How does Chris Wallace still have a job in the NBA....

This wasn't that bad of a deal for Memphis. People only criticize it because the deal was with the Lakers. Every single year a team in rebuilding mode trades a star for pennies on the dollar. What's so hard to grasp about that concept?

 

I wouldn't compare the Antwan Jamison deal to the Pau Gasol deal.

AJ is not in his prime and has an albatross contract to boot. Gasol was and still is an all star that has at least 3 years of high level productivity left in the tank.

Now if it was the Cavs garbage for Amar'e Stoudemire I'm pretty sure there would be more rumblings.

 

Looking from the Griz point of view. They traded their best player for young players(gasol), picks and contract flexibility. Looking on from now, its a pretty decent team with young talents. Would the same thing have happen if they have not traded Gasol? They be stuck in mediocrity for the past few years and the next few as Gasol will keep them barely afloat.

They will still be paying Gasol the max, meaning less financial flexibility, and by pumping the ball to Gasol young players like Gay and Mayo would not have improve as they had.

So its not really as one sided as it is.

 

In retrospect, Grizzles couldn't get any better deal than this.
They got cap relief and 3 first round, and another 2nd round that would be first round after 08 summer in Marc Gasol.

Marc Gasol alone is better than any player in Bulls (Rose wasn't there at the time), the only other team that could offer a package competitive.

 

Where were the complainers when the Lakers traded Caron Butler for Kwame Brown? No, the whiners only came out in full force when they traded Kwame (along with Marc Gasol) for Pau.

Teams that the Lakers have dealt with are quite happy with the trades. It's the butthurt fans of opposing franchises that can't stand it.

 

Jamison and Gasol are not really comparable players. Jamison is past his prime, and even if he weren't, he has never been the best player on a 50-win team, like Gasol was.

I agree, though, that people need to get over it.

 

Antwan?

A superstar? Are you high?

You have to be a Laker fan to make these comparisons.

 

When Kwame was traded to the Lakers, he was still having the "upside" label. When he was traded from the Lakers, everybody and his grandma knew that Kwame was worthless. That's the BIG difference.

Same thing with Marc Gasol, but from the opposite direction. When he was traded to the Grizzlies, nobody really expect much of him other than just another big body, or else he would have been drafted a lot higher.

Don't confuse the end results with the intention of the trade at that time. You have to look at the value of each traded piece to understand how lopsided a trade was AT THAT TIME.

 

It cracks me up when people throw out the term "first-round picks" like they mean something in and of themselves. There's a legitimate case to be made that late first-round picks actually have negative value for some teams, given the guaranteed contracts and the very low probability of success. It's no secret that GMs far prefer high second-round picks in the 30-35 range to 25-29, for this very reason. It's also no secret that you can buy late first-round picks for a bit of cash every single season. By trading Gasol to the Lakers, the Grizzlies were creating a power. They knew this, and knew those picks would be in the dreaded 25-29 range. Thus, those two "first-round picks" were almost negative value. Crittenton basically fell into that category as well.

Future first-round picks mean something, when it's a trade like the McGrady deal and the picks have a reasonable chance of carrying good value - either with the player or as an asset. Future first-round picks mean a lot less if you're picking them up from the likes of the Lakers.

All that said, yes, Marc Gasol turned out well and that was a good bit of scouting by Chris Wallace. The above wasn't to slam the trade as a whole - only to reject the simplistic nature of some of these "but they got 3 first round picks!!!" responses and to show how worthless that is without context. The bigger issue, as someone already stated, is that Wallace didn't play the Gasol card to its highest value, which would have been around the deadline. He caved at a time in which GMs almost never cave. That's what draws the hatred and suspicion from guys like Gregg Popovich.

 

You mean, the 08-09 Wizards that won 19 games, and the 09-10 Wizards that were 17-33 when Jamison was traded? He was a superstar because he was the leading scorer, face, and captain of a really crappy team?

 

Grizzles were 22-60 in 06-07, and on the pace to 22-60 when Gasol was traded in 07-08.

Gasol is younger, I give you that. But he didn't really have a better resume before the trade.

 

The same thing can be said when Cavs got Shaq and Jamison for free. Spurs got Jefferson for free.

People were craving that's the last piece to championship. Now the same people are talking how Shaq/Jamison are old, Jefferson can't defend.

Lakers didn't make a more lopsided deal. They just end up with more success.

 

He had a much better resume. He took a team of nobodies to 50 wins. People rave so much about what Kobe did in '06 with Odom, Kwame, etc, but Gasol actually led his team to a better record with a arguably worse cast (no one nearly as good as Odom). At the time of the trade, Gasol was a top-5 PF. Antawn was never top-5 anything. The closest thing to compare this to is how the Celts got Garnett (with an equally fishy McHale connection); but at least Minny got back Al Jefferson, a 20/10 big.

 

That's bull****, the Grizzle team had more talent. The Lakers team had Kobe/Odom and a bunch of NBDL players as starters.

KG won MVP and led his team to WCF finals once. Gasol never won one playoff game.

If Gasol was really that good, he would have ended up being in All NBA team then. Instead, he's on 3rd team twice only after traded to Lakers.

 

I'm not sure if it actually happened but I believe they were looking to sell the team so the actual owner wanted the team to have cheap but productive assets who can help the future. And well Wallace did it right. HE gave away a massive contract (from the Grizz perspective) and got back some talent in return (Gasol, Crittenton, draft picks). The bottom line for that trade was to have cheap productive assets and that deal achieved that goal.

 

Great post, Mr.Buttocks. Something one doesn't often get to write on a message board.

 

Didn't Baron Davis to GS for Dale Davis' ending contract?

 

Yes... he was perceived marginally better because he was YOUNGER than David Andersen. But they were worth more or less the same, or else why he be drafted in the 2nd round? Most people at the time thought as the center equivalent of Yi, just some guy drafted for novelty purposes and to give the Lakers more of a Spanish fanbase. Sure he had upside being only 23 at the time, but his upside was seen more similar to guys like Tiago Splitter, extremely intangible. If Tiago Splitter decided he wanted to come to the NBA after all and the Spurs handed his rights to the Lakers for Pau Gasol, won't you think that's highway robbery by the Spurs? You're trading a proven all-star caliber player for an unknown commodity. It might pan out, however if you're Memphis unless you're a total moron you wouldn't trade a sure thing for a long shot without other goodies thrown in.

Lakers got Memphis' best player, a proven all star who while unsuccessful, has the skills to complement a championship caliber wingman. Only a moron would look at Pau Gasol's skillset and not think that his addition would ensure the Laker's dominance for the next ~3-5 years.

Memphis didn't even get the Laker's 2nd or 3rd or 4rth best player, they got kwame brown (trash), crittenton (billed as someone with upside but really also trash), aaron mckie (trash), Marc Gasol, and two draft picks. To add insult to injury, Memphis also had to give away a 2nd round pick of their own. LMAO, Memphis' (likely) high 2nd round pick is probably more valuable from a trade value standpoint than the Lakers' low first round picks.

To goodbug/rock4ever:

I have no idea why you seem hellbent on praising Kobe to high heavens, to the point of trying make the Pau Gasol trade not a big deal, when it is the most lopsided trade in the past decade. It is definitely not comparable to the Cavs getting Antawn Jamison, because Jamison is already 33 years old when he was traded! Gasol is 28! He's in his freaking prime, and he got traded for peanuts? Are you kidding me? Memphis should have gotten at least Odom in return as well for the deal to look reasonable, and they could have kept him to play with Gay or traded him for other assets.