Looks like AI is definately gonna be traded

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

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, hobbes


Role Player
Posts: 345
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:51 pm
Location: Fremont
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 3:02 pm
A.I. Wants To Be Traded
Dec 8 - According to two agents whose clients play for the 76ers, Allen Iverson went to team president Billy King this past Tuesday and demanded to be traded, something he professed repeatedly over the years he'd never do.
According to two general managers King contacted yesterday, the 76ers are aggressively attempting to accommodate their forlorn franchise player.

Everybody is gladly available. Andre Iguodala or Sam Dalembert may have to be surrendered in order to move Chris Webber ($20.7M/22.3M next season) or A.I. "But the big push is on to deal Iverson." -- New York Post

In Related News ...


The Nuggets caught wind Thursday of a whisper that figures to have phones ringing off the hook in the offices of general managers throughout the NBA.
Allen Iverson is back on the trade block, according to a league source, who said the Nuggets are among the teams that have been contacted to measure interest in the 31-year-old point guard. -- Denver Post


There are no in-house solutions to this problem. Nor are there many out there leaguewide. But there is one that's becoming more and more available by the day: Allen Iverson.
The Warriors need this guy. And here's the best part: The 76ers don't. -- Oakland Tribune

I know there have been thousands of AI trade rumors but looks like its getting really serious. Just wanted your opinions on a possible trade for AI.

I really dont know how he would affect the warriors but I have a gut feeling he wouldnt do much. The biggest problems with him are hes already 31 and theres no way hes gonna hold up much longer with his style of play and of course hes an enourmous ball hog.

He would probably just harm the development of our younguns and we would probly lose at least 1 of them in the trade.

Moderator
Posts: 5353
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 10:21 pm
Poster Credit: 21
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:03 pm
yeah, billy king has had enough, and even though AI has some back spasms and wont be able to play for a couple games, King has sent AI home and immediately Boston and Minisota are the main interests....rumor is that randy foye might be swapped for AI, and a 3rd team being involved for salary balancing purposes...intense day in phili

Starting Lineup
Posts: 913
Joined: Sun May 23, 2004 9:01 am
Poster Credit: -3
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:51 pm
AI may be our only hope to get a decent all-star and dump our luxury tax killing contracts. The two players I would move would be Murphy and Ellis and throw in Pietrus or Foyle depending how desperate King is at dumping AI. Ellis would be a great replacement for AI, and the Warriors have no salary space to sign a dime-a-dozen quick but short two guard that will demand a massive contract in a couple of years with the NBA version of the three stugies in Foyle, Murphy and Dunleavy on the books. AI can finish games, and he will get plenty of help from J-Rich, BD, Biedrins, Dunleavy and company. A starting lineup of AI, BD, J-Rich, Dunleavy or DIogu and Beans would give us a solid nucleus to win and opponents plenty to worry about. We could run up and down with the like of Dallas and Phoenix for some wild shoot outs which would extend AI career and bring life to the anemic NBA playoff 1st rounds. We have too many one-dimensional players, our power forwards (Murphy and Diogu) can't pass, rebound or defend, our small forwards (Pietrus and Dunleavy) are massively inconsistent and poor perimeter defenders and our highest scorer is our lowest paid player.

Role Player
Posts: 284
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:05 pm
I wouldm not be opposed to Iverson coming to Golden State, but I am having a hard time trying to figure out how he will play together with Baron Davis in the previous post.

Both players demand the ball in their hands and for all intents and purposes play one-on-one ball. That being said, I could see Baron getting moved to Philly and keeping Ellis alongside Iverson.

Iverson is making 18,281,000 this year and is owed roughly 40 million over the next two seasons. Baron is making 15,000,000 this season and about 35 million over the next two seasons. Throw Mikael Pietrus in there, an expiring contract who is making about 2,500,000 this season and you have a deal.

Now, does everyone think Iverson is a better option than Baron? Also, do you think the Warriors would be wrong for dumping Pietrus? I think Pietrus is a solid player, but with the number of big contracts on this team (Dunleavy, Murphy and Foyle) I do not see how the Warriors resign him for the kind of money he will be looking for on the free agent market.

It would be great to get rid of either Murph, Dunleavy or Foyle, but I cannot see the Sixers taking any of those players. They are going to want to find a deal that not just rids them of Iverson, but also a deal that gets the team better so they are not simply rebuilding. Pietrus and Baron would make the Sixers better.

The question is this....would Iverson make a Baronless and Pietrusless Warriors team better?
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3086
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 9:51 pm
Location: Redwood City, CA
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:51 pm
No.

Role Player
Posts: 345
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:51 pm
Location: Fremont
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 1:02 am
dareedle wrote:AI may be our only hope to get a decent all-star and dump our luxury tax killing contracts. The two players I would move would be Murphy and Ellis and throw in Pietrus or Foyle depending how desperate King is at dumping AI. Ellis would be a great replacement for AI, and the Warriors have no salary space to sign a dime-a-dozen quick but short two guard that will demand a massive contract in a couple of years with the NBA version of the three stugies in Foyle, Murphy and Dunleavy on the books. AI can finish games, and he will get plenty of help from J-Rich, BD, Biedrins, Dunleavy and company. A starting lineup of AI, BD, J-Rich, Dunleavy or DIogu and Beans would give us a solid nucleus to win and opponents plenty to worry about. We could run up and down with the like of Dallas and Phoenix for some wild shoot outs which would extend AI career and bring life to the anemic NBA playoff 1st rounds. We have too many one-dimensional players, our power forwards (Murphy and Diogu) can't pass, rebound or defend, our small forwards (Pietrus and Dunleavy) are massively inconsistent and poor perimeter defenders and our highest scorer is our lowest paid player.


I have to disagree with you here.

Two ball dominating guards on the same team? I seriously doubt Baron and AI would work together. Not to mention J-rich diogu and AB would barely get any touches.

Plus if anything this would worsen our salary cap woes seeing as AI has an enourmous contract to the tune of about 60 mil over the next three years.

This is intruiging but overall i have to root against it.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21366
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:09 am
Finally Iverson is leaving the sixers! This maybe should have happened a couple of years ago!

The only appealing thing about trading for Iverson would be to get rid of at least two of the three bad contracts (Foyle, dun and Murphy) but Iverson himself has a big contract and I'm not sure how many more years he has left on his current contract.

The thing is - Iverson is not the type of player the team needs with Baron, JRich and Ellis here. I would not trade either one of those three for Iverson.

What would be a good idea is to do a three team trade where we get a couple of young players and some draft picks and we trade away at least two of the bad contracts. Wishful thinking :mrgreen:



No to getting Iverson
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: Sun Dec 10, 2006 7:59 am
They won't want our scrubs. We won't give them our young guys. Case closed. (Even tho I'd love to see him as a Warrior)

All Star
Posts: 2803
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 4:46 pm
Poster Credit: 7
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 1:28 pm
TMC wrote:They won't want our scrubs. We won't give them our young guys. Case closed. (Even tho I'd love to see him as a Warrior)


You are probably correct.

It would be fun to watch AI given the green light by Nelson to attack the basket on every offensive play.

BTW, AI is younger than Steve Nash.

If the Warriors can get AI, the Warriors should get him!
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 18461
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:48 am
Location: Somewhere in this site...
Poster Credit: -4
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 1:38 pm
uptempo wrote:BTW, AI is younger than Steve Nash.

If the Warriors can get AI, the Warriors should get him!


But, due to his style of play, will wear down sooner.

Nash still will be able to contribute even when he starts to decline phisically. AI's career will be over by that time. The pounding he goes through in each game will be too much for his body to endure.

Rookie
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 1:52 pm
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 1:48 pm
I've been hearing AI's gonna break down since '02 but he...just...keeps....going. I think whoever gets him has 3 great (not good) years left. Man, when he's 34, maybe then we can worry.

That said, Biedrins & Monta are deal-breakers. I agree with everyone who's said that. And BD would have to go instead of JRich, since, well, do we want two tempermental ball-dominators? You watched Marbury & Francis this year? Dry-heave central.

I'd love to see AI 40 times a year, but, you know, I just don't see it working. The only trades I'd be okay with would have to involve BD, a third of our grossly-overpaid-triumverate (Dun, Murph, Foyle), and any young guy besides Monta & Biedrins. If Billy King is that dumb, we should take it. Otherwise, hold pat...and try and win some freakin' games.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 18461
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:48 am
Location: Somewhere in this site...
Poster Credit: -4
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 1:58 pm
Birdmonster wrote:I've been hearing AI's gonna break down since '02 but he...just...keeps....going. I think whoever gets him has 3 great (not good) years left. Man, when he's 34, maybe then we can worry.


That's true, but the risk was always once he gets over the 30 years limit. Nobody breaks down at 28. This is the time to care about that. If we could be sure he'd still play til 34, that'd be great, as that's when his contract ends.

Agree about BD, tho. I can't see them playing well together... although probably Philly wouldn't go for that deal. They're supposedly looking for young guys and expirers.

All Star
Posts: 1128
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 11:06 am
Location: East Bay
Poster Credit: 5
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 2:05 pm
baron breaks down at 25, 26, 27
"Losing is inevitably close to winning," Guber said. "They're inches apart. Drama. If you have drama, you've got a ticket to sell." "They're not real fans," Lacob said. "They don't have season tickets."

Role Player
Posts: 284
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 2:05 pm
A quick two cents on thsi debate.....Allen Iverson is a player who relies on his quickness and his ability to get to the basket and create his own shot.

On the other hand, Steve Nash is a player who does not necessarily rely on the same qualities as Iverson. Nash relies on his vision of the whole floor, his ball-handling and his unselfish play.

The traits Iverson relies on will deteriorate with age. The strengths of Steve Nash may not always stay as they are, but if I were a GM, I would take the player in Nash who can be a step slower and still effective rather than a step slow Iverson who has trouble adapting his game to his worn down body.

Iverson still has a few years in the tank, but as I have said in other threads, mortgaging the future to get him would be a mistake.

Rookie
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 1:52 pm
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 2:26 pm
TMC wrote:That's true, but the risk was always once he gets over the 30 years limit. Nobody breaks down at 28. This is the time to care about that. If we could be sure he'd still play til 34, that'd be great, as that's when his contract ends.

Agree about BD, tho. I can't see them playing well together... although probably Philly wouldn't go for that deal. They're supposedly looking for young guys and expirers.

Hey, we got young guys. Take Mike Dunleavy, for example. He's young. PLEASE take Mike Dunleavy. (obligatory)

And I agree: Iverson's more likely to break down every year. But some players are just tough and hang around. I think he's one of these. I can see him playing at a high level until he's in his late 30's, honestly. He'd have to change his game but I think he's capable of it.

We'll see. I think he's going to the Celtics anyhow but I'm praying for the Wolves. I'd like to see two of the feircest yet abandoned competitors have a few good stabs at it together.
Next

Return to Trades

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests