How Much Would You Give For Amar'e?
by onlxn on Jun 28, 2009 10:51 PM PDT
51 comments
The thread jae started about a possible trade for Amar'e Stoudemire (trying to get used to the apostrophe) has been one of the best around here for awhile. It's covered a lot of ground and inspired a lot of useful, thoughtful discussion. It's also revealed one simple fact: collectively, we seem pretty conflicted about this trade. Amar'e offers big upside, but any trade would involve giving up a lot of talent and taking on a lot of financial risk... there are arguments in both directions. Some GSOMers think we need to grab this guy at all costs, some GSOMers think it's not worth messing with the young talent we have, and some GSOMers fall somewhere in between.
I have no hope of ending this debate, nor any desire to do... as I said, it's been a great discussion, and people on all sides are making excellent points. But I do want to try to get a rough sense of how many people are taking each position.
There are obviously thousands of possible offers we could make, a few of which have been suggested by people (including me), but most will never come close to happening, and trying to account for all of them would bog us down, at any rate. Let's stick to the various packages that the teams have actually discussed, according to reports: the base package of Biedrins/Wright/Belinelli, that package plus Curry, or that package plus Curry and Azubuike. (A Biedrins/Curry/Belinelli configuration was briefly rumored, but didn't seem to have legs, and it'd mess up the math anyway.)
So. How far would you go? Package A? Package B? Package C? No offer? Any offer? Where you at?
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!
3 recs |
51 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Maggette. He kills the ball movement. Andris,Belli,Wright,maggette for Amare, Earl Clark. (will not work huh)
Don't trade Stephen Curry Movement
by Sinigang on Jun 28, 2009 11:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Sorry link didn't work right.
It was Maggette and Biedrins for Amare and it worked perfectly
by dubzfan on Jun 28, 2009 11:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
doesn’t work for the Suns as they are attempting to shed salary
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 29, 2009 4:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and they actually have to want Maggette and @ that salary . . .
Reduce your carbon footprint, commit suicide.
by bloodsweatndonuts on Jun 29, 2009 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didnt even read it because my Im tired as *&!@#*!@#@!* right now but
the original deal sounds best-Biedrins,Marco and Wright.
if we can throw in Maggette for Marco or Wright then it’d be a dream come true.
Its time for a change...
by RunNdGun on Jun 28, 2009 11:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Biedrins, Wright, and Belinelli
Thats all I would give up.
It is the shoes!!!
by LighTz707OuT on Jun 28, 2009 11:16 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Me too
Oakland Raiders Fan
Golden State Warriors Fan
San Francisco Giants Fan
San Jose Sharks Fan
MMA Fan
USC Trojan Fan
by i love sports101 on Jun 28, 2009 11:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
we should of done the deal when we could of. Beans, Marco, Wright seems like the best offer the Suns could get seeing that they are getting nice prospects. Plus they need frontline help.
by Spee-D on Jun 29, 2009 12:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Either Biedrins or Wright, Belinelli, and maybe a 2010 draft pick.
I have changed my mind and I want the Warriors to pursue Bosh. I don’t feel like Stoudemire would be worth Biedrins and Wright anymore.
by Jayd92009 on Jun 28, 2009 11:35 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I do not think we can trade the 2010 draft pick at this point since we’ve dealt the 2011 already.
Bosh doesn’t want to sign an extension. I wouldn’t pursue either unless an extension arrangement could be worked out in advance of the trade.
by jae on Jun 28, 2009 11:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I go back and forth, but I think I’m now firmly in the “trade for him if we can keep Curry” camp. I was real happy we wound up with Curry and would say that my “final” offer would not include him if only because I think that as a hardball offer, the deal can get done without him. Let’s be realistic about Curry though. He probably fell a few spots but was still #7 in what is currently regarded as a ‘weak’ draft class. Since 5-9’s in general have about a 30% chance of never amounting to anything substantial (either a seldom used ‘role player’ or complete washout) on straight odds, we probably get too attached to them.
Still, Curry seems like he could be real special. Curry can shoot from way outside, passes well and doesn’t seem at all afraid of being the man, so I’d love to have him as yet another person we can dream will finally lead us out of the promised land. And if we do get Stoudemire and he pulls a Shawn Kemp, we’ll need that hope while we wait for Amare’s contract to come off the book.
(of course, I hated the Randolph pick a year ago and thought Randolph could be a bust even halfway through the season, so my track record for spotting guys in the draft is far, far from perfect.)
by jae on Jun 28, 2009 11:35 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
don't hold me on this, but I think Randolph will be better than Chris Bosh.
I was watching Bosh’s highlights the other day and Randolph looks scary similar to Bosh’s game (except for the fact that Bosh has a better post game and can shoot 3’s.) Randolph is just raw right now, but he’ll probably play superstar level near the middle to end of the year. Same goes with Ellis. I don’t think Ellis has really even reached his potential yet. People say he could never be a great point guard, but I don’t think he was given enough time to show what he’s worth. Plus, besides Iverson, Wade, Bryant and James, who else could drive better than Monta Ellis?
by Jayd92009 on Jun 28, 2009 11:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This-
And if we do get Stoudemire and he pulls a Shawn Kemp, we’ll need that hope while we wait for Amare’s contract to come off the book.
This along with the entire, collective, group of players we could be potentially be giving up are the biggest drawbacks in my mind. On another post, you or onlxn made the point about trade chips being handed over- should we want to make another move.
The positives of the trade go with out saying. I’d be willing to pull the deal with either one of the following scenarios (in addition to the Wright/Beans/Belinelli deal):
- Beans+Curry+Future lottery protected pick (don’t know if this would work contract wise, throw in Claxton/Law to work)
- Beans+Wright+Belinelli+2nd rd pick
I’m all for bringin Amar’e over, but not at the price of so much young talent.
Chris Cohan- YOU'RE FIRED!
by bonbrillio on Jun 29, 2009 7:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you have too...
give up young talent to get young talent, or even talent at all. People have wanted a superstar like this to come to the Bay for a while and now we have the opportunity and are complaining we are giving up too much. I understand people don’t want to give up too many ppl, but this is what it takes to get a superstar who w/o injuries will dominate the NBA for another 8-10 years. If it takes Beans, Marco, Wright, and Curry and anyone else besides Bukie, Morrow, Monta, and Randolph i’d do it.
by bizz 192 on Jun 29, 2009 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I go back and forth, but I think I’m now firmly in the "trade for him if we can keep Curry" camp. I was real happy we wound up with Curry and would say that my "final" offer would not include him if only because I think that as a hardball offer, the deal can get done without him.
That’s exactly where I am. I also think that the team will probably stick to their guns on this. I don’t think Nellie’s “he can buy a house” stuff would outright prevent them from trading Curry, but given that he said it so effusively and publicly, it’s something that would be thrown back in his face if Curry does move. All things being equal, I’d imagine Nellie wouldn’t want to deal with that… it creates an extra disincentive against trading the guy.
Let’s be realistic about Curry though.
We all seem to be having trouble with that, don’t we? I think our collective overenthusiasm (in which I’m fully taken part) has been fueled partly by the fact that we didn’t expect to get him. If the pre-draft consensus had been that he’d fall to us and we’d take him, I’m not sure that we’d all be so starry-eyed.
Still, this is the guy I was hoping for, a guy I’d rather have than at least half the guys above him. And it’d be great to be able to keep him, not only because he could be very good in and of himself, but because his presence would make it substantially easier to trade Monta down the road. I’m not saying I want us to trade Monta, but I think it’s fairly likely to happen at some point, and if it does, it’d be great if we had a capable guy to slot in for him. Stephen Curry could very well be that guy.
by onlxn on Jun 28, 2009 11:57 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
easier to trade Monta down the road
shhh, don’t wake the children! but absolutely right
by hardcore on Jun 29, 2009 8:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
if salaries matched
monta straight up
my code name is "kelenna bahongpuki"
by VonteegoCummings on Jun 29, 2009 4:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
We’ve missed you, Vonteego.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 29, 2009 12:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd love to read this post...
…but the obnoxious ad at the top (this one for “Evinrude” emphasis on the rude), covers up the whole post and doesn’t have an exit/cancel button. What’s up with these ads, yo? Sorry for the interruption.
by Hoopachoo on Jun 29, 2009 5:20 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I am a huge Amar'e fan
I’ve been telling anyone who would hear for a couple years, if we had that guy we would explode. Don Nelson has never had a PF like that in his career. He had Dirk Nowitzi, imagine what he could do with just as an efficient, but rougher/tougher guy? Finals? He took Dirk to Western Conference Finals. He is 26, in his prime…. Just gotta love it.
However…………I am not giving up Andris AND a talent like Curry. I would rather fall flat on my face next year then to guess that. NO ONE can predict how good Curry will be, but I think the forecast is obvious.
Insane shooter + insane offense + loose coach = Happy Fans + wins.
So although I would chop off my pinky toe in some weird religious sacrifice to get Amar’e, I am not ready to have a fire sale, so when he gets here we just lose, and he leves anyways.
by sjboy on Jun 29, 2009 8:22 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
As stated in other threads, the “likeability” of this trade is dependent on two things:
A) Who the Warriors have to give up
B) What kind of extension they sign Amare to
If A is Biedrins, Wright, Belinelli, then I like the trade. But B is the sticking point. A 5 year extension for the max? No thanks. For a 3 year extension at $50m? I like that a lot better.
Thing C
by markdash on Jun 29, 2009 8:59 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Beans, Wright, Azubuike. Why not keep Marco: a better overall player, IMO, than Azubuike who is also half the price.
Confident Marco Belinelli supporter
by Doctor Kajita on Jun 29, 2009 9:14 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Azubuike is a better spot up shooter, a stronger finisher, and a better rebounder. But, I feel we get the same from Maggette (except for the shooting part), whom we are stuck with.
Marco is a superior passer and playmaker, plays better D (yeah, I said it), is a more creative (yet less efficient) finisher, and has better handles than Azubuike.
They’re different players that fill different needs but play the same role: bench player. One is half the price of the other. Marco is what I feel the Warriors need more in a player in that role: someone who plays tough D, can keep the ball moving in half-court AND in transition (let’s be real, Buike is a horrible passer on the fast break, which the Warriors thrive on), and can create for himself and others more efficiently. That’s my argument.
I like both, but if you’re going to give one away, give the one that’s more expensive and does the same thing others on the team already do.
Confident Marco Belinelli supporter
by Doctor Kajita on Jun 29, 2009 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
if u think Marco is better than Bukie
please explain to me how you came up with this, because the way i see it
shooting: Bukie>Marco
Rebounding: Bukie>Marco
Defense: Bukie>>>>>>>Marco
Dribble Penetration: Bukie>Marco
i will give marco the edge on passing but thats it.
by bizz 192 on Jun 29, 2009 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe the argument should be who is more valuable to the team
Azubuike has been around the league a little longer and his game is a bit more refined because of it. I think that his ceiling has been reached, more or less. I admit I am still a sucker for Marco’s potential. Marco hasn’t reached his peak yet because he’s still young (age and being in the league) and hasn’t had as many minutes as Buike.
Azubuike is more of a SF than a SG on this team. I think his rebounding stats are “inflated” because he played a lot of SF and even PF last season and he was asked, more like, forced to rebound. He needed to do it to be valuable to the team and he did great. I don’t think Marco was ever asked to do that.
Defensively, I think Marco is better. Remember he went up against the likes of Kobe last season and did pretty well until he got injured. He was always guarding the other team’s top wing player. Azubuike’s defensive deficiencies are pretty apparent to me. For example, he’s always going under a screen when he should be going over. When he goes over, he gets burned. Laterally, he is pretty slow. Marco, while not that much better, puts forth more effort on the defensive end. To me, 90% of defense is effort.
Going off your list, I don’t see how Buike is given the edge in dribble penetration. Marco’s handles and ability to get into the lane are better. I will give the edge to Buike on driving in strong as he is stronger, but he is then limited as to what he can do. In fact, he’s limited to trying to finish. Marco opens up more opportunities when he drives and if you remember, he got a lot of assists doing so.
Marco has the potential to be a much better shooter. Buike wasn’t that great of a shooter until last season. Like I said, Marco hasn’t had a chance to refine his game as much due to the limited time in the league and his limited time on the floor.
That’s the kind of player that is more valuable to the Warriors right now.
Confident Marco Belinelli supporter
by Doctor Kajita on Jun 29, 2009 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
some things you missed.
Kelenna actually shot better in year 1 than he did this past season, albeit in only 41 games and like Marco, is still trending upwards in regards to his jump shot. I know perception is Marco has more potential as a shooter, but I’d be a lot more convinced if he was a better FT shooter. Statistical history has shown that guys who shoot in the 70s tend to be streaky shooters more than pure ones.
at the least, Kelenna’s a much more versatile defender. He can switch out and adequately defend onto a wider array of players than Marco.
Whether you think Kelenna’s rebounding is inflated or not, Marco is never going to be even an average rebounder… his rebounding %’s are quite possibly the worst in the league (worse than Nash, Ridnour, Vujacic, Calderon, Kapono). even NBA midgets Muggsy Bogues & Earl Boykins have better rebounding rates than Belinelli.
But those 2 areas (passing/ball movement) in which Marco is clearly ahead of Kelenna are in short supply on this team. In a bizarre twist of fate, Kelenna may be the more valuable player to have for every single NBA team except us.
another reason to keep Marco over Kelenna is that Nelson can’t play Marco at the 4 position, and not even the 3 position if Jackson is in the game at the 4.
by homer simpson on Jun 29, 2009 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok, now I’ve seen that Andris’s rebounding was inflated and Azubuike’s rebounding was inflated. Anyone else? How do we get multiple guys at different positions with “inflated” rebounding while the team seems to be terrible overall? Why do the guys who come from other teams (Crawford, Maggette, Turiaf; a guard, a swing forward and a big) more or less rebound at exactly their non-GSW career average, but somehow other guys have rebounds that are “inflated”? I’m just curious where these inflated rebounds are coming from and why is seems to be so selective in whose rebounds it inflates, seemingly without regard for position.
by jae on Jun 29, 2009 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hi Jae
I knew I was going to get a response from you on the “inflated” statement. I am not using that word the same as the other guy was. I should have taken the time to explain it more. I meant that Azubuike was put in more situations to be able to rebound the ball more than Marco. This is obvious given Azubuike’s physical advantage in that department over Azubuike. Make sense? So, to clarify, Azubuike is the better rebounder, period, but he was also put in positions so that he would grab more than he normally would if a team kept him primarily at SG, which I believe is his “true” position.
Confident Marco Belinelli supporter
by Doctor Kajita on Jun 29, 2009 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
typo
I meant to say “Azubuike’s physical advantage in that department over MARCO”
Confident Marco Belinelli supporter
by Doctor Kajita on Jun 29, 2009 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
FYI
Azubuike’s rebounding was just about average per minute for players listed as SFs (this doesn’t take into consideration guys listed as such who spend more time as guards etc) per minute on the court. It’s above averaged for guys primarily listed as 2’s. Playing him is more or less neutral to slightly above average rebounding with regards to the average opponent depending on whether he’s paired with a better rebounding forward or with a more average guard at the other swingman position.
Belinelli’s rebounding was well below average for 2s and below average for point guards as well. Playing him at off guard will generally put us at a rebound deficit for that position, (and at SF it’s a disaster, though I don’t think anyone seriously ever suggests this). It doesn’t look like there’s any situation you can put him in where he’s not going to hurt some on the boards.
by jae on Jun 29, 2009 3:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
My whole point is, I like Marco better than Azubuike FOR THIS TEAM despite his rebounding deficiencies.
Confident Marco Belinelli supporter
by Doctor Kajita on Jun 29, 2009 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
homer, I agree with everything you’ve written. I did not compare KA’s FG%, but I was going off of what I saw last season in his 3FG%.
Confident Marco Belinelli supporter
by Doctor Kajita on Jun 29, 2009 2:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
another reason to keep Marco over Kelenna is that Nelson can’t play Marco at the 4 position, and not even the 3 position if Jackson is in the game at the 4
I didn’t really understand this as a reason to keep Marco over Buike, but I also don’t see it as a reason to keep Buike over Marco.
Confident Marco Belinelli supporter
by Doctor Kajita on Jun 29, 2009 2:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No... Biedrins, Wright, Belinelli, and Bukie option?
Given the options I chose Biedrins, Wright, and Belinelli package.
Check out Goallineblitz - Free Football MMORPG
Build players, Build teams, watch games...
http://goallineblitz.com/game/signup.pl?ref=4892220
by FLAxwless on Jun 29, 2009 11:00 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I’ve not heard that version mentioned in reports about the discussions. I will say, though, that I think that’s a likely direction for future talks, and I think it’d make all kinds of sense on our end. I love ‘Buike, but on a team that’s stuck with Jack and Maggette for the foreseeable future and also has Morrow, I don’t think he’s necessary. If Biedrins/Wright/Belinelli needs a sweetener, it would ideally be him.
by onlxn on Jun 29, 2009 11:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed throw them those four and leave out curry
by Agent Zero on Jun 29, 2009 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why only Amare?
I would probably do the Beans,Wright,Marco deal.But I hate almost gutting the team and our rebounds for a big $$ player coming off injury.
Why can’t we go after a bruising-rebounding-defense oriented PF,ala; Paul Milsap,Carl Landry,Brandan Bass or trade San Antonio for Dejaun Blair?
We have plenty of scoring and this way we keep Beans and Curry.
Dr. Jeff
by JEFFSJAZZ on Jun 29, 2009 11:44 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
If you really think that Nellie is ready to change gears to play a bruising-rebounding-defense oriented PF full time, or close enough to make a difference, you’re in the minority.
by jae on Jun 29, 2009 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
For a while I thought Nelson was onto something with Biedrins, Wright and Randolph. All we had to do was trade for Bosh and we’d be one 6’10+ skinny lefty away from the newest genius offensive scheme. Can’t guard that!
by Missing Barry on Jun 29, 2009 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
haha yeah paul milsap and brandan bass will make us contenders
by Agent Zero on Jun 29, 2009 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
beidrins, wright, azabuike, bellinelli
by Agent Zero on Jun 29, 2009 5:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Biedrins, Wright and Bellinelli is a good deal for Phoenix
If you were to cobble together one of the now-famous Frankenplayers, Andren Writadrins would be a smooth-scoring rebound machine that could block shots and get abused on defense. But cobbling two players together to get better production than one doesn’t work because of the finite amount of minutes availible.
So the 30+ pts, 17+ reb and almost 4 blks per 36 wouldn’t replace Amar’e’s 21, 8 and 1 from last year. But it does illustrate how much Biedrins and Wright bring to the table as an aggregate.
I’m not exactly sure what value Belinelli has around the league, but the mere fact that he has raw skills and has shown to be coachable (see last year’s effort on defense) would explain some of the alleged interest from Toronto and Phoenix. That, combined with Nelson’s statement that the staff felt that Belinelli could become better than Crawford (IMO he’s at-worst equal to Jamal now), shows that the Warriors consider Belinelli is a bit more than a throw-in.
Amare is a superstar on offense. Biedrins is a superstar rebounder and is very good offensively. I know, I know, it doesn’t look pretty and he can’t score on-demand, but he does score 14+ per 36 and shoots a higher percentage than Amare.
Then, take into consideration that the Suns are highly motivated to get something for Amare because he is not going to want to re-sign there and the feeling is apparently mutual.
I think the slight downgrade of Biedrins plus the scoring prowess and potential of Wright plus Belinelli plus the fact that Phoenix will almost have to deal Amare makes this a more than fair exchange from the Phoenix perspective.
Reduce your carbon footprint, commit suicide.
by bloodsweatndonuts on Jun 29, 2009 7:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
3 for 1?
Give me Amare` from 2 years ago and I’d take this deal. He was an absolute beast. With his knee issue and his detached retina, I don’t think I’d pull the trigger on this deal. Andris is still very young and is now really coming into his own. He’s gotten better every season and I bet that trend continues. For all the money Amare` is requesting coupled with the fact Wright and Belinelli should have their best year, I’d say pass on Amare`. Giving up 3 players for 1?
by gabezgsw on Jun 30, 2009 8:29 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The Amare from 2 years ago was after the knee problem. Since the surgery, it hasn’t been a problem at all. He did not have a detached retina either. His eye injury was a partially torn iris, an altogether different type of injury.
by jae on Jun 30, 2009 9:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you sure? He suffered a partially torn iris after a finger poke from Boris Diaw during the preseason, but I believe his injury last season was a detached retina.
Thing C
by markdash on Jun 30, 2009 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Istand corrected. He had both problems with his eye.
by jae on Jun 30, 2009 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
how about...
Warriors: Biedrins, Wright, Belinelli, and Maggette
FOR
Suns: Stoudemire and Pavlovic
by nhlogan on Jun 30, 2009 2:08 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
How about none of it unless he signs a reasonable extension first which I feel will never
happen since he thinks of himself as some kind of basketball god and will demand the MAX. Which is one of the main reasons I wouldn’t want him here. If anything goes wrong with those knees we’re so screwed. At least with Biedrins, Wright, Bellinelli we have some trade chips and more depth. Also I felt that most of the guys on this team like each other and Amare seems to not be much of a team player which also sours the deal in my mind.
Has anyone asked why Phoenix wants to trade this great basketball player? Maybe it’s because they know he’ll want max money and he’s not worth it so it would be best for them to get rid of him and get something in return. If I’m Kerr I pull the trigger even without Curry, you get a top 5 rebounder and high effeciency player that has a knack for getting in great postion to recieve passes in the low block in Biedrins, who has shown improvement in almost every season and he’s only 23. A serviceable backup PF in Wright who has great length/shot blocking ability and a smooth hook shot from 6 feet in. A decent shooting guard that had shown the drive to improve on the defense end and the ability to knock down shots. I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again if we make this trade we are getting TAKEN.
It's all about the killer cross-over baby!
by warriorsfiend on Jun 30, 2009 4:02 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
