Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

177Re: [APBR_analysis] Re: Nets trades: Why (again)?

Expand Messages
  • Jim Hekel
    Jul 4 6:12 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      You're entitled to your opinion, but I think most NBA
      insiders are scratching their head on this one. If the
      Suns were so intent on trading the best point guard in
      the game, you would think they could get more than
      Marbury. This deal only makes sense if Phoenix also
      gets Van Horn or Kenyon Martin, or better yet, both.
      Marbury is a good example of a guy who's box score
      looks great, but it doesn't give a full picture of his
      value, or lack of the same. That's my opinion. Jim
      Hekel, Rowley, Iowa.

      --- harlanzo@... wrote:
      > --- In APBR_analysis@y..., Jim Hekel <jhekel@y...>
      > wrote:
      > > Wo, let's do some clarification here. I never said
      > the
      > > difference between Marbury and Kidd is not much.
      > > Marbury is not in the same category of Kidd. Kidd
      > is
      > > easily twice the player that Marbury could ever
      > hope
      > > to be. He is a gunner, not a real point guard, and
      > a
      > > cancer in the locker room. This deal was a steal
      > for
      > > the Nets. Jim Hekel, Rowley, Iowa.
      > I never said that you thought the difference between
      > Kidd and Marbury
      > is very little. I meant that any form of objective
      > analysis would
      > yield the two players being very equal (in fact some
      > favor MArbury).
      > Given the fact that the two players are so close in
      > value right now
      > and the Nets will not likely win much in the near
      > future it is better
      > for the Nets to take the player with the higher
      > upside. Kidd is
      > already 28 and he most likely reached his peak while
      > Marbury is only
      > 24 and his growth curve as a player would probably
      > go up. (Indeed,
      > look how much Kidd has improve since he was 24. In
      > 1997-98, when he
      > was 24, Kidd scored 11.6 ppg with 9.1 apg on 42%
      > shooting.) Thus, if
      > the Nets actually accrue depth over the next couple
      > of years they are
      > in a better position to captalize on it with Marbury
      > who will almost
      > certainly be better than Kidd 2 or 3 years from now.
      > I understand the preference for a pure point guard
      > like Kidd is. In
      > fact he is the second or third best passer I have
      > ever seen (I go
      > back to 84). However, disdain for scoring point
      > guards is not always
      > fair as we can see that other score-first point
      > guards (ie KJ,
      > PAyton, Tim Hardaway) have led very good teams in
      > the past. So,
      > while your Kidd preference is certainly reasonbale,
      > I think the Nets
      > are better with MArbury.

      Do You Yahoo!?
      Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
    • Show all 11 messages in this topic