This trade succeeded: would you do it?

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, 32

User avatar

Starting Lineup
Posts: 576
» Wed Jan 28, 2009 5:19 pm

I've always been a big Trevor Ariza fan. Lamar would also fit in perfectly here, being able to play the 4 mainly as well as the 5 and 3. He's a rebounder and shot blocker that doesn't cost you offense. Either that or he's an expirer. He shouldn't be getting 14 mil again next year so we could resign him, or let him go and make a run at Boozer or something.

The trade works with Step Jackson instead of Maggs as well, and that's what I tried first. The Lakers might want him a little more since he'd be the perfect third/fourth option who can lock people down, drill 3's and has won a championship. But I think Maggs is almost equally valuable to them in his own right. It's obvious that small forward is the Lakers' achilles. Luke Walton shouldn't be starting for a ring contender. Maggs can attack the basket and between him, Kobe, Andrew Bynum and Pau Gasol, there won't be a player on the other team NOT in foul trouble.

Crawford would be big for them too. Besides Kobe, no one can penetrate and go 1-on-1 from the outside. Jamal would take alot of the ball handling load off of Kobe. I know they like Jordan Farmar, but he's not even of a shade of the dynamic offensive player that JC is.

This trade makes the Lakers a better team. They get faster, higher scoring and deeper. They might be concerned about too many minutes for Bynum and Gasol, but as I see it right now Lamar is robbing Bynum of minutes.

It makes us a better rebounding, far better defense and even more versatile team. Perhaps more importantly, we get some financial breathing room. However that is exactly the reason the Lakers might hesitate to make the trade- finances.

Posts: 171
» Wed Jan 28, 2009 5:32 pm
interesting trade idea. i'd love to get either odom or ariza, or even better yet both. they could fit nelly's system well, and actually play defense.

and i could part with mags and crawford for the right pieces. and trading guards for forwards we could actually play and use is certainly the best reason to consider this.

but i doubt LA would bite. they really like ariza.

but i like it.
User avatar

All Star
Posts: 3242
» Wed Jan 28, 2009 5:42 pm
Ariza's been fantastic this year. Have watched a heap of LA games unfortunately(on here a lot) and he's just always where the ball is. Seems to have a real knack for being in the right place at the right time

We'd lose a ton of scoring in this trade, at the same time, I think that's the one thing we can cover. So I'd probably do it

(big cap relief too)
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 22191
» Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:16 pm
You see, the Lakers are winning because, like pretty much every championship team ever, they have role players and are not all scorers. They wouldn't do this trade firstly, because they are winning and don't need to change anything, as they are the number one team right now, and getting another scorer mentality player, let alone two, would ruin it all for them.

You can't have all scorers on the court for your team, you have to have role players. Look at Biedrins, he is successful on this team because he is the designated rebounder and shotblocker. He is not a scorer and only gets the ball near the basket, so it works well for him. I'd gladly replace Crawford or Maggette, even SJackson, with a role player that defended better and scored less. Nelson uses scorers though and he is the sole reason why the team is built the way it is right now
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 18315
» Thu Jan 29, 2009 12:29 am
Of course I'd do it... but I can't see a reason why the Lakers would. They have enough scorers already, and what they lack are role players, exactly what they'd be losing.
User avatar

Starting Lineup
Posts: 576
» Thu Jan 29, 2009 12:44 am
I agree mostly. However I doubt the Lakers are feeling invincible right now as they stack up against the Celtics and Cavs. They have some room to improve.

My thinking is that if you have a player like Odom, who for some reason can't or doesn't play on the floor with your two big guns up front, you could be wise to move him for someone similarly talented that plays a position you lack depth at. Personally, I don't know why Jackson doesn't play them all at the same time more often, maybe he doesn't think that's enough shooting and it will clog up the middle? If they had a small forward like Jack or Maggette they'd be even better.

I guess having Odom backing up let's them really limit Pau and Bynum's minutes. Come playoff time, if they are all healthy, they have to be the heavy favorite.

Not for long though. That teams payroll is going to be well over $100 million if they resigned Odom. They'll have to make some changes.

EDIT: They probably won't be able to resign Ariza either! Let's trade for some expirers and sign Boozer+ Ariza FTW FTW!!!!!!
User avatar

Posts: 75
» Thu Jan 29, 2009 2:13 pm
I like this trade idea, seems like one of the few trades on here that benefits both teams. While I'd agree with some of the comments about the Lakers not needing to change a good thing nor wanting to take on some shoot-first type of players, it's hard to argue that Maggette and Crawford wouldn't help their team. Fisher is old and more of a role player than a starter and Craw would take the burden off of ball-handling responsibilities. Maggette would be a much better alternative to both Walton and Radmanovic who combine for about 10 pts a game with sub-par defense. They also don't stand to lose much by giving up Odom whose role has steadily declined over the last couple of years. The deal breaker though is Ariza who (as previously stated) is well liked in LA and has tremendous upside over all of the aforementioned players.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests