# The Grizzlies could win it all...



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

...**** it, I'm going to say it. And this is not just about tonight, I was thinking this while I was watching the Heat game. 

I was gonna say some hokey shit like "they're as good as anybody when they want to be" blah blah...but I'll put it like this:

The West is now wide open. The Thunder are not going to be the same team...they are not head and shoulders any more...the Lakers have defense/bench issues (like last year), the Spurs are liable to suddenly show their age just like last year...the Grizzlies can exploit all of that and are on the same level if not number 1 if you ranked them all.

They're a tough, smart, defensive minded team with an all-star wing, two all-star low post players, a quick point guard who can shoot, solid depth and solid coaching. No small ball (though they could probably do it sometimes if they wanted to).

The Heat can be beat if you have the _right_ size on the court. The Heat won't be able to take Randolph and Gasol off the court like they managed to do with Perkins, essentially making the Thunder play their game which they couldn't do. Randolph and Gasol are too dangerous in the low post.

The Grizzlies are going to hit you in the mouth and make you grind with them, and they have the personnel to pull any game off down the stretch. They have Tony Allen who's probably the most disruptive wing defender going. Rudy Gay is underrated and a super complete wing. 

I don't know if anyone feels the same way, but coming into the season (like last year) I looked at the Grizzlies like one of those tough out teams that builds narrative for the Thunder or Lakers in their quest to the finals...but that roster is as good as anyone in the West and they have the matchups to beat the Heat. Their challenge will be beating the Thunder and/or Lakers. 

I'm not saying they're my pick, it's way too early for that, but this is kind of a revelation for me so I'm going to share it...my list of teams that I could conceivably see winning it all (barring a major top tier injury) grew: Heat, Thunder, Grizzlies, Lakers. And then the Lakers not really I just say it because they have too much talent to ignore.

And all that said it's a testament to Wallace and whoever else has been building in Memphis because they were a laughing stock and Zach Randolph was rapidly approaching cancer status. 

The comparisons to those Pistons are actually there when you look at it...a bunch of underestimated players who are coming together to prove themselves...Marc Gasol was looked at as a throw in in the Pau Gasol deal...a former Blazer forward with exceptional talent and ability to be the guy but can't get his head straight...a very good wing player from UCONN...Tony Allen...I'm going to shutup now but I like these guys and I actually hope they can steal a ring.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

Dre said:


> The West is now wide open. The Thunder are not going to be the same team...they are not head and shoulders any more...the Lakers have defense/bench issues (like last year), the Spurs are liable to suddenly show their age just like last year...the Grizzlies can exploit all of that and are on the same level if not number 1 if you ranked them all.


You forgot the Clippers.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

No I didn't


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

They can't beat the clippers


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

No.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

Grizzlies got a little Detroit Pistons to them: complete team who don't give you any position that you can really exploit as they got solid to better players at every position. Obviously tough, just enough outside shooting to keep you honest, and multiple guys who can be the hero on any given night.

I've liked them for awhile and I could see them winning the title: hopefully they stay healthy (Randolph in particular as he's the key piece)


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

Dre said:


> No I didn't


Memphis has match-up problems against the Clippers.

Oh wait...

Miami showed tonight they have match-up problems against the Clippers.

Oh wait...

San Antonio had a real problem with the Clippers in the last game.

Oh wait...

The Lakers...oh, never mind about the Lakers. That was an easy one for the Clippers.


----------



## Bubbles (Nov 12, 2005)

Don't see it happening for the Grizzlies.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Ron said:


> Memphis has match-up problems against the Clippers.
> 
> Oh wait...
> 
> ...


No I did not


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

Pioneer10 said:


> Grizzlies got a little Detroit Pistons to them: complete team who don't give you any position that you can really exploit as they got solid to better players at every position. Obviously tough, just enough outside shooting to keep you honest, and multiple guys who can be the hero on any given night.
> 
> I've liked them for awhile and I could see them winning the title: hopefully they stay healthy (Randolph in particular as he's the key piece)


Yeah, well I've heard about this Grizz team for the past two seasons going to the NBA Finals but look what happens...2nd round exit two years ago, 1st round exit last year.

Anyone can look good in October.

Let's see what happens in April next year to see if they can finally get a little deeper in the playoffs.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

Dre said:


> No I did not


IMO Clippers have a better shot at going to the Finals before the Grizzlies do.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Ron said:


> *Yeah, well I've heard about this Grizz team for the past two seasons going to the NBA Finals but look what happens*...2nd round exit two years ago, 1st round exit last year.
> 
> Anyone can look good in October.
> 
> Let's see what happens in April next year to see if they can finally get a little deeper in the playoffs.


Bullshit...not even the most homerific Grizz fan considered the Grizz contenders. Definitely nobody thought of them as contenders with Rudy Gay missing the playoffs and ZBo missing 75% of the season.

Plus, the Grizzlies have never started out a season strong. 

The Grizz are contenders this year but so are about 4 other teams in the West. However, the Grizzlies have a real problem with one man named Chris Paul. We have not figured out a way to even slow him down.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

Ron said:


> Yeah, well I've heard about this Grizz team for the past two seasons going to the NBA Finals but look what happens...2nd round exit two years ago, 1st round exit last year.
> 
> Anyone can look good in October.
> 
> Let's see what happens in April next year to see if they can finally get a little deeper in the playoffs.


They didn't have a healthy Randolph last year and Gay was hurt the year before: not sure what they did the last few seasons would be considered disappointing as you're making it out to be based on the injury report.


----------



## joser (Nov 29, 2005)

I think the Grizz, Clips, Spurs, and Thunder have a real shot. Lakers too...if they can get it together. 

I think mid January, we will have a better feel on who are the contenders vs pretenders.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

It's too early for this now, but so far the Clippers have looked as good as anyone in the games that I have seen. No clue why they lost those two games (which they obviously should have won if they had played well), but their wins have come against some of the elite teams in the NBA and they have looked very much the contender in those games.


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

Seen this movie before.

They need better point guard play to be considered contendors


----------



## JonMatrix (Apr 8, 2003)

Conley is fine as long as he's not the primary scorer from the perimeter. He's still a productive player. Memphis gave away a game in the playoffs by blowing a 20-something point lead. Wayne Ellington is a huge pickup for them that addresses their outside shooting problem. He's a career 38% shooter from 3pt range. They have Jerryd Bayless as well coming off the bench. They match up with any team in the west that doesn't play in LA.

Nobody is going to stop a healthy Chris Paul.
The Clippers improved from last year by adding a legit 6th man in Jamal Crawford and through the development of Blake Griffin and DeAndre Jordan. On nights when Lamar decides to show up, he gives the team a whole new dimension.
Let's not forget about the Vinny Del ***** factor- the guy will cost them games by himself. Chris Paul has won 2 playoff series in 7 years.

The Lakers have a lot of work to do. Fitting Kobe into the D'Antoni offense isn't going to be easy. Are Pau and Dwight even going to be able to stay on the court together? Does Pau have enough range to spread the floor for the Nash/Dwight or Kobe/Dwight pick and roll?

OKC took a step back this year. Even though the Harden trade will help them in the long run, they're missing a consistent third scorer and a guy that can make plays for others. They can still make a run with explosive scorers like Durant and Westbrook.

The Spurs are a wildcard. Because of the talent and experience of their stars, they can beat anybody. But due to their age, they can also lose to almost anybody. Tim Duncan looks like he's found the fountain of youth, although his game is based off of fundamentals instead of athleticism. Health is a concern with these guys too, especially Manu.


----------



## Dee-Zy (Jan 12, 2006)

Grizz are a dark horse to win it. It could happen but I don't think they have been deep in the playoffs enough to pull it off. I could see Gay pulling a Harden, which would hurt the Grizz more than Harden hurt OKC.

They also don't have a superstar player à la Durant to bail them out. It is possible but not the most likely.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Marcus13 said:


> Seen this movie before.
> 
> They need better point guard play to be considered contendors


Just like recent champs like Miami and LA needed quality PG's?


I don't think Memphis is winning it this year, but PG play is not the reason why.


----------



## kbdullah (Jul 8, 2010)

I'll buy the Grizzlies having a shot. Not because they are better or anything, but because the top of the West has grown weaker, allowing some other teams to contend for the Western Conference. Some team or teams is going to claim the odds the Thunder had of winning. Clippers have a shot too, sure. I trust Memphis' scorers more than I do the Clippers' outside of Paul, but hard to argue w/ a head to head win.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

could, yes - a bunch of good players, pretty well coached

but

titles are won by transcendant stars - Griz come up a little short in that department - maybe someone like ZBo or Gay can have a run like Dirk did a couple years back? Maybe?


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

Ron said:


> IMO Clippers have a better shot at going to the Finals before the Grizzlies do.


He said the Grizzlies COULD win it all.

Not that they WILL.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

I will say this about the Grizzlies, the weak point in their lineup is the all NBA defensive team member, Tony Allen. That's not a bad place to be. If there's one team that could replicate the 2004 Pistons' success (in terms of being a team to win a title without a top 10 player), they're it.


----------



## Dee-Zy (Jan 12, 2006)

e-monk said:


> could, yes - a bunch of good players, pretty well coached
> 
> but
> 
> titles are won by transcendant stars - Griz come up a little short in that department - maybe someone like ZBo or Gay can have a run like Dirk did a couple years back? Maybe?


Let's not forget that Dirk is also a one time MVP player.

Gay and Zbo will have to do a lot more than what they are currently doing to be on that level.

It's not because Dirk only one a chip once that it was a fluke. He was playing out of his mind!


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

that's what Im saying, Dirk was just light's out in a way he'd never been before really (despite previous MVP considerations)

Zbo had a great run in the playoffs a couple years ago so he'd be the likely candidate if it were to come to pass - dont think Gay has the game for it


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

For people dismissing Conely as a championship point guard - the last time a champion had a better point guard was 2007.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

I think you're forgetting Norris Cole


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

There are like 8 teams that COULD win it all. Not sure why the thread starter was somewhat anxious in his declaration like he thought he would get a bunch of backlash.


----------



## Dee-Zy (Jan 12, 2006)

8?

You might as well say that there are 30 teams that could win it all in that case.


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

Luke said:


> For people dismissing Conely as a championship point guard - the last time a champion had a better point guard was 2007.


So you think Conely is a better PG than Rondo?


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

JonMatrix said:


> OKC took a step back this year. Even though the Harden trade will help them in the long run, they're missing a consistent third scorer and a guy that can make plays for others. They can still make a run with explosive scorers like Durant and Westbrook.


Wait what? They're missing a consistent third scorer? I get the "a guy that can make plays for others part" but the consistent third scorer part...I don't get this. Are you saying they're missing a third best player on the team that can consistently score and make plays for others? If so then I definitely agree with you. Otherwise this just makes no sense.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

XxIrvingxX said:


> So you think Conely is a better PG than Rondo?


Rondo now? No. Rondo in 2008? Easily.


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

Luke said:


> Rondo now? No. Rondo in 2008? Easily.


Ah, okay I'll give you that one.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Dee-Zy said:


> 8?
> 
> You might as well say that there are 30 teams that could win it all in that case.


No. I don't think anyone in this thread that isn't insanely rich would put $100 down on the Cavaliers winning the title if it meant 1,000,000 to 1 odds.

Would I be surprised if the Grizzlies, Spurs, Celtics or Clippers won it all? Yes. Would it of been the most shocked I ever was a sports fan? Not even in the top 5. Hell people were more shocked when the Pistons won it in 04 even after they made it to the finals!


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

XxIrvingxX said:


> Wait what? They're missing a consistent third scorer? I get the "a guy that can make plays for others part" but the consistent third scorer part...I don't get this. Are you saying they're missing a third best player on the team that can consistently score and make plays for others? If so then I definitely agree with you. Otherwise this just makes no sense.


Kevin Martin is averaging 16ppg .586 efg / .693 ts% - I know a lot of people are invested in a certain narrative but...


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Ron said:


> *Yeah, well I've heard about this Grizz team for the past two seasons going to the NBA Finals* but look what happens...2nd round exit two years ago, 1st round exit last year.
> 
> Anyone can look good in October.
> 
> Let's see what happens in April next year to see if they can finally get a little deeper in the playoffs.


Where? Cite sources.

We've barely been on SportsCenter even after back-to-back blowout wins over the two 2012 NBA Finalists. 

We have like seven national TV games on ESPN or TNT this regular season, more than in past years.

There are two Grizzlies fans on this board, and we're not all that vocal.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

There are not 8 teams that could win it all. There are really not 5 teams that could win it all. Outside of that group I mentioned, and fine I'll concede the Clippers, no one else will be in the finals.

Lest we forget this is LeBron's league now so it's not going to stray far from him...there are definitely not 7 teams that could beat them 4 out of 7. 

I'll pull a Rawse/Carlos Boozer:

Barring a significant (season ending/hampering) injury to one of the Miami big 3, if the finals have *any* team that's not 

Miami, Either LA team, Memphis or OKC I will leave the site for a year.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

dont do it - these forums are dead enough as it is


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

It won't happen though


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Dre said:


> It won't happen though


Come on man. With your track record? 

I know I won't be holding you accountable for this. I regret helping run HB off the site.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Miami is a lock as far as the east goes, but the west is harder to gauge. I could see the Lakers, Thunder, or Grizz in the finals. 

Still not sold on the Clippers.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

I know it's early but Im actually finding the Knicks kind of dark horsey at the moment


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Still not sold on the Knicks. I just feel like they're going to come back to earth sooner or later.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Jamel Irief said:


> Come on man. With your track record?
> 
> I know I won't be holding you accountable for this. I regret helping run HB off the site.


OK give me some reasons why you realistically think the Spurs, Knicks, Pacers...umm...whoever else could be in the finals over the teams I mentioned besides injuries


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

e-monk said:


> I know it's early but Im actually finding the Knicks kind of dark horsey at the moment


I agree and said as much before the year started..but....


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Luke said:


> Still not sold on the Knicks. I just feel like they're going to come back to earth sooner or later.


probably right around the time Stat comes back and screws up the chemistry


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Dre said:


> OK give me some reasons why you realistically think the Spurs, Knicks, Pacers...umm...whoever else could be in the finals over the teams I mentioned besides injuries


For one, trades?

Who saw the Deron Williams to NJ trade happening?

What if the Blazers decide they want to go gut job and dump Aldridge to the spurs for Stephen Jackson or something?


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

That's true. I didn't think about that...that's still an anomaly type of thing though. I'm talking about the way things are presently stated


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Its a ****ing month into the season, calm down.

You know why threads get bumped ad nauseum here? Because of comments like this.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Well to his credit instead of the usual "I bet you won't bump this!" claim he put his money where his mouth is.


----------



## TouchMint (Nov 12, 2012)

I just dont see the Heat losing for a while unless someone gets hurt...


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

TouchMint said:


> I just dont see the Heat losing for a while unless someone gets hurt...


They're 7 and 3 and Wade has looked like hes continuing to drop off, am I missing something here?


I mean yea, I still see them as favorites, but I'm not understanding the whole forgone conclusion attitude some are taking here.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Jamel Irief said:


> Well to his credit instead of the usual "I bet you won't bump this!" claim he put his money where his mouth is.


Actually lately it's been "I don't care if you bump this" and it will always be, King Archivist :gay:


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

R-Star said:


> Its a ****ing month into the season, calm down.
> 
> You know why threads get bumped ad nauseum here? Because of comments like this.


Like what? Comments like the top crust of the league is already set? I mean you could list a top 10 teams in September and it will probably look close to the same by May. The NBA isn't "any given year" like the NFL.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Dre said:


> Like what? Comments like the top crust of the league is already set? I mean you could list a top 10 teams in September and it will probably look close to the same by May. The NBA isn't "any given year" like the NFL.


What? Yea it is. Orlando went from a top 10 team last year to a bottom 5 by the end of the season. Did anyone expect Dallas to be so mediocre last year? Some, but not popular opinion. That's two stories off the top of my head. Things change quickly in the NBA. Rose could come back 100% and all the sudden the Bulls could be a force and have a legit shot. New York could be for real and make a run at the title.

To act like this is Lebrons league and its all wrapped up is silly. Once again Wade is playing like shit so once again its "Oh, didn't I tell you? I'm super injured. Probably more than anyone ever. I just didn't tell anyone because I'm that much of a solider!", and once again Miamis flaws are very visible with weak PG and C rotations. 

Again, they're my favorite as well, but the season is far from some easy prediction, and even further from locked up as you alluded to.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

R-Star said:


> They're 7 and 3 and Wade has looked like hes continuing to drop off, am I missing something here?
> 
> 
> I mean yea, I still see them as favorites, but I'm not understanding the whole forgone conclusion attitude some are taking here.


I want to see the Heat matched up against the Sixers. Bynum will average 30 a game. Would Lebron be matched up with Holiday or Turner?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Dre said:


> Actually lately it's been "I don't care if you bump this" and it will always be, King Archivist :gay:


The Harden not getting near the max one specifically was "you can bump this, but I bet you won't."


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

R-Star said:


> What? Yea it is. Orlando went from a top 10 team last year to a bottom 5 by the end of the season. Did anyone expect Dallas to be so mediocre last year? Some, but not popular opinion. That's two stories off the top of my head. Things change quickly in the NBA. Rose could come back 100% and all the sudden the Bulls could be a force and have a legit shot. New York could be for real and make a run at the title.
> 
> To act like this is Lebrons league and its all wrapped up is silly. Once again Wade is playing like shit so once again its "Oh, didn't I tell you? I'm super injured. Probably more than anyone ever. I just didn't tell anyone because I'm that much of a solider!", and once again Miamis flaws are very visible with weak PG and C rotations.
> 
> Again, they're my favorite as well, but the season is far from some easy prediction, and even further from locked up as you alluded to.


A. It is pretty much the Heat's title to lose IMO because LeBron is just that good right now. 

But I never said anything was wrapped up


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> I want to see the Heat matched up against the Sixers. Bynum will average 30 a game. Would Lebron be matched up with Holiday or Turner?


Turner would be on Lebron I'd assume. Maybe Thad. 

Philly is deep. If you get Bynum back in there healthy and with his head straight they're causing legit problems for Miami.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Dre said:


> A. It is pretty much the Heat's title to lose IMO because LeBron is just that good right now.
> 
> But I never said anything was wrapped up


We watched the same playoffs last year Dre. When Wade wasn't on and Bosh was playing injured/below average, the Heat looked very vulnerable.



You're welcome to your opinion, I don't agree with it. Why are we acting like Lebron came in at some new gear this year? He hasn't done anything to separate himself from the other top players to start this season.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Jamel Irief said:


> The Harden not getting near the max one specifically was "you can bump this, but I bet you won't."


Meaning you can bump this...don't bump it..do what you want..Go whine about Mountain Dew with Adam or something. Stop nitpicking me


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Dre said:


> Meaning you can bump this...don't bump it..do what you want..Go whine about Mountain Dew with Adam or something. Stop nitpicking me


Ha, an Adam joke.


I like it. I take back my previous post.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

R-Star said:


> We watched the same playoffs last year Dre. When Wade wasn't on and Bosh was playing injured/below average, the Heat looked very vulnerable.


And what happened when the Heat's back were against the wall? LeBron saw red and the opposition couldn't do anything about it. That's going to happen as long as he wants it to happen in his prime...

And the Heat won that last series with Wade being off, taking retarded shots, getting lit up defensively and at the end of the day they still firmly outlasted the Thunder.

With the Heat to me it just depends on who they play in the finals. If it's a team with gifted big men (like the Grizzlies) who can score they might not win, but if it's a team that really thinks they can run with them they'll be mistaken.



> You're welcome to your opinion, I don't agree with it. Why are we acting like Lebron came in at some new gear this year? *He hasn't done anything to separate himself from the other top players to start this season.*


I don't agree with that. Starting with the beginning of last year he did step up into an even higher level and no one is as good as him. Better shot selection (got rid of the heat check 3 pointers), a real post game, and a better understanding of when it's time to take over. 

I'll put it like this..LeBron realized his full potential when he realized instead of having the mindset that the right basketball play is what wins down the stretch...whatever he does is the right basketball play for his team..and that's why he's different than in the past.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Dre said:


> Meaning you can bump this...don't bump it..do what you want..Go whine about Mountain Dew with Adam or something. Stop nitpicking me


You should of told me to go eat brussell sprouts again.

"Go nitpick with Adam, don't nitpick with me."

Remember you always claim I hate you? Isn't it my job to nitpick you if you really believe that?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Dre said:


> And what happened when the Heat's back were against the wall? LeBron saw red and the opposition couldn't do anything about it. That's going to happen as long as he wants it to happen in his prime...
> 
> And the Heat won that last series with Wade being off, taking retarded shots, getting lit up defensively and at the end of the day they still firmly outlasted the Thunder.
> 
> ...


Meh, agreed to disagree on this one dude bro. I, like you have seen Lebron separate himself, but I saw that in last years playoffs. Not this year. Not yet anyways.

Yes you'll have the argument that its early in the season, and yes I agree, who really cares if he does it until they reach they playoffs. My stance is, its not just a given he can do it again.

I think OKC still has a legit shot, LA if they get their shit together has a front court that will eat Miami alive, and then there's always a handful of teams with a shot to surprise. 

Its a long season, a lot can change, and a lot will change that no one sees coming by years end.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> You should of told me to go eat brussell sprouts again.
> 
> "Go nitpick with Adam, don't nitpick with me."
> 
> Remember you always claim I hate you? Isn't it my job to nitpick you if you really believe that?


How do you feel about being lumped in with Adam?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Ha, an Adam joke.
> 
> 
> I like it. I take back my previous post.


I like how Dre mentioned Dew. He already knows more about Pepsi products than Adam... yet Adam was the one claiming I was stupid because I compared them to water.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

R-Star said:


> How do you feel about being lumped in with Adam?


I have to say, it wasn't good for the ego. I would prefer he make fun of me for something I'm proud of (eating healthy, being the archivist, etc).

It's probably how you felt when they compared Red Deer to Wisconsin.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> I have to say, it wasn't good for the ego. I would prefer he make fun of me for something I'm proud of (eating healthy, being the archivist, etc).
> 
> It's probably how you felt when they compared Red Deer to Wisconsin.


The wounds you're opening are old, but the tears I'm shedding right now are new.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

R-Star said:


> The wounds you're opening are old, but the tears I'm shedding right now are new.


Ok, I'm done here. Sorry, I can just talk politics with Ballscientist while watching Norris Cole.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Have fun with that. Ballscientist is done man. Why talk to Ballscientist when you could just talk to PizzaHutGuy?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Posters generally fall off at post #2,000. Except transcedent posters like Lebron and HB.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Posters generally fall off at post #2,000. Except transcedent posters like Lebron and HB.


Do you have any math equations to back that up?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Do you have any math equations to back that up?


You're a Canadian drunk.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> You're a Canadian drunk.


Oh yea? Well the only posters worse than you are AJ23 and Futuristixen. Everyone laughs at your posts.


I got repped 3 times in this thread making fun of you. Everyone agrees with me man, just look back in the thread. We all think you suck.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

*Diable mode*


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Oh great, now he's left the thread. Big surprise. That never happens.

*"James Harden is better than Kobe Bryant!" -Jamiable
"Uhhhh, no he isn't bro" -R-Star
~~~~~~~gone* -Jamiable


****ing coward.


----------



## Noyze (Oct 7, 2010)

We should have a thread for this game tonight. What a sluggfest, Grizz are so strong


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

Can we get this thread back to talking about the Grizz. They're pretty darn good.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

no Im bored with them


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

e-monk said:


> no Im bored with them


Good call. **** these guys.



I do what I want.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Another double digit ass kicking...


----------



## hroz (Mar 4, 2006)

To be fair Knicks had a back to back both away games. 

I would still put them as 1a and 1b on my power rankings. 

But the Grizz are looking scary beating the undefeated Knicks and last years finalists in the same week.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> I want to see the Heat matched up against the Sixers. Bynum will average 30 a game. Would Lebron be matched up with Holiday or Turner?


Just got to remember to keep 'Drew away from bowling alleys, handicapped parking spaces, and "bad hair" barber shops.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

JonMatrix said:


> Wayne Ellington is a huge pickup for them that addresses their outside shooting problem. He's a career 38% shooter from 3pt range.


OJ Mayo is shooting 59% from 3 on 61 attempts so far this year. Ellington is at 40% on 30 attempts.


----------



## Porn Player (Apr 24, 2003)

RollWithEm said:


> OJ Mayo is shooting 59% from 3 on 61 attempts so far this year. Ellington is at 40% on 30 attempts.


As a starter OJ was a 38% 3pt shooter for Memphis, when relegated to the bench he became a 36% over the last two years in Memphis.

It's not massive, but the correlation indicates he clearly plays more efficiently when he gets the start, some players just can't adapt to being 6th men and tend to force their game. So it doesn't matter what he could shoot if he's starting, because that wasn't an option for the Grizzlies.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> What? Yea it is. Orlando went from a top 10 team last year to a bottom 5 by the end of the season. Did anyone expect Dallas to be so mediocre last year? Some, but not popular opinion. That's two stories off the top of my head. Things change quickly in the NBA. Rose could come back 100% and all the sudden the Bulls could be a force and have a legit shot. New York could be for real and make a run at the title.


Most of this is covered with the phrase "barring injury".


----------



## JonMatrix (Apr 8, 2003)

RollWithEm said:


> OJ Mayo is shooting 59% from 3 on 61 attempts so far this year. Ellington is at 40% on 30 attempts.


Mayo wasn't going to re-sign with Memphis.


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

JonMatrix said:


> Mayo wasn't going to re-sign with Memphis.


Same with Harden


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

The Griz are doing great but The Clippers (who beat the grizz this season) are more scarier because they have a complete roster from start to bottom and i dont know where to begin. I mean the clips starting five are Paul, Green, Butler, Griffin, improved post up Jordan. <<<Along with their bench in Crawford, Bledsoe, Barnes, Rodney, Odom, Hollins. <<<Mind you billups and Hill hasnt even play yet.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

they dont have consistent post play


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

rayz789 said:


> Same with Harden


Harden would have been an RFA, he wouldn't have any choice in the matter. The Grizz didn't make a QO, so Mayo was unrestricted.


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

E.H. Munro said:


> Harden would have been an RFA, he wouldn't have any choice in the matter. The Grizz didn't make a QO, so Mayo was unrestricted.


Actually he did had a choice in which he could have resign with the thunder 4 years around 46 or 50 million dollars in which the thunder offer him but harden instead was very very greedy in which he wanted far more and thats when the thunder traded him in which i dont blame them. And harden didnt have to sign an extension with the rockets but he did cause the rockets offer him around 80 millions dollars in which they over price himself like they over price himself by signing big money for overhype lin.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

That doesn't have anything to do with what you typed. Mayo was unrestricted, free to go wherever he wanted. Harden was not, he was always going to wherever OKC sent him.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

SMH @ Heisley's cheap ass

I still believe they could've at least gotten to the conference finals

And yeah I was bugging saying the Clippers weren't contenders, I hadn't seen enough of DeAndre Jordan at that point


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Dre said:


> SMH @ Heisley's cheap ass
> 
> I still believe they could've at least gotten to the conference finals


I still think they can. Who on that Memphis roster is afraid of seeing San Antonio in the second round?


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Dre said:


> SMH @ Heisley's cheap ass
> 
> I still believe they could've at least gotten to the conference finals
> 
> And yeah I was bugging saying the Clippers weren't contenders, I hadn't seen enough of DeAndre Jordan at that point


Heisley isn't the Grizzlies' owner, Dre. Keep up.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Oh, well whoever has them is a cheapskate


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

So are you just going to come around every couple months to bump your threads?


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Pretty much

a little tired of this place


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Dre said:


> Pretty much
> 
> a little tired of this place


Can't say I blame you. 

Not worth making cameos to just keep your CM title though.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

gave that up


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Dre said:


> gave that up


And they were too apathetic to remove it?


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

:kanyeshrug:

fwiw it was only today


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

I've seen spam sit in this board for a day lately, when that was the previous justification of having 42 community global mods. So I guess we'll see. 

The time needs to be spent on changing thread titles.


----------



## Dee-Zy (Jan 12, 2006)

Grizz is actually the team that scares me the most as a heat fan. 

Especially after the beat down that OKC got yesterday.


----------



## Knick Killer (Jul 16, 2006)

Jamel Irief said:


> I've seen spam sit in this board for a day lately, when that was the previous justification of having 42 community global mods. So I guess we'll see.
> 
> The time needs to be spent on changing thread titles.


Lol.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Knick Killer (Jul 16, 2006)

Dre said:


> Pretty much
> 
> a little tired of this place


I feel you on that.

I actually went on google the other day looking for new forums to try out. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Dre said:


> Oh, well whoever has them is a cheapskate


Why, Dre?


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Why? Because they let a decent chance at a title go to save money in like the middle of the haul

Plus if you want to save money why get rid of your youngest, best player, especially when you have Gasol to someone pick up Z-Bo's slack but no one that does what Gay does


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Gay wasn't their best player though. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Debatable

And in a year or two he will be regardless


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Marc Gasol says hello.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Tell him I said what's up buy this site back from VS

I wouldn't take Gasol over Gay. Gasol's overall value might be a little overstated because of the dearth of really good back to the basket players in the league but I would consider building around Gay before Gasol easily


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

You can't pay a 17/6 guy who had reached his potential in his given situation $18 million per year in the Memphis market, especially when he shoots 40 percent from the field (sub-30 from three) and takes the most shots on your team, both in games and in fourth quarters. Memphis' bread-and-butter has always been pounding people with the Randolph-Gasol tag team and moving the ball.

What was our record after November? What was our assist rate before the trade? What is our assist rate since the trade? What were offensive numbers after November? What are our offensive numbers after the trade? Offensive numbers in fourth quarters? These are all rhetorical.

This team had a hot start, but it wasn't winning a title with all the evidence that followed. Given the matchups, it may not have made the second round. Rudy Gay does a lot of good things, but you don't see many _truly_ successful teams whose leading scorer and (by far) most prolific shooter is as inefficient as Gay has been the last two years, while providing very little else besides scoring, on a massive contract no less.

I don't argue that Gay is a better player than Prince, and Memphis may even be better when Gay is totally focused and going as hard as he possibly can, as compared to having Prince totally focused and going as hard as _he_ can. The difference is that you can count on Prince to do that almost all of the time, and you just can't with Gay.

I guess we'll see at the end of the season when this in inevitably bumped again.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Grizzlies are a really good team that could probably put together one championship season, although I'd bet against it before I bet for it. The operative word is _could_ I guess. Too many things have to go their way. I thought they were at their best without Gay, but one could argue that is simply because Randolph was at his best. As an OKC fan, I don't fear them like I used to. If Randolph gets to making unreal shots again, Gasol gets his post game going, they move the ball around well enough and those threes start dropping, they're dangerous. We'll see.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Sounds like a lot of ifs.


----------



## jaw2929 (Dec 11, 2011)

Ron said:


> IMO Clippers have a better shot at going to the Finals before the Grizzlies do.


This. It'd be cool if either of them got to the Finals over the Thunder out West.... I'm not sure if either could be Miami though.


----------



## Jace (Sep 26, 2005)

Gay was definitely not their best player. Was Randolph for awhile, but it's become Gasol. They were never going to win it all with Gay playing the game he's played.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

Gay is in the perfect situation for himself now. He was born to be the best player on a bad team. He certainly needed to get out of the West and go somewhere that a player like him matters, it wasn't on the Grizz.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

I know that Rudy Gay is the awesomest player alive and a bonafide offensive superstar that makes every team he's on better (or so I've been told, usually with a snide remark that I must be some sort of idiot that never watches NBA basketball to think otherwise), but apparently my eyes might not have been deceiving me...

Grizzlies Better Without Gay?



Tom Haberstroh said:


> By sending Gay and his woefully inefficient play packing, the Grizzlies saw an opportunity to put the ball in better hands. Marc Gasol, Zach Randolph and Mike Conley can score, but oftentimes they were shut out as Gay flung up errant jumper after errant jumper. (Sorry, Toronto fans.)
> 
> The cleansing has yielded a much healthier offense without Gay, scoring 105.3 points per 100 trips down the floor since the trade. That's up from a pre-trade rating of 100.1 points per 100 possessions, which was 22nd in the NBA at the time.


After their slow start which had the R-Dres crowing, Memphis has won 14/15, only losing to Miami on the road. Their defense, which was already good, has improved since replacing Gay with Prince. But the real kicker? Their offensive efficiency since they "dumped their superstar for nothing" is amongst the ten best in the NBA, whereas they were 22nd in the NBA previously and winning games only via their defense. So, yeah, score one for us "idiots that don't watch the NBA". Apparently we're seeing things while "not watching" that the "superfans" are missing.


----------



## hroz (Mar 4, 2006)

I hope Gay does better in Toronto but I think its obvious that at the Grizzlies it wasn't working out. Gay is someone who needs shooters around him so he can attack the rim.

When Zach was out he played pretty damn well but with Zach and Marc clogging the paint he has had no room to create. 

Memphis are a tough inside out team Gay did not fit in. Its that simple.

I think with Parker out. Grizz could get the 2nd seed. But they 1st need to beat the impossible to beat nuggets at their home.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

The problem is that he's not exactly a great attack the rim player, either (unless you consider Jeff Green a great attack the rim player). He's a volume scorer and not a great one to boot. I think the Grizz are legit contenders now that they're going to grind opponents down on offense while still having a legitimately great defensive squad. With Gasol/Randolph I think they can give the Heat a run for their money.


----------



## hroz (Mar 4, 2006)

Apart from his rookie year and this year his FG% has been over .45 That's a good percentage.While scoring close to 20ppg.

He has been taking too many jumpers. He just hasn't had the room to get into the paint IMO.

In Toronto too there are no shooters especially now Andrea can't hit a three to save his life.... I am still of the opinion it was a good trade for the Grizz. But I am not writing off Gay as a future All Star.


----------



## hroz (Mar 4, 2006)

PS Gross are a playoff team. Tough defensive team with Marc and Zach not giving LeBron room to create it would be an exciting FINALS.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

First of all I don't even know why I'm replying to you because all you do is use lame names and exaggerate what people are saying, but anyways let me try to discuss this:

Say what you want about his inefficiency I just have a problem seeing them winning a title with no one on one wing player. You're going to need that down the stretch. Randolph is good but you can crowd the post and he's not athletically superior enough to just _make_ those X-Factor plays you need. 

You always need that player that scouting can't contain, and Gay isn't top tier like Melo/Durant or anything, but he's better than a lot of guys off the dribble.

I guarantee they will miss that element in some close games and that will be the story. 

Regular season is one thing, you deal with some necessary evils if long term it will help you beat playoff defenses and scouting.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

And this is my thread, how could you try to say I was shitting on them and then try to act like you're leading the charge of supporting them with "I think Randolph/Gasol can give the Heat a run for their money..." FOH I already said that.

I said they became a worse playoff team based on that Gay move and I maintain that. Part of my initial presentation of saying they could win it was Gay, without him I don't see it. If they prove me wrong so be it, but I think they'll miss that dynamic.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

I'm glad people are finaly jumping on the "Gay doesn't really help the Grizzlies much" bandwagon. I was saying that when they played the Thunder in the playoffs a couple years ago and people thought it to be outrageous. They are at their best running their offense through their two offensively gifted post players.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Hollinger doesnt know anything about basketball because he's an egg-head who never played the game and while we're at it Bill James' ideas about baseball are worthless


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Dre said:


> And this is my thread, how could you try to say I was shitting on them and then try to act like you're leading the charge of supporting them with "I think Randolph/Gasol can give the Heat a run for their money..." FOH I already said that.
> 
> I said they became a worse playoff team based on that Gay move and I maintain that. *Part of my initial presentation of saying they could win it was Gay, without him I don't see it.* If they prove me wrong so be it, but I think they'll miss that dynamic.


They weren't winning a title with Gay either. There's half of this season and all of last season to support that.

Having a shot creator like Gay is nice when he isn't shooting 40 percent overall, stopping the ball and dominating the offense. But that's what was happening.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Dre said:


> And this is my thread, how could you try to say I was shitting on them and then try to act like you're leading the charge of supporting them with "I think Randolph/Gasol can give the Heat a run for their money..." FOH I already said that.
> 
> I said they became a worse playoff team based on that Gay move and I maintain that. Part of my initial presentation of saying they could win it was Gay, without him I don't see it. If they prove me wrong so be it, but I think they'll miss that dynamic.


They've proved you wrong.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

I'm surprised to be honest. I'm all for addition by subtraction, but I thought losing Gay would at least hurt them a little, not lead them to their deepest playoff run in franchise history.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

If the Spurs/Warriors beat the Grizz, does Dre get to stay since Westbrooks injury played a factor?

Archivist?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> If the Spurs/Warriors beat the Grizz, does Dre get to stay since Westbrooks injury played a factor?
> 
> Archivist?


I shall allow it. 


But should the Grizz make it to the finals, Dre must leave the forum forever.


_So it is written in the archives._


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Cinco de Mayo said:


> They've proved you wrong.


They really are the one team that seems built to give the Heat a run for their money. Gasol/Randolph are going to force James and Bosh to work their asses off defensively and Tony Allen has given Wade troubles for the last few years. Miami may need every ounce of performance they can get from their roleplayers to win this thing because I'm not sure that James is enough to carry them.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

E.H. Munro said:


> They really are the one team that seems built to give the Heat a run for their money. Gasol/Randolph are going to force James and Bosh to work their asses off defensively and Tony Allen has given Wade troubles for the last few years. Miami may need every ounce of performance they can get from their roleplayers to win this thing because I'm not sure that James is enough to carry them.


The Heat can also put out a PG/Wade/LBJ/Bosh/Birdman rotation which would really make it messy for the Grizz to stop James, if Birdman is up to the task of playing Gasol hard (not shutting him down, just making him work for everything) the Heat could counter that quite well. 

That being said, as much as Randolph would make James work, there's no chance Randolph can defend LeBron on the other end. He's far too quick, far too dominant for a guy like Randolph to keep up with. They do not have a single person on their roster sans Tony Allen who can keep up with LeBron, and even that might be expecting too much from Allen. Especially if you take into account that removing Allen from Wade means you have somebody like Bayless or Conley on Wade. I don't think they have the man power to shut them both down.

I think a matchup with Miami could make the Grizzlies just a little sad that they still don't have Rudy Gay, I absolutely agree with the logic of the move and the fact Gay isn't worth that much money, but Prince/Pondexter are going to get manhandled by James.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Only thing is Miami will be getting alot of warm-ups playing against Boozer/Noah and West/Hibbert.


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

When the **** did the Grizzlies get Prince??

Edit: Oh wait that's right he got traded there...nvm.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

BlakeJesus said:


> The Heat can also put out a PG/Wade/LBJ/Bosh/Birdman rotation which would really make it messy for the Grizz to stop James, if Birdman is up to the task of playing Gasol hard (not shutting him down, just making him work for everything) the Heat could counter that quite well.


I'm just not sure how well Bosh defends anyone in that lineup, and I definitely don't believe that the barely 6'10" thirtysomething Birdman has enough in the tank to slow Gasol down. And the Grizz will run TA at James if the Heat move him to the 3. Just to mess with him (and he's done a pretty effective job on James in the last 4-5 years).



BlakeJesus said:


> That being said, as much as Randolph would make James work, there's no chance Randolph can defend LeBron on the other end.


They don't expect him to. I expect that the Grizz are hoping that grinding games out and forcing James to carry the offensive load will wear him down.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Dre said:


> I wouldn't take Gasol over Gay. Gasol's overall value might be a little overstated because of the dearth of really good back to the basket players in the league but I would consider building around Gay before Gasol easily


Let's put the argument about whether or not Memphis needs a wing guy who you can isolate at the end of games to score to the side for a minute. Can you at least admit that you were wrong about this?


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

If you are going to face the Grizzleds in the finals...Playing the Pacers is a pretty good tune-up.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Dre said:


> There are not 8 teams that could win it all. There are really not 5 teams that could win it all. Outside of that group I mentioned, and fine I'll concede the Clippers, no one else will be in the finals.
> 
> Lest we forget this is LeBron's league now so it's not going to stray far from him...there are definitely not 7 teams that could beat them 4 out of 7.
> 
> ...


See you next year? 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> See you next year?
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


Alright u got him but what has help to change the LA swept this year to me it becomes not noticable that you came here to remind me...


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

Cinco de Mayo said:


> They've proved *me* wrong.


FTFY.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

So the Pacers would have to win for Dre to flop on his wager.


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

In Dre's defense, he ridiculed Memphis after they traded away Gay. He predicted they would lose without him. That prediction Jamel quoted is from November and Dre ripped Memphis later on when the trade went down.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

This stuff is confusing. I don't envy those archivists, always having to keep track of this.


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

Agreed. Jamel will sort this out. We need to determine if Dre is actually banned from the site. Can we get a ruling on this, Jamel? Expedite this one.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Adam said:


> FTFY.


Adam, *Yeah, let's not do that - Dissonance*

Memphis wasn't winning any more with Rudy Gay than they would have without him. Might not have even made it past the Clippers.

He was a net negative - or a zero sum at best - on a max contract.

And as has been pointed out numerous times, you can't cherry pick when a team would theoretically "need Rudy Gay to create a shot."


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

Cinco de Mayo said:


> Adam, you're such a fucking moron.
> 
> Memphis wasn't winning any more with Rudy Gay than they would have without him. Might not have even made it past the Clippers.
> 
> ...


So you bumped a post of a guy saying he doesn't think the Grizzlies can win anymore without Gay and posted, "They've proved you wrong," what did you mean?

Are you a Grizzlies fan or a Mavericks fan? I'm not sure.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

lol ill walk if you need me to


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

Dre said:


> lol ill walk if you need me to


You canceled Memphis from the original bet. It's logical to assume San Antonio would be their replacement. You lost points but you gained points for being right about Gay. You also scored points on a premature bump by the guy with the Mavericks player in his avatar. It's Jamel's call but I think you beat this rap.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Adam said:


> Agreed. Jamel will sort this out. We need to determine if Dre is actually banned from the site. Can we get a ruling on this, Jamel? Expedite this one.


Westbrook is healthy and the thunder are in the finals. Plus he was hyped on the grizzlies with gay. 

Dre stays, but I hope has learned a valuable lesson about making these claims. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Adam said:


> You canceled Memphis from the original bet. It's logical to assume San Antonio would be their replacement. You lost points but you gained points for being right about Gay. You also scored points on a premature bump by the guy with the Mavericks player in his avatar. It's Jamel's call but I think you beat this rap.


It's not a premature bump. 

Memphis had a better winning percentage in the regular season without Gay. Memphis had more playoff success this postseason without Gay than it ever had with him.

They never became a "worse" playoff team because there's not a shred of evidence that points to Gay making Memphis a better team. Just making the Western Conference Finals drove a stake into Dre's post. They replaced him with one of the five or six worst starting small forwards in the league and two guys who barely played and were a better team for it.

Gay brought no "dynamic" to the table that Memphis missed or would have used to win a series with a Spurs team that won in four games. Does Memphis go from getting swept without Gay to winning the series? No. I know your whole schtick on this site is being deliberately dense, but I'm sure even you can admit Rudy Gay isn't that big of a difference-maker.

Hence, the bump. Not because of the title of the thread.


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

You're trying to make an argument that you would rather have Tayshaun Prince over Rudy Gay, and I'm the dense one?


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

The only thing the Grizzlies did wrong was not to get back more from Gay, but there's a reason why they couldn't. That's one of the worst contracts in the NBA and Gay wasn't performing at anywhere near the level to justify giving up anything of value for him. When Memphis traded him he was shooting 41% from the field (if you round up) and 31% on 3 point shots. He had a 14 PER. He's not better than an okay defensive. You can't pay a guy a near max contract on that sort of performance.


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

Diable said:


> The only thing the Grizzlies did wrong was not to get back more from Gay, but there's a reason why they couldn't. That's one of the worst contracts in the NBA and Gay wasn't performing at anywhere near the level to justify giving up anything of value for him. When Memphis traded him he was shooting 41% from the field (if you round up) and 31% on 3 point shots. He had a 14 PER. He's not better than an okay defensive. You can't pay a guy a near max contract on that sort of performance.


Yeah, you said the same crap about Tyson Chandler and then Dallas won a title with him. Memphis could have won this year if their owners weren't cheap and kept Speights and Gay. It's really that simple. Tayshaun Prince added nothing. Dre was right when he said cheap ownership traded away their season. I don't think there's anything more to say.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

The difference is that Chandler is a huge positive defensively when healthy (which he wasn't for a couple of years). Gay doesn't make a positive difference at either end of the floor. Memphis has plenty of time to find a better SF than Gay, and it won't be all that tough.

Their problem with the Spurs is that they ran into a team that was their mirror image and they couldn't quite figure out how to deal with it. Conley was incapable of stopping Parker, and Tony Allen isn't meant to be defending guys like that. 

If they had a guy like Bledsoe they would have been better off, and had Gay not had that ginormous contract I'm sure they would have gladly sent him to the Clippers for Bledsoe & Butler. But at the end of the day that contract was a killer, and there just weren't very many GMs desperate enough to take the deal off their hands.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

E.H. Munro said:


> The difference is that Chandler is a huge positive defensively when healthy (which he wasn't for a couple of years). Gay doesn't make a positive difference at either end of the floor. Memphis has plenty of time to find a better SF than Gay, and it won't be all that tough.


 
You can argue that the Grizzlies are a better team without Gay, but this crap needs to stop. Having an athletic perimeter player that can create his own shot is a huge plus offensively. Especially in a series where the Grizzlies scored under 15 points in what, 6 of the 16 quarters? You can't tell me that at the end of regulation in game 3 when midget Conley chucked up that garbage runner they wouldn't have been better off with Gay holding the basketball. 

I'm still not sure where I stand with the trade. I guess we'll have to see what Memphis does with the savings because a sweep in the WCF is the best they can hope for with the current roster. Could Gay have been modified to play a spark for 28 minutes a game role? Like Lamar Odom?


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Jamel Irief said:


> You can argue that the Grizzlies are a better team without Gay, but this crap needs to stop. Having an athletic perimeter player that can create his own shot is a huge plus offensively. Especially in a series where the Grizzlies scored under 15 points in what, 6 of the 16 quarters? You can't tell me that at the end of regulation in game 3 when midget Conley chucked up that garbage runner they wouldn't have been better off with Gay holding the basketball.


The problem is that it's also a gigantic minus when said player can't shoot and creates his own shot over and over and over and over again and takes shots away from actual effective players.

There's a reason that Rudy Gay's playoff career spans seven games and isn't going to get considerably larger before age and injury do him in.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Adam said:


> You're trying to make an argument that you would rather have Tayshaun Prince over Rudy Gay, and I'm the dense one?


Pretty much.

Point being, for the 87th time, that Memphis won more often with Tayshaun Prince, who looked like a fossil in the playoffs, than it did with Rudy Gay chucking it up 17 times per game at 40 percent.

Rudy Gay never won Memphis a playoff series. The Grizzlies went to the Western Conference Semifinals (or beyond) twice without him in the last three years.

That doesn't look good for Rudy Gay.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Let me save you some time Jamel. You're wrong. EH is right. 

Rudy Gay is exactly what EH says, to the T. In fact, nothing EH has ever said on this website has ever been anything but 100% accurate. To disagree with such a Nostradamus type deity like that is foolish.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Could Gay have been modified to play a spark for 28 minutes a game role? Like Lamar Odom?


Highly unlikely. Hollins would have lost him.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> Rudy Gay is exactly what EH says, to the T. In fact, nothing EH has ever said on this website has ever been anything but 100% accurate. To disagree with such a Nostradamus type deity like that is foolish.


You may want to look up the "Players you were wrong about" threads. I'm pretty much always the most active participant in them. And I've previously mentioned Gay as one of those guys I was wrong about as I expected him to actually become a good player. Only he never did. He's a one dimensional guy that isn't very good at his dimension. 

I know you're going to resort to your tired "You never watch the NBA!!!!" schtick, but have you noticed that the Grizzly fans who actually do watch every Memphis game are actually saying the exact same thing?


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Jamel Irief said:


> I'm still not sure where I stand with the trade. I guess we'll have to see what Memphis does with the savings because a sweep in the WCF is the best they can hope for with the current roster. Could Gay have been modified to play a spark for 28 minutes a game role? Like Lamar Odom?


I tend to make fun of Odom as he has a tendency to space out every once in a while. But Odom was always the consummate teammate. Gay needs to completely remake his game. Like I said, if the Grizz hadn't signed him to that insane deal, they would have got more for him, but there was only one GM desperate enough to give up _anything_ for Gay. And it didn't work as Colangelo has been Chris Wallaced.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

E.H. Munro said:


> You may want to look up the "Players you were wrong about" threads. I'm pretty much always the most active participant in them. And I've previously mentioned Gay as one of those guys I was wrong about as I expected him to actually become a good player. Only he never did. He's a one dimensional guy that isn't very good at his dimension.
> 
> I know you're going to resort to your tired "You never watch the NBA!!!!" schtick, but have you noticed that the Grizzly fans who actually do watch every Memphis game are actually saying the exact same thing?


I'm trying to save someone the time of responding to one of your posts.

That's all.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> I'm trying to save someone the time of responding to one of your posts.
> 
> That's all.


So, in other words, you actually don't have anything to add to the discussion. Which means that your record streak is still in tact.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

E.H. Munro said:


> So, in other words, you actually don't have anything to add to the discussion. Which means that your record streak is still in tact.


Ahhh, an insult from an old man who spends his days shouting from the roof tops how right he is all the time.

EH Munro, the King of the Interwebz.


----------



## Porn Player (Apr 24, 2003)

I don't think the Grizzlies have it in them to turn this around.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> Ahhh, an insult from an old man who spends his days shouting from the roof tops how right he is all the time.


I think you're getting the two of us confused again. Unlike you I can point to recent posts where I talk about mistakes, while you fly into a pseudo manly rage any time anyone laughs at one of your boners. For example, your continuing anger over being 100% wrong with your diatribes about Gay's greatness.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Porn Player said:


> I don't think the Grizzlies have it in them to turn this around.


Turn it around? Why would they want to turn it around, they're a contender. This is what you aspire to, not what you run from.


----------



## Porn Player (Apr 24, 2003)

Well that flew straight over someones head.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

E.H. Munro said:


> I think you're getting the two of us confused again. Unlike you I can point to recent posts where I talk about mistakes, while you fly into a pseudo manly rage any time anyone laughs at one of your boners. For example, your continuing anger over being 100% wrong with your diatribes about Gay's greatness.


Gay's greatness? Yea, I've never posted anything of the like, thanks. I think in your age you've got to the point of mental deterioration where you just construct stories in your head now. That must be fun EH?

And no. I admit to being wrong quite often. As anyone who posts in actual game threads see's. But hey, enjoy your stories.


As I said, I'm just trying to save everyone time. Because posting with you is a complete and utter waste of time. 

Do you want me to explain why?


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Well, pissing match aside, it'll be interesting to see how much tinkering Hollinger does or doesn't do this summer. I assume the longshot, "in a perfect world" scenario would be a three-team deal that sends Randolph to Washington and brings back Otto Porter and a signed-and-traded Josh Smith to Memphis, but you'd have to find enough spare parts to get Atlanta to take Emeka Okafor's expiring contract in the deal, unless they really liked the idea of a Horford-Nene frontcourt.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Josh Smith AND the 3rd overall pick seems like a pretty high price for ZBo.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

R-Star said:


> Josh Smith AND the 3rd overall pick seems like a pretty high price for ZBo.


Obviously they'd have to throw in additional pieces to make it work, which they may not even have. It's why I called it the longshot scenario with everything falling perfectly. It hinges on Atlanta _really_ wanting a serviceable center to bump Horford over and basically writing off the possibility of bringing back Josh Smith at the salary he's going to ask for.

EDIT: Again, assuming that Atlanta isn't bringing him back, I wonder if their choice of Nene (the better player) or Okafor (because he's an expiring), Quincy Pondexter, and picks #37 and #41 would be enough to get the Hawks to play along.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Bogg said:


> Well, pissing match aside, it'll be interesting to see how much tinkering Hollinger does or doesn't do this summer. I assume the longshot, "in a perfect world" scenario would be a three-team deal that sends Randolph to Washington and brings back Otto Porter and a signed-and-traded Josh Smith to Memphis, but you'd have to find enough spare parts to get Atlanta to take Emeka Okafor's expiring contract in the deal, unless they really liked the idea of a Horford-Nene frontcourt.


Not sure that the Wiz would like Nene/#3 for Z-bo. They did turn down Harden for Beal, after all. The Grizz did reduce the hit at the SF spot, and I suppose that Davis/Prince might allow them to deal for a SF and allow them to use the MLE on a roleplaying big to backup Gasol/Randolph/Arthur. I wouldn't be shocked to see them make a run at Pierce.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

E.H. Munro said:


> Not sure that the Wiz would like Nene/#3 for Z-bo. They did turn down Harden for Beal, after all. The Grizz did reduce the hit at the SF spot, and I suppose that Davis/Prince might allow them to deal for a SF and allow them to use the MLE on a roleplaying big to backup Gasol/Randolph/Arthur. I wouldn't be shocked to see them make a run at Pierce.


Pierce would be a nice fit in Memphis, but I don't really see them putting together a package I'd like for Boston, barring a three-teamer. If Atlanta preferred to go the route of the big expiring contract in Okafor instead of Nene I could see a deal being made, unless they're absolutely in love with Porter like they were with Beal. You could always include a Prince/Ariza swap as part of the deal to sweeten it for Washington.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Z-bo played his last all-star game. If he gets voted in by the fans or coaches again I leave this site for a year.

Not sure why any rebuilding team takes him on. Best bet would be sending him to a place like Miami, Houston or Dallas assuming they had the assets to make a trade work.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Jamel Irief said:


> Z-bo played his last all-star game. If he gets voted in by the fans or coaches again I leave this site for a year.
> 
> Not sure why any rebuilding team takes him on. Best bet would be sending him to a place like Miami, Houston or Dallas assuming they had the assets to make a trade work.


I wouldn't exactly say that Washington's rebuilding, they were supposed to be a playoff team last year but never got off the launching pad because of early-season injuries (and once they got healthy played like 5-8 seed). They're probably looking to leapfrog Brooklyn into that 4/5 matchup next season to ensure they don't wind up on the wrong end of a first-round sweep via Miami or Chicago. All that being said, there's a reason I called the trade a big longshot.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

I just don't see enough of a talent gap between Zbo and Nene to warrant dumping the 3rd pick. Especially for what they're trying to accomplish in the next two years. They're a second round team at best with either player.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Bogg said:


> Pierce would be a nice fit in Memphis, but I don't really see them putting together a package I'd like for Boston, barring a three-teamer.


Honestly I don't think Boston has a lot of options where Pierce is concerned. I was looking around the NBA for teams looking to cut payroll that would find the Pierce contract attractive and it was a pretty small list. Even the teams that want him outright wouldn't make the deal until after June 30th (for example, the Lakers _if_ Howard re-signed).

I suspect that Boston might be preparing a 2004 rerun where they milk the paying fans dry for every dime and then blow the team up next fall and pray that the draft saves them.

As for the Grizzlies they would have to ante up to get Ariza's expiring contract for Prince. But if they could manage it for a 2013 #1 as the sweetener they'd do it in a smile.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Jamel Irief said:


> I just don't see enough of a talent gap between Zbo and Nene to warrant dumping the 3rd pick. Especially for what they're trying to accomplish in the next two years. They're a second round team at best with either player.


I was one of the loudest voices in the "Nene is overrated" camp two summers ago when he got his new contract, so I admit that I'm more down on him than most, but I don't see what he's so great at. His rebounding numbers are pretty pedestrian, he can't be a go-to guy on the block with any regularity, and his defense is pretty good but nothing special. Having Randolph on the block would give Washington a defined top-three on offense and would allow Okafor to concentrate on only the things he does well (protect the rim and rebound), as well as solidifying them as a middle seed in the East with a chance to advance a round in order to get Beal/Wall some playoff reps that they badly need. This is all assuming that Washington is focused on fielding as competitive a team as possible right now. 

........_however_, I completely get the idea that you'd rather have Otto Porter(or some other rookie)'s next ten years over Randolph's next two or three, and if Washington or Atlanta hung up on the deal I wouldn't be surprised. I just said it would be ideal for Memphis. 



E.H. Munro said:


> Honestly I don't think Boston has a lot of options where Pierce is concerned. I was looking around the NBA for teams looking to cut payroll that would find the Pierce contract attractive and it was a pretty small list. Even the teams that want him outright wouldn't make the deal until after June 30th (for example, the Lakers _if_ Howard re-signed).


I'm hoping that Cleveland looks for a one-year placeholder at small forward for a playoff run and gives Boston a few future picks and a big trade exception in order to roll their cap space over and make a run at Lebron in 2014. There _really_ isn't much in the way of a decent Pierce trade out there.




E.H. Munro said:


> As for the Grizzlies they would have to ante up to get Ariza's expiring contract for Prince. But if they could manage it for a 2013 #1 as the sweetener they'd do it in a smile.


In all honesty, I didn't notice that Ariza was an expiring next year. I thought the contracts were for the same length, giving Washington a bit of an upgrade from Ariza to Prince over the next two years. I agree, the Wiz would probably just rather Ariza sticks around and falls off the cap.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Bogg said:


> I'm hoping that Cleveland looks for a one-year placeholder at small forward for a playoff run and gives Boston a few future picks and a big trade exception in order to roll their cap space over and make a run at Lebron in 2014. There _really_ isn't much in the way of a decent Pierce trade out there.


Honestly they'd have a lot more interest in Jeff Green, and this is one of those instances of Boston's recent (bad) luck. Because if Cleveland was drafting 2-5 they'd probably have called the Celtics about Green. But now they're #1 and can do a whole lot better. I guess maybe a three way deal where someone like Washington, Charlotte or Phoenix moves up with Boston getting #3-5 and Green and whatever going to the Cavs might work out for everyone.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Nobody is trading a top 5 pick for Green.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

I actually like Green playing in Boston next year. He's good enough that he could put up some legitimately impressive numbers and pump up his trade value for a team looking for a third option at a reasonable price, but not so good that he's going to drag the C's into, or at least near, the bottom of the playoffs. Of course, there is the possibility that Rondo comes back healthy with a massive chip on his shoulder from all the "Boston's better without him" rhetoric and plays all season like it's a Thursday night game, which _could_ put Boston in the playoffs.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Bogg said:


> I actually like Green playing in Boston next year. He's good enough that he could put up some legitimately impressive numbers and pump up his trade value for a team looking for a third option at a reasonable price, but not so good that he's going to drag the C's into, or at least near, the bottom of the playoffs. Of course, there is the possibility that Rondo comes back healthy with a massive chip on his shoulder from all the "Boston's better without him" rhetoric and plays all season like it's a Thursday night game, which _could_ put Boston in the playoffs.


Hes a good player, to be sure. I think a rebuilding Boston is a good lace for him.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Bogg said:


> I actually like Green playing in Boston next year. He's good enough that he could put up some legitimately impressive numbers and pump up his trade value for a team looking for a third option at a reasonable price, but not so good that he's going to drag the C's into, or at least near, the bottom of the playoffs. Of course, there is the possibility that Rondo comes back healthy with a massive chip on his shoulder from all the "Boston's better without him" rhetoric and plays all season like it's a Thursday night game, which _could_ put Boston in the playoffs.


I think the future we all see is one where Boston turns Rondo loose on a young team and by season's end get stuck with a late lottery pick and a cancer wracked roster that no one wants any part of.



R-Star said:


> Nobody is trading a top 5 pick for Green.


After Ben McLemore and Nerlins Noel you're talking about guys whose upside _is_ Jeff Green.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)




----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

E.H. Munro said:


> I think the future we all see is one where Boston turns Rondo loose on a young team and by season's end get stuck with a late lottery pick and a cancer wracked roster that no one wants any part of.


Assuming Pierce and Garnett leave this summer and Boston hands the keys to Rondo, most of the roster is still going to be holdovers from the last few years, so it's not like you're putting Rondo on a brand-new team: these guys know him. You're overstating how hard it is to work with him - aside from Ray (who had locker room problems with more than just Rondo) he's had a decent relationship with most of the veterans on the team (hell, he and Ray Allen were close the first year or two until Rondo emerging and Doc diminishing Ray's role caused them to clash).


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

I think the sheer relief of the rest of the team when he went down speaks volumes about how much they really liked him. And it wouldn't be the same team as they would be moving Pierce and Garnett for young guys, at least one of whom plays his position (Bledsoe). And there'd be no more counterbalance. And no more nationally televised games to motivate him. Every game would Wednesday night against Cleveland Rondo. That looks like a wasteland from here.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

E.H. Munro said:


> I think the sheer relief of the rest of the team when he went down speaks volumes about how much they really liked him.


"Relief" isn't exactly the right word for it. The rest of the roster was coasting the entire start of the season, only they weren't good enough anymore to get away with it. It was more like they woke the **** up. 



E.H. Munro said:


> And it wouldn't be the same team as they would be moving Pierce and Garnett for young guys, at least one of whom plays his position (Bledsoe). And there'd be no more counterbalance. And no more nationally televised games to motivate him. Every game would Wednesday night against Cleveland Rondo. That looks like a wasteland from here.


Like I said, he just spent the last several months hearing how much better the team was with Jason Terry and Terrence Williams playing his minutes, and in this theoretical it's going to be the first season where it's firmly "his" team. He's more likely to submit an entire F you season than he is to half-ass his way through the year.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Bogg said:


> Like I said, he just spent the last several months hearing how much better the team was with Jason Terry and Terrence Williams playing his minutes, and in this theoretical it's going to be the first season where it's firmly "his" team. He's more likely to submit an entire F you season than he is to half-ass his way through the year.


If he couldn't generate that sort of effort for a contender, and sure as shit didn't when they handed him the keys this year, I'm just not seeing where this imaginary effort is going to come from. Without the defensive personnel to cover for him it's a disaster waiting to happen.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

E.H. Munro said:


> If he couldn't generate that sort of effort for a contender, and sure as shit didn't when they handed him the keys this year, I'm just not seeing where this imaginary effort is going to come from. Without the defensive personnel to cover for him it's a disaster waiting to happen.


_Nobody_ on the Celtics generated any effort before February and they very nearly no-showed the playoffs against a beatable Knicks squad. The shitty start to last season is as much on KG and Pierce as it is on Rondo. If he doesn't care enough to try after eight months of hearing addition by subtraction talk then we'll know once and for all that he's worthless before April, but I doubt that's going to be the case.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

RollWithEm said:


>


I'll bite, aside from McLemore who are you seeing that rates out as better than a third/fourth option? Noel can certainly be an impact role-player, and those guys are valuable regardless of their offense (or lack thereof). 

Bennett? I'll grant he's a wildcard, I wasn't enthralled with his shooting ability, which makes me skeptical that he can transition to the 3 at the next level. But they did announce that he underwent rotocuff surgery recently, so maybe he can be the next Matrix. But I'd say the next Carl Landry was a lot more likely.

After that we're discussing roleplayers of varying quality. Otto Porter is about 40 lbs from being able to play the 3 at the next level. Oladipo is nice. But he certainly isn't a guy that's ever going to carry a team offensively. Trey Burke? Who? (I mean Ryan McDonough's old contacts in Boston have already claimed that he's willing to give away #5 to anyone that would get the Suns out from under the Frye & Beasley contracts. And honestly I don't blame him. And I don't think he's going to find anyone willing to pay that much money for a top five pick in _this_ draft.)


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

If I'm Washington I'd trade #3 for Green in a heartbeat (bad pun). He played very well down the stretch for Boston, is still just 26 and Washington with a healthy Wall is without question in the playoff mix. I agree with EH about the draft, after McLemore and Noel there's nobody I'd value more than Green.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

hobojoe said:


> If I'm Washington I'd trade #3 for Green in a heartbeat (bad pun). He played very well down the stretch for Boston, is still just 26 and Washington with a healthy Wall is without question in the playoff mix. I agree with EH about the draft, after McLemore and Noel there's nobody I'd value more than Green.


Yeah, in a vacuum I'd certainly agree that Green isn't worth a top five pick. Unfortunately this draft is sort of like 2000, and he's probably as good as any of these guys. He just isn't going to do Boston any good as their #1 scoring option.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

Oladipo by himself isn't that valuable but he's a guy I'd love to pair with a star from next year's draft. Moreso than Green for sure.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Floods said:


> Oladipo by himself isn't that valuable but he's a guy I'd love to pair with a star from next year's draft. Moreso than Green for sure.


I'm assuming that's Boston's interest. Let him develop next year while the team sucks and hope that you land Wiggins, Andy Harrison or Parker to build around.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Rudy Gay on First Take right now and talks about how there was a logjam with him, Randolph and Gasol all being on the court so he understood being traded since it was difficult to play on the court with them. He didn't say it in a negative way, though.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

I know, those bastards actually insisted on shooting the ball. The unmitigated gall.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Basel said:


> Rudy Gay on First Take right now and talks about how there was a logjam with him, Randolph and Gasol all being on the court so he understood being traded since it was difficult to play on the court with them. He didn't say it in a negative way, though.


Yeah, because Marc Gasol is such a selfish player and wouldn't be fun to play with at all.

Rudy should understand that he got traded because he was making $18 million per year while putting up numbers similar to Antawn Jamison Cleveland edition.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

I understand why people think Memphis is better sans Rudy Gay, and how hes a chucker, but I'm not sure why there's all this animosity towards him like he's a bad guy.

Hes been classy about the whole situation since day 1.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Basel said:


> Rudy Gay on First Take right now and talks about how there was a logjam with him, Randolph and Gasol all being on the court so he understood being traded since it was difficult to play on the court with them. He didn't say it in a negative way, though.


I think the ideal situation would of been to have him on the court when one of the two bigs were resting (at the 3 or 4 depending on matchups) and at all times in closing minutes. Hence my 28 mpg question earlier. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

R-Star said:


> I understand why people think Memphis is better sans Rudy Gay, and how hes a chucker, but I'm not sure why there's all this animosity towards him like he's a bad guy.
> 
> Hes been classy about the whole situation since day 1.


He was taking shots at the front office months after the trade long after it was a story. Came off like a jilted ex-girlfriend.


----------

