Lefty
New member
- Joined:
- Apr 19, 2010
- Posts:
- 2,241
- Liked Posts:
- 780
1) No, it isn't. It's a completely fictitious, irrelevant concern that is currently based on NOTHING. "Concerns" like these (completely asinine and worthless ones) should not serve to give a team pause before acquiring a Top-10 in in the NBA player.
2) You are horrendously overrating Taj Gibson. Look, if Boozer is out for another extended period of time after his return from his current injury, it makes no difference who is coming off the bench, this team isn't doing anything. They're just not. Ok, I guess that's not true: Taj Gibson could fill in for him again and have an MVP-like season, putting up numbers at least as good as Boozer, night in and night out. But is that the really the kind of outside chance you want to be the underpinning of your argument?
This Bulls bench isn't that good anyways, and almost certainly a severe injury to another of the key starters at any point in the season would be the death-blow, so there is no reason not to capitalize on a chance to maximize what little value they have on the bench and get a player of Carmelo's caliber in return. I can see where you are going with your arguments, but they just don't apply to this team.
3) It seems like you are able to acknowledge that Melo is far and away the better player than Deng, but when it comes time to audit this proposed move, you are incapable of bringing that acknowledgment into the equation. Let me break it down for you, once again: you say that we need a SG, primarily someone that is good at moving without the ball and can create their own shot, thus not commanding the ball on every possession but able to make due with it once they have it. That. Is. Carmelo. Anthony. Not only does he do those things, but he does them exceptionally well, and so what he isn't strictly a SG? He gives the team the production (in both quantity and quality) that this team lacks, and to pass on him or bluster at the notion of acquiring him because "the team needs a SG, not a SF, that's not a need" is laughably missing the point, made even more comical by the fact that YOU were the one that derived the point in the first place.
No, you're not saying anything, you're asking rhetorical questions designed to illustrate some point that has literally no basis in fact. You have no reason to believe whatsoever that Rose doesn't like Melo, wouldn't want him (Melo) on his (Rose's) team, would react poorly to not being "the guy" on the team (this is a separate issue entirely from Rose saying he wants to be "the guy", you must understand this), and that said reaction would have a negative impact on his game. You have no reason to believe any of this.
