A slight move to tweak our roster - Zaza Pachulia

by JustAnotherWarrior on Jan 27, 2008 11:21 AM PST Comment 35 comments

In light of Mullin's recent interview I decided to post about a candidate for a potential trade, who can address our need for a backup big man, without either spending too much money or giving away any of our young guns. That guy is Zaza Pachulia
It seems that he fell out of favor in Atlanta lately. There is simply not enough minutes for him with the personnel they have;they play uptempo and small with Horford at C M.Williams/J.Smith at PF and S.Williams at either PF or C of the bench. Plus he is not exactly on the best terms with coach Woodson, and was even suspended for the game against Denver today.
Why would we need him? He is a proven NBA player who is only 23 and makes a reasonable $4/mil a year. He was averaging 12/7 in 28min/game last year. Gives us a good size to battle down low, not a shoblocker, but a very good rebounder and post defender. Offensive game is decent, good pick and roll player, good post and face up moves. Would compliment Biedrins off the bench nicely.
Here is a type of trade scenario Mullin likes: A proven player with good potential, who is stuck in an unfavorable situation, even disgruntled, and who can be had for cheap(or so I think)

Do you guys think we can use him? Would Atlanta trade him, and who would you offer if they were willing to talk?

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!

0 recs | Comment 35 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Oh

At first glance, this is a gem of an idea in the midst of a bunch of crap fantasy trade proposals we cook up here on a daily basis.

But he's 280 pounds, does anyone know if he'd be mobile enough to get up and down the court with us? If so, he'd be a nice big post defender for us off the bench who could rebound well too.

In terms of what Atlanta might want back, I see that they need a backup SG.

Pietrus and Hudson's contract for Pachulia?
I'd be down for that, if Pachulia could hang with us.

by jlagace on Jan 23, 2008 10:34 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

oh yes

I'd echo jglace's sentiments; this is one of the better ideas thats been tossed about. Doesn't hurt that the diary writer actually added some substance to his post as well.

SB Nation Quality Control

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Jan 23, 2008 10:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks

Yeah, I've been irritated by a bunch of bs trade proposals here as much as you are.
There should be some kind of guideline on this site for all trade proposals. Wouldn't that be a common sense to ask if:

A player fits our need
Why would his team trade him
Does it work financially
Is there a realistic combination of our players/picks/whatever that can get the trade done

If everybody would at least try to follow this format, reading the proposals would be so much easier

by JustAnotherWarrior on Jan 23, 2008 11:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Problems

Any rule won't be imposed because the diary section is basically an unregulated zone.
Any one who cares enough to read and follow a given rule is probably someone that own't throw out a stupid proposal to begin with.

The trolls that spit the crappy ones out follow a recognizable pattern:

little to no analysis of why it helps us
zero thought to why the other team does it
no effort to check in with other team's fans (through a blog, forum, or email for the other franchise)
no thought given to financial ramifications
they never show up in the comments again because they came here just to pollute the diary section

So yeah, it's a lost cause.

SB Nation Quality Control

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Jan 24, 2008 12:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

ZaZa

He's been in the doghouse or otherwise buried on the Hawks' bench. I haven't followed them enough to know exactly why, but I believe it's a combination of injuries and the presence of Horford/Smith (both who deservingly get the bulk of the minutes).

Pachulia is a relatively soft big man, mobile, used to have a pretty decent midrange J. He doesn't block shots, although he historically rebounded pretty well. His steals rate was pretty good for a big man, too. I always thought of him as Troy Murpy clone (pre-injury, young version).

For his contract, he's a pretty low risk acquisition- the Hawks certainly wouldn't demand much for him. I just don't think he's a difference maker. POB might actually have more upside because his length could do damage on defense- it's not like either will control post position against other post players.

The guy I really want on the Hawks is Josh Childress, and yes, I would give up Ellis for him.

SB Nation Quality Control

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Jan 23, 2008 10:44 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

yes

Childress would be a nice acquisition.

Unfortunately, on our squad, he'd probably be limited to SF, the same position as SJax. Both him and Jackson lack the strength to play PF for us on a regular basis, and neither have the foot speed to play SG for us.

Too bad cuz Childress is a quality player too, along with alot of the other young talent they have on that team. Marvin Williams has gone under the radar and is having himself a solid season as well.

by jlagace on Jan 23, 2008 11:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

i was thinking

SJAX guards the team's best opposing backcourt player. I can see him taking his minutes at the 2 spot, and easily making room for Chill at the 3. I like Chill's game, you just can't expect too much. But for a streaky team, a constant steady player would be nice.

The guy i really wanted was Marvin Williams, but that was before the season started, and now...well we probably would have a better chance getting Joe Johnson than Marv.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Jan 27, 2008 12:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

asdf

I've never actually watched Josh Childress, how would he fit in with the Warriors?

by BD4mvp on Jan 23, 2008 10:48 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Childress

Nellie would have him play PF

Bring on the BD Show!!!

by dajrichshow on Jan 23, 2008 10:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

yes

And that effectively throw my idea under the bus.

I envisioned Childress as the uber 6th man, or even the SF if Jackson were moved up to SG (which would mean Gasp going big on the wings).

Childress is shooting a gaudy 58% from the field last time I checked, over 80% FT. He's not a 3P shooter, not even a long 2P shooter, but he gets to the basket, draws fouls. He's long and pretty sound defensively, and can dish the rock a bit. Basically he's what I wish Barnes was.

SB Nation Quality Control

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Jan 23, 2008 10:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Childress

He's a great defender, and a good rebounder for his size. On offense he literally never takes the jumper anymore, probably because the Hawks would rather have Marvin Williams or Joe Johnson shooting it. All of his shots are at the basket, thus the ridiculously high field goal percentage. He's pretty good at avoiding shot blockers and finishing, too. His game then wouldn't really seem to fit with us because he'd basically be a short version of Biedrins, but he's a career 35% 3-point shooter, so he's not incapable of making the perimeter shot. He's also great in the open court in one-on-one situations because he draws contact well and is a great finisher, so I think he'd be an excellent fit for our team.

Josh has a high basketball IQ, so I'm sure Warriors fans would immediately love a Pietrus-Childress trade. I doubt that the Hawks will have any interest at all in Pietrus, however. Their biggest need is for a point guard that can help right now, which we obviously can't give them, so we don't really seem like the best trade partners.

However, Childress is a restricted FA this summer, and most around the league feel that the Hawks will let him walk because there's little room for him with Marvin, Joe, and Josh Smith. For this reason there's a possibility he could be had for cheap. Maybe our first rounder this year and the TPE? The only problem I have is that Childress would presumably take Barnes' minutes, which might mess up our team's great chemistry. For this reason, I actually wouldn't make the deal and just hope to sign Josh in the off-season...

It's almost like the Warriors have 6 guys out there... they always have a guy open! - Jon Barry commentating game 3 last year

by gsw4life on Jan 24, 2008 10:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Childress

I'm aware he's an RFA- that's precisely why I want him. RFA basically means he's yours, since you have first right of refusal and a cap exception to sign him. If we trade for him, all those benefits are ours.

Without his RFA rights, the best we can do is throw the MLE at him, which is a cheap enough price the Hawks may very well match. Otherwise, the only way to get him is a sign-and-trade, which is the same thing as trading for him now, except we don't have his services the second half.

As for whether we need him (points raised below),...is anyone really happy with our perimeter defense? Baron and Jack are superb defenders, but they bear so much offense burden (for better and for worse) that it's unreasonable for them to be the anchors on both ends of the court. When either sits, we're short a wing defender- Pietrus clearly isn't, Barnes doesn't physically have the speed or size, Azubuike is a little small (and he's not a lock down defender anyways).

Childress gives us a legit 6'7, 6'8-ish wing man off the bench and/or matchup starter to relieve the responsibility of perimeter defense. That he's a highly efficient offensive player is an even added bonus.

The production we lose from Ellis (someone's bound to bring it up) is more than replaced with more minutes at the 2 for Azubuike/Watson AND a more consistent, more resilient defense.

SB Nation Quality Control

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Jan 24, 2008 1:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Childress

I like Childress a lot and I think he would flourish for our team. But Ellis is looking like a potential future star - his trade value is high enough right now so that even if we did want to trade him we could get a lot more than Childress.

The point I was making about his rfa status is that there's speculation that the Hawks wouldn't match even just a mid-level type salary because there's no room for him to play. We can only offer him the mid-level but the same can be said about just about every other team except for Philly. That was more just wishful thinking anyways since there's no indication Childress would choose us over any other team. But we can't really trade for Childress because the Hawks are only looking for a point guard, and that's not something we have to offer, so signing him as a rfa is more realistic than trading for him.

It's almost like the Warriors have 6 guys out there... they always have a guy open! - Jon Barry commentating game 3 last year

by gsw4life on Jan 24, 2008 11:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

lol

I would be very surprised if we got more than Childress for Ellis.

Nobody cares about defense.

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Jan 24, 2008 11:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

even if you don't agree that Ellis is by far

better (not to mention a lot more upside), you have to realize that this is what just about any nba follower would say.

It's almost like the Warriors have 6 guys out there... they always have a guy open! - Jon Barry commentating game 3 last year

by gsw4life on Jan 25, 2008 3:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

eh?

Defense and rebounding is underrated by the vast majority of so-called fans, people here don't even realize the negative effects of starting a 6'3 SG.

The New Jersey game is case in point:

Ellis can't guard Carter, so Baron has to
More wear and tear on Baron
because Baron needs to be protected with a double team, the defense is exposed, allowing more penetration or open looks
more penetration means more fouls on Biedrins as he comes to help plug the holes left by the help we give to Baron because we have to hide Ellis
Ellis was empty on the glass, nearly cancelling out the offensive efficiency he brings. More shots for the nets = more points for them

So:

Baron is gassed
Biedrins foul trouble
mega rebound deficit

Yay, he made a cool layup.

Tell me your great nba followers considered the situation in that depth. Then I'll respect what they say.

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Jan 25, 2008 5:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm talking about people

that get paid to watch basketball and talk about basketball. Yesterday for example JA Adande said that he'd take Ellis over Kevin Martin. Now I'm not saying that this is true just because JA Adande said it, but just the fact that he thinks that they're even close should tell you that Ellis' value right now is way above Childress'.

Childress just is not in the same class as Monta. He has a very limited offensive game. I've seen you bash Monta because he gets a lot of his points on the fast break and they're "replacable," but at least 80% of shots by Childress are on the fast break. Yesterday against the Sonics he shot 5-8 - 4 fast break dunks or layups and one off of the half court he caught an airball and got a layup.

Just because Childress is great at defense and Ellis is not does not mean that people are ignoring defense when they say Ellis is better. Ellis' combination of speed and shooting touch is very rare and it could make him special.

It's almost like the Warriors have 6 guys out there... they always have a guy open! - Jon Barry commentating game 3 last year

by gsw4life on Jan 26, 2008 10:44 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Scorers

put fans in the seats as well as put the media in a frenzy, and they get the airtime on sportscenter; but their game doesn't always translate to Wins in the win-loss column.

The defensive and rebounding issues we get with Monta Ellis aren't just something you can ignore because JA Adande said he's better than Kevin Martin.

Ben Gordon is having a monster year throwing up 30 point games too, do you think the Bulls are thinking he's untradeable?

Ellis' combination of speed and shooting touch are special, and it makes him a special scorer. Defense is half the battle of playing in the NBA.

by jlagace on Jan 27, 2008 2:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I smell it...

But the way I interpret what he's saying is that professional basketball followers like Ellis, for whatever that's worth, it increases his trade value. He starts, he scores, he's young, he shoots a high percentage, and he makes spectacular plays. Childress, meanwhile, is on the bench most of the game, and doesn't really do anything spectacular when he's in. Thus, the buzz around him isn't quite so high, and his trade value is definitely lower.

We probably couldn't pry somebody good from San Antonio, or another team in position to win a championship, but teams who still need to fill empty arenas could definitely use a Monta Ellis, meaning they might be willing to give up a stronger defender for some offensive sparkle.

by Dubs fan in Boston on Jan 28, 2008 8:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

again

I'm not ignoring defense when I say Ellis is by far better. But Childress is more of a liability on offense than Ellis is on defense. The guy guarding Childress usually backs up way off him, and if he has the ball, he still tries to drive on him because he doesn't want to take the jumper. Usually he doesn't have the ball, and Childress' man sags way off of him to help on other guys.

Now he's a very smart player, and he finds ways to be effective on offense. Basically he cuts and makes himself available for a pass, and he's very good at offensive rebounding for a small forward.

Like you said, defense is half the battle. The other half is what Childress struggles at.

I never said I'm ignoring defense and rebounding. Monta rebounds well for a shooting guard anyways. When you take the whole package Monta is just better.

The J.A. Adande comment was meant to illustrate the level of talent you should be targeting if you trade Monta. I think most would agree that Kevin Martin is better than Childress.

I never said that Monta is untradable; I said that we could get more than Childress. However, I do think that Monta means more to our team than to most because he is very important to our fast break.

PS All of Ben Gordon's numbers are down from a year ago. He is by no means having a "mosnter year."

It's almost like the Warriors have 6 guys out there... they always have a guy open! - Jon Barry commentating game 3 last year

by gsw4life on Jan 28, 2008 10:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

they could look into

adding a 3rd team to trade with. seattle, memphis & portland have a slew of point guards. arroyo, tinsley, or andre miller might be available, among others.

by the evil monkey on Jan 25, 2008 8:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Hmm...

Interesting idea. I haven't seen him play in quite some time but from what I remember he is pretty solid.

The big question I have is whether or not Nelson will play him. Assuming that Nellie would play him more than POB I would probably make the deal. But Nellie seems almost happy to be "stuck" with an undersized line-up.

by olympicmike on Jan 23, 2008 10:57 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

zazatube

zaza mix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rY_E9ed2Hw&feature=related

georgian basketball
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWIPtNOJBLw&feature=related

zaza top10 (good one over Kaman)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zz8TblzbYEA

zaza post moves
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DH7WnR_cx00

actually i like what and how he do
most important -he is ready to play

build a team & destroy the roof

by Lat We N Trash on Jan 23, 2008 11:55 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

on a completely different note- stephane lasme

http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/50471/20080123/realgms_top_10_d_leaguers/

Seems like lasme still has nba aspirations. Real GM ranked him second on their top 10 list of d-leaguers. "He is currently helping the team with10.5 points, 6.8 rebounds, and is leading the NBDL with 2.71 blocks per game." Best part is those blocks. Would be nice to have some interior defense help.

by crazyray on Jan 24, 2008 2:16 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

No and No

Regarding Zaza as stated above: "There is simply not enough minutes for him with the personnel they have;they play uptempo and small with Horford at C M.Williams/J.Smith at PF and S.Williams at either PF or C of the bench."

Ummmm, that quote speaks for itself. To use a little parallel analysis here: if Zaza plays for a team (the Hawks) that is considered to play "uptempo and small", then the Warriors play at Mach 5 and dwarf-like. In other words, why the hell would Zaza be able to fit into the Warriors ridiculously fast style if he can't fit into a Hawks system that is "uptempo and small" --makes abosolutely NO SENSE. Garbage.

Regarding Josh Childress: NO. Whatever, he's a fine player, but the last thing we need is another Swingman. Another horrible idea.

by B Randon on Jan 24, 2008 10:02 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Umm...

Horford, Josh Smith, Marvin Williams, and the Landlord is actually a decent and significantly deep lineup of big men.

Andris, Al, Matt Barnes, PoB do not have size, and are not great to begin with. Jeez man, we've even given Pietrus significant minutes at PF. As it stands right now, we have no choice but to play small, unless you think PoB and Kosta are the solution. Is Zaza a perfect fit? No, but he's a big man who's apparently available who could provide the depth which we sorely lack.

Depth down low is useful when AB is in foul trouble, Al is cold, or we're playing against big teams (Utah, SA, etc.). At the expense of Pietrus, it would definitely be a great trade for us.

Regarding Josh Childress:
The last thing we need is an injury to any one of our swingmen forcing Pietrus into the starting lineup.
The one thing we need is a player who is going to take it to the hole, shoot a high percentage, and get to the line.

by Dubs fan in Boston on Jan 24, 2008 10:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

no

Zaza is soft, and I'm not convinced that he is any better than POB, nonetheless B-Wright.

Childress is solid, but is he really that much better than Azubuike?

by B Randon on Jan 24, 2008 10:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with Dubz Fan in Boston

The difference is frontcourt depth in Atl.

We are forced to play small by the lack of players and trust in the bench. While in Atl they have Horford, Williams, Wright, JSmoove, Zaza to rotate with.

Childress is a constant player that would help our streaky offense. He's also a legit 6'8'' guy that has an IQ that is 1000% smarter than Pietrus' is.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Jan 27, 2008 1:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Lasme

No no no. We got rid of him because he's just another undersized PF. Pretty much a poor-man's Diogu without the "offensive moves"

by B Randon on Jan 24, 2008 10:04 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Another Thought

The trade deadline is coming up, no doubt, but the Warriors shouldn't just make a trade just to make a trade, ya dig?

Obviously we are in need of a post presence, true, but there aren't guys out there really that would help us right now without emasculating our team's chemistry, i.e., getting rid of a lot of our players to get one. Not a lot of big guys fit Nellie's system, as Mullin points out in his latest interview with Tim K. with SJ Mercury.

We got big men, we just need to develop them. Brandan Wright could be scary good. Oviously, he's only been ok. But we also have POB and Kosta, just in case. Obviously, these fools don't play that much, but if we continue to develop them, they can't be that bad to not be able to spare AB about 10 mins per night, can they? So pretty much, I'm content RIGHT NOW with the big men we have. Sort of.

I think what the Warriors need just as much as an inside presence is more discipline. Bring in Gary Payton, not really to play, but to be the guy on the bench, in the huddles to get the Warriors' sh*& straight during stretches of games like we've seen recently in Indiana and against the T-Wolves. If we want elite status, we need to be more disciplined. Bottom line. At this point in his career, GP wouldn't offer us much on the court, but in the locker room, on the sideline, in the huddles, I'll even give him 5 mins per game, I think he could really do a lot for the Warriors in terms of discipline and confidence.

Any thoughts?

by B Randon on Jan 24, 2008 10:31 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

good idea but

I don't really know if Zaza would help. He's not playing for the Hawks because their best players are swingmen, so they play Josh Smith at power forward to allow more room for the 2 and 3 positions. Rookie Al Horford took his starting position.

The Hawks don't really play uptempo - they're in the bottom third of the league in possessions per game. So the pace isn't the reason Zaza's not playing.

Zaza recently got suspended one game by the team for complaining to Coach Woodson about playing time. I was watching the game he complained about, a game at home against Portland where Zaza played 8 minutes in an overtime game. In the fourth quarter and overtime when the Hawks had to bench Horford, they would run with a lineup of Joe Johnson, Marvin Williams, Josh Childress at power forward, and Josh Smith at center. The lineup probably made it clear to Zaza that he's going to struggle to get playing time on this team.

Trading for a disgruntled player can be great, since they can come at a discount. I wouldn't give up anyone in the rotation for him - yes, not even Pietrus - but if the Hawks are simply looking to unload his contract, he might be worth a shot for a 2nd rounder and TPE.

It's almost like the Warriors have 6 guys out there... they always have a guy open! - Jon Barry commentating game 3 last year

by gsw4life on Jan 24, 2008 10:42 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

yes

Agreed.

by B Randon on Jan 24, 2008 11:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Right on

If he is already in the dog house we shouldn't have to give up much for him. Why give up Pietrus when he can be sent else where to add depth. The Warriors do need to trade him, especially with Barnes stepping up.
One thing I'm curious about is why are people so quick to get rid of Ellis?
His game is getting better and their is lots of room to grow. If he could improve his handles and passing, I definatley wouldn't mind seeing him in a Warriors uniform for a while. Why let some other team benefit.

by tangel29 on Jan 25, 2008 12:35 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Especially after

he's droppin career highs every night. 39!!! And near perfect shooting. DON'T TRADE MONTA. And whoever keeps throwing him in in trade scenarios needs to shut their mouths. Period.

by B Randon on Jan 25, 2008 11:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

you look to trade him

if you think you can get fair value at a position of higher need. Frontcourt players.

Plus, combo shooting guards are a dime a dozen and really affect the strategy we use.

I would personally wait and see what Belinelli could do. If he can gain confidence and defend; it would make parting with Monta so much easier. Plus we'd have to re-sign him in the offseason. More money to Monta means less money for AB, Baron and the bench.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Jan 27, 2008 1:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs