Andre Iguodala opts out

McGrady said he was afraid to come to NOLA for the All Star game a few years ago because he thought people were regularly getting their throats slit outside of the Arena.

Tracy McGrady was the guy that didn't want to attend the All Star game because it was held in New Orleans. What makes you think he'd want to sign here for cheap?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LAedwardo87

Mcgrady is retiring after the Finals btw

---

He never said that; he merely said he will consider it. If he has the chance to be a starting small forward, he will accept it. You can tell how badly he wants to be on the court.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THRILLHOUSE

McGrady said he was afraid to come to NOLA for the All Star game a few years ago because he thought people were regularly getting their throats slit outside of the Arena.

---

Beat me to it.

Not sure if I agree with the 15 million per year, but the leadership and lockerroom part would be invaluable. This video from team USA has a little clip on Iggy with Davis. I would love to see that happening here.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORj4M0OigaQ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by player_1

Tracy McGrady was the guy that didn't want to attend the All Star game because it was held in New Orleans. What makes you think he'd want to sign here for cheap?

---

5 years later....

You can tell how badly he wants to play, and he would get significant playing time here.

What makes you think Iggy will come here?

"I don't think it's the right city right now."

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/pos...ar-new-orleans

6 years ago

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

This is where people always get confused. I am not sold on Saric, I am just telling you who Dell will likely pick. I love CJ McCollum but I find no point in discussing what I want to see happen if it is not possible. Waste of time.

As for Iggy. Yeah, that's a lot of money, but I am comparing it to the alternatives, not just bashing it in a vaccuum. What are the realistic alternatives that are no-brainers? Options that are obviously so much better. I don't see many out there. Give that same money to Tyrke and Martell Webster? Does that really make us that much better? Are we contenders then?

We can talk about any free agent and list numerous reasons why we shouldn't sign them, because there are no perfect targets available, but this is all about A vs. B vs. C vs. D and I don't see better alternatives that are realistic.

*Cue the "Let's trade for Cousins or Monroe even though they are not available" alternative.

---

Don't want to waste time on far-fetched hypos either, and you know the market better than I do. But I thought the governing philosophy for the franchise at this point was to build with young vets and "fallen angels" who have some experience, might be ready to take a big step forward, and come at the right price, not cap-killing vets. If there really are no young vets that fit the bill, then I say stay patient, keep your powder dry, and wait for the right deal to present itself down the line. Don't reach and over pay.

Throw out a name at SF: Chase Budinger. Young vet, can score and should come at a reasonable price. Understand he might not do much for our perimeter defense, but we also need some dudes who can put the ball in the hoop, no?

McGrady--no way, no how.

Because money talks and AI hasn't bad mouthed New Orleans yet. At least not in public.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kumar

Not sure if I agree with the 15 million per year, but the leadership and lockerroom part would be invaluable. This video from team USA has a little clip on Iggy with Davis. I would love to see that happening here.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORj4M0OigaQ

---

Not much of a display of leadership to be making fun of missed shots. I know it's not a big deal, but this video doesn't display his leadership.

Monty wants to build a team on defense so I doubt Budinger would be a viable option.

He's not going to put this team over the top... he'll cap us out and at his age i dont think it's worth it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jsl05

Not much of a display of leadership to be making fun of missed shots. I know it's not a big deal, but this video doesn't display his leadership.

---

Not leadership, but more interactions and chemistry. They seemed to be having a good time.

A player who is pretty much a non-factor on offense, who relies almost only on his athleticism on everything else and is hitting 30? Giving the MAX to iguodala? Good lord i certainly hope not. I'd like to have him but for far, far less

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by new city champ

Don't want to waste time on far-fetched hypos either, and you know the market better than I do. But I thought the governing philosophy for the franchise at this point was to build with young vets and "fallen angels" who have some experience, might be ready to take a big step forward, and come at the right price, not cap-killing vets. If there really are no young vets that fit the bill, then I say stay patient, keep your powder dry, and wait for the right deal to present itself down the line. Don't reach and over pay.

Throw out a name at SF: Chase Budinger. Young vet, can score and should come at a reasonable price. Understand he might not do much for our perimeter defense, but we also need some dudes who can put the ball in the hoop, no?

McGrady--no way, no how.

---

There are already tons of young vets on this team, thought - Gordon, Anderson, Lopez, Vasquez, Smith, etc. You bring in another Tyreke Evans or Martell Webster or Corey Brewer, and that is nice and all in theory, but who is the leader of that team? Who do the guys look to after a three game losing streak? Who plays the role of buffer between Monty's wrath and the young players?

All that stuff really matters. One day AD will have to be that guy, but how is he going to learn to be that guy without a role model to draw from? Again, I dont think the Pelicans have a chance at being a contender in AD's first contract, and some probably disagree with that. I think these next 3-4 years are about his growth, in multiple areas. He will grow by playing in important games and by being in a culture that expects to win and hates to lose.

Those things will be important in year 6 or 7 when he is a top 3 player in the league, and Iggy will be well off the books by then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

There are already tons of young vets on this team, thought - Gordon, Anderson, Lopez, Vasquez, Smith, etc. You bring in another Tyreke Evans or Martell Webster or Corey Brewer, and that is nice and all in theory, but who is the leader of that team? Who do the guys look to after a three game losing streak? Who plays the role of buffer between Monty's wrath and the young players?

All that stuff really matters. One day AD will have to be that guy, but how is he going to learn to be that guy without a role model to draw from? Again, I dont think the Pelicans have a chance at being a contender in AD's first contract, and some probably disagree with that. I think these next 3-4 years are about his growth, in multiple areas. He will grow by playing in important games and by being in a culture that expects to win and hates to lose.

Those things will be important in year 6 or 7 when he is a top 3 player in the league, and Iggy will be well off the books by then.

---

Who was Houston's leader? OKC's?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by new city champ

Throw out a name at SF: Chase Budinger. Young vet, can score and should come at a reasonable price. Understand he might not do much for our perimeter defense, but we also need some dudes who can put the ball in the hoop, no?

---

Players often say things like this before there's actually money and competing offers on the line, but Budinger said if Adelman returns he's a lot more likely to return and the indications are that Adelman is returning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jsl05

Who was Houston's leader? OKC's?

---

And isn't Houston looking for that guy this year to make them a real contender?

As for OKC, I think they are the worst thing that happened to fans of a rebuilding teams. They think OKC is the norm. They drafted stud after stud in fairly strong drafts. Jumped up twice in the lottery, got really lucky. Ten times more often than not, their strategy leads to becoming the Sacramento Kings, but it worked once and now every fan base points to that route as the way to go.

There is no Westbrook or Harden in this draft. Heck, there might not be more than 1 or 2 Ibaka's. Can't go that route IMO. And even if we could, Dell has made it clear he doesn't want to, despite what we all might want.

Iggy's stats don't show the true overall impact he has on the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

And isn't Houston looking for that guy this year to make them a real contender?

As for OKC, I think they are the worst thing that happened to fans of a rebuilding teams. They think OKC is the norm. They drafted stud after stud in fairly strong drafts. Jumped up twice in the lottery, got really lucky. Ten times more often than not, their strategy leads to becoming the Sacramento Kings, but it worked once and now every fan base points to that route as the way to go.

There is no Westbrook or Harden in this draft. Heck, there might not be more than 1 or 2 Ibaka's. Can't go that route IMO. And even if we could, Dell has made it clear he doesn't want to, despite what we all might want.

---

Dwight Howard isn't exactly a leader. Plus, they just made the playoffs this year. We haven't gotten to that point yet. I'd rather save the space, allow internal improvement, and pick up our Iguodala-type player when we are ready to compete like Houston.

Still OKC didn't really have a "leader." We have Davis, Gordon, Rivers, and Anderson. We aren't as talented, but our guys are older. If the young guys in OKC didn't need a leader, then the older guys in NO shouldn't need a $15 million "leader."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jsl05

Dwight Howard isn't exactly a leader. Plus, they just made the playoffs this year. We haven't gotten to that point yet. I'd rather save the space, allow internal improvement, and pick up our Iguodala-type player when we are ready to compete like Houston.

Still OKC didn't really have a "leader." We have Davis, Gordon, Rivers, and Anderson. We aren't as talented, but our guys are older. If the young guys in OKC didn't need a leader, then the older guys in NO shouldn't need a $15 million "leader."

---

Rivers isn't good... He may become good in the future but as of right now he is not...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wuggie

Iggy's stats don't show the true overall impact he has on the game.

---

what does then?
you have to quantify his "impact" in some manner

the easy way is wins...
denver got better, philly got worse
but...was it iggy?

now here's a didyaknow:
iguodala's WS and WS/48 last year were career lows, by far

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tyler

Rivers isn't good... He may become good in the future but as of right now he is not...

---

I did say we aren't as talented, but he's still older than Durant, Westbrook... were

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cgrand

what does then?
you have to quantify his "impact" in some manner

the easy way is wins...
denver got better, philly got worse
but...was it iggy?

now here's a didyaknow:
iguodala's WS and WS/48 last year were career lows, by far

---

Isn't that expected when you go to an established team with a new role?

G

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cgrand

what does then?
you have to quantify his "impact" in some manner

the easy way is wins...
denver got better, philly got worse
but...was it iggy?

now here's a didyaknow:
iguodala's WS and WS/48 last year were career lows, by far

---

Geesh. His defense and intangibles, that's what I meant lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jsl05

Dwight Howard isn't exactly a leader. Plus, they just made the playoffs this year. We haven't gotten to that point yet. I'd rather save the space, allow internal improvement, and pick up our Iguodala-type player when we are ready to compete like Houston.

Still OKC didn't really have a "leader." We have Davis, Gordon, Rivers, and Anderson. We aren't as talented, but our guys are older. If the young guys in OKC didn't need a leader, then the older guys in NO shouldn't need a $15 million "leader."

---

I think we agree. mostly. I don't think we will be a contender for 4 years or so, which is why I would be okay with signing Iggy in the meantime to make us better and help the young guys. Then, when they are in their prime, he comes off the books and we add the over the top pieces

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bee-Fense

http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2012/0723...er2_cr_576.jpg

Look who's sitting together :love2:

---

HAH! Perfect!

Also, remember the Team USA video? When AD was shooting 3s, who was next to him giving him bro grief? Iggy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wuggie

G
Geesh. His defense and intangibles, that's what I meant lol

---

they have stats for defense, lots of them in fact
which ones do you like?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

There are already tons of young vets on this team, thought - Gordon, Anderson, Lopez, Vasquez, Smith, etc. You bring in another Tyreke Evans or Martell Webster or Corey Brewer, and that is nice and all in theory, but who is the leader of that team? Who do the guys look to after a three game losing streak? Who plays the role of buffer between Monty's wrath and the young players?

All that stuff really matters. One day AD will have to be that guy, but how is he going to learn to be that guy without a role model to draw from? Again, I dont think the Pelicans have a chance at being a contender in AD's first contract, and some probably disagree with that. I think these next 3-4 years are about his growth, in multiple areas. He will grow by playing in important games and by being in a culture that expects to win and hates to lose.

Those things will be important in year 6 or 7 when he is a top 3 player in the league, and Iggy will be well off the books by then.

---

If it's a 3-year deal I'm on board, even if you nearly max it out. You have to spend your cap somewhere, and he'd be as good a guy as any, with his deal expiring before we have to settle up with AD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cgrand

they have stats for defense, lots of them in fact
which ones do you like?

---

He was part of the team that won the most games in franchise history. He also averaged 18/8/5/2 on 50% shooting and 48% 3FG in the playoffs. He might not be a star that you're envisioning and probably not worth what he'll receive this year but he's a very good player who can impact the game in a number of ways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MonsterMash

If it's a 3-year deal I'm on board, even if you nearly max it out. You have to spend your cap somewhere, and he'd be as good a guy as any, with his deal expiring before we have to settle up with AD.

---

Exactly my thinking to a 'T'. If it is four years, he would have to take drastically less per year from me to agree to it. But three years makes us a young team with a very vet for the next three years. We win a playoff series or two or three, AD, Rivers, and [insert 2013 draft pick] develop while Gordon either learnds from Iggy and steps his game and attitude up or gets shipped out. Then, in the summer of 2016, we have a ton of cap room with AD, Rivers, and 2013-16 picks still on their rookie deals. Sign one or two guys, then AD's max deal kicks in and we are good to go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola Hornet

He was part of the team that won the most games in franchise history. He also averaged 18/8/5/2 on 50% shooting and 48% 3FG. He might not be a star that you're envisioning and probably not worth what he'll receive this year but he's a very good player who can impact the game in a number of ways.

---

those are stats (offense stats)
you said stats dont tell the story of iguodala's impact
now you are using stats to tell the story of iguodala's impact
what's worse, the stats you are using to tell the story of his impact are inaccurate

here are his actual stats

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...iguodan01.html

18/8/5/2 @ 50/48 would be max contract stats

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cgrand

those are stats (offense stats)
you said stats dont tell the story of iguodala's impact
now you are using stats to tell the story of iguodala's impact
what's worse, the stats you are using to tell the story of his impact are inaccurate

here are his actual stats

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...iguodan01.html

---

I didn't say anything about his defensive stats. I said he's clearly better than what you claim he is.

sorry got you confused with wuggie, cause you responded to my question to him
your stats are still wrong

why is he better that what i claim he is?
what did i claim he was, by the way?

Iggy second behing only Lebron in APG from the small forward position (5.4 per game)

If the plan is to share the ball and not have any ball dominant guys; let Gordon run the offense at times, Rivers at times, play GV off the ball more, etc. - then Iggy is an ideal fit as a guy who can keep the ball moving and make plays for others.

On the defensive end, he was elite in isolation situations, very good almost everywhere else.

He wouldn't just be a $12-15 million leader, he would be a very nice piece that fits in several ways on the court and in the locker room.

He is not a perfect fit, but again, show me the perfect free agent that will agree to come here for the exact price you want to pay him and we can all stop talking about the less than ideal options.

I think it's important to point out that Iguodala addresses almost all major needs for us

Perimeter defense? Check
Offense playmaking? Check
Veteran leadership? Check
Someone to push the ball on the break? Check
Forcing turnovers on D? Check

Also this is a very good article explaining how significant his impact is on defense. Worth a look.

http://www.denverstiffs.com/2013/2/2...ive-specialist

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Iggy second behing only Lebron in APG from the small forward position (5.4 per game)

If the plan is to share the ball and not have any ball dominant guys; let Gordon run the offense at times, Rivers at times, play GV off the ball more, etc. - then Iggy is an ideal fit as a guy who can keep the ball moving and make plays for others.

On the defensive end, he was elite in isolation situations, very good almost everywhere else.

He wouldn't just be a $12-15 million leader, he would be a very nice piece that fits in several ways on the court and in the locker room.

He is not a perfect fit, but again, show me the perfect free agent that will agree to come here for the exact price you want to pay him and we can all stop talking about the less than ideal options.

---

all of that makes him the most desirable of the "available" FA's
he's either going to max years with denver or max dollars somewhere else

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cgrand

sorry got you confused with wuggie, cause you responded to my question to him
your stats are still wrong

why is he better that what i claim he is?
what did i claim he was, by the way?

---

When you brought winshares to the table. DWS is a flawed stat that doesn't realisitically measure a player's defensive impact or capacity.

Iggy's a top 3 perimeter defender in the league. He'd be a pretty massive lift for us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola Hornet

When you brought winshares to the table. DWS is a flawed stat that doesn't realisitically measure a player's defensive impact or capacity.

---

never mentioned DWS specifically
i mentioned WS & WS/48
you are free to feel that they are flawed

not nearly as flawed as the fact that iguodala didnt really average 18/8/5/2 at 50/48, however

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MonsterMash

Iggy's a top 3 perimeter defender in the league. He'd be a pretty massive lift for us.

---

If I am hearing the detractors correctly, though, that is a fear of theirs. He makes us good enough to be a fringe playoff team, but not a contender. Therefore, "average" draft picks but no real chance to contend.

In theory, it makes sense, but again good franchises with a winning culture can get very good players after 10 in the draft and winning for the next few seasons will be noticed around the league, making us a more desirable destination in the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cgrand

never mentioned DWS specifically
i mentioned WS & WS/48
you are free to feel that they are flawed

not nearly as flawed as the fact that iguodala didnt really average 18/8/5/2 at 50/48, however

---

You clearly have no idea how WS are calculated. And the stat I brought up was his stats for the playoffs this past year. It was never meant to say that's what he'll average. It's meant to give you an idea of what his capacity is at any given time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

If I am hearing the detractors correctly, though, that is a fear of theirs. He makes us good enough to be a fringe playoff team, but not a contender. Therefore, "average" draft picks but no real chance to contend.

In theory, it makes sense, but again good franchises with a winning culture can get very good players after 10 in the draft and winning for the next few seasons will be noticed around the league, making us a more desirable destination in the future.

---

exactly, and you don't go from drafting 6 to championship contender immediately..it is a gradual process that takes time by getting better year after year(Pacers, Grizzlies)

as a matter of fact i do know how WS are calculated...never know who you are talking to on the internet
and i see you edited your original post to add that those were playoff stats

i would however characterize your 18/8/5/2 as "small sample size" and point out that years that he did approximate those numbers are now 5 years in the past. do you think he's worth a 4 year max? because that's what he's going to get

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

If I am hearing the detractors correctly, though, that is a fear of theirs. He makes us good enough to be a fringe playoff team, but not a contender. Therefore, "average" draft picks but no real chance to contend.

In theory, it makes sense, but again good franchises with a winning culture can get very good players after 10 in the draft and winning for the next few seasons will be noticed around the league, making us a more desirable destination in the future.

---

I've often talked about the culture of winning and losing and how it's not some switch your turn on and off. It's not like hey lets keep sucking and as soon as we draft x amount of payers lets stop playing Opossum and win the ship. Winning habits are formed over a long long time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PelicanFever

exactly, and you don't go from drafting 6 to championship contender immediately..it is a gradual process that takes time by getting better year after year(Pacers, Grizzlies)

---

But that addition of David West sure seemed to help out their young guys didn't it? And don't you think playing with him for these couple of years will help George and Hibbert, etc. long after he is gone?

If Vasquez is here, that's one leader, Jason Smith is another and I see it in Austin Rivers as a future leader also. Davis I hope he will step up when his game is polished and he makes his mark in this league, same for Rivers. Gordon isn't a leader, but Trey Burke may be one if he's apart of this franchise. So if not being a leader is a reason for not acquiring Iggy, it's a pretty dumb one. Leadership is leadership no matter if its from a veteran or not, which we do have. AI is a beast, not no anyone gets playing time on team USA which is very difficult team to make. And for him "not stepping up when Gallinari went down," I doubt we would be looking for him to be that type of guy, yes he will be getting paid like it but hell Ryan Anderson does too. He's a definite safe player to pick up from free- agency's like Guru would say, a line up of
Vasquez/Rivers/Burke(if drafted)
Gordon/Rivers/Roberts/(draftee)
Iggy/Miller(needs minutes)/(draftee)
AD/Anderson/Thomas
Lopez/draftee/


Sorry for the bad post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

If I am hearing the detractors correctly, though, that is a fear of theirs. He makes us good enough to be a fringe playoff team, but not a contender. Therefore, "average" draft picks but no real chance to contend.

In theory, it makes sense, but again good franchises with a winning culture can get very good players after 10 in the draft and winning for the next few seasons will be noticed around the league, making us a more desirable destination in the future.

---

Yeah I mean you'd like to have a team of young guys growing up together, but it would be even better if you've got a team of young dudes learning to win and playing in playoff games. That doesn't mean you cripple yourselves to sign mediocre vets, but going out and getting a very good player on a relatively short term deal seems like a nice way to go.

In a perfect world, you sign a "young" Iggy, but those guys are hard to land and most of the ones you'd get via free agency are gonna be restricted FA's anyway.

Put it this way, in a 29 team team league I think Anderson, Iggy, Davis and a healthy Gordon (if such a thing exists) are all guys who could make an argument as a top 40 level guy next year. And those guys play complimentary roles for the most part - two ball handlers/playmakers (Gordon, Iggy), two shooters (Anderson, Gordon), two projected defensive specialists (Iggy on the wing, Davis in the middle), one guy who can get a lot of his offense without designed plays for him (Davis). Seems like a really nice fit, if they could put it together.

-Editing to add: Perhaps best of all, the fifth beatle of that crew would need to be a point guard, and that's one of the more oversaturated positions in the league. With Gordon+Iggy handling the ball, you can try to draft a Chalmers type later on and be just fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cgrand

as a matter of fact i do know how WS are calculated...never know who you are talking to on the internet
and i see you edited your original post to add that those were playoff stats

i would however characterize your 18/8/5/2 as "small sample size" and point out that years that he did approximate those numbers are now 5 years in the past. do you think he's worth a 4 year max? because that's what he's going to get

---

You keep harping on those stats like I was implying that he's going to average that. He has put up those type of numbers out side of the percentages plenty of times throughout his entire career on any given night. You act like he's offensively challenged.

If you knew how winshares were calculated then why would you dismiss DWS if it is used to calculate winshares? Makes no sense to me.

$15 million a year for an aging Iguodala? What? Hell no! I like him as a player but not at more than $10 million. I am not sure what winning culture he brings as he played mainly for losing teams most of his career.