|
|
Post by somerandomguy on Nov 14, 2015 23:12:41 GMT
Hf made that thread after the 48 hours passed lol, even if someone claimed the very next second it wouldn't be valid
|
|
|
|
Post by somerandomguy on Nov 14, 2015 23:19:40 GMT
Also don't se the problem with Hughes on waivers chances are with the way waivers is structured he'll go to one of the lesser teams, isn't that what people want?
|
|
|
|
HARD CAP
Nov 14, 2015 23:22:18 GMT
via mobile
Post by BrazilianDude on Nov 14, 2015 23:22:18 GMT
I could agree AI is his best player since he's former mvp
|
|
|
|
Post by nyybaseball on Nov 14, 2015 23:30:17 GMT
Hughes > AI lol pretty easily
|
|
|
|
Post by SuperMaor23 on Nov 15, 2015 0:04:20 GMT
Hughes is his best player. Not AI
|
|
BANNAK
Moderator 
Posts: 5,210 
Staff Member
|
HARD CAP
Nov 15, 2015 0:38:53 GMT
via mobile
Post by BANNAK on Nov 15, 2015 0:38:53 GMT
Oh my I wonder who owns the Bucks next two unprotected picks Check the newly updated owed picks Bucks don't have a pick until 55 'Twas a joke, I have their next two first rounders |
|
|
|
HARD CAP
Nov 15, 2015 2:15:17 GMT
via mobile
Post by heatflash on Nov 15, 2015 2:15:17 GMT
AI is better..
|
|
|
|
Post by timtomas on Nov 15, 2015 2:55:20 GMT
I think Ai is his best player to be honest ..
|
|
|
|
Post by SuperMaor23 on Nov 15, 2015 2:57:07 GMT
Hughes is miles better than AI.
|
|
|
|
Post by timtomas on Nov 15, 2015 3:09:20 GMT
Hughes is younger but not miles better than Ai
Ai won player of the week this season and mvp last season
They are very close but not miles apart from each other
|
|
|
|
HARD CAP
Nov 15, 2015 3:33:27 GMT
via mobile
Post by heatflash on Nov 15, 2015 3:33:27 GMT
AI is better bro if he's first option he's putting 30/11 and Hughes can't do that.
28/11/5 with 3 spg
|
|
|
|
HARD CAP
Nov 15, 2015 3:34:51 GMT
via mobile
Post by getbeard on Nov 15, 2015 3:34:51 GMT
Hughes definitely better
|
|
|
|
Post by somerandomguy on Nov 15, 2015 3:44:19 GMT
if Hughes isn't better he's younger, so he has more value around the league. I see them as equals, so Hughes being 4 years younger makes him the more valued player imo.
|
|
|
|
HARD CAP
Nov 15, 2015 3:50:35 GMT
via mobile
Post by heatflash on Nov 15, 2015 3:50:35 GMT
But the rule says best player no?
|
|
|
|
Post by SuperMaor23 on Nov 15, 2015 3:53:51 GMT
But the rule says best player no? But it means moat valuable |
|
|
|
HARD CAP
Nov 15, 2015 4:00:01 GMT
via mobile
Post by heatflash on Nov 15, 2015 4:00:01 GMT
I ain't quitting but damn bruh don't understand why I had a pick that didn't belong to me and he's the reason that I'm over.
|
|
|
|
Post by timtomas on Nov 15, 2015 4:09:34 GMT
if Hughes isn't better he's younger, so he has more value around the league. I see them as equals, so Hughes being 4 years younger makes him the more valued player imo. yea i see them equal if not AI a little better but with age as well Hughes is much more valuable |
|
shorty
Administrator 
Administrator
Posts: 15,223
Staff Member
|
Post by shorty on Nov 15, 2015 4:25:41 GMT
Allen Iverson has more awards because he's a point guard. Larry Hughes is arguably the best SG in the league. Ask every GM in the league who they would rather start a franchise with: Larry Hughes or Allen Iverson, and the answer is Larry Hughes.
By that reasoning, release Larry Hughes into FA.
|
|
|
|
HARD CAP
Nov 15, 2015 4:30:44 GMT
via mobile
Post by getbeard on Nov 15, 2015 4:30:44 GMT
Allen Iverson has more awards because he's a point guard. Larry Hughes is arguably the best SG in the league. Ask every GM in the league who they would rather start a franchise with: Larry Hughes or Allen Iverson, and the answer is Larry Hughes. By that reasoning, release Larry Hughes into FA. Beat me to it Hughes is the best player at the weaker position. I agree talent wise you can argue either way but hughes is the top dog at his position in the league where AI has plenty of competition with all the talented Pgs |
|
|
|
Post by nyybaseball on Nov 15, 2015 8:43:18 GMT
It's not FA he goes on waivers!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by nyybaseball on Nov 15, 2015 8:44:18 GMT
You can't just switch a rule now because you can't afford a dude off waivers. Be consistent, he needs to be put on waivers.
|
|
BANNAK
Moderator
Posts: 5,210
Staff Member
|
Post by BANNAK on Nov 15, 2015 16:41:11 GMT
You can't just switch a rule now because you can't afford a dude off waivers. Be consistent, he needs to be put on waivers. Youre only up in arms about this cause you are going to get him, look objectively and you'll see how stupid putting a 30ppg player on waivers is |
|
BANNAK
Moderator
Posts: 5,210
Staff Member
|
HARD CAP
Nov 15, 2015 16:59:47 GMT
via mobile
Post by BANNAK on Nov 15, 2015 16:59:47 GMT
Also don't se the problem with Hughes on waivers chances are with the way waivers is structured he'll go to one of the lesser teams, isn't that what people want? In theory yes, but not in reality. Waiver order is based on previous seasons records, teams naturally can improve in the offseason. The Clippers are going to get him and they are the 7th seed right now. Adding a superstar for free mid-season is just retarded |
|
|
|
Post by nyybaseball on Nov 15, 2015 17:04:25 GMT
You can't just switch a rule now because you can't afford a dude off waivers. Be consistent, he needs to be put on waivers. Youre only up in arms about this cause you are going to get him, look objectively and you'll see how stupid putting a 30ppg player on waivers is Nope. Happened before and everybody was for it. Including me but let's just forget that right? I'm all for consistency. youre clearly delusional. Rick Barry was 30 ppg on waivers, everybody was for it. Except super at first obviously but he owned it later. |
|
BANNAK
Moderator
Posts: 5,210
Staff Member
|
Post by BANNAK on Nov 15, 2015 17:19:13 GMT
Youre only up in arms about this cause you are going to get him, look objectively and you'll see how stupid putting a 30ppg player on waivers is Nope. Happened before and everybody was for it. Including me but let's just forget that right? I'm all for consistency. youre clearly delusional. Rick Barry was 30 ppg on waivers, everybody was for it. Except super at first obviously but he owned it later. How is it fair for the rest of the league for one single team to benefit so much from another team's error? At least in FA multiple teams have the opportunity to sign him, and unlike waivers, teams with cap room in the 15m+ range are more likely to be bad than teams with last seasons worst record Maybe I am delusional trying to explain this to someone in your position, you're going to disagree regardless because of how much you benefit from the rules staying the same |
|
|
|
Post by nyybaseball on Nov 15, 2015 17:30:07 GMT
Nope. Happened before and everybody was for it. Including me but let's just forget that right? I'm all for consistency. youre clearly delusional. Rick Barry was 30 ppg on waivers, everybody was for it. Except super at first obviously but he owned it later. How is it fair for the rest of the league for one single team to benefit so much from another team's error? At least in FA multiple teams have the opportunity to sign him, and unlike waivers, teams with cap room in the 15m+ range are more likely to be bad than teams with last seasons worst record Maybe I am delusional trying to explain this to someone in your position, you're going to disagree regardless because of how much you benefit from the rules staying the same It's called parity. Why give a top team a chance at the player? Putting the player on waivers is the most fair way. Regardless, you can't change it unless you bring it up to aar in the next CBA. But I will be against changing it. |
|
BANNAK
Moderator
Posts: 5,210
Staff Member
|
HARD CAP
Nov 15, 2015 17:44:02 GMT
via mobile
Post by BANNAK on Nov 15, 2015 17:44:02 GMT
How is it fair for the rest of the league for one single team to benefit so much from another team's error? At least in FA multiple teams have the opportunity to sign him, and unlike waivers, teams with cap room in the 15m+ range are more likely to be bad than teams with last seasons worst record Maybe I am delusional trying to explain this to someone in your position, you're going to disagree regardless because of how much you benefit from the rules staying the same It's called parity. Why give a top team a chance at the player? Putting the player on waivers is the most fair way. Regardless, you can't change it unless you bring it up to aar in the next CBA. But I will be against changing it. Yeah cause top teams have 20m in cap room every offseason to throw at free agents....  ?? If you want to bring parity into it, the 76ers are more deserving. They are by far the worst team when compared to you. If the waiver system is a proponent of parity then they should get Hughes, see my point? The waiver system is retrospective. At least free agency is a current representation of a teams situation |
|
|
|
Post by nyybaseball on Nov 15, 2015 17:49:25 GMT
It's called parity. Why give a top team a chance at the player? Putting the player on waivers is the most fair way. Regardless, you can't change it unless you bring it up to aar in the next CBA. But I will be against changing it. Yeah cause top teams have 20m in cap room every offseason to throw at free agents.... ?? If you want to bring parity into it, the 76ers are more deserving. They are by far the worst team when compared to you. If the waiver system is a proponent of parity then they should get Hughes, see my point? The waiver system is retrospective. At least free agency is a current representation of a teams situation Lmao |
|
BANNAK
Moderator
Posts: 5,210
Staff Member
|
HARD CAP
Nov 15, 2015 18:07:07 GMT
via mobile
Post by BANNAK on Nov 15, 2015 18:07:07 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by aar on Nov 15, 2015 18:30:49 GMT
This will change next CBA. But waivers it is.
|
|
??