http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives...ted_in_iverson/ we're not listed as one of the six teams left. good. i don't want iverson. we don't need him.
and today, ric bucher also said the warriors are out of the running for iverson, saying that iverson would nix a deal to the warriors as well as the kings. he wants to stay in the east.
<div class="quote_poster">oaktank88 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post"> we're not listed as one of the six teams left. good. i don't want iverson. we don't need him.</div> Nobody wants AI now News Headliner "Nobody wants AI, AI stuck in Philly" Dangit... trade him already.
<div class="quote_poster">oaktank88 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">and today, ric bucher also said the warriors are out of the running for iverson, saying that iverson would nix a deal to the warriors as well as the kings. he wants to stay in the east.</div>Well, he can't technically nix a deal, Philadelphia can trade him wherever they want to. And I assume they'd like to not trade him to another eastern team if at all possible. So Denver is looking pretty good for AI.
Yeah, but why would a team trade for a player that doesn't want to play with your team? So in a way he does have to power to determine where he wants to go.
<div class="quote_poster">AnimeFANatic Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Yeah, but why would a team trade for a player that doesn't want to play with your team? So in a way he does have to power to determine where he wants to go.</div> Logically-I don't lock in on a guy I owe $50 million-plus knowing he's not a happy camper and will make big waves. I hope the W's don't lurch into any foolish band-aid deal. Past their peak " Stars" paid mega $$ are not the wise path. IF we get MAX VALUE for OUR assets-and a good bargain getting a guy with a great future/upside...sweet. I would tend to ask,where does this deal put us in 2009? in 2010? If the answer is NBA finals, Cool. If the answer is, Lottery then
I agree with REREM and AnimeFANatic about making sure AI is at least willing to play here. It seems as if AI is content to play with KG or Paul Pierce. I suppose next on the trading block could be Maggette...
<div class="quote_poster">AnimeFANatic Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Yeah, but why would a team trade for a player that doesn't want to play with your team? So in a way he does have to power to determine where he wants to go.</div> Nick Van Exel was quoted as saying "If I get traded to the Warriors, man, I'll retire." Then, a few years later, St' Jean/Mully swing a trade for him. He came, begrudgingly, but his "stint" here was hardly memorable, lol.
You know, if AI goes to Minnesota, it kind of sucks for the Warriors since that's going to mean the chances of KG being moved are zero. I know, I know, not that we'd have much of a chance anyway, but it's nice to dream.
<div class="quote_poster">AlleyOop Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Nick Van Exel was quoted as saying "If I get traded to the Warriors, man, I'll retire." Then, a few years later, St' Jean/Mully swing a trade for him. He came, begrudgingly, but his "stint" here was hardly memorable, lol.</div> Lol, yeah. Both Muss and Mullin didn't agree on a lot of things. But, one thing they agreed was about NVE. Muss gave NVE a paid half season vacation. And as soon as Mullin became an official GM, he traded him for D. Davis just to get rid of headache. If Iverson doesn't want to come here, so be it. The only reason I am mildly interested in Iverson is because Iverson is a flawed superstar, and Nelson is great at utilizing flawed player. It's not like he will solve any of our interior woes to begin with...
<div class="quote_poster">HiRez Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">You know, if AI goes to Minnesota, it kind of sucks for the Warriors since that's going to mean the chances of KG being moved are zero. I know, I know, not that we'd have much of a chance anyway, but it's nice to dream.</div> I don't know how they will afford to get Iverson though. Other than Iverson, Davis makes less than 7 mils (2 years), Blount makes around 6 mils (4 years), Hudson makes less than 6 mils (4 years), Jaric makes 5.5 mils (5 years), and James makes 5 mils (4 years). It would be very hard to package 3 overpaid and long garbage contracts to Philly, and I can even say our Murphy, Foyle package looks better than that. BTW, they really didn't do a good job surrounding talents around KG...
<div class="quote_poster">HiRez Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">You know, if AI goes to Minnesota, it kind of sucks for the Warriors since that's going to mean the chances of KG being moved are zero. I know, I know, not that we'd have much of a chance anyway, but it's nice to dream.</div> You're wrong actually (IMO)... Warriors have some of the best trading pieces around. If KG was available I think we'd have a good enough package to get him, but of course with sacrifice. I mean who wouldn't want players like Ellis, Diogu, Biedrins? Not to mention players in their prime JRich and Baron? And we also have big ass contracts (thank Mullin for that) to make the salaries match. We have better pieces than what most other teams have. Hell we could get AI if we really wanted. We have the power to get any player really. For example: JRich, Ellis, Biedrins in a trade. Never mind that it's an insane trade that I'd never do, the fact is we can get a player if we wanted.
<div class="quote_poster">AnimeFANatic Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">You're wrong actually (IMO)... Warriors have some of the best trading pieces around. If KG was available I think we'd have a good enough package to get him, but of course with sacrifice. I mean who wouldn't want players like Ellis, Diogu, Biedrins?</div>Well...that doesn't really work though because why give up the farm to get KG? Sure we could get him if we give up all our young talent, but then we're just the sucky T-Wolves moved west, who wants that? Ike I might consider, Monta I'd be hesitant, and Andris no way in hell. JRich and Baron? Well...MAYBE...but IMO that's a stretch. I don't think Minnesota is going to let KG go for "good" talent, they will either want elite talent (read: All-Stars) or a bunch of top-shelf young potential talent. Unless they end up dealing from a position of extreme desperation, but I imagine they'll have 29 other teams offering up deals when/if KG ever goes on the block. It's possible for the Warriors to work a good deal for KG, but I still think it's highly unlikely.
Man, I heard the Biedrins trade package rumor on the radio and I got upset all over again. It can't be true, but Mullin is such a clown as a GM sometimes it makes you wonder if he'd do something that stupid. We're talking about the guy that pissed away a good portion of team salary on four backup players in almost one season's length of time (and never looked like he planned for the years down the road and if we could re-sign our own draft picks). Don Nelson can't let him make any trades if he is going to do something that stupid. Nelson ought to know what is working and what isn't. He's out there on the battlefront and Mullin has never coached a day in his life to even know what a team is. He's out of touch (IMO) or else he would have never jumped on Dunleavy so soon and looked to find other options in case Dun never worked out. Another thing is, I just don't understand why we can't do Baron for AI straight up... Why even throw in Biedrins and get some underachieving center like Steven Hunter? At least we know Mullin was in love with Beans from day 1, so this rumor can't be true. But, if Philly indeed proposed such a trade and it got leaked to the press, they must think Mullin doesn't know a young talented big man if it hit him in the ass. The Foyle signing probably doesn't help Mullin's case in quieting the ridiculous rumor. Also, the other teams must be disrespecting Mullin big time if the Sixers even proposed such a trade to him.
<div class="quote_poster">custodianrules2 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Another thing is, I just don't understand why we can't do Baron for AI straight up...</div>The salaries are close enough to do a 1-for-1 swap, but I think Philly is looking for more. From their point of view, they're offering a durable multiple All-Star, a Top 50 player of all time, the league's leading scorer, and a lock for future Hall of Famer. For that, why consider Baron, who is not a perennial All-Star, a long shot for the HOF, and is injury-prone? I'm not saying what I think, just what they might be thinking.
<div class="quote_poster">HiRez Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">The salaries are close enough to do a 1-for-1 swap, but I think Philly is looking for more. From their point of view, they're offering a durable multiple All-Star, a Top 50 player of all time, the league's leading scorer, and a lock for future Hall of Famer. For that, why consider Baron, who is not a perennial All-Star, a long shot for the HOF, and is injury-prone? I'm not saying what I think, just what they might be thinking.</div> Gotcha. I just think Philly General Management is overly wishful. Iverson may be top 50 of all time, but what good does it do us when he goes for 50 points on 40-42% shooting and the rest of the team scores 40 combined? People will complain about shots, chemistry, the difficulty of putting together role players to surround him with... It's just too hard to build around this guy. Sixers couldn't even make things work with the worst division in the Eastern Conference. That tells me Iverson only works if he's distributing like Chris Paul and he's making others around him better and getting the other team in massive foul trouble. I don't think he does well with other 20pts+ scorers, especially with no inside help. Plus, I will never forget how he was unwilling to come off the bench after an injury. He felt he was above his team, beyond his coach, and was acting like a spoiled, punk primadonna who puts himself before anything else. He will probably demand another trade if he lands with us because there is no guarantee we can offer anything of a better situation than the Sixers. Sixers GM kind of messed up as well, but it's hard to build around an undersized shooting guard that likes to make himself the primary ballhandler and guy to take the first shot before even looking to pass.
<div class="quote_poster">HiRez Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Well...that doesn't really work though because why give up the farm to get KG? Sure we could get him if we give up all our young talent, but then we're just the sucky T-Wolves moved west, who wants that? Ike I might consider, Monta I'd be hesitant, and Andris no way in hell. JRich and Baron? Well...MAYBE...but IMO that's a stretch. I don't think Minnesota is going to let KG go for "good" talent, they will either want elite talent (read: All-Stars) or a bunch of top-shelf young potential talent. Unless they end up dealing from a position of extreme desperation, but I imagine they'll have 29 other teams offering up deals when/if KG ever goes on the block. It's possible for the Warriors to work a good deal for KG, but I still think it's highly unlikely.</div> I was just saying the Warriors could do a trade for KG if they wanted (if he was available). Because you said we don't have much of a chance if he was available.
<div class="quote_poster">HiRez Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">The salaries are close enough to do a 1-for-1 swap, but I think Philly is looking for more. From their point of view, they're offering a durable multiple All-Star, a Top 50 player of all time, the league's leading scorer, and a lock for future Hall of Famer. For that, why consider Baron, who is not a perennial All-Star, a long shot for the HOF, and is injury-prone? I'm not saying what I think, just what they might be thinking.</div> Yesterday does me no good at all. It's tommorrow that matters. What Iverson WAS is irrelevant. He will be an older,fading,volume shooter who insists on getting his own way and is paid $20 mill per for the next few seasons and then is gone. Can you remember the Mookie Blaylock deal? Terry Cummings? Mark Price? Ralph Sampson? Van Exel? Used -to- be just ain't what it used to be.
<div class="quote_poster">REREM Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Yesterday does me no good at all. It's tommorrow that matters. What Iverson WAS is irrelevant. He will be an older,fading,volume shooter who insists on getting his own way and is paid $20 mill per for the next few seasons and then is gone. Can you remember the Mookie Blaylock deal? Terry Cummings? Mark Price? Ralph Sampson? Van Exel? Used -to- be just ain't what it used to be.</div> Yeah...Sprewell for Terry Cummings, Chris Mills, and John Starks. I remember...and Jason Terry for Mookie Blaylock, and Jeff Foster(who became Vonteego Cummings and Troy Murphy). I kind of doubt that Iverson is getting that old. I think AI is still very productive. I mean he is like 31 or 32 right? I would think he has two or three good years left in him at least where he is an All-Star caliber player(well at least in the East).
<div class="quote_poster">Clif25 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post"> I kind of doubt that Iverson is getting that old. I think AI is still very productive. I mean he is like 31 or 32 right? I would think he has two or three good years left in him at least where he is an All-Star caliber player(well at least in the East).</div> Yeah, but we could get 10+ good years out of Ellis/Biedrins.
