Chad Ford's Draft Grade

by norcaldevilasu on Jun 29, 2007 9:01 AM PDT

Chad Ford has given the Warriors draft an A. Here's what Chad had to say.

Golden State Warriors Grade: A

Round 1: Brandan Wright (8), Marco Belinelli (18)

Round 2: Stephane Lasme (46)

Analysis: I think the Warriors made several excellent moves here. In exchange for Jason Richardson, they got a player with great upside in Wright, who will be at home given Golden State's up-tempo style. He also fits a need in the frontcourt.

Belinelli also will thrive with Golden State. He loves to let it fly and Nellie will let him.

But the biggest addition may have been one of subtraction. By sending Jason Richardson packing, the team created a whopping $10 million trade exception that they can use to lure a free agent via sign-and-trade or to help with a trade in the next year.

Chad Ford Article

The key to last nights deal is to give Mullin and Nelson time to complete the move. The trade exception should not be taken lightly when analyzing last nights deal. If we're able to get a player like Gerald Wallace or Ron Artest we'll have essentially traded Jason Richardson and a 2nd rounder for Brandan Wright and Artest or Wallace. That would be an absolute STEAL. Thoughts?

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 14 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

sounds good

by dallaswarrior on Jun 29, 2007 9:05 AM PDT reply actions

You got it.

I give Chad's analysis -- and this diary -- an A.

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 29, 2007 9:09 AM PDT reply actions

Perfectly said

This WILL be a steal, you will see. Exciting times!

by flaaron on Jun 29, 2007 9:16 AM PDT reply actions

will Cohan spend the money

I thought the deal was based on saving the money to extent at least Beans, who I suspect will get $10mil for 5 years over the summer. And that doesn't address extending Monta. Those extensions and their associated costs would start the season after this coming season.

Why would we think cheap ass Cohan is going to spend the money he just saved unless it is on a one year deal or something like that.

I also read that the league has to grant the exemption and those deals are not "slam dunks".

So what is the correct assumption: that we have created a scenario for a real steal of a deal or it we dumped Jason's salary for our future extensions?

by commish on Jun 29, 2007 9:19 AM PDT reply actions

Is Cohan...

Really that cheap? If he can give money to Fisher, Foyle, Dunmurphy, and Richardson, then why in the world would't he give it to Ellis and AB?

by alloveross on Jun 29, 2007 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions

cheap?

Cohan has for the most been a lousy owner, no doubt. He's for the most part hired the wrong people, done the wrong thing. But I'm not sure that it's fair to call him cheap. The Warriors have been above the NBA average team payroll many times over the decade of futility. He's shelled out bucks. It's that he hasn't spent the bucks wisely that's been the problem. He ok'd bigger contracts for Dunleavy, Murphy, Jamison, Damp, and Foyle than any deserved. He acquired an over-priced Fortson. These were dumb moves, but not cheap moves. Where he got the "cheap" reputation seems a bit out there.

by jae on Jun 29, 2007 9:52 AM PDT up reply actions

That's what I thought

He always gave up the money. He just didn't use it for the right players.

by alloveross on Jun 29, 2007 9:56 AM PDT up reply actions

i was so against this trade when it first happened

as evidenced by my repeated "noooooooooooo" in almost every thread about it. but after sleeping on it and thinking it through more, it could potentially be a great move. i think wright and AB could be a deadly duo down the line, but if wright can be a solid bench contributor his rookie year and get his weight up, it's all the better. but the main reason i'm liking the trade is b/c of the flexibility we have now in making another big trade or free agent signing.

now if only we could dump foyle's contract...wow this is a horrible thought but i'm just thinking, what happens to a player's contract if he dies? do we still have to pay his family or something. i'm not saying that i wish death on foyle, but i'm just curious what would happen if say his brain exploded from reading all those books on democracy.

the crowning achievement of ira newble's illustrious career

by JudBooshlur on Jun 29, 2007 9:44 AM PDT reply actions

Death not a way out.

A dead player still counts against the cap even if you're not paying him. If the player retires or dies, the team doesn't have to pay them, but the salary cap regards them as still on the books for the purposes of calculating the cap and the lux tax. Basically, there's no way out of it, short of him agreeing to a buyout.

by jae on Jun 29, 2007 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions

Buyout

Can someone tell me how a buyout works?

by alloveross on Jun 29, 2007 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions

I like the deal

regardless where jrich plays i will be a fan of his.

gdubb

by gogomaplata on Jun 29, 2007 9:45 AM PDT reply actions

I'm

not 100% sure but I think the way a buyout works is the team and player settle on a price, but you still get a cap hit of 20% his original salary for the remaining years on his contract. So say he's making 10 mil a year for 4 years, the next 4 years you'd have a cap hit of 2 mil. I'm not positive but I think that's how it works.