Line-Ups That Could've Been...?

by **BIG GREEN** on Wed Nov 12, 2003 9:30 am

..stevan..you're right...i take out monroe and west and replace um with Garnett and Kobe/t-mac

BTW..a little light hearted laugh at the NLSC is good once in a while..but if that is spamming..i apologise. (Y)

by **Shep** on Wed Nov 12, 2003 12:56 pm

scubilute wrote:That's the first answer to your question.

2nd, Mourning was planning to join the Mavs before the Nets offered him to stay in the East so he could still be the best center of the Conf.

if you read it again, mabe you could make sense of the fact that what teams could've been means if they kept these players/drafted these players. instead you've put mourning in the dallas line up just because he was rumoured to sign there. :roll:

.

by **Stevan** on Wed Nov 12, 2003 2:49 pm

Actually the point of the thread was to undo one key trade from the past few years with a team.

LOL whoops I undid a couple of trades and a passed up draft pick. It was an honest mistake :oops:

by **EGarrett** on Wed Nov 12, 2003 11:38 pm

Stevan wrote:LOL whoops I undid a couple of trades and a passed up draft pick. It was an honest mistake

LOL...don't worry about it man...that's just what I did in my post. There's no hard and fast rule... (Y)

...

by **scubilete** on Thu Nov 13, 2003 12:19 am

if you read it again, mabe you could make sense of the fact that what teams could've been means if they kept these players/drafted these players.

Signing is part of the deal as the thread maker posted Juwan & Lue in the Magic rosters. But, you can read it 2-3-4 times and it will still be the same "could've been" :roll:

instead you've put mourning in the dallas line up just because he was rumoured to sign there.

Even better, you would post something that is real in the Dallas line up as if it was something that could've been when it already is? :roll:

, line ups that could've been.

LINE UPS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN

COULD
HAVE
BEEN

:roll:

, read it again & again and it will make sense to you

by **bballer22** on Thu Nov 13, 2003 12:30 am

anyway.....
its fun to look at them all but ur looking at them form NBA live point of view, alot of these players are good after traded was beacuse of the atmosphere they are in on the team!
T-mac didnt want to play with VC they play the same possision and were imatue, Barkly did not want to share the post with Hakeem, but the most trade talk the could have been that realy enoyes me is the Washington Bullets, sure they had Rasheed, C-webb, and Haward , but.. Rasheed only realizes he had to start playing basketball when he ralizes he was tradable, C-webb did not want to play for Washington and Howard had his best years in washington!
so point is that players have to find the right position to be in b4 they achive greatness! Imagine if Ben never made it to Detroit where they put him on C coz they had no one there? he would probably be somewhre deep on thge bech as a 4th Gurd or bak in Italy!

there a a ton pf players that if were put in the right possision would become superstars, one of them i think is Eddie Griffin and Kurt Thomas!

by **EGarrett** on Thu Nov 13, 2003 5:40 am

Scub and Shep...you're each free to apply whatever rules you want to the lineup. I did it by taking the current roster and undoing a key trade. People can do that...but if someone doesn't...it's cool. Don't fight about it.

by **Filip** on Thu Nov 13, 2003 5:45 am

Shep Ramsey always seems kinda pissed off

by **EGarrett** on Thu Nov 13, 2003 6:01 am

Slam harder wrote:Shep Ramsey always seems kinda pissed off

I think it's his avatar :wink:

. Then again people seem to think I'm always pissed off or a lot more serious here than I really am so it's probably just a misunderstanding. Shep is a good guy.

Now...for more wishful thinking...the current Nets roster if we undid the Van Horn/Mutombo deal.

C Mourning
PF Martin
SF Jefferson
SG Kittles
PG Kidd
___________
SF Van Horn
SG Harris
PG Planinic
SF Rogers
C Collins
PF Williams

Not that bad...and I think Van Horn would benefit from being a 6th man. If it doesn't crush his confidence. He might be more assertive against the other team's bench and more motivated to prove himself.

by **Filip** on Thu Nov 13, 2003 8:34 am

Why are the Nets benching ZO no BTW? He is a great player, strong phycical blocket when he played before. Has he lost his strenght or why is the reason that he dosen't start?

by . on Thu Nov 13, 2003 8:41 am

Maybe they want a stronger bench

by **Filip** on Thu Nov 13, 2003 8:51 am

Ko8e4mvp wrote:Maybe they want a stronger bench

Why not put Shaq on the bench, and have Medvenko as starter :idea:

by . on Thu Nov 13, 2003 9:00 am

Because Shaq a teamleader unlike Zo, a go 2 guy unlike Zo, most dominant player on the team unlike Zo...and the list goes on

by **Filip** on Thu Nov 13, 2003 9:10 am

You think Jason Collins is a more teamleader than Zo?
Zo helped his Miami Heat to the playoffs in his prime days.

by **Full Surface** on Thu Nov 13, 2003 9:55 am

Actually, I read in a newspaper article once that Byron Scott was only benching Alonzo Mourning because he wants to use him when he's completely ready. The Nets don't really need Mourning to help them win games when they're going against weak teams.

by **Shep** on Thu Nov 13, 2003 2:14 pm

ok. lets play by scubilute's rules. what was rumoured to happen.

lakers sign tim duncan dirk nowtizki tracy mcgrady jason kidd zydrunas ilgauskas kevin garnett andrei kirilenko and paul pierce

their team could've looked like this:
C O'Neal
PF Duncan
SF Nowitzki
SG McGrady
PG Kidd

bench:
C Ilgauskas
PF Garnett
SF Kirilenko
SG Bryant
PG Payton
SG Pierce
PF Malone

all players sign for the minimum and players who already had contracts took paycuts.

by **Filip** on Thu Nov 13, 2003 8:56 pm

by **Jackal** on Thu Nov 13, 2003 9:35 pm

Shep wrote:ok. lets play by scubilute's rules. what was rumoured to happen.

lakers sign tim duncan dirk nowtizki tracy mcgrady jason kidd zydrunas ilgauskas kevin garnett andrei kirilenko and paul pierce

their team could've looked like this:
C O'Neal
PF Duncan
SF Nowitzki
SG McGrady
PG Kidd

bench:
C Ilgauskas
PF Garnett
SF Kirilenko
SG Bryant
PG Payton
SG Pierce
PF Malone

all players sign for the minimum and players who already had contracts took paycuts.

And some people call me childish :roll:

.

Atleast Mourning was rumoured to sign...those guys you mentioned were never even rumoured to sign with LA, don't try too hard to be funny Shep, you just cant do it, it comes off as being silly :roll:

by **Shep** on Thu Nov 13, 2003 9:49 pm

don't try too hard to be funny Shep, you just cant do it, it comes off as being silly

unlike you jackal, i don't try to impress people here, people who 'are closer to me than my real life friends' :lol:

....i'll have that one on you forever..... all i am saying is that it is stupid to base what could've been a teams roster, on rumour's, its fine to say that a team could've chose this person in the draft, or a team could've kept this player; but a team could've had this player if he signed over the offseason? i don't think so

Atleast Mourning was rumoured to sign...

why would i say those players were rumoured to sign if they wern't? :roll:

. one day i went to my local newsagent, buying some NBA magazine, and the guy said 'hey! did you know that Kirilenko is going to sign with the Lakers?' to which i replied 'shut up and give me my change'. so there was the rumour, as stupid as the person behind the counter was, it was still is a rumour.

by . on Thu Nov 13, 2003 10:06 pm

Slam harder wrote:You think Jason Collins is a more teamleader than Zo?
Zo helped his Miami Heat to the playoffs in his prime days.

no...I didnt say that, I said that Zo is not a teamleader anymore, U say that he helped the Heat in the play-offs.....yes he did, in his prime days.....he cannot do that anymore. but its most likely what Refuze said. I just said its a possibility that NJ wants a stronger bench

by **Jackal** on Thu Nov 13, 2003 10:07 pm

Shep wrote:unlike you jackal, i don't try to impress people here, who 'are closer to me than my real life friends' ....i'll have that one on you forever.....

Impress people? Did I try to impress people? I know what I said, and why it is I said it don't you worry bout that one. Eventually you do admit to trying to be funny, since I don't see you denying my accusations.

Heh, like you say, I guess I got you on that one eh?

Shep wrote: all i am saying is that it is stupid to base what could've been a teams roster, on rumour's

Well, if Zo's agent said that he was interested in Dallas, there is reason enough to believe that he would've and could've signed...if he could've signed, it COULD'VE been the Dallas' lineup.

Once again, like Scubilite has done many times already....the thread name says:

"Line-Ups That Could've Been...?"

Shep wrote:why would i say those players were rumoured to sign if they wern't? . one day i went to my local newsagent, buying some NBA magazine, and the guy said 'hey! did you know that Kirilenko is going to sign with the Lakers?' to which i replied 'shut up and give me my change'. so there was the rumour, as stupid as the person behind the counter was, it was still is a rumour.

Did Kirilenko's agent say "he's interested in various teams, Lakers are one of them" ? :roll:

by **Shep** on Thu Nov 13, 2003 10:20 pm

Did I try to impress people?

you obviously are since you are surrounded by your closest friends here on the forum :lol:

Eventually you do admit to trying to be funny

i do? where?

if Zo's agent said that he was interested in Dallas, there is reason enough to believe that he would've and could've signed

not at all. dallas didn't sign him, so it is not possible that they could've signed him.

by **Jackal** on Thu Nov 13, 2003 10:29 pm

Shep wrote:you obviously are since you are surrounded by your closest friends here on the forum

You might make friends by trying to impress them, not everyone does the same. You don't make friends by impressing them, you make friends by liking them and being able to talk to them :roll:

.

i do? where?

I don't see you denying it in your previous post.

not at all. dallas didn't sign him, so it is not possible that they could've signed him.

Eehm, sure. How bout you learn to read, then we'll discuss this further?

by **Shep** on Thu Nov 13, 2003 10:45 pm

You might make friends by trying to impress them, not everyone does the same. You don't make friends by impressing them, you make friends by liking them and being able to talk to them

i don't make friends by trying to impress them, its just something that friends do. once friendship happens, then obviously you talk to them about your accomplishments....but i'm sure you would know that if you ever had a friend in the real world...

I don't see you denying it in your previous post.

well the serious part of my previous post stated "all i am saying is that it is stupid to base what could've been a teams roster, on rumour's, its fine to say that a team could've chose this person in the draft, or a team could've kept this player; but a team could've had this player if he signed over the offseason? i don't think so".

whether the rest of my post wasn't me being serious or not, i wasn't trying to be funny. maybe i exaggerated a little bit, but all i was trying to do was prove a point.

Eehm, sure. How bout you learn to read, then we'll discuss this further?

ok...but only if you learn how to use a computer

by **Stevan** on Thu Nov 13, 2003 11:03 pm

God damn, there's more sexual tension in here than in the Delta centre pre-2003-04 season :lol:

Come on guys, cut the crap, you know you'll just end up being freinds anyway (y)

Line-Ups That Could've Been...?

Who is online