Can we finally put to rest that the Gasol/Brown trade was 1 sided

Marc Gasol was known. He was the most improved player by all accounts in the European league BEFORE the trade. People need to get their facts straight.

 

He was known but wasn't some top prospect as folks here are claiming. He had the value of say a 2nd round pick. If the Grizz thought he was a top prospect then they don't draft another center high. I guarentee you if the Jazz win the lotto they won't draft another PF high since they just got Favors.

 

Right, because we all know European success always translates to NBA success, as Darko Milicic and our very own Greek T-Mac will attest to.

 

Dude? You could have said the same thing about Lebron James, but I bet you that you'd have traded your whole team to get him.

Give me a break.

You need a link?

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Marc-Gasol-155/

 

doesn't necessarily mean his game will transfer. it's a 50-50, for every luis there is a darko.

 

Before Gasol ever played a minute of basketball in Memphis there were evaluators, not just in memphis, saying that he would be a first round pick had he come out that year.

You are so clueless. It's pathetic.

 

Also, let's get the time line straight.

Pau was traded in 07-08 in season a couple of weeks before the deadline.

Marc didn't come over till 08-09, but was drafted a year before in the 2nd round of the 07 draft.

When the 08 draft came up, there were many people speculating that if Marc would have been in the 08 draft he would have been a top 10 pick.

That is a fact. Chris Wallace even said that he received for number 1s and cap space for marc, since he was including marc as a first round pick by then.

Again, you are clueless.

 

Memphis had Gasol for a full year and they still spent a #2 pick on a center. Why do you keep ingoring that? That doesn't sound like a team who believes they have their answer at C.

Fine, he would have been a 1st rounder. That still isn't a top prospect. The Rockets can't trade our current 1st rounders to teams and claim top prospects can be had with our picks. It's not that complex.

The Grizz traded their star for a guy who wasn't considered a top prospect (i.e. top 5), some late draft picks and some cap space? You disagree with this?

 

I meant "four" & "Pau"

 

And again, he felt so strongly about him that he spent a #2 pick on another center. And top 10 picks are not considered the top prospects in a draft. It's typically top 5 guys. When we got the #8 pick that we traded for Battier, none of us thought we would get a stud at that pick.

I think you are clueless on what teams consider a top prospect.

 

Paul Pierce?

Where was Kobe drafted again?

 

he is only 4 years younger. When is this going to happen?

 

Icehouse, dude, you keep saying the same thing over and over.

They traded Pau for a 1st round prospect (Gasol), a 1st rounder (Crin-tin-tin), 2 future 1st rounders and a ****ton of expiring.

Who cares what they did with the 2nd overall pick of the next draft? How is that relevant?

You are telling me that 4 1st rounders and a ton of capspace is a bad deal for a rebuilding team? If you are telling me that, then there is no point having this discussion.

 

In terms of defense/rebounding/hustle/toughness, it has already happened.

And yes, I do think that the Lakers would still be going for a 3-peat if you replace Pau with Marc since they would still have crazy depth up front.

 

Where was Rodman drafted? Great players can emerge from anywhere, but find me one GM that says "we are going to get the top prospect with our #10 pick".

You know exactly what I mean so I don't see why you are beating around the bush. If you want a top prospect you typically try to get a very high pick, and not hope that someone falls to you. Gasol was not considered a top prospect. His own GM picked another top prospect that plays his same position.

 

No, I keep asking the same question over and over because you have yet to provide a relevant answer. You claimed that GM's use top picks to stack talent. I claim that GM's don't use top picks on positions that they are content in.

And that haul is typically less than what is received for a star player. And that's all I am arguing.

It's quite relevant when folks try to validate the trade by saying the Grizz knew Gasol was a stud and try to recreate history to make the trade about him. If you think you have a stud center you don't draft another center, unless you plan to play the two alongside each other. That really isn't possible with Thabeet and Gasol.

I like how it's no longer relevant when you can't provide concrete examples.

I'm telling you a prospect that isn't considered great (Gasol), capspace and two near 2nd rounders isn't a good deal for a rebuilding team when a star usually fetches a top prospect, capspace and high draft picks (i.e. not near 2nd rounders). And at the time of the trade Critt wasn't considered to be that good, and is he even still in the league?

 

At the time, Critt was a rookie drafted in the 1st round.

And yes, at that time, Marc was emerging as a promising bigman in Europe. What showed you proof of that and you acknowledged Marc as a 1st round prospect.

The cap is the key of the deal. Not many other teams in the league had the expiring contracts to match the maximum of that of Gasol (at least not many which could afford to/wanted to pay him the max) so all this talk about "Memphis should have gotten a better offer" confuses me.

They were rebuilding. Their plan was to get rid of their big contract, stockpile assets/picks/talent and start fresh. Clearly they did a good job at executing on that plan and the Gasol deal was easily the biggest reason as to why.

And no, trading Gasol for 4 1st rounders and cap is not a bad a deal at all. Minnesota gave Al Jefferson away for absolutely nothing. Same can be said about Charlotte giving Wallace to Portland. Compared to those deals (also including borderline allstars/max players), Memphis came away pretty strong.

 

Memphis, even with Pau, looked like they were going nowhere. Dude had a maximum level contract. Getting rid of him made the most sense for the franchise at the time. The Lakers were one of the few teams which had the pieces to get it done. Right place at the right time.

As far as Ray Allen for a top 5 pick goes. That is a special case. Seattle/OKC got lucky that Boston was desperate. How many other examples like that do you have?

 

How is the deal not one sided????

With Pau, the Lakers are on the par to win third championship in 4 years.

With Marc, first 2nd round playoffs appearance for the Grizzlies in 4 years.

Yes, to the kobe wankers like goodbug, Lakers without Paul and with Marc won win 2 in the row in the last 3 years!

 

And my answer to the question (which you have been repeating like a million times) as to why they drafted a center 2nd overall remains the same- TO STOCKPILE ASSETS/TALENT. To them, Thabeet was the best prospect available due for obvious reasons (look at him). The Thabeet pick may not have worked out but as a rebuilding team (which just traded away all of their talent to start fresh), they can afford to take that risk.

To them Marc was a 1st rounder as What pointed out. Why is it that a rebuilding drafting who you deem the best player available such a difficult concept to grasp?