migya wrote:Thing is ofcourse, getting garnett for only one year guaranteed is too risky. Rather get Gasol or Amare

Yeah. So far, KG has only talked about signing an extension if he gets traded to Phoenix.

If we can't persuade him to sign an extension with us, we should just forget about the trade.

TMC wrote:

migya wrote:Thing is ofcourse, getting garnett for only one year guaranteed is too risky. Rather get Gasol or Amare

Yeah. So far, KG has only talked about signing an extension if he gets traded to Phoenix.

If we can't persuade him to sign an extension with us, we should just forget about the trade.

He wants to go to Phoenix, McHale wants young talent - Mullin has got to see that two plus two equals four = Get Amare, Banks and James Jones. Trade Harrington, BWright, O'bryant, Jask and Foyle ot the TWolves

I thought James Jones was already shipped out, or did I dream that?

migya wrote:

TMC wrote:

migya wrote:Thing is ofcourse, getting garnett for only one year guaranteed is too risky. Rather get Gasol or Amare

Yeah. So far, KG has only talked about signing an extension if he gets traded to Phoenix.

If we can't persuade him to sign an extension with us, we should just forget about the trade.

He wants to go to Phoenix, McHale wants young talent - Mullin has got to see that two plus two equals four = Get Amare, Banks and James Jones. Trade Harrington, BWright, O'bryant, Jask and Foyle ot the TWolves

Honestly that just isn't even close to a viable trade Minny. They get hosed , Suns do okay (though I'd never do it if I were them) and we make out like bandits.

I am sure they can get way better deals than this from teams who haven't even been on the table yet. There's not a sure thing among that. Why wouldn't Phoenix just give them Amare and fillers? Why would either team want to involve Warriors for charitable purposes?

cladden wrote:

migya wrote:

TMC wrote:

migya wrote:Thing is ofcourse, getting garnett for only one year guaranteed is too risky. Rather get Gasol or Amare

Yeah. So far, KG has only talked about signing an extension if he gets traded to Phoenix.

If we can't persuade him to sign an extension with us, we should just forget about the trade.

He wants to go to Phoenix, McHale wants young talent - Mullin has got to see that two plus two equals four = Get Amare, Banks and James Jones. Trade Harrington, BWright, O'bryant, Jask and Foyle ot the TWolves

Honestly that just isn't even close to a viable trade Minny. They get hosed , Suns do okay (though I'd never do it if I were them) and we make out like bandits.

I am sure they can get way better deals than this from teams who haven't even been on the table yet. There's not a sure thing among that. Why wouldn't Phoenix just give them Amare and fillers? Why would either team want to involve Warriors for charitable purposes?

Go back two weeks, before the news about trade proposals surfaced, I'd have said that to get Garnett, a team would have to trade a bit more than my idea of a trade proposal above. However, after the news that Garnett and Steve Nash have a great friendship and want to play together for the rest of their careers AND the news that the TWolves, Suns and Hawks had a three team trade very close to being finalised (only to be rejected by the Hawks' idiotic GM Billy Knight) that involved Garnett going to the Suns, Amare and fillers going to Atlanta and the #3 and #11 picks, along with salary fillers (probably Speedy Claxton and others) going to the TWolves, I realised that McHale wanted to rebuild with young players and he had accepted that he wasn't going to get anywhere near equal back for Garnett.

Garnett wants to go to Phoenix above all else because the Suns are already a championship contender and because of his friendship with Nash. Mullin would give McHale the young guys he wants in BWright (a replacement for KG), O'bryant (possibly would become starting Center for TWolves immediately) and Harrington (who is very talented and has the salary needed to make the deal work). Salary filler need to be added, like Jask and Foyle to make the deal work. Jask is an expirer after this season and so can be used in a trade to get even more young talent or can be let expire and then McHale has another 4 million to work with. Foyle is an expirer in two seasons, as their is a team option for his contract and noone will keep him at that price. The Warriors need a star big, while keeping Biedrins at starting Center and by getting Amare, that's as good as it gets. Amare has flourished in the run and gun system of Phoenix and would do so under Nelson's similar system. Filler would be Banks (who immediately becomes the backup PG and a very good one) and James Jones (He is still on the Phoenix roster so looks like he hasn't been traded. He would replace Pietrus as a backup swingman).

All works out for all three teams. McHale would then have a team with young talented players that would have great potential for the future in Foye at PG, McCants at SG, Brewer at SF, BWright at PF and O'bryant at C.

Heck. I'd trade the guys we give in this deal for 3 and 11 and fillers no problem. I'd even take on some filler that is a little more long-term if necessary.

cladden wrote:Heck. I'd trade the guys we give in this deal for 3 and 11 and fillers no problem. I'd even take on some filler that is a little more long-term if necessary.

Well though the trade proposal was before the draft, thus McHale would have been the one making the picks and would have picked differently (in the case of Law at least), let's look at it:

All draft picks are unproven, though some are more of a sure thing than others. Potential seems to be worth more than solid talent that is a bit more proven, that's just the way it is, which is why guys like Curry and Chandler were picked so high a few years ago for example.

Harrington is a proven player who is no post monster but is versatile and has strengths in scoring and is decently allround. O'bryant, to most Warriors fans at least, is seen as a project with some potential to be real good. BWright was seen as the player with the third best potential amongst players in this draft class and so could have been picked with the #3 pick by McHale, thus being equal to the #3 pick offered by Atlanta. Looking at the fillers, Claxton or whoever the Hawks were offering, is not an expirer while Jask is and Foyle is in two years.

To some it up - This proposal I came up with is better than the one Atlanta cam up with because not only does McHale get two young players, one with sure talent and the other the #9 pick from the previous year with potential himself, McHale gets two big young players that fill needs (since the would need a PF with Garnett leaving). McHale wouldn't have gotten a Center better than O'bryant with the #11 pick and his biggest need is Center. Throw in Harrington, who is unopposed by anyone the Hawks offered in that trade proposal and you have far more talent offered than what Atlanta offered.

Mullin has a young talented team and in trades, that is the best value you have to offer. McHale has young players that are up for resigning over the next three years, starting with McCants at the end of this season (as it is his third season). Then Foye comes up the following year, as well as O'bryant. By then, Jask would have expired and they have extra salary to sign those young players. The season after that, BWright and Brewer would be up for resigning and since Foyle's contract would have expired (through team option ofcourse), that would give them another 9 or 10 million to use as well

migya wrote:

cladden wrote:Heck. I'd trade the guys we give in this deal for 3 and 11 and fillers no problem. I'd even take on some filler that is a little more long-term if necessary.

Well though the trade proposal was before the draft, thus McHale would have been the one making the picks and would have picked differently (in the case of Law at least), let's look at it:

All draft picks are unproven, though some are more of a sure thing than others. Potential seems to be worth more than solid talent that is a bit more proven, that's just the way it is, which is why guys like Curry and Chandler were picked so high a few years ago for example.

Harrington is a proven player who is no post monster but is versatile and has strengths in scoring and is decently allround. O'bryant, to most Warriors fans at least, is seen as a project with some potential to be real good. BWright was seen as the player with the third best potential amongst players in this draft class and so could have been picked with the #3 pick by McHale, thus being equal to the #3 pick offered by Atlanta. Looking at the fillers, Claxton or whoever the Hawks were offering, is not an expirer while Jask is and Foyle is in two years.

To some it up - This proposal I came up with is better than the one Atlanta cam up with because not only does McHale get two young players, one with sure talent and the other the #9 pick from the previous year with potential himself, McHale gets two big young players that fill needs (since the would need a PF with Garnett leaving). McHale wouldn't have gotten a Center better than O'bryant with the #11 pick and his biggest need is Center. Throw in Harrington, who is unopposed by anyone the Hawks offered in that trade proposal and you have far more talent offered than what Atlanta offered.

Mullin has a young talented team and in trades, that is the best value you have to offer. McHale has young players that are up for resigning over the next three years, starting with McCants at the end of this season (as it is his third season). Then Foye comes up the following year, as well as O'bryant. By then, Jask would have expired and they have extra salary to sign those young players. The season after that, BWright and Brewer would be up for resigning and since Foyle's contract would have expired (through team option ofcourse), that would give them another 9 or 10 million to use as well

I'm just very wary of overvaluing Warriors players in trade proposals. I am feeling too good about this trade to believe it has any chance of happening but by all means. If we pull that off my hat goes off to you.

cladden wrote:

migya wrote:

cladden wrote:Heck. I'd trade the guys we give in this deal for 3 and 11 and fillers no problem. I'd even take on some filler that is a little more long-term if necessary.

Well though the trade proposal was before the draft, thus McHale would have been the one making the picks and would have picked differently (in the case of Law at least), let's look at it:

All draft picks are unproven, though some are more of a sure thing than others. Potential seems to be worth more than solid talent that is a bit more proven, that's just the way it is, which is why guys like Curry and Chandler were picked so high a few years ago for example.

Harrington is a proven player who is no post monster but is versatile and has strengths in scoring and is decently allround. O'bryant, to most Warriors fans at least, is seen as a project with some potential to be real good. BWright was seen as the player with the third best potential amongst players in this draft class and so could have been picked with the #3 pick by McHale, thus being equal to the #3 pick offered by Atlanta. Looking at the fillers, Claxton or whoever the Hawks were offering, is not an expirer while Jask is and Foyle is in two years.

To some it up - This proposal I came up with is better than the one Atlanta cam up with because not only does McHale get two young players, one with sure talent and the other the #9 pick from the previous year with potential himself, McHale gets two big young players that fill needs (since the would need a PF with Garnett leaving). McHale wouldn't have gotten a Center better than O'bryant with the #11 pick and his biggest need is Center. Throw in Harrington, who is unopposed by anyone the Hawks offered in that trade proposal and you have far more talent offered than what Atlanta offered.

Mullin has a young talented team and in trades, that is the best value you have to offer. McHale has young players that are up for resigning over the next three years, starting with McCants at the end of this season (as it is his third season). Then Foye comes up the following year, as well as O'bryant. By then, Jask would have expired and they have extra salary to sign those young players. The season after that, BWright and Brewer would be up for resigning and since Foyle's contract would have expired (through team option ofcourse), that would give them another 9 or 10 million to use as well

I'm just very wary of overvaluing Warriors players in trade proposals. I am feeling too good about this trade to believe it has any chance of happening but by all means. If we pull that off my hat goes off to you.

You really think this is overhauling? What we've been hearing in some rumours the last week is that McHale is trying to scam getting Monta, Biedrins and O'bryant, along with filers ofcourse. That's more of an overhaul as most of the young talent is gone. McHale has to get rid of Garnett now and getting young talent, as well as expirers is a coup