Things to keep in mind so you don't look stupid with Trade Suggestions

by ZombieWarrior on May 16, 2007 10:28 AM PDT

Since it's the offseason, there's going to be plenty of suggestions on ways to improve this team. Which is cool, speculation is fun to talk about. BUT, here are things every diary-maker-of-trade-ideas need to keep in mind:

Just because it works out salary wise on RealGM, or ESPN Trade Machine or NBA Live... doesn't mean an actual real life GM will agree to it. Put yourself in the shoes of that other team's GM, you are trying to improve your team, not cripple it. For example, Gasol for Jrich would absolutely cripple the Grizzles, and the Grizz already have plenty of perimeter players. Shooting guards grow in trees and can be found anywhere/everywhere. See: Matt Barnes(GSW), Anthony Parker(Toronto), Tarence Kinsey(Memphis). And polished post players, that pretty much need to be double teamed when they position themselves in the post, that are taller than 6'10 are a whole different story. Players like Gasol are one of a handful... IN THE WORLD.
Keep in mind the "Never trade a big for a small" rule. Big men are way more valuable than perimeter players, all GMs know this. And this is more applicable to wing players, specifically shooting guards and 3s. I know that point guards are the 2nd hardest position to fill after the C position and they are highly valued as well. And any time this rule is broken, the team that dealt away their big man has been severely damaged and becomes only a shadow if it's former self. See: Lakers & Shaq, etc.
Of all the teams a big man, who hasn't won a ring yet, could go to... why would they want to come to GSW??? If anything, the big man would want to go to a team that would IMMEDIATELY be able to contend for a ring. For example, the Spurs, the Suns, Detroit, etc. For everything that makes the Warriors a dangerous team, they are FAR from being an immediate contender. Don't forget most established big men that are traded or are speculated to be traded, are traded or would only be traded because they want to win a ring. For example, the only way in hell KG would leave Minnesota would be to win a ring with a team that can contend IMMEDIATELY. Otherwise there is no point in KG leaving his team.

Just use your brain people, if Gasol was on the Warriors and Jrich was on the Grizzlies... and a Grizzlies fan suggested that the Grizzlies traded Jrich and a couple of draft picks for Gasol... what would you think?

And for all the upcomming KG and Jermaine ONeal ideas, if the Warriors want any chance in getting KG or JO... they would have to give up (in terms of talent) AT THE VERY LEAST: Baron and Jrich and more for JO, or Baron and Jax and more for KG, and that's just at the very least.

This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!

Tweet Comment 36 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I disagee with that

last point

I don't know that teams would automatically want Baron and J_rich because they are paid so much

Teams are going to want AB and Monta because of their upside

I don't think anyone wants JAX

by Zig on May 16, 2007 10:51 AM PDT reply actions

you have to match salaries

when you trade. If KG's annual is $20mil, which it's somwhere around there, the incomming players' salaries have to match the out going player(s).

Marv Albert: "I ain't trippin'!"

by ZombieWarrior on May 16, 2007 11:08 AM PDT up reply actions

AB's and Monta's contracts combined

are nowhere near close to what KG is getting paid

Marv Albert: "I ain't trippin'!"

by ZombieWarrior on May 16, 2007 11:08 AM PDT up reply actions

Sorry I wasn't clear

with what I wrote

I know they have to match salaries but I am saying the real prizes are Monta and AB

by Zig on May 16, 2007 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions

yeah I get what you're saying

AB is pretty much a sure thing at the rate he's developing. But Monta... is still kind of a gamble if you were a GM. Monta needs to be developed under the right coach otherwise things could go badly for him. But yeah, you're points are valid Zig. But coming off that crazy postseason performance, you can bet that teams would want Baron(who is in his prime) if they were trading away their franchise player.

Marv Albert: "I ain't trippin'!"

by ZombieWarrior on May 16, 2007 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions

yeah

and baron plus jay rich is about 25-30 mil range

duh! we all know you couldnt trade monta for kg straight up. everyone wants AB and Monta, but of course then you would have to throw in a j rich, maybe foyle, harrington, or some combination that would add up.

by travisl212 on May 16, 2007 4:02 PM PDT up reply actions

yes

baron and jax for JO. the Pacers really want him back.some good points but that statement kind of went against the whole dont make yourself look stupid idea

by azw on May 16, 2007 11:16 AM PDT reply actions

it was an example in terms

of what kind of talent the Warriors need to give up

Marv Albert: "I ain't trippin'!"

by ZombieWarrior on May 16, 2007 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions

kinda bitter sounding

did I shine some light on some things you might have said when you suggested trade ideas? no problem, glad to be here to help.

Marv Albert: "I ain't trippin'!"

by ZombieWarrior on May 16, 2007 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions

not bitter at all

just found that statement funny given the title of the diary,and i do find it a bit annoying when people try to tell others what to post and what not to(other than the mods).almost as annoying as some of the stupid posts that you are trying to avoid, but not quite
as i said you have some good points.
I do think that we are a more desirable location for some players than we where 2 months ago. i could picture KG watching the post season and the thought of playing here at least crossing his mind, but as you mentioned what we would likely have to give up to get him would defeat the purpose.
If someone would have posted the suggestion for the pacer trade before it happened i am sure they would have gotten alot of reponses that say Indy would never be that stupid, and to keep the trade ideas realistic. same with the BD for speedy deal.
as far as shedding any light on ideas that i have mentioned, i dont think i have brought any up, but i dont think we need a huge trade for a KG,Pau, or JO. i would say we just need a back up PG, and a good rebounding big man that can defend the post. unless we can pull off a Lebron for Adonal deal.
anyway after this season i am excited as i am sure you and everyone else is to see what we do this off season ,and hope we can improve on this one.

by azw on May 16, 2007 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions

yeah

sorry to respond to you with bitterness as well. i thought you were just maliciously attacking my diary for no reason.

Marv Albert: "I ain't trippin'!"

by ZombieWarrior on May 16, 2007 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions

Its all good man

that is one of problem with blogs and the written word, you cant really detect tone, or sarcasm, which is probably one of the reasons things can get a little heated

by azw on May 16, 2007 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions

and i think

it is well known how everyone on this team get along so well, and the chemistry is great and people wanna play the style that we play and they wanna play for nellie. i think people could look at us and see a great situation over here

by travisl212 on May 16, 2007 4:05 PM PDT up reply actions

HELL NO

BARON was our HEART and SOUL out there! It hurt to see him frustrated and taking his anger out on the JAZZ the wrong way!

I'd rather trade MONTA than BARON. Besides, why in the hell would the PACERS take back JAX after they wanted to get rid of him? Could they be that dumb? And who would be our PG anyway? Don't even say MONTA, because he's not a 1, he's a 2.

"THIS YEAR, WE BELIEVED...NEXT YEAR, WE KNOW...GO WARRIORS!!!"

by scottiepimppen on May 16, 2007 11:22 AM PDT reply actions

look at post above

Marv Albert: "I ain't trippin'!"

by ZombieWarrior on May 16, 2007 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions

and no one's saying

they want Baron to be traded, but that's what kind of talent you have to give up to get talent in return

Marv Albert: "I ain't trippin'!"

by ZombieWarrior on May 16, 2007 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions

Good diary...

but I disagree on a few points.

-First off, a team like the GSW is a great team for a player like Garnett, because they are at the perfect level of team development. They are a very solid team, looking for that one extra piece. I know they're not championship contenders the way Detroit, Phoenix and Dallas are, but how could KG end up on any of those teams? in order to get a player of KG's caliber, those teams would have to break up what is making them championship-contending teams. Yes if Garnett could be inserted in the Suns lineup they would be deadly, but face it; the Suns are not going to ever have a lineup of KG, Amare, Nash, Marion, and Barbosa.

On the other hand, the Warriors could possibly get KG for a package such as Monta and Andris, or Andris, MP2, Barnes and some draft picks. I'm not saying I'd be happy with those deals, but a W's line-up of Baron, JRich, SJax, Harrington and Garnett is a championship contender, in my mind.

-Also, Garnett may not go for as much as you think. I know it was a midseason crunch, but keep in mind that the Nuggets got AI for Andre Miller and Joe Smith. If no team makes a huge offer to Minnesota, KG might not go for too much.

by bradyk2 on May 16, 2007 11:43 AM PDT reply actions

Nuggets got AI

because AI wanted to play with Carmelo, and fortunately, Nuggets had some players the 76ers wouldn't mind trading for. You can be sure it had to be ok with Iverson to go to Denver, otherwise it wouldn't have happened. A player like AI doesn't get traded to a team unless he wants to be on that team.

Marv Albert: "I ain't trippin'!"

by ZombieWarrior on May 16, 2007 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions

KG might not go for much if he was to be traded

but I'm positive he would go for much more than Iverson. Remember now, at the time, well I'm sure he's still viewed as: a ball-monopolizing guard that needs to have the ball in his hands A LOT to be effective. Not many teams were too interested in getting a player like that... Twolves? Nuggets? Lakers?

Marv Albert: "I ain't trippin'!"

by ZombieWarrior on May 16, 2007 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions

kg would make us an

immediate contender

LORD BARON

by nfisch88 on May 16, 2007 11:56 AM PDT reply actions

it probably would

but do you think KG sees it that way? If you were a superstar and you wanted to be traded to a team where you would have the BEST chance to win a ring... what would your first 3 choice be? And you and I both know its: San Antonio, Phoenix, Detroit.

Marv Albert: "I ain't trippin'!"

by ZombieWarrior on May 16, 2007 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions

but

does he pick where he gets traded??...he may have a say...but of these 4 teams, who has the best chance to impress the t-wolves with young talent and get a deal done? Warriors, Pistons, Suns, Spurs...i'd say the warriors

LORD BARON

by nfisch88 on May 16, 2007 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions

jermaine o'neal

wasn't the reason in the first place we got al harrington and jax cause they werent fitting with JO?
geting JO would just mkae us the west coast pacers

by bun on May 16, 2007 2:33 PM PDT reply actions

we got AL and Jax

because Al wasn't playing alongside JO well... in Rick Carlise's system. JO would fit in just fine under Nellie. You should be saving these comments for when people on GSoM suggest ideas to bring in JO.

Marv Albert: "I ain't trippin'!"

by ZombieWarrior on May 16, 2007 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions

Great diary, ALX

Thanks for laying down some ground rules. Agreed on all points, except for maybe #3. I don't think this team is that far from being a championship contender.

As for this comment

I do find it a bit annoying when people try to tell others what to post and what not to (other than the mods).

Hm, I think it depends on the tone in which it's done. I'm all for diversity of voices and opinions, but there is plenty of stuff that gets posted here that adds nothing but noise and makes the site a generally lamer, less fun place to be. Totally outlandish trade proposals lead to nothing except a bunch of cranky responses from people who would prefer to discuss things that might actually happen in the real world.

And really, we shouldn't need the "mods" to tell us some of this stuff. A lot of it's just common sense. Putting yourself in the "other"'s shoes -- whether you're talking about an NBA trade proposal, a personal dilemma, or a war -- is just very basic good behavior. To imagine that other teams (or other people) are just lifeless cardboard cutouts who exist only to do our bidding is juvenile at best.

by Sleepy Freud on May 16, 2007 3:18 PM PDT reply actions

good post

just wanted to bring up one point in the "no GM trades big for small" debate.

case in point --> toronto trades villanueva for TJ Ford. villy goes on to play an injury plagued season for milwuakee, toronto gets into the playoffs for the first time, with TJ ford @ the point, since VC left.

there's exceptions to every rule, i'm sure that wasn't the first big for small trade that worked out in favor of the team giving up size.

anyways, i'm definitely excited to see what our front office can work out this offseason....bringing in KG? of course i would go nuts if we had that manchild, but let's be reasonable. i'm not so hot on jermaine either, just my opinion.

i'm down with the school of thought that suggests picking your spots and finding reasonably priced players that can fill key roles on this team i.e. - inside presence, rebounding, and taking care of the ball in backup minutes.

we get those three things handled and we'll still be cheering on our warriors this time next year.

jusgo

by tobin on May 16, 2007 3:22 PM PDT reply actions

good exception

I guess I should've made it more clear when I addressed this in my post, but I was talking about All-star/superstar big men because those are the main names that come up for trade speculation during the offseason. You're 10x more likely to encounter trade speculation on this site concerning players like KG or JO than you are Charlie V. good brainstorming though tobin

Marv Albert: "I ain't trippin'!"

by ZombieWarrior on May 16, 2007 7:07 PM PDT up reply actions

Real Quick

"Keep in mind the "Never trade a big for a small" rule. Big men are way more valuable than perimeter players, all GMs know this. And any time this rule is broken, the team that dealt away their big man has been severely damaged and becomes only a shadow if it's former self. See: Lakers & Shaq, etc."

Yeah, that's always true. Like it didn't help Toronto to trade Charlie Villanueva (6'10/6'11) to Milwaukee for T.J. Ford (6'0). Instead of becoming "only a shadow of it's former self", Toronto got the 3 seed in the east, and Milwaukee got the 3 seed in the draft lotto. If you want to talk Lakers, trading small (Caron Butler) for big (Kwame Brown) was great for that team too. Get your facts straight, bug guy. Sometimes small for big does work, it just depends on the players.

by dnalvare on May 16, 2007 4:20 PM PDT reply actions

I agree

That "never trade big for small" is a tad simplistic.

The more basic point is that you should always consider a player's position when you're assessing his trade value. Centers and true power forwards are the rarest commodities in the NBA, followed closely by true point guards like TJ Ford. Wingmen like JRich -- 6'6" guys who can score, rebound well, have so-so handles, and play average D -- are not hard to find.

So you can say that, relative his position, JRich (a top 10 shooting guard) may be close to Gasol (a top 10 big man) or Ford (a top 10 point guard), but in terms of trade value, he isn't anywhere near those guys.

Does that make sense, bug guy? ;-)

by Sleepy Freud on May 16, 2007 4:41 PM PDT up reply actions

Lakers traded for Kwame

that was the biggest steal on Washington's part... ever. And when a trade like Toronto/Milwaukee or Wash/Lakers happens... it's because of some bad decision-making. Who in their right mind would want to trade FOR Kwame Brown?? I assumed Mullin was smart enough not to make decisions similar to this when I wrote my diary.

Marv Albert: "I ain't trippin'!"

by ZombieWarrior on May 16, 2007 7:14 PM PDT up reply actions

whoops,

I didn't see the post directly above, so i'm the idiot.
p.s. i meant "big guy" not bug guy

by dnalvare on May 16, 2007 4:21 PM PDT reply actions

Here in LaLa land.....a recent radio interview...

with the Laker's owner summed up probably what many other NBA owners are thinking about....Basically real talks will begin after the draft order is set.

Anything up until then is speculation without accounting for what chips each team really holds, besides their current players. Perhaps some lottery team with a decent big will give them up if they're lucky enough to land a big in the draft.

Heck, if the Dubs were somehow far up enough in the draft, someone like a Spencer Hawes from Washington might be interesting to have. But yeah..I'll try to curb my own speculations until a few more days, hehe...great to see everyone keeping the blog fresh and on-going no matter what time of the bball season.

by warriorsfan4life on May 16, 2007 5:02 PM PDT reply actions

Warriors pick #18

That much we know for sure. Yup, that's the downside of making the playoffs: no lottery fun for us, not one pingpong ball with our name on it, no shot at Oden or Durant (and basically no shot at Hawes, either).

Still, on balance ... I'll take how things worked out. :-)

Fake edit: unless you mean we might trade up. But then you gotta think who we would package to trade up. Basically the only guys on the team with real trade value are Biedrins, Baron, Monta, and JRich. I don't think I'd trade any of them to move up, unless maybe we could get Brandan Wright or Al Horford (I'm assuming #1-2 are off limits).

by Sleepy Freud on May 16, 2007 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions

we're bringing CWebb back. yeah.

Maybe we can sign Penny and trade him and another three future first round picks and get Chris Webber back. That would be great and totally guarantee us the title.

I obviously have no point with this post, except that I'm still bitter about that godawful trade.

Seems like we have enough cheap to medium payscale guys that we could package a couple of them for a decent rebounding big man. Of course I have zero examples of who that might be, but that's why I'm not the GM. Getting KG, JO or Pau seems like a stretch though.

by TempletonPeck on May 16, 2007 5:04 PM PDT reply actions

regarding the Iverson trade

the Sixers didn't trade Iverson for Miller/Smith because they thought Iverson wasn't worth much. That trade was appealing to them because of Smith's $8mil/yr contract which will expire in the offseason.

The Warriors don't have any bargaining chips like that, we don't have any high dollar expiring contracts to deal out.

by jlagace on May 16, 2007 6:35 PM PDT reply actions

Nellie Playing the Retirement Card Ups the Ante

I liked your post, especially reinterating the money end of trades--that salaries have to be close to equitable. So many posted trade scenarios make no cents, so to speak (pun inteneded).

However, I am intrigued by Nellie playing the retirement card so early. To me that is a clear message next year's team will be one he can take deeper into the playoffs without the struggle of competiting for the 8th or 7th playoff spot.

Therefore, I believe we will see some significant movement of personnel. As far as I can tell Nellie is only wedded to Baron and maybe wanting to sign Barnes. Everyone else seems moveable for the right pieces to build a team that goes deep into the playoffs. Just look at what he did with Dallas, along with Cuban's checkbook.

by commish on May 16, 2007 9:42 PM PDT reply actions