AD trade scenarios...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Kuzma isn't worthless, but he's not worth very much. Doesn't play D, isn't very efficient. Can score, is aggressive, there's value in that but it's not sky high.

Ingram has Schrödinger's value. He's not a great player in the first place, so his base value isn't particularly high. But he's also got the health scare which holds the risk of turning any value he DOES have into negative value (that is, a cost) at any minute.

---

Lol , AD is a great player every piece we get for him is not going to be a great player , we’re not going to get four or five great players what we should be looking for is some good players that will fit around our great players Jrue and Zion . We are not getting equal value for AD it’s just not gonna happen .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistaWhoDat

Lol , AD is a great player every piece we get for him is not going to be a great player , we’re not going to get four or five great players what we should be looking for is some good players that will fit around our great players Jrue and Zion . We are not getting equal value for AD it’s just not gonna happen .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Nobody thinks we're going to get equal value. Every possible offer is a downgrade. That's just the starting point of trading any superstar

It's true that you're not going to get four or five great players. That doesn't mean you settle for three sub-average players with severe injury risks. There is a middle point where you get some assets. Trading AD must bring in SOME good assets. Blood Clot Ingram, No D Kuzma and No Shot Ball aren't good enough.

You don't expert perfection, but that doesn't mean you accept garbage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Primetime

Kuzma's valuable because he's cheap af for the next 3 years.

---

Just being cheap isn't a bonus. Stanley Johnson is cheap too, should we rush to resign him? Of course not. Obviously, Kuzma is better than Johnson, but you get the idea.

In order for an asset to be good they have to be cheap AND promising. If they're just cheap and crap, then they're just crap. If someone offered to mail manure to your house for the low price of $5, you wouldn't take it just because it's cheap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Nobody thinks we're going to get equal value. Every possible offer is a downgrade. That's just the starting point of trading any superstar

It's true that you're not going to get four or five great players. That doesn't mean you settle for three sub-average players with severe injury risks. There is a middle point where you get some assets. Trading AD must bring in SOME good assets. Blood Clot Ingram, No D Kuzma and No Shot Ball aren't good enough.

You don't expert perfection, but that doesn't mean you accept garbage.

---

Do you really think any of those guys have even came close to reaching their full potential yet , I mean they all showed flashes and with that train wreck organization they’ve been in since they’ve been drafted I would reserve judgement about just dismissing them as less than I think they all have better than average potential and I personally think Ingram has all star potential if he stays healthy .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistaWhoDat

Do you really think any of those guys have even came close to reaching their full potential yet , I mean they all showed flashes and with that train wreck organization they’ve been in since they’ve been drafted I would reserve judgement about just dismissing them as less than I think they all have better than average potential.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Maybe, maybe not. Would you be willing to risk your biggest trade asset available to rebuild your team on a bunch of players that all have significant questions marks?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Maybe, maybe not. Would you be willing to risk your biggest trade asset available to rebuild your team on a bunch of players that all have significant questions marks?

---

Ok , tell me what package of players that has been rumored is a slam dunk as for as assets go ??? The answer in NONE of them . I’m not saying I want the Lakers deal I’m just saying that basically saying it’s trash like some are doing is a bit much and a little to early to be judging these players especially considering how dysfunctional the organization has been is all I’m saying .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistaWhoDat

Ok , tell me what package of players that has been rumored is a slam dunk as for as assets go ??? The answer in NONE of them . I’m not saying I want the Lakers deal I’m just saying that basically saying it’s trash like some are doing is a bit much and a little to early to be judging these players especially considering how dysfunctional the organization has been is all I’m saying .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

No deal is a slam dunk but almost any other that has been mentioned has less question marks. When the best players in the deal have huge health issues, that is a red flag right away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

No deal is a slam dunk but almost any other that has been mentioned has less question marks. When the best players in the deal have huge health issues, that is a red flag right away.

---

This so much! The top two players in the Laker package both have injury concerns and one has already come out saying they don't want to be here. These are huge red flags.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

No deal is a slam dunk but almost any other that has been mentioned has less question marks. When the best players in the deal have huge health issues, that is a red flag right away.

---

I don't know how this can be made any clearer than the way you've put it here.

No deal is perfect. I've totally accepted, and so has everyone else, that any trade in which you LOSE the superstar is a trade you've pretty much lost by definition. There are exceptions but they are beyond rare.

Suffice it to say that the Knicks, Celtics, Nets, Clippers, and Suns all have better possible offers than the Lakers do. That doesn't mean their deals are ''slam dunks'', because in ALL of them we lose the biggest asset. But they're all BETTER than the Lakers deal.

The ONLY way I see us doing a Lakers deal is if they acquire another pick for Ball and we REALLY like two prospects in the top of the draft. I’d wager we do a deal with a D-league team before them otherwise.

Any chance the sixers or jazz would trade embiid or Donavan Mitchell and a pick for AD?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

Any chance the sixers or jazz would trade embiid or Donavan Mitchell and a pick for AD?

---

Sixers might, I wouldn't. Trade AD for Embiid and watch Embiid's knees crumble into chalk dust in front of your very eyes.

I wouldn't trade AD straight up for Mitchell. They'd need to add assets, picks and stuff. But they don't have any.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

This so much! The top two players in the Laker package both have injury concerns and one has already come out saying they don't want to be here. These are huge red flags.

---

This is false, I’m sorry but Ball himself has never said he didn’t want to be here it was his Dad and he has since dropped BBB and is distancing himself from his Dad . Players get injured if our top flight medical / training staff gives the ok then I’m good with it if the trade happens . Let me be clear I’m not advocating taking the Lakers deal not saying it’s the best I’m not saying it’s not we really don’t know but what I am saying dismissing these players as trash/ worthless is absurd .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistaWhoDat

This is false, I’m sorry but Ball himself has never said he didn’t want to be here it was his Dad and he has since dropped BBB and is distancing himself from his Dad . Players get injured if our top flight medical / training staff gives the ok then I’m good with it if the trade happens . Let me be clear I’m not advocating taking the Lakers deal not saying it’s the best I’m not saying it’s not we really don’t know but what I am saying dismissing these players as trash/ worthless is absurd .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

You will be very glad, then, to find out that nobody is saying that.

ESPN story on Rockets making entire roster and future picks available in trade talks. https://t.co/8eTaiD2FW4

— Adrian Wojnarowski (@wojespn) May 29, 2019

You think they try to get in on AD? I say they will try

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Imnos 2

ESPN story on Rockets making entire roster and future picks available in trade talks. https://t.co/8eTaiD2FW4

— Adrian Wojnarowski (@wojespn) May 29, 2019

You think they try to get in on AD? I say they will try

---

With what? Old and broken CP3? Clint Capela and his albatross contract? PJ Tucker? They don't have a pick this year in the first round. If they get AD to pair with Harden, their pick next year will be worth nothing. They don't have assets. They went hard to win now, and it failed.

Hence my point. They will try....we all know they don't have any assets but what does the report say? They think they have players and picks that somebody will foolishly take.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistaWhoDat

This is false, I’m sorry but Ball himself has never said he didn’t want to be here it was his Dad and he has since dropped BBB and is distancing himself from his Dad . Players get injured if our top flight medical / training staff gives the ok then I’m good with it if the trade happens . Let me be clear I’m not advocating taking the Lakers deal not saying it’s the best I’m not saying it’s not we really don’t know but what I am saying dismissing these players as trash/ worthless is absurd .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Oh let me guess... You also don't believe AD ever made any demands on where he wanted to be traded either right? That was all Rich and AD's dad correct? Not coming from AD at all.

Ball never said he wouldn't play here. The quote from his dad was taken out if context. PLEASE, for the love of Dan Dickau put that to rest. Hate the guy's game. Let's stop recycling made up drama.

I have more love for Kuzma. He is young and played in a very demoralized and dumpster fire of a team. He's defense could get better just changing scenes.

I would definitely prefer Tatum, RJ, and others straight up to him. So I'm not pretending like he is the cornerstone to a trade.....but if Ingram were healthy and the package also had the 4th and 7th pick (for Ball).....thay can be tasty. I'm higher on Kuzma than most.

1st year was a rookie year. 2nd year was next to LeBron on a trashed and degraded team. Actually I'll crawfish my stance and say people are being way too critical of him.

And yes, the ONLY deal that got close to even included Zion. Once he became ours outright, it meant there isn't a team that has enough ammunition for an even teade. Any deal we make will feel like we lost a bit.

This is LaVar's exact quote:

"We want to be in L.A.," LaVar Ball told ESPN. "But if he's traded, I don't want Lonzo in New Orleans. Phoenix is the best fit for him. And I am going to speak it into existence."

I'm not sure how that could be taken out of context.

Then of course Shams at the time tweeted this:

https://twitter.com/ShamsCharania/st...016822272?s=19

I mean these are credible people who reported it at the time.

Don't you crawfish on us! You said ONE OF THE PLAYERS (as in ball) said it. That is false. You were wrong.

Yes. His dad said it but it was in the context that we have an established PG and it was too cold. Both are wrong. Here is the video.
https://thespun.com/nba/los-angeles-...in-new-orleans

As Mista said, Lonzo is distancing himself from his dad and dropped BBB. So just stop. Anyone that claims Lonzo said he wouldn't play here is wrong.

And again, I don't want him because of his play. If he can he moved for a 7th, I do that in a heartbeat. But let's not make stuff up about him.

I'm not crawfishing at all. I've always stated that it came from LaVar. We had long discussions about it when LaVar said it. When I say a player that's said he doesn't want to be here I'm including his representation. That's why I brought up the AD analogy where AD said nothing but he representation said it all. If you're speaking on behalf of a player and are their agent / family member you're speaking for the player.

The player doesn't have to actually utter the worda for it to be coming from him.

I just don't get these lonzo apologists. AD did the exact same thing and no one questioned where it was actually coming from.

Would y’all do AD for Harden straight up ??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistaWhoDat

Would y’all do AD for Harden straight up ??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

No.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistaWhoDat

Would y’all do AD for Harden straight up ??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistaWhoDat

Would y’all do AD for Harden straight up ??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

No. If the goal is to put together a team that's good enough for multiple deep playoff runs then we should build it slowly and center that team around drafting well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

With what? Old and broken CP3? Clint Capela and his albatross contract? PJ Tucker? They don't have a pick this year in the first round. If they get AD to pair with Harden, their pick next year will be worth nothing. They don't have assets. They went hard to win now, and it failed.

---

And they almost made it worse by offering all those picks for Jimmy Butler.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistaWhoDat

Would y’all do AD for Harden straight up ??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

No, but only because Harden is 29

Man I dunno - Harden, Jrue, Zion is a team that can actually compete with the Warriors, even if it takes a year or two for Zion to develop. If you were to draw up the perfect backcourt partner for Harden it would be Jrue. If you were to draw up a PF for Harden to throw lobs to and constantly be cutting and moving, Zion is a pretty good match for that.

Plus he's locked up longer so you can always flip him if need be later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Man I dunno - Harden, Jrue, Zion is a team that can actually compete with the Warriors, even if it takes a year or two for Zion to develop. If you were to draw up the perfect backcourt partner for Harden it would be Jrue. If you were to draw up a PF for Harden to throw lobs to and constantly be cutting and moving, Zion is a pretty good match for that.

Plus he's locked up longer so you can always flip him if need be later.

---

That’s what I was thinking add some shooting and you have an instant playoff team


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If the Cs pony up Tatum, Brown and Smart + the Memphis pick, is there another deal you'd take instead? Part of me would love to see those three + Zion and Jrue starting in Gentry's system, playing at the fastest pace in the league and switching on everyone. Basically our version of the Hampton's Five/Death Lineup...

The reasons I'm adamantly against going for Harden are basically as follows:

1) Harden is a shoot-first, pass-second, defense-never chucker who pounds the ball and plays iso. I don't want a team to build around that identity, and I think that it would be a terrible system to try and develop Zion in, since it would take the ball out of Zion's hands, minimise the time he could spend developing as a ball-handler and passer, and essentially turn him into mini-Capela.

2) Harden is a choker who collapses in the playoffs regularly. We keep talking about deep playoff runs, but obviously the goal is the finals and a championship, and I have absolutely no faith that you can win a finals with Harden as your leading guy.

3) This is a more subjective one, so I understand if people don't agree here, but I watch basketball because I think it's fun. That's why I started watching it, and that's why I continue watching it. As a fan, I don't want watching my team to be a painful chore. Sometimes it has been this year, and in previous years, just due to awful players, but there is almost nothing I enjoy less than watching Harden dribble for 20 seconds at the top of the key before launching up a stupid three with the sole intention of getting fouled for free throws. It's boring, it's annoying, it's unsatisfying, and it doesn't work in the playoffs which is why Harden keeps choking and getting bounced. Trading for Harden would make me hate watching my own team.

When do you think the deadline is that Klutch gave Griff to get a deal done?

Been thinking about this, and surely this meeting wasn't just Griff and the Pels flexing on AD and Klutch. My guess is that if that hasn't happened yet, it will happen when Paul and AD reiterate definitively that Davis still wants to be traded. Then they'll give Pels a deadline.

The leverage those guys have is a very public declaration that AD still intends to opt out of his contract and sign with the Lakers in 2020. They don't necessarily have a strong hand to play, but that card is definitely sitting there for them as the Joker. I don't see Klutch allowing this to just play out on Griff's timetable. They'll be the primary party wanting AD traded before the draft.

I think all parties may want to be respectful of the NBA finals, but I'd expect a trade to be announced if not on an off day between games, then the day after whoever wins has their victory parade!

I’d rather see Harden go to the East than get him here. Sweet God wouldghay be a terrible move for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

When do you think the deadline is that Klutch gave Griff to get a deal done?

Been thinking about this, and surely this meeting wasn't just Griff and the Pels flexing on AD and Klutch. My guess is that if that hasn't happened yet, it will happen when Paul and AD reiterate definitively that Davis still wants to be traded. Then they'll give Pels a deadline.

The leverage those guys have is a very public declaration that AD still intends to opt out of his contract and sign with the Lakers in 2020. They don't necessarily have a strong hand to play, but that card is definitely sitting there for them as the Joker. I don't see Klutch allowing this to just play out on Griff's timetable. They'll be the primary party wanting AD traded before the draft.

I think all parties may want to be respectful of the NBA finals, but I'd expect a trade to be announced if not on an off day between games, then the day after whoever wins has their victory parade!

---

Not sure. The Lakers would have to forgo signing free agents now (when the big names are available) in order to hold open a spot for AD next year. That would waste another year of an aging Lebron. Not sure that is a ton of leverage, but I understand the point. I think it is best for all if a trade is done by the draft. I would expect it will go down to that week before the draft before something gets finalized.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Man I dunno - Harden, Jrue, Zion is a team that can actually compete with the Warriors, even if it takes a year or two for Zion to develop. If you were to draw up the perfect backcourt partner for Harden it would be Jrue. If you were to draw up a PF for Harden to throw lobs to and constantly be cutting and moving, Zion is a pretty good match for that.

Plus he's locked up longer so you can always flip him if need be later.

---

If you were to draw up a PF for Harden to throw lobs to and be constantly cutting and moving, Zion would be a pretty good match.

If you were to draw up a guard for Zion to play with and develop from, using his very varied skillset including his ability to create off the dribble, run the offense in transition, create for himself in the post and in the halfcourt, then Harden would be probably very very very low down on that list.

If your goal is ''design a team around Harden'', then Zion is probably a good fit, because it maximises Harden. If your goal is ''design a team around Zion'', then Harden is pretty low on the list because he minimises Zion's talents and turns him into, as I said, basically Capela 2.0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

If you were to draw up a PF for Harden to throw lobs to and be constantly cutting and moving, Zion would be a pretty good match.

If you were to draw up a guard for Zion to play with and develop from, using his very varied skillset including his ability to create off the dribble, run the offense in transition, create for himself in the post and in the halfcourt, then Harden would be probably very very very low down on that list.

If your goal is ''design a team around Harden'', then Zion is probably a good fit, because it maximises Harden. If your goal is ''design a team around Zion'', then Harden is pretty low on the list because he minimises Zion's talents and turns him into, as I said, basically Capela 2.0

---

This, need to surround Zion with all around players who can pass shoot and defend, people like jrue and a Chris Paul type, not cp3 himself but you know what I mean, a Ja Morant would be perfect

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

This, need to surround Zion with all around players who can pass shoot and defend, people like jrue and a Chris Paul type, not cp3 himself but you know what I mean, a Ja Morant would be perfect

---

Ja Morant can't defend his own shadow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Ja Morant can't defend his own shadow.

---

It is very difficult to catch your shadow. Everytime you get too him, he's behind you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tinman

It is very difficult to catch your shadow. Everytime you get too him, he's behind you.

---

Ahh, but the reverse is also true: it's very difficult to beat your shadow to the spot, as it's with you all the way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

If you were to draw up a PF for Harden to throw lobs to and be constantly cutting and moving, Zion would be a pretty good match.

If you were to draw up a guard for Zion to play with and develop from, using his very varied skillset including his ability to create off the dribble, run the offense in transition, create for himself in the post and in the halfcourt, then Harden would be probably very very very low down on that list.

If your goal is ''design a team around Harden'', then Zion is probably a good fit, because it maximises Harden. If your goal is ''design a team around Zion'', then Harden is pretty low on the list because he minimises Zion's talents and turns him into, as I said, basically Capela 2.0

---

The goal is to win a championship. I don't care how it's phrased who the team is built around as long as it works.

Zion could be the second coming of MJ, or he could end up being a bust. The best bet to try and develop him is probably not to throw him immediately into the fire with the weight of the team on him.

The question was asked if I'd do Harden for AD straight up. The answer is Yes. I'd do it before he even finished the sentence. I hate Harden's game as much as everyone but the dude can flat out ball and Jrue and Zion cover over his weaknesses while play into his strengths. It's a MUCH better pairing than with Chris Paul and that team already took the Warriors to the brink twice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

The goal is to win a championship. I don't care how it's phrased who the team is built around as long as it works.

Zion could be the second coming of MJ, or he could end up being a bust. The best bet to try and develop him is probably not to throw him immediately into the fire with the weight of the team on him.

The question was asked if I'd do Harden for AD straight up. The answer is Yes. I'd do it before he even finished the sentence. I hate Harden's game as much as everyone but the dude can flat out ball and Jrue and Zion cover over his weaknesses while play into his strengths. It's a MUCH better pairing than with Chris Paul and that team already took the Warriors to the brink twice.

---

Okay, good for you.

For me, the goal isn't to win a championship. Or rather, that's only one part of the long term goal which is sustained generational success. Ultimate goal is 10 years plus as a playoff team, with multiple championship opportunity. Spurs, essentially.

You don't get that by shoehorning your all-world-potential young guy into the role of super-roleplayer so that you can pump 500 isolation plays through an inefficient chucker who chokes in the playoffs. You also don't get it by throwing away your best chance at gaining assets to attain that chucker. Zion has an unbelievable ceiling. Putting an artificial cap on that ceiling for the sake of satisfying James Harden might win you a chip, but it would be a far too bitter pill to swallow. You'd be passing on a much higher potential team and getting a far less appealing product out of it. What good is the banner in the rafters if attaining the banner made you disgusted to watch your own team?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Ja Morant can't defend his own shadow.

---

You’re correct, I was refferring to his passing ability.

Brogdon would fit great, but can he create his own shot or only a 3 and D that can pass

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Okay, good for you.

For me, the goal isn't to win a championship. Or rather, that's only one part of the long term goal which is sustained generational success. Ultimate goal is 10 years plus as a playoff team, with multiple championship opportunity. Spurs, essentially.

You don't get that by shoehorning your all-world-potential young guy into the role of super-roleplayer so that you can pump 500 isolation plays through an inefficient chucker who chokes in the playoffs. You also don't get it by throwing away your best chance at gaining assets to attain that chucker. Zion has an unbelievable ceiling. Putting an artificial cap on that ceiling for the sake of satisfying James Harden might win you a chip, but it would be a far too bitter pill to swallow. You'd be passing on a much higher potential team and getting a far less appealing product out of it. What good is the banner in the rafters if attaining the banner made you disgusted to watch your own team?

---

You see it as shoehorning him into some specific role. I see it as allowing him to develop behind a MVP level player put into a perfect situation.

A banner means everything, period. What are you seriously going to not be able to enjoy a championship team because it wasn't done with the players you want or running a style you don't like? Lol. Give me a break.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

You see it as shoehorning him into some specific role. I see it as allowing him to develop behind a MVP level player put into a perfect situation.

A banner means everything, period. What are you seriously going to not be able to enjoy a championship team because it wasn't done with the players you want or running a style you don't like? Lol. Give me a break.

---

I mean, I don't mean to sound like I'm being pedantic here, but yes, I'm saying that if I don't enjoy watching the games, I won't enjoy watching the games. Thought that would be a little obvious, tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

I mean, I don't mean to sound like I'm being pedantic here, but yes, I'm saying that if I don't enjoy watching the games, I won't enjoy watching the games. Thought that would be a little obvious, tbh.

---

Then I pitty your narrow minded view. I'd rather win a Superbowl 3-0 in the most boring game ever than to lose in the 1st round of the playoffs in a shootout 70-63.

ALL that matters is holding up a trophy at the end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Then I pitty your narrow minded view. I'd rather win a Superbowl 3-0 in the most boring game ever than to lose in the 1st round of the playoffs in a shootout 70-63.

ALL that matters is holding up a trophy at the end.

---

What do you want me to do? I watch basketball cause it's fun. It's a hobby I enjoy. Sorry if I don't want my fun hobby that I do for fun to be turned into a boring chore.

Edit: also, NFL comparisons don't really mean much to me because I hate American Football.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

What do you want me to do? I watch basketball cause it's fun. It's a hobby I enjoy. Sorry if I don't want my fun hobby that I do for fun to be turned into a boring chore.

Edit: also, NFL comparisons don't really mean much to me because I hate American Football.

---

The point isn't about whether you like the sport or not. The point I was making was winning at all costs is more important than 1 fan finding the games boring or not.

I also find it very hard to believe that you will find the team a boring chore simply because Harden is on it. When we are crossing into the 60 win territory I bet your tune will have changed.

Sooooo like I was saying, can Brogdon create his own shot and create for others or more of a 3 and D who can hit the open guy too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

The point isn't about whether you like the sport or not. The point I was making was winning at all costs is more important than 1 fan finding the games boring or not.

I also find it very hard to believe that you will find the team a boring chore simply because Harden is on it. When we are crossing into the 60 win territory I bet your tune will have changed.

---

I speak from my perspective, and my perspective only. I don't expect the team or the management or the front office to care about what I think. When I'm talking about what I think, it's my opinion and that's all, and if you don't want to discuss my the opinions of individuals then forums aren't the best places to be.

I find James Harden boring. His game is boring, at best, when it's not annoying. I didn't bother watching any of their first round playoff games because I dislike watching his style so much. If (not when, not sure why you're acting like the trade is already done) we did that trade and got to 60 wins, I'd be rooting for the team, obviously, but I'd be hard pressed to watch the games with anything like the regularity I do now. I've watched pretty much every game this team has played for the past three seasons or so, and about 70% of the games in the previous couple of seasons before that. I don't think I'd be able to bring myself to watch more than 40 games if the New Orleans Pelicans became the James Harden Free Throw Showcase.

Obviously that's nobody else's problem, but on a forum where we all come to share our opinions, ideas, judgements, and responses, that's mine. If you don't agree, good for you.