Trade Dunleavy?

Discuss any moves or trades here, real, rumored, made up, you name it!

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, hobbes

User avatar
Starting Lineup
Posts: 879
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 12:41 pm
Location: Union City, CA
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:38 am
It'll be hard to trade a starting player from a winning team(first time in a decade). I would be shocked if Mullin has the cahoonas to do it.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13511
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Sun Oct 16, 2005 1:50 pm
I think we would. Afterall, Mully was the one who got rid of Antawn Jamison and let Gilbert Arena slip out the door. Mike Dunleavy doesn't seem like as bold of a move, so I'm sure he would.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21364
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:12 pm
If someone wants Dunleavy that is!!!!
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13511
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:20 pm
Someone will want the #3 pick of the draft... he's worth SOMETHING, if only potential
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21364
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 7:47 am
Player32 wrote:I think we would. Afterall, Mully was the one who got rid of Antawn Jamison and let Gilbert Arena slip out the door. Mike Dunleavy doesn't seem like as bold of a move, so I'm sure he would.



Mullin became GM the season after Jamison got traded didn't he?
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13511
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 8:44 am
Yes, Mullin became the VP of Operations after that season, but he was the one who handled that trade. I forget what position he was in the Warriors organization, but that trade was his (as was the Gilbert thing).
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21364
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 6:30 pm
Then that was a horrible trade! Jamison is better than both Dunleavy and Pietrus! Warriors may have made the playoffs last season if that hadn't happened!
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13511
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 8:41 pm
But you gotta see; that trade is what translated into the Baron Davis trade:

He traded Antawn for Nick Van Exel, essentially. That was the meat of the trade...

Van Exel was dished away for a couple players (the better of the two being Dale Davis)...

Speedy Claxton and Dale Davis were traded for Baron Davis...

In a round-a-bout way, we're better off.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21364
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:19 pm
Speedy could have been traded with someone else for Baron and Jamison would still be here and the Warriors would be better off
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13511
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:54 pm
Eh, I dunno... Dale Davis is a very solid big man and the Hornets weren't just looking for Speedy. Besides, Jamison wasn't going to help the Warriors win. Period. He had, like, 7 years to prove he could and he didn't. So Mully let him go. It was a good choice, overall. Is he a good player? Of course. But he wasn't doing it for Golden State.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
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 Oct 19, 2005 2:53 am
Player32 wrote:Eh, I dunno... Dale Davis is a very solid big man and the Hornets weren't just looking for Speedy. Besides, Jamison wasn't going to help the Warriors win. Period. He had, like, 7 years to prove he could and he didn't. So Mully let him go. It was a good choice, overall. Is he a good player? Of course. But he wasn't doing it for Golden State.


Come, on, Dale Davis was a non-factor in the trade. He was there adding salary just to make it work. He didn't play one game for the hornets. They cut him and went back to the Pacers. The Hornets did the trade just to get rid of Baron contract.

And Jamison was/is a great player, but he has a MAX contract he's not living up to. Mully had to do that trade.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21364
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 3:40 am
Player32 wrote:Eh, I dunno... Dale Davis is a very solid big man and the Hornets weren't just looking for Speedy. Besides, Jamison wasn't going to help the Warriors win. Period. He had, like, 7 years to prove he could and he didn't. So Mully let him go. It was a good choice, overall. Is he a good player? Of course. But he wasn't doing it for Golden State.




Was doing alot more than Dunleavy and any other SF since Mullin!

Dale Davis got waived immediately anyway - So much for the soild big man.

Trading Jamison was a bad thing at the time especially while only getting Nick Van Exel. Mullin could have waited to see the development of other guys and the opportunity to trade for a talented big guy or someone else more worthwhile
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13511
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:06 am
migya wrote:Was doing alot more than Dunleavy and any other SF since Mullin!

Dale Davis got waived immediately anyway - So much for the soild big man.

Trading Jamison was a bad thing at the time especially while only getting Nick Van Exel. Mullin could have waited to see the development of other guys and the opportunity to trade for a talented big guy or someone else more worthwhile


Yes, Jamison was doing better than Dunleavy is now. But you can't have Jamison and Baron on the same team. Not only because of contracts, but because (without Dale Davis) the trade wouldn't have happened. Even if Davis was only, like you said, contract room in the trade, it wouldn't have happened.

And that's why Mully did it... right there when you said "trading Jamison was a bad thing at the time"... Look at Chris Mullin's team. It hasn't even peaked yet. Ike Diogu, Jason Richardson, Mike Dunleavy, Monta Ellis, Chris Taft, Andris Biedrins, Mickael Pietrus... they'll all be better players next season than they were last season and the season before that. They all will become amazing players overtime.

Mully is doing what Nelly does; he's creating new stars. Steve Nash never got his break in Phoenix sitting behind Jason Kidd... nowadays, every team in the league would rather have Nash over Kidd. Dirk Nowitski wasn't even heard of by anybody, but Nelly took him. He traded Jason Kidd for Michael Finley, who turned out to be a stud! He's also traded for Eric Dampier, Jason Terry, and many other young studs who haven't established career seasons yet. Chris Mullin is the same kind of GM: he goes for the young talent that will carry the team in 3 or 4 years when the stars hit their prime and the rookies become great players. In 3 or 4 years, would Antawn be a factor? Hell no.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21364
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:25 am
In 3 or 4 years Jamison still will be something and probably more than Dunleavy.........

Nelson is a great GM (just hasn't had the championships with the Warriors or mavs) and Mullin looks to be following in his footsteps. When Mullin traded Jamison though, he got an aging headcase in Van Exel! Yes he ended up getting his hands on Baron but could have traded Jamison to the mavs for someone like Raef LaFrenz and another player like Marquis Daniels or Josh Howard (that would have been so great!) or even Jamison (and if required some little used player on the bench) for Finley!
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13511
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 8:53 am
migya wrote:In 3 or 4 years Jamison still will be something and probably more than Dunleavy.........

After last night, you still think that a 33 or 34 year old Antawn Jamison is gonna be a factor compared to Mike Dunleavy, who just may hit his prime in the next 3 or 4 years? I'm gonna seriously doubt it...

migya wrote:Nelson is a great GM (just hasn't had the championships with the Warriors or mavs) and Mullin looks to be following in his footsteps. When Mullin traded Jamison though, he got an aging headcase in Van Exel! Yes he ended up getting his hands on Baron but could have traded Jamison to the mavs for someone like Raef LaFrenz and another player like Marquis Daniels or Josh Howard (that would have been so great!) or even Jamison (and if required some little used player on the bench) for Finley!

Every trade you mentioned would have been bad for the Warriors long term. When Mully traded Jamison for Van Exel, he had no intention of making Nick the corner of the franchise. He was just an established player to hold over the crowd while Mully worked behind the scenes. We traded him after one season, slowly freeing up contract room. Dale Davis' contract only had one or two years left on it when we made the trade for him. Chris Mullin was looking to let him go and sign a really key free agent in the next two offseasons to be the cornerstone of the franchise with Jason Richardson and Troy Murphy. The truth is that after playing with the same core for years, the result was that the Warriors needed new blood. They needed a star to spark all the potential that was just lying around everywhere.

So Chris Mullin gets up from bed one morning, grabs some Captain Crunch, and hops on his computer. He has an email from an insider he's got in New Orleans saying that the Hornets are getting really serious about trading Baron Davis away to the right person. Chris thinks: the right person? Well, the league see's us as a doormat. We've been last place for years. Along with the fact that we're in the West and they're in the East, so we're not a playoff threat to them down the line... HEY, maybe I'll take a risk, say screw the free agency down the line, and grab this injured star who may turn out to regain his composure down the line. And, boy, was he right. Baron Davis became everything the Warriors needed. Not only was he a star in his own right, but he was like a flame to gasoline when it came to igniting the other players potential. Mike Dunleavy, Jason Richardson, Mickael Pietrus, and Troy Murphy all showed major improvements during the Baron era. It was a good trade.

If we'd have made the Finley trade, like you said, we'd have had a HUGE contract (hence, Dallas' use of the amnesty clause on him) with not that great of a player (he's good, but he aint what he used to be). Not only that, but odds are, we wouldn't have traded him away (keeping us out of free agency OR the Baron Davis trade). Michael Finley would have been just like Antawn Jamison; a great player, but he can't improve his teammates. And, like you mentioned, players like Josh Howard, Raef Lafrenz, and Daniels would have been harder to trade, too. You gotta accept the fact that Chris Mullin made a great trade, with the ends far justifying the means. Even if Baron wouldn't have fallen into our laps, he would have made a run at a free agent down the line. He was doing the right thing.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
PreviousNext

Return to Trades

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest