Would N.O. really Deal Chris Paul?

[winsomme]

It just so happens that when Rondo plays bad the Celtics usually struggle. It just so happens that when he does what he's supposed to do the Celtics usually flourish.

"it just so happens"? what does that mean?

it just so happens that when CP plays bad NO struggles too....the difference is when NO struggles you want to attribute it largely to something other than CP. you don't do that with Rondo even though both are in charge of running their teams respective offenses...

CP coming here would totally change the dynamic of our offense. now we would have a PG that needed to both score and play-make. and given the meltdown of NO last season there is merit IMO to the concern that changing the function of that position on the Cs could adversely alter how our team performs.

whether CP is more consistent or better than Rondo (things i'm not challenging) is largely irrelevant because CP would not just be replacing him.

[Cajun Celtic]

SIAP

"There is no chance of him getting traded,'' Weber said sternly. "I don't know how to say it any stronger, but there is just no deal we would contemplate for Chris. I can't speak for Chris, but I think he was talking about the nature of the business and the fact that the question was asked the way it was.''

"I have not nor will I enter any discussions for him,'' Bower said."(Trading Paul) is not going to happen. I think what Chris said just shows his selflessness that he's not different than anyone else on the team.''

http://blog.nola.com/hornetsbeat/20...ard_chri_7.html

[snively]

Rondo got dominated by vastly inferior players against Orlando for example. HE didn't do his job. HE didn't push the pace like he did in Chicago. In the first game against Chicago, even though he had that awesome game, I complained that he wasn't doing his job running the offense. He didn't move the ball as he should. Funny that I wasn't the only one criticizing him in one of the best games of his career, Doc later said pretty much the same thing. And funny too that the next game he did a much better job moving the ball, and coicidentally Ray got into a better shooting rhythm. In the latter, if Ray had missed those shots I wouldn't put any blame on Rondo, but I do put some blame in Ray's performance in the first game on Rondo.

Do you understand what I'm saying now?

Come on, man.  Rondo was not dominated in the Orlando series.  Hyperbole kills your credibility.

[BudweiserCeltic]

It just so happens that when Rondo plays bad the Celtics usually struggle. It just so happens that when he does what he's supposed to do the Celtics usually flourish.

"it just so happens"? what does that mean?

it just so happens that when CP plays bad NO struggles too....the difference is when NO struggles you want to attribute it largely to something other than CP. you don't do that with Rondo even though both are in charge of running their teams respective offenses...

CP coming here would totally change the dynamic of our offense. now we would have a PG that needed to both score and play-make. and given the meltdown of NO last season there is merit IMO to the concern that changing the function of that position on the Cs could adversely alter how our team performs.

whether CP is more consistent or better than Rondo (things i'm not challenging) is largely irrelevant because CP would not just be replacing him.

That's not what I'm doing. Didn't want to post again here, but it's hard you're describing something that I'm not doing. I'm explaining that NO's offensive problems had more to do with poor roster construction, poor health (injured players on the floor) and past contributors not being able to be relied upon. Just compare some of the minutes played from some past contributors like Peterson with what he did in last year's playoffs. That's why your claim of "basically same roster" doesn't hold.

CP3 did a pretty good job pushing the ball and giving people good shots. Was he as good at it as the past playoffs? Hell no. But the offesive struggles weren't because of bad playmaking. Was it subpar to CP3's standards? Completely, but again hardly the problem with their offense.

It's simply two different set of circumstances. I really don't see what's so hard to understand about it.

Rondo has trouble with pace. HE himself admits it. HE himself talked about it during the playoffs. This is nothing new, it has been a problem with him his whole career. So what's the deal? When he does what he's supposed to we play better, when he doesn't we struggle. What's so hard to understand?

The part you might be misunderstanding though is that I fully blame our offensive struggles on Rondo, when I don't. Particularly, I often look to Ray's performance as I think that's the one guy in our team that is very dependand on how Rondo plays. In the Bulls series, when Rondo did what he was supposed to do Ray flourished, when he didn't he struggle. I've been very consistent with this.

In the Orlando series, as poor as I thought Rondo played, I don't blame him for Ray's struggles because in that case Ray had an injury that was clearly bothering him. Even so, Rondo didn't dominate a match-up that he had quite an advantage over, his pace was horrible, his defense was quite bad.

Now, something I do take into account in Rondo's playoff run is that he was hurt. But I simply can't excuse his poor pacing and other offensive problems just because of this simply because they have been consistent problems he's had his whole career wether healthy or not.

The other factor you might not realize is that I put a huge chunk of the blame on Pierce too.

In all, in that Orlando series most of our key players struggled. Clearly, our offensive problems weren't solely Rondo's. A lot of our players played poorly, but that doesn't absolve Rondo from not pushing the ball etc.

Is that a bit more clear now on my stance with Rondo?

Now, as CP3 is concerned, he does all these good things of running an offense consistently well. You think I'm trying to absolve CP3 from the struggles in the playoffs? Fine. Let me clear it up. I'm not. All I'm saying is that you should understand the circumstances under which he was playing. He clearly underperformed, but not to the extent of how bad that offense looked. Him running the offense was hardly the problem even if he wasn't as good as his standards.

With West struggling, Chandler completely lost out there, and Peja missing his shots you've pretty much removed all of CP3's weapon's as far as running an offense is concerned. CP3's main problem during the playoffs is that he was finishing poorly and shooting poorly. Those were his main problems. Hey, did he have some nights where he might've run the team poorly? Absolutely, but it wasn't the problem that plagued the Hornets throughout the playoffs. Maybe it was a factor in that 60 point game. But overall, CP3's playmaking wasn't what caused their poor offense.

It's as if Rondo is moving the ball as he should and Ray starts missing his shots (which happens). I would never blame Rondo for this as long as he does what he should on offense.

So to conclude, I don't blame Rondo for our poor offense in Orlando. I do put a big chunk of the blame solely because he didn't do the things that he was supposed to. BUT, I aknowledge that Ray was hurt that Pierce was tired, and both played like crap regardless of how Rondo played. If Rondo played like he did in Chicago overall, and we struggled offensively in Orlando I wouldn't be putting any blame on him.

I really don't see what's hard to undertand about my stance.

Come on, man.  Rondo was not dominated in the Orlando series.  Hyperbole kills your credibility.

Of course it's a hyperbole. But, PG was a position in which we had a huge advantage in the series and Rondo didn't perform. Rondo can run circles around Alston and grandpa Anthony. But what happened? Rondo played poor defense which allowed these guards to get into the paint and setup Howard and their 3point shooters. That's huge. On offense, Rondo should've penetrated at will against these two. He rarely did, something he did very well in the Chicago series. More clear now?

[mgent]

I think you're both right.
Regardless the Hornets are not a championship team.
I think my main problem with Chris Paul is he does too much.  If we wanted him to fit in where Rondo was, he wouldn't score to the best of his ability, which would be a shame.  He feels a lot like AI who does his best when he has the ball a lot, which I feel is counter-productive to a team sport.  And then if he plays like a team player, that's counter-productive to being the best player he could be.  The good thing about Paul though is he can score AND pass.

You forget that Paul was ASKED to play that role. They had to push him to become the kind of scorer he is currently... he was quite content with distributing the ball.

Efficient scorer, better shooter than Rondo, better free-throw shooter than Rondo... good rebounder, good defense... defenders don't play off him like they do to Rondo, much better decision maker... we can go on and on.

All true, but the gap between Rondo and Paul is not big enough to swallow Ray and Perk.  Paul's a much, much better scorer than Rondo and that makes the rest of his game more effective, but Rondo really isn't that far behind.  His poor man's Paul routine is quite effective (49% shooting, 12 pts, 5 boards, 8 assists, 2 steals in 33mpg vs Paul's 50% shooting, 23 pts, 5 boards, 11 assists and 3 steals in 38 mpg), and Rondo even outplayed him by a wide margin in the playoffs (17-10-10 with better efficiency vs. 16-4-10 for Paul)  Subtract Ray and maybe Perk too and, without the resources to add impact players in their stead, it just wouldn't be worth it.

I'm not even sure that the gap is enough to swallow just Ray. even losing Rondo and Ray is losing a huge chunk of your starting lineup.

It would absolutely not swallow Ray.  Our team is set up perfect, the way teams were meant to be set up:  the point guard runs point and the shooting guard shoots.  If we trade 2 guys for 1 all we're doing is losing.  In NO he HAS to do both for his team, but here he wouldn't have to because Pierce is our main scorer and no one can shoot 3's better than Ray.  It's similar to the reason why AI would never work here.  CP is 2 positions in 1 and AI is 1 position in the wrong one.  We wouldn't want AI in the game with Rondo, and he couldn't play Rondo's role.  The thing with CP is he COULD fill Rondo's role.  But he couldn't fill Rondo AND Ray's.  As good of a player both of them are they just don't fit in our system.  It's perfect the way it is, don't try to fix it.

[winsomme]

It just so happens that when Rondo plays bad the Celtics usually struggle. It just so happens that when he does what he's supposed to do the Celtics usually flourish.

"it just so happens"? what does that mean?

it just so happens that when CP plays bad NO struggles too....the difference is when NO struggles you want to attribute it largely to something other than CP. you don't do that with Rondo even though both are in charge of running their teams respective offenses...

CP coming here would totally change the dynamic of our offense. now we would have a PG that needed to both score and play-make. and given the meltdown of NO last season there is merit IMO to the concern that changing the function of that position on the Cs could adversely alter how our team performs.

whether CP is more consistent or better than Rondo (things i'm not challenging) is largely irrelevant because CP would not just be replacing him.

That's not what I'm doing. Didn't want to post again here, but it's hard you're describing something that I'm not doing. I'm explaining that NO's offensive problems had more to do with poor roster construction, poor health (injured players on the floor) and past contributors not being able to be relied upon. Just compare some of the minutes played from some past contributors like Peterson with what he did in last year's playoffs. That's why your claim of "basically same roster" doesn't hold.

CP3 did a pretty good job pushing the ball and giving people good shots. Was he as good at it as the past playoffs? Hell no. But the offesive struggles weren't because of bad playmaking. Was it subpar to CP3's standards? Completely, but again hardly the problem with their offense.

It's simply two different set of circumstances. I really don't see what's so hard to understand about it.

Rondo has trouble with pace. HE himself admits it. HE himself talked about it during the playoffs. This is nothing new, it has been a problem with him his whole career. So what's the deal? When he does what he's supposed to we play better, when he doesn't we struggle. What's so hard to understand?

The part you might be misunderstanding though is that I fully blame our offensive struggles on Rondo, when I don't. Particularly, I often look to Ray's performance as I think that's the one guy in our team that is very dependand on how Rondo plays. In the Bulls series, when Rondo did what he was supposed to do Ray flourished, when he didn't he struggle. I've been very consistent with this.

In the Orlando series, as poor as I thought Rondo played, I don't blame him for Ray's struggles because in that case Ray had an injury that was clearly bothering him. Even so, Rondo didn't dominate a match-up that he had quite an advantage over, his pace was horrible, his defense was quite bad.

Now, something I do take into account in Rondo's playoff run is that he was hurt. But I simply can't excuse his poor pacing and other offensive problems just because of this simply because they have been consistent problems he's had his whole career wether healthy or not.

The other factor you might not realize is that I put a huge chunk of the blame on Pierce too.

In all, in that Orlando series most of our key players struggled. Clearly, our offensive problems weren't solely Rondo's. A lot of our players played poorly, but that doesn't absolve Rondo from not pushing the ball etc.

Is that a bit more clear now on my stance with Rondo?

Now, as CP3 is concerned, he does all these good things of running an offense consistently well. You think I'm trying to absolve CP3 from the struggles in the playoffs? Fine. Let me clear it up. I'm not. All I'm saying is that you should understand the circumstances under which he was playing. He clearly underperformed, but not to the extent of how bad that offense looked. Him running the offense was hardly the problem even if he wasn't as good as his standards.

With West struggling, Chandler completely lost out there, and Peja missing his shots you've pretty much removed all of CP3's weapon's as far as running an offense is concerned. CP3's main problem during the playoffs is that he was finishing poorly and shooting poorly. Those were his main problems. Hey, did he have some nights where he might've run the team poorly? Absolutely, but it wasn't the problem that plagued the Hornets throughout the playoffs. Maybe it was a factor in that 60 point game. But overall, CP3's playmaking wasn't what caused their poor offense.

It's as if Rondo is moving the ball as he should and Ray starts missing his shots (which happens). I would never blame Rondo for this as long as he does what he should on offense.

So to conclude, I don't blame Rondo for our poor offense in Orlando. I do put a big chunk of the blame solely because he didn't do the things that he was supposed to. BUT, I aknowledge that Ray was hurt that Pierce was tired, and both played like crap regardless of how Rondo played. If Rondo played like he did in Chicago overall, and we struggled offensively in Orlando I wouldn't be putting any blame on him.

I really don't see what's hard to undertand about my stance.

but here's the thing Bud. as you have noted, when both teams played poorly, there was blame pointed at both playmakers for both teams.

okay, so then the question becomes, specifically on the playmaking question, did CP struggle as much as Rondo when the team played poorly?

after going through all the different individual elements, you have to iron it all out in the end so you can make some conclusions.

and what I am saying is that given at the deficiencies (both teams had major injuries and major depth problems), the meltdown that CPs team experienced does give pause and lends merit to those questioning on whether he would be the better fit here.

I'm not siding with the people making the argument, but I'm saying there is reason to consider it - especially given that Ray is also in the proposed deal.

CP would essentially have to be the same player here in BOS as he was in NO. he would have to play-make and score.

remember, we are trying to assess whether he would be a BETTER fit. not an AS GOOD AS fit...

if the trade was simply Rondo for CP, then I might agree that CP would be completely fine running the offense and playmaking for PP, Ray, KG, and Sheed.

but that's not what we are talking about. we are talking about him having to step in and both score and play-make. and given how things shook down last season in NO, I think it gives rise the question of whether or not that is the better for our team. do we really want to transform the PG position into a top scoring position?

again, IMO there is merit to the position that our offense functions better with a PG that is playmaker and where scoring mostly comes from other sources.

[winsomme]

I think you're both right.
Regardless the Hornets are not a championship team.
I think my main problem with Chris Paul is he does too much.  If we wanted him to fit in where Rondo was, he wouldn't score to the best of his ability, which would be a shame.  He feels a lot like AI who does his best when he has the ball a lot, which I feel is counter-productive to a team sport.  And then if he plays like a team player, that's counter-productive to being the best player he could be.  The good thing about Paul though is he can score AND pass.

You forget that Paul was ASKED to play that role. They had to push him to become the kind of scorer he is currently... he was quite content with distributing the ball.

Efficient scorer, better shooter than Rondo, better free-throw shooter than Rondo... good rebounder, good defense... defenders don't play off him like they do to Rondo, much better decision maker... we can go on and on.

All true, but the gap between Rondo and Paul is not big enough to swallow Ray and Perk.  Paul's a much, much better scorer than Rondo and that makes the rest of his game more effective, but Rondo really isn't that far behind.  His poor man's Paul routine is quite effective (49% shooting, 12 pts, 5 boards, 8 assists, 2 steals in 33mpg vs Paul's 50% shooting, 23 pts, 5 boards, 11 assists and 3 steals in 38 mpg), and Rondo even outplayed him by a wide margin in the playoffs (17-10-10 with better efficiency vs. 16-4-10 for Paul)  Subtract Ray and maybe Perk too and, without the resources to add impact players in their stead, it just wouldn't be worth it.

I'm not even sure that the gap is enough to swallow just Ray. even losing Rondo and Ray is losing a huge chunk of your starting lineup.

It would absolutely not swallow Ray.  Our team is set up perfect, the way teams were meant to be set up:  the point guard runs point and the shooting guard shoots.  If we trade 2 guys for 1 all we're doing is losing.  In NO he HAS to do both for his team, but here he wouldn't have to because Pierce is our main scorer and no one can shoot 3's better than Ray.  It's similar to the reason why AI would never work here.  CP is 2 positions in 1 and AI is 1 position in the wrong one.  We wouldn't want AI in the game with Rondo, and he couldn't play Rondo's role.  The thing with CP is he COULD fill Rondo's role.  But he couldn't fill Rondo AND Ray's.  As good of a player both of them are they just don't fit in our system.  It's perfect the way it is, don't try to fix it.

yeah, that's where the "better fit" angle comes in. nobody is arguing that CP isn't great player. what is being argued is whether or not we really want to transform the PG into a scoring and playmaking position. is that the better fit for us? and I think there is merit to the argument of those that say no...

I mean, it would be exciting for sure to see what would happen. CP is a dynamic player.

I'm just not sure that we would end up getting the better result with CP running the point instead of Rondo with Ray at the two...

[BudweiserCeltic]

It just so happens that when Rondo plays bad the Celtics usually struggle. It just so happens that when he does what he's supposed to do the Celtics usually flourish.

"it just so happens"? what does that mean?

it just so happens that when CP plays bad NO struggles too....the difference is when NO struggles you want to attribute it largely to something other than CP. you don't do that with Rondo even though both are in charge of running their teams respective offenses...

CP coming here would totally change the dynamic of our offense. now we would have a PG that needed to both score and play-make. and given the meltdown of NO last season there is merit IMO to the concern that changing the function of that position on the Cs could adversely alter how our team performs.

whether CP is more consistent or better than Rondo (things i'm not challenging) is largely irrelevant because CP would not just be replacing him.

That's not what I'm doing. Didn't want to post again here, but it's hard you're describing something that I'm not doing. I'm explaining that NO's offensive problems had more to do with poor roster construction, poor health (injured players on the floor) and past contributors not being able to be relied upon. Just compare some of the minutes played from some past contributors like Peterson with what he did in last year's playoffs. That's why your claim of "basically same roster" doesn't hold.

CP3 did a pretty good job pushing the ball and giving people good shots. Was he as good at it as the past playoffs? Hell no. But the offesive struggles weren't because of bad playmaking. Was it subpar to CP3's standards? Completely, but again hardly the problem with their offense.

It's simply two different set of circumstances. I really don't see what's so hard to understand about it.

Rondo has trouble with pace. HE himself admits it. HE himself talked about it during the playoffs. This is nothing new, it has been a problem with him his whole career. So what's the deal? When he does what he's supposed to we play better, when he doesn't we struggle. What's so hard to understand?

The part you might be misunderstanding though is that I fully blame our offensive struggles on Rondo, when I don't. Particularly, I often look to Ray's performance as I think that's the one guy in our team that is very dependand on how Rondo plays. In the Bulls series, when Rondo did what he was supposed to do Ray flourished, when he didn't he struggle. I've been very consistent with this.

In the Orlando series, as poor as I thought Rondo played, I don't blame him for Ray's struggles because in that case Ray had an injury that was clearly bothering him. Even so, Rondo didn't dominate a match-up that he had quite an advantage over, his pace was horrible, his defense was quite bad.

Now, something I do take into account in Rondo's playoff run is that he was hurt. But I simply can't excuse his poor pacing and other offensive problems just because of this simply because they have been consistent problems he's had his whole career wether healthy or not.

The other factor you might not realize is that I put a huge chunk of the blame on Pierce too.

In all, in that Orlando series most of our key players struggled. Clearly, our offensive problems weren't solely Rondo's. A lot of our players played poorly, but that doesn't absolve Rondo from not pushing the ball etc.

Is that a bit more clear now on my stance with Rondo?

Now, as CP3 is concerned, he does all these good things of running an offense consistently well. You think I'm trying to absolve CP3 from the struggles in the playoffs? Fine. Let me clear it up. I'm not. All I'm saying is that you should understand the circumstances under which he was playing. He clearly underperformed, but not to the extent of how bad that offense looked. Him running the offense was hardly the problem even if he wasn't as good as his standards.

With West struggling, Chandler completely lost out there, and Peja missing his shots you've pretty much removed all of CP3's weapon's as far as running an offense is concerned. CP3's main problem during the playoffs is that he was finishing poorly and shooting poorly. Those were his main problems. Hey, did he have some nights where he might've run the team poorly? Absolutely, but it wasn't the problem that plagued the Hornets throughout the playoffs. Maybe it was a factor in that 60 point game. But overall, CP3's playmaking wasn't what caused their poor offense.

It's as if Rondo is moving the ball as he should and Ray starts missing his shots (which happens). I would never blame Rondo for this as long as he does what he should on offense.

So to conclude, I don't blame Rondo for our poor offense in Orlando. I do put a big chunk of the blame solely because he didn't do the things that he was supposed to. BUT, I aknowledge that Ray was hurt that Pierce was tired, and both played like crap regardless of how Rondo played. If Rondo played like he did in Chicago overall, and we struggled offensively in Orlando I wouldn't be putting any blame on him.

I really don't see what's hard to undertand about my stance.

but here's the thing Bud. as you have noted, when both teams played poorly, there was blame pointed at both playmakers for both teams.

okay, so then the question becomes, specifically on the playmaking question, did CP struggle as much as Rondo when the team played poorly?

after going through all the different individual elements, you have to iron it all out in the end so you can make some conclusions.

and what I am saying is that given at the deficiencies (both teams had major injuries and major depth problems), the meltdown that CPs team experienced does give pause and lends merit to those questioning on whether he would be the better fit here.

I'm not siding with the people making the argument, but I'm saying there is reason to consider it - especially given that Ray is also in the proposed deal.

CP would essentially have to be the same player here in BOS as he was in NO. he would have to play-make and score.

remember, we are trying to assess whether he would be a BETTER fit. not an AS GOOD AS fit...

if the trade was simply Rondo for CP, then I might agree that CP would be completely fine running the offense and playmaking for PP, Ray, KG, and Sheed.

but that's not what we are talking about. we are talking about him having to step in and both score and play-make. and given how things shook down last season in NO, I think it gives rise the question of whether or not that is the better for our team. do we really want to transform the PG position into a top scoring position?

again, IMO there is merit to the position that our offense functions better with a PG that is playmaker and where scoring mostly comes from other sources.

Yes, this is not a CP3 for Rondo deal, just as this is not solely a CP3 for Rondo and Ray deal. There's another piece here, in Peja. And as much as I love Ray Allen, we can't be blind and see that he has stuggled in two post seasons in a row.

As for CP3, he only had one bad playoff series... that's all. He's been excellent in all others. Rondo has only been really good, consistently good, in one series.

CP3 can play the Rajon Rondo role perfectly, we still have Pierce and Garnett in here, or have we forgotten. And again, the proposal is to bring Peja here too.

And I've said before, I undertand if people don't want to trade Ray for Peja essentially, and I don't mind that position... I completely understand it.

I'm arguing against people saying that Rondo himself is a better fit than CP3. This is where this whole argument has been stemming from. Not in wether this is a good deal or not, just in if Rondo is better for us than CP3 is... which I find it to be ridiculous.

As I said in a previous post, if you want to talk about how maybe the package itself is not in our best interest because of the Ray factor, then I can understand that. Although I think the improvement from Rondo to CP3 pretty much warrants it.

And don't forget the future factor, CP3 is a huge asset to build around as we go forward. More so than Rondo. It should extend our window.

Chris Paul is signed through 2012 with a player option in 2013. We don't know what kinds of offers Rondo is going to get and what value Ainge thinks Rondo will have in free-agency.

[winsomme]

Yes, this is not a CP3 for Rondo deal, just as this is not solely a CP3 for Rondo and Ray deal. There's another piece here, in Peja. And as much as I love Ray Allen, we can't be blind and see that he has stuggled in two post seasons in a row.

As for CP3, he only had one bad playoff series... that's all. He's been excellent in all others. Rondo has only been really good, consistently good, in one series.

CP3 can play the Rajon Rondo role perfectly, we still have Pierce and Garnett in here, or have we forgotten. And again, the proposal is to bring Peja here too.

And I've said before, I undertand if people don't want to trade Ray for Peja essentially, and I don't mind that position... I completely understand it.

I'm arguing against people saying that Rondo himself is a better fit than CP3. This is where this whole argument has been stemming from. Not in wether this is a good deal or not, just in if Rondo is better for us than CP3 is... which I find it to be ridiculous.

As I said in a previous post, if you want to talk about how maybe the package itself is not in our best interest because of the Ray factor, then I can understand that. Although I think the improvement from Rondo to CP3 pretty much warrants it.

And don't forget the future factor, CP3 is a huge asset to build around as we go forward. More so than Rondo. It should extend our window.

Chris Paul is signed through 2012 with a player option in 2013. We don't know what kinds of offers Rondo is going to get and what value Ainge thinks Rondo will have in free-agency.

but your argument only makes sense if we all put blinders on and pretend that these are somehow separate deals.

the "better fit" argument directly relates to how the PG position would function on the team as comprised before vs after the deal.

if CP came here, he would still be a play-maker and scorer. he would not just become a facilitator and that is the crux of the argument.

as currently comprised, the PG on our team is a facilitator. It would not be that way with CP at PG. that IMO is what worries people.

as for Peja, let me get this straight, he was one of the problems in NO and one of the reasons why CP had to be asked to be a scorer, but for the Cs he's going to make it possible for CP to not have to score?

Look, CP is going to be a scorer his whole career. It would be a waste for him not to be pushing 20 PPG on whatever team he is on. I'm just not sure OUR team is the right one to be shaping that kind of offense around.

having an offense where the PG is a facilitator has been working for the Cs, and I understand the people who don't want to change that.

[mgent]

what is being argued is whether or not we really want to transform the PG into a scoring and playmaking position. is that the better fit for us? and I think there is merit to the argument of those that say no...

ABSOLUTELY NO.  I've gotta stand behind Tommy as usual.  When people were talking about how Rondo couldn't shoot he said, "Thank God!  So what?!?!"  A point guard's ability to shoot is worthless when Ray freakin Allen is open.  CP for Rondo would make us slightly more consistent AT BEST.  CP for Rondo and Ray would certainly make our team worse.

[Bankshot]

What was up with CP3 in the playoffs?  He stunk.

[winsomme]

What was up with CP3 in the playoffs?  He stunk.

yeah that was brutal. I was so disappointed in him in the playoffs this year. I honestly was in shock watching that game 4...

and believe it or not, I am a big CP fan. He was so much fun to watch in the 08 playoffs, but there was nothing fun in 09.

[celticinorlando]

not a chance..he is that franchise...move him and they return to being the charlotte hornets

[vjcsmoke]

This trade works in the espn trade tracker:

Boston gives:
Ray Allen
Rajon Rondo

New Orleans gives:
Chris Paul
Rasaul Butler
James Posey

Sure Boston is downgraded at SG, but they improve at PG and they have a quality SF backup in James Posey.  A backup player that we actually need.

At the trade deadline, if Butler isn't looking so hot, we can package him along with Scalabrine and TA's expiring plus a draft pick or a youngun as sweetner to pick up a pretty good SG in a salary dump.  How's that trade look for us?

New Roster:

PG Chris Paul
SG Rasaul Butler
SF Paul Pierce
PF Kevin Garnett
C Kendrick Perkins

6th man Rasheed Wallace (PF/C)
7th man James Posey (SF/SG)

[Fafnir]

What was up with CP3 in the playoffs?  He stunk.

yeah that was brutal. I was so disappointed in him in the playoffs this year. I honestly was in shock watching that game 4...

and believe it or not, I am a big CP fan. He was so much fun to watch in the 08 playoffs, but there was nothing fun in 09.

He quit after the first couple of games. I think his ankle was hurt too, but overall their entire team just quit. Byron Scott looked like he'd lost the team completely in that series.