked like he was going to be a dominant player. In the NFL draft this year no one wants the #1 pick either. Each draft is different. A #1 pick does not maintain the same value year to year. What Cleveland would have gotten in Lebron's year is totally different than what we might be able to get. That pick was probably twice as valuable as ours will be.

I disagree. We use the term superstar too much for it to apply to only 2 or 3 players. Out of 30 some teams is applying that term to 6 or 7 players abusing it? We could use the term all star, but that has a factual connotation to it. What other term is there besides superstar? Every league needs more than two or three superstars. I think this is more the case of you elevating superstar to mean more than what it actually means. And yes, superstars are part media creation. If you are a top 5 talent in the league and the media does not pay much attention to you, it's difficult to call you a superstar.

I knew what you were thinking, but you said no big men were worth the #1 pick which wasn't true. The guys people kept bringing up to trade the pick for were the same guys that are on the market anyways. The most likely big man we could trade our pick for is Elton Brand. The Clippers will almost always dump salary for a draft pick. I'm not sure that wouldn't be SAR all over again, but I don't think I would trade our pick for Gasol either. Still, you can sometimes make a trade work if you're desperate enough. Look at what Golden State did with Chris Webber.

I would trade our #1 pick for Duncan, Garnett, Stoudemire, Okafor, D Howard, J Oneal, Bosh, or Yao. Possibly for Ben Wallace or Elton Brand. Would you not trade our pick for any of those guys?

Skip the definition. Who are the superstars in the league right now? For me they are Shaq, Duncan, Garnett, Kobe, AI, Lebron, Tmac, and Nowitzki. Other contenders: Kidd-former superstar Ray Allen-just isn't quite fantastic enough Stoudemire-one more year of domination and he makes the list Wade-Finals MVP turns him into superstar Nash-If he keeps up his pace for two more years perhaps Jermaine O'Neal-Came close to reaching superstar level last season Several other players are worth max contracts that are not on this list. That's what makes having superstars so valuable. They give you so much more than other players getting paid the same.

I agree with Hotlanta on this one. From an athletic stand point, Iggy is much more of a specimen. He has hops and a sculpted muscular physique that Chill looks like a toothpick next to. Chill might become a better player, but athletically Iggy has the advantage.

You have to be kidding that you would not trade the pick for Garnett. Everyone under 30 is approaching 30, but after seeing Miami make a run with Shaq, almost 30 is not that big of a deal. You have to understand that it is not simply about talent either. How many more tickets do we sell if we get Garnett? Every GM in the league would trade the #1 pick in this draft for Garnett on a talent and business level. Players like him you just don't trade. Would you trade the pick for Duncan?

Why do people keep saying that the Josh's can become shooters during the offseason? This is my new pet peeve. Nothing against the guy who posted this, but to just say that, "he can take care of that in the offseason..." oversimplifies things. I hope the young players on our team improve their jump shot in the offseason, but if it was so easy to just simply work on it and become great how come so few can do it? Everyone can improve, but what kind of improvement in a jump shot can you expect in one offseason? Can anyone provide an example of players who didn't have a great jump shot one season and the next season they had one? A lot of players of worked on their shot and developed it over the course of their career, but one offseason no way.

Overall, I'm just disappointed with the lack of talent on the top. I would rather have Okafor or Howard than any of these guys. Personally, I haven't decided on a top four. The consensus top three seem to be Paul, Bogut, and Williams. Given that none of the three seems to be a franchise player I would probably take Bogut because it's hardest to find talent at his position. At this point I don't have much confidence in getting anything more than a reliable consistent starter at the top of this draft.

The Clippers might or might not like Jaric, but it doesn't matter. The owner is in it for the money. He's not trying to win. Doesn't he make more money off the Clippers than most owners make off their teams? If you look at what he does from a business perspective it makes sense.

You are ridiculous. By that rationale there can only be one superstar for all time. There is a varying degree of talent within the hall of fame, or with any other star label. The other day somebody said Bill Laimbeer was a star center on this board. I disagree, but it's all about what the term means to you. Bill Laimbeer will be remembered, but not a star. No player is equal when compared to another, even superstars. By your logic each player should have their own label. My opinion is that's what names are for.

I do not like this plan.

I do wonder where information like this comes from. Billy Knight is the boss and doesn't talk to the media, but other executives within the organization might be talking. I can only guess who the source might be.

The term superstar is definitely a subjective term, but I hear it applied to players that won't necessarily be in the same realm as Bird, Chamberlain, Jordan. Maybe you can call players like those the greats or something else. There is no strict definition of a superstar, but to me Iverson qualifies. If you win MVP and lead the league in scoring you're a superstar. If you are voted into the all star game several years in a row and score 50+ points a few games a year you are a superstar. Other present day superstars include: Shaq, Garnett, Duncan, McGrady, Kobe, Lebron, and maybe a couple others I'm not thinking about.

This is ridiculous. Diesel, be a man and admit that you were wrong.

Larry Bird took Indiana State to the final game of the tournament on his own. Adam Morrison's team is out after the first round. He's not Larry Bird. Larry Bird was a once in a lifetime player and everybody knew it. This kid is not the same.

I would just like to point out that if the Laker pick next year is 11, we would still not get the pick. We did not make a trade for that Laker pick but for Boston's lowest pick in the first round. Next year we'll still get the lesser of Boston or the Laker's pick.

Not true Bill Laimbeer was not a star center. Many of the teams the Bulls played in the Finals did not have star centers either Portland, Utah, Lakers, Sonics, and Suns. For Ben Wallace it can be debated if he is a star or a center.

I think almost everyone had Alabama and Pittsburgh winning. Thankfully I had them both losing their next game. Somebody picked both of them to lose though.

Isn't it also true that your pick is determined by your record and not what your playoff seed is? If Boston had a .500 record, any team in the playoffs with a record above that would pick after Boston regardless of their seed.

Shut down defense is our best hope. That's why the #1 guy on my wish list for free agency is Tyson Chandler. I do have some concerns because of his injury history that he could become the next Theo Ratliff. But he is a better rebounder than Theo ever was, and is much more active on the floor. He could be our version of Ben Wallace. We must offer this guy a contract at least, but I think the Bulls will resign both Chandler and Curry. Still, we can force the Bulls to pay more than they wanted to, and we have to at least try to sign them.

I think most likely we got as much as possible for Walker, but I was just giving Blaw the benefit of the doubt. However, you can never know for sure if you got the most possible. You can say that BK made the best trade from his perspective. If we had another GM they might have gotten more or less, we can't know for sure.