Mullin won't accept trade offers for J Rich

Area for news articles related to the Warriors

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, hobbes

User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21375
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:52 am
TMC wrote:
migya wrote:KG would be better with better players around him because he has very good passing skills and can create for others so well. Imagine JRich and Pietrus cutting to the basket for dunks off KG feeds!


Sure. The problem would be if we have to send our other weapons to Minny to get KG. Then that trade would leave us in their situation right now.



But contractwise, Murphy, Dunleavy and Fisher woulld do :)
Getting rid of some baggage, overpaying and softness
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13525
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 2:45 am
migya wrote:But contractwise, Murphy, Dunleavy and Fisher woulld do :)
Getting rid of some baggage, overpaying and softness

And WHY in the hell would the Timberwolves take that trade...?
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21375
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 5:59 am
#32 wrote:
migya wrote:But contractwise, Murphy, Dunleavy and Fisher woulld do :)
Getting rid of some baggage, overpaying and softness

And WHY in the hell would the Timberwolves take that trade...?



Because it makes them a better team!!!!!!!

Murphy isn't great but he is better than the many dogs that are currently in the TWolves. Same for Fisher and Dunleavy (with what he is showing lately)!

Like I've said, there are many better players needed for the TWolves because their current players are not that good, besides Davis, Garnett and maybe Banks.

McHale will be looking to rebuild with younger, potentially great players and he will not have much choice if KG demands a trade quickly!

The Warriors could offer Murphy, Dunleavy, Fisher, the 1st round pick in this upcoming draft and maybe another player like Taft or Zarko for Garnett
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: Sat Apr 01, 2006 6:02 am
migya wrote:
#32 wrote:
migya wrote:But contractwise, Murphy, Dunleavy and Fisher woulld do :)
Getting rid of some baggage, overpaying and softness

And WHY in the hell would the Timberwolves take that trade...?


Because it makes them a better team!!!!!!!


:scratch: Losing KG for those three makes them a better team?.

It doesn't help them now, and it doesn't help them for the future, as those contracs eat a lot of cap space.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21375
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 7:02 am
TMC wrote:
migya wrote:
#32 wrote:
migya wrote:But contractwise, Murphy, Dunleavy and Fisher woulld do :)
Getting rid of some baggage, overpaying and softness

And WHY in the hell would the Timberwolves take that trade...?


Because it makes them a better team!!!!!!!


:scratch: Losing KG for those three makes them a better team?.

It doesn't help them now, and it doesn't help them for the future, as those contracs eat a lot of cap space.



Those contracts may be rather large but they get a PF that is a decent replacement and better than anyone else they have, a SF that has got potential, can sort of run an offense sometimes and is looking better lately which gives some hope. They also get a PG who may be better than any other they have and would probably their best spot up shooter. That is not great but is better than what they have and the draft pick can get them someone good to fill one of the other two positions. Like I said, throw in Taft or Zarko and they have another young player to develop or use as trade bait to get more established players.

Don't see many teams offering their best players for Garnett because the TWolves would be the ones in the difficult position and if McHale can't get any real stars in return, he'll most probably be going for young players with potential to be very good and that have already shown some good production. The Warriors have young players like that
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: Sat Apr 01, 2006 8:19 am
It may only be me, but, if forced to trade, I'd rather trade him for expirers and a few draft picks.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13525
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 12:45 pm
migya wrote:
#32 wrote:
migya wrote:But contractwise, Murphy, Dunleavy and Fisher woulld do :)
Getting rid of some baggage, overpaying and softness

And WHY in the hell would the Timberwolves take that trade...?

Because it makes them a better team!!!!!!!

Hmmm...

Murphy's a soft PF that rebounds extremely well. While I'm happy to have him as a 3rd option, he's a noticable step down from Garnett, if you're the T-Wolves.

Dunleavy is Dunleavy. There's nothing more to say. He's horribly inconsistent with the potential of exploding. Doesn't really further or hinder any team because his pluses and minuses cancel out. He's just sucking up cap space.

Lastly, Derek Fisher is a solid veteran whose on his way out faster than KG. He's a quick fix at point guard (but won't last long-term) and may, ultimately, fail at that (we saw how he performed in a starting role last year... it's clear he'd rather be a bench player with less pressure).

In the end, none of these players (not even combined) would make the Timberwolves forget KG. I see no reason at all for Minnesoda to pursue this trade. I'm with TMC; if I can't get a solid player from the Eastern Conference, I'm going with draft picks and expirers. If one is forced to rebuild from the ground up, there's no reason to half-ass it. Either go for another franchise or take the lottery picks; the worst thing the Timberwolves could do would be to take 3 barely above average players and settle. They'd drift around an 8th seed, never getting past the first round (or miss the playoffs altogether) for the next 10 years.

And, besides... would YOU make that trade, if you're Golden State? Suddenly, you've roadblocked Ike Diogu a lot worse than if you still had Troy Murphy around. Any theory about him branching out into a "star player" can be forgotten about (at least, if you're Golden State). We also give up Dunleavy for no small forward in return (and, no, Garnett's not gonna go back to playing the 3... he's lost a step of quickness - not to mention gained 2 inches of height - since his sophomore year). This leaves us starting Mickael Pietrus (which would be horrible, judging by how he's played lately). You can make an argument that we could slide JRich up to the 3-spot, but than whose going to play the 2? Monta? That would leave us without a backup point guard to spell the ever-so injury ridden Baron Davis. And after giving up (basically) both of our attractive trade pieces (Fisher and Murphy), we still haven't solved our problem at center (and KG can only do so much... we're seeing that now that he doesn't have Ervin J or Kandi Man watching his back).

Not only does this trade hurt Minnesoda long-term, but it also raises a lot more questions pertaining to Golden State and their current system. I know everybody here is pretty much ready to throw "the system" out the window to get KG, but there's no logical solution to our new holes at small forward and point guard if we lose Dunleavy and Fisher for nothing in return. The obvious solution would be to sign a couple minimum wage contracts (but while that gives us warm bodies for the floor, the elimination of our bench's depth is still taking place). Look at the depth charts:

PG: Baron and...?
SG: Monta/Pietrus/Cheaney
SF: Richardson and...?
PF: Garnett/Diogu/Taft/Chaparkaba
C: Foyle/Biedrins


Suddenly, we're handicapped at the 1 and 3 spots (not to mention still weak at the 5). That trade hurts both teams, so neither Mullin nor McHale will go for it.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21375
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 5:54 pm
TMC wrote:It may only be me, but, if forced to trade, I'd rather trade him for expirers and a few draft picks.



The draft picks yes, if they are from teams that will most certainly miss the playoffs for at least couple of seasons (therefore giving lottery picks). But the thing is, the TWolves don't want to become a horrible team while rebuilding, which has happened to the Trailblazers recently. McHale will firstly, want to keep his job, which he will not if the TWolves get real bad, and he will want some quality and quantity of some sort for KG.

Expirers are good if the TWolves have a real good chance of signing any major soon to be freeagents but that is getting harder with the ability of teams to resign their own players for more and the fact that a lot of stars are locked up for a few more years.

Murphy, Dunleavy and Fisher are the players I use in this example because the contract totals workout, which has to in order to make a trade. This trade makes both teams happy in that the Warriors get a real star and still have some quality players left to surround KG (which he has never had) and the TWolves get three players (four if needed by adding wither Taft or Zarko) and a lottery pick in this upcoming draft. They can either keep the three players, if they perform well enough which is possible, or they can use them (one, two or all three) as trade bait later on to get a star that wants out of their current team.

Either way, McHale will be the one who will be against the wall if Garnett wants to leave Minnesota and getting a number of quality players will be more difficult.
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21375
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 6:21 pm
#32 wrote:Murphy's a soft PF that rebounds extremely well. While I'm happy to have him as a 3rd option, he's a noticable step down from Garnett, if you're the T-Wolves.

Dunleavy is Dunleavy. There's nothing more to say. He's horribly inconsistent with the potential of exploding. Doesn't really further or hinder any team because his pluses and minuses cancel out. He's just sucking up cap space.

Lastly, Derek Fisher is a solid veteran whose on his way out faster than KG. He's a quick fix at point guard (but won't last long-term) and may, ultimately, fail at that (we saw how he performed in a starting role last year... it's clear he'd rather be a bench player with less pressure).


Murphy is a step down from Garnett but WHO ISN'T!!!!!!
Murphy is a contibutor and that is more than what most players in the TWolves do right now.

Dunleavy is not one of my favourites (obviously) but the man has got "potential" as many see it because he shows varied skills for a man his height, he has the potential to play more than one position which is always a nice thing and is better than most of the gabage on the TWolves right now besides Ricky Davis.

Fisher is not a young man but he is not that old and he has shown lately that he can perform well enough to be a major player at times. The TWolves inconsistent (Jaric) and injury prone (Hudson) PGs that just don't seem like ever being much at all. Marcus Banks shows promise but he has not been that consistent so far either and could benefit form getting some shooting instructions from Fisher.

In all - The TWolves would be getting starters for their team (much like the Lakers did when they traded Shaq) and players that are all liked by some GMs out there and so they can be used to trade for other players when the opportunity arises.


#32 wrote:And, besides... would YOU make that trade, if you're Golden State?


FUK YES!!!!!!


#32 wrote:Suddenly, you've roadblocked Ike Diogu a lot worse than if you still had Troy Murphy around. Any theory about him branching out into a "star player" can be forgotten about (at least, if you're Golden State).

Diogu can be starting PF and Garnett can play either SF (which he has shown always that he has the skills to play defensively and cause MAJOR matchup problems defensively or he can play Center, which many think he can't do but that is absurd, since Duncan does it well and KG is tall enough and more than skilled enough).

#32 wrote:We also give up Dunleavy for no small forward in return (and, no, Garnett's not gonna go back to playing the 3... he's lost a step of quickness - not to mention gained 2 inches of height - since his sophomore year). This leaves us starting Mickael Pietrus (which would be horrible, judging by how he's played lately). You can make an argument that we could slide JRich up to the 3-spot, but than whose going to play the 2? Monta? That would leave us without a backup point guard to spell the ever-so injury ridden Baron Davis. And after giving up (basically) both of our attractive trade pieces (Fisher and Murphy), we still haven't solved our problem at center (and KG can only do so much... we're seeing that now that he doesn't have Ervin J or Kandi Man watching his back).

Like I said above, KG plays SF well and has guarded the likes of TMac to the likes of Duncan before and done it well. If he plays Center or PF, Pietrus will play SF well at times like he has shown but if he is bad like he has been recently, either he can get traded (he has to show substance now!) or JRich can play some SF and Pietrus SG to see if that works. Other than that, many quality players would want to come to the Warriors if they get KG and so a SF can be easily obtained if needed.

As far as the PG position, Baron is still there until he gets traded (if ever) and Monta can backup both guard spots and this Will Bynum guy seems adequate for now also. Many PGs would want to come to the Warriors if they get KG, as would many players of all positions.

#32 wrote:Not only does this trade hurt Minnesoda long-term, but it also raises a lot more questions pertaining to Golden State and their current system. I know everybody here is pretty much ready to throw "the system" out the window to get KG, but there's no logical solution to our new holes at small forward and point guard if we lose Dunleavy and Fisher for nothing in return. The obvious solution would be to sign a couple minimum wage contracts (but while that gives us warm bodies for the floor, the elimination of our bench's depth is still taking place). Look at the depth charts:

PG: Baron and...?
SG: Monta/Pietrus/Cheaney
SF: Richardson and...?
PF: Garnett/Diogu/Taft/Chaparkaba
C: Foyle/Biedrins




The Warriors have enough good players to fill the positions. The roster will be:

PG - Baron/Monta/Bynum
SG - JRich/Pietrus/Cheany
SF - Garnett/Pietrus/Cheany
PF - Diogu/Taft(if he is not included in trade)/Zarko(same as Taft)/Garnett also
C - Biedrins/Foyle/Taft

If the Warriors don't include either Taft or Zarko in the trade, they still have 11 players all up but if they do, they still have 10 players - More than adequate and talented enough. WITH YOUTH AND POTENTIAL eg. Biedrins, Diogu, Ellis
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13525
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 10:09 pm
migya wrote:Murphy is a step down from Garnett but WHO ISN'T!!!!!!
Murphy is a contibutor and that is more than what most players in the TWolves do right now.

But as the best player in the trade (from Golden State's side), Murphy doesn't make this deal attractive if you're Minnesoda. He's exactly what you pointed out: a contributer. He'll deliver solid numbers in points and categories, but not much else. I guarentee you that nobody would be thrilled (least of all the Timberwolves, with a player like KG) at the idea of trading their franchise player of somebody's third option. Murphy would not doubt have to be included in a Garnett trade... but not as the main attraction.

migya wrote:Dunleavy is not one of my favourites (obviously) but the man has got "potential"

Ehhh. After 4 years in the league, claiming that a player has "potential" doesn't work. The T-Wolves (like the rest of the league) see Dunleavy as an inconsistent, unreliable player. Besides, his contract makes him trade poison. The ability to play awkwardly out of position for 10 minutes a night wont make Minnesoda forget all those strikes on him. He doesn't further a trade for KG at all.

migya wrote:Fisher is not a young man but he is not that old and he has shown lately that he can perform well enough to be a major player at times. The TWolves inconsistent (Jaric) and injury prone (Hudson) PGs that just don't seem like ever being much at all. Marcus Banks shows promise but he has not been that consistent so far either and could benefit form getting some shooting instructions from Fisher.

Marcus Banks is their choice for the future at the moment, and it's not hard to see why. Ever since the trade from Boston (giving him more floor time), Banks has played spectacularly (averaging 12 and 5, with a steal per night). He's a defensive lock-out with the ability to score in bunches and distributes the ball well. They would most likely start Banks instead of Fisher. This stacks their lineup with 4 PGs who all want playing time (Banks, Jaric, Fisher, and Hudson). I doubt another point guard is very attractive to a team that already has 3 decent ones.

migya wrote:In all - The TWolves would be getting starters for their team (much like the Lakers did when they traded Shaq) and players that are all liked by some GMs out there and so they can be used to trade for other players when the opportunity arises.

Certainly not Dunleavy; I doubt any GM would take him from the Warriors (much less the Timberwolves, where he'd get a second chance to shine). The only real value in the trade that may attract other GMs is Murphy. Fisher is a toss-up and Dunleavy's a no-go. Better valued as expirers (which wont happen anytime soon).

migya wrote:Diogu can be starting PF and Garnett can play either SF (which he has shown always that he has the skills to play defensively and cause MAJOR matchup problems defensively or he can play Center, which many think he can't do but that is absurd, since Duncan does it well and KG is tall enough and more than skilled enough).

Like I said, Garnett will not go back to playing small forward full time. He's gained 2 inches since the last time he played that position (not to mention aged 10 years). I agree, on a mismatch for the defense he's capable of handling a small forward or a center... but he won't do it the entire game. If you want to trade for Garnett, you need to realize that Diogu will be on his way out sooner than later. KG loves to float out near the midrange too much to be a center... and he's not physically capable of playing small forward full-time anymore (one full game of running around on the perimeter after Richard Jefferson or Corey Maggette would prove it). It's a nice thought as far as post options for the offense, but Garnett's best defense is played down on the block. Forcing him to the perimeter on defense would be moronic and a hillarious waste of his abilities.

migya wrote:Like I said above, KG plays SF well and has guarded the likes of TMac to the likes of Duncan before and done it well.

See above. A mismatch is not the same as a full game. KG can handle TMac for a couple plays a night, but would fail ultimately in anything more than a once in a while situation. Besides, a taller SF like McGrady isn't the kind of player you need to worry about. Someone like LeBron James or Ron Artest is what would really give Garnett trouble (and I doubt he could keep up with them the entire game). As for Duncan, I agree, he could probably make an awkward transition to center for a short while... but it wouldn't last. Garnett is a PF (and what's more, he's a star... so he no longer needs to attempt these strange adjustments at different positions. He has enough box office respect to play where he wants to play... which, ultimately, is where he plays the best). End of story.

migya wrote:Other than that, many quality players would want to come to the Warriors if they get KG and so a SF can be easily obtained if needed.

Doubtful. If that were true, than why doesn't Minnesoda have all-star players leaping at a shot to play with KG? Their squad with Spree and Cassell was good enough to lure a few free agents their way... and that didn't work. The key is the salary cap (and KG would max ours out).

migya wrote:As far as the PG position, Baron is still there until he gets traded (if ever) and Monta can backup both guard spots and this Will Bynum guy seems adequate for now also.
migya wrote:avis is injury prone, Monta Ellis plays best as SG (which is probably where he'll eventually end up), and Bynum won't be resigned next year. We'll be left without a backup.

migya wrote:Many PGs would want to come to the Warriors if they get KG, as would many players of all positions.

You can't keep falling back on this imaginary cavalry of players leaping onto the Warriors simply because of Garnett. Look at the Nets with Carter and Kidd. Look at the Wizards with Jamison and Arenas. Look at the 76ers with Webber and Iverson. Just because a team carries two franchise players doesn't mean all of their needed players begin to fall out of the sky. Garnett would suck up maximum cap space (like BD already is) and nobody decent is going to take a minimum salary.

The bottom line is that a KG trade (for the players you listed) opens more holes than is plugs. Bad idea.
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: Sun Apr 02, 2006 2:32 am
migya wrote:
#32 wrote:And, besides... would YOU make that trade, if you're Golden State?


FUK YES!!!!!!


It'd be retarded not to. We'd get a top 10 player for a few years and, at the same time, we would dump a bunch of overrated and overpaid players. My point is that Minny would be crazy to do that trade...

All Star
Posts: 2261
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2004 9:05 am
Location: Berkeley
Poster Credit: 1
PostPosted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 2:45 am
WOW :shock: All that for a amature/fantasy hypothetical unrealistic Trade :!: I guess 1 can dream huh :dontknow:
The Broe Knows Dont Hate....
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13525
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 11:07 am
TMC wrote:It'd be retarded not to. We'd get a top 10 player for a few years and, at the same time, we would dump a bunch of overrated and overpaid players.

I agree that Minnesoda would NEVER go for that trade in a million years, BUT...

You gotta admit: on the surface, this looks like a dream trade. But look deeper into it. It leaves our bench completely handicapped (which, ultimately, is the reason Sacramento plunged from first in the division to dead last). Teams live and die by their roles players. Garnett would be a great player to get... but not if he leaves our SF and PG spots weaker (and I mean a lot weaker). The Kings starting lineup didn't really get any weaker (they basically swapped Webber/Williams/Divac for Shareef/Bibby/Miller)... but the loss of their great depth is why they started losing! Players like Bobby Jackson, Scott Pollard, and Doug Christie made the difference for them... just like Derek Fisher, Monta Ellis, and (occasionally) Mike Dunleavy do for us. Dishing away our depth is not a smart idea (even for a player as tempting as Kevin Garnett).
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image

Starting Lineup
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 4:53 pm
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 1:03 pm
I'd do it cuz it's worth it. We'd be able to get blue chip bits to fill in the holes plus d-league talent...KG @ 30 is worth it, all the way. ---***030***---

PG: Baron/Monta
SG: Monta/Pietrus/Cheaney
SF: Richardson/MP/CC
PF: Garnett/Diogu/Taft
C: Foyle/Biedrins/Taft



I left off Zarko cuz he's a complete waste of roster space.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21375
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 7:56 pm
#32 wrote:
migya wrote:Murphy is a step down from Garnett but WHO ISN'T!!!!!!
Murphy is a contibutor and that is more than what most players in the TWolves do right now.

But as the best player in the trade (from Golden State's side), Murphy doesn't make this deal attractive if you're Minnesoda. He's exactly what you pointed out: a contributer. He'll deliver solid numbers in points and categories, but not much else. I guarentee you that nobody would be thrilled (least of all the Timberwolves, with a player like KG) at the idea of trading their franchise player of somebody's third option. Murphy would not doubt have to be included in a Garnett trade... but not as the main attraction.


You are partly right that Murphy may not be seen as a major player by McHale but he could easily be, as McHale likes rebounders and doesn't mind good shooters. Either way, Murphy is more than solid and young, which is something a team that will probably have no choice but to rebuild (since their current players, other than KG and Davis) are not much good.


migya wrote:Dunleavy is not one of my favourites (obviously) but the man has got "potential"

#32 wrote:Ehhh. After 4 years in the league, claiming that a player has "potential" doesn't work. The T-Wolves (like the rest of the league) see Dunleavy as an inconsistent, unreliable player. Besides, his contract makes him trade poison. The ability to play awkwardly out of position for 10 minutes a night wont make Minnesoda forget all those strikes on him. He doesn't further a trade for KG at all.


I agree with ya that dun is a bust right now but his "potential" with the height and fairly versatile skills is attractive to many GMs who always think "what if" and many do take chances on players that have not performed like expected. Again, he is probably better than most of the SF players they have.


migya wrote:Fisher is not a young man but he is not that old and he has shown lately that he can perform well enough to be a major player at times. The TWolves inconsistent (Jaric) and injury prone (Hudson) PGs that just don't seem like ever being much at all. Marcus Banks shows promise but he has not been that consistent so far either and could benefit form getting some shooting instructions from Fisher.

#32 wrote:Marcus Banks is their choice for the future at the moment, and it's not hard to see why. Ever since the trade from Boston (giving him more floor time), Banks has played spectacularly (averaging 12 and 5, with a steal per night). He's a defensive lock-out with the ability to score in bunches and distributes the ball well. They would most likely start Banks instead of Fisher. This stacks their lineup with 4 PGs who all want playing time (Banks, Jaric, Fisher, and Hudson). I doubt another point guard is very attractive to a team that already has 3 decent ones.


Banks has been inconsistent! That is not a very good PG and McHale has a major issue to resolve at PG since none of the current ones have been any sort of an answer! Fisher is enticing to alot of GMs because of his good shooting ability and his experiece. McHale would be looking for that rather than what he has at PG at the moment.

The three players I have mentioned - Murphy, dun and Fisher are all attractive to GMs for one reason or another, even though many of us realise that they are not what the warriros need. GMs look for talent and a player that fits in and these three would be convincing to alot of GMs.


migya wrote:Like I said above, KG plays SF well and has guarded the likes of TMac to the likes of Duncan before and done it well.

See above. A mismatch is not the same as a full game. KG can handle TMac for a couple plays a night, but would fail ultimately in anything more than a once in a while situation. Besides, a taller SF like McGrady isn't the kind of player you need to worry about. Someone like LeBron James or Ron Artest is what would really give Garnett trouble (and I doubt he could keep up with them the entire game). As for Duncan, I agree, he could probably make an awkward transition to center for a short while... but it wouldn't last. Garnett is a PF (and what's more, he's a star... so he no longer needs to attempt these strange adjustments at different positions. He has enough box office respect to play where he wants to play... which, ultimately, is where he plays the best). End of story.[/quote]

Garnett wants to win a championship! He will do what it takes to do that! I still remember his first 4 years in the nba where he refused to play PF much because he said he was a complete SF that can do it all and that was where he wanted to be. That, I believe, resulted in less success for the TWolves in those earlier days as KG would have guarded the great PFs better and instead, guys like Gugliotta did and that cost them dearly.

Garnett is more versatile than most players in the nba and he will do great in more than one position if needed!


migya wrote:Other than that, many quality players would want to come to the Warriors if they get KG and so a SF can be easily obtained if needed.

#32 wrote:Doubtful. If that were true, than why doesn't Minnesoda have all-star players leaping at a shot to play with KG? Their squad with Spree and Cassell was good enough to lure a few free agents their way... and that didn't work. The key is the salary cap (and KG would max ours out).


Firstly, the TWolves have not gotten good players to surround Garnett more because the management has been stupid and they had chances to get better role players than what they have. The TWolves have never really had any player that is real good, other than Garnett, and that does not look appealing for players looking to be on a championship caliber team. The Warriors however, with Baron, JRich and Garnett, would look very much like a championship caliber team and therefore would be far more attractive to great role players!

I agree that the salary cap would be rather huge with KG added but Murphy, dun and Fisher's contracts basically add up to KG's so the team would be in the same position they are now salarywise.


migya wrote:As far as the PG position, Baron is still there until he gets traded (if ever) and Monta can backup both guard spots and this Will Bynum guy seems adequate for now also.

#32 wrote:Davis is injury prone, Monta Ellis plays best as SG (which is probably where he'll eventually end up), and Bynum won't be resigned next year. We'll be left without a backup.


PG is one of the easiest positions to fill so that will be no problem!
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
PreviousNext

Return to News Articles

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests