The Moore signing was a mistake; Danny should have waited (split).

[BballTim]

Well we have made a lot of points in this thread. I'm not sure which one you are referring to.

In regards to Mar, I said that that i am not against the signing. But i think it was not filling a "clear need" because we already had backup PGs that were good enough to play the position on a Title winning club and was made because he was the best talent available.

now the question is whether or not the talent is going to make up for not filling the bigger need....

you can slice and dice it however you want BBall, but that is the point i was making in regards to the Mar signing. If it seems that i was saying differently before, then this is me clarifying it.

  I don't see why you can't understand that Sam isn't the player he was even last year, when he was already in decline. Just like bringing back PJ or Horry doesn't mean that they'll play at the same level they did in the past. But, in any case, thanks for clarifying. However, claiming Marbury was talented but that might not make up for filling the biggest need doesn't really bolster your case for signing Smith, a backup pf. He's clearly not the answer as sf either.

[winsomme]

Well we have made a lot of points in this thread. I'm not sure which one you are referring to.

In regards to Mar, I said that that i am not against the signing. But i think it was not filling a "clear need" because we already had backup PGs that were good enough to play the position on a Title winning club and was made because he was the best talent available.

now the question is whether or not the talent is going to make up for not filling the bigger need....

you can slice and dice it however you want BBall, but that is the point i was making in regards to the Mar signing. If it seems that i was saying differently before, then this is me clarifying it.

  I don't see why you can't understand that Sam isn't the player he was even last year, when he was already in decline. Just like bringing back PJ or Horry doesn't mean that they'll play at the same level they did in the past. But, in any case, thanks for clarifying. However, claiming Marbury was talented but that might not make up for filling the biggest need doesn't really bolster your case for signing Smith, a backup pf. He's clearly not the answer as sf either.

Well, it does actually because Smith was the beter of the bigs (Smith v Moore) and IMO would also fill the need of backup big (another with the loss of PJ) better than Moore.

HIs signing would have made even more sense because he's the better player AND better filled the need.

[BballTim]

Well we have made a lot of points in this thread. I'm not sure which one you are referring to.

In regards to Mar, I said that that i am not against the signing. But i think it was not filling a "clear need" because we already had backup PGs that were good enough to play the position on a Title winning club and was made because he was the best talent available.

now the question is whether or not the talent is going to make up for not filling the bigger need....

you can slice and dice it however you want BBall, but that is the point i was making in regards to the Mar signing. If it seems that i was saying differently before, then this is me clarifying it.

  I don't see why you can't understand that Sam isn't the player he was even last year, when he was already in decline. Just like bringing back PJ or Horry doesn't mean that they'll play at the same level they did in the past. But, in any case, thanks for clarifying. However, claiming Marbury was talented but that might not make up for filling the biggest need doesn't really bolster your case for signing Smith, a backup pf. He's clearly not the answer as sf either.

Well, it does actually because Smith was the beter of the bigs (Smith v Moore) and IMO would also fill the need of backup big (another with the loss of PJ) better than Moore.

HIs signing would have made even more sense because he's the better player AND better filled the need.

  You're just talking in circles.

[winsomme]

Well we have made a lot of points in this thread. I'm not sure which one you are referring to.

In regards to Mar, I said that that i am not against the signing. But i think it was not filling a "clear need" because we already had backup PGs that were good enough to play the position on a Title winning club and was made because he was the best talent available.

now the question is whether or not the talent is going to make up for not filling the bigger need....

you can slice and dice it however you want BBall, but that is the point i was making in regards to the Mar signing. If it seems that i was saying differently before, then this is me clarifying it.

  I don't see why you can't understand that Sam isn't the player he was even last year, when he was already in decline. Just like bringing back PJ or Horry doesn't mean that they'll play at the same level they did in the past. But, in any case, thanks for clarifying. However, claiming Marbury was talented but that might not make up for filling the biggest need doesn't really bolster your case for signing Smith, a backup pf. He's clearly not the answer as sf either.

Well, it does actually because Smith was the beter of the bigs (Smith v Moore) and IMO would also fill the need of backup big (another with the loss of PJ) better than Moore.

HIs signing would have made even more sense because he's the better player AND better filled the need.

  You're just talking in circles.

how so?

[winsomme]

let's try this BBall.

we had two "clear" needs based on losing PJ and Posey.

Smith would have been a great signing because he replaces PJ and is better than the player we actually picked up to fill the role.

Mar is a decent signing because he was the most talented player out there but not a great signing because it didn't fill one of the "clear" needs.

[BudweiserCeltic]

let's try this BBall.

we had two "clear" needs based on losing PJ and Posey.

Things don't work that way, sorry. It ignores improvement on players already on the roster for example... no matter how the columnist might want you to buy into it.

[BballTim]

let's try this BBall.

we had two "clear" needs based on losing PJ and Posey.

Things don't work that way, sorry. It ignores improvement on players already on the roster for example... no matter how the columnist might want you to buy into it.

  It also ignores things like players getting older. Once again, since you refuse to see things like Cassell being below Pruitt on the depth chart or the fact that people like Pierce and Tony Allen often run the offense when Eddie's playing as a sign that we might need a backup pg, only because we scraped by with them last year, this discussion is a waste of time.

[winsomme]

let's try this BBall.

we had two "clear" needs based on losing PJ and Posey.

Things don't work that way, sorry. It ignores improvement on players already on the roster for example... no matter how the columnist might want you to buy into it.

  It also ignores things like players getting older. Once again, since you refuse to see things like Cassell being below Pruitt on the depth chart or the fact that people like Pierce and Tony Allen often run the offense when Eddie's playing as a sign that we might need a backup pg, only because we scraped by with them last year, this discussion is a waste of time.

and if you refuse to acknowledge not having a player at a particular position making it much more of a need....then i concur this is a waste of time....

[BballTim]

let's try this BBall.

we had two "clear" needs based on losing PJ and Posey.

Things don't work that way, sorry. It ignores improvement on players already on the roster for example... no matter how the columnist might want you to buy into it.

  It also ignores things like players getting older. Once again, since you refuse to see things like Cassell being below Pruitt on the depth chart or the fact that people like Pierce and Tony Allen often run the offense when Eddie's playing as a sign that we might need a backup pg, only because we scraped by with them last year, this discussion is a waste of time.

and if you refuse to acknowledge not having a player at a particular position making it much more of a need....then i concur this is a waste of time....

  But won't we have players at backup sf for the playoffs?

[cordobes]

One can always use upgrades at every position.

But our backup wings are both injured for at least another month, one of them is more of a tweener who, due to being relatively slow-footed, is better suited to play small and perimeter oriented PFs than big wings, the other is more of a guard, who's been inconsistent and injury-prone his all career and that even defensively has been underwhelming this season, accordingly to the team's coaching staff and that is a bad fit when paired together with the starting PG because they both lack a reliable jump-shot.

[winsomme]

let's try this BBall.

we had two "clear" needs based on losing PJ and Posey.

Things don't work that way, sorry. It ignores improvement on players already on the roster for example... no matter how the columnist might want you to buy into it.

  It also ignores things like players getting older. Once again, since you refuse to see things like Cassell being below Pruitt on the depth chart or the fact that people like Pierce and Tony Allen often run the offense when Eddie's playing as a sign that we might need a backup pg, only because we scraped by with them last year, this discussion is a waste of time.

the craziest thing about this whole thing BBall is that your line of inquiry is into the Mar signing. a signing i actually support, and totally ignores the one i don't support...

you're trying to force me to admit that PG was a huge need...to what end? I support the signing. I'm just not as enthused as you...

[winsomme]

let's try this BBall.

we had two "clear" needs based on losing PJ and Posey.

Things don't work that way, sorry. It ignores improvement on players already on the roster for example... no matter how the columnist might want you to buy into it.

  It also ignores things like players getting older. Once again, since you refuse to see things like Cassell being below Pruitt on the depth chart or the fact that people like Pierce and Tony Allen often run the offense when Eddie's playing as a sign that we might need a backup pg, only because we scraped by with them last year, this discussion is a waste of time.

and if you refuse to acknowledge not having a player at a particular position making it much more of a need....then i concur this is a waste of time....

  But won't we have players at backup sf for the playoffs?

I have no idea. the two most likely players are out. One with surgery and one with PCS....total question marks...

[BballTim]

One can always use upgrades at every position.

But our backup wings are both injured for at least another month, one of them is more of a tweener who's, due to being relatively slow-footed, is better suited to play small and perimeter oriented PFs than big wings, the other is more of a guard, who's been inconsistent and injury-prone his all career and that even defensively has been underwhelming this season, accordingly to the team's coaching staff and that is a bad fit when paired together with the starting PG because they both lack a reliable jump-shot.

  I heard Doc say that Tony's defense wasn't what it could be, which is outstanding. He didn't say that it was poor, I don't know that he even said it was as bad as average. Just not what it could be. He's still a good defender.

[BballTim]

let's try this BBall.

we had two "clear" needs based on losing PJ and Posey.

Things don't work that way, sorry. It ignores improvement on players already on the roster for example... no matter how the columnist might want you to buy into it.

  It also ignores things like players getting older. Once again, since you refuse to see things like Cassell being below Pruitt on the depth chart or the fact that people like Pierce and Tony Allen often run the offense when Eddie's playing as a sign that we might need a backup pg, only because we scraped by with them last year, this discussion is a waste of time.

the craziest thing about this whole thing BBall is that your line of inquiry is into the Mar signing. a signing i actually support, and totally ignores the one i don't support...

you're trying to force me to admit that PG was a huge need...to what end? I support the signing. I'm just not as enthused as you...

  I hate having to keep summarizing the discussions because you lose track of the subject. I'm pretty much done with this one, but this snippet will give you the gist of what it was about:

so you defend the Mar signing because he was the better player, but you defend the Moore signing because he more filled the need?

  Which part do you disagree with?

choosing "need" in regards to signing Moore because i'm not even sure that he fills the need.

  Does Joe Smith fill our need for length at backup center? Does Brian Skinner? Does Robert Horry?

well, no...that's the point I'm making in relation to Marbury. If you can't fill a need, then at least target the better player..

  So, again, you were saying (and have said since) that Marbury didn't fill a need, he was just an acquisition based on talent. You finally (somewhat) agreed that we did have a need at backup pg, no doubt because you lost track of the point you were making.

[BudweiserCeltic]

One can always use upgrades at every position.

But our backup wings are both injured for at least another month, one of them is more of a tweener who's, due to being relatively slow-footed, is better suited to play small and perimeter oriented PFs than big wings, the other is more of a guard, who's been inconsistent and injury-prone his all career and that even defensively has been underwhelming this season, accordingly to the team's coaching staff and that is a bad fit when paired together with the starting PG because they both lack a reliable jump-shot.

  I heard Doc say that Tony's defense wasn't what it could be, which is outstanding. He didn't say that it was poor, I don't know that he even said it was as bad as average. Just not what it could be. He's still a good defender.

Exactly, the point I've been making about that quote specifically and the misuse of it. Tib's comment was of the same vein.