# Eric Snow?



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

First Question: is it true that Eric Snow is on the trading block?
Second Q.: what would the Sixers like for him?
Third Q.: would you do this trade (salaries work):

Portland trades Derek Anderson and Jeff McInnis 
for Eric Snow and Todd MacCulloch
?

Fourth Q.: Same as second, only for Aaron McKie. How's his health these days?


----------



## dmilesai (Jul 19, 2002)

1)I'm pretty sure he's on the trading block, but I doubt he'll be traded.

2)A big guard that can handle and score, a guy with a lot of potential to be a star (Zach Randolph ), or an established big man.

3)No. DA plays SG and we have Iverson there. I would rather have Snow/Iverson in the backcourt than AI/DA. McInnis COULD start, but he's not that good.

4)We wouldn't need much for McKie. A decent player with potential and a guy with a season ending contract possibly.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

Eric Snow, isn't, and shouldn't be on the trading block. The guy has done nothing but improve over the last few years, and I'm hearing people wanting to ship him out of town for nothing. It makes absolutely no sense. If we were to trade Snow, I want to see a lot more than Zach Randolph, or anyone like that in return.

Aaron McKie on the otherhand, I'd take pretty much anything you could throw my way, especially since John Salmons is being brought up to play the same role that McKie has had on the Sixers in years past. Maybe a backup who runs the court, and is young and athletic.

-Tim


----------



## Muffin (Feb 11, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PhillyPhanatic</b>!
> Eric Snow, isn't, and shouldn't be on the trading block. The guy has done nothing but improve over the last few years, and I'm hearing people wanting to ship him out of town for nothing. It makes absolutely no sense. If we were to trade Snow, I want to see a lot more than Zach Randolph, or anyone like that in return.
> 
> Aaron McKie on the otherhand, I'd take pretty much anything you could throw my way, especially since John Salmons is being brought up to play the same role that McKie has had on the Sixers in years past. Maybe a backup who runs the court, and is young and athletic.
> ...


I totally agree about Snow. He was 12th in the league last year for apg. What more do you want from a PG!? And he's a pretty decent FT shooter.

Aaron McKie and Buckner would be the 2 on my trading block if I were the GM. Camby or Dampier salaries match those 2 if their teams were interested. :angel:


----------



## Kunlun (Jun 22, 2003)

I want Salmons to start at point some day, because his size complements Allen Iverson's size. Did that make any sense?


----------



## dmilesai (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Muffin</b>!
> 
> 
> I totally agree about Snow. He was 12th in the league last year for apg. What more do you want from a PG!? And he's a pretty decent FT shooter.
> ...


:yes:

I want to keep Snow, but it seems like he's always on the trade block.


----------



## Jermaniac Fan (Jul 27, 2003)

*will be traded to pacers?*

Go to http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?threadid=47024&forumid=30


----------



## jsa (Jul 16, 2002)

Snow is a very solid point guard and a team leader. His jumpshot is below average for an NBA guard, but has improved. The other phases of his game are good to very good. 

Salmons has excellent size to team with Iverson, but did not show point guard skills last year. His other skills looked decent, and he has the attitude and athleticism to improve., as he apparently has this summer. But he is no NBA point now. I believe he was drafted to replace McKie in 2-3 years, and that is hopefully what he will be able to do. 

With Iverson's game improving, his future backcourt mate will need to be tall and rugged, but it may not be necessary for him to be a true point guard.


----------



## STCBBall3 (Jun 21, 2003)

Yeah, KL Dawger that does make sense. If Salmons started at PG, then AI's size wouldn't be as big a problem.

Snow should not be traded. He is a good defender, can score when he needs too, and can lead a team. 



> With Iverson's game improving, his future backcourt mate will need to be tall and rugged


LeBron?


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>STCBBall3</b>!
> 
> 
> LeBron?


ONe could only wish:sigh:


----------



## XCoRyX (Feb 19, 2003)

like many say i agree,dont get rid of snow,why should and do we need to?


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>XCoRyX</b>!
> like many say i agree,dont get rid of snow,why should and do we need to?


Cory welcome to the Sixer boards and I hope you stay and bring some of your friends. What part of Philly are you from???


----------



## RoyWilliams (May 25, 2003)

If we could get Randolph and something else for Snow that could be a good thing for us. He put some good numbers up in the West which is a tough place for Forwards. I like his potential if he didnt have any baggage.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RoyWilliams</b>!
> If we could get Randolph and something else for Snow that could be a good thing for us. He put some good numbers up in the West which is a tough place for Forwards. I like his potential if he didnt have any baggage.


He doesnt have any baggage. Until that fight he got into with Ruben Patterson he was a model citizen and teammate. Portland is not going to give up Randolph for Snow


----------



## Kunlun (Jun 22, 2003)

Snow for Hamilton would be nice.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KL Dawger</b>!
> Snow for Hamilton would be nice.


What Hamilton? Richard. Detroit would never do that


----------



## RoyWilliams (May 25, 2003)

I was just responding to the person who said they wouldnt want Randolph, i wasnt trying to imply that we could get him........i know one fight is not baggage but i had to mention it.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RoyWilliams</b>!
> I was just responding to the person who said they wouldnt want Randolph, i wasnt trying to imply that we could get him........i know one fight is not baggage but i had to mention it.


I understand. Are you a Sixers fan. I see you are new here


----------



## RoyWilliams (May 25, 2003)

Yeah im a Philly fan, i have read on this site for awhile but now that im back in a dorm i have time to post. I also like the Bulls on the side, but always Philly.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RoyWilliams</b>!
> Yeah im a Philly fan, i have read on this site for awhile but now that im back in a dorm i have time to post. I also like the Bulls on the side, but always Philly.


Cool. As you see the fan base isnt as large here as some of the other boards here so I know you have a few friends that are Philly fans so get them on here so we can discuss these sixers. Welcome again


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KL Dawger</b>!
> I want Salmons to start at point some day, because his size complements Allen Iverson's size. Did that make any sense?


I think Snow is considered a larger PG whom compliments Iverson's size already.

-Petey


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> What Hamilton? Richard. Detroit would never do that


If I were the Pistons, I would have listened at the least... Snow and a 1st round pick for Hamilton. Hamilton is a real solid player, but he doesn't shoot the 3 well, and I think Billups isn't a pass first PG whom Snow is more of. So instead of Billups and Hamilton, it would be more like a Snow and Billups which I would feel is similar in style to a Snow and Iverson lineup.

-Petey


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Petey</b>!
> 
> 
> If I were the Pistons, I would have listened at the least... Snow and a 1st round pick for Hamilton. Hamilton is a real solid player, but he doesn't shoot the 3 well, and I think Billups isn't a pass first PG whom Snow is more of. So instead of Billups and Hamilton, it would be more like a Snow and Billups which I would feel is similar in style to a Snow and Iverson lineup.
> ...


I'm not exactly so keen on that as far as Detroit is concerned. Rip was the main reason they had gotten as far as they did


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

Billups put up some awesome numbers as well. With Darko now too, they might want a pg to pass him the ball a bit, unlike in Houston how Francis horded the ball from Yao, would be similar here with Billups and Darko?

-Petey


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Petey</b>!
> Billups put up some awesome numbers as well. With Darko now too, they might want a pg to pass him the ball a bit, unlike in Houston how Francis horded the ball from Yao, would be similar here with Billups and Darko?
> 
> -Petey


Come on though, Petey, remember who Pistons coach is. LB isn't going to be playing Darko much, even though he should. And anyway, it's not fair to compare Darko to Yao, I mean, Yao's a phenom, Darko's Darko. I think it'll be a harder adjustment for him, anyhow, because of his frame and the position he's playing.

-Tim


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PhillyPhanatic</b>!
> Come on though, Petey, remember who Pistons coach is. LB isn't going to be playing Darko much, even though he should. And anyway, it's not fair to compare Darko to Yao, I mean, Yao's a phenom, Darko's Darko. I think it'll be a harder adjustment for him, anyhow, because of his frame and the position he's playing.
> 
> -Tim


True, he won't get my PT, but it seems if you think he should, like I do, would he be able to develop with limited touches and a non-passing pg? That is what I am basing my suggestion upon. Hamilton is an excellent baller, but I think Darko is a bigger part of their future.

-Petey


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Petey</b>!
> True, he won't get my PT, but it seems if you think he should, like I do, would he be able to develop with limited touches and a non-passing pg? That is what I am basing my suggestion upon. Hamilton is an excellent baller, but I think Darko is a bigger part of their future.
> 
> -Petey


But the question comes down to this, if the idea was to trade Rip all along, why'd they sign him to the contract? Wouldn't it have been easier to move him by trading him before signing a deal? And also with Darko sitting the bench, most likely, this season I think it's too early to get rid of either of the Pistons top scorers until after the season. 

And if Darko's the player people hyped him up to be (I have no idea what he's capable of, I've never seen him play) he should definitely be a bigger part of the Pistons future than Rip, since he should be a franchise player. Though with the Pistons, they don't need him to breakthrough this season, since they're one of the top teams in the East.

-Tim


----------

