Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Tiger Woods, Tony Romo Grouped Together At Pebble Beach

RUMOR: Milwaukee Bucks offering Dan Gadzuric and Charlie Bell to Golden State Warriors for Corey Maggette + Is Andris Biedrins next salary dump?

The Warriors dropped 10 spots in the 2nd round of the 2010 NBA Draft for some cold hard cash yesterday. It doesn't look like they're done trying to help the bottom line.

Jump for the info!

Star-divide

Over at The Journal Times Gary Gery Woelfel writes in Trade winds brewing before NBA Draft:

Now there's some chatter on the NBA grapevine the Bucks may be interested in another small forward - Corey Maggette of the Golden State Warriors.
It's no secret the Warriors have Maggette on the trading block - even though he is coming off a quality season in which he was the Warriors' second-leading scorer at 19.8 points a game. He also averaged 5.3 rebounds.
But Maggette has a fairly hefty contract - he still has three years, $31 million remaining on it - and the money-conscious Warriors would like to unload it.
The speculation is the Bucks are offering the Warriors center Dan Gadzuric, who has one year left on his contract for $7.4M, and guard Charlie Bell ($3.8M).

I'll be the first to say that the Maggette splurge right after Baron Davis departed to LA-LA land was a silly reactionary move, but give this man his props. His efficiency last season was nothing short of stunning (nearly 20ppg in under 30 mpg with a guady 61.5% true shooting) and from my view he seemed like a fantastic locker room presence that was great influence on his young teammates.

There's definitely better ways to spend his salary, but do you honestly really believe the Cohan-owned Warriors are going to do that? A sale changes everything obviously, but at this point I wouldn't be surprised if it dragged awhile longer. (If you're a buyer, what's the rush? The franchise value is only going to go down with the Warriors missing the playoffs next season.) I really wouldn't mind the Warriors holding onto Maggette and his contract (versus a straight salary dump which this essentially is) until the new ownership takes over. I will concede that the new ownership might actually use those two incoming Bucks' expiring contracts to net a bigger fish though (what a concept!), but if a certain tech CEO purchases the team Maggette's contract might not be such a burden.

 

Also, my man Adam also has some good words in Once Again, Cohan's Gain is the Warriors' Loss where he very astutely posits that Andris Biedrins is the likely next victim of a Cohan salary dump. Don't get me wrong, I'd be happy if the Warriors cut ties with this very flawed player (we won't even talk about the silly circa-2007 nonsense that he and Monta Ellis were amazing building blocks for a mythically bright future post-WE BELIEVE) with questionable dedication to improving his game (he's about to hit his 7th year in the league and still has very, very, very poor basic basketball big man fundamentals). However, it would be incredibly frustrating to see his salary dumped for the likes of cash savings. Biedrins (unlike Marco Belinelli who one was last season's salary dump- though I'm in the camp that Devean George was actually the better player last year) is a servicable player and not a player to just be tossed aside without getting anything good in return. Cap space in itself (aside from this potentially rare monumental offseason) more often that not means over paying players on the "free market" that their former teams don't even want... which (unfortunately) brings us full circle to the Corey Maggette contract.

For more discussion on the Maggette rumor check out kenntoe's FanShot.

Archive: RUMOR: Cavaliers talking to Warriors about Corey Maggette + LeBron James believes Maggette can help

Poll
Should the Warriors try to dump Corey Maggette's contract this summer simply for expiring contracts?
YES, it's not a good contract to have on the books
1231 votes
NO, keep #50 on the Dubs or make a basketball trade for a change
773 votes

2004 votes | Poll has closed

Comment 474 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

This is a miracle. Wait, but is it for Maggette and Biedrins? If Biedrins is involved, then hell no. We’re not getting any smaller.

[Info on Randolph] Would have been valuable at this time... But our management failed.

by LarryLegendofOracle on Jun 22, 2010 9:12 AM PDT reply actions  

Oh my never mind
We’re getting a price for Maggette! Hooray!

[Info on Randolph] Would have been valuable at this time... But our management failed.

by LarryLegendofOracle on Jun 22, 2010 9:13 AM PDT reply actions  

Guzdrich

* Fairly athletic for a center and can both run and jump well for a 7-footer. Works fairly hard on the boards and as a shot-blocker, and can score on put-backs and short-range moves.

Flaws

    * Inconsistent; will disappear for stretches. Fouls too readily. Doesn’t show great hands for shooting, ball-handling, or passing.

Career Potential

    * Backup / spot-starter at center.

[Info on Randolph] Would have been valuable at this time... But our management failed.

by LarryLegendofOracle on Jun 22, 2010 9:17 AM PDT reply actions  

Flaws

    * Inconsistent; will disappear for stretches. Fouls too readily. Doesn’t show great hands for shooting, ball-handling, or passing.

Career Potential

    * Backup / spot-starter at center.

[Info on Randolph] Would have been valuable at this time... But our management failed.

by LarryLegendofOracle on Jun 22, 2010 9:17 AM PDT up reply actions  

Does this mean we can enter the Marc Gasol sweepstakes in 2011?

by Baygiant11 on Jun 22, 2010 9:17 AM PDT reply actions  

There’s going to be a Marc Gasol sweepstakes in 2011?

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions  

actually yeah there might be

He is an unrestricted free agent after next year.

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 10:10 AM PDT up reply actions  

Unrestricted already? Hmmmm, how’d that come about? What is going on over in Memphis?

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions  

He was a 2nd round draft pick and had leverage given what he had done back in Europe

Got 3 million a year for three years guaranteed. So now he is a free agent HOWEVER because it was 3 years, the Grizzlies have his Bird Rights so they can offer more than anybody else.

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions  

Gasol is also restricted so the Grizz can match any offer Gasol gets.

EvilCowtownInc: Screwin Suckaz over since 1985......

Maybe we should adjust our stats to per36 years of age? -- ElRonToro

No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Jun 22, 2010 5:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

You wouldn't want Gasol?

Personally I’d prefer to draft Cousins, hope we get new ownership who will change the Warriors image around the league and we enter Carmelo 2011 sweepstakes

by tafkasam on Jun 22, 2010 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions  

The more I look at Cousins

the more I think we should stay away. He always has that dumb*ss matter-of-fact look on his face with his forehead all balled up, as if interviewers are annoyingly disrupting his genius. Everything is obvious to him, right? We don’t need that. I think if we had somebody like an Avery Johnson, we could afford to take a chance. Nelson will take one look at this kid and throw him on the bench without an explanation. Do you see Cousins biting his lip? I don’t.

Incidentally, I don’t think Nelson will coach another game for the Warriors, but as of now he’s our man. Marc Gasol will be the best center in the league some day. Between he and Lopez, Gasol is among the top 3 up and coming big men in the league. I think it is realistic to think we will have a good shot at landing him next free agency. I trust new ownership and the continuing emergence of our point guard should make this a decent enough attraction come next market. We’ll probably end up in the lottery again as well! At least as a fan, I can honestly say the glass is now half full.

by lilboots on Jun 22, 2010 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions  

I doubt Gasol gets away from Memphis. If he was our center and the FO thinks the same way as you, why would they let him get away? We sure as hell wouldn’t let that happen. I bet he signs some kind of extension this year.

by SuperStarAR on Jun 22, 2010 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

Let

is a very strong word. Correct me if I’m wrong please, but is he not an unrestricted free agent after this upcoming season?

by lilboots on Jun 22, 2010 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

yup

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

Might not be easy to force him to stay though

Although he did go to high school in Memphis so I suppose he does have roots there.

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

I just think that if you have a center that is as good as Gasol that still is improving, you do whatever you can to keep him. I also think a player leans toward signing with their own team rather than going somewhere else. All things being equal, I think he would chose to stay in Memphis.

If that happens, we are out in the cold.

by SuperStarAR on Jun 22, 2010 11:01 AM PDT up reply actions  

So what if you are out in the cold, you move on

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions  

i’m just replying to how if we didn’t pick up Cousins (if he is there) to try and get Gasol next year it would be a wasted opportunity. One that could haunt us for years

by SuperStarAR on Jun 22, 2010 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions  

oh okay I didn't see that part

Well if they guy you drafted instead of Cousins is pretty good might not necessarily be a waste

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions  

I may

pick Cousins over Monroe, just for the sake of trading him. There are rumored to be several teams who are desperately trying to get Cousins on their team. With all due respect to Greg Monroe, a bargaining chip such as Cousins may hold much more value in the grand scheme of things. For example, we may be able to involve ourselves in a multiple team deal involving Ellis with Cousins being the icing on the cake for a better suited, young talented player.

by lilboots on Jun 22, 2010 11:10 AM PDT up reply actions  

I ask why.

What is so great about Memphis right now? They are shopping Mayo, they are “rumored” to be shopping Rudy Gay, they are disappointed with their high pick Conley, and Zach Randolph is a mental midget. Have you been to Memphis? I would come running to Golden State if I were Gasol. We will get a good owner soon who will help us greatly in this endeavor. Our problems as Warriors fans is we have no idea what it’s like to be pretty. We are used to being very ugly. A princess can kiss a frog. You’ll see that proverbial yacht coming around the bend with cash flow my friend, and the glass will be half full.

by lilboots on Jun 22, 2010 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well…say all that is true about Memphis. The fact is Golden State doesn’t have a record of undeniable success the last few decades. There is still no guartantee that he would chose to come here. There will definitely be other teams looking for his services. I would put our odds at less than 20%.

by SuperStarAR on Jun 22, 2010 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions  

I actually really want to visit Memphis, personally…

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions  

To each his own… would you like to live there, or just visit?

by lilboots on Jun 22, 2010 11:22 AM PDT up reply actions  

I’d have to visit before I have an answer to that! I wouldn’t mind living in Nashville, if that’s relevant….

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions  

Nashes is cool

I met my brother there last year when he came to the states on business from the old country. I don’t mean to offend anyone, I just think the bay area is a very unique place to live. Perhaps I overstep in my assumptions given my obvious bias, but I don’t see how anyone can come from the south to the bay and not fall in love with this place.

by lilboots on Jun 22, 2010 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions  

Ha, don’t worry, I’m not taking offense. I’m a native of the Bay, love it there, I’m actually a fan of both the South and the Bay. Two best places in the country…

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions  

What is your take

on Cousins’ problems? Do these perceptions threaten your beliefs about his potential contributions as a player? Do you believe he has a better chance to be dominate than fail? Do you believe we will have the ability to get it together quickly enough to make this a reliable environment for an immature talent to grow?

Cus was a fit for Mike Tyson, because he could channel the young fighter’s talent to a very acute passage towards greatness. Demarcus is a similar force to a Tyson. I would pick him just because of the value he holds alone if he were to fall. I just want to know your honest opinion of him as a Warrior since you are a long time fan.

by lilboots on Jun 22, 2010 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions  

I honestly don’t know what to make of Cousins. I’m convinced a lot of his reputation is one of those things that was established years ago and just stuck with him – it doesn’t seem like there’s a whole lot of real evidence people can point to since he went to college of reasons to question his attitude. For me, the big thing would be – will he work hard to be a good player? Showing up as out of shape as he did at the combine wasn’t a good sign. Definitely makes me wary. I would put a lot of stock into what his teammates/coaches said about his work ethic, because ultimately, that will be the dominant factor that affects how he’ll turn out. I’d definitely pick him at #6, I don’t really like any of the other options, and even if it doesn’t work out….oh well, the chance it does work out is worth it. That’s a big payoff if it does.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions  

Absolutely right.

We are no better than Memphis in a lot of ways. But the important thing is, we will likely have more money to sign Gasol along with another good player. We also have a point guard who I think will make just a big of impact on the league next year as Paul and Deron Williams did in their respected uprising. This kind of notoriety in a young point guard works wonders for a basketball team. It will be interesting to see how merciful the new ownership will be towards evils past. I think most will be crucified and a general amnesty will be granted to those who remain. In other words, we have the momentum and a born leader along with great location.

by lilboots on Jun 22, 2010 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions  

They are shopping Mayo, they are "rumored" to be shopping Rudy Gay,

I wouldn’t put much stock in that rumor. Rudy Gay is a free agent.

by jae on Jun 22, 2010 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

I also think a player leans toward signing with their own team rather than going somewhere else.

and he might be looking forward to playin with Montay once the deal goes down?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 22, 2010 2:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

His roots

are still grounded far away, but I see your point. In any case my good man, money talks. If the team is really laboring to dump the likes of Andris and Corey, we should have a lot to show for it by the time Gasol is for sale. Add a cultured area such as the bay (in comparison to Memphis, respectively), and a point guard as good as Stephen, we may be a realistic forerunner in such a sweepstakes.

by lilboots on Jun 22, 2010 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions  

Is location really that important?

I could see the case being made if the bay was where he grew up, but how often do players actually pick a team based on it’s location. If you are rich, most places are actually quite nice. :-)

by AYEq on Jun 22, 2010 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think

it matters somewhat. It is where you will be living, right? A lot of people I know refuse to live anywhere cold or too hot, so that also is a big deal.

by lilboots on Jun 22, 2010 11:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

We are talking about Memphis here.

Chris Wallace isn’t the sharpest tool in the shed.

by Screwfish on Jun 22, 2010 3:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

I’m not a big fan of reading a lot into facial expressions. Maybe that’s just me…

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions  

Either way, it was a funny line.

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 11:10 AM PDT up reply actions  

He always has that dumb*ss matter-of-fact look on his face with his forehead all balled up, as if interviewers are annoyingly disrupting his genius. Everything is obvious to him, right?

 Larry Bird was no prize as a person but he played pretty good?
    You want game or make nice?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 22, 2010 2:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

hahahaha

Larry Bird was a god, and he backed that up. I’m talking about a 19 year old kid who has proved nothing and has not shown the kind of effort I’d hope to see towards diminishing the nasty reputation that’s been tagged on him. If anything, he’s fueled that fire.

by lilboots on Jun 22, 2010 11:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

Bad trade. Move Mags for a decent 3.

by J-RIDAH on Jun 22, 2010 9:20 AM PDT reply actions  

lol

easier said than done

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 9:29 AM PDT up reply actions  

Maggette is a decent three.

The Ultimate Opportunist

by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 22, 2010 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

yup

Any trade of Maggettee would be either (a) for an overpaid decent player or (b) a salary dump. That is about it.

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 9:42 AM PDT up reply actions  

I agree. Who are you gonna get for Maggette? You expected to get someone in return?

[Info on Randolph] Would have been valuable at this time... But our management failed.

by LarryLegendofOracle on Jun 22, 2010 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions  

I agree. I don't think Maggs has any value.

He’s a wing that plays iso every time he gets the ball. Plays absolutely no defense and is a perennial loser. No one is giving up value with his contract. Take the dump and move on. How is this trade not done yesterday?

"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."

by kenntoe on Jun 22, 2010 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions  

I mostly agree, just want to say I don’t think the “perennial loser” point is fair. Playing for the Warriors and Clippers will make anyone a “perennial loser”.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

I agree.

This team is a ways away from being good, and being a bad team with a lot of salary guarantees is not a good thing. Get rid of the contracts, build around Curry through the draft, and we will be able to have pay roll flexibility for new ownership.

by won't stop on Jun 22, 2010 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

No. He only played in 32 games that season. Their best players were Brand, Cassell, Mobley and Kaman.

by samuraaaaiiiiiii on Jun 22, 2010 2:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'd like Maggette if he at least tried a little bit on defense.

"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."

by kenntoe on Jun 22, 2010 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

This isn’t a bad trade. We get rid of a bad fit for two role players and a ton of cap. I say it may be the best we get.

[Info on Randolph] Would have been valuable at this time... But our management failed.

by LarryLegendofOracle on Jun 22, 2010 9:25 AM PDT reply actions  

Unfortunately...

I think it’s the price to pay to move Magg’s contract. Biendrins though loved by us GS fans, doesn’t hold much trade value after that bad season. I think he’s better than that, but if we can get Cousins or Monroe in the draft, Ronny can slide to the the starting spot w/ whatever rook filling that whole later.

by esco41510 on Jun 22, 2010 9:28 AM PDT reply actions  

No, he can't.
Ronny can slide to the the starting spot

Ronny should probably not even be seeing substantial minutes as a backup. He’s really not good.

by Ronaldinho on Jun 22, 2010 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions  

Neither was Beans last year...

though I do agree Beidrins is better. But both of them were hurt quite often last year, and aside from Ronny @ the 5, who do we plug in? Gadzuric? It’s say Ronny fits what we run better than he does.

I hope that would only be a temporary solution until which ever big we draft is up to speed.

by esco41510 on Jun 22, 2010 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions  

Biedrins was injured

for just about every minute of basketball he played last year. Ronny is a solid back up. He cannot start under any circumstance.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 2:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

He can start under the circumstance that all other centers and PF’s are injured in my opinion.

Warriors.

by jonathannn on Jun 22, 2010 3:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah

that would be okay. He’s an upgrade over guys like Chris Hunter, Mikki Moore. On other teams, guys like DJ Mbenga… you get the point.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 4:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ronny is a nice back up.

Solid defender and shot blocker, excellent teammate. Not a great rebounder, but that’s why he isn’t a starter.

by won't stop on Jun 22, 2010 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

Eh, I’m personally underwhelmed by his on ball defense, both in the post and out of the post. I guess he’s decent at the pick and roll for a C….

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ronny is not a quality backup

He’s an okay defender (who looks good only in comparison to Beidrins), bad scorer, bad rebounder. I agree with you about his quality as a teammate, his work ethic, and attitude. He’s excellent in those three areas. Unfortunately, they contribute only indirectly to winning.

He’s not a “nice backup” if by “nice backup” you mean someone who deserves 20+ minutes a game.

An NBA team really needs three guys who can play major minutes at the two big positions – and Turiaf is not good enough to be one of those three guys. He may be a reasonable 4th big man (eg, someone who only plays more than 5 minutes when there’s an injury or the guys ahead of him are in foul trouble.)

If he’s your third big, you’re in trouble.

by Ronaldinho on Jun 22, 2010 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

Dan Gadzuric and Charlie Bell to Golden State Warriors for Corey Maggette ?

  WTF, could they at least offer a player someone has heard of?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 22, 2010 9:28 AM PDT reply actions  

How is that unreasonable?

there would only be $4 million of salary on the 2011/2012 season. Your shedding $6 million of salary that year and $10.9 million the next year

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 9:32 AM PDT up reply actions  

That's 10 million

In expiring contracts. Add in Radmonovic’s 7 million, and the Warriors have 17 million in expiring deals to take on a bigger salary in a trade. Keep in mind by the time the expiring will be used, a new owner will be in charge.

by BayLife5518 on Jun 22, 2010 10:43 AM PDT up reply actions  

that really sucks. If I’m giving up a produtive player like Maggette and getting 2 insignificant players back, they should expire this year, otherwise no deal.

by SuperStarAR on Jun 22, 2010 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

I was actually watching ESPN Classic

Charlie Bell was on Jason Richardson’s college team.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 2:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

Wait did you guys seriously not know who Charlie Bell was?

I thought everyone was joking. He was a pretty good college player back at Michigan St.

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 2:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

bad trade

Who takes Maggs’ place at SF? Morrow? Buike? Williams? Not a bad idea to have a backup guard, but this trade hurts the team overall.

by Evanz on Jun 22, 2010 9:31 AM PDT reply actions  

Morrow, Azubuike and Williams are backups at the wing spots. If one person starts, Radmanovic can be a backup small forward and won’t see that much time anyway if people are somewhat healthy.

The Ultimate Opportunist

by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 22, 2010 9:40 AM PDT up reply actions  

Do you think we’re a playoff contender next year? If not, than who cares, really? That’s a question we can address in the future.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 10:01 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

+1,

If Maggette gives us 4 more wins than Bell or DG…. it doesnt matter if we still win ~35 games or less. Dump Maggette without having to lose Azibuike, Wright, or Turiaf would be great.

Thing B

by warriorsscore110 on Jun 22, 2010 10:46 AM PDT up reply actions  

As much

as I hate to admit this, I don’t know how much we need Azubuike anymore with the addition of Reggie Williams. I only say this because it’s impossible to evaluate Kelenna accurately given the potency of his injury. He looked fat. If he were to come to training camp and play the way he did at the beginning of last season or even better, I’d reconsider. I doubt this will be the scenario. I love Kelenna’s game, and ordinarily it would be a harder judgment to weigh out which is the better man between he and Williams. But that was a big time injury, and 6-5 is already pushing it for a small forward, where I think the majority of his minutes would have to be distributed.

by lilboots on Jun 22, 2010 10:56 AM PDT up reply actions  

Personally I don't think Azu or WIlliams are the "answer"

They’re nice depth and role players that deserve minutes, that’s for sure. We still don’t have a starter at the SF position though.

"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."

by kenntoe on Jun 22, 2010 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions  

I agree

I guess I’m trying to say that Williams is a better candidate at the shooting guard as of now, and in a retrospective glance, I would rather have a starting SF over 6-5. This sets an expendable tone for the recovering Azu. I was sort of responding to the notion that Azubuike is still a key piece to this team, when I believe he is not. I hear Memphis is shopping Rudy Gay. Do you see any Scenario in which we could move Ellis to attain him, while Mayo be moved elsewhere to satisfy another position?

by lilboots on Jun 22, 2010 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions  

I doubt the Warriors make a big move like that.

"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."

by kenntoe on Jun 22, 2010 2:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

Buike has better size than Williams

I like him as a small forward, whereas Reggie at the SF makes me cringe a little.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

I’m not sure which of them has better overall size – Buike is probably taller, but Williams is really, really long. Either way, I prefer both of them to be the smaller wing on the court…..

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

Williams is listed an inch taller than Buike.

by samuraaaaiiiiiii on Jun 22, 2010 2:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

Oops..

Meant they have Buike listed heavier. 220 to Reggie’s 210

by esco41510 on Jun 22, 2010 3:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

Williams is just over 6'3"

barefoot. He’s 6’4" in shoes. He’s long, though.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Williams is listed at a way taller height than he actually is.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

Either way, I prefer both of them to be the smaller wing on the court

Agree

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Tough

I wouldn’t trade Maggette. He’s the toughest player on the Warriors. When the team’s outside shooting gets cold, Maggette will go inside and make something happen. I think he is a good influence in the locker room. His salary may be high but I wouldn’t be too quick to pull the triger on a trade until we see what the returning long bodies will do.

by John Will on Jun 22, 2010 9:43 AM PDT reply actions  

Toughest player?

He misses games for every little nick and bruise he gets

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 2:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

I wouldn’t trade Maggette. He’s the toughest player on the Warriors

and Mr. automatic on the drives, the man either scores or goes to the freethrow line. What we gonna do that’s any good with another no name center and backup point anyway?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 22, 2010 9:48 AM PDT reply actions  

Bell is a sg/sf defensive specialist

I agree it’d suck to lose another driver but with a healthy Buike and Monta and possibly an inside player like Cuz we should be fine

When I get older, I will be stronger.
They’ll call me freedom, just like a Waving Flag

by dubzfan on Jun 22, 2010 9:56 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

Bell isn’t a great defender. But like most guards in the league he’s an upgrade over Monta on the defensive end for sure.

[Info on Randolph] Would have been valuable at this time... But our management failed.

by LarryLegendofOracle on Jun 22, 2010 10:01 AM PDT up reply actions  

He's Acie Law

a small forward in a point guards body

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 2:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

What we gonna do that’s any good with another no name center and backup point anyway?

Is that a joke. With all that cap we can sign an FA. We’ve been very limited to make financial moves to go out and get a player because of all these stupid shawty contracts.

[Info on Randolph] Would have been valuable at this time... But our management failed.

by LarryLegendofOracle on Jun 22, 2010 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

With all that cap we can sign an FA.

 Haha Magette was a free agent and they signed him. That’s what you’ll get for the money.
    Getting #1 draft picks is the smart way to build a team so I guess if this trade helps us lose more games in that respect it might pay off?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 22, 2010 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions  

Just understand that this is a trade that makes us substantially worse in the short run -

- even if you don’t include Beidrins.

My take: I’d do the trade if it didn’t involve Beidrins, would not do it if it did. But Gadzuric is worse than Turiaf (and that’s saying something), and Bell is also downright bad by NBA standards.

But if the new ownership wants some salary flexibility, this would be a great way to go about it. It’d clear the Corey signing off the books with minimal damage. UNLESS you include Beans.

by Ronaldinho on Jun 22, 2010 10:04 AM PDT reply actions  

The funny thing is though I was thinking the exact opposite

I think I would want it done if it did somehow include Biedrins. Hey if you are going to pull a salary dump and make the team substantially wore in the short run, heck you might as well go all the way.

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions  

Maggette as a salary dump makes sense. Biedrins as a salary dump makes no sense. He’s young, he’s part of the future (unless we find a true impact C, which would be awesome, but unlikely), and he’s affordable. $9M fixed contract for a productive big man is not an overpay. Big men cost money.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions  

It's not a knock on Biedrins

If they team wants to go into a different direction and have more flexibility they are going to have to do something about the team salary. If they can find ways to move the salary of Ellis, Biederins, and Maggette they will have a ton of flexibility. Moving just Maggette’s salary just doesn’t do a whole heck of a lot.

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions  

I guess I see the point of a salary dump as getting people off the payroll who aren’t part of the future. Maggette isn’t part of the future. Depending on how overpaid you think Monta is, maybe he isn’t a good piece for the future, either (but maybe he is). I don’t see the case that Biedrins isn’t a good piece for the future, though…..losing talent for financial flexibility is bad if you can’t replace that talent….

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions  

I think the Biedrins dump is just a rumor and suspicion of Cohans next move. Its not part of the trade.

[Info on Randolph] Would have been valuable at this time... But our management failed.

by LarryLegendofOracle on Jun 22, 2010 10:32 AM PDT up reply actions  

yeah I don't see how Biedrins would fit in such a deal

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 10:40 AM PDT up reply actions  

we'd have to take back

Michael Redd or some crap to get rid of Biedrins. Not worth it. Biedrins is young and productive.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 2:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don't understand that logic

For the things Beidrins does well when healthy, he’s a reasonably-paid player.

(Obviously, this last year, he sucked – but he was injured the whole time, too. I’m assuming he’ll be healthy this year).

You don’t dump reasonably-paid productive players. You dump overpaid guys. Beans isn’t overpaid, assuming he regains his health.

by Ronaldinho on Jun 22, 2010 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

But if the new ownership wants some salary flexibility

  I thought the point of Ellison was he’s got the cash to go over the cap and laugh at it?
    If he’s another penny pinchin Cohan why care if we get a new owner or not?
      I hear they are floating the yuan so maybe that Chinese bid is worth more now?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 22, 2010 10:14 AM PDT reply actions  

Yes and no.

To get elite players you need to be UNDER the cap. If Ellison thinks he can bring in a free agent, the type who want no part of GSW because of Cohan, the team needs to be under cap.

It’s also been said, franchise has most value with least amount of money on books, 1) for business reasons. 2) Because then new ownership has a clean slate to do what they want. Kind of like New Jersey?

by tafkasam on Jun 22, 2010 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions  

But it's not enough to be under the cap ...

Since it’s impossible to overpay the top players (they’re worth more than the max contract) you have to create a situation where they feel they can come in and be successful. They have to WANT to play here.

And those guys don’t just decide based on the owner and the coach. They decide based on the players – is there a foundation in place for them to come in and win?

So when making salary moves, you need to be cognizant of that foundation.

Corey Maggette isn’t part of the foundation that will attract a superstar. Beidrins, on the other hand, might be. He rebounds well, he finishes well, he cleans up other guy’s defensive mistakes. He makes wing players look better. Trading Beidrins without getting something worthwhile back in return, therefore, makes us a LESS appealing destination for a top free agent.

There’s no such hidden cost to trading Mags.

by Ronaldinho on Jun 22, 2010 5:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Here's what the NBA needs to do

Approve the deal to Ellison’s group

Then Mr. Ellison and the Warriors can make an offer to Lebron James. I guess one can only dream right?

by Rocky632156 on Jun 22, 2010 10:21 AM PDT up reply actions  

So we’re going to offer Lebron the MLE….?

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 10:28 AM PDT up reply actions  

Nah

We got a business man in Ellison. I think he could talk some of those contracts and rework them. Specifically Maggette’s and Biedrins.

by Rocky632156 on Jun 22, 2010 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions  

I do and you should know

If the Warriors are under the salary cap they can rework any player contract.

by Rocky632156 on Jun 22, 2010 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions  

You are correct, however, there are huge limits on what can be done. I don’t see how this could make your proposal make sense at all. First, if we trade guys with big salaries, it will be for expiring contracts, so we’ll still be over the cap this season, meaning we can’t go after Lebron. We won’t have the cap space until next year. Second, the player has to agree to any renegotiated payment. Third, the contract cannot be renegotiated downward. Fourth, any renegotiation can’t take you over the salary cap. Just not sure how this is going to work to the Warriors advantage?

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

Exactly

The salary cap is soft, and there is wiggle room with contracts but there are enough limitations in the rules that it doesn’t matter how much money the owner is willing to spend the Warrior’s are not in position to improve through spending this off-season. Any plan for Ellison or some other ownership group to ride in and start splashing cash around to improve the Warrior’s this year is seriously misplaced.

I’m as excited as anyone to get Cohan out, but the Warrior’s are pretty hamstrung in what they are able to do this off-season, no need to indulge in fairytales.

by OkayJay81 on Jun 22, 2010 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

This is not true at all
If the Warriors are under the salary cap they can rework any player contract.

Here is Coon’s FAQ:

A contract for four or more seasons can be renegotiated after the third anniversary of its signing, extension, or renegotiation that increased any season’s salary by more than 8%. Contracts for fewer than four seasons cannot be renegotiated. A contract cannot be renegotiated between March 1 and June 30 of any year. Only teams under the cap can renegotiate a contract, and the salary in the then-current season can be increased only to the extent that the team has room under the cap. Raises in subsequent years are limited to 10.5% of the salary in the first renegotiated season. The renegotiation may not contain a signing bonus. Contracts cannot be renegotiated downward (players can’t take a “pay cut” in order to create salary cap room for the team) or to contain fewer seasons.

Again, a team over the salary cap cannot renegotiate a contract. An interesting case of this was Shawn Kemp with the Sonics. Kemp, who was unhappy with his contract and wanted to renegotiate, could not get a larger contract from the Sonics because they were over the cap. Kemp forced a trade to Cleveland, who was far enough under the cap at the time to give him the large contract he wanted. Kemp’s contract was renegotiated soon after the trade.

You can’t do this because most of the contracts the Dubs aren’t that long. The one’s that are require a player to get MORE money in a renegotiation not less. The NBA is not the NFL where you can rework a players contract to get more players.

EvilCowtownInc: Screwin Suckaz over since 1985......

Maybe we should adjust our stats to per36 years of age? -- ElRonToro

No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Jun 22, 2010 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

Link

EvilCowtownInc: Screwin Suckaz over since 1985......

Maybe we should adjust our stats to per36 years of age? -- ElRonToro

No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Jun 22, 2010 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

LOL

I’m sure there is nothing in the Collective Bargaining Agreement against that.

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 10:59 AM PDT up reply actions  

There are two ways you can look at having less money on the books

1. Sign big free agents.
2. Have the space to take on other team’s salary problems but also get draft picks for wasting your time. I’m thinking about stuff like the Kurt Thomas for draft picks trades.

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 10:31 AM PDT up reply actions  

3 ways – resigning your own players (mostly a luxury tax consideration).

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 10:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

Warriors don't have a trade exception that big to accomplish it.

And they are over the cap as of the moment.

EvilCowtownInc: Screwin Suckaz over since 1985......

Maybe we should adjust our stats to per36 years of age? -- ElRonToro

No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Jun 22, 2010 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

THis is a financial decision. Like Wally says, it’s really up to the owner and his staff.

[Info on Randolph] Would have been valuable at this time... But our management failed.

by LarryLegendofOracle on Jun 22, 2010 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions  

and they can't force other teams to do sign and trades if they don't want to

being a rich owner has it’s advantages but you have to actually use those advantages. Having money to burn I don’t think gets you very far. Where the cash helps though is for buying draft picks, hiring a stat crew who knows what they are doing, hiring a good coaching staff, using cap space as an asset in other ways than just throwing long term money at players, etc.

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 10:43 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yep, money is great, but you have to acquire the talent first. The biggest hep having a financial advantage gives you is to resign your own guys.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions  

This isn't baseball

you can’t go offering players huge contracts if you’re over the cap. There is a handy salary cap rules FAQ on the internet. I recommend that you read it a little.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

Warriors only make a trade with Biedrins if they get Cousins

But, why would Milwaukee want him? They gave Bogut a big contract. I’m calling no dice

As for Maggette, hasn’t Indiana and Houston sniffed around repeatedly. I heard Morey say directly, they are looking for players who can get to the line. As he put it, that’s where there team is most dangerous with Yao. What would Houston give us? Not much i imagine

by tafkasam on Jun 22, 2010 10:16 AM PDT reply actions  

Gettin Bell and Gadzuric

For Maggette doesn’t make any sense at all. If the Warriors are bought by Ellison I don’t think he’ll mind spending the money on players to improve the team and taking on salary as well.

The Warriors should hang on to Biedrins and even if the magically draft Cousins it doesn’t make sense to trade Biedrins because Cousins is not a center!

by Rocky632156 on Jun 22, 2010 10:20 AM PDT reply actions  

Cousins is not a center!

Oy. Always the wrong answer!

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 22, 2010 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

You can't take on salary without cap space.

As long as guys like Maggette are under contract, we won’t be able to go after any stars. We have over 50 mil on the books next year; no room to add anything.

by won't stop on Jun 22, 2010 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

What is Cousins if not a center?

He’s too fat and slow to play PF. He’s HUGE.
I mean, are you kidding? That’s outrageous.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 2:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

At the same time

Turiaf will see a lot of time. Perhaps a 5th big will come in a trade of Biedrins. I’d want to trade Biedrins if we were lucky enough to get Cousins. We need to give him playing time to develop. Playing Biedrins 20 mins, Turiaf 15, and Cousins 13 mins makes no sense. And will only devalue Biedrins.

by tafkasam on Jun 22, 2010 10:40 AM PDT up reply actions  

I’m not worried about too little PT for our big men, personally. I also like the idea of Cousins playing with Biedrins at times.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions  

I suppose there are worse things

I will make it clear though, I have NO interest in dumping any of our bigs if we don’t draft a big. Even then I’d rather use a big (Biedrins in this case) to get a good perimeter defender, but only if we do draft a big (Cousins).

Can we just find the new Bruce Bowen?

by tafkasam on Jun 22, 2010 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions  

I would trade him but i would miss Maggette's professionalism.

If thats a word

"Momma, there goes that man!" - Marc Jackson

by thecity23 on Jun 22, 2010 10:38 AM PDT reply actions  

I'd probably do it.

But I kinda want the Warriors to hold onto him for a bit longer before trading him because I think maybe some teams with cap room who miss out on the big free agents might want him and could make a better offer, this is probably just wishful thinking though.

by freddyb on Jun 22, 2010 10:40 AM PDT reply actions  

Yes

Getting Maggette off the roster and off the books is a priority. More than trying to trade Monta or anyone else. Maggette’s a great guy, but a poor fit for this team. Maggette’s starter spot at 3 is in need of a defensive-minded, play-making SF. Let’s free that spot up, even if we don’t get that player right away. Let’s free up the books to give the new ownership more flexibility (and perhaps entice potential buyers for a quicker purchase).

A couple role players on their last year of their contract…that’s perfect. There’s no obligation to play them and they will be playing hard for their next contract while being good teammates.

This is a good trade RUMOR.

Confident Marco Belinelli supporter

by Doctor Kajita on Jun 22, 2010 10:41 AM PDT reply actions  

defensive-minded, play-making SF.

What the Warriors need is a defensive-minded, playmaking PG.
What the Warriors need is a defensive-minded, playmaking SG.
What the Warriors need is a defensive-minded, playmaking SF.
What the Warriors need is a defensive-minded, playmaking PF.
What the Warriors need is a defensive-minded, playmaking C.
What the Warriors need is a defensive-minded, playmaking coach.

You’re just asking for the perfect player. If only we had somebody who was really, really, really good at offense and defense. That’d be the bees knees.

Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.

-randolphforpresident

by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 22, 2010 10:45 AM PDT up reply actions  

You’re just asking for the perfect player. If only we had somebody who was really, really, really good at offense and defense. That’d be the bees knees.

I don’t think it’s asking too much. Actually, Raja Bell fits this description perfectly. But he’s not a perfect player by any means. Passing the ball doesn’t require super athletic ability. It just requires you to understand the game. Maggette does not as far as I’m concerned.

Confident Marco Belinelli supporter

by Doctor Kajita on Jun 22, 2010 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions  

Perhaps I should have worded it differently. A SF that plays defense and passes the ball on offense.

Confident Marco Belinelli supporter

by Doctor Kajita on Jun 22, 2010 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions  

I like that.

I’ll settle for the new Bruce Bowen . Just give me a defensive wing with no real interest in offense except hitting corner 3s at a high percentage. Warriors don’t NEED offense.

by tafkasam on Jun 22, 2010 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions  

OK

Maggette = ~$10M

Gadzuric + Bell = ~$12M

Biedrins = $9M

The trade is Maggette for Gadz + Bell. The trade cannot include Biedrins because the money doesn’t work. Mentioning Biedrins is only a reference to Adam Lauridsen’s assertion that Biedrins could potentially be moved next. Reading comprehension, people.

Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.

-randolphforpresident

by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 22, 2010 10:42 AM PDT reply actions  

Yeah I don't know how Biedrins got thrown into this

my only guess is it would be Biedrins and Vlad for Redd thrown in? Just a guess but probably not worth speculating over.

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions  

Ugh

Don’t need Redd. I don’t think anybody in the NBA does… maybe the Celtics. Flip Jesus for Redd?

Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.

-randolphforpresident

by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 22, 2010 10:46 AM PDT up reply actions  

Maggette = ~$10M Gadzuric + Bell = ~$12M

so we’d spend more on two players we don’t need than on the one that we can use to foul out the other teams? That makes us better how??

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 22, 2010 3:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

It doesn’t make us better. But in a year, Some of that salary goes away. It’s a move about longer term financial realities, not about short term on court performance.

by jae on Jun 22, 2010 4:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

That's too short-sighted

The real number is Maggette= ~ $31M, Gadzuric + Bell = ~ $15M

It makes us better by creating flexibility to build a team around Stephen Curry.

by OkayJay81 on Jun 22, 2010 4:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

Salary dump and financial flexibilty

Being a die hard Warriors fan the past 16 years, I’m trying to think of the best player we got out of free agency. All I could come up with is Maggette. The truth is no one great has ever signed with us via free agency. So I think financial flexibility and getting under the cap to sign a “supa-sta” is worthless for our team.

by masterpeej on Jun 22, 2010 10:47 AM PDT via mobile reply actions  

If we draft Wes Johnson, I'm all for this trade!!!!!!

If we don’t, I don’t really care. I love Corey for what he does, as the 6th man, he is a BEAST. However his contract isn’t 6th man worthy, unless Corey was a multi-fasceted 6th man, a-la Manu, but he’s not.

Buike backed up by Bell Reggie and Morrow isn’t too bad. Gadzuric only plays if someone is injured, so I guess I would be down regardless for the contract dump.

Save that money to lockup Steph AR and BWright!

by myk on Jun 22, 2010 11:00 AM PDT reply actions  

Buike is a big ?

After 2 knee surgeries last season, is he still as effective? Plus Gadzuric could be traded later in the season for someone else who needs to dump salary and we can pick up someone else. And we have radman’s expiring contract.

by mosdl on Jun 22, 2010 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions  

One of those knee surgeries

was less than nothing.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

Buike backed up by Bell Reggie and Morrow isn’t too bad.

 Haha, that’s like a injury recovering D leaguer backed up by a hurt old guy and another D leaguer and a guy who was undrafted? Yeah that’s not too bad.

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 22, 2010 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

DO IT!

Like I said in the original fan post do this trade with the intention of locking up Azubuike and Williams next season (both FA next season) when Gadruzic comes off the books and maybe this gives the more wiggle room for Morrow.

Maggette became bearable last season but I’d rather have Azubukie and/or Reggie Williams for the price of Magette next year. Both players are younger and play better defense than Maggs.

Check out Goallineblitz - Free Football MMORPG
Build players, Build teams, watch games...

http://goallineblitz.com/game/signup.pl?ref=4892220

by FLAxwless on Jun 22, 2010 11:02 AM PDT reply actions  

I would take the deal

Maggette played well last year but as a 3 who doesn’t defend all that well and can’t play without the ball he isn’t really a good fit for the team over the next 3 years.

Also, I would just take the part about making a basketball trade out of the poll. I think the evidence from the last few years makes a pretty convincing case that basketball trades don’t happen anymore. Teams trade contracts now rather than players, and for as good as Maggette was last year he is still a bad contract. The Warrior’s only have three options with him, trade him for expirings, trade him for another bad contract, or keep him and let him keep competing with Curry, and Ellis for possessions on the offensive end.

Considering he is going to be 31 this year, has battled injuries through out his career, and his value rests almost entirely in his ability to bully his way to the basket, you have to be concerned that some time soon his body won’t be able to handle the pounding of constantly driving the lane. If he has to start relying on his outside game he becomes virtually worthless.

by OkayJay81 on Jun 22, 2010 11:04 AM PDT reply actions  

I want to remind everyone of one thing...

Salary dumps are a part of the process in remolding a winning franchise, but this organization needs to realize that until we can put together a winning season, with talent, chemistry and finally some respect from the league (A lot of that has to do w/ the FO), we’ll be relegated to signing OVER priced FA’s like we had to do w/ Maggette to get him here in the first place. Until that happens, we can keep day dreaming all we want about the Elite tier players like Bosh, LBJ, Melo, but they won’t think twice about coming here.

Whether they make this move or not, it won’t matter a lick until we can start winning games.

by esco41510 on Jun 22, 2010 11:22 AM PDT reply actions  

Good Point

I actually think Maggette really improved as a TEAM player for the W’s this season, but I think his best value to the team is as a salary dump.

Maggette should be the 4th or 5th best player on a team. Right now he’s 2 or 3 on the W’s. And that’s not good enough for a playoff push.

Dumping his salary will give the W’s a chance the following year to push the reset button on FA signing and do something (hopefully) more effective than the Maggette signing.

For the Bucks, this is a sensational deal.

With 1 more season of Curry, and whatever the W’s get for Monta (I still think he’s going this offseason), hopefully the W’s can be a positive destination for FA’s to want to sign and we don’t continue overpaying for FA’s.

by joegiant on Jun 22, 2010 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions  

Does anybody

think Maggette would do well in Chicago? I could see Rose, Bosh, and Maggette working very well together, as well as Hinrich in Golden State. Of course I have no idea how Chicago would react to this, I just want to hear others’ opinions.

by lilboots on Jun 22, 2010 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions  

Combining Corey with a PG and PF without range would be a disaster

Teams could just clog the lane in half-court and no one would be able to make them pay

by dprodigy19 on Jun 22, 2010 3:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

Good point

the Bulls desperately need some three point shooting. They should try to trade up for Xavier Henry, or hope he falls.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

This is a horrible trade

I never even heard of these scrubs. I know Biedrins had a bad year, but Maggette is a player that we want to keep. He’s our 6th man the brings in a bunch of offense when we need it.

Let’s honor our contracts for a change. Dumping them for scrubs doesn’t make any sense at all.

by brewitt on Jun 22, 2010 11:47 AM PDT reply actions  

Maggette is a player that we want to keep

Many of us disagree with this. This trade might make sense if you don’t think Maggette is a player we want to keep.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

Who’s going to be the 6th man then? Reggie Williams?? Buke?

by brewitt on Jun 22, 2010 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

Sure. Morrow, too. To be honest, I don’t really care all that much. We aren’t a playoff team at the moment, so short term benefits don’t mean very much at all. We need to be making moves to build the best team in the long run as possible. In my mind, that involves dumping Maggette.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

I understand dumping the salaries in a calculated move in order to obtain a free agent or make a trade for a player that we can pay because we’d have cap room. If that is on the horizon, then I say yes make the move. I don’t know if that’s your point? With the upcoming sale, I don’t know if anything like this will even be contemplated. Knowing this we don’t make the deal just for the sake of making it and then clean up the pieces later.

by brewitt on Jun 22, 2010 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

It’s financial flexibility in general. Being farther under the luxury tax is good – gives you more room to resign your own guys. Also, it’s not just about this year – it’s about the next two years after that when Maggette is going to be making $10 and $11M. Do you really think he’s going to be worth that?

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

Maggette is going to be making $10 and $11M. Do you really think he’s going to be worth that?

No. Absolutely not. I just don’t want to give him up yet unless we have some kind of plan laid out first.

by brewitt on Jun 22, 2010 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think his value is peaking right now after the year he just had, wings are easy enough to find, and who knows if anything will be available to us later, so that’s why I’d lean towards just dumping him. I want out of his salary. I believe we’d actually be in a good salary cap position next offseason if we could dump his contract for mostly expirings.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Lots of people have read the title wrong

Biedrins is not being considered in this deal at all. The question of whether or not Biedrins is next on the trading block is completely separate.

The trade is Gadzuric and Bell for Maggette + filler (not Biedrins). Beans makes way too much money to be paired with Maggette in this trade.

I would like this trade a lot more if it was for Gadzuric and some player that they sign and trade for one year just to make the deal work.

by samuraaaaiiiiiii on Jun 22, 2010 11:50 AM PDT reply actions  

right

it’s pretty funny actually

by Evanz on Jun 22, 2010 11:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

The title should be fixed

It’s a little misleading the way it is written.

by brewitt on Jun 22, 2010 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

I completely agree...

The one good thing we have to look forward to, is that even with a team of of D-Leaguers, we play a fun entertaining style of ball. And with a healthy team, we could surprise a few teams steal a few wins. But your def on point that barring a miracle, it’ll be another tough season to watch.

by esco41510 on Jun 22, 2010 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

Agreed

I would really not be shocked if there is a complete roster shake up over the next year or two.

Please note the 11 next to my name. All others are frauds.

by wallywagon11 on Jun 22, 2010 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

This post should have been rec’d at least 10 times by now.

by jae on Jun 22, 2010 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 22, 2010 4:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

"Stephen Curry and a clean slate" sounds good to me (well, "and Randolph" too)

I agree that we’d be a worse team next year without Maggette and Beans. And that would be a good thing. As far as I’m concerned, there are pretty much two things you want to be in the NBA: a really good team or a really bad team. You pretty much are not going to become the former without a stretch as the latter (see: OKC). I don’t want to rehash the tired “should we tank?” argument, which comes around every spring as predictably as the buds on the cherry trees. Those fans who agree with the great visionary championship builder Garry St. Jean (“you don’t learn to win by losing”) are free to throw in their lot with Maggs, Beans, Monta and all those other expensive, kind-of-good guys and settle in for even more of our interminable 35-win seasons. But I would actually feel much happier if we just cleared out everyone aside from Steph, Randolph (who is a gamble for sure, but one I’m still 100 percent willing to take), and maybe some of our other cheap guys with potential. I don’t care if it’s a “garage sale” or a “garbage” sale. Let’s just clear it out. We might end up like New Jersey, you say? I say “awesome.”

by BlueInTheFace on Jun 22, 2010 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Yep

I pretty much agree with everything you say. I’m not going to get excited about a bunch of salary dumps though. I’m kind of in a “wake me up when we get good” kind of mode right now. I do actually think it will be worth it in the long run, but I don’t want to force myself to pretend to enjoy another season like last season. It was almost unwatchable.

So yeah, Cohan, please strip the team down to the studs and let the new owner rebuild. Let me know when the remodel is done so I can move back in.

Golden State Warriors '10-'11 Season: The Return of ^^^^

by olympicmike on Jun 22, 2010 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

It will be worth it, right?

 hell yeah, the west just won the rings so everything is right with the world.
  I can take another year of D leaguers and injuries for the glory of the cap space.
    say “Queensbridge”

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 22, 2010 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

Two points:

First of all, it’s bizzare that current ownership would hold a fire sale, seeing as that they’re not paying out that money.

I mean maybe they can bump up their sale price a little by cutting liabilities, but there’s got to a limit to how much that works. Therefore, I doubt many debatable moves would be made without the tacit consent of the incoming ownership group unless Cohan was in f-u mode.

Secondly, for all the talk of us having “only $34.6m” committed for ‘11-12 (which is true) it’s also important to recognize that number is one of the higher ones in the league – and that is the relevant comparison, not comparing it to the current salary cap.

The teams which have more money than that committed fall into four categories:

1) Current championship contenders (Lakers, Celts, Cavs, Orlando) who overspent to make a run at a title.
2) Recent championship contenders still paying for it. (Spurs)
3) Bad teams which are totally hosed and are in shed salary mode (New Orleans, Toronto, Detroit, Philly) and have no clear path to improvement.
4) Scrappy bottom-tier playoff teams which don’t seem like they’re going to be contenders anytime soon (Charlotte, Denver.)

That’s it. Basically, if you’re one of those teams and you haven’t been playing for the title in the last couple of years, you are in a bad, bad spot going forward. You do not want to be in categories 3 or 4.

by Ronaldinho on Jun 22, 2010 5:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

This is why no one wants to come to the Warriors

Because we keep getting rid of our good players for trash. Maggette may not be a great player but he is a good player. In case anyone hasn’t noticed over the last decade we can’t attract great FA’s anyways. Again, no one wants to come to a losing team and play with a bunch of trash.

Now, Cohan probably won’t make this move without the new owners approval. He can’t get approval until he has someone in contract so. It’s interesting but irrelevant at this point. It doesn’t save Cohan any money so why would he green light the project on his own?

by Balance on Jun 22, 2010 12:46 PM PDT reply actions  

i completely agree

this is why nobody wants to come here. but i disagree when you said cohan needs the new owners approval because he just traded our early second round pick for a late second round pick and a million dollars in his pocket.

by mekanikal on Jun 22, 2010 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think the fact that we have Maggette may deter many players from wanting to be here.

Confident Marco Belinelli supporter

by Doctor Kajita on Jun 22, 2010 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

Magette is a good player BUT....

he doesn’t fit into our team next to Curry.

Maggette needs the ball in his hands to be effective, which means Curry plays off the ball more. Now that would be a good thing if Maggette knew how to find the open man instead of bulling his way into the lane, but more times then not when Maggs gets the ball he’s looking to score.

Ellis for all his warts has already shown to be an effective player off the ball w/ BD so if Ellis choose he fits in offensively with Curry.

Williams, Buike, Morrow are all effective playing off the ball and don’t demand a lot of possessions to be effective.

Biedrins and Turiaf are decent PnR options and again neither demand touches on offense to be effective.

Then we have the 4 spot where Wright, Randolph, and Monroe/Cousins need to step up.

So yes Maggs is a good player, but he’s a good OLD, EXPENSIVE, and ILL FITTING player.

Check out Goallineblitz - Free Football MMORPG
Build players, Build teams, watch games...

http://goallineblitz.com/game/signup.pl?ref=4892220

by FLAxwless on Jun 22, 2010 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

True, and in addition to that, I think simply based on age Maggette doesn’t fit. He’s turning 31 this year, his contract is only getting more expensive, and he’s likely to get worse. By the time we’re good, he’s going to be worse and more overpaid. Not a good fit for the long term direction of this franchise.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don't know about that

It seems to me that the reason the Warriors can’t attract great FA’s is because they never have any cap room because all their money is tied up in average players like Maggette. I can’t remember the last time the Warrior’s have had any serious cap space going into an off-season. If you can come up with any examples of times the Warrior’s had money to sign a great FA but got turned down I would be interested to see it.

I always felt like the Warrior’s would continually tread water just under the cap with players like Troy Murphy, Derek Fisher, Erik Dampier, Stephen Jackson, Corey Maggette, and Andris Biedrins eating up all the cap space while providing performances that ranged from mediocre to pretty good. I think you have it backwards, it’s continuing to hold on to decent players like Maggette with bloated contracts that prevents the Warrior’s from making any big signings in free agency. They’ve never been willing to make the moves to create serious cap space.

by OkayJay81 on Jun 22, 2010 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

I can’t remember the last time the Warrior’s have had any serious cap space going into an off-season.

It was when they signed Corey Maggette.

by jae on Jun 22, 2010 1:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well, yea

That’s the only time I can think of but they weren’t planning to have cap space that off-season and were caught by surprise when Davis opted out. Then they panicked in a weak free agent year and threw all their money at the first free agent they could get their hands on. It wasn’t like they couldn’t convince better players to come to Oakland.

by OkayJay81 on Jun 22, 2010 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well, we did fail at convincing Arenas and Brand to come before Maggette….but in hindsight, that was a very, very good thing….

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 1:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

Then they panicked in a weak free agent year and threw all their money at the first free agent they could get their hands on.

Not all their money. They actually structured the deal in concert with the offer for Turiaf that LA would have a tough time matching without huge lux tax implications.

by jae on Jun 22, 2010 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

Now, Cohan probably won’t make this move without the new owners approval.

Importantly, there’s not a new owner yet to green light things, but in the past, new owners have tended to see purchases with fewer long term contract obligations as being more enticing than otherwise. It allows for more rapid rebuilding and thus makes the package more enticing to bidders.

The generalizations like “over the last decade we haven’t…” aren’t worth discussing in the context of a new owner. The hope is that the new owner can make this a more attractive destination for free agents, can hire a GM who can use assets wisely, can avoid all of the mistakes for which Cohan has been criticized. The reactionary position that because something didn’t work under Cohan it will never work is flawed thinking.

And if the absence of Corey Maggette makes a bidder think twice about acquiring the team, that’s an owner whose general sense of priorities is so out of line that I’d rather not have him controlling the team.

by jae on Jun 22, 2010 1:22 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Key (and scary) factor
Importantly, there’s not a new owner yet to green light things, but in the past, new owners have tended to see purchases with fewer long term contract obligations as being more enticing than otherwise.

New Jersey is an example of this. In no other way would a team who had as awful a year as them be enticing to free agents (and we’ll see ultimately how enticing) except now it’s known, new ownership who wants to win, will spend big (supposedly), and the stigma or losing team is in a sense gone.

For a new owner with large ambitions (which is what we’re all hoping for as Warriors fans), a team 20 or more million below the cap, with freedom to bring in there players is a lot more enticing then being hamstrung to a flawed roster that won’t make the playoffs

by tafkasam on Jun 22, 2010 4:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

Dump Magg’s contract, then trade Monta (yes I said trade Monta Ellis).

by DubsFan408 on Jun 22, 2010 12:49 PM PDT reply actions  

News Flash!

The Nets are looking at DeMarcus at #3!

Happy Days are here again! Wildcat's have #1 recruiting class again!

by oldcat70 on Jun 22, 2010 1:18 PM PDT reply actions  

Sorry about

a link. It was in a AP story in our local paper this morning.

Happy Days are here again! Wildcat's have #1 recruiting class again!

by oldcat70 on Jun 22, 2010 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

The Nets are looking at DeMarcus at #3!

  He should go at #2 right behind JohnWall

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 22, 2010 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

We need a long-term PLAN to entice Curry to stay.

Yes, we should dump Maggette, who I like a lot, and other pieces who aren’t building blocks in order to free up space and stock-pile first rounders, BUT THERE IS A MUCH BETTER TRADE TO MAKE…

I would MUCH RATHER see us trade Maggette, who is a very nice player, to San Antonio for Richard Jefferson, which will free up 15 MILLION in salary, helping to ease the long-term burden of Ellis’ contract. RJ will fit in better next year for Nelson, and is worth it just for the cap space, even if we have to give up other nice players such as Turiaf, Azubuike or whoever. We’d still have depth at SF, and we might be able to get back SA’s first rounder this year or next.
We need a plan to build around and retain Curry!

Thoughts?
I’d be especially glad to read Atma Brother ONE speculate on this.

by asstman on Jun 22, 2010 1:25 PM PDT reply actions  

A variation of this trade is already being discussed on this board.

Of course, the variation involves our tossing in our #6 pick, which makes it pretty distasteful from the Ws’ perspective, imo. I like your version much better. Not sure how wild the Spurs would be about it, alas.

I’d be especially glad to read Atma Brother ONE speculate on this.

Haha. Who doesn’t enjoy reading AB1 speculate? Even more than that, I enjoy reading him postulate, hypothesize, conjecture, and muse. ;-)

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 22, 2010 1:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

I would MUCH RATHER see us trade Maggette, who is a very nice player, to San Antonio for Richard Jefferson, which will free up 15 MILLION in salary

What you’d rather see isn’t as relevant as what another team would actually be willing to do.

by jae on Jun 22, 2010 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

IT JUST HAPPENED!!!!!

Report on KNBR - Trade just happened as cited above.

by joegiant on Jun 22, 2010 2:28 PM PDT reply actions  

They're calling it unconfirmed

…Not a good trade IMO, unless it sets up another move….

Two guys who are 3rd stringers at best on a 30 win team?!?!?!

by joegiant on Jun 22, 2010 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

It’s not about talent, it’s about getting out of Corey’s contract.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions  

It's official

Multiple sources now confirming. This is a great trade because it does so many things: frees up cap space, frees up roster space for a better/younger/defensive-minded SF, and no more hair pulling from watching Maggette.

Confident Marco Belinelli supporter

by Doctor Kajita on Jun 22, 2010 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Gotta love the off-season

For giving us hope and the chance to play with the trade machines out there.

Here’s a deal that checks out on RealGM with GSW, MEM and MIL: http://www.realgm.com/src_checktrade.php?tradeid=5564085

MEM gets Ellis
MIL gets Maggette, Conley and Arthur
GSW gets Redd and Thabbett

All the players involved have been rumor to be expendable from each of their teams. The next question is why would these teams do this deal?

For Milwaukee it’s easy. They’re going to lose Salmons after he opts out at the end of the month and need a productive offensive player at the SF spot. Maggette is a natural fit plus they get Conley to backup Jennings and Arthur to help them at in post. Further more all it cost them is the dead weight of Redd’s contract. It’s a no brainer.

For Memphis, they take a bit PR hit is admitting they botch both the Conley and Thabett picks, but instantly add Ellis a pseudo local star as the face of the franchise. Even if they lose Gay to FA they’d still have solid core and won’t have to sacrifice any a draft picks. This also give them a strong scoring back court of Mayo and Ellis (albeit undersized back court not that they weren’t already undersized when Conley and Mayo played together). I believe if Gay flies the nest that they’d do whatever it takes to get Ellis to save the momentum they built last season with their fan base.

For the Warriors it’s a super tough deal to swallow. Essentially they’re hitting the rest button from the 2008 off-season extension of Ellis and signing of Maggette. But with a new owner on the horizon major changes are just a few months away and this would give whoever owns the team next an much cleaner slate to deal with. It clears a ton of cap space which several posters in this post have mentioned with suggesting trading for Redd instead.

Personally, I think if the deal could be worked out this is the best way for the Warriors to purge themselves of the Cohan era. Sure it’s hard to see 45 ppg game go for an broken down vet and project center, but some times you gotta some risks to get to the top.

A Sonics fan without a team... but after 6 seasons now of GS Warriors season tickets have convinced me to adopt the boys from Oakland.

by mcwalter44 on Jun 22, 2010 2:29 PM PDT reply actions  

opps... guess I posted that too late

A Sonics fan without a team... but after 6 seasons now of GS Warriors season tickets have convinced me to adopt the boys from Oakland.

by mcwalter44 on Jun 22, 2010 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

I guess it's done
Adrian Wojnarowski WojYahooNBA
  
Warriors have traded Corey Maggette to Bucks for Charlie Bell and Dan Gadzuric, league source confirms.

"Even the Swedes are getting mad."-Randy Hahn
"It's very cozy in the sin bin."-Randy Hahn

by 49er16 on Jun 22, 2010 2:35 PM PDT reply actions  

Jesus...talk about pennies to the dollar

Gadzuric? Bell? I mean I know they’re expiring but I would have thought you guys could have gotten something better than that for Maggette…

Jonas Jerebko once killed a charging female rhinoceros in heat protecting its young with nothing more than a hook shot.

by The Boourns on Jun 22, 2010 2:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

Subtraction at any means necessary.

Confident Marco Belinelli supporter

by Doctor Kajita on Jun 22, 2010 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

I’m really not sure we could have. The only other rumored deal I’ve ever seen was the one the Cavs were considering as a backup to Jamison, and that was just for expirings, too….

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 2:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

I wonder if this changes the Draft...

from either big in Monroe or Cousins, to a SF like Aminu? We can all speculate but I’m going to be anxious to see what develops.

by esco41510 on Jun 22, 2010 2:42 PM PDT reply actions  

I know i don't post here much, it's been like 6 or 7 months or so

but yea, i would imagine this would somewhat change how they approach the draft. They could definitely go after a SF now, and in my opinion, couldn’t they trade down in the draft?
Obviously i know that that’s been thrown around here as an option along with a good amount of other options. But one of the players i am in love with is Paul George, another SF, however the level of competition scares me. Just throwing that out there for people here, trade down if they are for sure on knowing Cousins will get drafted by Sac? i know Marcus Thompson tweeted about “#GSW needs SF & @King24George is a beast. And if there is a way to get Milsap too …” but, dont know how they could get that done

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

k, might get alot of criticism for the Fresno state pic there....

but in all honesty, i’m a Samhan fan, since i live right here in Moraga, but go to school out in Ohio

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 2:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

There are a bunch of teams looking to move up...

so you may be on to something there. I know Cousins is the target, but Monroe has impressed quite a few teams also.

by esco41510 on Jun 22, 2010 2:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

yea, totally, i wouldn’t be opposed at all to moving down in the draft given the opportunity, and given Cousins is out of reach, because at this point with Maggette gone, does that reallllllly put the warriors in a need for a SF?

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don’t think it changes our draft strategy at all because a 3 or big man were really our biggest needs before, and still are….

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

Just wondering, so, Kelenna would be just a backup at the 3, Reggie would also be a back up at the 3

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 2:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

They can play wherever there are available minutes. I see them both as rotation players, but not as core players for the team. Basically, they fill in where you need wing minutes.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

Good point, i mean, in the nelson system, the numbers are almost pointless

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 6:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

Actually big men is not the need

The biggest need for the Warriors is a three with length who plays defense and can handle the ball. Someone like Evan Turner or Wesley Johnson.

Warriors have Biedrins, Anthony Randolph, Brandan Wright, Anthony Tolliver, and Chris Hunter.

by Rocky632156 on Jun 22, 2010 2:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

IMO The biggest need is any kind of upgrade in the front court.

While I do think Small Forward is a need. I don’t prioritize that position over the need for a big man.

If our best bigs going into next year are Biedrins, AR, Turiaf and Wright, I think we’re still going to have problems in the West.

Cousins is the best fit for our most glaring need of the past 15 seasons.

"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."

by kenntoe on Jun 22, 2010 3:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

Warriors have Biedrins, Anthony Randolph, Brandan Wright, Anthony Tolliver, and Chris Hunter.

 Three skinny tall guy and Tolly and Hunter are not a winning front court, so I’d say big men are still a need? I don’t see our Bynum or Gasol on that list?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 22, 2010 3:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

I’m not so sure Tolliver and Hunter will be on the team next year… All we need is Biedrins back to normal,AR or Wright to have a breakout year, and Cousins/Monroe to be drafted (guaranteed one of them). So things aren’t looking too bad big men wise assuming things go according to (my) plan. As for the SF position…

Warriors.

by jonathannn on Jun 22, 2010 4:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Turner’s not long, and honestly, I’m not sure he’ll ever be that great a defender….

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

I like our big man situation, but we’re not at the point where we should stop looking for an upgrade. If one’s out there, we should go after it. Big men are important. Also, we need one more big man.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

While I don't think this changes their approach to the draft.

I have this nightmare, and it involves the selection of Al Farouq-Aminu. I don’t think he’s worth picking at the 6th spot. He’s such a project and his only value is that hopefully one day he can play the SF spot. While in college he displayed very little in the way of SF skills (Outside shooting, dribbling, passing, too many TO’s).

My nightmarish spidey-sense is telling me: What if we draft Cousins at 6 and trade his rights for Al Farouq Aminu + assets? Tell me I’m delusional, but it might be possible if Detroit is very high on Cousins and would trade Prince + Aminu + ???? for Vlad + Cousins or whatever else it’d take to make salaries to work.

I know I’d draft Cousins at 6 if available and hold on to him. But with Riley and Nelson they might want to get top value and a veteran back for a guy they might not be 100% sold on.

I hope I’m wrong, I just don’t have much faith in Aminu becoming a good SF in the next 2-3 years.

"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."

by kenntoe on Jun 22, 2010 3:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm not a big fan of drafting Aminu that early either

If that’s who they’re looking at, then they should trade down and see what the options are later in the draft

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

Aminu supposedly has a promise with the Clippers.

Please oh please oh please oh please…

"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."

by kenntoe on Jun 22, 2010 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Is he really projected to be drafted THAT early?

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

well, it's a rumor so take it with a huge grain of salt.

Saw the link to a tweet or something on WW.net.

"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."

by kenntoe on Jun 22, 2010 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

Also saw that Detroit is leaning towards Davis.

I guess that’s assuming they can’t move up.

"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."

by kenntoe on Jun 22, 2010 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

Random thing about Detroit, i was at a breakfast place near the palace, saw Maxiel eat breakfast right near us, it was pretty awesome, this woman behind me was flippin out

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

He's predicted to be drafted

between 6 and 9. He’s in the third tier of players.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

Interesting

All i’m hearing about him is the fact he has FREAKISH athleticism, i mean, didn’t Randolph have that going for him when he was drafted?

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

yeah

And he fell on draft night to 14. He was projected to go somewhere in the mid lottery.

"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."

by kenntoe on Jun 22, 2010 3:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

Got ya, i mean, i guess it’s the fact i’m SLIGHTLY biased by the fact i’m somewhat of a Fresno State fan, but seeing them go somewhat local with George would be cool, plus he fits a SF position. But, guess that just doesnt help the front court. I think the issue there is that we don’t really know what we have with Wright yet

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah

but Randolph had kind of a bad attitude, right?
Aminu has always been considered a very high prospect.
For a long long time, Aminu was considered the 6th best player in the draft. Monroe only moved up there recently.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ok, so that goes with Cousins

he doesnt have the athleticism, but has that bad attitude. I’m just not into a PASSING big, isn’t Turiaf that kind of guy?

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

sorry,

what i’m saying is, Randolph had that bad attitude coming out of college, doesnt Cousins have that same mold? Plus, what i MEANT to say was, concerning Monroe, is it worth spending a 6 pick on a guy who is a passing center? Does Turiaf fit that mold of a passing center?

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

Biedrins is more of a passing center than Turiaf

I think. I don’t like Monroe. He isn’t good athlete. Doesn’t have much offense, just passing. Isn’t a special rebounder, doesn’t have great size or length.
I’d rather take a chance on Aminu.
About cousins- I think he’s considered too talented to drop in this draft. The 08 draft had a lot of good players taken ahead of Randolph, who was super raw. Cousins isn’t as raw, just kinda fat.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

Right, k, so here's what is going through my head

And i’m pretty sure it’s already been discussed here multiple times. But hypothetically, Cousins is taken at 5. It would almost sound necessary for the warriors to trade out of the 6th spot to go after a SF later in the draft. That’s what it’d sound like

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

What other SFs are available

that would be considered a better prospect than Aminu?

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yea, i’d have to check the draft board, but Aminu at 6?

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

Aminu is

usually ranked 6-8. I read a Chad Ford article where he would be in that third tier of player. He’s about as good of a prospect as Monroe and Davis, I think, so a team at 6 who needed a SF could take Aminu, unless Cousins fell. If Cousins falls to 6, you take him.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yea, i see what you're sayin

not sure how good Aminu is on the defensive end, but kinda almost feel like he’s in the Randolph mold minus the attitude

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:32 PM PDT up reply actions  

Aminu is a pretty solid defender who could become a really good one. He’s versatile enough to defend a few positions.

The Ultimate Opportunist

by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 22, 2010 3:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

Aminu

is supposed to have incredible defensive potential. Some say he could guard at least 3 positions. he has great length and footwork.
Sizewise, he’s kinda like a longer/bigger Luol Deng.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

Aight, sweet,

so it’ll be interesting to see where the warriors decide on going with this years draft, they have obvious needs with SF and big man, so it’ll be very interesting

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

Really kinda does

look like a Luol Deng 2.0

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

Deng was a better offensive player imo coming out of Duke.

"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."

by kenntoe on Jun 22, 2010 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

Really didn’t watch him play at Duke too much, but It’s gonna be a pretty eventful day Thursday, possible trades, and very exciting

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

Deng definitely has more of an offensive game

physically, he’s kinda like Deng, but a little longer, and possibly a little more athletic. Deng is a good defender too.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

I’m gonna say this, and this just might be me, but i wouldn’t care so much if they drafted AMinu, or traded down to draft George…. FRESNO STATE BIAS!!!

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 4:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Seems to me Aminu has Dennis Rodman like defensive potential. He’s loooonnnnnnggggg. He’s athletic. He rebounds. He’s versatile, can guard multiple positions. Decent size. I’m really picturing Detroit Pistons Dennis Rodman here, and think, defensively, it’s a valid comparison (though I’m not sure how close Aminu is to actually being that player, it might take some work).

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

I’m hearing alooottttttt of hype on this forum now about Aminu compared to other sites.

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 6:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ha, I’m not sold on Aminu overall, I don’t think he’s even close to ready to play wing in the NBA, and I’m not sure how good he is overall, but there are two positives I see out of him – he rebounds, and he has tons of defensive potential (but again, I’m unsure how far along his defense actually is at the moment).

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 7:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

don’t really know if they’re better, but on the same level. George, Babbit. Really all i’m seeing there

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

Babbit is one tier down

George might be there too, or the next tier.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Dream scenario

would be Cousins and a good SF, haha, me being the optimist

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

I’d actually call Turiaf the better passer. Turiaf is one of the best passing big men out there right now. Biedrins is also a good passer, but not as good.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

Beans doesn't pass very much ...

… but the truth is, the way he gets the ball, and given his incredible efficiency when he shoots it, he probably shouldn’t be passing it very much.

by Ronaldinho on Jun 22, 2010 6:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

~3 assists/40 out of a big man that has as limited a role in the offense as Biedrins does is very good. NBA average in ‘08-09 was 1.5 from C’s. 1.8 this past year. Turiaf lead all C’s in assists/40 this past season, by the way. Biedrins just missed Top 10 each of the past 2 seasons.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 7:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Turiaf lead all C’s in assists/40 this past season

I had no idea. Huh. Knowledge is power

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 7:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

True, but by acquiring an extra big...

We know have AR,Beans, Wright, Turiaf, Tolliver(?), and Gadzuric. That’s a fair number of players if we decided to add another Big.

Though of course are swing and 3 position doesn’t look any less crowded.

by esco41510 on Jun 22, 2010 3:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

Tolliver and Gadzuric are very expendable.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

Negative.

"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."

by kenntoe on Jun 22, 2010 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

Stong Maybe

According to the Warriors salary page on Hoopshype.com they have the following players under contract:

Ellis – 11 million
Biedrins – 9 million
Turiaf – 4.3 million (PO)
Curry – 3.1 million (TO)
Randolph – 2.9 million (TO)
Wright – 4.5 million (QO)

That’s $34.8 million for 11-12 season. Although Morrow will probably be signed in the 3-5 range and our 1st round pick will probably be in the 3-4 range. So lets call that 43 million or so committed to 11-12 season. Depending on the cap we still don’t have that much wiggle room.

A Sonics fan without a team... but after 6 seasons now of GS Warriors season tickets have convinced me to adopt the boys from Oakland.

by mcwalter44 on Jun 22, 2010 3:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

He has no choice if the FA isn't already on our team.

A Sonics fan without a team... but after 6 seasons now of GS Warriors season tickets have convinced me to adopt the boys from Oakland.

by mcwalter44 on Jun 22, 2010 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

He's the 6th richest man in the world

If he got a chance to sign a superstar to make a contender, then I’m sure he’d do it right? isn’t that his mindset?!? sigh…

by bojangles408 on Jun 22, 2010 3:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

You can't do anything without cap space

It doesn’t matter how much money you have. If you’re not a maximum salary below the cap, you aren’t capable of adding a maximum salary.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:10 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Again, he has no choice

You can’t just buy FA’s otherwise, Lebron, Bosh and Wade would be easy targets for the Knicks, Mavericks, or Trailblazers because their owners are loaded. Can they sign and trade? Of course, but then they have to give up enough salary to fit the star in. It only helps to have Ellison to spend on a good GM, scouting, and real coach and in wooing FA’s so long as their contract fits under the cap.

A Sonics fan without a team... but after 6 seasons now of GS Warriors season tickets have convinced me to adopt the boys from Oakland.

by mcwalter44 on Jun 22, 2010 3:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

There is virtually zero relationship between the net-worth of an NBA owner and the success of his teams.

by jae on Jun 22, 2010 4:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well yeah...too many other variables

New York spent a ton but it was Isiah driving that flaming bus off a cliff. An intelligent GM combined with more or less limitless budget would be incredibly effective…only problem is the smartest GMs in the NBA are the ones who value players appropriately and maintain some level of fiscal responsibility which goes against the idea of spending whatever is necessary to win.

Jonas Jerebko once killed a charging female rhinoceros in heat protecting its young with nothing more than a hook shot.

by The Boourns on Jun 22, 2010 4:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

An intelligent GM combined with more or less limitless budget would be incredibly effective

The relationship is weak to nonexistent because the cap doesn’t allow a team to simply buy players if they’re over the cap. Ellison’s effective spending worth just isn’t any different from most other NBA owners when it comes to what he is allowed to spend.

spending whatever is necessary to win.

How is this accomplished? How, when there’s a fairly intricate collective bargaining agreement with maximum salaries and a salary cap, can you “spend whatever is necessary to win”? There’s no real way to buy a winner. There are ways to continue to spend and watch salaries escalate upwards to maintain a winner, but that’s a different issue altogether.

by jae on Jun 22, 2010 5:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ellis wouldn't care about

the cap space because he is going to want a winning team and he’s going to change the whole atmosphere.

by Rocky632156 on Jun 22, 2010 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Looks like it's official

Cya Maggs .. Still bummed we didn’t get a draft pick or any sort of talent in return .. But hello ball movement!

Will this effect Monta? Maggs was his best pal…

by Potential on Jun 22, 2010 2:57 PM PDT reply actions  

This trade just furthers proof that

The NBA needs to approve the bid of Ellison’s group immediately. Of course the other blame goes to Stern in which trades with money rather then a players skill happen.

Maggette for a two scrubs who will never see action.

by Rocky632156 on Jun 22, 2010 2:57 PM PDT reply actions  

Maggette for two scrubs who will never see action one biggish expiring contract and another that’s cheap enough to buy out or waive.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 22, 2010 3:03 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

[reposting]

I kinda liked Corey as a player and a dude, and thought he got a bum rap around these parts.

That said, he’s coming off a career year, is at an age where players start to decline, has an annoyingly long and pricy contract, is injury prone, didn’t fit our team very well, and played a position that’s pretty easy to replace.

If Kelenna were 100% healthy and/or we knew Wes Johnson were falling to us, this would be a total no-brainer. But even as it is … not a bad move at all.

It would be nice to see us make a basketball move one of these days, tho, wouldn’t it?

Thinking aloud: does this make it more likely that we’re secretly targeting a SF – say, Aminu, George, or Babbitt? Or is that crediting the Warriors’ front office with too much actual thought and foresight? Is this the beginning of the fire sale OlympicMike warned us about?

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 22, 2010 2:59 PM PDT reply actions  

Guess that'll be a wait and see

for the draft at least, k, so can someone help me out here, i understand it’s a salary dump, but the warriors are getting 2 expiring contracts. Are they just planning ahead and setting themselves up for next year?

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

Bell’s actually not expiring, but he’s pretty cheap at 2 years/$8M. He is a total scrub, tho. Meh … as long as neither of these guys see any real minutes, and Kelenna is close to 100% healthy by the start of the season, I can live with this deal.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 22, 2010 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ok, that makes some sense, so they're putting faith in Kelenna

Was Bell really utilized that much over in Milwaukee? But yea, i totally agree, they should be bench players and spot the starters. So basically they’re setting themselves up

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

Bell was here and there for Milwaukee...

rarely saw time on the floor and the fact that he got into a fight with Skiles didnt help either.

by Spee-D on Jun 22, 2010 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

So basically they were just saying “let’s just get this guy out of here”

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

I hope not

If more and more rumors of contract shredding happens thats when the league needs to get involved.

by Rocky632156 on Jun 22, 2010 3:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

Why does the league need to be involved, exactly…?

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

I am surprised by the amount of people who are unhappy about this trade. It proves that fans overvalue the players on the team they root for.

Confident Marco Belinelli supporter

by Doctor Kajita on Jun 22, 2010 3:06 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

I know!

I thought the pole would be a landslide homerun. When I checked it, people were actually bummed. Don’t understand, are we watching the same team?

"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."

by kenntoe on Jun 22, 2010 3:07 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Maggette was instant offense

off the bench he did more than he gets credit for. Sure he was never going to be described as the best defensive player on the team or anything to that extent and at times he forced things. But, he contributed throughout most of the season and provided instant offense.

Tell me does Gadzuric and Bell equal the nearly 20 points a game that was lost when Maggette was traded.

by Rocky632156 on Jun 22, 2010 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

He started for most of last season

does Maggette’s 20 ppg, but no defense, make up for the $15 M we save in this deal?

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yes, the 20 point per game

= The 15 million considering that the Warriors got nothing in return for him. At least get someone who has a specialty. Such as actually playing defense.

by Rocky632156 on Jun 22, 2010 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

It's a salary dump

we couldn’t get anything for Maggette. His contract is that bad.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm pretty sure the

Warriors could have gotten something better for Maggette. It’s just that the Warriors do no have a front office that could do it. Larry Riley isn’t the master negotiator.

by Rocky632156 on Jun 22, 2010 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

No

they really couldn’t have. His contract is feces. If we took back more talent, we would need to take back a stupidly terrible contract.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

No...they don't...

but adding Magg’s minutes to Buike and specially Williams on how he looked last season, sure could make up the point differential.

by esco41510 on Jun 22, 2010 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

but adding Magg’s minutes to Buike and specially Williams on how he looked last season, sure could make up the point differential.

Yup. This trade opens up many possibilities. You guys that are upset about it need a little foresight!

Confident Marco Belinelli supporter

by Doctor Kajita on Jun 22, 2010 3:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

The Warriors don’t need Maggette’s scoring. They needed him to defend, pass, rebound, set screens, do the dirty work, etc.

Confident Marco Belinelli supporter

by Doctor Kajita on Jun 22, 2010 3:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well

they’re looking at it from a talent perspective. We lost talent in this trade.
They aren’t looking at it from a money perspective. in that regard, this is a hugely great trade for us.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

Right

While it may reduce a singular talent I think this improves the team performance on the court.. Upstairs, the execs now have more flexibility to get the talent they need, whether now or in the future. So, if people would have some foresight, they might understand that no

Confident Marco Belinelli supporter

by Doctor Kajita on Jun 22, 2010 3:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

I felt the same way.. REC'ed

A Sonics fan without a team... but after 6 seasons now of GS Warriors season tickets have convinced me to adopt the boys from Oakland.

by mcwalter44 on Jun 22, 2010 3:08 PM PDT reply actions  

Well...

I think they’re unhappy that the team gets worse in talent, and not looking at it as that we get in a better position financially. Understandable from that sense, but I think it had to be done.

by esco41510 on Jun 22, 2010 3:08 PM PDT reply actions  

WHO CARES ABOUT A HUGE SALARY IF YOU MAKE YOUR TEAM WORSE AND ANOTHER TEAM BETTER

Bell AND Gadzuric…Boooooooo

Why do we always trade for WACK players…I’m pissed! the last trade that worked was for Baron….can we impeach FRONT OFFICE..like the whole FRONT OFFICE. We (real Warrior FANS) need to see some serious moves made and we better get Cousins or Monroe.

Rudy Gay?
Joe Johnson?

someone realistic? I want Lebron too, imagining him with Steph and Monta would be deadly…but hey we never even made a pitch…can we make a pitch for a poor man’s Lebron…RUDY GAY

by Oakland2NYC on Jun 22, 2010 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

Rudy Gay

as a poor man’s LeBron is ridiculous. Rudy Gay is a poor rebounder and a worse passer.
Also- are you implying that we could have signed any of them? Cause we can’t. We don’t have the capspace.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

Rudy Gay is a poor man’s Corey Maggette.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 22, 2010 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

because the Warriors aren't 1 player away

They only got one play bonafide player (Curry) and some good assets in Randolph and Ellis. That’s it in my opinion. So losing Maggette is mute and if it is the start of a massive rebuild around Randolph and Curry than I’m 100% for it.

A Sonics fan without a team... but after 6 seasons now of GS Warriors season tickets have convinced me to adopt the boys from Oakland.

by mcwalter44 on Jun 22, 2010 3:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

The Warriors have plenty of talent to actually do things

The problem is staying healthy and the lack of defense called for in Don Nelson’s system.

by Rocky632156 on Jun 22, 2010 3:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

I guarantee you Don Nelson’s system doesn’t call for a lack of defense.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:32 PM PDT up reply actions  

True. But it doesn't prioritize it.

And Nelson himself seems fairly indifferent to it one way or the other with 80% of his players.

Also, Nelson’s resistance to putting two players with classic big man skills on the floor at the same time (which is a part of his system) tends to create a mismatch the team will struggle with defensively.

by Ronaldinho on Jun 22, 2010 6:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

Shows you how hard it was to move Maggette when you need to include a pick just to get garbage back.

by samuraaaaiiiiiii on Jun 22, 2010 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

No

It just shows how incompetent the front office is.

by Rocky632156 on Jun 22, 2010 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

No

shows how little you know about the way money works in the NBA. Or the NBA in general.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

No

It has nothing to do with money. I’m pretty sure there were other teams that had bad contracts as well.

by Rocky632156 on Jun 22, 2010 3:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

Why would we want them

answer: we wouldn’t. This is a good salary dump.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

This is such a good salary dump they had to break out the Febreze.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 22, 2010 3:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

What about Jeremy Lin???

Actually, he’ll probably go undrafted and join our LV summer league team. We’ve had pretty good luck with those types…

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 22, 2010 3:15 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

love the idea.. REC'ed

A Sonics fan without a team... but after 6 seasons now of GS Warriors season tickets have convinced me to adopt the boys from Oakland.

by mcwalter44 on Jun 22, 2010 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

I could see it next year. I'm calling it.

Curry
Morrow / Reggie
Carmelo
Anthony Randolph / Wright
Demarcus Cousins / Biedrins / Turiaf

by bojangles408 on Jun 22, 2010 3:12 PM PDT reply actions  

Wow

so we added a 2nd round draft pick with it wow you gotta be kidding no more jeremy lin

by Myeroc on Jun 22, 2010 3:16 PM PDT reply actions  

J. Lin probably won’t be drafted. Warriors can still sign him as an undrafted FA.

Confident Marco Belinelli supporter

by Doctor Kajita on Jun 22, 2010 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not only that, but with the D-League and the W’s ability to find talent there, there’s really not much value in the 44th pick.

Confident Marco Belinelli supporter

by Doctor Kajita on Jun 22, 2010 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

And the money we got from Portland. Looks like it isn’t going in Cohan’s pocket.

by samuraaaaiiiiiii on Jun 22, 2010 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

so we're in the same position as we were last year

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

Going from Nelly to Skiles is going to be a shock to Corey's system

Nice trade by the Warriors. True, they didn’t really get anything (I like Bell but he’s pretty washed up) but they cut out Maggs’ deal and Bell will be an expiring deal next offseason and have some value.

I really don’t get why the Bucks, who seemed to be saving up cap space, made this move. If they re-sign Salmons, they’ll basically be stranded in mediocrity unless they can make a huge salary dump deal with Redd’s contract. Corey can score but I could see him clashing with Scott Skiles.

I get that people are upset about losing a player for financial reasons but these are deals that help a team get better in the long run.

SoulMock - picks 21 - 25 @ www.soulhonky.com

by SoulHonky on Jun 22, 2010 3:20 PM PDT reply actions  

I remember last year ..

It was all about getting rid of Maggs, Jax and Crawford.. Now it’s Maggs, Ellis and Biedrins. Maggs is gone, who’s next :o

by Potential on Jun 22, 2010 3:25 PM PDT reply actions  

Biedrins and Ellis

Biedrins is next up for a salary dump

Ellis would be a talent deal.

by joegiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:28 PM PDT reply actions  

Ellis and Biedrins aren’t going anywhere.

Thanks again, Karnak.

Do you think repeating it like a mantra will somehow make it a certainty?

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 22, 2010 3:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

Biedrins is next up for a salary dump

Ellis would be a talent deal.

Does it matter? If we’re trading both for the two reasons, they are interchangeable. Monta is better as a salary dump since his contract is bigger. Also, since Biedrins’ contract is a little less, his services a little more valuable, and his behavioral track record a little cleaner, I’d think he would attract better talent than Monta.

Confident Marco Belinelli supporter

by Doctor Kajita on Jun 22, 2010 3:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

Then you have no clue

Ellis would get way more for his services than Biedrins. Who’s foul proned! Ellis is a premiere scorer and with his defense improving he’d be a steal for any team. But, then again obviously you don’t know much about basketball if you think Biedrins would get you more talent than Monta.

by Rocky632156 on Jun 22, 2010 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

Dumb NBA teams may value Monta more. Smart ones value Biedrins.

Monta Ellis's #1 Fan!!!

by philthiest on Jun 22, 2010 3:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

You obviously don't know anything

if you think that Monta is a decent defender and a premiere scorer. He’s neither of those things. Any remotely intelligent franchise would stay away after last season.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ellis=poor defender, he can score definitely, but he obviously takes a ton of shots, i mean, i bet it’s already been discussed how he takes an incredible amount of shots every game.

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

It's insane

He was what, 6th in the league in scoring? Pretty sure he was 2nd or 3rd in shot attempts. His scoring efficiency was poor.
And he’s an absolute defensive sieve.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 3:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

He lead the league an FGA/g. And minutes/g. Basically, he was 6th in scoring because he had more chances then anyone else.

Monta Ellis's #1 Fan!!!

by philthiest on Jun 22, 2010 3:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

yea, i mean, i’m one of those fans that love the fact Ellis can score, but that’s what Maggette was, he was a scorer, however what they both fail to do is play D, consistent D.

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

sorry didn’t complete it, i’m also a fan that likes TEAM PLAY, where they spread the ball around, and that’s what Ellis really didn’t do all too often

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

The difference is Maggette doesn’t need many possessions to get his points – he’s efficient, while Monta needs a ton of shots to get his, which is bad and hurts the team with how inefficient he is….

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

And what's Ellis going to continue to do?

TAKE SHOTS, this team needs defense, and of course Maggette nor ellis are that at all, but i’ll take the loss of Maggette

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 7:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ellis would get way more for his services than Biedrins. Who’s foul proned! Ellis is a premiere scorer and with his defense improving he’d be a steal for any team. But, then again obviously you don’t know much about basketball if you think Biedrins would get you more talent than Monta.

Yup, I’m so stupid to think that an undersized SG with poor efficiency and a bigger contract is less valuable than a center that rebounds and scores at a high efficiency…Stupid me. I sound like Kawakami now.

Confident Marco Belinelli supporter

by Doctor Kajita on Jun 22, 2010 4:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

Biedrins isn’t actually foul prone. That’s just a false claim. Unless you think this past year is more meaningful than the 3 full seasons he played before that….

obviously you don’t know much about basketball if you think Biedrins would get you more talent than Monta.

…because he actually considers their productivity and their respective contracts now he doesn’t know much about basketball….?

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

I know that Detroit fans are high on Biedrins

And a swap of Tay and Biedrins would still work from a salary perspective…although I don’t think that JoD would give up Tay just for Biedrins especially if he knows how badly GS wants to be rid of his contract.

Other issue being that Detroit has Charlie V and Ben Gordon locked through 4 more years and would now have Biedrins in the same situation…

Jonas Jerebko once killed a charging female rhinoceros in heat protecting its young with nothing more than a hook shot.

by The Boourns on Jun 22, 2010 3:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

That might work...

Still think the toughest thing to swallow is the contract seeing as the Pistons ownership are only a little ways behind where Golden State is as far as selling the team. Although I don’t think Detroit will get sold until after the new CBA is reached.

Jonas Jerebko once killed a charging female rhinoceros in heat protecting its young with nothing more than a hook shot.

by The Boourns on Jun 22, 2010 3:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

Sorry meant to provide a reason for the "might"

I think the big thing taht they will look at is “what is more valuable in the potential sale of the team?”

Biedrins contract + a future first rounder or Tay’s contract?

Since we can’t expect the team to be sold before Tay’s contract is expired, I would think that Biedrins + a future first rounder if that first rounder was say 2012 and unprotected would be more valuable but then again, no one wants Ed Davis since we need a center and somehow all the rumors are coming out with us taking Davis if we can’t move up so who knows what the hell our management is thinking.

Jonas Jerebko once killed a charging female rhinoceros in heat protecting its young with nothing more than a hook shot.

by The Boourns on Jun 22, 2010 3:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don’t think that JoD would give up Tay just for Biedrins

Haha. I don’t think Riley would trade Biedrins for just Prince. Based on last year’s production, it looks like a fair enough deal (mediocre SF for mediocre-to-crappy C), but based on Biedrins’ last two healthy seasons it’s a total steal for the Snot-sip.

Then again, if we both think it’s an unfair deal for our teams, maybe it’s not that far off…

Personally, I’d only consider it if we got Cousins. And even then, I’d much rather move Turiaf for a small forward who isn’t on the wrong side of his career arc, and isn’t a touch overrated by virtue of having a championship ring.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 22, 2010 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

Unfair to only look at Princes production last year

He missed his first start in 496 games because of a ruptured disc in his back which had obviously been bothering him prior to going out for a big chunk of the season so looking at his stats last season is more or less apple-picking stats.

Meanwhile Biedrins missed more games than Tay and has 4 years left on his contract compared to Tay’s expiring next year.

So given the fact that you just gave Maggette away for Dan Gadzuric and Charlie Bell, methinks that JoD could get more for a SF like Tay from Golden State than just Biedrins.

Jonas Jerebko once killed a charging female rhinoceros in heat protecting its young with nothing more than a hook shot.

by The Boourns on Jun 22, 2010 4:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

but you also can't look at the players in a vacuum..

i agree PRince is the better player but Biedrins is a Center and a 6’11, former double double averaging big man….you are probably right that the bulging disc has effected Prince’s numbers but then you got to wonder if Prince will be an injury concern here on out…I don’t like trading Bigs for sg’s/sf’s …I have to say that this trade seems borderline on who it favors.

by JimBarnett2KevinGarnett on Jun 22, 2010 4:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

All very good points, including the age difference.

Jonas Jerebko once killed a charging female rhinoceros in heat protecting its young with nothing more than a hook shot.

by The Boourns on Jun 22, 2010 4:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

also...

Maggette is not as good as everyone (outside of Golden State) thinks…he has negative value and I honestly think the front office did a good job (rare) in the Maggette deal…

by JimBarnett2KevinGarnett on Jun 22, 2010 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

If Maggette has negative value

then an NBA championship winning, lockdown defending, veteran SF who’s willing to play in a complimentary role to your already ball-dominating backcourt on an expiring contract would be net positive value that you’re not mentioning.

I don’t want to come in and be defined as the guy who derails threads and I agree that most likely a Biedrins for Tayshaun trade straight up is relatively fair to both teams assuming that was the direction and need for both teams and that both players played to their potential.

My point was that if your team management just gave up a 2nd rounder and a high-scoring SF (ball dominating tendencies aside) for Dan Gadzuric and Charlie Bell, then it would appear that your management is overvaluing expiring contracts to the extreme and therefore puts them in a position of weakness for negotiating the movement of another long-term contract off their books for $11M in expiring salary.

But I think what we have here is a classic case of two fans not seeing eye-to-eye on the perceived value of the respective players in question…which is common enough :-)

Jonas Jerebko once killed a charging female rhinoceros in heat protecting its young with nothing more than a hook shot.

by The Boourns on Jun 22, 2010 4:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

As a player

Maggette could have a lot of value. He’s really good at what he does. Unfortunately, he is making so much money that he’ll be a cap burden for the rest of his career.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 5:32 PM PDT up reply actions  

methinks that JoD could get more for a SF like Tay from Golden State than just Biedrins.

Haha. You keep holding out.

Personally, I would much rather have Biedrins than Prince, even given Prince’s shorter contract.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 22, 2010 4:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'll take Biedrins as well

yea he wasn’t really that great last year, but i’d still like to see what he can do this year, and i’ll take the size Biedrins gives the team along with the jump hook :)

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 4:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

Prince isn’t a very good offensive player, isn’t a very good rebounder, in my opinion his D is slipping (though I’ll defer to your opinion if you disagree, seeing as how you watched him way more than me) and is at the point where he’ll probably start declining…..I’d much rather go with a productive C with an affordable contract entering his prime personally….

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don’t think we’re really that desperate to get out of Biedrins contract. It’s a pretty solid contract for how good Biedrins is.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

The WRONG BELL

Charlie Bell?!?!?!

I thought we all wanted RAJA BELL for the 2-spot….

by joegiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:29 PM PDT reply actions  

Haha. It’s not about what we want… We’d all love for Raja to come to warriors I’m sure.

Warriors.

by jonathannn on Jun 22, 2010 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

If we buy out Charlie Bell, how much of his salary do we shed after this season?

The Ultimate Opportunist

by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 22, 2010 3:38 PM PDT reply actions  

Who cares about after this season

If the Warriors want their young players to mature and win you play for this season, not net, not two years, not five years. You try to make the best team as possible not the worst. But, then again Warriors owner Chris Cohan has never understood this process.

by Rocky632156 on Jun 22, 2010 3:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

Why build for a season when you aren’t even a playoff contender? Why not put a long term plan in place where your talent all comes together at once and you turn into a legitimate playoff team?

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

Depends on the terms of the buyout. The total buyout amount gets pro-rated over the length of the contract (in this case, two years) and counted against the cap.

Given that no one is going to sign Charlie Bell, I’d guess he wouldn’t take much less than the full value of the contract.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 22, 2010 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

i wonder how Monta will feel now...

Maggette was his BFF. Will he be even more disgruntled that he was coming into last season? Will he force a trade?

by Spee-D on Jun 22, 2010 3:42 PM PDT reply actions  

I don't get it

Ellis has consistently stated he wants to stay with the Warriors. His only blemish was stating that he didn’t think the backcourt of him and Curry would work, but as the season progressed he saw how well Curry could play.

by Rocky632156 on Jun 22, 2010 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

Are we already forgetting

That whole moped thing and the ensuing standoff with management?

Monta Ellis's #1 Fan!!!

by philthiest on Jun 22, 2010 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

You're joking right??

This is 15 more touches for Monta!!!! He’s gotta be stoked!

by joegiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

and 15 more shots

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

Considering...

He took more shots that ANYONE in the league, I’d say he needs to leave those shots alone.

by esco41510 on Jun 22, 2010 3:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

Steph will make Monta become his new best friend with his babyface.

Warriors.

by jonathannn on Jun 22, 2010 4:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

And if not, he'll kill him.

Cause he IS the Baby Faced Assassin.

by Screwfish on Jun 22, 2010 4:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Where do we go from here?

We seriously need to do something at the SF spot ..

by Potential on Jun 22, 2010 3:46 PM PDT reply actions  

Draft

this is if Cousins is gone by the 6th pick

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yoooooou willlll draft Aminu if Cousins is still on the board...*Waves Hand*

JEDI MIND TRICK’D

Jonas Jerebko once killed a charging female rhinoceros in heat protecting its young with nothing more than a hook shot.

by The Boourns on Jun 22, 2010 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!

ok deal

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think Morrow/Buike/Williams can fill the role for now. We’re not a legitimate playoff team at this point, so I don’t mind them as stopgaps until we’re a better team and find a better option at the SF spot.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

Looking back at that trade to Portland

Where the Warriors received 2 million to move down 10 picks in the 2nd. And how the Warriors added 1.4 million in salary cap for the trade. Ellison’s already running the show people!!

by Jayd92009 on Jun 22, 2010 4:02 PM PDT reply actions  

Expirings for next year

$14.1 million
Gadzuric at $7.2M and Vladimir Radmanovic at 6.9M.

New owner should be happy.

by mosdl on Jun 22, 2010 4:03 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

Yea, they look to be setting themselves up

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 4:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well

Its not out of the realm that Lebron signs a 1 year deal with cleveland this year. LEBRON IN 2011!!!!

by Jayd92009 on Jun 22, 2010 4:06 PM PDT reply actions  

We get to pay them

for the remainder of their contract

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

Are we gonna miss Maggette's locker room presence?

Like teaching the other guys to be professional.

"Momma, there goes that man!" - Marc Jackson

by thecity23 on Jun 22, 2010 4:16 PM PDT reply actions  

biedrins

not so sure i agree with your assessment of the biedrins and i definitely dont agree with the one on maggette. yeah he averaged 19 ppg but most of those are freethrows. plus in nellie’s free shooting system, average players can do that, especially when they start at power forward and sit on the perimeter where their defender doesnt want to go. maggette would be a solid player if he wasnt making big money. for what he gets paid, he’s average. and locker presence means nothing if your team is just all around bad. it certainly isnt worth what he was being paid.

as for biedrins, he isnt a c/pf to build around, mainly because of his offensive deficiencies. but the fact is that with the exception of this past year he has improved every year. he is a good rebounder and has great hands. if you take him for what he is, a good role player then he’s a worthwhile guy to have. if you think he’s ever gonna be an offensive force, you’re living in a world of fantasy. he should be like your 5th best player if your team is good. on the W’s he was supposed to be 3rd best and thats a problem. keep him, his value is low right now after last season and try to get some offensively skilled big men to put in there with him.

by Hugh Mungustic on Jun 22, 2010 4:21 PM PDT reply actions  

most of those are freethrows

As boring as that is to watch, it isn’t a bad thing. Free throws are the highest percentage shot in the game, aside from fast break layups.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 4:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

This. FT’s are the most efficient shots out there. I do agree with all the rest of Hugh’s points, though.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

I couldn't sift through it

Even with periods, it can be tough to wade through a paragraph that has no capitalization.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 7:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

Freethrows are worth more than the points they produce...

They also bring a defender one more foul closer to fouling out of the game. Games are changed when players foul out or are sat down because they are close to fouling out.

by J-House on Jun 22, 2010 6:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

one more thing

the W’s have 2 main problems don nelson and their backcourt. don nelson’s system has maxed out in golden state. he will never achieve more than he did in the we believe year. he is averse to defense and he doesnt have the right players to effectively play nellie ball. let him go. the second problem is the fact that with 2 undersized guards we dont match up to any of the premier teams in the league. on top of that neither one of those gus is actually a true pg, they are sg that are undersized. so as long as we trot both those guys out there we will be at a defensive deficit. i say trade ellis for a bigger guy. not because i dont like him or his game but because the W’s arent getting anywhere with that backcourt.

by Hugh Mungustic on Jun 22, 2010 4:25 PM PDT reply actions  

2 undersized guards?

I’m pretty sure 6’3 is the average for a PG. Curry isnt undersized for a PG.

by Jayd92009 on Jun 22, 2010 5:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Weight wise i guess?

i mean, i agree, Curry is pretty typical for a PG, possibly a little added strength, but yea that’s pretty typical

His name is Bond, Brock Bond, and his adopted father? ME, any questions?

by PiKAgiant on Jun 22, 2010 5:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

Weight-wise

Curry weighed in at 180 and played at 170 for most of the season. Not big, but hardly small. Brandon Jennings is small. Jameer Nelson is small.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 5:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Curry is also very not long, though…..

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah

but when I think of undersized PG, I think of guys who are like 6’ tall or less

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 7:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

Curry isn't a PG?

Were we watching the same team last year? He can create shots for others better than about half the so-called PGs in this league.

by Screwfish on Jun 22, 2010 6:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

Good for Maggs!

Bogut, Jennings, and Corey is a pretty solid core. Bucks will probably be 4 or 5 in the East with that lineup.

by Evanz on Jun 22, 2010 4:26 PM PDT reply actions  

horrible trade

You trade a useful SF with a slightly small brain and get in return a useless big man with no brain and some backup pg no one’s heard of. The only benefit is we get an expiring contract but history has shown that the Warriors SUCK with cap space. Since the sale is still far from complete and with the CPA looming in 2011 one has to wonder if we’re counting our proverbial eggs before they hatch in regards to the benefits of cap space, all the while losing a remarkable, at least statistics wise, talent and getting almost nothing in return.

Randolph is a garbage-point collector and Wright is probably never going to be an NBA starter, not JONeal at all.

LarryLegendofOracle

by dso on Jun 22, 2010 4:28 PM PDT reply actions  

We sucked with cap space cause our FO sucks ..

If new ownership takes place in a few months as expected, we shouldn’t worry about our ‘history’

by Potential on Jun 22, 2010 4:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

It’s not always about using cap space, it can also help you resign your own players….

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

you mean overpay for our own players

jrich/dunleavy/foyle/murphy/Ellis/Biedrins/SJax

yeah, things might magically change with new ownership… if we find out who our new owner is, or if we even get a new owner. And we’ll probably be more frugal… if there’s even a new CBA to play by and there’s not a strike. Those are a lot of uncertain variables that we’re risking just for the sake of Cap Room, of which we have shown a history of failure in both acquiring better players and re-signing our own at competitive prices

Randolph is a garbage-point collector and Wright is probably never going to be an NBA starter, not JONeal at all.

LarryLegendofOracle

by dso on Jun 22, 2010 8:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

GOOD RIDDENCE

glad corey is GONE

this team live & die on ball movement

corey & ball movement dont go together…. ever

ANY QUESTIONS???

by KennySeagle on Jun 22, 2010 4:42 PM PDT reply actions  

Horrible trade.

Warriors management have once again managed to have a talented player and FAILED to sign and trade expiring contracts or simply traded down for “cap space” (Baron/Jackson/J-Rich).

Freeing cap space is not a solution to attract talented players. NO premier player desires to sign with the Warriors or thinks they will win championships by coming here. If we have a guy like Maggs, we HAVE to keep him or trade him for an equal caliber player or package him with someone else (Biedrins, Ellis, Randolph, or Wright) to get an allstar player.

Even if we COULD convince a great free agent to come here, trading Maggs gives us more case NEXT year, after all these blockbuster allstars will all be locked down in long term contracts. The Warriors just traded away a major contributor to the team for “intangible assets”… something the Warriors should worry about after they get more tangible assets.

by Woody421 on Jun 22, 2010 6:03 PM PDT reply actions  

Good points dsu and Woody...

Who are all these knuckle-heads that celebrate trading our #2 scorer last year. They must not have been watching last year. He is a high scorer who drives to the hoop, consistantly draws fouls. With he, Curry and Monte healthy and on the floor at the same time there are always crucial opponents in foul trouble; besides all the points those 3 produce. Why do we need cap room? For Gasol? C’mon, this team is built to run the floor. Besides if Gasol is all that’s available, why would he come hear? Corey only struggled when Nelson stuck him in some ridiculous line-up with mags playing PF or C.
PS— WE’RE NOT GETTING COUSINS!!! SO STOP WASTING EVERYONE"S TIME TALKING ABOUT GETTING HIM!!!! WE are #6 IN THE DRAFT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by J-House on Jun 22, 2010 6:05 PM PDT reply actions  

Amen to all that.

My only extra thought is, we are a fastbreak team that shoots in the first 8 seconds when we can. Few big men in the league could actually run up and down the court for 40 minutes a game in Nellie ball. I wouldn’t mind getting a big guy in the system strictly for our defence. Let the other 4 guys on the court bring in 100 pt. nights.

by Woody421 on Jun 22, 2010 6:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

Why didn’t you capitalize “are”?

Did you choke on something while you were shouting?

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 22, 2010 6:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

Sorry for all the "shouting"

It just drives me crazy when the Warriors make bone-headed moves and some easily accept it; then they talk about landing a draft pick we have no chance at and getting Gasol a year from now when we don’t even know what the new salary cap will be at.

by J-House on Jun 22, 2010 6:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

The bone-headed move was signing Maggette. Not sure why correcting that is such a bad idea…?

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 6:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

Because he was the #2 scorer on our team last year!

And we get nothing out of it this year except a back-up center and a useless gaurd. We don’t even get cap room this year.

by J-House on Jun 22, 2010 6:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

Who cares about this year. We aren’t a contender this year. We’re thinking about 2 years, 3 years down the road, when we ARE trying to be a contender. It’s called “long term planning”, and it’s important to building a successful franchise.

by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2010 7:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

How long have we been "long term planning"?

*Since the “We Believe” year? Since Baron? J-Rich? Murphy? Crawford? Jackson? Harrington? etc… It’s the Warrior Merry-Go-Round!
*Besides, how can you say we wouldn’t be a contender? Our starting line-up never even got the chance to play together. We only had 7-8 players available for a huge chunk of the season and still didn’t end up in the bottom 3. We had no Cs or PFs to speak of for God’s sake!
*You’ve been drinking the “do no research on losing West-coast teams, since the majority of our fan base in on the East Coast” ESPN Kool-Aid!!!

by J-House on Jun 22, 2010 7:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

How can you say we would be a contender?

We don’t have any top 30 players on our team. Even with health, we’re looking at a 35-40 win team AT MOST. We’d still get killed on the boards. We’d still have terrible defense. We’d still have Monta da Ballhog taking 30 shots a game.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jun 22, 2010 7:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

these conclusions you derive

are your own and are not substantiated. Past precedent does not always dictate future performance. A team’s ability to win involves more than the talent levels of the individual players, and the correlation between good teams and good players does not equate to causation. In other words, do good players make good teams or do good teams make good players? Is it the accumulation of stars that makes for successful teams, or do well-coached teams with good chemistry make players look good? Yes, the two are correlated but it’s hard to say which one causes the other, and just cuz our team/players are not successful now does not preclude the possibility of becoming a good team with good players in the future.

Randolph is a garbage-point collector and Wright is probably never going to be an NBA starter, not JONeal at all.

LarryLegendofOracle

by dso on Jun 22, 2010 8:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yoou all know what this means....

We are going to sign Devean George to a multi-year contract!

Take my bags, not my top 3 pick!
"Winning is not enough. All others must lose." - Larry Ellison

by Badly Browned on Jun 22, 2010 6:10 PM PDT reply actions  

Also...

We had to put up listening to all those know-nothing East Coast ESPN commentators all last season trying to tell everyone the reason the Warriors’ failings were do to lack of talent…even when we were playing with 8 men or less. Unfortunately some of the Warriors’ fans drank this cool-aid. We set records with injuries and call-ups: THAT’S THE REASON FOR A BAD SEASON. Those who know basketball were drooling with the thought of a healthy line-up further bolstered by the quality back-ups discovered from the D-League.

by J-House on Jun 22, 2010 6:27 PM PDT reply actions  

Injuries

Don’t get me wrong, I LOVE Nellie ball. The run-n-gun is by far the funnest thing to watch in all sports. BUT, I think the reason why we had no big men is because tall, lanky, fast guys can’t keep up without breaking down.

It is not just them being “soft” or needing to build more muscle, I think anybody that tall would get hurt in 82 games.

by Woody421 on Jun 22, 2010 6:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

B-Browned:

LOL…Sad thing is you’re probably right!!!

by J-House on Jun 22, 2010 6:31 PM PDT reply actions  

Fortunately...

We’re stacked enough to have Azibuke ready to start.

by J-House on Jun 22, 2010 6:42 PM PDT reply actions  

Is Larry Harris still working for the W's?

I know he was an assistant a couple years ago but didn’t see him on the website listing anymore. Just enjoying the irony of Larry potentially reuniting with Gadz and Bell, two of his biggest mistakes as a GM…great guy, but an unfortunate stint as GM.

by Frank Madden on Jun 22, 2010 7:20 PM PDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

"UNSTOPPABLE BABY!"

Golden State Warriors rookie Marc Jackson to the Mavericks' bench, after hitting a lay-up during a 29-point loss (2000)

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Ringnovember1981_small
Klay Thompson, a bust?
Small
Why Steph Curry is the Warriors most important player, and why they should heavily consider trading him
Warriors2_medium_small
Tom Abdenour... Where is he now?

Recent FanPosts

Small
Trade Idea with Wiz
Small
Lessons Learned from the Linsanity
Small
A little off topic: does GOM sell t-shirts?
Small
Warriors @ Nuggets Preview
Monta_small
Warrior Wonder Standings (December/January)
Angel_beats__logo_small
Looking at the Late-Game playcalls
Ringnovember1981_small
Should Andris Biedrins be sent to the D-League?
Angel_beats__logo_small
An Alternative Explanation to why the Warriors let Lin, Williams and Bell go

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


GSoM Crew -------------------------

Atma-160_small Atma Brother ONE

Gw090_small Fantasy Junkie

Natehead_small Nate Parham

--------------------------------------------------------

Small Hash

Small dj fuzzylogic

600px-olympic_rings_square olympicmike

Small IQofaWarrior

Shutterstock_10276351_basketball_mind_small Evanz

--------------------------------------------------------

We_still_believe_small R Dizzle

Small Adam Lauridsen

Small jae

Gsom_tony_small Tony.psd

Kanji_love_small Sleepy Freud

Japan_by_miaumi_small YaoButtaMing

Drmlg_logo-gmail_small Poor Man's Commish

Nellie2_small Feltbot