Traceman Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 but I doubt they would do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KB21 Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 Basically because Josh Childress is one of the types of players that I call "glue" guys. He has a tendancy to hold the team together when he is on the floor because he is willing to do a lot of the little things that don't show up in the stats sheet. If you trade him for a one year rental of Jamaal Magloire, how much better have you gotten? In my mind, you haven't gotten much better. Jamaal Magloire has had back to back poor seasons with his numbers in a steady decline over that time span. Milwaukee pretty much got fed up with him this past season. There's not guarantee that he would even start over Zaza. Zaza's PER was 4 points higher than Jamaal's this past season. Whatever edge Jamaal brings in rebounding is offset by everything else. So, you are essentially trading a "glue" guy for a player who may or may not be motivated to play for you, and his only motivation may be the fact that he is in a contract year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KB21 Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 Yep. Basically, Josh is one of those players that is a "glue" guy, much like Shane Battier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BusBoyIsBack Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 Because Childress won't ever be a starter we should trade him? That doesn't make any sense. This isn't NBA Live. It's about more that a starting 5. With a versatile player like Childress who won't cheat you on defense and with a great stroke and shot selection on offense, we have one helluva 6th man. Do you think the Mavs are going to trade Stackhouse just because he doesn't start? Dumb post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Sothron Posted July 27, 2006 Premium Member Report Share Posted July 27, 2006 Quote: Maybe you were not a Hawks fan during the Danny Manning Debacle. However, I don't want to repeat it. Magloire looks like a bad situation. Why do you think N.O. would have rather been without a Center than to keep Magloire?? I just think they knew that Magloire was going to bolt... Shouldn't we have the same thought?? Moreover, next year is a big FA year, that means that there will be more FAs but it also means more teams with money. You can't be seriously asking me that question. Look at my sig. I've been a Hawks fan longer than 90% of this board has been alive. I was going to Hawks games with my Dad before Dominique even came out of UGA lol. I remember Danny Manning quite well. That POS assured Babcock he was going to resign with us before we traded 'Nique for him and instead he took a 1 million dollar tender from Phoenix. I did not feel any pity for him when he went on to blow out his ACL in each knee after that. We don't know what Magloire will do as a FA. We would have his Bird rights which at least would make him want to use us in a S&T situation. Personally I'd kill to sign Chris Kaman away from the Clippers in next year's free agency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeye Posted July 27, 2006 Report Share Posted July 27, 2006 Quote: lol Childress blows....bottomline. I'd take Magloire even for 1 season Bucks fan right here!!!^^^^^^^^^ STupid Dumbass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now