Golden State Of Mind: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Rumor: Mike Dunleavy, Troy Murphy, or Jason Richardson + Monta Ellis for Allen Iverson

Atma-160_tiny by Atma Brother ONE on in Rumors

From Stephen A. Smith's piece this morning Deal is all that matters now in the Philadelphia Inquirer:

Golden State: Mike Dunleavy Jr., Troy Murphy or Jason Richardson would have to come to Philly to make a deal happen, but the Sixers would love to get their hands on Monta Ellis. The Warriors say they're not about to part with Ellis, but everyone talks that nonsense before a deal gets done.

If there's anyone out there in the media who knows Allen Iverson and the 76ers, it's Stephen A. So, if you're at all interested in the AI sweepstakes definitely check out his entire piece.

Would you give up Monta Ellis in a trade for Allen Iverson?


Also check out:

99% of rumors never happen, but 99% of them are fun to talk about!

0 recs | Comment 73 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

hmmm......
Any of Murphy, Ike, Dunleavy, Zarko, etc., I'd be willing to part with. J-rich would be so hard to get  rid of. And the thought of losing a player as good as Ellis, who has so many years left in him, for a controversial player that will head downhill in a year or 2 is painful... It would be awesome to get AI, althuogh with J-Rich, ellis, and Baron, it's hard to believe they would seriously want the Answer without getting rid of a guard...

by bradyk2 on Dec 11, 2006 10:29 AM PST   0 recs

don't give up on ellis
this guy is just getting started! This would be a big mistake. I'm greedy though, I don't wanna give up J-Rich either. I say no deal. It's not worth it. This team healthy is gonna be amazing.
Big Tone

by tadams1080 on Dec 11, 2006 10:42 AM PST   0 recs

Good god no!
Why on earth would you give up a young player with tons of potential for an older player on the downside of his career when you're nowhere near contending for a title if you make the trade?

Even assuming this trade netting us 10-15 wins this year, we're still a middle-of-the-playoff pack team this year (at best) and we're substantially worse three years from now.

They give up Monta for Iverson and I turn in my Warriors fan club membership.

by Ronaldinho on Dec 11, 2006 10:49 AM PST   0 recs

sigh, middle of the PLAYOFF pack ...
Guys, we haven't even SNIFFED playoffs in some of your life times! Let's not be so cavalier with making the playoffs!

by hardcore on Dec 11, 2006 3:10 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If we are going to improve this team with a trade it needs to be in the front court. Our back court when health is one of the best in the NBA. We don't need a ball hog that is near the end of his career in Golden State.

by Psion on Dec 11, 2006 10:57 AM PST   0 recs

Don't trade Monta for Iverson.
Iverson with a team that can't rebound is a disaster waiting to happen.  If Iverson is such a huge plus, it's curious why his teams haven't been better than the Warriors for several years.  I'll repeat myself here, but unless he's got significant rebounding help, he can be a liability because he just misses too many shots.  It's not tough to see why this is, though the gawdy point total and the hype--machine that follows Iverson seems to blind people to this.

I worry that Monta may follow that path as his shot selection seems to deteriorate as he tries to take over on his own, but for the time, I believe him to be as effect for us as Iverson would be.

by jae on Dec 11, 2006 11:01 AM PST   0 recs

Would you give up Monta Ellis in a trade for AI
  Of course if it didn't involve JRich.
    If they'd take Monta, Dunleavey, Foyle and Zarko I'd jump on it, Monta is not going to be cheap in a couple of years, this trade would solve some of our contract problems as well as give us a fun to watch player for a few years.
  Iverson, Baron,Jason, Murph and B'Dris would be a pretty good starting lineup with pietrus, Ike, Barnes MacCloud etc. on the bench.  

by Skeptic con Urquell on Dec 11, 2006 11:19 AM PST   0 recs

AMEN
Finally someone with some common sense.  Thank you brotha!

by gsdubz on Dec 11, 2006 6:08 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Baron and AI
I dont know if that would work....But that would be crazy to watch...Really Crazy...gives me goose bumps...

by Jcab on Dec 11, 2006 11:23 AM PST   0 recs

yeah,
I wouldn't pull the trigger on that deal. Monta > Iverson.

If you take a look out of your windows, you can now see Dallas, TX. Quite the site, no?

by coma on Dec 11, 2006 11:28 AM PST   0 recs

NO DICE!
First, J-Rich should be untouchable!  Secondly, I wouldn't give the future Proactive star (cosmic acne) unless they decided to take Foyle's contract along with Murph's... Since I don't see that EVER happening the NO!  Like I said in a post somewhere on this board b4... If the Sixers are desperate enough (which it looks like they are) I'd just offer Murphy and most to all of our 1 year deals (Pietrus, Zarko, McLeod and Roberson is around $6 mil in salaries) with a pick or two for Iverson.  I know it seemed really lopsided before and got a lot of greif... but it's looking more and more like a reality with every second that Iverson isn't moved.  MULLIN.... JUST KEEP YOUR FEET ON THE GROUND WITH THIS ONE!!  Billy King is teetering... we just gotta do him like we did the Hornets (Baron Davis for Dale Davis and Speedy was a STEAL!!!)

by mightymadskillz on Dec 11, 2006 12:14 PM PST   0 recs

I don't see
Iverson and Baron coexisting happily.
What we should end up doing is setting up a three way deal with Minnesota, where we end up with Garnett and the T-wolves end up with Iverson. Where's Billy Beane when you need him?

by racsan on Dec 11, 2006 12:25 PM PST   0 recs

J-Rich
hmm..random thought...J-rich is currently on the bench due to some random injury...is there a possibility that Jrich is not really injured, but they want to keep him sidelined during the possible trade for Iverson? ..

I havent really been following Iverson, Why is he currently not playing? Is it because he just dosent want to play for the 6ers?

by WhoreRIORS on Dec 11, 2006 12:38 PM PST   0 recs

unlikely
they didn't sit anyone else potentially in the trade and these win-able games are too important to our playoff chances to hold anyone out this long

by hardcore on Dec 11, 2006 3:12 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Just do it!
I say make it happen. I like Monta a lot but these past few games have me feeling like I was watching a young Kobe. Monta can score but how many shots does he plan to take per game? Monta to me is similar to Iverson. I'm getting tired of waiting for our future. Every year is "Wait till' next year". This is a big name talent who can definately put the Warriors on the map. It'll be interesting to see a backcourt tandem of Davis and A.I.

by ON THE RUN on Dec 11, 2006 1:03 PM PST   0 recs

no
this has been the warriors problem throughout the years. they can't decide whether they want to build for the future or win now. i say don't make this trade and make a stand to build for the future.

by AJC3317 on Dec 11, 2006 1:09 PM PST   0 recs

Why don't we focus on getting
Webber also? I would like to see Webber play for the Warriors again. This guy is better than Murphy, who we may possibly be able to trade away for him. Why not?

by Zorgon on Dec 11, 2006 1:26 PM PST   0 recs

Webber? No Thanks.
Have you watched Webber this year?  He's a pretty sad sight.  While at one time Webber was a great player, I'm really not sure he does anything better than Murphy at this point.  He's slow and has almost no ability to get off a shot inside.  He's lost more than a step and has a real hard time making shots, though he still seems to take them.  

Honestly, at the MLE, I'm not sure Webber is an asset.  At $20million a year for the next two, he's a major liability.

by jae on Dec 11, 2006 1:35 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

To be honest,
no, I haven't watched Webber this year. I have seen him be good in the past, so maybe I've missed his downslope. I'll be sure to watch the next Sixers game.

by Zorgon on Dec 11, 2006 2:00 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

no!!
like someone already said, our problem is in the front court not the back!  i say "hellllllll no!"

by wander7 on Dec 11, 2006 1:53 PM PST   0 recs

one more thing...
we need to build a team not collect duplicate talents.  

by wander7 on Dec 11, 2006 1:55 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

dude.
If we get Iverson, there is no way we're getting to the playoffs... especially since we'll be giving away Muprhy/Jrich/Monta..... we need Murphy as much as we need Jrich. How on earth are we supposed to compete in a DEEP DEEP West with only AB in the middle?? Murphy is our only dependable (noticed how I chose to say "dependable" instead of "talented") big man. Iverson is on the decline and do we really want to see a Gilbert Arenas part 2 with Monta??

DO NOT GIVE AWAY MONTA!

But honestly though, if Mullin wasnt going to give up Murphy/Digou for Ron Artest, there is no way he will give up Murphy/Jrich or Monta for Iverson. Artest is a WAAAY more valuable player than Iverson.

For all you jokers who want Iverson to come here: just because Iverson's on the team.... doesnt mean we'll make the playoffs. and he WILL hurt the team with his 210632713061723 shot attempts per game. i cant even see Iverson and Baron coexisting in the backcourt.

DONT BRING IN IVERSON IF WE HAVE TO GIVE AWAY JRICH OR MONTA!!!

by ZombieWarrior on Dec 11, 2006 1:55 PM PST   0 recs

Hard to say
I like Monta, he's exciting and all that but it's hard to turn down a chance to get AI.  Maybe he's a jerk, he wouldn't co-exist with Baron, maybe he would take too many shots etc....but he's still Allen Iverson.  At some point you have to overlook all the small details and realize he's a HoF player.  I don't think he's washed up either (ya he's played hard for a long time now, but he's only 31). Even if he is only good for two years, you are talking about two years from one of the best guards ever and the guy with the 3rd highest PPG average in NBA history.  He has only gotten better over the past three years and he's raised his APG - pretty good considering who he plays with.

People always overvalue potential. I'm not saying Monta won't be great someday or that maybe we'll regret giving him away, but obviously the current lineup isn't working and no amount of endless upside/potential will change that.  What if Monta raises his game next year and averages 25 ppg?  Are the Warriors suddenly going to win 10 more games with the same supporting cast? Hasn't worked for Michael Redd and Milwaukee.  I don't want to call this season lost already, but it's not looking good at this point and all the youth/exciting players aren't changing that.

All that being said, I wouldn't trade both JRich and Monta. I would probably rather keep JRich just because of what he means to the Warriors.  But if we can get rid of one of our terrible contracts with Monta and get AI, then I think I am for it.

by Jud Booshler on Dec 11, 2006 2:04 PM PST   0 recs

We still Talkin Bout This
Why would we want another player on tha team that needs to get his points. I like AI but we do not need another guard especially if we have to give up J-Rich and Monta. I say wait a little bit then when tha Celtics r out of it try to get Paul Pierce. Than we would have Baron, Monta, Jason, Paul, and Andris as starters, oh that would go. We would jus give tha celtics like Murph, Pietrus, maybe another and a pick. But we would kill.
I love 2 tell tha truth, but I'm such a Good Liar

by JRichIsStillAGodButBiedrinsIsABeast on Dec 11, 2006 2:05 PM PST   0 recs

hell yea
no doubt about it! i would give up monta ellis for iverson without hesitation.  have you guys seen how ellis has been playing lately?  we would be getting a steal

by chimp on Dec 11, 2006 2:36 PM PST   0 recs

I'll run against the crowd
This is only the FIRST step in remaking this roster

We should have dealt earlier for some inside depth when we had the chance so that the loss of Murphy wouldn't bite so hard now ... too late now

We may not get another chance to unload two Mullin mistakes in one shot - both Dunleavy & Murphy contracts are albatrosses

So, Yes, swallow hard & let Monta go - with BD, AI, and JRich when healthy, how much would he play in the next three years?

If they were willing to take Baron, rather than Murphy, and throw in a player to make the deal work, that would be ideal. I'm not sold on AI, BD, and JRich as 1-2-3 either but we can still trade one of them later for a big man that we desperately need once healthy ... this is just the first step, and a big one ...

How often will we get a chance to move two big contracts?

by hardcore on Dec 11, 2006 3:26 PM PST   0 recs

no way!
The notion that you'd rather give up Murphy (a player with a contract so bad we're going to have to bleed talen to get rid of him) than Baron defies comprehension.

Baron is a player with value.

Murphy is not.

All this talk is just insane. Iverson isn't that good. He scores a ton, but he does so by dominating the ball.

If we get Iverson, we might get a few more wins, but you'll see every other player on the team get worse.

To give up a young potential superstar in favor of an old, over-the-hill superstar is crazy. Yes, I said over-the-hill.

If Iverson was so great, why haven't his teams been any good for thee years?

You don't mortgage your future just to make the playoffs once.

by Ronaldinho on Dec 12, 2006 8:51 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

what are you hoping for?
I'd give up Murphy's FIVE year contract along with Dunleavy's FIVE year contract for AI (3 year) in a heartbeat

But Baron has SO LITTLE VALUE that he couldn't be given away last summer when Mullin tried, before dumping Montgomery's contract and bringing in Nelson. If Murphy has no value, why is HE the one being considered? On the right team, he is a double-double performer (proven, last season) not a "potential" superstar ....

Baron STILL has SO LITTLE VALUE that he wasn't even in the conversation when the AI trade was raised - not even discussed!

We won't be trading Baron for any big men, we MIGHT be able to trade JRich for a big down the road ...

mortgaging the future? isn't that what we've been doing for 12 FUGGIN YEARS? That's gotten old ...

We pick up AI now, unload those albatross contracts, and trade for a big later ...

or we swap AI for BD + side players to see if AI can do what BARON HAS NOT DONE for us ...

As for the potential superstar, how is Monta going to become a superstar behind Baron and JRich? If your answer is trading JRich, then we are back to a small backcourt. If the answer is trading Baron, well, no one wants to take him off our hands ...

Do you really expect to get any value for BD?
Do you want to bank on Monta becoming the next AI, or just get AI?
Do you think we're going to get KG? Or a comperable player? how?

The status quo is not good enough to make the playoffs, and the future is now to unload Mullin's past mistakes ... and Mullin isn't far behind as far as I'm concerned ...

by hardcore on Dec 12, 2006 9:09 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Absolutely No.
Warriors finally get a developing young talent who has boatloads of potential (Ellis) and you guys want to ship him off for a fading superstar?  Ridiculous.  

This is how franchises are killed.  Think Herschel Walker, OJ Simpson, Chris Webber (from Sac), Bill Walton (Portland to Clippers).  Aside from the Barkley and Chamberlain trades, trading young talent for a fading superstar almost never works.  

Plus you want to gut your franchise for someone who just wants to roll the ball out and play streetball?  Great leadership for......the Jailblazers and Pacers.  AI is the answer for "who needs coaching and practice to win?"

Nothing better than "The City".

by philsmith75 on Dec 11, 2006 3:42 PM PST   0 recs

they wont expiring contacts
not big ones. The Sixers won't take both.

by Psion on Dec 11, 2006 3:44 PM PST   0 recs

math.
sucking team without forwards - young guard witih potential + old guard = older sucking team without forwards.

by justin on Dec 11, 2006 3:46 PM PST   0 recs

this trade works $$$$ wise...
 on espn trade machine:

b. davis - 15,070,000
m. dunlevy  - 7,438,016

FOR

iverson - 17,184,375
kyle korver - 4,018,182

Why not do it????

by sftraderdude on Dec 11, 2006 4:07 PM PST   0 recs

NO WAY
AI is no where near as good as a point guard as BD. This trade wouldn't help us in anyway in fact it would hurt us.

by Psion on Dec 11, 2006 4:27 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

your trade =
exactly what was proposed here - last summer

and it still makes sense

by hardcore on Dec 11, 2006 6:43 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

as much as I love Iverson....
having 2 point guards quick to pull the trigger with their bad shot selections, and who have histories of not getting along with coaches is not what we need.

We can work with 1.

by bradyk2 on Dec 11, 2006 4:09 PM PST   0 recs

Come on...
Some of you guys are acting like AI would come in here and ruin a 20-0 team.  Right now what we have didn't work last year and it doesn't appear as though it will work this year.  Yes, there would be lots of guys who would be better fit....a nice PF or something.  But we don't have a shot of getting 80% of the players we actually want because they aren't free agents and their teams will never trade them.

Monta has talent, but 15-20 good games does not make him the next Arenas.  What if people start to guard him like he's a good player? How long can he surprise people for?  Anyways...what is it that Monta Ellis does that we are so enamored with?  SCORE. Kinda like what AI does.  Maybe five years down the road I'll be wrong about Monta, but right now I'd take a few years of AI's known for the unknown of Monta.

To me Webber is a good example for this trade, not against.  He brought respectibility back to the Kings, put fans in the seats and got them on the verge of a title.  Granted Warrior fans are loyal no matter what and the Kings had more talent, but still.

But I'll concede that I wouldn't want to add Monta to the very long and painful list of "ones that got away".  

by Jud Booshler on Dec 11, 2006 4:27 PM PST   0 recs

The Webber situation is different ...
Because when the Kings acquired Webber, he was one of the best two or three forwards in the game, and still coming into his prime.

AI is NOT one of the best two or three guards in the game. He's a big name, but: Kobe, Wade, LeBron, Paul, McGrady, and Nash are all clearly better than he is - and you could make another list, just as long, including Baron, who are aproximately as good.

Webber made a splash in Sacto not just because he was a good name, but because he was a top player. Iverson, at this point, is not that quality of a player.

While it may be necessary to make a talent-losing trade to rid ourselves of the Foyle and/or Murphy contracts (I think Dunleavy might prove more tradeable), don't kid yourself that adding Iverson makes us a significantly better team. He's not a top-20 player in the league.

by Ronaldinho on Dec 12, 2006 10:52 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Win now, win later... win ever?
I've seen a few posts about this team deciding whether it wants to build for the future or win now, but it seems to me that doing nothing will prevent us from achieving either of these goals.  We've got almost 60 million committed for the next two years, which will make it tough to resign Monta, Biedrins, Diogu and Pietrus unless we dump someone (Dunleavy, JRich, TDouble, Foyle).  Our cap situation will allow us to resign two (maybe three) of these players.  Given that, and barring any cap freeing moves, I think the W's will have to choose between Pietrus and Monta.  I'd take us dealing one (or two) in order to dump our long term contract issues over losing them Gilbert style to the Warriors East.  Maybe the Answer is not the Answer, but we would be foolish to look past this chance.  

Deals I would consider (that I am guessing would work money wise):
JRich + Diogu + Dunleavy = Iverson + cheap crap
Monta/Pietrus + Dunleavy/TDouble + Foyle = Iverson
But I would be surprised if Philly would do those.

Manute Bol stole my lunch money

by manute-o on Dec 11, 2006 4:31 PM PST   0 recs

From the Hollinger chat
P (NYC): Hey John, why aren't the Warriors involved in any talks? It seems like they have the right combination of big salary guys (Baron, Murph, Dunleavy) and promsing young guys (Pietrus, Diogu, assuming they won't give up Ellis & Biedrins). What gives?

SportsNation John Hollinger: Not sure, I'd like to see GSt get into the mix. But they seem reluctant to part with Monta Ellis, and that's going to be part of the price of admission. Unless Nelly trades all his bigs to get Iverson and just throws out a lineup of Davis, Ellis, Richardson, Iverson and Pietrus, which I suppose given Nelly's history we shouldn't rule out.

by Fantasy Junkie on Dec 11, 2006 5:02 PM PST   0 recs

This is easy! Just trade...
Dunleavy/Murphy/Pietrus & a 1st rounder (the 76ers). Ha!

(or)

Murphy/J-Rich for A.I.

That'll give us:

BD
AI
Monta
Pietrus
Biedrins

Not bad at all...

by bigcity7 on Dec 11, 2006 5:25 PM PST   0 recs

baron + ai together in the backcourt?
is that going to be the next Starbury + Francis duo?

by dj fuzzylogic on Dec 11, 2006 5:31 PM PST   0 recs

do it
I'm personally willing to take crap in return if somehow mullin is able to get rid of Bumleavy and/or Murphy

Sure Ellis has potential but will we have another chance to unload some mistakes. If reports are true that the Sixers want it done soon, why not capitalize on their state of mind. I don't want their GM to sober up anytime soon.

by ufwa on Dec 11, 2006 5:46 PM PST   0 recs

They missed one part of the article
The ending was very important too

 


Troy Murphy, Mike Dunleavy Jr., Jason Richardson.   Sixers most interested in Monta Ellis.

WOW.  Monta+Dun would intrigue me.  Monta+Troy would kinda hurt.  Monta+Jrich ... HAHA in your wildest dreams!

by gsdubz on Dec 11, 2006 6:24 PM PST   0 recs

.413FG% & .226 3pt%
These are AT's #'s plus in only 15 games he has put up 366 shots(24.4 per game). Now Monta has put up more shots on the Warriors than any one else(298 in 21 games). This is 68 less shots in 6 more games. Everybody on the Warriors are shooting better than AI. So how in hell is this going to make us a better team. If you think this would make the W's better,could I have some of whatever it is you are smoking.

by Psion on Dec 11, 2006 6:44 PM PST   0 recs

different circumstances
not arguing with your numbers one bit

but the circumstances Monta has enjoyed are completely different than AI in Philly

Monta surprised the league, has other shooters playing alongside him, and takes fewer contested shots (there's a very valid argument he will not florish under more pressure, which he certainly will be getting)

by hardcore on Dec 11, 2006 7:47 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

I'm not
saying Monta is better than AI. What I'm saying is AI takes way too many shots with poor %'s. While there is no one on the W's with such low %'s. We don't rebound the ball good enough to have such a high volume shooter,his misses way too much. This will only hurt our team not help. I will say this again,we need to improve our front court not our back court.

by Psion on Dec 11, 2006 7:54 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

agreed on front court,
your singing to the choir on that - and I like your posts, good analysis, good points ... I just see the opportunity to move two bad 5 year contracts for one bad 3 three year contract (see below) - plus AI plays he plays every night, he plays defense, he plays clutch at the FT line ... we can try to trade for a big using BD, or JR if necessary - a healthy JR is a big chip to trade, and with AI & BD we'd have enough scoring. Like I said above, this is just the first step. I hear you, I hate giving up on Monta, but the big picture looks better unloading those contracts and gaining an All League player ...

AND, all this energy is probably worthless anyway, if the Dubz were going to pull the trigger, they would have by now I'd think ....

by hardcore on Dec 11, 2006 8:17 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Wouldn't give up Ellis for Iverson
Ellis has the makings of being a poor man's Iverson and, given Iverson's age and his imminent decline, Iverson himself should be a poor man's Iverson before long.

I really think that in a couple years Iverson and Ellis will be about on equal footing. Which is to take nothing away from AI's brilliant career, just that it has to start slowing down somewhere, and that time is likely sooner rather than later.

by jonathan on Dec 11, 2006 7:04 PM PST   0 recs

Ellis > Iverson? Not yet...
And probably not ever. True, Iverson is going to fade soon and Ellis is just going to get better. But there are some realities here we have to deal with:
  1. Even if Ellis turns out to be the next AI, that doesn't mean it'll happen in Oakland. See: Arenas, Gilbert.
  2. AI ain't done YET. He's still leading the league in scoring, and he rarely ever takes a night off--which cannot necessarily be said for some Warriors. Scrappy defense, steals, driving to the cup, and most importantly, he gets to the line, and makes his damn free throws.
  3. We haven't been to the playoffs in a bajillion years. If getting Iverson helps us make it to the playoffs, DO IT. I don't care if it makes us a middle-of-the-pack playoff team--it's still PLAYOFFS. Do we really need to wait around for a few more years for Ellis to develop into the Savior? And see (1) for more details.
  4. AI's got 3 years left on his contract. If he declines in 2 years, that's a huge fucking expiring contract that can potentially mean great things for the team's future. So it's not like you're condemning the team to a thousand years in Hell by trading Ellis. Scratch that: ANOTHER 1000 years in Hell.
It might work, it might not, but ferchrissakes, it's A-freakin-I. He's a future Hall of Famer, and he's still ballin' like crazy. And if Mullin didn't explore this, he'd be crazy too.

by ffgolden on Dec 11, 2006 7:22 PM PST   0 recs

I'm jinxing it... AI in a Warriors jersey
LOL OK it's horrible quality cuz I just did it on MS Paint, but I am jinxing this whole AI thing so we can stop talking about it once and for all!



by gsdubz on Dec 11, 2006 7:27 PM PST   0 recs

AI in a Warriors jersey
   DAMN!! That looks so right!

by Skeptic con Urquell on Dec 11, 2006 8:23 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

No it doesn't...
Sorry but I can't see him in a W's jersey unless it's for cheap.  It just reminds me of John Starks so much... I don't know why... It's that awkward

by mightymadskillz on Dec 11, 2006 9:04 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Sometimes we speak before thinking
Say this out loud:

John Stars equals Allen Iverson.

Say it a few more times... again....
again.... now... hear it?  That's what you just said! Sounds crazy huh?

by gsdubz on Dec 11, 2006 9:18 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Mully, make the deal!
Remember Murph, Pietrus and Ike Diogu for Ron Artest?  Remember how the Ws passed on that one?!!!  If we had Artest the Ws would've made the playoffs last year like the Kings. And we'd be contenders this year!  

Make the deal Mully!  Unless both you AND Nellie think Ellis or Biedrins (my two favorite Warriors) will become superstars too.  I'd trade anyone for Iverson but it would hurt if both Monta and Andris  goes. Hopefully they can keep one or both if the Answer comes to town!  I love JRich but what you gonna do.

Iverson is leading the league in scoring with Carmelo.  He plays D and he's a tough son of a gun. The guy will do anything to WIN!

DO IT NOW!  Dang, with all these fire sales, the Warriors could've had both Artest and Iverson!  Simply mind-blowing!

Kirk

by kirkkazas on Dec 11, 2006 7:40 PM PST   0 recs

Different player
Artest is a different player, he would of gave us a defensive mind set and brought intensity, plus he would of filled tha void at SF. But AI jus gives us another perimeter shooter wit low FG%.
I love 2 tell tha truth, but I'm such a Good Liar

by JRichIsStillAGodButBiedrinsIsABeast on Dec 11, 2006 9:42 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

NO way
If the warriors want to make front office suicide, then be my guest.
AI was the answer 3-4 years ago, now he's half the answer especially if he comes here. Baron and AI would take 50 combined shots! To me, i'd always rather have younger players than older ones. Pluse AI would financially cripple us anway.

by kenntoe on Dec 11, 2006 7:42 PM PST   0 recs

f'r Christ's sake y'all!
- you are forgetting that we are UNLOADING BAD CONTRACTS + getting AI ... it's like using an "eraser" to get the right "answer" ... it's Mullin's mulligan (I don't play golf, but it sounds right) ... Dunleavy and Murphy have FIVE years left on those contracts! FIVE PHUGGIN YEARS! That's what will strangle this franchise for-freaking-ever!

AI for Dunleavy and injured JRich - is there any guarantee JRich comes back 100%? I LOVE JR but ...

AI for Baron and both sides throw in change (MP/Korver) is my preference, but not a bit of rumor about BD so that about kills that (and what does THAT say to all those who praise BD - he's not even being considered!)

AI for Murphy and Dunleavy, and Monta is a trade though it's awkward with AI & BD but it's still erasing TWO HUGE 5 YEAR ALBATROSSES, and Monta is not gonna play much with AI, BD, and a healthy JR anyway

by hardcore on Dec 11, 2006 8:02 PM PST   0 recs

That sums up everything i wanted to say...lol
Just do it! I'm tired of building for the future and grooming our rookies who later leave for bigger money (G. Arenas). If they want Monta then we give them Monta. Iverson's contract might be huge but getting rid of one bad contract is a lot easier then trying to get rid of 4 (dun, foyle, murphy, baron)! This is our chance and if all it takes to get rid of 2 contracts is to add in Monta, then I say let's do this. I'm ready for a new era. Atleast I'll feel more confident with A.I. holding the ball in the last minute.

by ON THE RUN on Dec 11, 2006 8:33 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

nellie will need Iverson to pick up on
Nellie ball pretty quickly if AI comes here to get back into the playoff picture the way we are dropping games. and this will probably mean Iverson has to go to practice.

("Are we talkin' bout' practice?!?!")^172561753762537625376237253723

by ZombieWarrior on Dec 11, 2006 8:27 PM PST   0 recs

Get AI
Trade anybody to get AI. Iverson is still a top player in this league and certainly better than anyone we have right now. It's about time the Warriors had a legit superstar. Seriously, how long has it been since we've had anyone as good as Iverson? We're not going to the playoffs this year, without a move.

by showerman on Dec 11, 2006 8:35 PM PST   0 recs

only if...
if we can trade 2 bad contracts (foyle, dun, murph-pick em) and monta for AI then i say do it! 2 big contracts for 1 big contract is worth giving up monta. you can always draft another guard who can score and play some D. but a chance to get rid of horrible contracts very early ( murph, foyle, and dun still have 4+ years) almost never happens! AI can still play and even if he only has 2 good years left, we can package his expiring contract for some more talent later (maybe for a big man) from what we have seen so far this year, the W's are NOT a playoff team and there is no way they even have a chance at a championship anytime soon. so it's time to erase as many mistakes as possible and start rebuilding the right way!

by jmorales on Dec 11, 2006 9:37 PM PST   0 recs

Get ai
AI and korver for BD MP and Monta

Or
Ai and hunter for BD Murph and monta
getting rid of two bad contracts

by bor887 on Dec 11, 2006 9:43 PM PST   0 recs

How do you think AI and BD would get along?
I just can't see it. I mean, if it were 5 years ago, sure, but it's not like the Warriors are making a push for the finals. Why give up so much for a season like this. I'd rather we try and dump salary some other way, and I'm still dreaming of magically landing Greg Oden.

by Jeremy Belvins on Dec 11, 2006 9:54 PM PST   0 recs

Announcement expected Tuesday?
I just heard that the frontrunners to land Iverson are Boston, Golden State and Sacramento. Strangely tomorrow the Sixers play the Celtics...What a homecoming for Iverson??? All this refreshing hoping to be the first one to see the "BREAKING NEWS ALERT: IVERSON TRADED TO WARRIORS IN A BLOCKBUSTER DEAL INVOLVING 3 TEAMS" Put me out of my misery and trade for the guy already!

by ON THE RUN on Dec 11, 2006 9:58 PM PST   0 recs

HAHAHAHAHAHA
I'm with you.  Sad what we go through every year praying for the miracles.  I always get angry thinking how many people we have let slip past us, but then I focus on the time we actually got B.D., and feel a little better.

by gsdubz on Dec 11, 2006 10:02 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Tell me about it!
I'm tired of talking about "who are we drafting this year"? Haven't we suffered enough. We need a superstar on board! Relying on a rookie to develop is risky because most of the times they don't never pan out or if they do they end up leaving for more money elsewhere. Monta is a tough kid but he ain't as healthy as everyone thinks. Why else do you think other teams passed on him. His value right now is as big as it gets given his low salary and potential. Look at what happened to Pietrus...When he was drafter they called him the Michael Jordan of France. Like Ellis he showed some signs but now that he's finally developing them he's heading into the last year of his contract. I'm pretty sure some other team will over pay for his services. So to sum it all up, give us the ANSWER for questions about the playoffs. Don't even bring up the Greg Oden talk because I'm not digging this whole LOTTERY PICK status our team goes through each year.

by ON THE RUN on Dec 11, 2006 10:11 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

PLEASE DONT GIVE UP
JRICH OR MONTA. PLEASE!!!!!

by ZombieWarrior on Dec 11, 2006 10:10 PM PST   0 recs

PLEASE GIVE UP IVERSON!
You can have anyone you want. Pick your poison.

by ON THE RUN on Dec 11, 2006 10:12 PM PST   0 recs

i am still not sold on getting AI, but
would consider moving Monta, if we can get rid of one, or more of the bad contracts,and keep BD, JRich, and Biedrins. It may be a good start If we can also make a move for a quality big man(KG, J. Oneal, Pao)either by the deadline or in the offseason, with the other bad contracts, and possibly BD, or Jrich, or AI to work with. I think a BD, AI backcourt could work, AI is more of an undersized 2 anyway(and we wouldnt have to have barnes putting up 19 shots) Getting AI MIGHT help us get into (and shortly out of) the playoffs, he also may make it more appealing for his buddy KG to play here. basically it is going to be more important to get some help down low.

and i think the people that are wanting Webber may need a little warrior history lesson he is the anti-warrior. maybe we should bring back adelman too.

by azw on Dec 12, 2006 12:17 AM PST   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed

Search

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)