bada wrote:I wont dispute you on the fact that Paul is better however I just dont like the idea of trading our only marketable assets address an area that is the strength of our team.

We dont NEED to improve at PG. We NEED to improve our frontcourt. Lets use Monta and or our draft pick to get that done. Not to somewhat or marginally improve PG. We are doing just fine there.

migya wrote:

bada wrote:I wont dispute you on the fact that Paul is better however I just dont like the idea of trading our only marketable assets address an area that is the strength of our team.

We dont NEED to improve at PG. We NEED to improve our frontcourt. Lets use Monta and or our draft pick to get that done. Not to somewhat or marginally improve PG. We are doing just fine there.

You are absolutely right, but how about the team is able to make a trade of AB and the lottery pick for one of the bigs we've spoken about (MGasol/BLopez/Love/AJeff) first and then we go for this trade. That would mean getting the very good big the team needs at Center, while not keeping the current Center AB, and then getting rid of Monta while getting the best PG there is.

That'd be the best case scenario I think

Chum wrote:I'm a little messed up right now, so I'm having a hard time following this, but am I reading that you are STILL contemplating trading Curry to Paul?

If that's what you are getting at then I vote NO! I'm probably going to be called for jumping the gun here but from here on out I think Curry will be a better PG than Paul. Not saying better career wise. Paul already hit his peak and will drop. He'll still be one of the best. Curry may be the best PG in the league NEXT YEAR!!!

If you are just saying that we get Paul without trading Curry, I don't see it. Mostly because 2 PGs don't work. I wish they did. Paul and Curry are about my two favorite players to watch. Imagine a Curry/Paul backcourt with 10 assists a night each

migya wrote:

Chum wrote:I'm a little messed up right now, so I'm having a hard time following this, but am I reading that you are STILL contemplating trading Curry to Paul?

If that's what you are getting at then I vote NO! I'm probably going to be called for jumping the gun here but from here on out I think Curry will be a better PG than Paul. Not saying better career wise. Paul already hit his peak and will drop. He'll still be one of the best. Curry may be the best PG in the league NEXT YEAR!!!

If you are just saying that we get Paul without trading Curry, I don't see it. Mostly because 2 PGs don't work. I wish they did. Paul and Curry are about my two favorite players to watch. Imagine a Curry/Paul backcourt with 10 assists a night each

Firstly, Paul is still young and could get even better. Curry is nowhere near as good as Paul, just a PG getting good stats on an awful team. Curry could be as good as Paul, but you know that Paul is already the best there is at PG and you never know with Curry. Curry has alot of improvement

Chum wrote:

migya wrote:

Chum wrote:I'm a little messed up right now, so I'm having a hard time following this, but am I reading that you are STILL contemplating trading Curry to Paul?

If that's what you are getting at then I vote NO! I'm probably going to be called for jumping the gun here but from here on out I think Curry will be a better PG than Paul. Not saying better career wise. Paul already hit his peak and will drop. He'll still be one of the best. Curry may be the best PG in the league NEXT YEAR!!!

If you are just saying that we get Paul without trading Curry, I don't see it. Mostly because 2 PGs don't work. I wish they did. Paul and Curry are about my two favorite players to watch. Imagine a Curry/Paul backcourt with 10 assists a night each

Firstly, Paul is still young and could get even better. Curry is nowhere near as good as Paul, just a PG getting good stats on an awful team. Curry could be as good as Paul, but you know that Paul is already the best there is at PG and you never know with Curry. Curry has alot of improvement

I think we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't see either of us budging on this one. I'll take Curry over CP3.

migya wrote:Just bringing back the topic of Paul. I'd still trade Curry and Monta for Paul, even though many would say that's overpaying for Paul. Everyone is so high on Curry, but Paul is still better, I think a fair bit better. Curry's lack of defense is the bigest difference between the two.

warchief wrote:

migya wrote:Just bringing back the topic of Paul. I'd still trade Curry and Monta for Paul, even though many would say that's overpaying for Paul. Everyone is so high on Curry, but Paul is still better, I think a fair bit better. Curry's lack of defense is the bigest difference between the two.

That is what it would take to get Chris Paul. Curry is verry promising, Monta Ellis is verry solid. I'd hate to give up both. Other teams have more to offer? Orlando is more of a preferred destination for Paul. Jameer Nelson and some picks/good contracts are certainliy more attractive than what GS has to offer.

Still an interesting thought. What if you'd only have to give up Ellis+Wright+picks? Would never happen but that'd be pretty sick.. Paul+Curry Combo..

Mr. Crackerz wrote:I would do it... I mean we are talking about Paul and Curry, both scrappy PG's who can shoot really well. Curry can play his more natural SG position but also at times bring the ball up. Though the likelihood of happening are slim to none.

migya wrote:

Mr. Crackerz wrote:I would do it... I mean we are talking about Paul and Curry, both scrappy PG's who can shoot really well. Curry can play his more natural SG position but also at times bring the ball up. Though the likelihood of happening are slim to none.

That's a very small backcourt and Curry has weak defense. Opposing SGs would have it so easy

Mr. Crackerz wrote:

migya wrote:

Mr. Crackerz wrote:I would do it... I mean we are talking about Paul and Curry, both scrappy PG's who can shoot really well. Curry can play his more natural SG position but also at times bring the ball up. Though the likelihood of happening are slim to none.

That's a very small backcourt and Curry has weak defense. Opposing SGs would have it so easy

yeah it would be small for defensive purposes. But Paul is a solid defender. And Curry was decent against bigger defenders in college. But it would be great offensively. I think its worth it if we had a good defensive big men (though we don't).