re: John Hollinger's Hornets deadline deal that should happen. Thoughts?

I debated with someone for like two pages about Okafor and they kept saying he wasn't that bad. That the team could get by with him. A bunch of other people were backing him up.

quote:

---

What everybody on here is saying is that Jack, Ariza and Okafor are solid starters and shouldn't be traded. Gordon is a future superstar and shouldn't be traded.

---

Not wanting to use Kaman to "dump" Ariza's "horrible" contract doesn't mean that we think none should be traded.

quote:

---

brmark70816

---

JHornet alter?

quote:

---

I know I'm in the minority, cause I want to totally clear the cupboard.

---

That's got to be a gradually process though, we're pretty bad now but that trade makes us the Bobcats.

Totally clearing out doesn't help us at this point. You have to rebuild with a mix of veterans and young players. If you don't, you're stuck being shitty for a decade.

Ariza is a good player. You need players like him when rebuilding. With a healthy Gordon, a high lottery pick, and our players developing, we can get better, quickly.

quote:

---

I know I'm in the minority, cause I want to totally clear the cupboard. But who should they keep? I realize everybody has a price, but I'm always shocked when guys covet random guys like Ariza.

---

Clearly this team needs to be upgraded, but it depends on the pieces that are eventually added when you're talking about who should be traded. Okafor, Kaman, Ariza and Jack (individually) arguably could be "solid" starters if certain other pieces were in place around them. Read carefully. I'm not saying keep all of them. I'm saying each of them has value.

For example, with the right PF, Oak and the right PF whoever he is, with solid contributions by bigs off of the bench, could be part of a very good team down low, especially if the PF in question can score and be a second option to Gordon.

Likewise, Ariza is very good player having a good year. He is the guy we put on the other team's biggest offensive threat. He doesn't have to be an exceptional scorer if the scoring comes from elsewhere. Again, it depends upon what pieces are around him.

I think some of you guys look around the league and isolate two or three top players at each position and whine because an individual starter on the Hornets doesn't measure up. No team actually has that kind of starting lineup (Miami, maybe, comes close).

So no, I'm not saying those guys in the starting lineup will make the Hornets contenders. I am saying that any one of them, indivdually, can be of value on a contending Hornets team.

quote:

---

So he wasn't joking about wanting 5 picks in the first..... Lets just 86 the whole roster every year until we win the championship. That is smart rebuilding with a historical basis to suggest repeatability. Yeah, that was sarcasm, because it makes no damned sense

---

What template should we be following? Every successfull rebuild I have observed required obtaining younger more talented players and clearing out bad contracts. I'm just following logic. While some of the players are solid and not over paid, they're talents are wasted at the momment and serve no great purpose. Ariza might be decent and making what he should, but if you can package him for something worthwhile that might elevate the team in the future than I'd explore it.

Btw, one of the greatest rebuilds in NBA history came just from totally reloading. The 89-90 Spurs had a 35 game improvement (was the record) with 5 new starters, including 2 rookies and a bench full of young players. It is an option.

quote:

---

To begin with, that comes out to once in 30 years or so. Rebuild smart. Don't be dumb. Don't give away decent assets. It seems to me you're thinking a) you can put together five starters who are each better at each position than we have now, and that b) younger/new necessarily means better

---

I just knew it off the top of my head, cause I'm a huge David Robinson fan. But you are right, you have to be smart.

If you are asking me honestly, then yes. I think with a clear cap, they could sign or draft 5 better or cheaper comparable starters than they have now. It's not realistic, cause no GM would ever take that type of risk. But I believe it is possible.