Baron Davis' arrival made the addition of Derek Fisher irrelevant, redundant as well as sillily expensive. Would DF, coveted before his bad contract was signed (with @$31 mil still due), be worth Spoon, and @$6mil (on an expiring contract), IF there was also a trade of #1's, #9 for #24? I'd be averse, wouldn't even consider, but -- in a hypothetical situation, would this be worth considering?
If you had someone great targeted at the #9 slot, then perhaps. Though I haven't followed the draft prospects too closely, my impression is that the talent difference between #9 and #24 won't be as great as usual, and for the marquee prospects, you need to be in the top 6 or so. So I would lean towar no, unless there is a difference maker at #9 I don't know about.
Ouch, that's a hard bargain. I wouldn't take on Fisher's contract unless there was a swap of picks atleast. Spoon/Ward/#24 for DFish/#9
i think that would be a great trade, at #9 we would have our choice of some pretty good players, possibly Raymond Felton, Martell Webster, Fran Vazquez, Jarrett Jack(although i dont like him), Antoine Wright, i think if that offer was on the table we would have to do it
Okay, I'll split the difference. Fisher #9 Pietrus for Spoon #24 I'd do that. But I doubt the Warriors would. I think they are looking for an impact player at #9, and then they'll figure out the finances later.
Why would GS trade us the #9 pick and a decent backup PG for Spoon and the #24? Cap space? I don't think that's the answer since for 2006-07 Davis makes $15m, Foyle $8m, & Dunleavey (@ rookie scale, unextended) $6m. That's $29m before you tack on a maxed JRich and Troy Murphy (can't find the salary but I recall it's around $8m). Fisher is owed ~ $33m for 5 more years. But IMHO a #9 ought to be a starter so you've balanced Fisher with a rookie scale contract. If we could dupe the Warriors into this one, I'm all over it. Sure, it's creates some logjams at certain positions, but when your logjam has tradeable talent, you deal with that later.
If we were to throw in Mike James, it might be a fairer trade. There's really no reason the Rockets would need both James and Fisher. They are essentially the same player, only difference is one has a terrible contract.
WTF. You were the one that originally said that you wouldn't take Fisher's contract for anything less than Pietrus + #9, and now you want to throw in the #24 and Mike James? I mean that would be a fairer deal, but you took a pretty quick about-face.
The contract is hideous and I wouldn't accept it unless the other pieces in the deal were hugely in our favor. #9 for #24 or #9 alone wouldn't be enough for me. But Pietrus + #9 for #24 and James would definitely tip the scales enough in our favor enough for me to do the deal. Having James and Fisher (plus Wesley, who's also the similar to those two) would create problems.
Fisher's contract is gross. To top it off, I don't think he's that good of a player. But ... I would do it if the #9 pick was thrown in. I would do it if Pietrus was thrown in. But not for a simple swap of the 24 for the 9 ... we'd have to get something else back.
Noway we are going to take Fisher's contract just for a 9th pick, too much of a gamble. Especially with recent history of drafts by the Rockets.
I don't think this is hypothetical. Derek Fisher has a really bad contract and some really good veteran championship experience. He knows what it takes to win and knows how to win with a great SG and great Center. We might want this type of trade and they may too. Now, I think the trade needs some tweaking, but we could get a solid role player in this trade and they could get something for their future(cap room, draft pick). NIKEstrad, Do we pay all of Juwon Howard's contract? He gets paid by several teams doesn't he? Also, does his whole contract he signed years ago count against our cap space or just part of it? The reason I ask is because Baron Davis' contract may not be counted entirely against GSW's cap space and they may not have the cap problems we think they have.
Guys, no way GS trades Pietrus. He had a good season and became their best defender. I honestly think GS would rather trade JRich than Peitrus right now, especially when comparing their contracts.
This isn't baseball. The team that the player is currently on, pays for their contract. The Warriors are on the hook for the rest of Davis' contract until he gets traded or bought-out, or the contract runs out, whichever comes first.
Well we are talking about the uber-GM-Genius Chris Mullin, who shelled out about $80 million for Fisher and Foyle. But I agree that we probably won't be able to pry the #9 pick from them. I'm sure they want more mileage out of the pick than just to move out a bad contract.
I'm blown away by some of the logic I'm seeing here. For discussions sake, I'm hoping everyone sees the difference in who is available at #9 vs #24. That should be a no brainer. Therefore, is there an argument that Spoon is more productive than Fisher? I clearly don't see one. And they both make roughly the same $ for 2005-06. So the end result is you wind up paying Fisher 3 extra years at slightly above the current MLE for in all probability a starter quality draft pick. And people are balking at this because we're going to pay Fisher ~$6m/yr for 3 more years than Spoon? (The TMac-maxed Yao Rox are never going to be players in the FA marketplace). With all the whining that goes on about how old we are, or Juwan's game or our lack of depth or Wesley being too old and/or too small....we're going to pass over a shot at Deron Williams, Fran Vasquez, Danny Granger, Raymond Felton, Martynas Andriuskevicius, Antoine Wright, Charlie Villanueva, Sean May or Joey Graham or 1 of the current top picks who drops slightly....because we won't pay Derrick Fisher $18m over 3 years? And I haven't touched upon trading down or how James, Sura or Wesley could be packed. Being against this trade is one of the most short-sighted positions I've seen with mass popularity in a long time.
Umm...if you're referring to the obscene contract Howard signed years ago, it's over. And no, he wasn't paid by several teams, it was always by whatever team he played for (though teams may have thrown in the max of $3 mill in cash considerations to get rid of him). The contract he's on now is lengthy, but not horrible figure-wise. He makes around 6 mill this year. gucci- Golden State signed Jrich to that contract last summer. He's coming off his best year yet. Pietrus was 5th on the team among perimeter players in MPG at only 20. I would not at all be surprised if Golden State decides between Pietrus and Dunleavy. No bones about it, Golden State's long term cap situation sucks hard. GATER- It wouldn't be for cap space, it would be to get out of cap hell (that they created by acquiring Davis, and signing Fisher and Foyle to downright stupid deals, plus probably overpaying for Murphy and/or Richardson). We're talking over 50 mill committed in 2006/2007 to Davis, Foyle, Fisher, Murphy, Richardson, and Biedrins. That's before paying Dunleavy in free agency and before paying Pietrus, plus a couple more lotto picks will probably be in the mix in the meantime. That's some serious jack for a team that's iffy to make the playioffs. That said...I agree with JV's analysis on the marginal difference within this draft of even a 15 pick move. I am intrigued with New Jack's idea the most- Fisher, Pietrus, 9 for Spoon, James, and 24. Golden State does need a solid backup for a creaky kneed Baron Davis, which James certainly would provide (at half the annual cost and half the years of Fisher).
