Ray Allen 6-5 SG from Connecticut 15.9 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 2.9 apg in 36.5 minutes Brian Scalabrine 6-9 PF from USC 1.8 ppg, 1.0 rpg, 0.6 apg in 10.3 minutes Outgoing Players Tracy McGrady 6-8 SG / SF from Mount Zion Christian Academy (HS) 3.2 ppg, 0.8 rpg, 1.0 apg in 7.6 minutes Joey Dorsey 6-9 PF from Memphis 0.0 ppg, 1.0 rpg, 0.0 apg in 2.3 minutes DO IT !
I was playing the trade machine, and since the Wizards are having quite the issues, I traded with them, T-Mac for Bulter, Foye and Haywood. I really don't that much about those 3, but I saw Haywood is a 7 footer who only makes about 6 million, and I think this might be the last yr of his contract. My question is, Is he a good player? I've seen the AI/ Dalembert trade talks on here, I just want the team to get stuck with that trade kicker. Again thanks for the help, its honestly becoming like a 2nd education for me.
I think I like your trade better than the one for Iggy. Butler solid with only a year left after this. Haywood is a very solid bigman, and if he only has a year left I like it. Foye a young talent that hasn't reached his potential yet. This trade is solid if they want to add some wins this year, future not sure if it's enough for Dm
http://twitter.com/RicBucher/status/8255947316 *Biedrins being the bad longterm contract that gets dumped.
No thanks. I'm not sure how that improves the team moving forward and/or makes the Rockets more of a contender. You trade a HUGE expiring contract, a young starting PG coming into his own and a nice looking rookie that looks like could become a player in this league for what? A short combo-guard that looks to shoot first, a one-year rental on an aging player and a HORRIBLE contract for Yao's backup. And, you can't just dump a 5 yr. contract, especially at that salary. No offense, but YUCK!!!
Brooks or Curry? Curry's in his rookie season and I don't think they're that far off from each other right now. The major difference being Curry is 21 and Brook is 25. Curry's avg 19.67pts /game in January. He's finishes better than Brooks in the paint and holds a higher FG%. IMO this team lacks a Reggie Miller type player, need more midrange punch, possibly making Curry a better fit. Biedrins is the price that the Rockets have to pay. Bell and Claxton are just expiring filler.
I agree. I was never on the Stephan Curry bandwagon, and Biedrins is an avg NBA center at best. I hate the idea of giving up Aaron Brooks especially since he buys into the team-first approach and the playoff experience should go unsaid. REJECTED!
Fire sale or not, I don't see the Warriors trading Curry. Their GM said he might have to trade someone he didn't want to trade....I would think Randolph would be him. Randolph is, what?, 6'10"? About 4" taller than Nelson's ideal player height. If we reeeeeeeeeaally wanted to, we might get Randolph, but goodness, what horrific contracts the Warriors would add with him.
The only problem i have ever had with this trade is that you are essentially mortgaging this teams future for the next 3 or 4 years. Does this make us a title contender? Or do we end up like New Orleans and end up just on the cusp for one year, then only to fall back to Earth when expectations get to high. If this is the best trade the Rockets can get, then so be it. I'm just not in love with it....
I agree. Having a first round pick go bad is not nearly as crippling as in the NFL, and the potential for that pick working out is great. However, what team will be willing to dump first round picks for T-Mac? Three years ago it would have been Pheonix, but who now?
How about McGrady, Brooks, and Budinger for Ellis, Maggette, and Turiaf? That solves your scoring and shot-blocking problems. And the Warriors get young talent plus massive financial relief.
Valid points but you're making an awful big trade for all that amounts to MAYBE an upgrade at one position. If it was to get an elite replacement like a Paul, then i could justify it better. But I don't see Curry ever being that, or anything close to that, AT ALL. Hell, I personally don't see him as an upgrade over Brooks. That's just me though. So, to me, it looks like your trading away an awful lot and hand-tying the team financially just to acquire a better all-around shooter at one position.
How about this 3 team trade with Knicks and 6ers? http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yzrw6pk Houston Receives: Jefferies Jordan Hill Iggy Knicks Receive: T-Mac Philly Receives: Larry Hughes We make out like bandits in this trade, but Knicks dump one of their awful contracts in Jefferies and get T-mac (who for some reason they want), and Philly gets some cap room without giving up any young talent.
dude thats a real bad trade, you usually have really good ideas but i gota disagree with this one. beidrins isnt that good and whats he going to do with yao, be an expensive back up for that man years. that dalembert trade looks better because its only 2 yrs this and next year.
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yzw793r This trade would never happen because it makes too much sense for everyone. Oh to be a fantasy GM. The Rockets: Use their major assets (cheap talent, cap relief) to get defense and rebounding in the paint (Biedrins), an extremely overpaid offense only 6th man (Maggette), an offense only starting SG with range (Richardson), and a truer pass first/fewer turnover PG in George Hill to replace Aaron Brooks. They take a gamble on Randolph's potential as an acquisition of young athleticism. The only thing making this trade palpable is the fact that Battier and Richardson would both come off the books next year (which could be considered an additional asset). The major problem I see with this is the trade does not fulfill Morey's insistence on "All-Star level" talent to fit the NBA's tried and true 2 superstar championship team building. The Warriors: Shed their two worst contracts (Biedrins and Maggette) merely by swapping Landry for Randolph (if either the Rockets or Warriors object to this caveat the trade could be reworked without it). They do this purely as a salary dump, and do so without shipping off any of their "talent": Ellis, Curry, Morrow (and/or Randolph as amended prior) The Suns: Giving up what, some consider, major talent in Stoudemire, they must receive a handsome reward. Shedding Richardson's salary should decrease their demands to where they "may" accept Brooks in return. They also receive the ability to resign Scola and Ginobli for reasonable prices, keeping them a playoff contender until the Nash era ends while simultaneously setting up their next generation of a Brooks/Barbosa backcourt. The rest of this trade is merely expiring contract filler. The Spurs: Seem to have interest in Stoudemire for some odd reason. Ginobli is their only tradeable large contract so I assume any trade for Stoudemire would have to involve him (I doubt anyone would touch that Jefferson contract). Essentially a Ginobli/Hill/Bonner for Stoudemire trade. If they have interest in Dragic as a backup point to replace Hill, this swap would make even more sense.
