Two Realistic Trade Proposals

by YaHeard on May 9, 2009 2:18 AM PDT

First trade:

Crawford (19mil / 2 yrs)
- to CHA for -
Mohammed (13mil / 2 yrs)
May (3.7mil / 1 yr)
Future 1st Rounder

Charlotte is lacking a go-to scorer since the departure of JRich. Crawford could be to the Bobcats what Harrington is to the Knicks, and he fits nicely into their lack of depth at SG.

Mohammed's and May's contracts combined are an improvement over Crawford's. Plus they can replace Kurz and Davidson on our depth chart. Who knows, they may even be useful for us. Currently, they sit at the end of the bench for the Bobcats because of Diaw, Wallace, Okafor, Radmanovic, and Diop.

The first round pick is nice too, protected or not. The main point of the trade is to get Crawford off the squad to avoid him pulling another "Al Harrington" (distraction to the team), without making our cap situation worse, and without bringing in someone who will demand minutes and take them away from our young players.

Second trade:

Maggette ( 39mil / 4 yrs)
- to POR for -
Blake ( 5mil / 1 yr)
Webster ( 20 mil / 3 yrs)
Future 1st Rounder

If there's any position the Blazers should want to upgrade talent-wise (offensively), it has to be at SF. Even though they're taking on Maggette's contract, they're essentially just upgrading from Webster and his contract to Maggette and his. The Blazers can have Jerryd Bayless and Sergio Rodriguez replace Steve Blake at PG. We ask for a future first rounder because the Blazers are probably the last team that needs more young talent.

We get our (much needed) veteran, pass-first PG. We also get Webster, who I'm not crazy about. But we can limit his minutes or stash him on the bench and he won't be an issue like Maggette might be if we tried limiting his minutes. Much like the Crawford trade, the main point of this one is to get minute-hungry expensive vets off the team, without hurting our cap situation, and getting a pick in the process.

These trades aren't as flashy as the "Crawford/Maggette for AK47" (best case scenario) or "Everyone for Bosh/Amare/Boozer" trades, but they're alot more realistic. No team is going to be willing to trade away good talent for Crawford or Maggette, that's just the way it is in this economic climate. The best thing we can do is try to improve our cap situation, get some future draft picks, complete our depth chart (we only have 11 guys on the payroll now), get a vet PG, and free up minutes for our young talent.

Like many have pined for in other threads, this is essentially "trading them away for a bag of chips". Plus future draft picks.

A worse alternative is to stay put and watch Crawford and Maggette (and their agents) demand minutes and cause a distraction in the locker room, when we all know those minutes should go to other players.

PG Ellis / Blake / Watson
SG Belinelli / Morrow / Azubuike
SF Jackson / Webster
PF Randolph / Wright / May
C Biedrins / Turiaf / Mohammed

It might not be much of an improvement over last season's roster, but I don't think it could do any worse than 29 wins. The keys are that we increase our financial flexibility, add future draft picks, and allow the young core to grow as a whole.

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 55 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I like the Portland deal a lot. I’m not sure they’d throw in a draft pick, but I like it. I don’t see the Charlotte trade as very realistic. I can’t imagine Nellie signing off on 2 big, relatively slow and relatively unskilled guys like May and Mohammed who don’t exactly scream mismatch (at least not in a good way) and I can’t imagine Brown signing off on a volume shooting guard who doesn’t play D and isn’t named Allen Iverson. Its not the worst deal in the world for either team, but it seems a bit out of character for both. But my only big problem is that your final lineup has Marco Belinelli starting at SG. With those trades I’m thinking the lineup would/should look a lot more like this:
Monta/Blake/Watson/Belinelli
Jackson/Morrow/Monta/Belinelli
Azubuike/Morrow/Webster
Randolph/Wright/May
Biedrins/Turiaf/Mohammed

With Belinelli, May, Mohammed and maybe Webster fighting over about 10-15 mpg before injuries.

Thing A

by sam23 on May 9, 2009 5:42 AM PDT reply actions

you had me

until the first round draft picks.

Otherwise, I think they are OK.

by markdash on May 9, 2009 8:51 AM PDT reply actions

+1

I’m not sure how realistic these deals are, but I think those 1st round picks kill what would otherwise be at least debatable.

Thing 2

by olympicmike on May 9, 2009 9:40 AM PDT up reply actions

I think in either of the trades we would have to throw in bellinelli or wright in the trade if we want the first rounder

by FeartheBeard4 on May 9, 2009 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

make webster outlaw an then hell yes

by nateoak10 on May 9, 2009 1:25 PM PDT reply actions

outlaw!

You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk

by LostHawk on May 9, 2009 2:39 PM PDT reply actions

is a huge ball hogg

by 123707THIZZ on May 9, 2009 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions

uhh...

when compared to maggs….he is a distributor!

You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk

by LostHawk on May 9, 2009 4:48 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

sooooo true +1000000!!

by farid on May 9, 2009 7:46 PM PDT up reply actions

meh

i guess, but thats not saying much. Ive literally watched Outlaw take 5 shots in a row (missing them all)

by 123707THIZZ on May 9, 2009 9:49 PM PDT up reply actions

He is the bizarro Maggette

Instead of getting free throws, he shoots undefended jumpers. When he is hot there is no stopping him, when he is cold he adds nothing to your team.

"The brownies,'' Fernandez said after the game. "The brownies are good for me to make three-points.''

by Sabonis4Ever on May 11, 2009 8:50 PM PDT up reply actions

I feel you bruski, but naw.

it wont happen. that loser Batum starts, but only plays 5 minutes of every game. consider outlaw a full flegged starter. hes raw tho.

by P-40 the Ballatician on May 12, 2009 1:16 PM PDT up reply actions

i would do that Maggs trade oh so quickly

by 123707THIZZ on May 9, 2009 3:19 PM PDT reply actions

I would do either of those

Not so proud adoptive parent of the set-up man.
This is definitely not Howry do it!

by CB30 on May 9, 2009 7:47 PM PDT reply actions

first trade def not gonna happen

sean may is overweight and played only handful of games as brown confronted him about his weight issue. ill go ahead and predict that don nelson will def not go with sean may.

by farid on May 9, 2009 7:57 PM PDT reply actions

that's not the point

May and Mohammed replace Kurz and Davidson (ie: are not expected to get much PT). We trade for them because the Bobcats could use a scoring SG, May/Mohammed have the salaries (but aren’t quite as burdensome in the long-term) to match Crawford’s in the trade, and they won’t cause problems if we play our young talent in front of them.

"We Deserve"

by YaHeard on May 10, 2009 12:07 AM PDT up reply actions

agreed awful trade

i’d take 1 of mohammad or may if it came w/ a peice of we wanted…. but both for crawford is just throwing away talent. radmanovic + may 4 craford or something like that

still not exactly mind blowing

by tafkasam on May 11, 2009 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions

If Crawford does not opt out

then I am not sure what his legitimate gripe would be about sitting. He has been given way more advance notice about the team’s plans than most players are afforded. As for Maggs, despite his shortcomings he is too talented a player to give away for “a bag of chips.”

Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!

by Supafishal on May 11, 2009 9:28 AM PDT reply actions

What does the bag of chips’ contract look like?

Thing A

by sam23 on May 11, 2009 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions

3 years remaining, $27m.

On the upside they are crunchy, flavorful, and low in sodium!

by markdash on May 11, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions

Wow...

Flavorful and low in sodium? I don’t believe it. Rowell, get it done!

Thing 2

by olympicmike on May 11, 2009 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions

I might take the bag of chips. Can we eat them and still trade them in 2 years?

Thing A

by sam23 on May 11, 2009 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions

Are these a premium chip, Hawaiian style or something, or are we talking about a grocery store house brand? I’d have to know before…no, wait I don’t. Either way the deal should be a go.

by jae on May 11, 2009 4:06 PM PDT up reply actions

mmmm

Thing A

by sam23 on May 11, 2009 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions

mmm....

Nice choice.

Thing 2

by olympicmike on May 11, 2009 4:32 PM PDT up reply actions

yea its gotta be those or the salt and pepper flavor

Thing A

by sam23 on May 11, 2009 4:41 PM PDT up reply actions

You sir...

Have good taste in snacks.

Thing 2

by olympicmike on May 11, 2009 4:48 PM PDT up reply actions

+1

by jae on May 11, 2009 4:51 PM PDT up reply actions

yea

didn’t we already agree on candy too?

Thing A

by sam23 on May 11, 2009 5:36 PM PDT up reply actions

haha

Yeah, that’s right. If we ever go to the movies we won’t argue at the snack counter.

Thing 2

by olympicmike on May 11, 2009 8:04 PM PDT up reply actions

point taken, but...

I guess I just don’t think Maggette’s contract is SO far out of line relative to his production that he needs to be given away for nothing more than shorter contracts.

Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!

by Supafishal on May 11, 2009 11:34 AM PDT reply actions

considering....

maggette missed 31games this season and (not counting his first year in nba where he didn’t see consistent minutes) he’s averaged of missing 18 games a season (the previous 8). I consider his contract TERRIBLE.

If he gave us his production for 82 games (or atleast 75+) I could live with it, a slight over pay but still a very efficient bench scorer. but considering he has a history of missing 20-25% of EVERY season its far far worse. This team isnt good enough to have a player of his caliber miss that much time. but i mean its consistant with the warrior philosophy. We’d rather pay 5 good players 10 mil, all of whom have visable limitations, than 2-3 players BIG time money and sign good fitting role players like azubuike/turiaf etc

by tafkasam on May 11, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions

Sigh

You may be right about Maggette. I don’t think he misses 31 games and I don’t think he plays with an injury for another 16 this year. Could it happen? Sure, it’s a risk. However, your view of the “Warriors philosophy” is way out of whack.

We’d rather pay 5 good players 10 mil, all of whom have visable limitations, than 2-3 players BIG time money and sign good fitting role players like azubuike/turiaf etc

If it was as simple as just signing “2-3 players to BIG time money”, everybody would win the championship every year. However, there are only a handful of players who deserve “BIG time money”, and these players are already signed by their current teams who can easily re-sign these players if they want (they can offer an extra year on any contract, and they can go over the cap to sign their player while you can’t go over the cap to sign free agents).

This is a pretty common misconception in Warriors-land. Players who actually deserve “BIG time money” don’t grow on trees. We haven’t had any, so we haven’t given out that money. Just because somebody was stupid enough to give Richardson, Dunleavy, Foyle, and Murphy $10M/year contracts doesn’t make them deserving of those contracts and doesn’t mean the Warriors FO would rather have those 4 guys than two $20M/year players like Shaq & Kobe.

Name one player who has played for the Warriors in the last 10 years who deserved “BIG time money”. Chris Webber maybe, but he was shipped out well before he deserved that kind of money. Baron Davis? He was getting “BIG time money” when he arrived, but when it came to re-sign him, he wasn’t worth “BIG time money” anymore. Richardson? Hardly. Monta & Biedrins? Not yet. Was Garnett available? Maybe, probably not… Who else has been available and on our radar… like ever?

You can sit there and say “Rowell, trade our bad contracts for a BIG time money player” all day until you’re blue in the face, but until one comes on the market and we have the best offer on the table, it’s not going to happen. And yes, you can say “Nooo!!!! Don’t sign Corey Maggette to $10M/year”, but it’s not $10M/year, he’s only $8.9M this year, which means that if the Spurs want to make one last push next year, all they’d have to give us is Bruce Bowen and Fabricio Oberto. Would they do it? I don’t know… those two are expiring contracts next year, but if they’re making a final push, they’ll need another scorer to take the load off of their big 3 when they all inevitably get injured at various points in the season.

"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
AB1=TK

by Dubs fan in Boston on May 11, 2009 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions

Sigh
You may be right about Maggette.

We finally wore you down!

Thing A

by sam23 on May 11, 2009 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions

We should trade

Beans/Maggs
for
CB4/POB

Monta/Crawford/CJ
Jack/Marco/Morrow
Randolph/Buike
Bwright/Turiaf/Kurz
Bosh/POB/Bwright

"I got game like Stuart Scott...
Fresh out the ESPN shop..."

by siniGANGSTER.GSW on May 11, 2009 4:27 PM PDT reply actions

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ononp9

"I got game like Stuart Scott...
Fresh out the ESPN shop..."

by siniGANGSTER.GSW on May 11, 2009 4:28 PM PDT reply actions

if you put a link in the title line, it does not function as a link. It is just text that you have to copy and paste.

Why is there a title line anyhow? What does it add to a post?

by jae on May 11, 2009 4:35 PM PDT up reply actions

allows you to recognize your comments when you look at your comments list maybe? I could do without.

Thing A

by sam23 on May 11, 2009 4:43 PM PDT up reply actions

I guess that must be it, but I don’t think that many people use that feature. I see so many people use it as half a first sentence though and it doesn’t add anything to have the first sentence half in bold and split apart. It definitely makes sense on the sort of threaded boards like Warriorsworld where you can follow most posts without the, uh, ‘content’ in the main post, but here, where the whole post is there when you open the thread, I don’t see much advantage. Maybe an easier way to boldface +1’s?

by jae on May 11, 2009 4:50 PM PDT up reply actions

+1

i know i don’t want to deal with bolding my agreement in the body of a post. waste of time.

heart of a champion, will of the warrior.

by cap'n hack on May 11, 2009 5:06 PM PDT up reply actions

+1 whew, I’m exhausted. nap time.

Thing A

by sam23 on May 11, 2009 5:38 PM PDT up reply actions

One nice feature...

about the subject line (I did that just to bug jae) is that when you click them it collapses the body of the comment. I don’t use it much, but it’s a nice way to de-clutter a thread.

I do actually like to look through my comment list to find conversations if I can’t remember what fanpost they were in, so that’s nice too.

The one thing that bugs me is how some people (skeptic) use it to quote someone. It took me a month to figure out what he was doing. He is confusing enough as it is. =P

Thing 2

by olympicmike on May 11, 2009 8:10 PM PDT up reply actions

wow. You really DO learn something new...

…every day.

I’d never noticed that. Perhaps it’s because the only time I ever click on it is when there’s nothing but a link (that doesn’t work) and no body to close, so it changes nothing.

by jae on May 11, 2009 9:58 PM PDT up reply actions

Yea I only learned that a couple weeks ago by accident…..come to think of it I think I was clicking on something I thought was a link in a post by Skep.

Thing A

by sam23 on May 12, 2009 12:07 AM PDT up reply actions

The last thing the Raptors want is no cap space.

"The brownies,'' Fernandez said after the game. "The brownies are good for me to make three-points.''

by Sabonis4Ever on May 11, 2009 8:52 PM PDT up reply actions

But I’m sure they’d love to give you Calderon for Outlaw/Blake….or is Calderon not quite as elite as you’re looking for?

Thing A

by sam23 on May 12, 2009 12:09 AM PDT up reply actions

I liked the 1st option

and hated the 2nd

=Gaucho=

by Gaucho! on May 11, 2009 4:30 PM PDT reply actions

here's something neat

over at slcdunk, the jazz sbnation blog, someone mentioned the possibility of a mags for ak47 trade in a positive light. when i asked if they were serious and mentioned the cap issues with it and threw crawford into this hypothetical deal, no one jumped down my throat. the person who responded said that if the jazz could hang onto two of the boozer, milsap, okur trifecta, a deal based on maggs for ak would be appealling. i hope the jazz front office thinks the same way and that crawford’s inclusion isn’t a deal breaker; i just can’t think of another way to balance the salaries that doesn’t suck tremendously.

link to the story: http://www.slcdunk.com/2009/5/4/864363/sign-ben-gordon-and-millsap-for

heart of a champion, will of the warrior.

by cap'n hack on May 11, 2009 8:15 PM PDT reply actions

and now they’ve given it a fanpost over at slcdunk. god i want this to happen. seriously, i hope jazz fans and the jazz front office are on the same page.

http://www.slcdunk.com/2009/5/11/872627/andrei-kirilenko-untradeable

heart of a champion, will of the warrior.

by cap'n hack on May 11, 2009 10:26 PM PDT up reply actions

well done captain

I pray to god you are Larry Riley in disguise.

"We Deserve"

by YaHeard on May 11, 2009 10:58 PM PDT up reply actions

Hmm...

Maybe there is some obscure rule in the CBA that would allow us to make the deal happen without the approval of the GM’s if we can get both SBnation blogs to approve the deal with 80% or better poll results. I’m going to email Larry Coon and see what he thinks. (I find the “powers endowed to NBA bloggers” section of the CBA a little too technical to understand myself)

Thing 2

by olympicmike on May 11, 2009 11:18 PM PDT up reply actions

bury crawford on the bench. he’s a nice kid and i’d hate to see jerry sloan murder him

cap’n u r my hero!

by farid on May 11, 2009 11:50 PM PDT up reply actions

that would be amazing

Monta/Lawson?/Watson
Jack/Morrow
Buike/AK47
Randolph/Wright
Biedrins/Turiaf

Its not exactly gonna win the West but I would definitely be excited about that team even if we weren’t able to make any other significant moves this offseason and the future would be much brighter.

Thing A

by sam23 on May 12, 2009 12:17 AM PDT up reply actions

look at that lineup

i’m excited about it, even if it’s only a hypothetical lineup that exists via a hypothetical trade on sbnation. there’s a fair amount of trade flexibility there too.

we might be able to work out a wright/marco/maybe buike trade for a legit starting small forward and move ak to the 4, where he plays much better. i’d be happy with just getting kirilenko, but if we could grab a sf for 2 or 3 of those guys, wow. i don’t know what i’d do with myself.

heart of a champion, will of the warrior.

by cap'n hack on May 12, 2009 12:24 AM PDT up reply actions