Carmelo Anthony Free Agency Watch

Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

1) Yah
20
28%
2) Nay
28
40%
3) Not only no but hell no
22
31%
 
Total votes : 70

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Vasashi17 on Mon Jan 06, 2014 1:58 pm

BTW, I think Pau for Deng should be explored and then you really don't need Melo. If that doesn't come to fruition, then tank to get a high draft pick. Package that (if its not top 3) to the Celts to get Rondo. Sign Melo this summer.

Kobe, Deng, Rondo or Kobe, Melo, Rondo....with a defensive coach hire (ie JVG)....yea all day on that, tank you very much.
Image
User avatar
Vasashi17
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 13018
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2003 11:38 am
Location: Anywhere Purple & Gold

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Rooscooter on Mon Jan 06, 2014 2:07 pm

Lets Go Lakers wrote:
Lakerjones wrote:Kind of on the fence on this one. On the one hand I actually like Melo quite a bit. On the other, I'm not sure he's the guy to build around. But I don't think Love is either. The only guy I am 100% behind building around would be Durant but there's absolutely no guarantee he would come here. I really don't know what direction the FO is going to take. Seems like the complete unknown right now.


History has shown that you need two superstars/stars to win rings (in most cases). I think Love would be a great superstar to complement a star guard like Irving or Westbrook.


History?…. pre-new CBA History is the correct answer. Unless we draft one of these "two needed" superstars we won't be winning any championships if that is the true pre-requisite. Paying two superstars Max money leaves basically nothing for the rest of the team….. and since we will have basically nothing under contract that means we have to pay "retail" for the rest of the team as well…. Even if we get 2 "superstars" the odds of surrounding them with the needed support players are remote. That's why I've advocated trading Pau for pieces for going on 2 years now. We need a quantity of decent players under contract for a few years for continuity as well and what we are doing now is basically turning the team over every year or two in the hopes that a "superstar" becomes magically available in the off seasons. Indiana is doing pretty well right now with no real "superstar". Detroit beat our "superstar" laden team with a group that included only a few multi-time all stars. I'd say there is another way…. just not for the ones with short attention spans.
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 23048
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Lets Go Lakers on Mon Jan 06, 2014 2:17 pm

Rooscooter wrote:
Lets Go Lakers wrote:
Lakerjones wrote:Kind of on the fence on this one. On the one hand I actually like Melo quite a bit. On the other, I'm not sure he's the guy to build around. But I don't think Love is either. The only guy I am 100% behind building around would be Durant but there's absolutely no guarantee he would come here. I really don't know what direction the FO is going to take. Seems like the complete unknown right now.


History has shown that you need two superstars/stars to win rings (in most cases). I think Love would be a great superstar to complement a star guard like Irving or Westbrook.


History?…. pre-new CBA History is the correct answer. Unless we draft one of these "two needed" superstars we won't be winning any championships if that is the true pre-requisite. Paying two superstars Max money leaves basically nothing for the rest of the team….. and since we will have basically nothing under contract that means we have to pay "retail" for the rest of the team as well…. Even if we get 2 "superstars" the odds of surrounding them with the needed support players are remote. That's why I've advocated trading Pau for pieces for going on 2 years now. We need a quantity of decent players under contract for a few years for continuity as well and what we are doing now is basically turning the team over every year or two in the hopes that a "superstar" becomes magically available in the off seasons. Indiana is doing pretty well right now with no real "superstar". Detroit beat our "superstar" laden team with a group that included only a few multi-time all stars. I'd say there is another way…. just not for the ones with short attention spans.


The Heat have 3 max contract type players (to some extent). It's definitely possible to have 2 max contract players and fill the rest with contributors as long as you do it right. The Pacers do have a superstar player and his name is Paul George and he will get paid accordingly in due time. And Hibbert isn't that far removed from being a max player.

The 03-04 Pistons are one of the rare exceptions that won without 2 superstars/stars. History has shown that 95% of the time, you need two superstars/stars. An alpha dog and a second fiddle star. That's just how it goes in the NBA.
User avatar
Lets Go Lakers

 
Posts: 2877
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:25 pm

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby XXIV on Mon Jan 06, 2014 2:46 pm

^ The Heat were formed pre-new CBA so they aren't the greatest example. There has even been discussions on how the Heat may not be able to keep the Big 3 together for much longer.
XXIV

 
Posts: 6390
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 11:20 am
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby lakerfan2 on Mon Jan 06, 2014 2:56 pm

It's not impossible. An example of how it MAY work post-CBA with two superstars (and Kobe's bloated contract). *and Nash is retired (medically)

$58M Cap:
Kobe - $23.5M
Melo - $21M
Jordan Hill - $5.5M
Farmar - $3M
Young - $4.1M
Sacre - $900k

MLE:
Wes Johnson $3M
Meeks $2M

Bi-Annual Exception:
Maxiel $1.6M

Minimum:
Marshall $1M

Farmar/Marshall
Kobe/Meeks
Johnson/Young
Melo/Maxiell
Hill/Sacre
#OURHOUSE
User avatar
lakerfan2

 
Posts: 9920
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 5:23 pm

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Rooscooter on Mon Jan 06, 2014 3:23 pm

Lets Go Lakers wrote:
Rooscooter wrote:
Lets Go Lakers wrote:
Lakerjones wrote:Kind of on the fence on this one. On the one hand I actually like Melo quite a bit. On the other, I'm not sure he's the guy to build around. But I don't think Love is either. The only guy I am 100% behind building around would be Durant but there's absolutely no guarantee he would come here. I really don't know what direction the FO is going to take. Seems like the complete unknown right now.


History has shown that you need two superstars/stars to win rings (in most cases). I think Love would be a great superstar to complement a star guard like Irving or Westbrook.


History?…. pre-new CBA History is the correct answer. Unless we draft one of these "two needed" superstars we won't be winning any championships if that is the true pre-requisite. Paying two superstars Max money leaves basically nothing for the rest of the team….. and since we will have basically nothing under contract that means we have to pay "retail" for the rest of the team as well…. Even if we get 2 "superstars" the odds of surrounding them with the needed support players are remote. That's why I've advocated trading Pau for pieces for going on 2 years now. We need a quantity of decent players under contract for a few years for continuity as well and what we are doing now is basically turning the team over every year or two in the hopes that a "superstar" becomes magically available in the off seasons. Indiana is doing pretty well right now with no real "superstar". Detroit beat our "superstar" laden team with a group that included only a few multi-time all stars. I'd say there is another way…. just not for the ones with short attention spans.


The Heat have 3 max contract type players (to some extent). It's definitely possible to have 2 max contract players and fill the rest with contributors as long as you do it right. The Pacers do have a superstar player and his name is Paul George and he will get paid accordingly in due time. And Hibbert isn't that far removed from being a max player.

The 03-04 Pistons are one of the rare exceptions that won without 2 superstars/stars. History has shown that 95% of the time, you need two superstars/stars. An alpha dog and a second fiddle star. That's just how it goes in the NBA.


When did the Heat sign those 3 and when did the new CBA take effect? We must define "superstar" differently…. neither George or Hibbert are that IMHO. It takes post season success, intestinal fortitude and experience to be that for me. That's why CP3, Melo, Howard and several others don't qualify for that label with me.

As for "history" again…. tell me just how many titles have been won by teams other than the Lakers, Celtics, Bulls and Spurs, Pistons and Heat…. Yes, those teams had multiple stars but if you actually look at where those "stars" came from it's mostly from within…. not through FA and not after this new CBA. "Stars" having success in leading teams don't go into FA….. The "fake" ones do…..
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 23048
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby abeer3 on Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:11 pm

Rooscooter wrote:I'm not sure you can make that assumption so easily…. and signing a guy like Melo at 31 years old for a max deal ties your hands for years to come….. at which time you do the same thing again to keep a "star" on the floor? That's exactly what the Knicks have been doing since the mid 1990's…. they always have a marketable star…. and they never achieve much of anything.

Melo satisfies the need to have a marketable star on the team and very little else IMO…. especially given our circumstances of having a duplicate wing player and no front court whatsoever. We need to spend the money to balance the team. We will have a high scoring shoot first wing player for at least 2 years who is arguable just as good from a total contribution perspective. We will have no front court players which cost a lot more than wings in this league…. and there are far fewer of them as well.

I think we need to go after the best young front court player out there…. that seems to be Monroe this offseason and Love the next.


Monroe's an RFA. odds he leaves are near nil. they'd rather sign & trade him for assets the lakers don't have if they can't afford him.

for love, you have to tank another full year. I just don't love the options for the lakers right now.

it's one thing to say "get a top-notch young big", it's quite another to actually do it. we'll see if the fanbase is patient enough to wait on that. I'm guessing no.

but we've had this discussion already.
abeer3

 
Posts: 10407
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 4:15 pm

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby LakersN4 on Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:14 pm

Rooscooter wrote:
As for "history" again…. tell me just how many titles have been won by teams other than the Lakers, Celtics, Bulls and Spurs, Pistons and Heat…. Yes, those teams had multiple stars but if you actually look at where those "stars" came from it's mostly from within…. not through FA and not after this new CBA. "Stars" having success in leading teams don't go into FA….. The "fake" ones do…..

From within? Shaq was signed as a FA.. Almost our entire core for our last run came via trade (LO, Pau, Ariza)..Ray Allen & KG were both traded for.. The Pistons midseason deal for Sheed is what put them over the top & gave them that ring. Wade's first ring came from them trading for Shaq.. Wade's next 2 came from the big 3 forming though free agency.. The Spurs & Bulls are pretty much the lone examples of teams that built championship teams from within. This notion that guys that hit the FA market or their teams are willing to trade them can't be the piece that puts a team over the top is extremely far off.
LakersN4

 
Posts: 2531
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 2:55 am

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby abeer3 on Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:15 pm

Rooscooter wrote:History?…. pre-new CBA History is the correct answer. Unless we draft one of these "two needed" superstars we won't be winning any championships if that is the true pre-requisite. Paying two superstars Max money leaves basically nothing for the rest of the team….. and since we will have basically nothing under contract that means we have to pay "retail" for the rest of the team as well…. Even if we get 2 "superstars" the odds of surrounding them with the needed support players are remote. That's why I've advocated trading Pau for pieces for going on 2 years now. We need a quantity of decent players under contract for a few years for continuity as well and what we are doing now is basically turning the team over every year or two in the hopes that a "superstar" becomes magically available in the off seasons. Indiana is doing pretty well right now with no real "superstar". Detroit beat our "superstar" laden team with a group that included only a few multi-time all stars. I'd say there is another way…. just not for the ones with short attention spans.


so all the lakers need to do is add 4 guys who are top 10 (at least two of which are top 5) at their position with the 23 million in cap space? I'm not sure they could afford gortat and lowry (two guys who probably don't fit the top-10 designation) for that, much less find a sf and pf.

you have to work within the given parameters. the lakers have kobe under contract and zero assets aside from about 23 million in cap space? what do you do?
abeer3

 
Posts: 10407
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 4:15 pm

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Rooscooter on Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:27 pm

LakersN4 wrote:
Rooscooter wrote:
As for "history" again…. tell me just how many titles have been won by teams other than the Lakers, Celtics, Bulls and Spurs, Pistons and Heat…. Yes, those teams had multiple stars but if you actually look at where those "stars" came from it's mostly from within…. not through FA and not after this new CBA. "Stars" having success in leading teams don't go into FA….. The "fake" ones do…..

From within? Shaq was signed as a FA.. Almost our entire core for our last run came via trade (LO, Pau, Ariza)..Ray Allen & KG were both traded for.. The Pistons midseason deal for Sheed is what put them over the top & gave them that ring. Wade's first ring came from them trading for Shaq.. Wade's next 2 came from the big 3 forming though free agency.. The Spurs & Bulls are pretty much the lone examples of teams that built championship teams from within. This notion that guys that hit the FA market or their teams are willing to trade them can't be the piece that puts a team over the top is extremely far off.


All under a different CBA…. on teams with cores that were either built from within…. NOTE: to trade you have to have assets….. if you don't have them you don't trade for stars or even "key role players". So how do we trade for all those guys again with our team as currently constructed again? The situation we are in is that we have no tradable assets other than Pau and we have just what we can get below the cap to build with. If we sign a max contract it better be the right person because trading them is nearly impossible until their next to last year…. and even then it's not as easy as it used to be…. evidence is right in front of us.
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 23048
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Rooscooter on Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:29 pm

abeer3 wrote:
Rooscooter wrote:History?…. pre-new CBA History is the correct answer. Unless we draft one of these "two needed" superstars we won't be winning any championships if that is the true pre-requisite. Paying two superstars Max money leaves basically nothing for the rest of the team….. and since we will have basically nothing under contract that means we have to pay "retail" for the rest of the team as well…. Even if we get 2 "superstars" the odds of surrounding them with the needed support players are remote. That's why I've advocated trading Pau for pieces for going on 2 years now. We need a quantity of decent players under contract for a few years for continuity as well and what we are doing now is basically turning the team over every year or two in the hopes that a "superstar" becomes magically available in the off seasons. Indiana is doing pretty well right now with no real "superstar". Detroit beat our "superstar" laden team with a group that included only a few multi-time all stars. I'd say there is another way…. just not for the ones with short attention spans.


so all the lakers need to do is add 4 guys who are top 10 (at least two of which are top 5) at their position with the 23 million in cap space? I'm not sure they could afford gortat and lowry (two guys who probably don't fit the top-10 designation) for that, much less find a sf and pf.

you have to work within the given parameters. the lakers have kobe under contract and zero assets aside from about 23 million in cap space? what do you do?


building a team of cohesive parts over building with what ever is available for what we have to spend in a given offseason. One demands a plan and guts…. the other is swinging for the fences ever offseason. Essentially what the Knicks do.
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 23048
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Damian Necronamous on Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:45 pm

If we land a Top 3 pick so we can get Wiggins, Randle or Parker then YAY on Carmelo. Having that duo along with Kobe could make us an elite team.

If we don't land that pick then I'd rather pass and save the money for Kevin Love.
Damian Necronamous

 
Posts: 769
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 6:35 pm

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Center Court on Mon Jan 06, 2014 5:33 pm

Vasashi17 wrote:Melo in, means MDA is out.
Melo is tight with Kobe.
Apparently Melo is also tight with Rondo.
Melo and Rondo are linked according to the media.
Melo is a superstar and there are only a few ahead of him that could do what he does.

Yeah, I'm definitely a yay person on this matter. But I do agree with the naysayers that Melo and Kobe alone can't get it done...you would need that Rondo piece.


Mix in what is a sure lotto pick this year....
User avatar
Center Court

 
Posts: 3177
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:45 pm
Location: @ CL since '04

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby ericdabbs on Mon Jan 06, 2014 6:03 pm

Can't do much next year with Kobe taking up 24 million of the salary cap. I still can't fathom why Lakers decided to offer Kobe so 48 million for 2 years when they haven't even seen him play a game after his Achilles injury.
ericdabbs

 
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 12:50 am

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby 432J on Mon Jan 06, 2014 6:10 pm

i'd take kyrie irving any day over melo
Image
User avatar
432J

 
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Sherbrooke, Quebec

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby karacha on Mon Jan 06, 2014 6:12 pm

432J wrote:i'd take kyrie irving any day over melo


Is he going to be available?
"It's not realistic to get younger and better when you only have the veteran's minimum to offer free agents." :mhihi:

-Troll Kupchak
User avatar
karacha
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 37461
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby purp n gold on Mon Jan 06, 2014 6:16 pm

I think Melo is a good player, and I'm even fairly interested in seeing a Kob-enstein/Melo combo, but I just don't want the Lakers to give him a max contract. He's not a spring chicken and his track record is what it is... mildly successful, then whines and bolts when the chips are down
There are two teams that play in the Staples Center:
the LA Lakers and NBA Clippers.
User avatar
purp n gold

 
Posts: 2339
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 3:39 am

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby LakersN4 on Mon Jan 06, 2014 7:05 pm

karacha wrote:
432J wrote:i'd take kyrie irving any day over melo


Is he going to be available?

He can become a restricted free agent in 15/16 (Cavs match any offer of course) or play out his QO & be unrestricted in 16/17 (when Durant could also hit the market).

What would make signing Melo an absolute no brainer would be if he accepted 2 years guaranteed with an ETO on the 3rd.. If we can get 2 years of Melo + a chance to chase Kyrie & Durant in 2016, I could care less about missing out on Love.
LakersN4

 
Posts: 2531
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 2:55 am

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby karacha on Mon Jan 06, 2014 7:07 pm

So, basically, that's like saying: "I'd take Bron and Durant before Melo".
"It's not realistic to get younger and better when you only have the veteran's minimum to offer free agents." :mhihi:

-Troll Kupchak
User avatar
karacha
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 37461
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Lets Go Lakers on Tue Jan 07, 2014 7:15 am

Rooscooter wrote:
Lets Go Lakers wrote:
Rooscooter wrote:
Lets Go Lakers wrote:
Lakerjones wrote:Kind of on the fence on this one. On the one hand I actually like Melo quite a bit. On the other, I'm not sure he's the guy to build around. But I don't think Love is either. The only guy I am 100% behind building around would be Durant but there's absolutely no guarantee he would come here. I really don't know what direction the FO is going to take. Seems like the complete unknown right now.


History has shown that you need two superstars/stars to win rings (in most cases). I think Love would be a great superstar to complement a star guard like Irving or Westbrook.


History?…. pre-new CBA History is the correct answer. Unless we draft one of these "two needed" superstars we won't be winning any championships if that is the true pre-requisite. Paying two superstars Max money leaves basically nothing for the rest of the team….. and since we will have basically nothing under contract that means we have to pay "retail" for the rest of the team as well…. Even if we get 2 "superstars" the odds of surrounding them with the needed support players are remote. That's why I've advocated trading Pau for pieces for going on 2 years now. We need a quantity of decent players under contract for a few years for continuity as well and what we are doing now is basically turning the team over every year or two in the hopes that a "superstar" becomes magically available in the off seasons. Indiana is doing pretty well right now with no real "superstar". Detroit beat our "superstar" laden team with a group that included only a few multi-time all stars. I'd say there is another way…. just not for the ones with short attention spans.


The Heat have 3 max contract type players (to some extent). It's definitely possible to have 2 max contract players and fill the rest with contributors as long as you do it right. The Pacers do have a superstar player and his name is Paul George and he will get paid accordingly in due time. And Hibbert isn't that far removed from being a max player.

The 03-04 Pistons are one of the rare exceptions that won without 2 superstars/stars. History has shown that 95% of the time, you need two superstars/stars. An alpha dog and a second fiddle star. That's just how it goes in the NBA.


When did the Heat sign those 3 and when did the new CBA take effect? We must define "superstar" differently…. neither George or Hibbert are that IMHO. It takes post season success, intestinal fortitude and experience to be that for me. That's why CP3, Melo, Howard and several others don't qualify for that label with me.

As for "history" again…. tell me just how many titles have been won by teams other than the Lakers, Celtics, Bulls and Spurs, Pistons and Heat…. Yes, those teams had multiple stars but if you actually look at where those "stars" came from it's mostly from within…. not through FA and not after this new CBA. "Stars" having success in leading teams don't go into FA….. The "fake" ones do…..


Your definition of superstar must mean an all-time great because if CP3 ain't a superstar, no one is. You don't need to have postseason success or intestinal fortitude to be a superstar. Just a player who performs at the highest level for years. CP3, Melo and Howard have done that. And Paul George is on his way.

As for your second paragraph, we actually acquired Shaq and Gasol. We acquired Jabbar and Wilt. The Heat acquired LeBron and Bosh. The Celtics acquired Garnett and Allen. The Bulls acquired Rodman. The Heat acquired Shaq. The Pistons acquired Billups. The Rockets acquired Drexler. The 76ers acquired Moses Malone. So a good amount of the "history" has shown that you CAN win championships by acquiring superstars.
User avatar
Lets Go Lakers

 
Posts: 2877
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:25 pm

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Rooscooter on Tue Jan 07, 2014 7:28 am

Lets Go Lakers wrote:Your definition of superstar must mean an all-time great because if CP3 ain't a superstar, no one is. You don't need to have postseason success or intestinal fortitude to be a superstar. Just a player who performs at the highest level for years. CP3, Melo and Howard have done that. And Paul George is on his way.

As for your second paragraph, we actually acquired Shaq and Gasol. We acquired Jabbar and Wilt. The Heat acquired LeBron and Bosh. The Celtics acquired Garnett and Allen. The Bulls acquired Rodman. The Heat acquired Shaq. The 76ers acquired Moses Malone. So a good amount of the "history" has shown that you CAN win championships by acquiring superstars.


Yes….. Superstar is an all time great IMHO. Paul is a stat hound that can be easily nullified in the playoffs. History has shown that again and again.

…..and they did that under much different financial rules….. something I've said 3 times to you that you have ignored 3 times.
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 23048
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Lets Go Lakers on Tue Jan 07, 2014 7:37 am

Rooscooter wrote:
Lets Go Lakers wrote:Your definition of superstar must mean an all-time great because if CP3 ain't a superstar, no one is. You don't need to have postseason success or intestinal fortitude to be a superstar. Just a player who performs at the highest level for years. CP3, Melo and Howard have done that. And Paul George is on his way.

As for your second paragraph, we actually acquired Shaq and Gasol. We acquired Jabbar and Wilt. The Heat acquired LeBron and Bosh. The Celtics acquired Garnett and Allen. The Bulls acquired Rodman. The Heat acquired Shaq. The 76ers acquired Moses Malone. So a good amount of the "history" has shown that you CAN win championships by acquiring superstars.


Yes….. Superstar is an all time great IMHO. Paul is a stat hound that can be easily nullified in the playoffs. History has shown that again and again.

…..and they did that under much different financial rules….. something I've said 3 times to you that you have ignored 3 times.


LOL at your Paul response. The guy is absolutely one of the best PGs ever. Yeah, his lack of postseason success does hinder his overall legacy somewhat but watching this guy on a nightly basis, he's special.

So what really is your point about acquiring superstars and winning rings? That you can't acquire two superstars in today's CBA agreement? Or that teams who acquire superstars via trade or FA can't win rings (I eliminated that notion).
User avatar
Lets Go Lakers

 
Posts: 2877
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:25 pm

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Rooscooter on Tue Jan 07, 2014 8:03 am

Lets Go Lakers wrote:
Rooscooter wrote:
Lets Go Lakers wrote:Your definition of superstar must mean an all-time great because if CP3 ain't a superstar, no one is. You don't need to have postseason success or intestinal fortitude to be a superstar. Just a player who performs at the highest level for years. CP3, Melo and Howard have done that. And Paul George is on his way.

As for your second paragraph, we actually acquired Shaq and Gasol. We acquired Jabbar and Wilt. The Heat acquired LeBron and Bosh. The Celtics acquired Garnett and Allen. The Bulls acquired Rodman. The Heat acquired Shaq. The 76ers acquired Moses Malone. So a good amount of the "history" has shown that you CAN win championships by acquiring superstars.


Yes….. Superstar is an all time great IMHO. Paul is a stat hound that can be easily nullified in the playoffs. History has shown that again and again.

…..and they did that under much different financial rules….. something I've said 3 times to you that you have ignored 3 times.


LOL at your Paul response. The guy is absolutely one of the best PGs ever. Yeah, his lack of postseason success does hinder his overall legacy somewhat but watching this guy on a nightly basis, he's special.

So what really is your point about acquiring superstars and winning rings? That you can't acquire two superstars in today's CBA agreement? Or that teams who acquire superstars via trade or FA can't win rings (I eliminated that notion).



Last try…. Paul is like Howard and Melo in that they are not super stars in my opinion…. they are like Iverson…. great individual players but will have to "tag along" to ever win a championship. If your impressed by stats or playing Fantasy this is your guy…. if not and you want to follow a team to success in the playoffs then these guys will disappoint over and over again. If we're comparing Paul to the all time greats then I'll compile a list of PG's I've seen personally over 40+ years of watching the game that have been better than Paul. I'd take Iverson over him and you would too if you are looking at stats…. All of this is before the fact that he's got a character flaw in that he focuses a large part of his game on tricking the officials. Beautifully that has backfired and he injured his shoulder flopping. Karma is a great thing.

You "eliminated nothing"….. 2004 Lakers and 2012-13 Lakers show that acquiring star players doesn't translate into winning championships. The Heat are the exception….. not the rule. The Knicks during the late 90 and early 2000's acquired several top star players and sucked. Dallas won a championship with one legit star player and an over the hill great PG…. Detroit spanked our superstar team in 04. Detroit in the late 80's beat the crap out our team with one aged all time great and a bunch of great role players. Seattle won a chip with no HOFer's, Golden State won in the 70's with a similar team. Name a player on Portland's championship team other than Walton. There is plenty of "history" out there to show that teams can win with one alpha and a well balanced team behind them.

Finally, the new CBA makes what you flippantly say nearly impossible. Star players have a huge incentive to stay where they are (more per and an extra year). As I said before…. true superstars…. the ones that lead teams to championships don't move because they are where they want to be (winning). The ones who move are running from failure 9 times out of 10 or are looking for money they can't get where they are.
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 23048
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Lets Go Lakers on Tue Jan 07, 2014 8:17 am

Rooscooter wrote:
Lets Go Lakers wrote:
Rooscooter wrote:
Lets Go Lakers wrote:Your definition of superstar must mean an all-time great because if CP3 ain't a superstar, no one is. You don't need to have postseason success or intestinal fortitude to be a superstar. Just a player who performs at the highest level for years. CP3, Melo and Howard have done that. And Paul George is on his way.

As for your second paragraph, we actually acquired Shaq and Gasol. We acquired Jabbar and Wilt. The Heat acquired LeBron and Bosh. The Celtics acquired Garnett and Allen. The Bulls acquired Rodman. The Heat acquired Shaq. The 76ers acquired Moses Malone. So a good amount of the "history" has shown that you CAN win championships by acquiring superstars.


Yes….. Superstar is an all time great IMHO. Paul is a stat hound that can be easily nullified in the playoffs. History has shown that again and again.

…..and they did that under much different financial rules….. something I've said 3 times to you that you have ignored 3 times.


LOL at your Paul response. The guy is absolutely one of the best PGs ever. Yeah, his lack of postseason success does hinder his overall legacy somewhat but watching this guy on a nightly basis, he's special.

So what really is your point about acquiring superstars and winning rings? That you can't acquire two superstars in today's CBA agreement? Or that teams who acquire superstars via trade or FA can't win rings (I eliminated that notion).



Last try…. Paul is like Howard and Melo in that they are not super stars in my opinion…. they are like Iverson…. great individual players but will have to "tag along" to ever win a championship. If your impressed by stats or playing Fantasy this is your guy…. if not and you want to follow a team to success in the playoffs then these guys will disappoint over and over again. If we're comparing Paul to the all time greats

You "eliminated nothing"….. 2004 Lakers and 2012-13 Lakers show that acquiring star players doesn't translate into winning championships. The Heat are the exception….. not the rule. The Knicks during the late 90 and early 2000's acquired several top star players and sucked. Dallas won a championship with one legit star player and an over the hill great PG…. Detroit spanked our superstar team in 04. Detroit in the late 80's beat the crap out our team with one aged all time great and a bunch of great role players. Seattle won a chip with no HOFer's, Golden State won in the 70's with a similar team. Name a player on Portland's championship team other than Walton. There is plenty of "history" out there to show that teams can win with one alpha and a well balanced team behind them.

Finally, the new CBA makes what you flippantly say nearly impossible. Star players have a huge incentive to stay where they are (more per and an extra year). As I said before…. true superstars…. the ones that lead teams to championships don't move because they are where they want to be (winning). The ones who move are running from failure 9 times out of 10 or are looking for money they can't get where they are.


LOL. Do you even read my responses or do you just start typing? Because I clearly laid out to you MANY examples of teams that won multiple championships and established dynasties by acquiring superstars from other teams. Yet you still seem to have this separate category for a "true superstar". Well, are the players I mentioned above not "true superstars"? Because they happen to be some of the best ever, like Jabbar, Shaq, Wilt and LeBron. They all switched teams and won rings.

And I never said you can't win a ring with just one alpha dog and a great supporting cast. I only said that about 95% of the time, history has shown that championship winning teams have 2 superstars/stars. And that is absolutely the truth.

And if Iverson isn't a superstar, I don't know who is. He is one of the best scorers in NBA history, won a regular season MVP and took a pathetic 76ers team to the Finals.

I'll just stop here.
User avatar
Lets Go Lakers

 
Posts: 2877
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:25 pm

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby BadCoaching on Tue Jan 07, 2014 8:24 am

As it is right now, I don't see adding Carmelo and becoming a great team. Carmelo isn't going to improve the in-the-paint situation and lack of inside defense. Carmelo does help Kobe, obviously, with his ability to score, teams can't just double or triple Kobe anymore in the 4th quarter.. which is a huge reason Kobe was so tired and not as successful in the last few seasons to close a lot of games out. But will Kobe be the key to this team again? Hard to say it but it's certainly looking like he may not be.

The biggest problem is the costs associated to Melo and he's simply not a franchise player and offers no credible evidence stating otherwise. He fills seats and scores a lot of points but he doesn't win playoffs games.

I want to see Kobe able to play 15 games in a row without another injury before we go and waste the rest of the loot on pudgy.
User avatar
BadCoaching

 
Posts: 4223
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 9:07 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Lakers Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 7 guests

cron
Advertise Here | Privacy Policy | ©2008 Sculu Sports. Come Strong.