To be fair, and at this time, Curry was coming off a 15 ppg season where his ankle injuries were an extreme cause for concern. And Ellis, up until the trade to MIL, was averaging 22 ppg. Obviously now, in hindsight, no one would take Ellis over Curry. But back then, it was a tough decision.
No it was not. Curry was young and had potential. Ellis was like a Rudy Gay. Good player near all star level but you will never achieve anything with him
Young and had potential, sure. But he also had glass ankles at the time. Sure, Ellis wasn't in the top echelon of players, but at least he was available. Also, he was a fan favorite. The amount of fan backlash the Warriors got, for trading Ellis, was real.
His ankle injuries, surgery on his ankle. It was unbelievable how easy it is for Stephen Curry to break his own ankle. Thanks to both ankle braces, his injuries have stopped.
How is that typical? Curry's stock wasnt that good because of his ankle injuries in fact he didnt even sign a max deal he got like 15M when Max deals were like 25M because of his health. That showed nobody believed he would be healthy and have a long career even GSW and Curry himself. Curry is a freak he is the only person I know who was often injured in the past and then suddenly became healthy for an extended period of time. And the Bucks had Bogut qho was an injury prone player himself so its understandable they would be shy about taking injury prone guys. The NBA grinds down players' bodies over time it's crazy how somebody can become healthy as they grow older and has more wear and tear then when they were still fresh.
No one could have foreseen Curry actually playing this many games per season after those ankle injuries much less turn into a 2 time MVP.
curry with yanis antenakomounounmpo would be awesome. you would see curry in his true form since he won't be getting the protection from the refs and league like he does now.
Nope, Klay was a rookie when this deal went down, he ended up taking Ellis' spot in the starting lineup.
This was known from the moment it happened. The previous owner was extremely meddling and determined to have the team always in treadmill, make the 8th place in the playoffs by all means necessary, overpaying journey men and over the hill "known" names and because it is a small market it also suffered and still does from not being able to sign any big free agent. So of course he wouldnt take any risks. The GM was only allowed to take some risks in the draft on raw players but even then most were traded away in a year. Thats why the biggest fortune for any nba franchise is to have a good owner. All the other are secondary if the fish stinks from the head. Anyway the current owners themselves arent that good either and extremely meddling but at least they are risk takers and daring. Perhaps because they arent from Wisconsin and they dont have inferiority complex.
Here's an article from 3 or 4 years ago that said the same thing (this isn't exactly news). But they also throw in that Klay Thompson could've been had if not for the "conservative" approach of ownership/management : https://journaltimes.com/sports/bas...cle_6a9c8ba2-77fe-5d6f-a009-1b57861ad0fe.html
Wow, they could've broken up a dynasty of villainous evil, and changed the future of the NBA. Kevin Durant would still be arguing with fake twitter accounts instead of riding coattails.
