Rondo for George HIll is fair?

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from billge. Show billge's posts

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    Side note; How is the weather up there today, 37?

     
  3. 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]

    rame

    I enjoy watching you squirm.

    So let's keep this thread alive forever.

    HAHAHA

    [/QUOTE]

    Squirm?

    You have been destroyed and humiliated on this thread.

    I have not squirmed once as you lost this argument last week and yet want to 'keep it going' for whatever sick weird reasoning you may have where you think the more you post that must mean the more likely you 'win'.

    It doesn't mean anything. You lost.

    I am allowed to argue that package of assets from Indy is fair value for rondo. Keep bringing whatever weak sauce you can Fierce. You lost the debate and continue to lose the game of life, showing us all how truly disturbed you really are.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    See.... it is that kind of assumption on what time zone I am (not one where it was 3am haha) and what my motives were (just making pretty funny posts about a VERY ignorant person) that show me you know you lost this one a loooong time ago.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    In response to rameakap's comment:


    Fierce... a LYING CLOWN as always

    I said we'd lose 'a little' in performance..... BASED ON PER ONLY... not 'stat filling triple double' numbers Rondo occasionally puts up on national tv games.

    When it comes to overall statistical performance, both ends of the floor, shooting percentage, points allowed to the other guard, +/- Rondo is a 17 PER guy and Hill is 15. We lose a little there.

    The swap of PG's in NOT A FAIR TRADE and I specifically said I DO NOT WANT THIS TRADE.

    I simply said when you take into consideration losing the salaries of Lee and Wallace for the expiring Granger, cutting the money we have on the cap in '15 by more than half (17m to 8m) while ALSO ADDING A DRAFT PICK... That it can be argued the deal is 'fair' for both sides. Especially with Rondo's injury/attitude history, soon to be max contract demands and his raised level of play in important games (the kinds Indy will be playing not us over the next 2-3 years) compared to his checked out performances in many MANY 'insignificant' games (the kinds C's will be playing this year and next before his contract is up).

     



    HAHAHA

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

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    In response to rameakap's comment:


    Fierce... a LYING CLOWN as always

    I said we'd lose 'a little' in performance..... BASED ON PER ONLY... not 'stat filling triple double' numbers Rondo occasionally puts up on national tv games.

    When it comes to overall statistical performance, both ends of the floor, shooting percentage, points allowed to the other guard, +/- Rondo is a 17 PER guy and Hill is 15. We lose a little there.

    The swap of PG's in NOT A FAIR TRADE and I specifically said I DO NOT WANT THIS TRADE.

    I simply said when you take into consideration losing the salaries of Lee and Wallace for the expiring Granger, cutting the money we have on the cap in '15 by more than half (17m to 8m) while ALSO ADDING A DRAFT PICK... That it can be argued the deal is 'fair' for both sides. Especially with Rondo's injury/attitude history, soon to be max contract demands and his raised level of play in important games (the kinds Indy will be playing not us over the next 2-3 years) compared to his checked out performances in many MANY 'insignificant' games (the kinds C's will be playing this year and next before his contract is up).

     



    Lee ended up in Memphis and Granger signed with the Clips.

     

    Like I said, only an idiot would believe Rondo for George Hill is fair.

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

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    Like I said... only an IDIOT would think the trade idea was Rondo for Hill when clearly it was Rondo for two unprotected picks, 25 million dollars (being free of the Wallace deal) and a DISTANT 3rd was Hill.

    Hahahaha

    and I said I wouldn't even do it... only that it could be 'discussed' as being 'fair'

    What a sad, pathetic man you are for continuing to bring this up as some sort of 'proof' to you winning a competition with me in which you have been wrong over 20 times to my 2 or 3.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fiercy. Show Fiercy's posts

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    In response to rameakap's comment:

    Like I said... only an IDIOT would think the trade idea was Rondo for Hill when clearly it was Rondo for two unprotected picks, 25 million dollars (being free of the Wallace deal) and a DISTANT 3rd was Hill.

    Hahahaha

    and I said I wouldn't even do it... only that it could be 'discussed' as being 'fair'

    What a sad, pathetic man you are for continuing to bring this up as some sort of 'proof' to you winning a competition with me in which you have been wrong over 20 times to my 2 or 3.



    The trade deadline has passed and Rondo was not traded for George Hill and Granger.

    So you ended up being wrong because you thought Rondo was going to be traded for George Hill.

     

    Here's the thing, rame, just like Mployee, none of your scenarios pan out.

     

    And only an idiot would tell everybody that George Hill for Rondo is fair but you wouldn't do it.

    DUH!!!

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

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    It's common sense.

    I mean if you think it's fair then why won't you do it, right?

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

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    In response to Fiercy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    It's common sense.

    I mean if you think it's fair then why won't you do it, right?

    [/QUOTE]

    Ummm.... because I think we can do better. Duh.

    It might be 'fair' to trade a tempermental 28 year old former all-star who never learned to shoot and has been labeled 'uncoachable' but wants a 100 million dollar max deal off an ACL injury for massive cap/$ savings, two unprotected 1st rd picks and a decent rotation 28 year old combo-guard who has trade value and can be flipped for another asset.

    But...

    I wouldn't have made the trade b/c I would gamble on the Celtics getting a better deal or Rondo staying and becoming a better player.

    But, RR can just as easily be given 100 million, not improve at all, and have a contract after age 30 that destroys this team.

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

    Re: Rondo for George HIll is fair?

    Rondo at any price is a bad deal for the Celtics...Get rid of this punk asap for whatever you can get. Hes a loser!! DA knows this and unfortunately, so do most GMs around the league..  Even Brandon Knight wont be offered again for the narcissistic roller skater.

    As evidenced over a sample size of many seasons now... the Celtics are more successful with ROndo not playing than when he does play. Let RR be someone elses nightmare~

     

Share