Rumor: Warriors Haven't Made a Sign-and-Trade Offer for Chris Wilcox
From Gary Washburn of SeattlePi.com:
The Golden State Warriors also appear interested in Wilcox, but have yet to make the Sonics a sign-and-trade offer.
I'm guessing that the Sonics want Troy Murphy given their GM's earlier ridiculous proclamation that they expect an All Star forward in return for a sign-and-trade with Chris Wilcox. Troy's not an All Star, but he's a decent power forward; just a bad fit alongside Mike Dunleavy and Adonal Foyle. If that's true, then the Warriors are dead on here. Troy Murphy for Chris Wilcox is not a wise move. T-Double has proved that he can live up to his nickname with his 14 and 10 average. On the other hand, Wilcox is far from a sure thing. Before averaging 14 and 8 in 29 games with the Sonics last season Wilcox was averaging less than 5 points and 4 points with the Clips in 2005-2006. At least you know exactly what you're going to get from TMurph.
What kind of sign-and-trade offers for Chris Wilcox do you think make sense for the Warriors and (hopefully soon-to-be San Jose) Sonics? Or do you think the Warriors should make this restricted free agent an offer and see if the Sonics match?
Also see:
- Rumor: Chris Wilcox's Agent Pushing Warriors
- Rumor: Warriors Trying to Trade for Wilcox
- Rumor: Warriors Want Wilcox
- Rumor: Warriors Inquiring about Chris Wilcox
- Rumor: Chris Wilcox Sign-and-Trade to Warriors
99% of rumors never happen, but 99% of them are fun to talk about!
0 recs |
11
comments
Comments
put in a bid
by hardcore on Aug 8, 2006 9:34 AM PDT 0 recs
Re: put in a bid
More likely there will be a trade if the Warriors are going to get Wilcox, but I am not sure Seattle is interested in Murphy - our prime trade bait - since their financial status is insecure at best.
by MightyReds2020 on
Aug 8, 2006 10:02 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Blame Denver
Seattle can resign Wilcox for the qualifying offer and he'd play hard for a contract in 2007. While they could lose him to FA for nothing in 2007, they would still have cap space.
Our Murphy is worth more than Wilcox. No way I'd swap. I can't see who Seattle would want to take on that's worth trading for Wilcox.
For the sake of argument, I'd give up Ike and Foyle if Seattle would include someone else to match salaries. They'd have to accept a salary dump on a character player, Foyle, and would get a talented PF, Ike, for their effort.
Wilcox would be asked to play center which would give him major minutes for this team. Could he and Murphy play at the same time?
by joe sez on Aug 8, 2006 9:45 PM PDT 0 recs
Seriously Blame Denver
It's kind of like the Nets giving away Vince Carter for pennies 1.5 years ago. It set the bar so low for future teams that wanted to part with a superstar (i.e. Allen Iverson and Kevin Garnett presently).

93 'til Infinity: The Warriors' playoff drought?
by Atma Brother ONE on
Aug 8, 2006 10:17 PM PDT
up
0 recs
BYC
Maybe Mullin hasn't officially contacted Seattle because he understands that the math is complicated. I doubt this is really his excuse, but perhaps he realizes that the rumors are fantasy filled and that a real deal going to involve a lot more than that because of cap considerations anyhow.
by jae on
Aug 9, 2006 5:27 AM PDT
up
0 recs
isn't that all the more reason
by hardcore on
Aug 9, 2006 8:00 AM PDT
up
0 recs
the offers we can make
We can offer it to Wilcox and may have done so--the reports are that Mullin hasn't contacted Seattle--not that he hasn't been in touch with Wilcox-- but Seattle only has to try to match if Wilcox accepts an offer. If he does, then Seattle very likely matches and gets him locked in for 3 years at that price. Wilcox doesn't want that. He wants more now, and if not now, in a year.
by jae on Aug 9, 2006 1:25 PM PDT 0 recs
put the pressure on the Sonics
Sonics offered him $19m for 3 yr, GS could offer something in the range of $21m for 3 yr. Sonics can match or not. If they match, and then want to trade Wilcox, the trade still has to be in GS interests or Seattle is stuck with him, or trades him elsewhere. No damage.
The gamble is that Wilcox accepts, Seattle declines to match, and GS has $21m/3yr PF over and above what they have now, then GS has to shave payroll some other way to avoid paying huge luxury taxe$ ala Knicks/Jeffries (NY didn't have room so much as a willingness to pay the luxury tax - essentially doubling Jeffries $30m to $60m!).
Having Wilcox in the fold is a better problem to have than waiting to respond to Seattle, meeting their trade demands, or not doing anything. That is if Mullin has that freedom, and wants Wilcox more than anyone else. The second point is doubtful - I believe Mullin is trying to wait to see what happens with Harrington first, and might prefer exhausting all options of adding him before committing to Wilcox for reasons already discussed here (SF vs PF). That's his gamble as I see it.
by hardcore on Aug 9, 2006 2:42 PM PDT 0 recs
can't happen
Your trade further can't happen. The resources we have for Wilcox are limited because if he signs for a sign and trade, BYC clauses come into play and it means the deal has to be big, involving more players or more teams. Straight up, we can't swap salaries for him. If he doesn't do that, there's no way we can get him unless Seattle decides he's not worth even the MLE. They've already offered him that and he's turned it down, so that's unlikely as well.
by jae on
Aug 9, 2006 5:43 PM PDT
up
0 recs
d#@& it!
ok, how do we grab Wilcox (assuming we want him) then? Only through S&T? If so, that would explain a lot ... and, how did the Knicks go so far over the cap to get Jeffries?
by hardcore on Aug 9, 2006 11:07 PM PDT 0 recs
MLE
The available ways to do a sign-and-trade are to either keep the contract low (which won't happen) or have the total salaries moved be in the neighborhood of 12-16 million going each way. We're talking Foyle and Murphy or Murphy and Pietrus (though I don't think he's valuable and would ship him out for a broken crescent wrench) and Zarko or something in that salary neighborhood. We'd have to take back something other than Wilcox too though and it's got to be a pretty big salary. Fortson might work--I've not really calculated the numbers, but otherwise Seattle isn't loaded with contract they're trying to move for cap situations. Fort comes off their books at the end of next year so he's probably more valuable to them for his cap space than as a tool to get a player they don't really want like Murphy or Foyle.
Otherwise, the option is to involve another team that can broker the deal divide the salary differential into a team that's not capped. These teams are few and far between and they'll want something of value (eg picks) for use of their cap space.
I can't really blame Mullin for not getting these things done now, though signing Murphy and Dunleavy when he did was just dumb. It was dumb at the time and hasn't gotten any smarter with the passage.
by jae on
Aug 10, 2006 8:33 AM PDT
up
0 recs















