If it's the best deal, we have to take it. That's why the W's got a tough, ex-player like Elie as assistant. He can handle a disruptive player for Monty. If we do this deal, it serves two purposes that Mully seems to be focused on: cap space in the future, and still field a competitve (or at least fun to watch) team now. The W's don't have any GREAT players, but we'd have pretty good depth and a nice mix of youth and vets.
Posted today: Chad Ford's take on Damp/Warriors from ESPN Insider "A Damp free-agent market? With Rasheed Wallace now off the board, Erick Dampier sits a top Insider's free-agent list. Where will he go? Dampier's chances of landing on the Knicks took a huge blow on Tuesday when the Warriors traded for Dale Davis. The Knicks were offering Nazr Mohammed and Othella Harrington. Now, the Warriors no longer need or want Mohammed. That leaves only the Hawks left offering him a contract for more than the mid-level. Still, the Hawks offer (3 years, $26 million) isn't anywhere near what the Knicks were willing to pay (6 years, $71 million). Dampier would consider the Hawks, even though they are rebuilding, because it's closer to his home in Mississippi. It also why he had strong interest in the Grizzlies. However, the Hawks are currently offering him only a three-year contract at roughly the same numbers he gave up to become an unrestricted free agent. They've made it clear they won't overpay, leaving Dampier with three options. He can either try to convince the Warriors to do a sign-and-trade with another team, go to the Hawks for three years and pocket roughly $24-$26 million, or go to a contender on a six-year deal for the mid-level and bring home six years at roughly $37 million. Given Dampier's age (30) and his history of injuries, he's probably better off taking the mid-level contract. The Warriors are reluctant to take back any large salaries at the moment. They talked with the Mavericks and Sixers about deals that would ship Dampier and one bad contract out for the expiring contract of either Glenn Robinson or Antoine Walker, but so far talks haven't led anywhere. It's unlikely he'll get another huge deal after his contract with the Hawks expires in three years. Taking the mid-level might be Dampier's best chance of landing a solid long-term contract with a team that could give him a ring someday. If he's interested, a number of teams, including the Pacers, Blazers, Suns and Timberwolves, would show interest." More on the Warriors: "What are the Warriors up to? The Warriors made a solid trade on Tuesday when they shipped Nick Van Exel to the Blazers for Dale Davis and Dan Dickau. They killed two birds with one stone in the trade. They found a hard-working, back-up center for Adonal Foyle, and they got rid of a headache in Van Exel. However, let's not forget that around this time last year, the Warriors were talking up Van Exel as the savior of the franchise. The trade that sent Antawn Jamison, Danny Fortson and Jiri Welsch to Dallas for Van Exel turned out to be a disaster for the Warriors. They essentially swapped Jamison (good player, bad contract), Fortson (bad player, bad contract) and Welsch (good player, great contract) for Davis (ancient player, short contract) and Evan Eschmeyer (injured player, bad contract). Ugh. That was Chris Mullin's first big trade, and we're willing to give him a little slack. He did put the Warriors is a better cap position . . . one that he's hurt, in part, by overpaying for veterans like Adonal Foyle and Derek Fisher. From the looks of things, Mullin is trying to fill his team with hard-working, defensive-minded veterans who aren't afraid to lead. Foyle, Fisher and Davis all fit in that category. The Warriors will be better defensively next season. They will play hard if Mike Montgomery has anything to say about it. The problem is that the team just doesn't have enough talent to compete in the West. I can't find anyone in the league in love with Jason Richardson and Mike Dunleavy, the Warriors' best two offensive options. I like the idea of emulating what the Pistons and Grizzlies have done with depth and blue collar-type players. Add Mickael Pietrus, Cliff Robinson and Troy Murphy to their blue collar core of Foyle, Fisher and Davis, and the Warriors have plenty of grit. But the Pistons and Grizzlies have got it done, in part, with some impressive talent and without really overpaying for players (we'll ignore the Brian Cardinal signing for a second). What's most troubling about the Warriors' signings this year is the fact that the money they spent on Fisher and Foyle is close to what they could've gotten Dampier and Cardinal back for. Given that Dampier and Cardinal are far superior to the Fisher and Foyle, I don't understand the thinking. It's one thing to cut cap. It's another to let two players go and spend similar money on two inferior ones. The Warriors have upgraded a key component of their team this summer. But they've done it by jettisoning off more talented players in return. There's got to be a fine line between role players and stars on a team. The Warriors have yet to find it."
Man this guy totally neglected that Dampier didn't even want to be here. He's got no loyalty. But then again there's no loyalty in sports these days. It's the owners versus the players and the fans caught in between.
IMO opinion GS has solidified their roster. They needed a back-up center, and they got it. I don't see any reason why GS should take on any contract now unless that player will be an impact to the team and a part of their future. While Robinson would be an impact player, the Warriors do not need him, and I couldn't see him being a part of their future. Why not give the playing time to Biedrins, Dunleavy, and Murph at the 3/4 position. IMO the Big Dog would not be a star, centerpiece type player.
We do have a solidfied roster but what if someone goes down? What if Dunleavy gets hurt? Than our lack of depth at that particular spot would be exposed and you can't afford that when you will be fighting for the last playoff spot.
Good point, however IMO GS will not have a very good chance of fighting for that 8th spot. I disagreed with Mussleman's approach last year. He was more concerned about winning and making a show of attempting to hang in the playoff race than he was with developing the younger talent. I know it's been said before, but for most of the year he went with C. Cheaney over Pietrus and he went with C. Robinson over Dunleavy / Murphy. If Pietrus started and played heavy minutes last year, GS probably wouldn't have come near the playoffs (who knows) but Pietrus would be much further along in his development. I believe getting guys like O. Harrington, Antoine Walker, G. Robinson, etc. will only impede the progress of what Warriors execs. are calling "their core of young talent, the future of GS." IMO the young players, even Biedrins, should play heavy minutes, with proper guidance from the vets of course, and GS should not be concerned with the playoffs this year.
I think we should pick up Cheaney again if we want to make sure we have a decent role player that is consistent behind Dunleavy. As much as I hated that guy's decision making sometimes, he was the most consistent and humble player on the team. Plus he was a good role model.
