PDA

View Full Version : Which Talented Players Wouldn't You Want On Your Team?



Wade n Fade
02-26-2015, 12:42 PM
Say you were a GM. Which players wouldn't you want on your team? I wouldn't want Rondo or Stephenson. Both display their talents from time to time (until Stephenson signed with the Hornets), but both are immature. I also wouldn't want a Melo since he commands a high salary for someone who doesn't improve his teammate's play because he just shoots too much and doesn't want to play enough team ball.

jaydubb
02-26-2015, 12:46 PM
I really wouldn't want james harden.. He's great on offense but man he could get so bad on defense at times, that would just kill me to watch over and over..

jaydubb
02-26-2015, 12:48 PM
I also wouldn't want Kevin love because I think he's a bit overrated that is also terrible on defense.

ThuglifeJ
02-26-2015, 01:48 PM
Rudy Gay, K Love, Harden, Josh Smith, JR Smith, Melo, Rondo, Rose, Reggie Jackson, OJ Mayo, Jennings

KnicksorBust
02-26-2015, 01:53 PM
All offense no defense types come to mind...

like JR Smith, Amar'e Stoudemire, Carmelo Anthony... oh wait...

Hawkeye15
02-26-2015, 01:54 PM
All offense no defense types come to mind...

like JR Smith, Amar'e Stoudemire, Carmelo Anthony... oh wait...

I see a pattern.

lol, please
02-26-2015, 02:08 PM
Keep Lebron and Dwight away from my franchise. It's not only about winning, it's about winning the right way. I don't want any accolades of my team associated with non-leaders, ring chasers, quitters, or mental midgets.

Hawkeye15
02-26-2015, 02:11 PM
Kobe cause he's old!

Jamiecballer
02-26-2015, 02:27 PM
Say you were a GM. Which players wouldn't you want on your team? I wouldn't want Rondo or Stephenson. Both display their talents from time to time (until Stephenson signed with the Hornets), but both are immature. I also wouldn't want a Melo since he commands a high salary for someone who doesn't improve his teammate's play because he just shoots too much and doesn't want to play enough team ball.

great thread topic. current players i would never pursue if I was a GM:

Westbrook
Anthony
Aldridge

don't get me wrong, there are lots of guys i'd rather not have, but these are the 3 that come to mind where they are talented enough, and strong enough personalities that i think they would push my team to play a certain way, one that i wouldn't want. and so for that reason i wouldn't want any part of them.

Chronz
02-26-2015, 02:33 PM
none. my teams bench sucks

sixers247
02-26-2015, 02:48 PM
Keep Lebron and Dwight away from my franchise. It's not only about winning, it's about winning the right way. I don't want any accolades of my team associated with non-leaders, ring chasers, quitters, or mental midgets.

lol this is so comical to read. I am starting to think Kobe might actually have an account on this site.

Sanjay
02-26-2015, 06:38 PM
I would not spend money on Howard, he is too casual on the court and his team jumping free throw shooting is a worry.

jerellh528
02-26-2015, 06:39 PM
Lebron
Howard
Harden

Hawkeye15
02-26-2015, 09:07 PM
overpaid volume shooters who are not good defenders is about it.

Anyone who said LeBron or Harden above, you would be a terrible GM

Hawkeye15
02-26-2015, 09:08 PM
I would not spend money on Howard, he is too casual on the court and his team jumping free throw shooting is a worry.

The only reason I would pass on Dwight at this point, is his back, and now his knee is starting to act up. Not a good thing.

But, I would still take a chance on him if my medical team cleared him.

lol, please
02-27-2015, 01:44 AM
The only reason I would pass on Dwight at this point, is his back, and now his knee is starting to act up. Not a good thing.

But, I would still take a chance on him if my medical team cleared him.
I would take DeAndre, bogut, davis, and cousins all over Dwight just off the top.

FlashBolt
02-27-2015, 01:48 AM
Funny how two years ago, 90% of you guys would be saying Westbrook.

Tony_Starks
02-27-2015, 02:22 AM
Kyle Lowry
Lance Stephenson
AnybodyonPhilly
Kevin Love
Dwight Howard

Tony_Starks
02-27-2015, 02:35 AM
overpaid volume shooters who are not good defenders is about it.

Anyone who said LeBron or Harden above, you would be a terrible GM

If I have multiple all stars and 3 point champs on my team I definitely want Lebron as my leader....

Goose17
02-27-2015, 03:28 AM
Funny how two years ago, 90% of you guys would be saying Westbrook.

I would still say Westbrook. He's still a poor decision maker and gambles a lot defensively. But more than that I wouldn't want any hot heads who are going to start throwing chairs and just spitting the dummy out every time something doesn't go their way.

I wouldn't want Melo, Love, Dwight, Ellis or Rondo (if people still think he's talented).

ThuglifeJ
02-27-2015, 03:44 AM
Funny how two years ago, 90% of you guys would be saying Westbrook.

You mean the guy who just tried to reverse an open layup with the game on the line which didn't even make it up the rim?


Ya, nice try.

Stop building yourself a complex. Some probably felt that way then. Some probably feel that way now. Get over it.

Ty22Mitchell
02-27-2015, 04:33 AM
Idk if there is anyone I wouldn't want on my team (maybe Cousins, young Rasheed Wallace). For me it's more about who my superstar is and who is his supporting cast. Dwight, K Love, Westbrook, Prime Pau would never be my number one superstars, they're not cut out for it imo. Same for lesser guys like DeAndre Jordan, Brandon Jennings, etc. It's about matching a player's strengths to the the right role.

FlashBolt
02-27-2015, 04:46 AM
You mean the guy who just tried to reverse an open layup with the game on the line which didn't even make it up the rim?


Ya, nice try.

Stop building yourself a complex. Some probably felt that way then. Some probably feel that way now. Get over it.

What the hell is your problem? Do you even understand what complex means? People wouldn't want Westbrook? LMAO. He's a top five player. Yeah, I'm sure people don't want him.

ThuglifeJ
02-27-2015, 05:39 AM
You mean the guy who just tried to reverse an open layup with the game on the line which didn't even make it up the rim?


Ya, nice try.

Stop building yourself a complex. Some probably felt that way then. Some probably feel that way now. Get over it.

What the hell is your problem? Do you even understand what complex means? People wouldn't want Westbrook? LMAO. He's a top five player. Yeah, I'm sure people don't want him.

My problem is I'm telling you to get over it. Some people (not even me) stated they wouldn't want a Westbrook now. Some people would probably not want him if you asked the same question past seasons. Its possible. And you can't accept that for some reason. So yeah, you're building yourself a complex. Which clearly you don't know what that means, much like you didn't the words 'fluke'. Here's a hint. There's more than one definition for the word.

prodigy
02-27-2015, 06:54 AM
All offense no defense types come to mind...

like JR Smith, Amar'e Stoudemire, Carmelo Anthony... oh wait...

you see JR Smiths defense on Thompson last night? lol

JLynn943
02-27-2015, 11:22 AM
Melo
Kobe (at this point he's severely overpaid and injury-riddled)
Lance Stephenson
Reggie Jackson
Joe Johnson

And while I'd certainly take Chris Paul because he's great, I do hate him and would find it extremely difficult to root for him.

lol, please
02-27-2015, 01:25 PM
What the hell is your problem? Do you even understand what complex means? People wouldn't want Westbrook? LMAO. He's a top five player. Yeah, I'm sure people don't want him.
Agreed. My top 5 list is:

Durant
Davis
Curry
Lebron
Westbrook

In that order.

Bruno
02-27-2015, 01:42 PM
The only reason I would pass on Dwight at this point, is his back, and now his knee is starting to act up. Not a good thing.
the diet he had during his orlando and laker days didn't help either. he was consuming sugar like a 12 year old on Halloween while his back was recovering from surgery.


But, I would still take a chance on him if my medical team cleared him.

at this point, had he signed with the Lakers, that 5th year would start to look a little worrisome right about now (32 years old by playoffs 2018 at 25M). he's almost 900 games in for his career including playoffs. Dwight has mileage. I think the Rockets managed to sign him for the perfect amount of time under what they're trying to do with Harden. so long as he can produce and play and give them consistency throughout the contract. do rocket fans want Dwight to opt into his 23.2M in 2016-2017? he has a player option.

JustinTime
02-27-2015, 01:43 PM
Lebron

JustinTime
02-27-2015, 01:46 PM
overpaid volume shooters who are not good defenders is about it.

Anyone who said LeBron or Harden above, you would be a terrible GM

You wouldn't be a GM if you didn't say Lebron. Everyone knows that Lebron is the real GM of the Cavs.

Bruno
02-27-2015, 01:51 PM
anyone over 30 who's making over 14+ million dollars for three years or longer we already have an old guy. watch the lakers screw up the rebuild by brining in Rondo or Dragic, guys who are almost 30, who will squander Clarksons chance to be something.

either through the draft, or free agency- the Lakers need to invest in a center, and a small forward. if they're lucky enough to get Okafor and pair him with Randle, the next move is to offer Leonard a four year max offer. not because the Lakers are likely to get him, but so that San Antonio has to match a top dollar offer sheet. priority #1 for the entire league in the off-season should be to make the Spurs spend market value on Leonard.

seriously though, if i were a GM i'd take on anyone who i think I can flip and get assets with. as long as it doesn't cripple the books under a scenario where the player can't be flipped for assets. caps about to boom, taking some chances and hoarding assets is how you put yourself in position to trade for a potential James Harder caliber player.

PhillyFaninLA
02-27-2015, 01:59 PM
Kyle Lowry
Lance Stephenson
AnybodyonPhilly
Kevin Love
Dwight Howard


So you wouldn't want Noles, Embiid, Saric, Grant, or Covington

Hawkeye15
02-27-2015, 02:02 PM
You wouldn't be a GM if you didn't say Lebron. Everyone knows that Lebron is the real GM of the Cavs.

So the Cavs would be better off if they had passed on him, right?

You are going to be a terrible GM if you let personal bias get in the way. That is a fact.

Bruno
02-27-2015, 02:04 PM
So you wouldn't want Noles, Embiid, Saric, Grant, or Covington

I'd love all those guys. are you pissed that Hinkie traded KJ?

PhillyFaninLA
02-27-2015, 02:09 PM
I'd love all those guys. are you pissed that Hinkie traded KJ?

Yeah....he could have been the best 6th or 7th man in the game for a decade with us...hope he does it even though we traded him.

Canaan looks ok and if he develops some basketball IQ he could be good, he does have skill

Bruno
02-27-2015, 02:18 PM
Yeah....he could have been the best 6th or 7th man in the game for a decade with us...hope he does it even though we traded him.

Canaan looks ok and if he develops some basketball IQ he could be good, he does have skill

yeah. I think you guys should have kept KJ, and drafted Muiday. i still think Mudiay makes sense for Phili.

Minimal
02-27-2015, 02:32 PM
Lets see. Melo, Rose, Kobe, Harden (useless in playoffs), Jennings, Joe Johnson.

PhillyFaninLA
02-27-2015, 02:39 PM
yeah. I think you guys should have kept KJ, and drafted Muiday. i still think Mudiay makes sense for Phili.

That is what I was hoping....I'll give them the benefit of the doubt for this year. Before the season I was going to give them this season, and I fully support the prior season, but I want to see a roster start coming together.

We actual have a system in place, Brown has done a good job with that, now we just need the players.

Bruno
02-27-2015, 02:45 PM
That is what I was hoping....I'll give them the benefit of the doubt for this year. Before the season I was going to give them this season, and I fully support the prior season, but I want to see a roster start coming together.

We actual have a system in place, Brown has done a good job with that, now we just need the players.

I think Muiday is the last piece to the puzzle. it will be a spacing and geometry nightmare next season whenever Covington isn't on the floor, but it will be fun. If Muiday can't provide enough shooting towards the end of his rookie deal, ship him and a future pick off to get the floor spreading, distributing PG that phili will need. that guys out there somewhere, even if it isn't Muiday. but i think you gotta take Muiday and give it a shot because at least the positions fit, no overlap in developing talent.

TheIlladelph16
02-27-2015, 02:48 PM
:laugh:

^People actually naming Lebron, Harden or Westbrook (basically 3 of the top 5 players in the NBA) on their lists. As Hawk pointed out, some of you would make some god awful GMs.

The players I wouldn't want are the ones who have serious injury concerns or serious deficiencies in their game that aren't able to outweigh what they do give you: Howard, Rondo, Rose, DWade (at this point), certainly 2014-2015 version of Kobe, a probably a bunch of others.

Tony_Starks
02-27-2015, 07:42 PM
Kyle Lowry
Lance Stephenson
AnybodyonPhilly
Kevin Love
Dwight Howard


So you wouldn't want Noles, Embiid, Saric, Grant, or Covington

Nope. I want no part of players that have been conditioned to lose for years as part of some bigger picture, and Noles and Embiid I just flat out wouldn't want anyway because they went way too high for projects with questionable health...

Chronz
02-27-2015, 08:59 PM
You are going to be a terrible GM if you let personal bias get in the way. That is a fact.

Truth. LOL at the notion that adding Bron isn't worth the additional wins.

goingfor28
02-27-2015, 09:55 PM
Lebron only bc I don't like him. He's no doubt the best player in the league but I would have such a hard time cheering for him

IKnowHoops
02-27-2015, 10:01 PM
overpaid volume shooters who are not good defenders is about it.

Anyone who said LeBron or Harden above, you would be a terrible GM

x1000

I'm 1000000000000% positive every GM in the NBA would agree with me too. Its not stupidity on there part either, its proof of hate.

IKnowHoops
02-27-2015, 10:08 PM
My problem is I'm telling you to get over it. Some people (not even me) stated they wouldn't want a Westbrook now. Some people would probably not want him if you asked the same question past seasons. Its possible. And you can't accept that for some reason. So yeah, you're building yourself a complex. Which clearly you don't know what that means, much like you didn't the words 'fluke'. Here's a hint. There's more than one definition for the word.

And thats why they aren't GM's. Again, I think every GM in the league would pursue and jump for joy if they could acquire westbrook. Its either hate or stupidity.

True Rocket
02-28-2015, 08:25 AM
Yeah I don't want James Harden the league leading scorer who dishes out 7apg and has led his team to the 4th best record in the NBA. He would be a bad addition.

Goose17
02-28-2015, 10:29 AM
:laugh:

^People actually naming Lebron, Harden or Westbrook (basically 3 of the top 5 players in the NBA) on their lists. As Hawk pointed out, some of you would make some god awful GMs.

The players I wouldn't want are the ones who have serious injury concerns or serious deficiencies in their game that aren't able to outweigh what they do give you: Howard, Rondo, Rose, DWade (at this point), certainly 2014-2015 version of Kobe, a probably a bunch of others.

I agree with LeBron and Harden.

But Westbrook? I get he's had a good 12 games or so recently, when you look at the box scores and you see the triple doubles, you watch him play and he's uber athletic, flashy, entertaining.

But he is also...

1. Horribly inefficient. In his last three games he's gone 34 for 89 from the field (38%) and he's gone 2-14 from deep (14%), against Phoenix it took him 38 shot attempts to get 39 points. This isn't a new thing, for his career he shoots 43% from the field and 30% from deep. For his career Iverson shot 42% from the field and 31% from deep. And Iverson is regarded as one of the most inefficient chuckers and "superstars" of all time.

2. A poor decision maker. In his last three games he has a combined 15 turnovers. His Assist to Turnover ratio this season is 2.09. That's worse than Irving, Lillard, Conley, Curry, Rubio, Teague, Wall, Lowry, Holiday, Lawson, CP3 etc. The only other point guards playing 33 minutes per game (or more) with a worse AST:TO are; MCW and Bledsoe. And it's not just his passing, a lot of his shot choices are head scratchers, he forces the issue, some right this off as "aggressiveness". Not me, I think there's a difference between being aggressive and being stupid. I mean he shoots 34% on jump shots this season, he shoots 54% on lay ups. And yet he continues to take terrible jump shots, it wouldn't bother me if they were smart shots but they're not. I also think he's a poor decision maker defensively, I think he gambles way too much.

3. He's a hot head. This is just my opinion but I can't see him being a good locker room presence, forget the ball hogging and putting up 38 shot attempts in a game or making terrible passes and forcing the issue. Off the court I'm not convinced he would be good for chemistry. That's just me though, I have nothing to back this up, it's just my gut instinct.


Conclusion; He has great athleticism, a lot of heart, hustles and plays hard, he is obviously skilled and has a lot of confidence. But he is a terrible decision maker, terribly inefficient and a hot head.


Personally I would not want Westbrook if I was a GM, other than for trade bait.

As a GM I would want a point guard that is a coach-able guy who buys into the team culture, is efficient and plays smart.

Jamiecballer
02-28-2015, 10:42 AM
There are plenty of GMs that would pass on Westbrook. Jackson, Ujiri, Morey and that guy in SA come to mind.

HeatFan
02-28-2015, 11:42 AM
I like Westbrook but just feel like he is the type of player that when eventually he has to rely on skills and not just brutal speed and force, he won't be as effective as now, and now although he puts up monster numbers, is usually highly inefficient (e.g. 13/38 fg typish). Wade falls into this category of relying on athleticism mainly but he is still efficient, even though he is slower than before. Also, it hurts when I see a top three player like Durant get ignored by him in a late game situation.

Another talent I would absolutely not want on my team is Derrick "Glass" Rose. Not his fault all the injuries but you have to admit he is a walking liability.

HeatFan
02-28-2015, 11:49 AM
And thats why they aren't GM's. Again, I think every GM in the league would pursue and jump for joy if they could acquire westbrook. Its either hate or stupidity.

Not wanting Westbrook is a legit comment. Although as a GM, if I didn't have a better option I would still sign Westbrook. Just that if I had my pick, I would prefer not to dedicate a huge chunk of my salary cap on a player that I honestly don't think will be able to win me a ring, and even on a good team could be the reason I don't end up winning the ring (because of some of the reasons others have mentioned). I think he is a freak of nature, but not the type I feel would compete my ideal team. Look at the Hawks, Spurs, Raptors, hell even Dallas. No clear top 10 player (sorry Dirk - not anymore), they have teams that would complete with OKC in any series and don't need a Top 5 talent like Westbrook. If they did sign him, it would be at the cost of letting some of their key players go, along with the chemistry that this means.

from a pure talent standpoint, I understand you. But talent is not the only factor.

Jamiecballer
02-28-2015, 12:29 PM
I have to say, although I wouldn't want Westbrook in 96% of cases, there is one scenario where I absolutely would want him. If I had an expansion team he is the type of player that could energize a new fan base and put butts in the seats through their early struggles.

Goose17
02-28-2015, 12:40 PM
I have to say, although I wouldn't want Westbrook in 96% of cases, there is one scenario where I absolutely would want him. If I had an expansion team he is the type of player that could energize a new fan base and put butts in the seats through their early struggles.

Yeah he would also be a good starting point for building a new franchise. You could build around him, with the right coaching staff etc and have a limited amount of success. Enough to build a positive culture.

Especially if your new franchise was in the East.

KnicksorBust
02-28-2015, 12:47 PM
I have to say, although I wouldn't want Westbrook in 96% of cases, there is one scenario where I absolutely would want him. If I had an expansion team he is the type of player that could energize a new fan base and put butts in the seats through their early struggles.

Yeah he would also be a good starting point for building a new franchise. You could build around him, with the right coaching staff etc and have a limited amount of success. Enough to build a positive culture.

Especially if your new franchise was in the East.

It would be interesting to see a team built around Westbrook. For example, if he magically got to replace Rose in Chicago that team could become a title favorite overnight. I just have never thought he and Durant were a perfect fit. Both see themselves as #1. They are just too phenomenally talented to fail.

HeatFan
02-28-2015, 12:50 PM
I have to say, although I wouldn't want Westbrook in 96% of cases, there is one scenario where I absolutely would want him. If I had an expansion team he is the type of player that could energize a new fan base and put butts in the seats through their early struggles.

Yeah, makes sense. Kind of like Iverson back in the day.

KnicksorBust
02-28-2015, 12:57 PM
I have to say, although I wouldn't want Westbrook in 96% of cases, there is one scenario where I absolutely would want him. If I had an expansion team he is the type of player that could energize a new fan base and put butts in the seats through their early struggles.

Yeah, makes sense. Kind of like Iverson back in the day.

Prime Westy or prime AI?

HeatFan
02-28-2015, 12:57 PM
It would be interesting to see a team built around Westbrook. For example, if he magically got to replace Rose in Chicago that team could become a title favorite overnight. I just have never thought he and Durant were a perfect fit. Both see themselves as #1. They are just too phenomenally talented to fail.

I think that is true. However, Westbrook has been alone for a fair portion of this season. He has thrived statistically but still the team isn't as good as having them both.

-Kobe24-TJ19-
02-28-2015, 12:59 PM
melo
harden
dwight
lebron
klove

KnicksorBust
02-28-2015, 01:04 PM
It would be interesting to see a team built around Westbrook. For example, if he magically got to replace Rose in Chicago that team could become a title favorite overnight. I just have never thought he and Durant were a perfect fit. Both see themselves as #1. They are just too phenomenally talented to fail.

I think that is true. However, Westbrook has been alone for a fair portion of this season. He has thrived statistically but still the team isn't as good as having them both.

Of course not. Bc Durant is too infinitely valuable. However if you were able to return 90% of Durants talent in a trade that gave them players that fit better with Westbrook then I think OKCs potential would be better. For example, replace Durant with Horford and Korver and watch OKC take off.

mightybosstone
02-28-2015, 01:07 PM
melo
harden
dwight
lebron
klove

As a Lakers fan, you should be so lucky to have ANY of those guys on your god awful, train wreck of a roster right now.

Mr.ATLHawks
02-28-2015, 01:07 PM
Melo
Kobe
Westbrick
J Crawford
Kemba Walker
Dion Waiters
Joe Johnson

mightybosstone
02-28-2015, 01:29 PM
Seriously, those of you naming Harden and Lebron are COMPLETELY missing the mark on this thread. And frankly, all of you are either blatant haters or should probably take an IQ test, because you're hovering dangerously close to mental retardation. Lennie from "Of Mice and Men" has better reasoning skills than you all do.

Any GM would LOVE to have guys like that on their team. If Daryl Morey calls up the other 29 teams in the league right now and says, "Hey, I'm shopping James Harden. You guys interested?," there would be 29 GMs on the other the end of that phone sporting massive erections.

This thread should be reserved for talented guys who have either massive flaws in their game, are detrimental to their teams in some way on the floor and/or affect their teams negatively with attitude or off-the-floor problems. OP's examples of Harden and Stephenson are perfect, although I would disagree on the Melo front. Sure, he commands a lot of money and doesn't always make his teammates substantially better, but with the right supporting cast, he could still absolutely be the No. 1 guy on a contending team.

As for other candidates, I absolutely would have put Josh Smith on this list before he came to Houston, which is I was so reluctant about the signing initially. But I have been pleasantly surprised by his play as a Rocket the last month or so, so it's really hard to judge at this point.

Three guys I'd like to name are players who all kind of fit the same mold: Monta Ellis, Rudy Gay and Tyreke Evans. These are the high volume, low efficiency, poor shooter guys. In the defense of Ellis and Gay, they've gotten a little better since coming to Dallas and Sacramento, respectively. In fact, Gay has gotten so much more efficient, I hate to include him on the list, but I almost want to consider this season an outlier. Ellis, however, exacerbates his poor scoring efficiency with his inability to play PG and his small stature in defending opposing SGs. But basically, if you guys get one of those three guys at a discount, I'd be all for having them as a No. 3 scoring option. But the amount of money they warrant as solid scoring threats means they normally will have to be No. 2 options offensively. Evans doesn't make quite as much, but he still isn't a bargain at $10 million plus per season.

Finally, I don't think I've seen his name on here, but I absolutely would not want Derrick Rose on my team. It's not that I don't think he's a great character guy. But the injuries have become too much, and the on-court product when he has been healthy the last two seasons isn't even worthy of a max contract any more. Whoever give him his next contract is going to take a huge gamble on him, and I pray it's not Houston.

Goose17
02-28-2015, 01:44 PM
Seriously, those of you naming Harden and Lebron are COMPLETELY missing the mark on this thread. And frankly, all of you are either blatant haters or should probably take an IQ test, because you're hovering dangerously close to mental retardation. Lennie from "Of Mice and Men" has better reasoning skills than you all do.

Any GM would LOVE to have guys like that on their team. If Daryl Morey calls up the other 29 teams in the league right now and says, "Hey, I'm shopping James Harden. You guys interested?," there would be 29 GMs on the other the end of that phone sporting massive erections.

This thread should be reserved for talented guys who have either massive flaws in their game, are detrimental to their teams in some way on the floor and/or affect their teams negatively with attitude or off-the-floor problems. OP's examples of Harden and Stephenson are perfect, although I would disagree on the Melo front. Sure, he commands a lot of money and doesn't always make his teammates substantially better, but with the right supporting cast, he could still absolutely be the No. 1 guy on a contending team.

As for other candidates, I absolutely would have put Josh Smith on this list before he came to Houston, which is I was so reluctant about the signing initially. But I have been pleasantly surprised by his play as a Rocket the last month or so, so it's really hard to judge at this point.

Three guys I'd like to name are players who all kind of fit the same mold: Monta Ellis, Rudy Gay and Tyreke Evans. These are the high volume, low efficiency, poor shooter guys. In the defense of Ellis and Gay, they've gotten a little better since coming to Dallas and Sacramento, respectively. In fact, Gay has gotten so much more efficient, I hate to include him on the list, but I almost want to consider this season an outlier. Ellis, however, exacerbates his poor scoring efficiency with his inability to play PG and his small stature in defending opposing SGs. But basically, if you guys get one of those three guys at a discount, I'd be all for having them as a No. 3 scoring option. But the amount of money they warrant as solid scoring threats means they normally will have to be No. 2 options offensively. Evans doesn't make quite as much, but he still isn't a bargain at $10 million plus per season.

Finally, I don't think I've seen his name on here, but I absolutely would not want Derrick Rose on my team. It's not that I don't think he's a great character guy. But the injuries have become too much, and the on-court product when he has been healthy the last two seasons isn't even worthy of a max contract any more. Whoever give him his next contract is going to take a huge gamble on him, and I pray it's not Houston.

I like watching you trying to defend Josh Smith. You had to be one of his biggest critics on here (rightly so) but now that he's on your team you're doing your best to find a silver lining in his game. I get it. And he has played "okay" since arriving in Houston. I can just tell you're cringing when talking about him lol.

Jamiecballer
02-28-2015, 02:02 PM
Prime Westy or prime AI?
Westbrook. His contribution on the boards and defense are the major difference.

mightybosstone
02-28-2015, 02:11 PM
I like watching you trying to defend Josh Smith. You had to be one of his biggest critics on here (rightly so) but now that he's on your team you're doing your best to find a silver lining in his game. I get it. And he has played "okay" since arriving in Houston. I can just tell you're cringing when talking about him lol.

Have you seen the guy play lately? He's been a lot better than "okay" when you consider he's making $2 million this season. In the month of February, he's averaging 13.8/7.8/3.6/1.7/0.8 while shooting 46.6% from the floor and 38% from the 3-point line. Believe me when I say I'm looking for a reason to criticize the guy, but he's been a lot better than I expected. Sure, he can't make a free throw to save his life and he still takes far too many ill advised threes, but I'll take it for the rest of the impact he provides when he's on the floor.

Hawkeye15
02-28-2015, 02:33 PM
I agree with LeBron and Harden.

But Westbrook? I get he's had a good 12 games or so recently, when you look at the box scores and you see the triple doubles, you watch him play and he's uber athletic, flashy, entertaining.

But he is also...

1. Horribly inefficient. In his last three games he's gone 34 for 89 from the field (38%) and he's gone 2-14 from deep (14%), against Phoenix it took him 38 shot attempts to get 39 points. This isn't a new thing, for his career he shoots 43% from the field and 30% from deep. For his career Iverson shot 42% from the field and 31% from deep. And Iverson is regarded as one of the most inefficient chuckers and "superstars" of all time.

2. A poor decision maker. In his last three games he has a combined 15 turnovers. His Assist to Turnover ratio this season is 2.09. That's worse than Irving, Lillard, Conley, Curry, Rubio, Teague, Wall, Lowry, Holiday, Lawson, CP3 etc. The only other point guards playing 33 minutes per game (or more) with a worse AST:TO are; MCW and Bledsoe. And it's not just his passing, a lot of his shot choices are head scratchers, he forces the issue, some right this off as "aggressiveness". Not me, I think there's a difference between being aggressive and being stupid. I mean he shoots 34% on jump shots this season, he shoots 54% on lay ups. And yet he continues to take terrible jump shots, it wouldn't bother me if they were smart shots but they're not. I also think he's a poor decision maker defensively, I think he gambles way too much.

3. He's a hot head. This is just my opinion but I can't see him being a good locker room presence, forget the ball hogging and putting up 38 shot attempts in a game or making terrible passes and forcing the issue. Off the court I'm not convinced he would be good for chemistry. That's just me though, I have nothing to back this up, it's just my gut instinct.


Conclusion; He has great athleticism, a lot of heart, hustles and plays hard, he is obviously skilled and has a lot of confidence. But he is a terrible decision maker, terribly inefficient and a hot head.


Personally I would not want Westbrook if I was a GM, other than for trade bait.

As a GM I would want a point guard that is a coach-able guy who buys into the team culture, is efficient and plays smart.

except outside maybe Curry, Westbrook adds more wins to your roster than any other PG. So yes, as a GM, you want him. Because its your job to add wins.

Hawkeye15
02-28-2015, 02:37 PM
Have you seen the guy play lately? He's been a lot better than "okay" when you consider he's making $2 million this season. In the month of February, he's averaging 13.8/7.8/3.6/1.7/0.8 while shooting 46.6% from the floor and 38% from the 3-point line. Believe me when I say I'm looking for a reason to criticize the guy, but he's been a lot better than I expected. Sure, he can't make a free throw to save his life and he still takes far too many ill advised threes, but I'll take it for the rest of the impact he provides when he's on the floor.

he was put in his ideal situation. Limited usage, a game plan that doesn't allow long 2's (always his nemesis), and even though he has been worse, he still isn't playing that well. But, now he is a bench guy, and his biggest weakness has been taken away by the playbook.

Goose17
02-28-2015, 02:46 PM
Have you seen the guy play lately? He's been a lot better than "okay" when you consider he's making $2 million this season. In the month of February, he's averaging 13.8/7.8/3.6/1.7/0.8 while shooting 46.6% from the floor and 38% from the 3-point line. Believe me when I say I'm looking for a reason to criticize the guy, but he's been a lot better than I expected. Sure, he can't make a free throw to save his life and he still takes far too many ill advised threes, but I'll take it for the rest of the impact he provides when he's on the floor.

Only Houston games I've watched this month are the two games against the Clips (he was terrible in both of those imo, although he did seem to rebound well), the game against Dallas (he was okay) and the game against Minny (ehh...)

But I'll take your word for it as you obviously watch more Houston games than I do.

Goose17
02-28-2015, 02:48 PM
except outside maybe Curry, Westbrook adds more wins to your roster than any other PG. So yes, as a GM, you want him. Because its your job to add wins.

Nah. I don't want him. I don't trust him as a decision maker. Plus all the other flaws I mentioned. There's much better options at the point imo. He's just not a player I would want.

And I'm not sure what you were looking at stat wise but OKC are terrible without him and Durant, literally awful. So it's not surprising he's key for a lot of their wins.

I don't see him adding more wins for a team like Atlanta, by taking the ball out of other guys hands, killing the movement, jacking up 30+ shots. Sorry, I don't see it.

If I already have a team and it's a team like Philly or Lakers then sure, give me Westbrook. And when I'm ready (Noel/Randle are developed) I'll trade him for young talent.

Hawkeye15
02-28-2015, 03:11 PM
Nah. I don't want him. I don't trust him as a decision maker. Plus all the other flaws I mentioned. There's much better options at the point imo. He's just not a player I would want.

And I'm not sure what you were looking at stat wise but OKC are terrible without him and Durant, literally awful. So it's not surprising he's key for a lot of their wins.

I don't see him adding more wins for a team like Atlanta, by taking the ball out of other guys hands, killing the movement, jacking up 30+ shots. Sorry, I don't see it.

If I already have a team and it's a team like Philly or Lakers then sure, give me Westbrook. And when I'm ready (Noel/Randle are developed) I'll trade him for young talent.

the thread premise leaves out a bunch of variables obviously. What kind of team do you already have, and what you are trying to have. But at it's base level, Westbrook is a top 5-8 player. You would be insane to not want him, unless you already had a makeup of a roster where his skillset is something you don't need. If you are at that place, you have already done an incredible job, and are a top GM anyways (or at least got it right for now).

Goose17
02-28-2015, 03:17 PM
the thread premise leaves out a bunch of variables obviously. What kind of team do you already have, and what you are trying to have. But at it's base level, Westbrook is a top 5-8 player. You would be insane to not want him, unless you already had a makeup of a roster where his skillset is something you don't need. If you are at that place, you have already done an incredible job, and are a top GM anyways (or at least got it right for now).

Like I said, I would only want him as trade bait. If I was a GM I wouldn't want that type of player on my team. It's not all about gathering the most talented guys. I feel like I'm just repeating myself here, he's a hot head who is probably terrible for chemistry and disliked by team mates, he's a shockingly bad decision maker, horribly inefficient and an unpredictable defender. Yes he has skill, athleticism, hunger, heart, potential. But for me, personally, the negatives would outweigh the positives. Just the way I feel.

If I was a GM I would be trying to build a team like GS, SAS, ATL, MEM or even Portland. A guy like Westbrook is just not what I would look for as a GM. The talent is there but the character traits hold him back imo.

HeatFan
02-28-2015, 03:35 PM
Prime Westy or prime AI?

Good one. I have to say prime Westy just because he is bigger and IMO faster. Allen Iverson was a Beast and no disrespect to him. This is really splitting hairs. how about u?

HeatFan
02-28-2015, 03:41 PM
Seriously, those of you naming Harden and Lebron are COMPLETELY missing the mark on this thread. And frankly, all of you are either blatant haters or should probably take an IQ test, because you're hovering dangerously close to mental retardation. Lennie from "Of Mice and Men" has better reasoning skills than you all do.

Any GM would LOVE to have guys like that on their team. If Daryl Morey calls up the other 29 teams in the league right now and says, "Hey, I'm shopping James Harden. You guys interested?," there would be 29 GMs on the other the end of that phone sporting massive erections.

This thread should be reserved for talented guys who have either massive flaws in their game, are detrimental to their teams in some way on the floor and/or affect their teams negatively with attitude or off-the-floor problems. OP's examples of Harden and Stephenson are perfect, although I would disagree on the Melo front. Sure, he commands a lot of money and doesn't always make his teammates substantially better, but with the right supporting cast, he could still absolutely be the No. 1 guy on a contending team.

As for other candidates, I absolutely would have put Josh Smith on this list before he came to Houston, which is I was so reluctant about the signing initially. But I have been pleasantly surprised by his play as a Rocket the last month or so, so it's really hard to judge at this point.

Three guys I'd like to name are players who all kind of fit the same mold: Monta Ellis, Rudy Gay and Tyreke Evans. These are the high volume, low efficiency, poor shooter guys. In the defense of Ellis and Gay, they've gotten a little better since coming to Dallas and Sacramento, respectively. In fact, Gay has gotten so much more efficient, I hate to include him on the list, but I almost want to consider this season an outlier. Ellis, however, exacerbates his poor scoring efficiency with his inability to play PG and his small stature in defending opposing SGs. But basically, if you guys get one of those three guys at a discount, I'd be all for having them as a No. 3 scoring option. But the amount of money they warrant as solid scoring threats means they normally will have to be No. 2 options offensively. Evans doesn't make quite as much, but he still isn't a bargain at $10 million plus per season.

Finally, I don't think I've seen his name on here, but I absolutely would not want Derrick Rose on my team. It's not that I don't think he's a great character guy. But the injuries have become too much, and the on-court product when he has been healthy the last two seasons isn't even worthy of a max contract any more. Whoever give him his next contract is going to take a huge gamble on him, and I pray it's not Houston.

Like Hawkeye mentioned, there are many factors involved in such a decision for you to say categorically that all GMs want Harden. Some teams are in rebuild mode and have young potential that they'd rather develop into a long term great team than have Harden and not be able to put much around him, or have money issues because of current personnel (ala OKC - who clearly preferred investing in Durant/Westbrook/Ibaka - even if this was not the right move). I think Harden has proved he is top 5 right now (and he is not my pick for someone I wouldn't take) but to say that anyone is Ludicrous for mentioning him is kind of wrong.

Goose17
02-28-2015, 03:50 PM
the thread premise leaves out a bunch of variables obviously. What kind of team do you already have, and what you are trying to have. But at it's base level, Westbrook is a top 5-8 player. You would be insane to not want him, unless you already had a makeup of a roster where his skillset is something you don't need. If you are at that place, you have already done an incredible job, and are a top GM anyways (or at least got it right for now).

I should be clear. I'm not doubting Westbrook as top 5-8. I think he can be even better than that. What I doubt is if he can put it all together, if he can become a better decision maker, if he can retain the passion and fire but keep a level head come crunch time, if he can be a leader, not just on the floor but off it. I know he can, I just don't know if he will.

And as a GM I don't think I want to take that risk, and as he is right now, he has a lot of flaws in his character.

Jamiecballer
02-28-2015, 03:59 PM
the thread premise leaves out a bunch of variables obviously. What kind of team do you already have, and what you are trying to have. But at it's base level, Westbrook is a top 5-8 player. You would be insane to not want him, unless you already had a makeup of a roster where his skillset is something you don't need. If you are at that place, you have already done an incredible job, and are a top GM anyways (or at least got it right for now).
I still don't agree. The people who don't want him almost certainly believe in a certain type of philosophy that he inhibits. I wouldn't blame any GM who didn't want him, regardless of what they had.

mightybosstone
02-28-2015, 04:00 PM
Like Hawkeye mentioned, there are many factors involved in such a decision for you to say categorically that all GMs want Harden. Some teams are in rebuild mode and have young potential that they'd rather develop into a long term great team than have Harden and not be able to put much around him, or have money issues because of current personnel (ala OKC - who clearly preferred investing in Durant/Westbrook/Ibaka - even if this was not the right move). I think Harden has proved he is top 5 right now (and he is not my pick for someone I wouldn't take) but to say that anyone is Ludicrous for mentioning him is kind of wrong.

No, it's not. Because based on the logic you just used, then why would that team want any great player? Your (completely flawed) logic is that a team would rather stay in rebuild mode and keep young assets with potential than trade for a top five player. So, then based on that logic, someone could say they wouldn't want Durant, Lebron, Curry, Westbrook, Davis, Paul, etc. on their roster either.

No GM is stupid enough to think that picks and potential assets are greater than top 5 caliber athletes in their sport. Especially in the NBA. If Hinkie got a phone call right now and he picked up to hear Golden State, OKC or Houston on the phone offering up Curry, Durant or Harden, you can absolutely bet that he's willing to offer any number of assets at Philly's disposal to get that deal done. Why? Because Hinkie's goal isn't to get assets. It's to use any assets at his disposal to get a top 5 player and/or other top tier athletes on Philly's roster. You know how I know this? Because that was the logic he used in helping Morey orchestrate the Harden deal in the first place. Houston had quite a few solid young prospects and picks, but the Rockets were willing to deal those in a heartbeat for Harden, and it turned out amazing for Houston. And Harden wasn't even remotely considered a top 5 guy at he time. Imagine what Hinkie or any other GM in rebuilding mode would be willing to offer for a top 5 player at the beginning of his prime with multiple years left on his contract?

HeatFan
02-28-2015, 04:16 PM
No, it's not. Because based on the logic you just used, then why would that team want any great player? Your (completely flawed) logic is that a team would rather stay in rebuild mode and keep young assets with potential than trade for a top five player. So, then based on that logic, someone could say they wouldn't want Durant, Lebron, Curry, Westbrook, Davis, Paul, etc. on their roster either.

No GM is stupid enough to think that picks and potential assets are greater than top 5 caliber athletes in their sport. Especially in the NBA. If Hinkie got a phone call right now and he picked up to hear Golden State, OKC or Houston on the phone offering up Curry, Durant or Harden, you can absolutely bet that he's willing to offer any number of assets at Philly's disposal to get that deal done. Why? Because Hinkie's goal isn't to get assets. It's to use any assets at his disposal to get a top 5 player and/or other top tier athletes on Philly's roster. You know how I know this? Because that was the logic he used in helping Morey orchestrate the Harden deal in the first place. Houston had quite a few solid young prospects and picks, but the Rockets were willing to deal those in a heartbeat for Harden, and it turned out amazing for Houston. And Harden wasn't even remotely considered a top 5 guy at he time. Imagine what Hinkie or any other GM in rebuilding mode would be willing to offer for a top 5 player at the beginning of his prime with multiple years left on his contract?

My logic is that stating that everyone HAS to want Harden or they are crazy is way off. I myself, if I were a GM, would want Harden. But I understand and can see reasons why others wouldn't. Those reasons wouldn't convince me to not take Harden. I just mentioned in an earlier comment a few examples of teams that have so much chemistry and are having so much success right now that why break it up to get Harden in their circumstances, even though it is a huge deal to have someone like him. The rebuilding mode or money argument are just examples. You ran with the rebuilding mode argument as my flawed logic when there are many more reasons and probably some I haven't even thought of. It is based on a much broader analysis than just that.

Shammyguy3
03-01-2015, 01:06 AM
Excluding guys with major injury history like Brook Lopez, Derrick Rose, etc... here would be my list of guys that are talented but not what I want on my team: Nikola Pekovic, Al Jefferson, Deron Williams, Monta Ellis, Tyreke Evans, Rajon Rondo.

Off the top of my head

jerellh528
03-01-2015, 01:14 AM
No, it's not. Because based on the logic you just used, then why would that team want any great player? Your (completely flawed) logic is that a team would rather stay in rebuild mode and keep young assets with potential than trade for a top five player. So, then based on that logic, someone could say they wouldn't want Durant, Lebron, Curry, Westbrook, Davis, Paul, etc. on their roster either.

No GM is stupid enough to think that picks and potential assets are greater than top 5 caliber athletes in their sport. Especially in the NBA. If Hinkie got a phone call right now and he picked up to hear Golden State, OKC or Houston on the phone offering up Curry, Durant or Harden, you can absolutely bet that he's willing to offer any number of assets at Philly's disposal to get that deal done. Why? Because Hinkie's goal isn't to get assets. It's to use any assets at his disposal to get a top 5 player and/or other top tier athletes on Philly's roster. You know how I know this? Because that was the logic he used in helping Morey orchestrate the Harden deal in the first place. Houston had quite a few solid young prospects and picks, but the Rockets were willing to deal those in a heartbeat for Harden, and it turned out amazing for Houston. And Harden wasn't even remotely considered a top 5 guy at he time. Imagine what Hinkie or any other GM in rebuilding mode would be willing to offer for a top 5 player at the beginning of his prime with multiple years left on his contract?

We're not gms though. This thread would be boring as hell and we would all answer the same things if it were taken literally, any old, broken or character issue guy. I was under the impression this thread was who the individual poster wouldn't want on thier team for any various reason, not who we should all agree is dumb not to have on our team. My choice of Lebron for example, I don't like him, I wouldn't want him to take me and my head coach hostage to create team of his pleasure that enhance his particular skill set, meanwhile having him as a 30 yr old signing 1 yr contracts picking when he wants to coast or play hard. It's not like Lebron is a guaranteed ring, far from it, he's won two his entire career, teamed up with a loaded cast. There are other ways to create great teams that don't involve Lebron. My personal preference would be to do without him. It's a make belive thread, any answer shouldnt be made to be the bad guy just because they don't agree with you or whoever and choose harden or anyone else.

Tony_Starks
03-01-2015, 01:50 AM
No, it's not. Because based on the logic you just used, then why would that team want any great player? Your (completely flawed) logic is that a team would rather stay in rebuild mode and keep young assets with potential than trade for a top five player. So, then based on that logic, someone could say they wouldn't want Durant, Lebron, Curry, Westbrook, Davis, Paul, etc. on their roster either.

No GM is stupid enough to think that picks and potential assets are greater than top 5 caliber athletes in their sport. Especially in the NBA. If Hinkie got a phone call right now and he picked up to hear Golden State, OKC or Houston on the phone offering up Curry, Durant or Harden, you can absolutely bet that he's willing to offer any number of assets at Philly's disposal to get that deal done. Why? Because Hinkie's goal isn't to get assets. It's to use any assets at his disposal to get a top 5 player and/or other top tier athletes on Philly's roster. You know how I know this? Because that was the logic he used in helping Morey orchestrate the Harden deal in the first place. Houston had quite a few solid young prospects and picks, but the Rockets were willing to deal those in a heartbeat for Harden, and it turned out amazing for Houston. And Harden wasn't even remotely considered a top 5 guy at he time. Imagine what Hinkie or any other GM in rebuilding mode would be willing to offer for a top 5 player at the beginning of his prime with multiple years left on his contract?

We're not gms though. This thread would be boring as hell and we would all answer the same things if it were taken literally, any old, broken or character issue guy. I was under the impression this thread was who the individual poster wouldn't want on thier team for any various reason, not who we should all agree is dumb not to have on our team. My choice of Lebron for example, I don't like him, I wouldn't want him to take me and my head coach hostage to create team of his pleasure that enhance his particular skill set, meanwhile having him as a 30 yr old signing 1 yr contracts picking when he wants to coast or play hard. It's not like Lebron is a guaranteed ring, far from it, he's won two his entire career, teamed up with a loaded cast. There are other ways to create great teams that don't involve Lebron. My personal preference would be to do without him. It's a make belive thread, any answer shouldnt be made to be the bad guy just because they don't agree with you or whoever and choose harden or anyone else.

It seems kindof ridiculous that in a thread asking specifically for your personal preference that you still get people saying anybody that disagrees with the status quo answer is crazy has bad judgement or whatever negative rhetoric. There are a lot of so called great players that people rant and rave about that I wouldn't want anywhere near my team.

meloman1592
03-01-2015, 02:57 AM
Josh smith, Brandon Jennings, amare, d rose

DitchDat
03-01-2015, 04:08 AM
That would be Carmelo by a landslide. Great and versatile scorer, but not "get you to the promised land" material.

jayjay33
03-01-2015, 04:11 AM
overpaid volume shooters who are not good defenders is about it.

Anyone who said LeBron or Harden above, you would be a terrible GM

If I have multiple all stars and 3 point champs on my team I definitely want Lebron as my leader....

Lmao......

HeatFan
03-01-2015, 08:07 AM
It seems kindof ridiculous that in a thread asking specifically for your personal preference that you still get people saying anybody that disagrees with the status quo answer is crazy has bad judgement or whatever negative rhetoric. There are a lot of so called great players that people rant and rave about that I wouldn't want anywhere near my team.

Exactly!!

HeatFan
03-01-2015, 08:09 AM
Excluding guys with major injury history like Brook Lopez, Derrick Rose, etc... here would be my list of guys that are talented but not what I want on my team: Nikola Pekovic, Al Jefferson, Deron Williams, Monta Ellis, Tyreke Evans, Rajon Rondo.

Off the top of my head

Forgot about Rondo. He just leaped to first on my list

Kyben36
03-01-2015, 09:02 AM
Dwight Howard

Kobe Bryant (at this point)

Josh smith

Brook Lopez, (dont beleive a team will ever win with a 7 footer who cant rebound

JR Smith

Brandon Jennings

Andre Drummond (think he has potential, but never like 7 footers who cant shoot FTs

Mike Beasley

Ben Gordon (Bulls Horror story of past Reasons)

Rondo (if i cant stand a C who cant shoot, why would i like a PG who cant )

Deandre Jordon

Javalle mcgee

Zack Randolph

Anthony Bennet (saw enough to know i would not touch him)

Dion Waiters

Jabari parker













JK about the last one, the rest i stand to though.

mightybosstone
03-01-2015, 10:51 AM
My logic is that stating that everyone HAS to want Harden or they are crazy is way off. I myself, if I were a GM, would want Harden. But I understand and can see reasons why others wouldn't. Those reasons wouldn't convince me to not take Harden. I just mentioned in an earlier comment a few examples of teams that have so much chemistry and are having so much success right now that why break it up to get Harden in their circumstances, even though it is a huge deal to have someone like him. The rebuilding mode or money argument are just examples. You ran with the rebuilding mode argument as my flawed logic when there are many more reasons and probably some I haven't even thought of. It is based on a much broader analysis than just that.

But your argument is also flawed, because that's not what these posters are using as their argument. And it's way too specific. OP's question was not "Which talented players would you not want under ridiculously specific circumstances on these particular teams?" The question clearly was a lot more general than that. Plus, the people naming guys like Harden and James aren't doing it because of the specific reasons you're citing. They're doing it because they're haters and/or idiots who will look for any excuse to criticize those two guys. In reality, if their favorite teams signed or traded for them, they'd be freaking ecstatic. That's the truth of the matter.

mightybosstone
03-01-2015, 11:03 AM
We're not gms though. This thread would be boring as hell and we would all answer the same things if it were taken literally, any old, broken or character issue guy. I was under the impression this thread was who the individual poster wouldn't want on thier team for any various reason, not who we should all agree is dumb not to have on our team. My choice of Lebron for example, I don't like him, I wouldn't want him to take me and my head coach hostage to create team of his pleasure that enhance his particular skill set, meanwhile having him as a 30 yr old signing 1 yr contracts picking when he wants to coast or play hard. It's not like Lebron is a guaranteed ring, far from it, he's won two his entire career, teamed up with a loaded cast. There are other ways to create great teams that don't involve Lebron. My personal preference would be to do without him. It's a make belive thread, any answer shouldnt be made to be the bad guy just because they don't agree with you or whoever and choose harden or anyone else.
Here's the problem with your argument. If the Lakers traded for or signed Lebron James in the offseason, are you telling me you wouldn't be thrilled? How could you not be? This guy is the greatest player in the world, and you're telling me you wouldn't want him on your team if they had a legitimate shot at him?

I call total ******** on that. There's a lot of guys in the league I haven't liked. I hated Kobe at his peak. If Houston could have traded for him, you think I would have said "No thank you. I'm going to let my personal feelings about a player get in the way of my favorite team winning basketball games." Hell no. Because I'm not an idiot, and neither are you. Ultimately, winning cures all ailments. And if Lebron James became a Los Angeles Laker and helped them win a championship, you wouldn't give a damn about anything the guy did prior to becoming a Laker.


It seems kindof ridiculous that in a thread asking specifically for your personal preference that you still get people saying anybody that disagrees with the status quo answer is crazy has bad judgement or whatever negative rhetoric. There are a lot of so called great players that people rant and rave about that I wouldn't want anywhere near my team.
Because you should be able to back up your logic for why you don't want a player other than "I don't like him." That's incredibly weak. And there have been dozens of instances in professional sports where a player from another franchise that was hated by that franchise later switched teams to help that franchise succeed. Off the top of my head, I recall Ron Artest getting into it with Kobe in the second round of the 07-08 postseason. I remember a lot of Lakers fans having some choice words on PSD with him, and if you had asked them right then which players they wouldn't have wanted on their franchise, I guarantee they would have said Artest. Flash forward a year later and Artest is helping Kobe win his fourth title.

If you let your personal feelings cloud your judgment about players, that's pretty much the definition of "hater."

Tony_Starks
03-01-2015, 08:48 PM
We're not gms though. This thread would be boring as hell and we would all answer the same things if it were taken literally, any old, broken or character issue guy. I was under the impression this thread was who the individual poster wouldn't want on thier team for any various reason, not who we should all agree is dumb not to have on our team. My choice of Lebron for example, I don't like him, I wouldn't want him to take me and my head coach hostage to create team of his pleasure that enhance his particular skill set, meanwhile having him as a 30 yr old signing 1 yr contracts picking when he wants to coast or play hard. It's not like Lebron is a guaranteed ring, far from it, he's won two his entire career, teamed up with a loaded cast. There are other ways to create great teams that don't involve Lebron. My personal preference would be to do without him. It's a make belive thread, any answer shouldnt be made to be the bad guy just because they don't agree with you or whoever and choose harden or anyone else.
Here's the problem with your argument. If the Lakers traded for or signed Lebron James in the offseason, are you telling me you wouldn't be thrilled? How could you not be? This guy is the greatest player in the world, and you're telling me you wouldn't want him on your team if they had a legitimate shot at him?

I call total ******** on that. There's a lot of guys in the league I haven't liked. I hated Kobe at his peak. If Houston could have traded for him, you think I would have said "No thank you. I'm going to let my personal feelings about a player get in the way of my favorite team winning basketball games." Hell no. Because I'm not an idiot, and neither are you. Ultimately, winning cures all ailments. And if Lebron James became a Los Angeles Laker and helped them win a championship, you wouldn't give a damn about anything the guy did prior to becoming a Laker.


It seems kindof ridiculous that in a thread asking specifically for your personal preference that you still get people saying anybody that disagrees with the status quo answer is crazy has bad judgement or whatever negative rhetoric. There are a lot of so called great players that people rant and rave about that I wouldn't want anywhere near my team.
Because you should be able to back up your logic for why you don't want a player other than "I don't like him." That's incredibly weak. And there have been dozens of instances in professional sports where a player from another franchise that was hated by that franchise later switched teams to help that franchise succeed. Off the top of my head, I recall Ron Artest getting into it with Kobe in the second round of the 07-08 postseason. I remember a lot of Lakers fans having some choice words on PSD with him, and if you had asked them right then which players they wouldn't have wanted on their franchise, I guarantee they would have said Artest. Flash forward a year later and Artest is helping Kobe win his fourth title.

If you let your personal feelings cloud your judgment about players, that's pretty much the definition of "hater."


Except he gave you his logic. He said the guy is a ring chaser, doesn't want to have to fit an entire team around his playing style, and its still not a lock that you're getting a ring even if you give him a superteam. What more do you want him to say?

Disagree with it all you want but its HIS opinion. Do you go to beauty contest and call everybody that doesn't like the same girl as you haters because they don't have what you deem a logical reason to like someone else? This isn't a exam dude, there are no wrong answers.....

lol, please
03-01-2015, 11:50 PM
Except he gave you his logic. He said the guy is a ring chaser, doesn't want to have to fit an entire team around his playing style, and its still not a lock that you're getting a ring even if you give him a superteam. What more do you want him to say?

Disagree with it all you want but its HIS opinion. Do you go to beauty contest and call everybody that doesn't like the same girl as you haters because they don't have what you deem a logical reason to like someone else? This isn't a exam dude, there are no wrong answers.....
:clap: :clap:

Chronz
03-02-2015, 01:02 AM
So essentially, you guys would regret players that made your team better, all because of you have a personal bias against him?

LMFAO

SlimKid
03-02-2015, 01:19 AM
Jeebuz, the self-righteousness of some in this thread is obnoxious. The question posed should result in subjective answers, not whether the team would be better or whether someone would make a good g.m. Get the F over yourselves

Chronz
03-02-2015, 02:09 AM
Jeebuz, the self-righteousness of some in this thread is obnoxious. The question posed should result in subjective answers, not whether the team would be better or whether someone would make a good g.m. Get the F over yourselves

As long as thats out in the open, I love people outing themselves. Power to you haters

cmellofan15
03-02-2015, 10:53 AM
when the craziness or laziness or idiocy outweighs the talent is where i draw the line. guys like spreewell, marbury, sjax, bynum would not be on my team. only certain staffs and players can deal with stuff like that, and if you're not producing like a dennis rodman or ron artest then ya gotta go. when you see a guy and think that he would only really fit with the spurs or mavs then that's usually saying something haha

of the current nba I'd prolly only say rondo and bynum

Jamiecballer
03-02-2015, 02:08 PM
Except he gave you his logic. He said the guy is a ring chaser, doesn't want to have to fit an entire team around his playing style, and its still not a lock that you're getting a ring even if you give him a superteam. What more do you want him to say?

Disagree with it all you want but its HIS opinion. Do you go to beauty contest and call everybody that doesn't like the same girl as you haters because they don't have what you deem a logical reason to like someone else? This isn't a exam dude, there are no wrong answers.....

well said.

IKnowHoops
03-03-2015, 05:09 AM
I guess the title of this thread should be "What skilled players do you hate?"