Keep the core?

[NineOhTheRino]

I define the core as Joe, Josh, Al and Marvin.

Just a simple poll with no wiggle room to gauge where fans stand with the notion of this mystical untouchable core.

Edited January 28, 2011 by NineOhTheRino

[frosgrim]

I do think it is time to juggle the lineup to get better at PG and even out the roster.

[coachx]

Trade Josh Smith.

Fran Tarkenton was speaking this morning on Ocho Conco and T.O. He said any time a team / coach sacrifices principle for talent you lose in the end.

I know there is a tipping point where talent wins out but I don't think Josh Smith is at that tipping point. I think the locker-room is tired of Smith's antics, immaturity, decision making, and shot selection and I know the coach can't control him.

Edited January 28, 2011 by coachx

[macdaddy]

I was going to vote yes then i saw you included Marvin??? If that's the case then i'd vote no but i don't consider Marv part of the core. Everyone's down on Smoove because he played like crap last game. If you're going to wait 5 years for Marvin to do ANYTHING I think we'd have some patience for Smoove since he he is a huge contributor. Should he have figured out what his game is by now? Yes. If you are going to give Woody a bunch of credit for getting Smoove to not shoot 3s for one season then dog him for having this talent for 5 years and not teaching him how to play the offensive game.

Sorry, I digress. I'd keep Joe/Smoove/Horf unless Joe or Smoove will bring us Cp3 or Deron.

[AHF]

Keep the core if you can't trade them for better pieces. Same answer as always.

You can't answer this "yes" or "no" without context. It is like asking if you should keep Horford. If you are being offered Lebron, the answer is "no make the trade!" If the best guy you can get for him is Zach Randolph, the answer is "yes, keep Horford."

[Watchman]

Keep the core if you can't trade them for better pieces. Same answer as always.

You can't answer this "yes" or "no" without context. It is like asking if you should keep Horford. If you are being offered Lebron, the answer is "no make the trade!" If the best guy you can get for him is Zach Randolph, the answer is "yes, keep Horford."

I'd trade Smith for Randolph in a heartbeat.

[HawkItus]

I'm at the point where I'd make a trade for the sake of change. Addition by substraction maybe isn't good math, but it is great for geating a hold of a household.

[AHF]

I'd trade Smith for Randolph in a heartbeat.

I'd trade Jason Collins for him but my point was that I clearly wouldn't deal Horford for Randolph and so you need context. In fact, your comment makes that clear. "Would you trade for Zach Randolph?" You have to know who they want before you can answer "yes" or "no."

[MaceCase]

This core is simply not championship calibre all while sucking up a tremendous amount of caproom. I simply do not have the view that "player x should only be traded for a player ten times his worth because that's how good I think he is." It's asinine. If any of these players were that good then we wouldn't be questioning the longterm viability of this core but truth is that they have maxed out both talentwise and contractually. If there are a few "lesser" non superstar pieces available that will not only better balance the team but also give it financial flexibility in the future then you take it.

[Watchman]

I'd trade Jason Collins for him but my point was that I clearly wouldn't deal Horford for Randolph and so you need context. In fact, your comment makes that clear. "Would you trade for Zach Randolph?" You have to know who they want before you can answer "yes" or "no."

My point was that no, I would not trade Horford for Randolph, but I'd definitely trade Smith for Randolph.

[AHF]

My point was that no, I would not trade Horford for Randolph, but I'd definitely trade Smith for Randolph.

Exactly. That is why you can't answer the question without context.

[NineOhTheRino]

I'm at the point where I'd make a trade for the sake of change. Addition by substraction maybe isn't good math, but it is great for geating a hold of a household.

It's bad as a fan when you lose hope. I honestly had more interest in the future during the 13 win season. This team is not winning a title so what's the point? At least with the bad team you thought about drafting a transcending player in the lottery to lead you to the promise land.

Edited January 28, 2011 by NineOhTheRino

[AHF]

No one is untouchable in my mind. We should keep them unless we can get something better back (players, cap relief, picks, etc.).

[capstone21]

My point was that no, I would not trade Horford for Randolph, but I'd definitely trade Smith for Randolph.

Randolph is the prime example of a player who puts up great stats but does nothing to help his team win. I would not trade anyone of worth for him.

[Watchman]

Randolph is the prime example of a player who puts up great stats but does nothing to help his team win. I would not trade anyone of worth for him.

I thought that I was meeting your criteria by trading Smith. At least Randolph has a low-post offensive game and is a tremendous rebounder.

Edited January 28, 2011 by Watchman

[sasuke]

IMO Horford is the only untouchable. We can trade the rest for the right deal.

[MaceCase]

I thought that I was meeting your criteria by trading Smith. At least Randolph has a low-post offensive game and is a tremendous rebounder.

Also has a huge expiring. Something people should be more open to if they ever want to see a superstar on this roster.

[AHF]

IMO Horford is the only untouchable. We can trade the rest for the right deal.

You really wouldn't deal him for Dwight Howard? I am not sure people mean "untouchable" when they say that about any of our players.

[NineOhTheRino]

IMO Horford is the only untouchable. We can trade the rest for the right deal.

He's a good pick n pop player but what else is he? He's nothing special on defense and looks like a fool when he tries to post up. Add in that he seems to be a locker room lawyer and I'll argue that he's right after Marvin on the expendable list.

Edited January 28, 2011 by NineOhTheRino

[AHF]

He's a good pick n pop player but what else is he? He's nothing special on defense and looks like a fool when he tries to post up. Add in that he seems to be a locker room lawyer and I'll argue that he's right after Marvin on the expendable list.

Wow! BK and Woody are big-time talents but Horford is nearly as expendable as Marvin?!?