Intellectual Trade

[Nash13]

Would you do this?


Dallas trades: SF Josh Howard (8.6 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 1.5 apg in 23.7 minutes)
C Shawn Bradley (3.3 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 0.3 apg in 11.7 minutes)
PF Dirk Nowitzki (21.8 ppg, 8.7 rpg, 2.7 apg in 37.9 minutes)
Dallas receives: PF Malik Rose (7.9 ppg, 4.8 rpg, 1.0 apg in 18.8 minutes)
PF Tim Duncan (22.3 ppg, 12.4 rpg, 3.1 apg in 36.6 minutes)
Change in team outlook: -3.5 ppg, +0.4 rpg, and -0.4 apg.

San Antonio trades: PF Malik Rose (7.9 ppg, 4.8 rpg, 1.0 apg in 18.8 minutes)
PF Tim Duncan (22.3 ppg, 12.4 rpg, 3.1 apg in 36.6 minutes)
San Antonio receives: SF Josh Howard (8.6 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 1.5 apg in 67 games)
C Shawn Bradley (3.3 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 0.3 apg in 66 games)
PF Dirk Nowitzki (21.8 ppg, 8.7 rpg, 2.7 apg in 77 games)
Change in team outlook: +3.5 ppg, -0.4 rpg, and +0.4 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED

lineup

Terry/Harris
Daniels/Stackhouse
Finley/
Duncan/Rose
Dampier/Booth/DJ/Pavel

[Fah Q]

Yes

I know this is a fantasy trade so I won't be disparaging and say it will never happen.

[Male30Dan]

Of course you do that... I dont even think twice about it...

[Male30Dan]

I dont know that you could pick any two players on the Mavs that I wouldnt trade for Duncan...

I love Dirk, but he simply is not and never will be in Duncan's league!!!

[cheesestar]

duncan is the best player in the league (imo)

yes

[dalmations202]

Personally, I wouldn't do that trade for anyone in the league..........except Tim Duncan...so Yes..

[endtroducing]

Originally posted by: Male23Dan


I love Dirk, but he simply is not and never will be in Duncan's league!!!

can't say that. dirk's 26 years old, and he hasn't even hit his prime...

[Joey]

I'd trade dirk for only two people in the league...KG or Duncan.

[Ninkobei]

No way guys! Dirk is the best part about this team. He defines the mavericks! Accepting that trade would be equivelant to Steve Nash signing with the Suns for more money. You aren't supposed to sell out your team! I'm hoping Dirk is a mav for life so he can have his number retired here and be one of the few who have never played anywhere but here. I'm shocked and appalled. Viva Dirk!

[sike]

Intellectual Trade: Albert Einstein for Jonathan Edwards
Einstein gives you a strong mathematical mind (science being a forte) where as Edwards is considered by many the greatest theological mind of the past 500 years…
I could see this trade being fair and equitable

[Male30Dan]

Originally posted by: endtroducing

can't say that. dirk's 26 years old, and he hasn't even hit his prime...

Oh I can say that... You would have to be one of the select few on the board that has a problem with my assessment... Duncan is 28, and based on your age restraints, would have come into "his prime" last year... The only problem with that is that Duncan has been Duncan since year one, (look up the guys stats... His rookie year he had 21 pts, 12 rebs, and 2.5 blocks - this past year he had 22 pts, 12.5 rebs, and 2.7 blocks)... Duncan is a beast on the boards, a great shot blocker, one helluva defender, and can score at will... He is completely unstoppable and only KG and Shaq, (he will not be for long), are in his league... There are only three big men that you trade the farm for, and one of them is too old to do so anymore...

To say that Dirk will be as good as Duncan one day is a bunch of BS... Again, I love the guy, but that is just gumdrops and candy cane talk... It WONT happen because Dirk will NEVER, EVER, EVER, EVER be as good on the defensive end as Duncan... He will improve and that will be noted this year with the help of a banging center, but he just doesnt have that attitude, (the same attitude that seems to prevent him from being THE GUY)...

Bottom line, Duncan will go down as one of the best all-around players in the history of the NBA... Dirk will go down as one of the most unstoppable offensive european players in NBA history...

[SeriousSummer]

Intellectual Trade: Albert Einstein for Jonathan Edwards

No way you do that. Einstein's work led, among other things, to the development of atomic power. Edwards is only the author of a lot of boring sermons. Besides, I think Edwards hit his prime a century or more ago while Einstein is still one of the big theoretical players in physics.

If I'm giving up Einstein, then I want at least Fermi, Curie, Newton, and Aristotle as well.

Plus salary cap relief and a No. 1 draft pick--not lottery protected.

[dalmations202]

If I'm giving up Einstein, then I want at least Fermi, Curie, Newton, and Aristotle as well.

Yea, and give me Robin Williams and Tom Hanks as well.

[sike]

[quote]
Originally posted by: SeriousSummer

Intellectual Trade: Albert Einstein for Jonathan Edwards

No way you do that. Einstein's work led, among other things, to the development of atomic power.

It all depends on your need at the moment SS, if cultural advances in the field of science is your desire, then you certainly go with Einstein...If your pursuit is a passion for the realm of the unseen God who surpasses all culture...you certainly go with Edwards.

Edwards is only the author of a lot of boring sermons.

wrong. Jonathan Edwards' complete catalog of work is incredible...his works on the process of salvation, the essence of God, and the nature of the will of man have long been treasured by men of all faiths....he was also the front man for the Greatest move of Revival the States have ever seen(Great Awakening)....certainly not a common preacher...one of the greatest minds in US history.

Besides, I think Edwards hit his prime a century or more ago while Einstein is still one of the big theoretical players in physics.

His works are still major influences on anyone who reads theology today...As with Einstein, brilliance never goes out of date.

If I'm giving up Einstein, then I want at least Fermi, Curie, Newton, and Aristotle as well.

If I'm giving up Edwards, then I at least want Martin Luther, Tertullian, Chrysostom, Origen, or Jerome in return...we may be able to work out a combo deal for Aristotle...as for Newton..hes mine!

Plus salary cap relief and a No. 1 draft pick--not lottery protected

[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

PUPPY, YOU CAN HAVE ROBIN WILLIAMS....ANYTHING TO SHUT HIM UP! [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img].....as for Hanks....you may have to give me Ed Norton and Christian Bale....(a super star for an up and coming superstar and a great prospect)

[SeriousSummer]

O.K., Sike, How about this:

You give me:

Edwards, Fermi, Curie, Aristotle, Newton, (I'll take da Vinci instead if you want--that dude has versatility, he can play anywhere at the one through the five) a number 1 (no lottery protection) and a $5 million trade exception for

Einstein, Martin Luther, Tertullian, Chrysostom, and Thomas Aquinas (runs a more disciplined offense than Origen or Jerome). If pushed I might give up Bishop Lamy and a couple of second round draft choices, but you'd have to take Pat Robertson as well--I really need to unload his contract.

If you want to make it a three-way deal, then I'll send Milton to The Spotted One, he sends Hanks to you and I'll take Selma Hayek.

[dalmations202]

No Milton, send Richard and Eddie instead.

These guys at least knew how to not take life so serious.

<edit>

And Whoppi is my coach.....

Charles R. Drew is my Center of Attention.

Drew in the center, Hanks and Williams as my forwards, and Richard and Eddie as my guards. Whoppi as coach.

We'd win every year.

[sike]

Originally posted by: SeriousSummer
O.K., Sike, How about this:

You give me:

Edwards, Fermi, Curie, Aristotle, Newton, (I'll take da Vinci instead if you want--that dude has versatility, he can play anywhere at the one through the five) a number 1 (no lottery protection) and a $5 million trade exception for

Einstein, Martin Luther, Tertullian, Chrysostom, and Thomas Aquinas (runs a more disciplined offense than Origen or Jerome). If pushed I might give up Bishop Lamy and a couple of second round draft choices, but you'd have to take Pat Robertson as well--I really need to unload his contract.

If you want to make it a three-way deal, then I'll send Milton to The Spotted One, he sends Hanks to you and I'll take Selma Hayek.

well SS(very funny), I will make that deal as long as I can cut Pat Robertson and only eat half of his contract. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]
Selma is pretty hot(looks like my wife...except my wife is from Brazil) but can't act to well(though I did not see Freda) so If I can get Hanks from you and turn around and ship him off to puppy for Norton and Bale this whole deal will work out beautifully....
this may be off topic [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img] but I am still conflicted about trading Dirk for Tim...my heart says no and my head is screaming "you fool! Do the deal!"

[poohrichardson]

Originally posted by: sike

well SS(very funny), I will make that deal as long as I can cut Pat Robertson and only eat half of his contract. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]
Selma is pretty hot(looks like my wife...except my wife is from Brazil) but can't act to well(though I did not see Freda) so If I can get Hanks from you and turn around and ship him off to puppy for Norton and Bale this whole deal will work out beautifully....
this may be off topic [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img] but I am still conflicted about trading Dirk for Tim...my heart says no and my head is screaming "you fool! Do the deal!"

To me, the only player in the league worth trading Dirk for is Garnett, who I feel is far and away the best player on the planet. Duncan is Garnett lite.

I'd still be hard-pressed to see myself trading Dirk though. Franchises need to show more loyalty to true franchise players, no matter who they might get for him.

[dalmations202]

To me, the only player in the league worth trading Dirk for is Garnett, who I feel is far and away the best player on the planet. Duncan is Garnett lite.

Duncan has 2 titles (in 7 NBA seasons). Garnett has been out of the 1st round of the playoffs once (in 9 NBA seasons).
Duncan has been MVP 2 Garnett 1.
TD is 1" taller and 45lbs heavier.

They were born the same year (1976).

Both average over 38 minutes per game.

TD average 22.8 ppg for his career
KG averages 20 ppg for his career

TD averages 12.3 rpg
KG averages 10.8 rpg

TD averages 2.5 blocks/pg
KG averages 1.8 blocks/pg

TD career FG% = 50.9
KG career FG% = 48.8

Sorry to disagree, but KG is TD lite, not the other way around.

[endtroducing]

Duncan is soft. Garnett's not.

I'd take KG.

[Male30Dan]

Originally posted by: endtroducing
Duncan is soft. Garnett's not.

I'd take KG.

Wow... I would take a 2-time soft NBA Champion anyday, (especially one as talented as Tim)...

I will say it again, Wow!!!

[poohrichardson]

Originally posted by: dalmations202

Duncan has 2 titles (in 7 NBA seasons). Garnett has been out of the 1st round of the playoffs once (in 9 NBA seasons).
Duncan has been MVP 2 Garnett 1.
TD is 1" taller and 45lbs heavier.

They were born the same year (1976).

Both average over 38 minutes per game.

TD average 22.8 ppg for his career
KG averages 20 ppg for his career

TD averages 12.3 rpg
KG averages 10.8 rpg

TD averages 2.5 blocks/pg
KG averages 1.8 blocks/pg

TD career FG% = 50.9
KG career FG% = 48.8

Sorry to disagree, but KG is TD lite, not the other way around.

Duncan's numbers aren't even that much better than Garnett's... especially considering Duncan has been on a legit contender (based on his supporting squad) whereas Garnett has had ONE season with a halfway decent team, and the only thing that kept them from going to the Finals was 3 injuries (Cassell, Szczerbiak, Hudson). Garnett is much more aggressive, much more active.. and he just plays like he wants it more than Duncan does. No knock on TD.. but Garnett has emerged as far and away the best player on the planet.

[sike]

Originally posted by: endtroducing
Duncan is soft. Garnett's not.
I'd take KG.

using the same logic, one could also say that Duncan is clutch and that other than one year of his career KG has been a choker...

[DCowboysGal]

K. Garnett's rebounding, shot-blocking, and FG% numbers are worse than Duncan's because Garnett has played a lot at SF whereas Duncan has played exclusively in the post at PF/C. Garnett is more versatile offensively than Duncan because his shooting range extends to the 3-point line while Duncan's is limited to closer in. Garnett also has better career steals numbers: 1.40/season to Duncan's 0.80/season.

[Male30Dan]

Originally posted by: DCowboysGal
K. Garnett's rebounding, shot-blocking, and FG% numbers are worse than Duncan's because Garnett has played a lot at SF whereas Duncan has played exclusively in the post at PF/C. Garnett is more versatile offensively than Duncan because he has 3-point range on his shot whereas Duncan doesn't. Garnett also has better career steals numbers: 1.46/season to Duncan's 0.90/season.

So should one say that Antoine Walker is comparable to Duncan because his FG% numbers are worse than Tim's because of the excessive 3-point shooting he takes??? I dont care what position a guy plays, he is either more or less productive than someone else... You cant fault Shaq because he doesnt shoot outside of the paint anymore than you can talk-up KG due to his inside-outside game...

Regarding versatility, I say hands down KG is better, but the 3-point shot you speak of is not worth speaking of...

Don't get me wrong in anything I have said in this thread... I have never once said that Duncan is the best player in the NBA... I, like many of you, believe that should likely go to either KG or Shaq... Once Shaq retires, whenever that is, I believe the two best players in the NBA will be VERY close, and that they will be KG and Duncan... They bring so much more to the game than just offense and defense... They want to win and they make everyone around them better...

I only supported Duncan so strong because there are people on our fine board that like to label him as soft and as a player that is possibly not as talented as the not yet in his prime Dirk... Both bullshit by the way!

[Murphy3]

Until last season, KG hadn't shown the ability to take over late in the game or dominate the game on the offensive side of the ball. Last year, KG probably closed the gap alot between himself and Duncan.

[dalmations202]

Everyone here can have their own opinion, but mine has always come from productivity.

TD wins hands down.

7 years is a large sampling from players who probably won't play much over 12.
They are at least half way through their careers, and TD wins in every statistical category except steals, assists.

Yes, KG is more versitile yes. Better player, No.

As far as the 3 pt idea. Add them up. KG averages in his career making 12.5 3pt's a year. Last year, when he was the MVP, he made 11 of them. I don't think that is really enough to push him past TD.

Also include the fact that TD is a six time (in his first 6 years) ALL-NBA first teamer. Something Garnett didn't do.

TD is the better player. It is a joke to call him soft though, because he isn't. He just seems that way because he doesn't lose his cool like KG and go screaming off like some spoiled child.

[Pongo]

Last Season


TD 22.3 PPG
KG 24.2 PPG

TD 12.4 RPG
KG 13.9 RPG

TD 3.1 APG
KG 5.0 APG

TD .90 SPG
KG 1.46 SPG

TD 2.68 BPG
KG 2.17 BPG

TD 50.1 FG%
KG 49.9 FG%

TD 59.9 FT%
KG 79.1 FT%

Garnett clearly played better last year, at least according the stats

[endtroducing]

KG won a WCF finals game with Darrick Martin at point guard and Oliver Miller, Olowocoochie and Madsen at center. KG played at least 10 minutes at the point in that game, too. Duncan had more help (Horry, Ginobili, Parker, Rose, Rasho, Turkoglu, Bowen, etc) and STILL lost in six games, just like Minnesota did.

Duncan is a whole lot less versatile, and a whole lot less athletic than Garnett.

[dalmations202]

Originally posted by: endtroducing
KG won a WCF finals game with Darrick Martin at point guard and Oliver Miller, Olowocoochie and Madsen at center. KG played at least 10 minutes at the point in that game, too. Duncan had more help (Horry, Ginobili, Parker, Rose, Rasho, Turkoglu, Bowen, etc) and STILL lost in six games, just like Minnesota did.

And Garnett played with All-Star, Sam Cassell and previous All-Star Latrell Spreewell

Who are the All-Stars that TD played with? ? ?

Duncan is a whole lot less versatile, and a whole lot less athletic than Garnett.

Yes, but TD is better at the main position of PF. And that is what both of them are listed as.


If you had to start a new league with new draft, I'd argue that at least 80% of all GM's in the NBA would take Tim Duncan #1 overall.

[endtroducing]

cassell did not play in that game.

[dalmations202]

Originally posted by: endtroducing
cassell did not play in that game.

Maybe not, but to get the stats he had last year, Cassell did play most of it. And was an all-star. And let's face it Sprewell played better than Ginobili and Bowen.

You say that KG did alot, TD did it all year with less top talent around him. And he took the team to the same place that KG did.....losing to the Lakers in 6.

[endtroducing]

there were only two other good players on Garnett's team...and his bench help was Gary Trent and Fred Hoiberg. c'mon.

[dalmations202]

Ok, then let's look at the last 7 years......since TD has been in the league.

Playoffs:
1998 SA 2nd round, Minn 1st round
1999 SA Championship, Minn 1st round
2000 SA 1st round , Minn 1st round
2001 SA WCF, Minn 1st round
2002 SA 2nd Round, Minn 1st round
2003 SA Championship, Minn 1st round
2004 SA 2nd round, Minn WCF

Even Dirk, who came to a team that was the worse team of the 90's, has taken his team to the WCF once, and out of the 1st round three times.

[alby]

I believe a player cannot be classified as 'great' or the 'best' unless he takes his team to the championship, willing them over the top, and ultimately winning a ring. Just like when MJ was winning all his scoring titles and the rest of his individual accolades, his knock as a player was still one that 'couldnt win the big one' and thus, was never compared to Magic or Bird because of the lack of respect of a player who has never been at the pinnacle of his own sport. MJ is now claimed by many as the greatest of all time BECAUSE of six titles. If you are to based a player's greatness by stats, shouldn't Karl Malone be up there since he is second in scoring in the history of the NBA (laughing). Sorry, but it is quite ludacris to even mention KG's name in the same breath as Duncan, because the fact of the matter is Garnett has been out of the first round only one time in his career.

[sike]

Originally posted by: Murphy3
Until last season, KG hadn't shown the ability to take over late in the game or dominate the game on the offensive side of the ball. Last year, KG probably closed the gap alot between himself and Duncan.

last year KG also had more talent on his team that Timmy has ever had on any team in his entire career.

[poohrichardson]

Originally posted by: alby
I believe a player cannot be classified as 'great' or the 'best' unless he takes his team to the championship, willing them over the top, and ultimately winning a ring. Just like when MJ was winning all his scoring titles and the rest of his individual accolades, his knock as a player was still one that 'couldnt win the big one' and thus, was never compared to Magic or Bird because of the lack of respect of a player who has never been at the pinnacle of his own sport. MJ is now claimed by many as the greatest of all time BECAUSE of six titles. If you are to based a player's greatness by stats, shouldn't Karl Malone be up there since he is second in scoring in the history of the NBA (laughing). Sorry, but it is quite ludacris to even mention KG's name in the same breath as Duncan, because the fact of the matter is Garnett has been out of the first round only one time in his career.

I'm sorry.. but if you don't think Karl Malone and John Stockton.. two players without NBA titles... are all-time greats... you have absolutely no credibility as a judge of basketball talent.

[poohrichardson]

Originally posted by: sike

last year KG also had more talent on his team that Timmy has ever had on any team in his entire career.

It only appears that way because Garnett's intensity and competitiveness are contagious. Duncan is a great player, but he isn't nearly as intense as Garnett. KG can play every position on the floor (literally, as he's shown this past season) and his desire to win really makes players like Fred Hoiberg, Trenton Hassell, and in many ways even Latrell Sprewell, look like they're better than they really are. Sprewell is arguable, but I think this past season, while it might not have been as productive statistically (oh my God!) as seasons with the Knicks have appeared to be in the past, it was still the best year Spree has had since taking the Knicks into the ECF 4 years ago.

Bottom line for me is that Garnett's intensity is infectious, making his team all around better. Duncan doesn't do nearly as much.

[dalmations202]

It only appears that way because Garnett's intensity and competitiveness are contagious. Duncan is a great player, but he isn't nearly as intense as Garnett. KG can play every position on the floor (literally, as he's shown this past season) and his desire to win really makes players like Fred Hoiberg, Trenton Hassell, and in many ways even Latrell Sprewell, look like they're better than they really are. Sprewell is arguable, but I think this past season, while it might not have been as productive statistically (oh my God!) as seasons with the Knicks have appeared to be in the past, it was still the best year Spree has had since taking the Knicks into the ECF 4 years ago.

Bottom line for me is that Garnett's intensity is infectious, making his team all around better. Duncan doesn't do nearly as much.

Then by your definition, Ron Artest is easily the best player in the league. He is more intense than Garnett ever thought of being. He cusses more, and is even more willing to fight. He can play all 5 positions, and can defend any player in the league. He is surrounded by some average players like J O'Neal, R Miller, but makes them look very productive.

I've changed my vote from TD as the best player in the league to Ron Artest............

[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

[sike]

It only appears that way because Garnett's intensity and competitiveness are contagious.

no actually, it appears that way because it is true. Cassell/Spree/Candy/Wally is a better supporting cast than TD has ever had...that is why I said it.

Duncan is a great player, but he isn't nearly as intense as Garnett.

intesity makes one better necessarily?...is this logical? nope

KG can play every position on the floor (literally, as he's shown this past season)

all he can really play well is the 3-5...he cannot play the 1 or the 2

and his desire to win really makes players like Fred Hoiberg, Trenton Hassell, and in many ways even Latrell Sprewell, look like they're better than they really are. Sprewell is arguable, but I think this past season, while it might not have been as productive statistically (oh my God!) as seasons with the Knicks have appeared to be in the past, it was still the best year Spree has had since taking the Knicks into the ECF 4 years ago.

this is merely subjective opinion...I would guess one could make a similar with SA players and TD abilities to improve them

Bottom line for me is that Garnett's intensity is infectious, making his team all around better. Duncan doesn't do nearly as much.

well, other than assists, the stats do not prove this out. If you want to say that KG is more intense than TD, ok....if by intense you mean visibly agitated or emotionally overcharged…but if by intense you mean a serious focus on the job to be done which would be closer to real intensity…you would be wrong…TD is as intensely focused as any player in the league.