Warriors Talking about Tinsley w/ Pacers....

Al’s “panned out” in some ways more than we could have expected – while some here pan him for not finishing better around the basket or for costing too much, I disagree (see The one who must answer Mullin’s Call to Arms). In short he’s played more positions and made more adjustments than almost any other player imaginable and is well suited to Nelson’s scheme. We need more out of Al this season for sure, but he’s not the “problem” he’s part of the solution:

We have a very young team – with a new major player in Maggette, so Al’s presence will be felt both on the floor and locker room.

We do have a lot of guards – when Monta comes back what do we do with 4 starting guards (Monta, Jax, Tinsley, Maggette) plus KAz? Do we trade Harrington for essentially another guard off the bench? Trade big for little? We would then be short handed inside again. And what does Daniels bring that we need?

Tinsley’s contract is not very attractive – in fact even those who complain about Al’s contract would have to swallow hard to take Tinsley’s three years rather than Al’s shorter deal (which was one of the reasons to take him for DunMurphy in the first place).

This is exactly the kind of knee-jerk move that we should avoid. I know they want to trade Al and Monta is injured but I don’t think that this makes sense for us in the long term.

Tinsley has three years left on his deal and Harrington has two. Its simple mathematics from there. Harrington is still useful in this Warrior team, but if we trade him for Tinsley, what will that do to Marcus Williams, who has tons of potential and a much cheaper price tag. This is a move that would totally benefit the Pacers and make the Warriors very volatile.

Best case scenario from this trade is Tinsley plays his best basketball as a below average shooter and a great passer who is very turnover prone in a very small, defensively weak backcourt. Worst case scenario is Tinsley is still the headcase he’s been in Indy and we have to bear the brunt of his terrible contract for the next three years.

Too bad it’s not a 2 year contract for Tinsley. If we trade Al we’ll give several minutes more to our young forwards.

  That would be excruciatingly painful

if you wanted brandan wright to start at PF.Brandan Wright is not ready to be a starter.We should be happy with the players we have now.Al should be more productive because he won’t have to defend bigger opponents.Also, I don’t think corey maggette will be as productive off the bench because if we bring in Jamaal Tinsley, Monta would drop to the 2 again and Jackson will settle for nothing less than to start.

the case FOR this trade. With Williams, CJ, Jack, Maggette, Buike, and Marco we have plenty of guards to hold us over for 3,4, or 5 months while Monta is out. Sure, none of ‘em are likely to be great PG’s but Tinsley isnt all that great either. I’d rather hang on to Al’s contract.

Trading Al is something I’ve been lobbying for all summer, but for Jamaal Tinsley….NO. Marcus and Marco will be OK as the temporary point guard. CJ, Bookie, and Jack can bring the ball up as well. During Summer League, we saw a glimpse of Randolph’s ball handling skills. Not that I want Ant Randy to be the point forward, but my point is that Mully is overreacting to the loss of Monta. Maybe the front office is just putting up a front and making themselves look like they’re desperate. But Shaun Livingston?? The last time I saw him was when he tried to rebound his own miss and bent his knee totally sideways. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8vl7lNtbjg
Monta’s injury opens up an opportunity for Marcus and Marco. Both are first round draft picks, now’s the time for them to prove that they’re first round worthy…