Better than CP3/Shamet and no picks
fukk….
Better than CP3/Shamet and no picks
For sure but I’m just saying that their win does not disprove anything about high profile talent and high payrolls needed to win.1 technically isn’t a max player even when he’s getting paid like it.
Not really as they don't have someone that can act as a playmaker and initiate their offense as Beal isn't a playmaker like that.I mean if this ridiculous shyt I see being offered is true they just might. Like not giving up Herro in that Beal trade? Sounds crazy. Beal Herro Jimmy Bam C (whoever they can get on vet minimum) seems pretty balanced.
Edit: Jimmy would run the offense.Not really as they don't have someone that can act as a playmaker and initiate their offense as Beal isn't a playmaker like that.
Jimmy can't do it full time no more than Devin Booker could. It'd be the same problem that Phoenix would have in that they don't have a starting PG or a competent backup.Edit: Jimmy would run the offense.
I don’t agree whatsoever. And that team has multiple playmakers. They even run the offense through Bam. They don’t need one dedicated PG. Phoenix’s problem was a lack of talent period. You’re analysis of the two teams is completely off. Booker running the offense wasn’t the problem, not having anyone to pass it to who could make an open shot was the problem. When Shamet made his open shots everything looked fine lol. Teams being able to focus on two dudes was the problem.Jimmy can't do it full time no more than Devin Booker could. It'd be the same problem that Phoenix would have in that they don't have a starting PG or a competent backup.
Where in my comment did I say that Book running the offense was the problem? What I said was that you don't want him to be your full time go to playmaker, which is a true statement. Just because you can rack up assist doesn't necessarily make you a playmaker and that is the case of someone like Beal and Herro.I don’t agree whatsoever. And that team has multiple playmakers. They even run the offense through Bam. They don’t need one dedicated PG. Phoenix’s problem was a lack of talent period. You’re analysis of the two teams is completely off. Booker running the offense wasn’t the problem, not having anyone to pass it to who could make an open shot was the problem. When Shamet made his open shots everything looked fine lol. Teams being able to focus on two dudes was the problem.
Beal Herro Jimmy Bam and a stretch 5 running the Heat offense would work fine. Bam isn’t Ayton with his terrible decision making with the ball Shamet and Payne aren’t in the same atmosphere as Beal/Herro. Like what are we talking about?
Better than CP3/Shamet and no picks
CP3 keeps getting hurt in the playoffs and his deal is expiring. Phoenix isnt exactly in position to refuse somebody like Beal if he’s available regardless of how the fit might be.Where in my comment did I say that Book running the offense was the problem? What I said was that you don't want him to be your full time go to playmaker, which is a true statement. Just because you can rack up assist doesn't necessarily make you a playmaker and that is the case of someone like Beal and Herro.
There's a reason why Phoenix still has a need for CP3's services even if his offense isn't what it was was. His playmaking helps take the load of everyone else.
For Miami it might even not even anyways as they'll have 3 guys that can initiate their own offense.
My stance won't change either. I will say again, the owners able and willing to pay a half a bill to keep a championship core and worthy revolving pieces will be based in the biggest markets in the country.I will say again, if the owner is willing to pay half a bill to field a team, that’s their prerogative. The same way it’s their prerogative for those owners who cut corners to try to keep their payroll as low as possible.
My stance won’t change…if a team is organically built, they drafted and developed their own core, it should not be treated like a bad thing because their owner is willing and able to pay to keep them together.
So we can agree to disagree