View Single Post
Old 06-14-2006, 01:51 PM   #39
adamcz
Bucks fan
 
adamcz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: MA
Posts: 3,727
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Qwyjibo
The point of that deal is that it's simply a dumb trade for a young rebuilding team.
You mean "building," not "re-building."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qwyjibo
Magloire and Mo Williams will both be free agents after next year with both looking at significant pay raises (even though Magloire is overrated as well and doesn't deserve one).
Do we really need to go over Magloire's value again? I thought I put an end to that in the other thread. He will get paid what he's worth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qwyjibo
The talent is pretty much equal on both sides of the deal but I'll take the cheaper 2 with more potential than going for positional need and getting either 1 year rentals or bad long term deals for unproven (Williams) and undeserved (Magloire) players.
You're losing it Qwyj! Williams is a proven NBA player. He was a fulltime starter in 2004-05, and he averaged 10 and 6, while leading the Bucks to 30 wins. This likely would have been 35 wins, but the Bucks tanked at the trade deadline. Either way, it was a better team than the Raptors have had since 2001-02. This year Mo came off the bench for 12 and 4, and was a top sixth man of the year candidate until he got injured. How can you put unproven in front of his name without putting a more exaggerated term in front of Charlie's name? And how does he have less potential? He's only two years older, and he plays point guard!
adamcz is offline   Reply With Quote