Bring back CP3

[bojangles837]

I meant "needle movers," I mistyped.

Overall, I'm with you though, not against you. You're just making a different argument to make the same point, which is AD and Boogie haven't done anything to prove they can lead a successful team.

But just to address your "needle mover point," I think their ability to "move the needle" is limited by the fact that they aren't perimeter players. Today's NBA is a perimeter-driven league, and our backcourt as it stands is Crawford, Moore, Cook, and Jackson. Ouch.

Interesting point. Is chris paul a needle mover? bringing this full circle lol

[SilkySlim]

Players won't come as fan support isn't good, arena regularly looks half empty and is quiet compared to most other arenas, our roster is garbage outside our two bigs and we have an atrocious coach who doesn't even have a clue how to use two of the top bigs in the game.

Plus Boogie very well might leave next yr. If we don't make the playoffs I see almost no chance he re-signs.

[PelsFan2313]

Interesting point. Is chris paul a needle mover? bringing this full circle lol

Yes. Replace Jrue with Paul and we're an exponentially better team. I don't doubt that for a second.

[da ThRONe]

I think people are just taking your realistic views towards the franchise as negativity. Just because we have two superstars does not mean that anything is guaranteed or that our franchise is any different as a whole in regards to disfunction. Even though i see the current team (including Jrue) as a playoff team, i dont think we have a "playoff culture" so to speak in the locker room. There hasnt been a defined leader on this team since CP left and i dont see Davis becoming that guy this year

It's NOT "players" won't come here because of AD and Boogie's presence.

It's "players" won't come here DESPITE AD and Boogie's presence, until they both prove they can win games together.

For the 2342o-0o420th time, that's not a statement against their potential. It's an assessment of who they have been as players separately and together, however brief.

(And before you attack the use of the word, "players," I'm only using the same jargon as the OP).

I really don't understand where everything gets lost in translation. Nobody's crapping on Davis or Cousins are blaming the lack of playoffs appearances squarely on them. I've been watching the Kings be one of the worse run organizations and the Pelicans make several bad decisions with a slew of injuries sparkled in. However you can't crown these young men something that they have yet to produce simply because they play on your team. And judging by the fact that this early it doesn't appear that top FA will have NOLA on their radars' is farther evidence that unproven is how people view this core.

[hornetsrebirth]

A- I didn't say AD and Cousins weren't "needle movers," DaThrone did. Don't put words in my mouth.
B- They have shown they are elite when it comes to putting up individual numbers. They have not shown that they are elite when it comes to winning basketball games.

Ok so basically point A is that I'm putting words in your mouth by saying they aren't needle movers, and your point B is that they aren't needle movers. Cool.

So yes, you are making presumptions. Individual excellence does not necessarily translate to team excellence, particularly when the rest of the supporting cast is poor. And again you can't have it both ways. Either the supporting cast matters, so we can't assume we'll win next year (without knowing what the supporting case will be) OR the supporting cast doesn't matter, which means AD and Cousins aren't the "needle movers," you claim them to be.

Also, on another point, the LeBron and MJ "couldn't do it by themselves" is a silly argument because you're still talking about varying levels of success. MJ took the early Bulls teams deep into the postseason. LeBron took a hot pile of garbage to the Finals in 2007. Meanwhile, Cousins hasn't even sniffed the playoffs, and AD hasn't won a single playoff game.

Lebron's hot garbage got to the finals because they were in the East and they got swept in the Finals when they played a team from the West. Today's Western Conference is one of the most competitive ever seen in the NBA. If the Pelicans played in a weaker conference AD would have more playoff success but because the competition is stiffer, then he isn't a winner or whatever. That's BS.

[da ThRONe]

See above. And Bosh only made the playoffs twice with Toronto if I recall (and did not get out of the 1st round).

Ok yeah Bosh isn't on Wade or James level in term of needle mover.

[PelsFan2313]

Ok so basically point A is that I'm putting words in your mouth by saying they aren't needle movers, and your point B is that they aren't needle movers. Cool.

Again, let me explain the distinction to you. There's a difference between saying they aren't "needle-movers" and they haven't proven to be "needle-movers." The former is an affirmative statement, the latter is a reserved statement. I'm not going to call them "needle-movers" because they haven't "moved the needle" at any point in their career. I'm also not going to say they can't be "needle-movers" next year because we haven't seen a large enough sample size of AD and Boogie playing together and we don't know who the supporting cast is going to be. I'm non-committal because I'm willing to wait and see, as opposed to making sweeping declarations one way or the other.

Lebron's hot garbage got to the finals because they were in the East and they got swept in the Finals when they played a team from the West. Today's Western Conference is one of the most competitive ever seen in the NBA. If the Pelicans played in a weaker conference AD would have more playoff success but because the competition is stiffer, then he isn't a winner or whatever. That's BS.

The fact remains that LeBron "moved the needle," despite having a terrible supporting cast; there's definitive proof of it happening. Argue all you want about whether or not AD or Boogie could do the same under similar circumstances (granted you're severely underestimating how good that Pistons team was). But once more, that's nothing but conjecture because to this point, they haven't accomplished anything meaningful on a team level, separately or together.

You've also dodged my question about the supporting cast twice now. Does it affect the ability to "needle-move" or not?

[hornetsrebirth]

Again, let me explain the distinction to you. There's a difference between saying they aren't "needle-movers" and they haven't proven to be "needle-movers." The former is an affirmative statement, the latter is a reserved statement. I'm not going to call them "needle-movers" because they haven't "moved the needle" at any point in their career. I'm also not going to say they can't be "needle-movers" next year because we haven't seen a large enough sample size of AD and Boogie playing together and we don't know who the supporting cast is going to be. I'm non-committal because I'm willing to wait and see, as opposed to making sweeping declarations one way or the other.



The fact remains that LeBron "moved the needle," despite having a terrible supporting cast; there's definitive proof of it happening. Argue all you want about whether or not AD or Boogie could do the same under similar circumstances (granted you're severely underestimating how good that Pistons team was). But once more, that's nothing but conjecture because to this point, they haven't accomplished anything meaningful on a team level, separately or together.

You've also dodged my question about the supporting cast twice now. Does it affect the ability to "needle-move" or not?

I didn't think I dodged that question at all. My whole point is that wins are a team stat, not an individual stat. To say player A isn't a needle mover because he doesn't have a good enough win percentage, and then put him on a better team and magically he is a needle mover, that makes no sense because the individual player has not changed, what has changed is the situation around him. To define an individual player's attributes based on his team's win percentage is not logical when he is the lone bright spot on a dysfunctional team.

[PelsFan2313]

I didn't think I dodged that question at all. My whole point is that wins are a team stat, not an individual stat. To say player A isn't a needle mover because he doesn't have a good enough win percentage, and then put him on a better team and magically he is a needle mover, that makes no sense because the individual player has not changed, what has changed is the situation around him. To define an individual player's attributes based on his team's win percentage is not logical when he is the lone bright spot on a dysfunctional team.

It does make sense because a player isn't a needle mover until he "moves the needle." Until then, labeling a player as such is premature and is based on nothing but conjecture. Now if the player joins a better team, and the team wins, that doesn't necessarily mean the individual player has improved drastically on an individual level, you're right there. But it does allow us to judge the player more fairly, because he is then placed in a situation where he can show how his individual talent can contribute to the overall success of a team. At that point, there is no excuse. You either move the needle or you don't. But a player needs the opportunity to prove he can "move the needle," before he can actually "move the needle" and be labeled as such. That's where the supporting cast matters, coaching and personnel.

[Denza]

I don't get why anyone is still talking about Chris Paul when we are clearly using Cousins as Point-Center. I don't think we could make a competitive offer anyway. This team has its core. Cousins + AD + Jrue are all we need to build Asst coach Finch's system. Time to look for shooter upgrades and value depth.

[hornetsrebirth]

It does make sense because a player isn't a needle mover until he "moves the needle." Until then, labeling a player as such is premature and is based on nothing but conjecture. Now if the player joins a better team, and the team wins, that doesn't necessarily mean the individual player has improved drastically on an individual level, you're right there. But it does allow us to judge the player more fairly, because he is then placed in a situation where he can show how his individual talent can contribute to the overall success of a team. At that point, there is no excuse. You either move the needle or you don't. But a player needs the opportunity to prove he can "move the needle," before he can actually "move the needle" and be labeled as such. That's where the supporting cast matters, coaching and personnel.

First you claim I put words in your mouth that AD and Cousins aren't "needle movers", now here you are saying a player isn't a needle mover until they move the needle. So you are saying AD and Cousins haven't moved the needle, and therefore aren't needle movers. You can't argue both sides of an issue like this. It's total nonsense.

On an individual level, moving the needle should be considered rising above the rest of your peers. AD and Cousins have done that. They moved the needle. On a team level, they haven't competed for championships because they haven't been on a complete team. Stop conflating the issue.

This idea of not being a "needle mover" is just a cheap way to discount a premier athlete. The only other time I've heard this phrase was Dana White saying Nate Diaz doesn't "move the needle", and it was total BS from his mouth as well.

[PelsFan2313]

First you claim I put words in your mouth that AD and Cousins aren't "needle movers", now here you are saying a player isn't a needle mover until they move the needle. So you are saying AD and Cousins haven't moved the needle, and therefore aren't needle movers. You can't argue both sides of an issue like this. It's total nonsense.

On an individual level, moving the needle should be considered rising above the rest of your peers. AD and Cousins have done that. They moved the needle. On a team level, they haven't competed for championships because they haven't been on a complete team. Stop conflating the issue.

This idea of not being a "needle mover" is just a cheap way to discount a premier athlete. The only other time I've heard this phrase was Dana White saying Nate Diaz doesn't "move the needle", and it was total BS from his mouth as well.

Well of course I'm talking about a "needle mover" now because you initiated this conversation with me by bringing in DaThrone's argument and attributing it to my own (which is understandable, because him and I are making the same point using different arguments). I'm going to address my perception of the needle mover argument one more time and be done with it, because again, it's deviating from the main point I was making and just giving you fodder to play with semantics. When I think of a needle mover, I think of an ability to lift a supporting cast to excellence. Juxtapose that to another point, one we agree on on a basic level: stars need some level of competency from their supporting case in order to excel at a team level. Now combine those two rules. We don't know whether AD and Boogie have the ability to "needle move" because they haven't had the opportunity to play with the requisite competent supporting case to excel on a team level. They may have had the ability to "needle move," for years, given their individual talents, but haven't been exposed to the proper enviroment to which they could demonstrate that ther individual ability translates into team success. As a result, I can say they haven't "moved the needle" and say "I don't know if they are needle movers" without being inconsistent because they haven't been exposed to an enviroment where they could prove that ability one way or the other.

So yes, you aren't a needle mover until you move a needle. You got that far with understanding my argument. What you missed is the second part. In order to move the needle, you need to be exposed to the proper enviroment. In that regard, I anticipate they'll have the opportunity to answer that question for the first time. This is where DaThrone and me "divide." He acknowledged the first part and made a conclusion, subject to change. I argued the first part and the second part, subject to classification.
You argued neither part, finding that they already have moved the needle by "rising above their peers." Semantics are fun.

Again, the point is more important than this side-tracked argument. The point is this. AD and Boogie haven't done anything on a team level, either apart or together. They might do something on a team level, depending on their continued development and the competency of the supporting cast. Until they've done something on a team level, we can't assume it's going to happen. That level of caution extends to upcoming FAs, particularly those who want to win. As a result, free agents who are looking to win aren't going to come to us as their first options provided that teams which have already won are available. Why? Because there's no point in gambling that a loser will become a winner, when you can just join the proven winners, and maximize your winning capabilities.

/thread (for me).

[HoustonPelicans]

I think we should consider the fact that Chris Paul has experienced some success here. This isn't just some team with the best big men tandem in the league, this is home for him.
I think we should also consider his age and the fact that he's probably not trying to be leaned on for 20 points a night anymire. He would be a 3rd option here, can any other team say that? Chris Paul never played with anybody as offensively talented as either of them and he gets to play with 2 of them? I get y'all angle of we having won anything yet but like I said what good does waiting for them to prove themselves do for Chris Paul when he's signing his last major contract this summer. If he looks at them and sees dominance, he would be wise to join them now because he literally does not have the option to wait.

[UNO Gracias]

Put me in the group that says that no free agents will take a pay cut to play with AD and Boogie this year. We might get a look from guys like Rondo, Greene, etc., B and C list players, but no star is going to come here when they don't know what the future will be for our franchise. Would you come here if you weren't sure if:
1) The system was going to work.
2) Boogie could bounce if the season goes in the can
3) We finish horribly

No, nobody is going to come here until we prove ourselves. Right now we are the OKC Thunder with Durant and Westbrook. We have two superstars, but we are in an odd location, and we haven't shown nearly as much as those Thunder did.

If we bust out, and next season we do amazing, then yeah, look for some stars to come look our way, and why wouldn't they. But this season is a prove it year for us.

[luckyman]

Because AD and Cousins haven't had team success yet (AD did lead a western conference injury riddled playoff team), they can't be assumed to do so at some point and therefore cannot be considered a "needle mover".

Nevermind all the all-star appearances, Team USA appearances, assured max contracts, and pick of the litter when contract time comes up. No sir. No needle mover here.

Outstanding logic on display at PR as usual.

[UNO Gracias]

I wouldn't say that we are without a needle mover, certainly AD and Boogie are needle movers, but nobody can tell us how well we will perform next season, or what a reasonable basis is. That is what is going to prevent a CP3 or anyone in that A-List from coming here.

[tdcreator]

I personally don't think we need another A-list player, it'd be nice but not needed. Give me 4-5 really good role players or B and C to go along with our 2 big guys and we'll do fine. As for Boogie running point center, I'm ok with it but someone has to bring the ball up the court and then give it to him. So essentially you need a good ball handler and passer at that position along with good defense. If he gives you any shooting its a plus but defense and no turnovers is key. The other thought is getting 2 combo guard that can shoot and defend the 1 through potentially 3. Having 1 non shooter and 4 shooters on the floor at all times should keep other teams from doubling too often but all depends on that first FA signing as to which way we're looking to go.

[tdcreator]

Would anyone consider Dwayne Wade as a one year rental and if we could drop Asik in the deal? Looks like Chicago could be trying for a buyout but maybe we could get a little something.

[PELICANSFAN]

Would anyone consider Dwayne Wade as a one year rental and if we could drop Asik in the deal? Looks like Chicago could be trying for a buyout but maybe we could get a little something.

I saw MM propose Asik/Moore and protected 1st for Wade. If the 1st was lottery protected or if we could make it a 2nd instead of a 1st, I would be all for it.

[tthier2]

I saw MM propose Asik/Moore and protected 1st for Wade. If the 1st was lottery protected or if we could make it a 2nd instead of a 1st, I would be all for it.

I would absolutely LOVE that deal.

[Silver Nail]

Why the 1st? If the b/o rumor is true, they get value, would rather add Q-Pon if more salary needed

[shanesy]

Assume 1st is for taking on the Asik albatross contract. Wade ability to contribute makes his contract acceptable.

[msusousaphone]

Pretty sure if I read needle mover one more time I will begin clubbing baby seals, again.

I see both sides. Most FAs would look at the Pelicans and not see them as an attractive destination, however I could see how a back court player with a high locus of control could fathom themselves the link that makes combines with our front court to be brilliant.

Anyways, if the Boogie trade taught us anything it should have been that we really don't have a clue what can and will happen. That some people have all this conviction that they know for a fact something can or can't happen just shows how shortsighted they are.

[OnesieBells]

I know he isnt the most sexy pick, but TJ McConnell could look really good with the pels. Should be much cheaper than most alternatives Ive heard in the past months too. Dont know what trade could work.

[Werdiknight]

Pretty sure if I read needle mover one more time I will begin clubbing baby seals, again.

I see both sides. Most FAs would look at the Pelicans and not see them as an attractive destination, however I could see how a back court player with a high locus of control could fathom themselves the link that makes combines with our front court to be brilliant.

Anyways, if the Boogie trade taught us anything it should have been that we really don't have a clue what can and will happen. That some people have all this conviction that they know for a fact something can or can't happen just shows how shortsighted they are.

There are some things suggested here that are just plain and simple impossible. You cannot just take the Boogie trade as a "proove" that "anything is possible" and then go on and put some dream-scenario players on our roster and ignore that there are trade and cap rules to follow. You just cannot bend those rules to your will. When talking about what just isn't and what is at least probably not possible you should also take into account that we had much more valuable assets before the Boogie trade which are gone now (this years pick, Hield). I also believe that it should be allowed to say that it is highly improbable, bordering impossible to do a trade like Asik and Hill for let's say Durant, even if it might be theoretically possible. Although the Boogie trade was a surprise it was still somewhat reasonable for the other team. Looking at what some here suggest I personally sometimes don't see this reason for the other team AT ALL. It's just kind of like, sorry, childish behaviour, the strong wish for a shiny new toy and ignoring all circumstances. In those cases you just should be allowed to say "not happening".