Rondo for George HIll is fair?

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    In my opinion yes.... I haven't given you enough of my facts and reasoning by now... sigh... you are so pathetic.

    Just because you mention Rondo being an all-star (pre-injury), and Hill is certainly not, that does not mean this team will be drastically better with Rondo than with Hill. 

    NBA Trade Machine: Try Rondo and Marshon Brooks for George Hill and Chris Copeland

    It = +2 in wins for Celtics  - 3 in wins for Pacers

    Copeland is hardly a better 3rd string SF than Brooks is a 3rd string SG (nearly identical PER's) to alter the trade outcome between the two main pieces that much.

    But we all know I didn't say Rondo for Hill was fair, even if the trade machine does. I said Rondo for 27 million in savings and two first rd picks was fair. Hill for Lee is the player swap I think is fair as far as roles on the team.

    Immediate Impact:

    Say Hill takes Lee and Pressey's 28 minutes a game. Meanwhile Avery and Crawford keep growing together and play 34 minutes a game instead of 30-31. Would you rather have a pouting Lee who can't play PG off the bench and Pressey as backup PG, or Hill doing both? He has basically the same career #'s as Lee except he gets twice as many assists. And more minutes for Craw/Bradley is good as well, Pressey was only getting minutes b/c Lee and Avery can't play PG.

    Team is at the very least 'a little worse' making this trade than the plan of incoroprating Rondo into a starters role, seeing if he can alter his pound the ball into the floor slow it down style with a mostly new roster around him and reducing the roles/mins of Crawford (to the bench) and Avery.

    You may think Rondo jumps in at all-star levels and... what? Leads this team to the playoffs? That is the WORST thing this team can have happen.

    Long-Term Impact:

    The team can afford to pay Crawford 24 million over 4 years, because it will be paying Hill 8m a year instead of Rondo 12 and then a max contract of 5/100. Basically over the next 4 years the team would pay several million less a year for Crawford and Hill than for Rondo and a vet min player.

    Crawford is also blossoming under Stevens. He is 2 years younger than Rondo, taller, a better shooter and no knee injury issues. 

    Meanwhile... the team has a better 2014 draft pick (HUGE) The team saves 27 million (HUGE) and the team has TWO first round picks added in 2016 and 2018 (DOUBLE HUGE).

    Clearly the trade can be considered fair for both sides and in my opinion the team overall gets only a little worse with Hill over Rondo but has the $ flexibility and better/more picks to take one tiny leap back and then two monster leaps forward.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from romneywins. Show romneywins's posts

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    Keep Rondo, he is the only guard we have.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    In response to Fierce34's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Just stop it, rame!

    You're the only one here saying George Hill for Rondo is fair.

    And you must be mentally ill because you say Rondo for George Hill is not happening, but until now you still keep justifying the Rondo for George Hill trade.

    [/QUOTE]

    Why do you continue psychopathic LYING

    I never said George Hill for Rondo was fair

    Just that it could be argued the overall trade package including draft picks, cap space in 2015 and savings 27 million dollars WAS fair. 

    Get it?

    Clearly you can't comprehend the basics of the deal. Pitiful.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    So you think Rudy Gay for John Salmons is fair Fierce?

    I don't.

    But that is the kind of stalking mentally ill garbage you would be bringing if I talked about the Raptors deal being 'fair' value for Rudy Gay. That was a trade you seem to be in favor of by the way. Hypocrite? Of course you are.

    I mean there were FIVE other players in that deal between Toronto and Sacramento... and it was almost entirely a money clearing move for Toronto. But when it comes to the Indy/Boston proposal you can only see it as 'Hill for Rondo'?? Are you this dumb?

    So after unloading easily the best player in the deal, the Raptors ripped off a bunch of wins right after that trade. They are BETTER without Gay.

    Rudy Gay is the Rajon Rondo of SF's. A poor shooting long and lean freak athlete with multiple other talents who no team is going anywhere with if he is their first or second best player.

    And I NEVER said the C's would get BETTER if they traded Rondo, the point was they would only, at the most, be a 'little' worse.

    You lost this one Fierce. Like always:-) Actual facts and real NBA situations prove that I can argue that hypothetical probably not going to happen trade I DON'T EVEN WANT.... is fair value...

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from puddinpuddin. Show puddinpuddin's posts

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    35 thrusts for fungus.... 14 parries for rame......  in this thread alone.

    Quite the sparing duo.

    Guys... go get a motel room and bang things out.

    You know you want to.... more than life itself.

    Pud

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from 37stories. Show 37stories's posts

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    and you like to watch.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    [/QUOTE]


    You must be mentally ill.

     

    Why do you keep repeating the same argument and expecting a different result each time?

     

    This thread clearly proves that nobody here wants to swap Rondo for George Hill even if it involves other pieces.

    Get it?

    [/QUOTE]

    Hahahaha

    This thread has proven NOTHING. Other than you being a LIAR. Not a single poster here posted that a deal also involving draft picks and cap space could not be considered fair. NOT one.

    Sure a handful of people said Rondo is better than Hill or they didn't want to trade him to the Pacers. 

    BUT SO DID I!!!

    Hedley actually came out and said we won't ever get 100% 'fair' value for Rondo but such a proposed deal with Indy could be considred fair.

    Others in this thread (and the original trade idea one) made these things known:

    - OneonOne, Mployee, Puddin and several others here despise you

    - Puddin and Acie would do the swap even without draft picks and cap space

    - Melswitt dislikes the way Rondo plays the sport

    - TrollSpanker say there is no way to know Rondo's value until he plays again

    Nobody said the deal with the picks and monster cap space was a terrible and unfair offer.

    Haha, what a LIAR you are.

    And yes, you can lose the argument even if the players are not traded. Like you already have over and over. Only an absolute fool thinks he can only win or lose arguments if the players are actually traded or not. 

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Here's the thing, rame, I'm not here because I want the people here to like me.

    Good because almost everyone despises you.

    I simply want to talk about the Celtics, that's why I post here.

    Yay! what a great person you must be then.... oh wait... you are a terrible human being who happens to talk relentlessly  and endlessly about the Celtics.

    So I don't care if everybody here doesn't like me.

    Get it?

    Yup, I get that you post obnoxiously on an internet message board that attempts to be professional and maintain rules like regular society and you break those with your childish antics and 'don't care' if you are universally disliked for that.

    I pity you and the serious mental issues you obviously have. So do most of the others who 'talk about the Celtics' here. Good thing you don't care about the kind of despicable and ignorant race-baiting liar and bully you come off as.

    You keep saying I'm a liar because I didn't include the draft picks and cap space?

    That is correct you are a LIAR when you say that I think a Rondo for Hill swap is fair or that I support this proposed trade. I made it clear I do not.

    The main pieces of the trade proposal are Rondo and George Hill.

    Hahahahahahahaha

    Draft picks and cap space cannot be considered main pieces in a trade? You posted no ill will towards the Raptors/Kings trade... but in your twisted head the 'main pieces' are Rudy Gay and John Salmons. Is that fair??

    Oh wait the main asset for the Raptors was CAP SPACE. Idiot.

    Didn't I ask you who the free-agents are for 2015?

    Didn't I tell you I don't do your homework assignments?

    What will you do with cap space if you no free-agent to give it to?

    I am not the GM of the Celtics. But are you telling me that you are so ignorant about the way the sport is run that you do not get the utmost importance teams place on dumping overpaid players from the roster and creating cap space??

    Do you think Ainge would rather pay Wallace and Lee 17 million in 2016 or George Hill 8 million? Who will be harder to move TWO players almost NOBODY wants or one player several teams wouldn't mind?

    And please, Paul George is just 23 years old, you really any of the Pacers' draft picks will be high for the next 3 years?

    Do you really think we are going to get a top 7 pick for Rondo in one of the deepest drafts ever??

    Didn't I say I THINK WE CAN DO BETTER THAN THIS TRADE??

    Hahaha... I don't even want it to happen. I just think you can argue it is fair. Why are you so mentally ill you cannot comprehend this simple thing???

    Again, you lost this argument the moment you said you also don't want to trade Rondo to Indy.

    Really?

    People are NEVER allowed to argue something is 'FAIR' even if they don't want it to happen??

    Do you actually function and live in the real world? Do you know ANYTHING about our culture and society. You are seriously messed up.

    You keep justifying a trade that you don't want to happen.

    That's stupid!

    Hahahaha

    You are really a piece of work. Touched in the head as they say.

    So now we know Fierce 'thinks' he 'wins' arguments based on idiocy like 'nobody can defend the fairness of a trade if they don't want to see it happen' and 'nobody can prove anything or have the superior opinions/points/facts in an argument over a trade idea until the trade does or does not actually happen'.

    Wow.

    You clearly don't get what this board is for or how debates work. Did you even get through the 6th or 7th grade? We know you must not function in (or contribute to) society with the amount of time you spend (waste) posting here. But really... it shocks me just how clueless you are.

    And that is why you lose these things to me OVER and OVER. The walls in your mind that block you from thinking like a normal intelligent person are what prevent you from winning debates. It is truly sad.

    [/QUOTE]


     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    In response to rameakap's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Here's the thing, rame, I'm not here because I want the people here to like me.

    Good because almost everyone despises you.

    I simply want to talk about the Celtics, that's why I post here.

    Yay! what a great person you must be then.... oh wait... you are a terrible human being who happens to talk relentlessly  and endlessly about the Celtics.

    So I don't care if everybody here doesn't like me.

    Get it?

    Yup, I get that you post obnoxiously on an internet message board that attempts to be professional and maintain rules like regular society and you break those with your childish antics and 'don't care' if you are universally disliked for that.

    I pity you and the serious mental issues you obviously have. So do most of the others who 'talk about the Celtics' here. Good thing you don't care about the kind of despicable and ignorant race-baiting liar and bully you come off as.

    You keep saying I'm a liar because I didn't include the draft picks and cap space?

    That is correct you are a LIAR when you say that I think a Rondo for Hill swap is fair or that I support this proposed trade. I made it clear I do not.

    The main pieces of the trade proposal are Rondo and George Hill.

    Hahahahahahahaha

    Draft picks and cap space cannot be considered main pieces in a trade? You posted no ill will towards the Raptors/Kings trade... but in your twisted head the 'main pieces' are Rudy Gay and John Salmons. Is that fair??

    Oh wait the main asset for the Raptors was CAP SPACE. Idiot.

    Didn't I ask you who the free-agents are for 2015?

    Didn't I tell you I don't do your homework assignments?

    What will you do with cap space if you no free-agent to give it to?

    I am not the GM of the Celtics. But are you telling me that you are so ignorant about the way the sport is run that you do not get the utmost importance teams place on dumping overpaid players from the roster and creating cap space??

    Do you think Ainge would rather pay Wallace and Lee 17 million in 2016 or George Hill 8 million? Who will be harder to move TWO players almost NOBODY wants or one player several teams wouldn't mind?

    And please, Paul George is just 23 years old, you really any of the Pacers' draft picks will be high for the next 3 years?

    Do you really think we are going to get a top 7 pick for Rondo in one of the deepest drafts ever??

    Didn't I say I THINK WE CAN DO BETTER THAN THIS TRADE??

    Hahaha... I don't even want it to happen. I just think you can argue it is fair. Why are you so mentally ill you cannot comprehend this simple thing???

    Again, you lost this argument the moment you said you also don't want to trade Rondo to Indy.

    Really?

    People are NEVER allowed to argue something is 'FAIR' even if they don't want it to happen??

    Do you actually function and live in the real world? Do you know ANYTHING about our culture and society. You are seriously messed up.

    You keep justifying a trade that you don't want to happen.

    That's stupid!

    Hahahaha

    You are really a piece of work. Touched in the head as they say.

    So now we know Fierce 'thinks' he 'wins' arguments based on idiocy like 'nobody can defend the fairness of a trade if they don't want to see it happen' and 'nobody can prove anything or have the superior opinions/points/facts in an argument over a trade idea until the trade does or does not actually happen'.

    Wow.

    You clearly don't get what this board is for or how debates work. Did you even get through the 6th or 7th grade? We know you must not function in (or contribute to) society with the amount of time you spend (waste) posting here. But really... it shocks me just how clueless you are.

    And that is why you lose these things to me OVER and OVER. The walls in your mind that block you from thinking like a normal intelligent person are what prevent you from winning debates. It is truly sad.

    [/QUOTE]


    Can you tell the board again how you don't think draft picks and cap space can be the 'main pieces in a trade'??

    Ha!

    Then tell us how 'ever since they dumped Rudy Gay the Raptors have been playing great'

    What were the main pieces in that trade Fiece? Cap space or Gay and John Salmons??

    Ha!

    What a hypocrite

    Tell the board some more lies about how I think Hill for Rondo is fair.

    Tell them that because in your small brain it is 'stupid' to defend the fairness of something you don't really want to see go down... that automatically loses an argument for that person.

    Hahaha

    How many lawyers win cases for clients who they don't really want to see get cut a break but can properly defend with facts why it would be 'fair' if they did.

    Do you understand how a debate works AT ALL Fierce?

     

     



     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from puddinpuddin. Show puddinpuddin's posts

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    I score it 39 lame-azz posts fungus, 17 lame-azz posts rame.

    Advantage....  fungus!

    Keep it up, gurls!

    Pud

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from puddinpuddin. Show puddinpuddin's posts

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    Guess who..... ???...!!!!

    Pud

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from tomobo. Show tomobo's posts

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    In response to 37stories' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    and you like to watch.

    [/QUOTE]

    That sounds like that bothers you, Brian. What ever happened to "not that there's anything wrong with that"?

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share