# Why is Shaun Livingston untouchable?



## clips_r_teh_wieners (Nov 4, 2005)

what has he done to prove he's untradable for elite players like iverson, pierce, and so many other missed opportunities that would have immediately improved our team? why, because he's young, came out of high school, TALL for a PG? how far will that get him? by the time he gets to that level, or lemme rephrase, IF HE EVEN DOES, elton brand might already be on the decline. so i ask all you livingston nuthuggers out there, WHY?


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

clips_r_teh_wieners said:


> what has he done to prove he's untradable for elite players like iverson, pierce, and so many other missed opportunities that would have immediately improved our team? why, because he's young, came out of high school, TALL for a PG? how far will that get him? by the time he gets to that level, or lemme rephrase, IF HE EVEN DOES, elton brand might already be on the decline. so i ask all you livingston nuthuggers out there, WHY?


Not me, i'm with you dude, trade him right now for a top level player. :biggrin:


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

Because he still has the potential to become a star! Havent you been watching in the last couple of games! Those are star stats!!!


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

NOFX22 said:


> Because he still has the potential to become a star! Havent you been watching in the last couple of games! Those are star stats!!!


Will he ever be as good as Iverson in his late-prime?

Will he ever play more than 72 games a season and 40 mpg?

Will he ever be an icon and considered one of the top 25 all-time?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

I hope you didnt mean Iverson is to be considered a top 25 all-time player.


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

R-Star said:


> I hope you didnt mean Iverson is to be considered a top 25 all-time player.


Yep, i think he could bump half the players on the top 50 list down a notch.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

leidout said:


> Yep, i think he could bump half the players on the top 50 list down a notch.


I dont think he could.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

leidout said:


> Will he ever be as good as Iverson in his late-prime?
> 
> Will he ever play more than 72 games a season and 40 mpg?
> 
> Will he ever be an icon and considered one of the top 25 all-time?


If we traded him we would never know! He's only 21 people! Im not ready to give up on him yet.


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

So you'd much rather have AI for two seasons as opposed to grooming a nice young franchise player and most likely signing him to a cheaper contract? weird if you ask me


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

qross1fan said:


> So you'd much rather have AI for two seasons as opposed to grooming a nice young franchise player and most likely signing him to a cheaper contract? weird if you ask me


No I would trade Maggette for A.I. The only trade with philly I want that includes Livingston if they include A.I 2. but thats unlikely.


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

NOFX22 said:


> No I would trade Maggette for A.I. The only trade with philly I want that includes Livingston if they include A.I 2. but thats unlikely.


I agree, but their stating toss Livingston for a two year rental of AI and who knows if he'll even last the two years or whatever he has left on his contract. Remember this guy has a ton of injuries and can slow down at any moment. If that occurs, he'd be sitting and getting paid about what? 20 mil or so?


----------



## ElMarroAfamado (Nov 1, 2005)

the 76ers will not include Iggy in the deal....cmon you guys really think Livingston is even as good a player as Iggy??? cmon now...dont be ridiculous....
and yeah this is a good thread, finally someone besides me asks the QUESTION 
WHAT WHAT WHAT !!! WHAT IS IT ABOUT LIVINGSTON !!!! nothing is going to happen with this kid damnit, it gets me even more mad now that we have the chance to get A.I, but it does not happen cuz supposedly the Clips dont wanna include Livingston....CMON .....its silly really......the Clippers are stupid for not going through with it Livingston + Maggette for A.I, they are lucky the 76ers dont ask for more being that Livingston is nothing....geesh...


----------



## ElMarroAfamado (Nov 1, 2005)

and i dont know who, but someone had put one of these days
"including Livingston is too much" 
cmon now .......damnit ITS LIVINGSTON DAMNIT LIVINGSTON!!!!! 
its funny i always speak amongst my friends about Livingston with sarcasm 
"no we cant trade him he is too good!!cmon for A.I??? cmon Its livingston!! he is the future!!!" 

:lol:


----------



## cadarn (Feb 1, 2006)

ElMarroAfamado said:


> WHAT WHAT WHAT !!! WHAT IS IT ABOUT LIVINGSTON !!!!


honestly, by the time he develops (if he does) the clippers will probably be a throwaway team again.


----------



## universal! (Mar 5, 2006)

Why not Mobley, Maggette, Livingston, + a pick for AI + AI2 ?

Btw it has to be Maggette + Livingston + someone else (Rebraca probably) for AI, due to salaries. If Philly get this trade, they get exactly what they want, a good youngish player in Maggette, a young promising PG in Livingston, and they get to trim their payroll! Why should the Clips try to accomodate the Sixers? Everyone knows they need to trade AI and want to do it right away- and that most other teams don't have the right combination to offer Philly and satisfy AI (decent, talented team in major market).


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

qross1fan said:


> So you'd much rather have AI for two seasons as opposed to grooming a nice young franchise player and most likely signing him to a cheaper contract? weird if you ask me


It's more like 2 + 3/4 seasons... which also happen to be the prime years (27-30) for guys like Brand & Maggette, if you wait for Livingston to develop by age 25 or so, those two will be on the wrong side of the hill...


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

Obviously will have other players, or at least I hope so. Besides isnt baby shaq coming over next year.


----------



## ElMarroAfamado (Nov 1, 2005)

cadarn said:


> honestly, by the time he develops (if he does) the clippers will probably be a throwaway team again.


the thing is, i will love the Clippers regardless, hell if they win 10 games in a season, but i dont want what we have or had (last season) to fall apart....we can still do stuff this season if we just make the right moves....CMON!:yay:


----------



## ElMarroAfamado (Nov 1, 2005)

NOFX22 said:


> Obviously will have other players, or at least I hope so. Besides isnt baby shaq coming over next year.


good point....

but who knows where this team will be by the time Livingston develops....i try to catch NBA games often as possible and today i saw the ROckets/Lakers game...and whether it was Alston, Lucas Jr., or Head....what a great thing it is to have a PG who can score and dish the ball 
even the crappiest of teams have a PG who can do both....


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

Shaun Livingston is a 3rd year player, age 21.

Allen Iverson as a rookie, age 21.
Mike Bibby as a rookie, age 20.
Gilbert Arenas as a rookie, age 19.
Chris Paul as a rookie, age 20.
Deron Williams as a rookie, age 21.

Most people will agree that all 5 of the point guard rookies had better 1st seasons at age 20-ish than Shaun has *ever* had. Shaun has 3 years of NBA level experience and is still not close to approaching the impact these guys had at such a young age, he really hasn't separated himself from the pack of young PGs at all so far. 

You can argue about the injuries hampering his abilities (yet these same people ignore the fact that he's ridiculously injury-prone), but that fact is that *great players always emerge very young*, it's time trade him while his value is still high.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

Everyone remember called Billups a bust? Now he's finals mvp!!! Lets not give up on Livingston just yet.


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

NOFX22 said:


> Everyone remember called Billups a bust? Now he's finals mvp!!! Lets not give up on Livingston just yet.


Don't forget Jermaine O'Neal . . . once Livingston leaves, he will become a star. Mark my words. We need to keep him, bench Cassell, put him on the court with players that actually move the damn ball(not Maggs nor Cassell)


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

NOFX22 said:


> Obviously will have other players, or at least I hope so. Besides isnt baby shaq coming over next year.


I like Sofo, but I doubt Livingston + Brand + Sofo is going to be better than AI + Brand.


----------



## Kapitalistsvin (Mar 30, 2006)

> Shaun Livingston is a 3rd year player, age 21.
> 
> Allen Iverson as a rookie, age 21.
> Mike Bibby as a rookie, age 20.
> ...


Look at Livingston these lats games... that's better than Deron last year. That's one of your list.

Gilbert Arenas didn't excactly blow the league away at age 19, here are his stats:

Year 1: 10.9 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 3.7 apg, 1.5 spg, 0.2 bpg

And if the coaching staff are confident that Livingston isn't gonna be injury prone all his career, then that does work as an explanation of his slow start.



> fact is that great players always emerge very young, it's time trade him while his value is still high.


Well... Steve Nash didn't look like much for years, he was 22 as a rookie, take a look at the stats:

Year 1: 3.3 ppg, 1.0 rpg, 2.1 apg, 0.3 spg, 0.0 bpg
Year 2: 9.1 ppg, 2.1 rpg, 3.4 apg, 0.8 spg, 0.0 bpg
Year 3: 7.9 ppg, 2.9 rpg, 5.5 apg, 0.9 spg, 0.0 bpg
Year 4: 8.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 4.9 apg, 0.7 spg, 0.0 bpg

And we all know how he ended up...

The injuries are a concern, and the aging of the team too. But Cassell is around to be the leader and the clutch veteran, and I think we are starting to see the emergance of Livingston. The struggles of the team are not his fault, it is rather Kaman being infected with the Dampier syndrom and Brand being infected with some kind of "nice-guy" virus.

Hell Sam was the general in many of the worst games, and since Livingston has stepped into the starting lineup he has produced.

Will AI even be able to share the wealth enough to keep Kaman awake, Brand effective and Mobley happy? I don't know... and I could see the temptations in a hall of famer like AI, but I don't buy this crap about Livingston being a bust.

The kid delivers time and again when he gets the chance... and I think he is ready to take over at point, even at this age. Im 60-40 in favor of Livingston I'd say.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

Its ridiculous really to say anyone is untouchable, even in a situation where you can improve the team. I think to be untouchable, that means, that you couldnt make your franchise better by trading that guy.

Like lebron. Even if you trade him for like a kobe, i dont think that makes the cavs better because of other factors. So lebron i say is untouchable. 

Carmello personally i would say ISNT untouchable. I bet nuggs would trade him for lebron. Livingston is WAY WAY WAY down the list. You could trade him for a lot of players, including iverson that WOULD make the team better this year, next year, and the year after. I dont see how you can say no to that.


----------



## alexander (May 6, 2005)

yamaneko said:


> Its ridiculous really to say anyone is untouchable, even in a situation where you can improve the team. I think to be untouchable, that means, that you couldnt make your franchise better by trading that guy.
> 
> Like lebron. Even if you trade him for like a kobe, i dont think that makes the cavs better because of other factors. So lebron i say is untouchable.
> 
> Carmello personally i would say ISNT untouchable. I bet nuggs would trade him for lebron. Livingston is WAY WAY WAY down the list. You could trade him for a lot of players, including iverson that WOULD make the team better this year, next year, and the year after. *I dont see how you can say no to that*.


exactly

if we only need to trade away Livingston and, lets say, Mobley in order to get Iverson then there is absolutely no reason to hesitate.

GET US IVERSON ASAP!


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Livingston is not untouchable, however if we move him we will package him with Mobley to dump his salary, and will be looking for a star player in return. The reason Maggette and Livingston will not be traded for Iverson, is because we are not ready to give up on Livingston for a 31 year old Iverson, who might only be here for 2 years.

Cassell and Maggette, plus a first I could see. No way we package Livingston with Maggette for Iverson.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

i doubt we do it either, but thats only because of the clippers stupidity if you ask me. 

I certainly wouldnt say trading livvy for iverson is "giving up" on iverson, any more than trading odom for shaq was "giving up" on odom. Youre just trading for a phenomenantly better player. Clippers did say he was untouchable...again, i dont know why they say that. 

Who cares if iverson is only here for 2 or three years? Thats 2 or three years of a championship caliber team...You only build for the future if you have nothing left, or are in dire straights. The clippers have a lot of keys, but those keys will be older or gone by the time livvy can get to all star level (IF he even can).

i say screw 5 years from now. Become a championship team NOW, and then when iverson's contract expires, youll have all the top guys wanting to come play here to continue the winning.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Im saying that we dont need to give up Livingston to get Iverson, because other deals will come around. Remember we were 1 game from the WCF last year. I am not saying we are a championship caliber team, but we arent a poor team. We are playing like a poor team, but im not ready to move Livingston and Maggette for Iverson. 

We are going to be forced to trade Maggette, so new talent will be coming in. Also, if we are willing to give up Maggette and Livingston for Iverson, then why not offer that package plus someone like Pierce ect.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

Ill take iverson before pierce for now. We have a terrible time pushing the ball and just scoring period. Iverson would instantly help in those regards. 

Will i take pierce for livvy and maggs? Of course i would as well. But again, none of these things can even be considered if the clippers stick with their thing that livvy, brand, kaman are quote "untouchable." 

The ONLY possibility is if the clippers are just trying to play hardball, and drive up livvy's price...and then possibley if the sixers are about to pull off another move, they will offer him at the last second. But we saw last year what happens when you dilly dally around, with the artest deal.


----------



## PAIDNFULL23 (Jul 9, 2005)

With everyone askng if Livy is untouchable, why is Kamen untouchable. In this new era of the NBA, where teams play small and put their best 5 on the court, Kamen doesn't fit in. This is his fourth year, one more than Livy and he was gotten plenty of minutes to improve and get experience, the exact oppostie is true for Livy. The Clippers time and time again try their hardest to get Kamen tocuhes and involve him in the games, while with Livy they want him to walk the ball up court and do nothing. 

Just last night Livy throws a perfect pass to Kamen under the basket with nobody there and he does some retarded *** pump fake, allowing the defender to foul him, when he just should have dunked the ball when he got the pass. He then goes on to miss the FTs and the Clippers need up with nothing when they should have had two easy ones.

If the Clippers just let Livy play his game, which is suited for a more up-tempo style, he would excel.

I say trade Kamen and Maggette for a perimeter superstar, like AI or Pierce and fill the center spot with someone who will run the floor, rebound and block shots, like Steven Hunter or Maglorie.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

On that hoop you mentioned, i believe he did make one out of two, and also was able to draw a foul on an important player. Other people on the team make just as many mistakes as kaman does.

Having said that, no i wouldnt say kaman is untouchable at this point. id say he is more important though to the clippers than livingston is when were discussing an AI trade, since we would be left with ZERO front court outside of brand if we give up kaman.

I love kaman, but if we could trade him and maggette for a guy like gasol, or another all star, then youve got to do it.


----------



## PAIDNFULL23 (Jul 9, 2005)

yamaneko said:


> On that hoop you mentioned, i believe he did make one out of two, and also was able to draw a foul on an important player. Other people on the team make just as many mistakes as kaman does.
> 
> Having said that, no i wouldnt say kaman is untouchable at this point. id say he is more important though to the clippers than livingston is when were discussing an AI trade,* since we would be left with ZERO front court outside of brand if we give up kaman.*
> 
> I love kaman, but if we could trade him and maggette for a guy like gasol, or another all star, then youve got to do it.


That's why I said get someone like Hunter or Maglorie


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

yamaneko said:


> I love kaman, but if we could trade him and maggette for a guy like gasol, or another all star, then youve got to do it.


Oh no doubt about that. Ill take Gasol any day over Kaman. I just cant imagine us trading Livingston, because with Maggette wanting out, that would leave us with Ross, Cassell, and Mobley in the backcourt. Cassell cant handle those minutes all year long, so we either have to get a PG back in a trade or we have to do everything we can to keep Livingston and move Cassell/Mobley/Ross/Kaman.

Obviously, if we traded for Iverson and included Livingston, Iverson can bring the ball up, but I am not sure Cassell and Iverson can get along in the same backcourt.


----------



## DaFranchise (Jun 29, 2005)

My question is if we trade Livy which Im 100% against who will be a point guard? WIth Sam and his aging body already banged up we will have no depth at PG. Please dont tell me Ewing cuz he is a damn 2 guard in a PG body. Id rather keep Livy than rent AI for 2 years. By the way Livy has been lookin better each game since becoming the starter. Let the kid develop. We all knew he was going to be a project coming out of high school. The kid is just now growing into his body and his jummper has already improved 100%. Screw AI and his crappy attitude. Practice?


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

id have iverson be out point. Cassell coming off of the bench. With our strange offense, we dont really need the prototypical point guard. ANd iverson even not fully playing PG, still averages more assists than our guys. 

i couldnt care about iversons attitude if he helps us win games. If he wants a little bit of time off of practice, fine. Dont know if dunleavvy would be the same way. But if he practices half butted, and averages 31 points, fine with me. Look at the best running back in the history of the NFL...tomlinson...hasnt played a preaseason game in years.


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

DaFranchise said:


> My question is if we trade Livy which Im 100% against who will be a point guard? WIth Sam and his aging body already banged up we will have no depth at PG. Please dont tell me Ewing cuz he is a damn 2 guard in a PG body. Id rather keep Livy than rent AI for 2 years. By the way Livy has been lookin better each game since becoming the starter. Let the kid develop. We all knew he was going to be a project coming out of high school. The kid is just now growing into his body and his jummper has already improved 100%. Screw AI and his crappy attitude. Practice?


Clippers still do hold the rights to Guillermo Diaz who can run point IMO. People forgot all about Guillermo, why not use him in a deal to get AI is beyond me...


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

There is a reason Diaz isnt on the roster. While, Philly may be interested in him, he isnt going to make or break any trade.

Not to mention Willie Green is better then Diaz anyway.


----------



## DaFranchise (Jun 29, 2005)

yamaneko said:


> id have iverson be out point. Cassell coming off of the bench. With our strange offense, we dont really need the prototypical point guard. ANd iverson even not fully playing PG, still averages more assists than our guys.
> 
> i couldnt care about iversons attitude if he helps us win games. If he wants a little bit of time off of practice, fine. Dont know if dunleavvy would be the same way. But if he practices half butted, and averages 31 points, fine with me. Look at the best running back in the history of the NFL...tomlinson...hasnt played a preaseason game in years.


Are you really comparing LT not playing preseason games to AI not practicing? Please stick to Clipper talk instead of the NFL cuz you have no clue if you think LT doesnt play pre season games because he doesnt feel like playing. LT doesnt play in meaningless NFL preseason games due to the risk of injury. NFL is slightly(sarcasm) more physical game than an NBA practice. Gimme a break, please do not compare one of the classiest athletes in LT to that little thug they call AI.


----------



## DaFranchise (Jun 29, 2005)

qross1fan said:


> Clippers still do hold the rights to Guillermo Diaz who can run point IMO. People forgot all about Guillermo, why not use him in a deal to get AI is beyond me...


Diaz cant run point in the NBA. He is just like Ewing in the sense that he is a shooting guard in a point guards body.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

> Are you really comparing LT not playing preseason games to AI not practicing? Please stick to Clipper talk instead of the NFL cuz you have no clue if you think LT doesnt play pre season games because he doesnt feel like playing. LT doesnt play in meaningless NFL preseason games due to the risk of injury. NFL is slightly(sarcasm) more physical game than an NBA practice. Gimme a break, please do not compare one of the classiest athletes in LT to that little thug they call AI.


And theres no risk of injury in practice? Where have half the clippers injuries come from? It all comes down to standards. Superstars are given more leeway. Preseason, like practice is considered mandatory for 99% of players in any sport that has them. Anyone is at risk for injury in preseason. But do you think michael turner can say that he doesnt want to play preseason? Do you think if L.t. was a 3.0 yard a game rusher he wouldnt have to play preseason? Thats the only correlation immaking. I say if a superstar can put up numbers on his team no one else can touch, give him some leeway as long as it doesnt really hurt the team. Rodman is another example. If A.I. wants to skip a couple practices, i say let him if hes the leading scorer in the league, and as long as no one will be a crybaby about it on the team. If his scoring average really dips and he still wants to miss practice, then screw him.


----------



## myGod (Nov 27, 2006)

I think a Iverson & Livy backcourt would be pretty unstoppable. - On defense too.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

Yup. But we cant have our cake and eat it too. Dun needs to realize he has to give up to get.


----------

