Having seen what you have seen....

[benhillboy]

Paul is an awesome player and all (gotta love PG's that hit boards), but I never been a fan of injury-prone guys, no matter how good they are. Plus, I saw how he maneuvered around Lenox once, with his bodyguards and his Bentley and locking up stores and not buying anything, just kinda diva-esque and soft to me when he's supposed to portray this good humble boy, man of the people type image.

As far as Joe being considered an ironman over Kobe is taking it a bit far: Sure, Joe doesn't have the severity of injuries as Kobe, but Kobe would damn sure play through much more pain/ discomfort than Joe ever would think about doing.

I have long been a proponent of Jamal taking a few shot oppurtunities away from Joe because A) in our time of dire need (last year's debacle against Orlando) Jamal, while not great offensively, still thoroughly outplayed Joe, and B) Jamal is about twice as prone to draw fouls and get to the line than Joe is, let alone being the much more effective off-dribble scorer while I would give Joe the slight edge in overall jump-shooting and considerable one in distributing. I'm not sure about all these other trades and configurations, I like them together better than most realistic trade possibilities. Just always thought Joe was slightly better (and severely underrated) at the defensive end than offensive comprehensively, but with this new offense in place we'll see. Bibby's play is key, too: If he's stroking his shot and at least keeping in the spirit with the team defensive objective, we've all seen that trio light it up. I wouldn't make a choice between the two because Joe has been the primary perimeter defender for 7 years, and we've seen what happens to teams that insert Craw into that role: Lottery. I just think Jamal strikes a little more fear into a defender than Joe, and there's no subsitiute for his 4-point plays that greatly energize the team. He did it 9 times last year. Did we lose a single game when he did?

Edited October 23, 2010 by benhillboy

[dlpin]

If Chris Paul leaves NO High and Dry.. do you know what that means for that franchise? Not only is he their franchise player, he's really their only good player. His value is dropping daily because he doesn't want to be in NO. Right now, NO has the only leverage that it has, but they fear being Lebroned int he offseason. JJ is signed for 6 years. NO would be excited to get Joe Johnson and build around him and West.

You and superstar must have missed this past offseason. The Nuggets and the Hornets do not want to be Lebroned. A team that can offer them a star player in return for their allstar will be on their speed dial. Plus... outside of Atlanta, Joe is considered a beast. It's only amoung Hawks fans that Joe is seen as being = Peja.

First, no, outside of Atlanta Joe Johnson isn't considered a beast. He is considered what he is, which is a solid back up all star that will never contend for an MVP or be the best player on a championship team.

Second, the only reason Chris Paul has indicated he wants out of NO is because he is fed up that their ownership is cheap and he wants to play with another superstar. Which brings up the obvious questions: if he wants out of NO because ownership is cheap and he wants to play with another superstar (his preferred destinations are supposed to be the magic, knicks and lakers), why would he come to Atlanta? If the whole thing with NO is that they are cheap, why would they trade for the player with the most money left on his contract in the entire NBA?

This is the sort of idea that if you brought up to an NBA insider or in a neutral NBA forum you would get laughed out of the room.

[Diesel]

First, no, outside of Atlanta Joe Johnson isn't considered a beast. He is considered what he is, which is a solid back up all star that will never contend for an MVP or be the best player on a championship team.

Second, the only reason Chris Paul has indicated he wants out of NO is because he is fed up that their ownership is cheap and he wants to play with another superstar. Which brings up the obvious questions: if he wants out of NO because ownership is cheap and he wants to play with another superstar (his preferred destinations are supposed to be the magic, knicks and lakers), why would he come to Atlanta? If the whole thing with NO is that they are cheap, why would they trade for the player with the most money left on his contract in the entire NBA?

This is the sort of idea that if you brought up to an NBA insider or in a neutral NBA forum you would get laughed out of the room.

It really doesn't matte why Paul wants out of NO. He wants out of NO. The race is on to find a deal. You obviously missed Lebron's move this summer, so let me share. If NO takes Paul to the offseason of 2012, he's going to opt out and walk. NO should start planning for the future now and get a player of value for Paul and start developing Collison. Again, in these type of trades (over the years), the team that trades a superstar rarely gets a star in his prime back. Usually they get a gang of picks and maybe some prospects. Look at the Gasol trade. Look at the Shaq trades. Look at the KG trade. Look at the Ray Allen trade. Look at the Amare, Lebron, or Bosh trades.

[dlpin]

It really doesn't matte why Paul wants out of NO. He wants out of NO. The race is on to find a deal. You obviously missed Lebron's move this summer, so let me share. If NO takes Paul to the offseason of 2012, he's going to opt out and walk. NO should start planning for the future now and get a player of value for Paul and start developing Collison. Again, in these type of trades (over the years), the team that trades a superstar rarely gets a star in his prime back. Usually they get a gang of picks and maybe some prospects. Look at the Gasol trade. Look at the Shaq trades. Look at the KG trade. Look at the Ray Allen trade. Look at the Amare, Lebron, or Bosh trades.

Wow. Yeah, this is so silly that I am ashamed I am even wasting time on it.

Yeah, the New Orleans Hornets should really start developing Collison. Maybe they should even send a few trainers to Indiana seeing as Collison is an Indiana Pacer.

And please, in how many of the examples you gave did the team trading away the superstar get back an OLDER, MORE EXPENSIVE player? I am sure New Orleans is thinking "hey, last year we were thinking of dumping an MVP candidate because he still had 30 million left in his contract, why don't we trade him for a clearly inferior player who only has FOUR TIMES as much money left on his contract?"

Edited October 24, 2010 by dlpin

[DJlaysitup]

With what we've seen of JC2 so far and his similarity to JC in terms of production and style there's no doubt in my mind that I'd much rather trade Jamal than Joe if we're looking to acquire CP3 or another star...

Well that's a pretty bold approach Dolfan since JC2's overall production in regular season NBA games is nada, nothing, zip. Not his fault - he hasn't played in one yet.

[BudBall]

It really doesn't matte why Paul wants out of NO. He wants out of NO. The race is on to find a deal. You obviously missed Lebron's move this summer, so let me share. If NO takes Paul to the offseason of 2012, he's going to opt out and walk. NO should start planning for the future now and get a player of value for Paul and start developing Collison. Again, in these type of trades (over the years), the team that trades a superstar rarely gets a star in his prime back. Usually they get a gang of picks and maybe some prospects. Look at the Gasol trade. Look at the Shaq trades. Look at the KG trade. Look at the Ray Allen trade. Look at the Amare, Lebron, or Bosh trades.

[Diesel]

Well, I missed that trade. I was on hiatus. It was a dumb one.

[Diesel]

And please, in how many of the examples you gave did the team trading away the superstar get back an OLDER, MORE EXPENSIVE player? I am sure New Orleans is thinking "hey, last year we were thinking of dumping an MVP candidate because he still had 30 million left in his contract, why don't we trade him for a clearly inferior player who only has FOUR TIMES as much money left on his contract?"

A team trades away a superstar to get a player who they can build around.

It's rare that a superstar is traded. Usually superstars just man up and play through their disgust. However: Not that i would call Al Jefferson a superstar but at the time, he was THE FUTURE... in Boston. The same is true when Charlotte gave up Kobe Bryant for Vlade Divas. Or how about again, not saying superstar but definitely future Devin Harris for Jason Kidd? Or what about Allen Iverson for Chauncey Billups.

I say this.. let's just wait and see what NO does get for CP3. It won't be a Pau Gasol deal but I guarantee that they won't get equal value for him.

[dlpin]

A team trades away a superstar to get a player who they can build around.

It's rare that a superstar is traded. Usually superstars just man up and play through their disgust. However: Not that i would call Al Jefferson a superstar but at the time, he was THE FUTURE... in Boston. The same is true when Charlotte gave up Kobe Bryant for Vlade Divas. Or how about again, not saying superstar but definitely future Devin Harris for Jason Kidd? Or what about Allen Iverson for Chauncey Billups.

I say this.. let's just wait and see what NO does get for CP3. It won't be a Pau Gasol deal but I guarantee that they won't get equal value for him.

None of those examples are in any way comparable. Kobe Bryant was a 13th pick at the time, not a superstar like Chris Paul. Jason Kidd was the superstar in that deal, and he was traded for a younger and cheaper player. In the Billups-Iverson trade, detroit was the one trying to dump salary, so they traded him for Iverson, which was an expiring deal.

This isn't hard to understand. A team that is considering dumping a guy who is an MVP candidate to save money isn't going to trade that player for someone who has FOUR TIMES the amount of money left on his contract. A team that is considering rebuilding full time isn't going to dump their only star for a player that is 4 years older and a lot worse. New Orleans would rather see him walk than take on Joe Johnson. IF they trade him they will not get equal value, but they most definitely will NOT contradict what they are trying to do. Teams only accept lesser value when it involves reducing salary or getting younger, and Joe Johnson would do neither.

[AHF]

It really doesn't matte why Paul wants out of NO. He wants out of NO. The race is on to find a deal. You obviously missed Lebron's move this summer, so let me share. If NO takes Paul to the offseason of 2012, he's going to opt out and walk. NO should start planning for the future now and get a player of value for Paul and start developing Collison. Again, in these type of trades (over the years), the team that trades a superstar rarely gets a star in his prime back. Usually they get a gang of picks and maybe some prospects. Look at the Gasol trade. Look at the Shaq trades. Look at the KG trade. Look at the Ray Allen trade. Look at the Amare, Lebron, or Bosh trades.

That was an unfortunate lead to discussing Collison, but Diesel has two valid points here:

(1) We should be in the conversation on Paul because we have a variety of assets (young stud pre-extension, young stud post-extension, all-star, 6th MOY with expiring deal, etc.) that should put us in with the contenders for any deal New Orleans considers.

(2) Dealing Collison for Trevor Ariza was inane.

[Diesel]

None of those examples are in any way comparable. Kobe Bryant was a 13th pick at the time, not a superstar like Chris Paul. Jason Kidd was the superstar in that deal, and he was traded for a younger and cheaper player. In the Billups-Iverson trade, detroit was the one trying to dump salary, so they traded him for Iverson, which was an expiring deal.

This isn't hard to understand. A team that is considering dumping a guy who is an MVP candidate to save money isn't going to trade that player for someone who has FOUR TIMES the amount of money left on his contract. A team that is considering rebuilding full time isn't going to dump their only star for a player that is 4 years older and a lot worse. New Orleans would rather see him walk than take on Joe Johnson. IF they trade him they will not get equal value, but they most definitely will NOT contradict what they are trying to do. Teams only accept lesser value when it involves reducing salary or getting younger, and Joe Johnson would do neither.

First off, don't overplay Paul. I love the guy but MVP candidate?? Uhm? Let me know when Lebron, Wade, Kobe, Durant, Melo, Howard, and Dirk fall off. In fact, let me know the next time NO sniffs the second round of the playoffs?

Secondly. As I said before, there haven't been occasions until recently that players under contract demand a trade in the middle of their contract. Especially not superstars. When you can recreate those conditions, then we can talk about same situation.

[dlpin]

That was an unfortunate lead to discussing Collison, but Diesel has two valid points here:

(1) We should be in the conversation on Paul because we have a variety of assets (young stud pre-extension, young stud post-extension, all-star, 6th MOY with expiring deal, etc.) that should put us in with the contenders for any deal New Orleans considers.

(2) Dealing Collison for Trevor Ariza was inane.

If the discussion is, say, Horford for Chris Paul, it'd still be unlikely, but at least it would be plausible and possible. I don't think that NO would do it, but something like Crawford and Horford for Chris Paul would at least make some sense (i.e., young players and expiring deals for a superstar).

Joe Johnson for Chris Paul makes absolutely no sense. It would be very hard getting equal value for Joe Johnson given his age and amount of money left on his deal, and it would be impossible to get more than equal value for him.

[Diesel]

That was an unfortunate lead to discussing Collison, but Diesel has two valid points here:

(1) We should be in the conversation on Paul because we have a variety of assets (young stud pre-extension, young stud post-extension, all-star, 6th MOY with expiring deal, etc.) that should put us in with the contenders for any deal New Orleans considers.

(2) Dealing Collison for Trevor Ariza was inane.

Along these lines, i have heard Smoove/Craw for CP3 and Horf Craw for CP3 of course appropriate filler added. However, I'm not sold on the chemistry.

I'm not serious about trading Joe but I do think that it's not a no brainer (in this situ) that Joe not be discussed.

Joe is still in his prime. He's still at least 21, 5, and 5. He's still a player that can be built around. He's still an ironman. NO without Paul is nothing. They would have to rebuild. With their fanbase, they would need to rebuild rapidly (no time to wait on a draft pick or to shop positions). Joe being from Ark might be able to help the fanbase.

[dlpin]

First off, don't overplay Paul. I love the guy but MVP candidate?? Uhm? Let me know when Lebron, Wade, Kobe, Durant, Melo, Howard, and Dirk fall off. In fact, let me know the next time NO sniffs the second round of the playoffs?

Secondly. As I said before, there haven't been occasions until recently that players under contract demand a trade in the middle of their contract. Especially not superstars. When you can recreate those conditions, then we can talk about same situation.

Chris Paul was 2nd in mvp voting at 22 in 2008, fifth at 23 at in 2009. That is by definition MVP candidate.

Kobe, Shaq, KG all demanded trades, either publicly or internally. Kobe didn't get traded, Shaq and KG did, and neither of those were for older, higher paid athletes.

How hard is it to understand, really, that New Orleans would be better off hanging on to Chris Paul for 2 seasons and letting him walk for nothing than trading for a 29 year old guard who has 120+ million left on his contract? This whole thing started as them trying to save money, and if they lost Chris Paul they would choose to rebuild. A 29 year old guard that is owed the most money in the league is not how you rebuild, especially if you want to save money.

The hawks would have a hard time trading Joe Johnson for even a younger borderline all star, never mind a younger player who will likely be either 1st team or 2nd team all nba the rest of his career.

[Diesel]

If the discussion is, say, Horford for Chris Paul, it'd still be unlikely, but at least it would be plausible and possible. I don't think that NO would do it, but something like Crawford and Horford for Chris Paul would at least make some sense (i.e., young players and expiring deals for a superstar).

Joe Johnson for Chris Paul makes absolutely no sense. It would be very hard getting equal value for Joe Johnson given his age and amount of money left on his deal, and it would be impossible to get more than equal value for him.

You post as if NO is a stable market.

N.O. is a team that made a deal with their state. If their attendance fails then there deal will be dissolved.

They don't have time to do another rebuild. They will need a player that can keep them in the playoff conversation. That's the reason that they didn't trade Paul in the offseason. They needed the season ticket holders to commit and nobody is going to commit to 2 unproven rookies, an ending contract and 3 1st round draft picks. As you know that means piss poor basketball. Obviously, they'd rather pay Trevor Ariza than start over??

[Diesel]

Kobe, Shaq, KG all demanded trades, either publicly or internally. Kobe didn't get traded, Shaq and KG did, and neither of those were for older, higher paid athletes.

Funny. When KG demanded a trade, wasn't he the highest paid player in the league??

Are you talking about when Shaq was traded for Ben Wallace? Because Shaq didn't demand a trade from LAL. LAL decided to stick with Kobe.

[dlpin]

You post as if NO is a stable market.

N.O. is a team that made a deal with their state. If their attendance fails then there deal will be dissolved.

They don't have time to do another rebuild. They will need a player that can keep them in the playoff conversation. That's the reason that they didn't trade Paul in the offseason. They needed the season ticket holders to commit and nobody is going to commit to 2 unproven rookies, an ending contract and 3 1st round draft picks. As you know that means piss poor basketball. Obviously, they'd rather pay Trevor Ariza than start over??

None of those things make a Joe Johnson trade any more desirable. Joe Johnson is certainly not good enough to take the rest of New Orleans' team to the playoffs in the west. Not at 29, certainly not at 35. And not at the max.

[dlpin]

Funny. When KG demanded a trade, wasn't he the highest paid player in the league??

Are you talking about when Shaq was traded for Ben Wallace? Because Shaq didn't demand a trade from LAL. LAL decided to stick with Kobe.

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/5397513/

Days after Los Angeles lost this year’s championship series to Detroit, O’Neal demanded to be traded, weary of feuding with Kobe Bryant and feeling disrespected by owner Jerry Buss.