# K.G. Will Have Many Suitors...Us Included...



## PaCeRhOLiC (May 22, 2005)

> *Garnett will have plenty of choices*
> 
> _March 19, 2006
> 
> ...


Link 



*Go PaCeRs!!!*


----------



## absolutebest (Jun 10, 2002)

Personally, I think the problem is our backcourt, not our frontcourt. Obviously, A.J., Jack, Freddie and Tinsley are not good enough to get it done. Sick of this year's team...


----------



## absolutebest (Jun 10, 2002)

Actually, Fred and A.J. are damn good back ups... It's just Tinsley and Jackson that are the problem. I just looked and they shot 2-12 (Tinsley) and 6-17 (Jack) today. That, my friends, is a joke. Get them out of here.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

absolutebest said:


> Personally, I think the problem is our backcourt, not our frontcourt. Obviously, A.J., Jack, Freddie and Tinsley are not good enough to get it done. Sick of this year's team...


Tinsley was playing great until this game.

Freddie was playing great until he partially tore a ligament in his finger.

AJ is normally solid or very good. Although, he occasionally has bad games.

All will be solved if Jermaine plays inside and we're injury-free.

Although, I would like to put together a Jackson-JO package and see if Minnesota bites.


----------



## Pacersthebest (Aug 6, 2005)

absolutebest said:


> Actually, Fred and A.J. are damn good back ups... It's just Tinsley and Jackson that are the problem. I just looked and they shot 2-12 (Tinsley) and 6-17 (Jack) today. That, my friends, is a joke. Get them out of here.


I would pick Tinsley any time above AJ.


----------



## Pacersthebest (Aug 6, 2005)

Pacers Fan said:


> Tinsley was playing great until this game.
> 
> Freddie was playing great until he partially tore a ligament in his finger.
> 
> ...


Agree with you, although I think we need to offer more then Jackson-JO....


----------



## absolutebest (Jun 10, 2002)

I've always heard that it would be J.O., Croshere and Tinsley. That is probably up in smoke after all of the injuries. And you could not have Ricky Davis and Jack on the same team. Absolutely not. That would be an 'effing disaster.


----------



## absolutebest (Jun 10, 2002)

Pacersthebest said:


> I would pick Tinsley any time above AJ.


I'm not so sure after the way this year has gone. I am really starting to think that neither of them can cut it as our PG.


----------



## PaCeRhOLiC (May 22, 2005)

J.O.'s going no where!!!...





*Go PaCeRs!!!*


----------



## StephenJackson (Oct 28, 2004)

PaCeRhOLiC said:


> J.O.'s going no where!!!...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


THANK YOU! If JO leaves, my heart will go with him.


----------



## absolutebest (Jun 10, 2002)

PaCeRhOLiC said:


> J.O.'s going no where!!!...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thank you!!!!!


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

I'd trade anyone but Tinsley for him, and even Tinsley if it was really favored towards us.


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

We're not going to give up Jermaine, so we're probably not going to get Garnett.


----------



## bbasok (Oct 30, 2005)

PaCeRhOLiC said:


> J.O.'s going no where!!!...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


yep..Agreed


----------



## Free Arsenal (Nov 8, 2004)

I am not a person who follows the Pacers, but I notice that Jermaine O'neal always seems to get injured during the season.

Maybe trading for Garnett would be better since he does not get injured as often, and he's a lot more durable.

Just an outside opinion.


----------



## Auggie (Mar 7, 2004)

i dont want JO to leave, but peja+jax+tinsley+croshere for kg is just not gonna happen  we really dont have much to offer if we arent willing to part with JO  however if we can put up a package that doesnt contain JO and granger in any way im all for... comon, dream line up:

Sarunas Jasikevicius
Trenton Hassell
Danny Granger
JO
KG

Eddie Gill
Fred Jones
Jeff Foster
Scot Pollard
David Harrison

then re-sign some of those boys i liked from preseason camp like jimmie hunter or desmon farmer for instance. cheap guys but have some skill, to strengthen our backcourt. 

oh well i finished dreaming now, back to reality and this will never happen


----------



## bbasok (Oct 30, 2005)

Auggie said:


> i dont want JO to leave, but peja+jax+tinsley+croshere for kg is just not gonna happen  we really dont have much to offer if we arent willing to part with JO  however if we can put up a package that doesnt contain JO and granger in any way im all for... comon, dream line up:
> 
> Sarunas Jasikevicius
> Trenton Hassell
> ...



I'd LOVE to see KG with J.O.


----------



## TheRoc5 (Mar 1, 2005)

i would think stephon would be a better fit than kg. if we could have oneal peja and stephon that would already make this team a contender. yall are deep enough to do a trade to get him. the pacers dont need kg yall have oneal thats younger and puts up the same type of numbers. the problem is the back court.
stephon
jackson
peja
oneal
filler 

the pacers could trade picks and young players/cap players and could become one of the best teams in the whole nba.sure the pacers might loose some depth, youth and allmost all of there cap but yall need to make a push for the title some time and i think this would be perfect. with oneal yall will allways be a playoff team.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

TheRoc5 said:


> i would think stephon would be a better fit than kg. if we could have oneal peja and stephon that would already make this team a contender.


That'd make us a better version of the New York Knicks right now. What the Pacers are probably missing is a player who can score by creating for himself, yet still pass well, similar to Marbury. The only problem is that with Jackson, Peja, and O'Neal also on the team, I'd worry about the effort, defense, and egos every night. Actually, we could package Peja, Jackson, and Anthony Johnson for him, although that'd leave us dry at the wings.



> yall are deep enough to do a trade to get him. the pacers dont need kg yall have oneal thats younger and puts up the same type of numbers.


The numbers are the same, but everything O'Neal is good at, KG, is better. Garnett has a better jump shot, post game, defense, rebounding, and is better at shot blocking. Not to mention that his passing would really help Indy.



> stephon
> jackson
> peja
> oneal
> filler


We don't need a filler at Center. Foster and Harrison are both very good, and Pollard is servicable when healthy.


----------



## absolutebest (Jun 10, 2002)

I'm sick of all the J.O. haters on here. You will soon eat your words.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

absolutebest said:


> I'm sick of all the J.O. haters on here. You will soon eat your words.


I won't be "eating my words" if he plays well, simply because it really all depends on him. He could be a very good low post scorer, rebounder, and enforcer if he'd only try to play that way. I'll like him much more if he starts playing like a real big man.

I'll cheer him if he performs well, and if he doesn't, I'll criticize him. It works the same way with every other Pacer...except Gill. The only problem is that O'Neal is the best player on our team and really affects how we play, so I blame him the most.


----------



## absolutebest (Jun 10, 2002)

I just get sick of people saying we are better without him. Interesting stat I read over at ESPN.com today... _we are 3-9 in games decided by less than 5 points since Jermaine went out on Jan. 24th._ Does anyone still feel that we are better without him?


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

absolutebest said:


> I just get sick of people saying we are better without him.


The offense is more free without him, but we're not a better team consistently.



> Interesting stat I read over at ESPN.com today... _we are 3-9 in games decided by less than 5 points since Jermaine went out on Jan. 24th._ Does anyone still feel that we are better without him?


I've noticed that for a while now. Losing almost every game down the stretch sucks. We've been spoiled in clutch situations with Jermaine.


----------



## PaCeRhOLiC (May 22, 2005)

absolutebest said:


> Does anyone still feel that we are better without him?




Any team that loses it's Superstar is NEVER better off...and that should not even be a question...


Give me J.O. over K.G. anyday, now I know The Kid's obviously better, but like I said before Jermaine's younger, and it's not that far away from him neither...

Why give up important pieces to get another PF when we're already way better than alot of teams right now in that department...

I like him, and everything, but the one I really see going after the season is S-Jax...him...and maybe Peja, who I think Indy should sign, because his contract is gonna be horrible....



*Go PaCeRs!!!*


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

PaCeRhOLiC said:


> Give me J.O. over K.G. anyday, now I know The Kid's obviously better, but like I said before Jermaine's younger, and it's not that far away from him neither...


We needs vets to win championships. Teams of 25 year olds don't win rings. Garnett is better than Jermaine at everything, and most importantly, has a passing game that would help get others involved.



> Why give up important pieces to get another PF when we're already way better than alot of teams right now in that department...


Jackson isn't very important. We can find another streaky shooting ball hog with decent defense elsewhere.


----------



## PaCeRhOLiC (May 22, 2005)

Pacers Fan said:


> Jackson isn't very important. We can find another streaky shooting ball hog with decent defense elsewhere.



I wouldn't say he isn't very important, but yeah I agree with you, I was mainly referring to Freddie, and, Foster, though...




*Go PaCeRs!!!*


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

PaCeRhOLiC said:


> I wouldn't say he isn't very important, but yeah I agree with you, I was mainly referring to Freddie, and, Foster, though...


I said he wasn't very important because he can be replaced so easily. Actually, he has a better post game than most guards, so maybe not so much.


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

absolutebest said:


> I just get sick of people saying we are better without him. Interesting stat I read over at ESPN.com today... _we are 3-9 in games decided by less than 5 points since Jermaine went out on Jan. 24th._ Does anyone still feel that we are better without him?


I've never really thought we're better without him. Sure, we're better as a team, but definately not winning anymore games. I like watching our games when he's not playing, though. He was really boring before he was injured. Fade away jumpshot after fade away jumpshot, then an occasional easy layup. Pretty boring.


----------



## Banjoriddim (Aug 14, 2004)

Larry Legend said:


> I've never really thought we're better without him. Sure, we're better as a team, but definately not winning anymore games. I like watching our games when he's not playing, though. He was really boring before he was injured. Fade away jumpshot after fade away jumpshot, then an occasional easy layup. Pretty boring.


I agree with it but this is not the main problem for me, the problem is that JO isn't playing and if he is then he isn't the pf he should/could be, also I have bad feeling about him since he is decleared as a leader of this team but I just don't see him as leader (and as long as he is here nothing changes he is still supposed to be leader). He is smart guy but he is better at giveing interviews then being leader of team (so far). However I didn't vote and still have hope. I must say I like JO but I have my doupts in him and in team in general. I still like him (I really do) but I feel that Pacers as a team might head into deadlock. And I don't think it anybodys fault expect maybe S-Jax (and I agree he cannot be changed but that is not excuse... I mean I am hothead and stubborn and tend to f**** things up also I have big ego but at times I can shelter my flaws and if I can't then back off a bit... but then again I am not a basketball millionair :biggrin: ....).


----------



## jermaine7fan (Aug 19, 2005)

Jermaine has 3 months to prove to the bosses (and doubters) in Indy... that he can lead this team... and be an effective part of this new offense... if he can perform as expected or better he will be safe... but I for one... am very scared at the possibility of this trade...

I have faith and hope for my boy... he has all the tools to to do what we need him to do to keep him here in Indy... I just pray that he can step up and be the man... in a lesser role... 

BTW - I have a feeling his jumpers will decrease... for those of you guys who hate them... I believe he will be used more in the interior within the new offense... because that is where we need him most... and it should create the best spacing...

I pray things will work out... because I would just not be the same if JO were moved...

Jermaine grew from a boy into a man in Indiana... now I hope he will become an old man here... 


HE CAN DO IT!

P.S. - Pacerfan... JO is a better shot blocker... I know you hate it but... here's the stats...
JO - 2.3
KG - 1.3

Rebounding and assists are the two things KG stands out more in...

I'll admit that KG is better than JO... but he is someone else's superstar...

Jermaine is ours... I am just a loyalist... especially to someone who grows here...

But I would faint if I ever heard that we had KG and JO on the same team together... I would give up Peja and others for KG... 

Agreed... If you could get a front line of JO, KG, and Granger... talk about unstoppable!


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

lol @ "give me JO over KG anyday"


----------



## absolutebest (Jun 10, 2002)

OK, but J.O. has been just as far in the playoffs, is younger and we would have to give up a lot more than J.O. to get K.G. I just don't see why everyone thinks he's the best player in the game. He hasn't even made the playoffs the last two years. You put Duncan on any team and they make the playoffs. Kobe's supporting cast isn't as good as K.G.'s, he's making the playoffs.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

absolutebest said:


> OK, but J.O. has been just as far in the playoffs


JO's had a better supporting cast.



> is younger and we would have to give up a lot more than J.O. to get K.G.


Would you really mind trading Stephen Jackson and a future 1st rounder if we could?



> I just don't see why everyone thinks he's the best player in the game. He hasn't even made the playoffs the last two years. You put Duncan on any team and they make the playoffs. Kobe's supporting cast isn't as good as K.G.'s, he's making the playoffs.


Kobe's a better individual player. Garnett's probably (He hasn't had much of a chance) a player who plays within the team to win.


----------



## StephenJackson (Oct 28, 2004)

PacersguyUSA said:


> lol @ "give me JO over KG anyday"


I'd rather have JO over KG...anyday. I've said it a million times, I'll say it again, I am forever loyal to JO.


----------



## PaCeRhOLiC (May 22, 2005)

PacersguyUSA said:


> lol @ "give me JO over KG anyday"



Basing everything on age, and team needs...

Like I said before K.G.'s obviously better, but why trade for another PF, when we can get better in different ways....

Because of one player, what now we gotta get rid of everyone else, and start all over again..

So somehow we get K.G. aight...is that gonna make Peja play defense, and score in the 4th., or is that gonna stop Jax from getting into too many isos...or is that gonna keep Tinman, and the rest of our team healthy??...

If it does....then I''m down with you, and everyone who want's to give up our franchise.... :cheers: 




*Go PaCeRs!!!!*


----------



## DemonaL (Aug 24, 2005)

absolutebest said:


> Personally, I think the problem is our backcourt, not our frontcourt. Obviously, A.J., Jack, Freddie and Tinsley are not good enough to get it done. Sick of this year's team...


I agree, you guys need a back court.


----------



## MillerTime (Jul 6, 2003)

absolutebest said:


> Personally, I think the problem is our backcourt, not our frontcourt. Obviously, A.J., Jack, Freddie and Tinsley are not good enough to get it done. Sick of this year's team...


I totally agree. I have no problems of our frontcourt, and honestly, i don't think KG would be a good fit for us. Our backcourt needs the work to be fixed, from everyone, all of them are not as good as they should be, including Jones, Tins or Saras. 

However, the article says NYK are in the race. How can the Knicks be in the race? Can someone explain that to me? They have NOONE the Wolves would want. If KG gets traded to the Knicks, the NBA is officially fixed.


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

jermaine7fan said:


> P.S. - Pacerfan... JO is a better shot blocker... I know you hate it but... here's the stats...
> JO - 2.3
> KG - 1.3


Garnett averages less fouls, what does that tell you?


----------



## absolutebest (Jun 10, 2002)

Pacers Fan said:


> JO's had a better supporting cast.


That is hard to argue except for this point: KG had a better back court that year. Especially point guard (Cassell, who averaged around 20 and 7 that year), but also Spree at shooting guard. Those two were a lot better that year than what our backcourt has consistently done all year. They also had Wally, Troy Hudson (when he could still play) and Trenton Hassell. Yes, they were thin up front, but they still had considerable talent. 





Pacers Fan said:


> Would you really mind trading Stephen Jackson and a future 1st rounder if we could?


No... but other than health reasons, I see no reason to trade J.O. for K.G. Plus, Minnesota would not want Jack when they already have both similar players (Davis, McCants) and head cases (Davis, McCants, Griffin).


----------



## absolutebest (Jun 10, 2002)

Larry Legend said:


> Garnett averages less fouls, what does that tell you?


That he gets more calls... or, should I say, no-calls. K.G. gets the star treatment.


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

absolutebest said:


> That he gets more calls... or, should I say, no-calls. K.G. gets the star treatment.


It tells me that he swats more and puts himself in position to get those calls.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

absolutebest said:


> That is hard to argue except for this point: KG had a better back court that year. Especially point guard (Cassell, who averaged around 20 and 7 that year), but also Spree at shooting guard. Those two were a lot better that year than what our backcourt has consistently done all year. They also had Wally, Troy Hudson (when he could still play) and Trenton Hassell. Yes, they were thin up front, but they still had considerable talent.


Hudson and Wally play no defense and are basically cancers. Spree is also a cancer, and Cassell doesn't do much on defense, either.



> No... but other than health reasons, I see no reason to trade J.O. for K.G. Plus, Minnesota would not want Jack when they already have both similar players (Davis, McCants) and head cases (Davis, McCants, Griffin).


Minnesota will probably end up dealing McCants or Davis to some other team. Ricky and Jackson are very similar players, but if Jackson takes the post and the occasional 3, while Davis focuses on driving, it could work out well.


----------



## jermaine7fan (Aug 19, 2005)

Larry Legend said:


> It tells me that he swats more and puts himself in position to get those calls.


What do PFs have to do with swatting shots... if anything that would show that JO is more aggressive on D... or KG gets more no-calls...

JO still swats 1 more block per game than KG... PFs are meaningless in this case... unless you can help me catch what you are trying to say...

If JO blocks a shot... and fouls the person... they don't count his block... 

JO's blocking numbers are higher than KG's... there is no way to dispute that...

KG is better than JO at about everything else... but that is JO's one shining spot...

P.S. - JO's shot blocking skills is why I loved him as a rookie... and the rest of his time in POR... he is a natural swatter... he had to learn the rest...


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

jermaine7fan said:


> What do PFs have to do with swatting shots... if anything that would show that JO is more aggressive on D... or KG gets more no-calls...
> 
> JO still swats 1 more block per game than KG... PFs are meaningless in this case... unless you can help me catch what you are trying to say...


Swats or goes for the block more is what I'm trying to say. And I was said nothing about PF's in general.

I guess what you're trying to say is getting a lot of blocks means you're really good at defense. Artest averages less than one block per game and he's one of the best defensive players in the league.


----------



## jermaine7fan (Aug 19, 2005)

Larry Legend said:


> Swats or goes for the block more is what I'm trying to say. And I was said nothing about PF's in general.


I got ya... you are saying that KG gets the block rather than the foul... at a higher percentage than JO does...




Larry Legend said:


> I guess what you're trying to say is getting a lot of blocks means you're really good at defense. Artest averages less than one block per game and he's one of the best defensive players in the league.


Nope... KG is the better all-around defender... for sure... he is a good stealer... and a way better perimeter defender than JO is... 

but I do believe JO is better at the swatting part of the D...

It is the only thing he is better at than KG...

JO prolly puts a lot more empasis on the shot blocking part of his D... it's a very strong point for him... KG has other things he can do... and has to worry about on the defensive end...


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

jermaine7fan said:


> What do PFs have to do with swatting shots... if anything that would show that JO is more aggressive on D... or KG gets more no-calls...


Jermaine's not a good defender, so he often gambles on blocks. Similar to Jamaal Tinsley and steals, but Jermaine's a better defender than Tinsley. Anyway, Jermaine jumps in the air more, making him foul opponents more, but also having a greater chance at a block.


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

jermaine7fan said:


> I got ya... you are saying that KG gets the block rather than the foul... at a higher percentage than JO does...


No, I never said anything about Garnett's blocking abilities. I implied that he keeps his feet on the ground and doesn't go for the block as often, that's probably why he averages less blocks. Obviously, the more attempts you get at a block, the more blocks you're going to get.



> Nope... KG is the better all-around defender... for sure... he is a good stealer... and a way better perimeter defender than JO is...
> 
> but I do believe JO is better at the swatting part of the D...
> 
> ...


Let me get this straight, if you had a choice (regardless how much of a fan of Jermaine you are) who would you rather have? Jermaine or Garnett


----------



## PaCeRhOLiC (May 22, 2005)

Larry Legend said:


> Jermaine or Garnett



K.G. with the age, and blocking ability of J.O....




*Go PaCeRs!!!!*


----------



## jermaine7fan (Aug 19, 2005)

Larry Legend said:


> No, I never said anything about Garnett's blocking abilities. I implied that he keeps his feet on the ground and doesn't go for the block as often, that's probably why he averages less blocks. Obviously, the more attempts you get at a block, the more blocks you're going to get.
> 
> 
> 
> Let me get this straight, if you had a choice (regardless how much of a fan of Jermaine you are) who would you rather have? Jermaine or Garnett


Throw out my love for JO... and my loyalty to players who grow here... and give their all for our franchise...

And I would pick KG... he is obviously the more rounded baller... and a more experienced leader...

But as things stand... I want my JO in Indy... even at the expense of loosing an opportunity at a rare talent like KG...

Even if I weren't as huge a JO fan... and just a plain ol' Pacer fan... I would not want to give up JO for anything... he is a Pacer... through and through... He has given his heart to Indy... Who am I to say... BYE... THANKS FOR THE HELP OVER THE YEARS... WE RAISED YOU FROM A ROLE PLAYER INTO AN ALL-STAR... BUT ARE NOW READY TO MOVE ON...

Reggie has given me a serious loyalty complex when it comes to Pacer players... I say... Stick with what ya got... when it comes to all-stars who give you their all...


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

jermaine7fan said:


> WE RAISED YOU FROM A SCRUB INTO AN ALL-STAR...


He rarely played in Portland. I think bench warmer would be the correct term.


----------



## jermaine7fan (Aug 19, 2005)

Larry Legend said:


> He rarely played in Portland. I think bench warmer would be the correct term.


I'll edit then... look back...


----------



## StephenJackson (Oct 28, 2004)

jermaine7fan said:


> Even if I weren't as huge a JO fan... and just a plain ol' Pacer fan... I would not want to give up JO for anything... he is a Pacer... through and through... He has given his heart to Indy... Who am I to say... BYE... THANKS FOR THE HELP OVER THE YEARS... WE RAISED YOU FROM A ROLE PLAYER INTO AN ALL-STAR... BUT ARE NOW READY TO MOVE ON...
> 
> Reggie has given me a serious loyalty complex when it comes to Pacer players... I say... Stick with what ya got... when it comes to all-stars who give you their all...


I swear we are the same person. JO for life.


----------



## JayRedd (Jan 2, 2006)

Pacers Fan said:


> The numbers are the same, but everything O'Neal is good at, KG, is better. Garnett has a better jump shot, post game, defense, rebounding, and is better at shot blocking. Not to mention that his passing would really help Indy.


Exactly right...This is one of the most pointless threads I've seen in a looong time. Minnesota is not trading us KG for JO. It's just not happening. And nothing short of JO/Granger/Tinsley would even get McHale to return a phone call.

Really, the only logic Kevin McHale needs to use in a JO for KG trade is the same logic Homer uses in a Simpsons episode when someone asks him if he wants to go to Canada: "Why would I want go to America Jr. if I'm already in America?"


----------



## jermaine7fan (Aug 19, 2005)

JayRedd said:


> Exactly right...This is one of the most pointless threads I've seen in a looong time. Minnesota is not trading us KG for JO. It's just not happening. And nothing short of JO/Granger/Tinsley would even get McHale to return a phone call.
> 
> Really, the only logic Kevin McHale needs to use in a JO for KG trade is the same logic Homer uses in a Simpsons episode when someone asks him if he wants to go to Canada: "Why would I want go to America Jr. if I'm already in America?"


Then where do you see KG ending up after this summer?.. He won't be in Minny... garaunteed... Their run together is about over...

If the Wolves wouldn't take JO for him... who else is better that you think they would go for?


----------



## MillerTime (Jul 6, 2003)

JayRedd said:


> Really, the only logic Kevin McHale needs to use in a JO for KG trade is the same logic Homer uses in a Simpsons episode when someone asks him if he wants to go to Canada: "Why would I want go to America Jr. if I'm already in America?"


haha very well said man. I agree, a 1 for 1 deal will not happen, although, and i don't think you're that much off on the trade proposal. JO, Granger and a Tinsley for KG seems right, and now you have to ask the question, would you do it? Because i wouldn't do it... i'd keep JO and Granger, definetly the upside of Granger and the current skill of JO is way too much and we're not rebuilding, but fix a few problems and we're contenders, no need for a blockbuster deal.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

MillerTime said:


> haha very well said man. I agree, a 1 for 1 deal will not happen, although, and i don't think you're that much off on the trade proposal. JO, Granger and a Tinsley for KG seems right, and now you have to ask the question, would you do it? Because i wouldn't do it... i'd keep JO and Granger, definetly the upside of Granger and the current skill of JO is way too much and we're not rebuilding, but fix a few problems and we're contenders, no need for a blockbuster deal.


Granger is traded for no one outside a young stud more studly than himself.


----------



## MillerTime (Jul 6, 2003)

Pacers Fan said:


> Granger is traded for no one outside a young stud more studly than himself.


I know... which is why this thread is pointless like JayRedd said, because it's not realistic that KG would be traded here... because JO for KG is not enough, and what would be enough, we wouldn't want any part of that deal.


----------



## AMΣRICAN GOD™ (Jun 4, 2005)

I say...

Celtics Get - 
J.O, K.G, and Ricky Davis

Indy Gets - 
2nd round draft pick

Minny gets - 
Second round draft pick


Sounds good to me! :cheers:


----------



## JayRedd (Jan 2, 2006)

jermaine7fan said:


> Then where do you see KG ending up after this summer?.. He won't be in Minny... garaunteed... Their run together is about over...
> 
> If the Wolves wouldn't take JO for him... who else is better that you think they would go for?


Frankly, Minnesota would be crazy to trade him. But if he does force a trade (and I seriously doubt he'd ever pull a public stunt like Vince Carter. I'd guess it was a behind the scenes meeting with McHale that won't surface for some time), my guess is a team like Chicago, Toronto, Atlanta or even possibly New York.

Getting JO doesn't help Minny rebuild because Oneal's contract is almost as ridiculously expensive as Garnett's is currently. They would need to trade for youth, cheap talent and picks, with an expiring albatross contract to make the money work.

Most likely McHale would deal with an East team. NY could package, Frye, Crawford, Rose, Lee and a #1 for KG and Blount. Chicago could give Hinrich, Deng, Chandler and Othella Harrington for KG and McCants. Given KGs contract, the money is tough to work for the Bulls, but they have the young talent and draft picks (including NYKs #1 this year) to possibly make something work. Would probably hafta be a three-way trade though. Atlanta could give up Joe Johnson, Marvin Williams, one of the Josh's and a #1 for KG and McCants. 

Either way, there are a lot of teams with cheap young talent that could help a Minny team if they decide they need to fold their hand by trading KG. But other than Granger and Harrison, we just don't have a lot of young, cheap or non-injury-prone talent. 

I really don't see JO going anywhere. Not for KG or anyone else. His contract is too large, he's injured too much and as a Top 10 - 15 player in the league, we're not gonna get any Herschel Walker type deals.


----------

