Richmond for Owens trade was the right choice

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, hobbes

Was Trading Richmond for Owens a move

1. Yes totally, the team would never have gotten any better with Richmond
0
No votes
2. Yes but maybe an already established PF could have been attained for just Richmond
0
No votes
3. No but the team would not have become a great one with Richmond anyway
0
No votes
4. No totally, the team would have been elite with Richmond
8
62%
5. GIVE ME GARNETT!
5
38%
 
Total votes : 13

User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21366
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:08 pm
32 wrote:
migya wrote:It was in response to your stupid call for this thread to be deleted. Maybe your "ramblings" threads should be thrown in the trash as well. TMC really baited you in a way by saying that maybe it should be


Hey, while you're at it... why don't you threaten to delete TMC's "Riley Takes Over Heat" thread. Or pawno's old "Look-a-like" thread? ::lol:



Because you're the only fool at the minute talking shiit :wink:
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21366
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:22 pm
TMC wrote:
migya wrote:Anyone is entitled to talk about subjects related to the team!


Yeah, I just can't see how anyone can defend the Richmond-for-Owens trade. It should be pretty clear that you don't trade an all star like Richmond unless you're getting Shaq... Even Nellie himself would say so.



As I've pointed out, the team won more with a Rookie Owens straight away! The team would never have been more than a 7th or 8th seed had it stayed the same and that trade filled a need and worked. The following seasons (1992/93 and 1993/94) were full of injuries to the main players and the team NEVER had a chance to show what they were capable of doing! That team was a capable 55 win team every seasons until it got disassembled and Nelson left, THAT'S THE TRUTH!

Richmond took years to take the Kings to the playoffs and that lasted ONE YEAR! He only got back to the playoffs his season with the Champion Lakers were he played very minor minutes while riding Shaq and Kobe to a championship
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 18461
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:48 am
Location: Somewhere in this site...
Poster Credit: -4
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 3:44 am
migya wrote:As I've pointed out, the team won more with a Rookie Owens straight away! The team would never have been more than a 7th or 8th seed had it stayed the same and that trade filled a need and worked. The following seasons (1992/93 and 1993/94) were full of injuries to the main players and the team NEVER had a chance to show what they were capable of doing! That team was a capable 55 win team every seasons until it got disassembled and Nelson left, THAT'S THE TRUTH!


But not because of Owens... He never matched Richmond's production, so it can't be said that he improved the team in any way.

All Star
Posts: 2958
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 8:41 am
Poster Credit: 3
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:42 am
As I said earlier. Billy Owens was very intruiging because he was a jack-of-all-trades player at Syracuse. At that time, the Warriors had peaked with the Run-TMC. The Warriors were aware that they would never win a championship with that team and felt they needed to get bigger. Billy Owens was an excellent passer for his size. he could rebound and run the court. In reality, he had more tools than Richmond. Mitch was actually a tweener. he played forward throughout his college career anever really became a good ballhandler. What the Warriors did not take in consideration was the heart of players invovlved. Mitch was JRich to that team. No one played harder or with more passion. Mitch was not a smooth or graceful player. He was a bulldog. Mitch would run through a brick wall to win a game.

I remember those Warriors days very well. The trade was not that out of line at the time. Remeber guys, hindsight is always 20-20. Don't knock Billy Owens. He suffered a very bad knee injury and was never the same after that. Plus he had a worst supporting cast than Mitch. Billy Owens was one of the best all-around players in college history. Mitch actually was the 2nd best player in the state of Kansas when he came out of college. Remember he played behind Danny Manning all through his college career.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21366
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 6:02 pm
TMC wrote:
migya wrote:As I've pointed out, the team won more with a Rookie Owens straight away! The team would never have been more than a 7th or 8th seed had it stayed the same and that trade filled a need and worked. The following seasons (1992/93 and 1993/94) were full of injuries to the main players and the team NEVER had a chance to show what they were capable of doing! That team was a capable 55 win team every seasons until it got disassembled and Nelson left, THAT'S THE TRUTH!


But not because of Owens... He never matched Richmond's production, so it can't be said that he improved the team in any way.



But what he did do was more than any other PF on the RunTMC teams and Sarunas, a great player waiting for more court time, was able to start and produce more. The trade improved the team because the PF position was fixed and SG was very good because Sarunas was there. It is not like the team didn't have anyone to take the SG spot, Sarunas was real good and Nelson saw the chance to improve. It was injuries and the team getting just three seasons together that ruined any chance of the team becoming elite
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21366
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 6:07 pm
ReginaldLewis wrote:As I said earlier. Billy Owens was very intruiging because he was a jack-of-all-trades player at Syracuse. At that time, the Warriors had peaked with the Run-TMC. The Warriors were aware that they would never win a championship with that team and felt they needed to get bigger. Billy Owens was an excellent passer for his size. he could rebound and run the court. In reality, he had more tools than Richmond. Mitch was actually a tweener. he played forward throughout his college career anever really became a good ballhandler. What the Warriors did not take in consideration was the heart of players invovlved. Mitch was JRich to that team. No one played harder or with more passion. Mitch was not a smooth or graceful player. He was a bulldog. Mitch would run through a brick wall to win a game.

I remember those Warriors days very well. The trade was not that out of line at the time. Remeber guys, hindsight is always 20-20. Don't knock Billy Owens. He suffered a very bad knee injury and was never the same after that. Plus he had a worst supporting cast than Mitch. Billy Owens was one of the best all-around players in college history. Mitch actually was the 2nd best player in the state of Kansas when he came out of college. Remember he played behind Danny Manning all through his college career.



This is what I've been stating the whole time in this thread - Richmond was expendable as Sarunas was a great SG waiting for more minutes and PF was a huge need at the time. The RunTMC team would not have gotten any better and would not have picked up a very good PF.

It was injuries and the fact that the team was broken up after just 3 years that ruined it all
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya

All Star
Posts: 2958
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 8:41 am
Poster Credit: 3
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 7:26 am
migya wrote:
ReginaldLewis wrote:As I said earlier. Billy Owens was very intruiging because he was a jack-of-all-trades player at Syracuse. At that time, the Warriors had peaked with the Run-TMC. The Warriors were aware that they would never win a championship with that team and felt they needed to get bigger. Billy Owens was an excellent passer for his size. he could rebound and run the court. In reality, he had more tools than Richmond. Mitch was actually a tweener. he played forward throughout his college career anever really became a good ballhandler. What the Warriors did not take in consideration was the heart of players invovlved. Mitch was JRich to that team. No one played harder or with more passion. Mitch was not a smooth or graceful player. He was a bulldog. Mitch would run through a brick wall to win a game.

I remember those Warriors days very well. The trade was not that out of line at the time. Remeber guys, hindsight is always 20-20. Don't knock Billy Owens. He suffered a very bad knee injury and was never the same after that. Plus he had a worst supporting cast than Mitch. Billy Owens was one of the best all-around players in college history. Mitch actually was the 2nd best player in the state of Kansas when he came out of college. Remember he played behind Danny Manning all through his college career.



This is what I've been stating the whole time in this thread - Richmond was expendable as Sarunas was a great SG waiting for more minutes and PF was a huge need at the time. The RunTMC team would not have gotten any better and would not have picked up a very good PF.

It was injuries and the fact that the team was broken up after just 3 years that ruined it all


I actually helped migya make a point. Take me now Lord. :)
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 18461
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:48 am
Location: Somewhere in this site...
Poster Credit: -4
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:38 am
ReginaldLewis wrote:I actually helped migya make a point. Take me now Lord. :)


::lol:
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21366
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 3:15 am
ReginaldLewis wrote:
migya wrote:
ReginaldLewis wrote:As I said earlier. Billy Owens was very intruiging because he was a jack-of-all-trades player at Syracuse. At that time, the Warriors had peaked with the Run-TMC. The Warriors were aware that they would never win a championship with that team and felt they needed to get bigger. Billy Owens was an excellent passer for his size. he could rebound and run the court. In reality, he had more tools than Richmond. Mitch was actually a tweener. he played forward throughout his college career anever really became a good ballhandler. What the Warriors did not take in consideration was the heart of players invovlved. Mitch was JRich to that team. No one played harder or with more passion. Mitch was not a smooth or graceful player. He was a bulldog. Mitch would run through a brick wall to win a game.

I remember those Warriors days very well. The trade was not that out of line at the time. Remeber guys, hindsight is always 20-20. Don't knock Billy Owens. He suffered a very bad knee injury and was never the same after that. Plus he had a worst supporting cast than Mitch. Billy Owens was one of the best all-around players in college history. Mitch actually was the 2nd best player in the state of Kansas when he came out of college. Remember he played behind Danny Manning all through his college career.



This is what I've been stating the whole time in this thread - Richmond was expendable as Sarunas was a great SG waiting for more minutes and PF was a huge need at the time. The RunTMC team would not have gotten any better and would not have picked up a very good PF.

It was injuries and the fact that the team was broken up after just 3 years that ruined it all


I actually helped migya make a point. Take me now Lord. :)



You just know what's right! Owens's passing ability was probably second to TimBug on that team. He made others around him better
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 18461
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:48 am
Location: Somewhere in this site...
Poster Credit: -4
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 4:17 am
migya wrote:Owens's made others around him look better


Now, my friend, you're speaking the truth. :mrgreen:
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21366
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 6:22 am
TMC wrote:
migya wrote:Owens's made others around him look better


Now, my friend, you're speaking the truth. :mrgreen:



The guy was a good playmaker and Hardaway and Mullin had their best season's in 1991/92 with Owens
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 1221
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 9:54 pm
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 11:29 am
migya wrote:The facts I have presented and they speak for themselves, it was a good trade


how can you say that it was a good trade??? :roll:

what good came out of that trade?
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21366
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 1:53 am
aletha33 wrote:
migya wrote:The facts I have presented and they speak for themselves, it was a good trade


how can you say that it was a good trade??? :roll:

what good came out of that trade?



Read what I've written!
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13512
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Sat Apr 14, 2007 10:24 am
aletha33 wrote:
migya wrote:The facts I have presented and they speak for themselves, it was a good trade


how can you say that it was a good trade??? :roll:

what good came out of that trade?

aletha, no. Please. Just stop. Don't have migya repeat his whole verbatum about this ludacrous trade.

First he'll tell you how Mitch Richmond was expendable. Yes. A 6-time All-Star is 'expendable'. :roll: Richmond only went on to represent the Kings in 6 straight ASG's, winning a gold medal in 1996 on the 2nd Dream Team, and average 23.5 PPG for 7 years in Sacramento. Of course, miggy sees no reason as to why we'd want to hold onto that kind of player.

:-s Then he'll let you know that Marciulionis 'replaced him'. In other words, Sarunas Marciulionis putting up 18 PPG, then 17 PPG the following year, and then finally disappearing off the face of the earth has made everyone forget about Mitch Richmond. Hell, who would rather take 24 points over the next 7 years when you could take 17.5 points over the next 2? :roll: Makes perfect sense again.

Finally, he'll tell you (with a straight face) that Billy Owens was a good player in Golden State. Since words cannot describe the sick feeling in my gut that I get every time migya claims Owens was an integral part of the Golden State roster, I give you Exhibit A (Billy Owens' career stats):

BILLY OWENS (1991-2001)
11.7 PPG, 6.7 RPG, 2.8 APG in 29.4 MPG.


If those numbers look familiar, its probably because Mike Dunleavy put up eerily similar numbers in the same time. Mike's career statline is as follows:

MIKE DUNLEAVY JR (2002-2006)
10.5 PPG, 4.7 RPG, 2.4 APG in 27.7 MPG.


There you have it. Billy Owens was Mike Dunleavy's superior by a rebound or two every 48 minutes. Other than that, they were exactly the same. Yet migya loves Billy Owens. :roll:

Trust me, aletha. What seems obvious to most is way over miggy's head here. He refuses to believe that, what most would call one of the Top 3 worst trades in Warrior History, was a bad move.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image

All Star
Posts: 2261
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2004 9:05 am
Location: Berkeley
Poster Credit: 1
PostPosted: Sat Apr 14, 2007 2:40 pm
Checkmate :mrgreen:
The Broe Knows Dont Hate....
PreviousNext

Return to Warriors Basketball

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron