there was a collumn in the local paper (fairfield) today that mentioned the possibility of KG going to the w's. it was referencing an article from the san jo paper, and the guy writing it really thought that the w's had a legitimate shot at trading for KG. it suggested that we trade j-rich, murphy and ike for KG. as much as i'd love to see KG in a warriors uniform, it'd be nice if we didn't have to give up j-rich. also, murphy has been one of my fav players this season, and i have high hopes for ike. however, KG is a beast...can u imagine him running with baron? the article also suggested getting rid of foyle's contract in the deal, which sounds too good to be true. anyone else hear this?? you think this is actually feasible?
Yes the reason why this wasn't posted earlier is because the trade is NOT feasible. Tim Kawakami doesn't know what he's talking about...ever. Every hardcore Warrior fan knows this and since this is such a small board, everyone knows here. The trade doesn't even work because both Murphy and Richardson are BYC1 (Base Year Compensation year 1, which is a rule that requires that they take back a lot more salary than they are trading for.) Since we have no salary cap to absorb the extra dollars required to trade those two BYC players, the trade doesn't work. Now if we traded just one BYC player like Murphy and threw in a rookie, a first round pick, and one vet, that would work. It would work because both trading teams are over the salary cap have to be within a certain dollar amount of each other's combined traded salaries, and Murphy's deal is treated bigger than it is because of the BYC rule. Just think of the BYC rule as a rule that makes newly signed players harder to trade. It lasts for about two years. The rule inflates contracts so that players recently signed can't be traded unless they had agreed to a sign and trade. The reason multiple BYC player can't be traded is also because of another rule, the rule that makes it so teams have to have salary cap available to absorb a contract, or teams over the salary cap are at least a % of dollars close in total salaries being traded. Two BYC contracts are treated like normal salary to us, but during a trade they are (I think) 1.5 times bigger. So dealing Jrich and Murphy would already be like dealing a two max players. Anyway, don't deal Jrich! Internally, it could have huge repercussions. If we're going to trade for a superstar the conditions have to be right. No trading for the sake of trading. But it's fun to talk about at least. http://www.justbball.com/forums/showthread...?t=46156&page=2
707, The San Jose Mercury news has this guy who writes all the basketball columns (Tim Kawakami). I think he's the writer of the article that you read because I read the same article and it's in the San Jose Mercury news. So that's why I'm assuming we read the same article. (It starts out something like Let the KG trade rumors begin...").
Yeah. During this season, it's basically impossible to trade for KG. We CAN package something, if we include Davis, but other big contracts are all BYC1 (Richardson, Murphy), BYC2 (Foyle, Fisher) or Poison Pill (Dunleavy). Besides, we trade Richardson AND Murphy? That's simply too much and that will put KG right back to current Wolves situation. KG will hit, 30 and he isn't exactly a young kid anymore. If we actually get him, we better be ready to roll right away...
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Kwan1031:</div><div class="quote_post">Yeah. During this season, it's basically impossible to trade for KG. We CAN package something, if we include Davis, but other big contracts are all BYC1 (Richardson, Murphy), BYC2 (Foyle, Fisher) or Poison Pill (Dunleavy). Besides, we trade Richardson AND Murphy? That's simply too much and that will put KG right back to current Wolves situation. KG will hit, 30 and he isn't exactly a young kid anymore. If we actually get him, we better be ready to roll right away...</div> Yup, IMO, this would be too much risk for the W's. While KG is a MONSTER and I love his game, giving up two key pieces of our future in hopes of making a run at the playoffs (and going deep into the playoffs as that would be expected with KG) is too much risk.
As I recall the deal proposed was J Rich,Murphy,Foyle,Diogu .....AND..2 round 1's for KG and Hassell. with Foyle and Hassell sort of included as options. That is a lot to give. This,as noted,is not likely to work due to BYC ,and if it was okay,it would be too much. I don't expect a Warrior deal for KG. His salary is BIG and so we not only add that to our salaries,but need to send talent to match his $$$. Meanwhile the Wolves likely won't take Fish or Dun in a deal,so we part with picks,depth and any hope of cap space. We,in theory COULD get terms that work well for us,but I expect at least a few teams to get reckless,to offer a huge package we could not sensibly match.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting REREM:</div><div class="quote_post">As I recall the deal proposed was J Rich,Murphy,Foyle,Diogu .....AND..2 round 1's for KG and Hassell. with Foyle and Hassell sort of included as options. That is a lot to give. This,as noted,is not likely to work due to BYC ,and if it was okay,it would be too much. I don't expect a Warrior deal for KG. His salary is BIG and so we not only add that to our salaries,but need to send talent to match his $$$. Meanwhile the Wolves likely won't take Fish or Dun in a deal,so we part with picks,depth and any hope of cap space. We,in theory COULD get terms that work well for us,but I expect at least a few teams to get reckless,to offer a huge package we could not sensibly match.</div> All of those players for KG? Hell no, not worth a dime.
I think it would be great to see basketball freaks like Baron Davis, Mickael Pietrus, and Kevin Garnett share the same court on the same team. The problem though, might be the high injury possibility of both Baron and Pietrus. And I guess, from what Custodian is saying, it's just about impossible to trade for KG anyway, so there goes that idea.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> And I guess, from what Custodian is saying, it's just about impossible to trade for KG anyway, so there goes that idea.</div> It's impossible to include two BYC1 players like the writer of the SJ article was mentioning, unless Minny throws in other players to balance it out. If it's just for KG then 4 or 5 Warrior players need to be included in that deal just to get him. I just think we shouldn't give up our entire team just to land Garnett. That's very dangerous. We better be within championship contention just to keep KG happy. That's why if we work out a deal for Garnett, we'd better have Jrich, Baron still. If we're trading for Garnett, we don't need Troy. So Troy, Foyle or Fish + 2 rookies or 2 picks instead of rookies would work. The deal would then just need two contracts that are first round rookie salaries. I think Troy, Foyle, Pietrus + a future first rounder is a valid trade. It is possible to include a BYC1 and a Foyle or Fish contract type player since Garnett's contract is pretty monstrous. Then all that needs to be done is for two rookies to be added in the deal. If the warriors future first rounders aren't lottery bound, I'd bet they'd want Biedrins, Ike or somebody. I'd try to hold off on trading Ike since low post presence is in high demand. But I wouldn't mind trading Biedrins to get KG.
If there were ever a trade... I'd love to get rid of Dunleavy, if possible. My patience has limits, and that kid has gone above and beyond those lines.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AnimeFANatic:</div><div class="quote_post">If there were ever a trade... I'd love to get rid of Dunleavy, if possible. My patience has limits, and that kid has gone above and beyond those lines.</div> Dun could have been the rookie salary we sent off, but Mullin just signed him and made him the poison pill contract which kicks in next year. This is all assuming that Minny would even want anything to do with Dunleavy or any of our 1rst round rookies + Murphy + Foyle or Fisher or whatever works numbers wise. The team with the disgruntled superstar has fewer options since the trading partner has to be a winner or contender. No winning team wants to give up the ingredients which make that a winning team, but they can offer young talents that can't be developed because of playing time issues or future picks. If it's picks, future picks in such a proposed deal have to be lucrative and usually it's not since winning teams bear late picks because they aren't lottery bound. Minny would also have to be in love with the guys we've drafted. If they like our young players and they are cool headed characters, and the franchise is committed to developing them, the trade could make both teams winners according to their respective situations. We get Garnett, Minny gets some players that turn out to be really talented in the near future. After all the Warriors have drafted very well (except for Dunleavy, but hey it was a weak draft and Amare wasn't interested in working out for us) Biedrins, Pietrus would be great for a rebuilding team and then if Minny happens to draft well along the way or sign some good free agents, they could be rolling again. There's just a time limit to these things (with Baron's time here, Jrich's time, Garnett's time with twolves, etc), but two athletic rookies with good size is a bargaining chip we do have. Plus, Murphy is a big body with rebounding and scoring capabilities and either Foyle or Fisher is a solid veteran that can bring a few things to the locker room as well as the court. If Garnett gets traded for players of questionable personality (Sheed, Odom + rookies) Minny might have just made a bad trade since they won't be winning teams in the near future and no winning team will trade for Garnett if it means giving up a majority of their team. Losing makes questionable players like Sheed or Odom not as effective as they could be. So young rookies in need of development time with potential, work ethic, and good attitude are great bargaining chips along with veterans that can produce and are solid role models. We are in a good position if Minny likes what we have. If not, then we lose out. It would be ideal if our vet contracts came off the books right away, but at least there are some intangibles there. Fisher and Pietrus like each other. Both play with the mentality to hit the big shot and be a stud.
1. Custodian and Kwan are right about the BYC players. The best thing anyone can do when reading a Tim Kawakami article is to keep saying to yourself that the guy is an idiot and has absolutely no understanding of how the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) works. If you want to know about the CBA, you should bookmark this link: http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm It's for the old CBA, and I'd love it if this guy wrote a new faq for the new cba, but between this link and the one CBA faq from justbball.com (Custodian, that link didn't work for me), you'll have everything you need to know about the CBA. 2. While it's true that when you trade a superstar like KG it's impossible to get equal value in return, I'm sure any KG trade would have to involve the Warriors trading Baron Davis. But the problem with that is that when you include the fact that Dunleavy, Richardson, and Murphy are very difficult to trade and Foyle is difficult to trade as well, all because of their BYC status (Kwan, I don't think Fisher is a BYC because the last contract he signed was about what he's making now), there just isn't a plausible trade scenario. The Wolves don't need Fisher because Jaric just signed a big deal and he's BYC as well. The Warriors would have to trade a first rounder plus two of the following: Pietrus, Biedrins, Zarko, Diogu, and Taft to get an appropriate combination of salary and talent. The Warriors just can't afford to lose their rookie contract guys or draft picks since they've signed so many big contracts recently. It's their form of child labor. 3. And I can't say this enough, Tim Kawakami sucks. I hate when he writes articles because he doesn't know anything about the CBA (and to a lesser extent, reality in general) and every time he says something stupid there's always this 3-5 day period where people talk about his articles as realistic possibilities and guys like Kwan and Custiodian who know the CBA have to spend time debunking Kawakami's articles. 4. The same goes for Skip Bayless.
We should put an articles blacklist up. Or if anytime we post an article up with a blacklisted name, we should put a disclaimer at the top. I've fallen into this trap as well on not recognizing what is b.s. trade suggestions sooner because I didn't know all the details. But that is what the forum is for. To educate, discuss and learn something. One more thing I forgot to comment on was that the KG deal (if there is one) go down in the East most likely. I mean, why trade a top 5 NBA player within the same conference? Minny would try their best to send him Eastward bound just so they don't have to face him as often. A lot of the contending Eastern conference teams do have contracts of difficult structure which make it hard, though. Other teams would run into the same problems of making the numbers work. Check out this Boston trade: Kevin Garnett for Ricky Davis, Raef LaFrentz, Gerald Green, Al Jefferson, Ryan Gomes (some players can be replaced with 1rst or 2nd round picks) That's 5 players right there. For Indiana, there's KG for Croshere, Pollard, Fred Jones and Danny Granger. With that trade there's only Granger and Jones they walk away with. The rest are expiring or near expiring deals. For the Nets, all their highest paid players are guys they want to keep and can't afford to lose. GM's can always make bad deals though. Look at New Orleans and the time they chose to pull the trigger on Baron Davis (maybe worry over Baron Davis' disgruntled attitude and his history of injuries pressured the deal to happen sooner than later). Also the difference was that Baron Davis wanted to go to Golden State. I don't think it would have worked for any of the other teams he wouldn't mind going to because the contracts wouldn't work. (No expiring deals or no lucrative rookies or future picks). The W's should be rockin when it comes to landing a big man because they've got two key ingredients: Jason Richardson and Baron Davis. Big men look for good guard play to get them involved. If a big man like KG should come to the Warriors that would definitely improve a lot of things like our rebounding, that's for sure.
To the dumbasses who say it wont happen I got breaking news for you bandwagon fans...this WILL go down. I got a inside source that tells me this trade will happen by the deadline. So you fake Warriors can now know the truth. ps you guys know nothing about BYC and contracts BABAY!! According to Stephan A. Smith this **** will happen BABAY!!!
Its alright, like always you will stick around for a few days then we wont see you for several months, kind of like Mike Dunleavy's game...
SanQuinn, do you ever read what you write? Think of how you come off sounding. I got no problem with your enthusiasm, it's just that it tends to rub plenty of people the wrong way. It just doesn't sound like mature, friendly or intelligent discussion and that's what the board and the site is trying to emphasize. Also quite frankly, Stephen A. Smith has been wrong about plenty of things. Remember he said Baron Davis would not be traded in last season's deadline? Remember, he said that T-mac would lead the Magic to the playoffs after they started out something like 0 and 20?
The only thing that gets on my nerves about him is when he says babay all over the place. That is just him, and that is just me. Also the troll thread in the Utah forum was very low class...
