Dr. Spaceman wrote:

32 wrote:Mehhhhh. The Wizards don't need a shooting guard. They're toying with the idea of letting Nick Young walk because they like Jordan Crawford so much... And I doubt Young will make as much money as Ellis. You really think they'd give us their pick AND McGee?


I have a bad feeling he'll end up in Boston... And we won't get Rondo back. Salary dump or no, I'd hate to walk away with Ray Allen and Brandon Bass. We need a center. Or a lottery pick.

I think they'll let Young walk because when his shot doesn't fall he has not impact on the game. Crawford is promising but not starter material yet, and McGee is a RFA.

We could sweeten the deal by throwing in Dorrell and Kwame's expiring for Blatche (who Washington wants out of there) and give a huge post scoring threat to our bench.

Curry/ ?
Rush/ Klay
MKG/ McGuire
Lee/ Blatche/ Udoh
McGee/ Udoh/ Tyler

is a solid starting lineup and bench.

I'm with you on the fact that we need a lottery pick. I'd rather have that than Allen and Bass or some of the other realistic veteran players we could get for Monta.

It's intriguing and I'd love to convince Washington to go for it, but I'm still iffy.

Firstly, as I reminded hobbes in the Kaman thread, Kwame Brown's contract cannot be dealt before he's physically cleared to play. So, unfortunately, his expiring $7 million won't be available for trade until AFTER the deadline.

Secondly, I don't understand the difference between Monta Ellis and your description of Nick Young. I would wager any coach in the NBA will tell you that they're more than happy to deal with a slumping Ellis. He has a high turn-over rate and doesn't play the best fundamental defense. Young is a cheaper, taller version of, basically, the same player. Granted, we can split hairs regarding the different styles they play (Ellis is more of a slasher, while Young is a jump shooter), but I'm willing to throw that out of the equation on the grounds of redundance: they both have equalizingly good and bad aspects to their scoring styles. That being said, Crawford is averaging 11 and 3 in 22 minutes off the bench (and, as his percentages show) he's fighting throw a sophomore slump. I truly believe the Wizards believe he's capable of starting and can get him on the cheap.

But, lastly, regarding JaVelle McGee... You bring up that he's a RFA, the implication being that Washington won't want to engage in an inevitable bidding war for his services. Okay. But seeing as DeAndre Jordan and Mark Gasol received contract extensions similar to Ellis' remaining deal, it's curious that you'd introduce this argument amongst contesting that the Wizards would be willing to, essentially, give McGee's money to Ellis..? You think they'd prefer taking Ellis' money on the books over their exclusive rights to match any offer to JaVelle McGee?

I'm all for the idea; I'd love it. But do you really think Washington (with 2 cheap SG options) want Ellis enough to give up McGee? Do you think any team wants Ellis bad enough to surrender a starting center?

You look at Denver and what they've done since they traded Anthony, then you'd really have to considered trading Ellis. Granted, Ellis is no Anthony and he won't bring back all those young players and picks, but they do have to start somewhere. My opinion is that this team is better when Ellis is not on the floor, so trading him for nothing, alone makes this team better. Because it becomes a team that will move the ball and play within a team concept. Not just having a guy dribbling the ball for 20 seconds, waiting for a lane to the right and shooting it. Klay Thompson may not be ready for prime time minutes, but we're not going to find out unless he plays. Make no mistake about it. This isn't a playoff caliber team with or without Ellis. The goal is to build a team that will, ultimately, win a championship. After 4 years as Ellis as the best player with limited results, it maybe time to move on.

Not sure the Wizards would give up McGee for Ellis, even if it was straight up. But for McGee and another player to make the salaries match? I don't think so. Another idea would be Ellis for Danny Granger straight up. Paul George is a Granger clone who is forced to play the SG position. This would move George to his natural SF position. Collison, Ellis, George, West and Hibbert wouldn't be a bad line up. The Warriors would have Curry, Thompson, Granger, Lee and Biedrins.

Well, we mentioned that Ellis for Granger option quite a few times and I can't remember if there was a single person here that was against it. If there's a slightest chance that the Pacers would go for that deal, we would be crazy to ignore it.

I'm gonna mention this once again, cause I hope FO will start thinking in the same direction if I repeat it few times. :P

Anyway, I'm know more and more convinced that our best option to get a center, for a smallest price, and to have him for this season (cause apparently we have a PO chances) is to go for Darko (and I said I'd try to take Beasley in the deal as well). Milicic recovered I believe, and he still didn't play tonight. Minnesota is playing some good basketball, and Pekovic is playing great, so I'm quite sure they are ready to deal Milicic, if they already don't have a plan set in motion. Watching the game tonight it is so painful to see all those second chances for Portland, because no one can get rebound, or be that big body that will make rebounds for other guys much easier. I don't wanna mention how bad our post defense is, Lee is a liability there, seeing how Jamal Crawford is scoring over him at will.

So, I'd like to see some push from our FO to get that deal done.

32, I would say the major difference between Young and Ellis is that Ellis can create his own shot and facilitate an offense. Monta is a combo guard who can play either position well, but is not dominant at either. Young is actually a better defender, but if you think Nick Young can do what Monta is asked to do as a #1 on offense then you'd be mistaken.

BayAreaHoopz, I agree with you on some things. I disagree that we are better without Monta, but do agree that there would not be a huge dropoff if he left, especially if we could replace him with a solid SF or C. Klay and Rush are both doing very well. BUT I feel like Klay is a better fit next to Monta than Steph. Steph does not like to attack the paint, and likes to hang around the perimeter for the kickback. He is much more a SG than PG right now, and Klay is mostly a taller version of Steph at the moment. A true PG is still needed for this team. Curry for Rondo?

And NONONO to trading Monta for Darko, unless it comes with Derrick Williams. Darko has never contributed to any winning team. He is tall and decent, but EXTREMELY overrated (some could say similar stuff about Monta, but they are on completely different echelons of this). If we need a big body to clog the paint, you sign a Kwame or Gadz etc. You don't trade a solid trade chip for one of these guys though. Trading a top 5 SG for a C who is arguably top 20 is exactly the type of stupid move the Warriors FO always makes. You gotta be patient like they were with Troy and Dumbleavy.

Monta should realistically be traded for either 1) A lotto pick 2) A starting quality SF or C who is seen as a bit of a bad contract (Rudy Gay type) or 3) A SF or C with upside AND a pick (like Asik and Charlotte's pick from Chicago or McGee and a pick (maybe not their lotto pick this year) from the Wizards.

That way, if like some speculate is correct, and there won't be a huge dropoff with Monta, we will be a team on the rise with real assetts.

monta is overpaid, everyteam we talked to are low balling us. whatever monta can do, JR smith can do(and jr smith is knicks 6thman) .. at most monta is a 6th man to champion contender teams. its good to have hope, but i dont think warriors will get anything good in return.

Dr. Spaceman wrote:
And NONONO to trading Monta for Darko, unless it comes with Derrick Williams. Darko has never contributed to any winning team. He is tall and decent, but EXTREMELY overrated (some could say similar stuff about Monta, but they are on completely different echelons of this). If we need a big body to clog the paint, you sign a Kwame or Gadz etc. You don't trade a solid trade chip for one of these guys though. Trading a top 5 SG for a C who is arguably top 20 is exactly the type of stupid move the Warriors FO always makes. You gotta be patient like they were with Troy and Dumbleavy.

How exactly is he overrated when he almost has no value at all, especially now when Pekovic is outplaying him? And I was saying that we should get Beasley with him as well. So, we would get a starting center and a SF. Milicic is top 20 center in the league, in right system he is better than that. And he is not just a big body, he actually does play great defense. But ok, apparently we have different opinions on him.

Guybrush wrote:

Dr. Spaceman wrote:
And NONONO to trading Monta for Darko, unless it comes with Derrick Williams. Darko has never contributed to any winning team. He is tall and decent, but EXTREMELY overrated (some could say similar stuff about Monta, but they are on completely different echelons of this). If we need a big body to clog the paint, you sign a Kwame or Gadz etc. You don't trade a solid trade chip for one of these guys though. Trading a top 5 SG for a C who is arguably top 20 is exactly the type of stupid move the Warriors FO always makes. You gotta be patient like they were with Troy and Dumbleavy.

How exactly is he overrated when he almost has no value at all, especially now when Pekovic is outplaying him? And I was saying that we should get Beasley with him as well. So, we would get a starting center and a SF. Milicic is top 20 center in the league, in right system he is better than that. And he is not just a big body, he actually does play great defense. But ok, apparently we have different opinions on him.

He's overrated according to his contract. He's no better than Kwame, who was only more expensive because we paid to get him on a one year deal. And Beasley would be able to walk after this year, and is the SF version of Monta withworse tunnel vision and a lower b ball IQ. At least Williams has some solid upside and is cheaper. I guess you could say he is borderline top 20, but if he is a great at defense why were the T Wolves the worst defensive team in the NBA the last few years? He's a decent shotblocker, good passer and decent at defense, but he doesn't have the mental fortitude to be a real defensive anchor. No one is afraid at attacking the rim with Darko in there. Unless Darko's deal is expiring I don't want him, because there are better FA options for a Center.

I just think if we're gonna trade Monta we better get some real value back, and Darko does not have much value in the league and should not be a part of our plan for the future.

Dr. Spaceman wrote:32, I would say the major difference between Young and Ellis is that Ellis can create his own shot and facilitate an offense. Monta is a combo guard who can play either position well, but is not dominant at either. Young is actually a better defender, but if you think Nick Young can do what Monta is asked to do as a #1 on offense then you'd be mistaken.

Ehhh, I'll respectfully disagree. Young is getting to 18 points on 15 attempts per night. Ellis is at 22 points on 19 attempts. It's extremely comparable.

If you haven't seen much of Nick Young, I'll let you know he's more than just a JJ Reddick stand-up shooter incapable of getting his own shot; you don't put up 18 PPG if thats the case. He uses his pump fake well out of the triple threat, he can get through a lane going to his right, and he fills it up from everywhere on the floor when he's hot. Sure, he doesn't have Ellis' driving ability, but you can't simply shrug him off as a jump shooter. Even then, he's 38% on three's and 88% from the line... so what exactly is the problem with him shooting?

I continue to attest that either player during a slump is a team cancer. But that's a given. So given the current system of our team, I believe Young would be the more useful player for us. Just my opinion.

Just read on Kawakami's Twitter that he mentions something like "Warriors saying no to Beasley and Pekovic". So, that was pretty close to my trade idea, Milicic and Beasley to Warriors. Glad to see that there is some thought going that way, but I don't see a reason why they wouldn't go for it. I said Milicic because I knew his value isn't high now, and Pekovic's is on a quite a rise at the moment, so maybe that "no" is because we would have to give a lot in return.

I think that was a trade talk back in June. It didn't happen because we also wanted the 1st round pick (turned up to be No 2) and we couldn't decide what to give with Ellis to make it happen.

The thing is Warriors value Monta as a great player, but the problem is the other teams in the league don't value Monta high, because he hasn't win or made the team good enough to be 500 at least when he is the best player on the team.

Monta has way too many cons vs. his pros to be considered a star player or even a first option on a good team. His list of positives is a short one. He can score. Thats it. There isn't anything else you can possibly add to that list. You take that away and you'd have an undersized shooting guard that can't defend. He's still a below average ball handler for a player that is 6'3 and teams are starting to force him to his left which he has trouble doing. He's not a good rebounder. He turns the ball over at a high rate (3.3 a game). He's not a great passer. He's a soft player that doesn't like contact. He's as one-dimensional as they get.

So where is the value in that? He's third in the league in shot attempts and 6th in scoring. Kevin Durant takes nearly a shot more than Ellis a game and he's averaging 27.7 a game while Ellis is at 22.3. Lets not make this out to be a "because Durant gets to the free throw line more" because its not a huge difference. Durant attempts 7.1 free throw shots a game while Ellis is 5.7 which doesn't make up the difference in scoring average.

BayAreaHoopz wrote:Monta has way too many cons vs. his pros to be considered a star player or even a first option on a good team. His list of positives is a short one. He can score. Thats it. There isn't anything else you can possibly add to that list. You take that away and you'd have an undersized shooting guard that can't defend. He's still a below average ball handler for a player that is 6'3 and teams are starting to force him to his left which he has trouble doing. He's not a good rebounder. He turns the ball over at a high rate (3.3 a game). He's not a great passer. He's a soft player that doesn't like contact. He's as one-dimensional as they get.

So where is the value in that? He's third in the league in shot attempts and 6th in scoring. Kevin Durant takes nearly a shot more than Ellis a game and he's averaging 27.7 a game while Ellis is at 22.3. Lets not make this out to be a "because Durant gets to the free throw line more" because its not a huge difference. Durant attempts 7.1 free throw shots a game while Ellis is 5.7 which doesn't make up the difference in scoring average.

I'd give Ellis more credit on his handle than you do, but sadly... the rest is pretty spot-on.

That's my point about trading Ellis: for who? Warriors fans pretend he's worth a star, but (as I rated him above) other teams are only interested in bad-contract-for-bad-contract deals for him. He's an undersized SG whose value crash lands when he's forced into a 1st or 2nd option role.

I'm absolutely floored to hear that they were offered Beasley... My first impression is that Tim K is probably blowing smoke while citing "unnamed sources" again, just like when he claimed the only thing that kept the Warriors from getting Garnett was picking Brandan Wright instead of Al Thorton. Kawakami loves to report his hindsight opinion as fact when it comes to trades.

Finally we got a game winner.