Magette + Williams for Vlad + Luke

Mamba Venom · Post #1 » by **Mamba Venom** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 1:34 am

I work for the Bakersfield JAM the NBADleague team associated w/ the Warriors. Grew up a Lakers fan. Here is a trade that works for BOTH teams.

Lets be real: This trade is for talented players being paid far too much.

Magette is owed a ton of $ (45 mil) for the next 5 years until he is 35 years old (JUST SCARY). Vlad is owed for 2 more years and Walton for 4 more years. Both LAL players have lead the NBA in 3pt % for half a season in their careers and have played starting roles w/ a very good team so there is some value.

The Lakers have 2 areas they need to improve: PG depth (w/ the injury) & solidifying the starting SF spot since PJ WILL NOT start Odom or Ariza.

The Warriors need a change! They are running and gunning but need to get out of the bad move that brought Magette to the Warriors. Hes not the best fit up North. He is almost 30 and owed 45 mil!!! until age 35 (scary). They can get out of his contract and devy up Mags scoring role to 2 guys that can play the same position and can shoot the ball. Luke is great in the transition game and Vlad is a 6-10 marksmen. LAL can afford Magettes salary w/ the crazy ticket prices since LAL are in win now mode they may be willing to overpay. The outside shooting would be brutal w/ the Warriors.

(plain and simple and Magette will only lead my employer to .500 at best)
The worst thing you can do in sports is being stuck in the middle. You need to be winning or developing talent for the future (and hoping for a top draft pick). Mags doesnt fit with the Warriors.

Trade that works Warriors get Vlad Rad + Luke Walton for Magette and Williams. Its good for both teams.

Boo-YA

Post #2 » by **VintaGe36** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 1:37 am

GSW should wait out for expirings, or NOT a long term contract like walton.

old rem · Post #3 » by **old rem** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 3:08 am

If one bad contract is a no-no...2 worse contracts are worse than twice as crappy. If I want to MOVE Maggette THAT desperately that I take a rivals worse contract burdens...I do it AFTER I fire the front office and the coach...but then....with their replacements, I'd figure to have some better options than this. Most anthing...or nothing,would be better.

HotSpurs21 · Post #4 » by **HotSpurs21** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 3:15 am

there's no way Maggette will get any playing time with Phil Jackson at the helm

xxSnEaKyPxx · Post #5 » by **xxSnEaKyPxx** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 3:37 am

VintaGe36 wrote:GSW should wait out for expirings, or NOT a long term contract like walton.

They'll be waiting a good 2-3 years.

DS1 · Post #6 » by **DS1** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 3:39 am

HotSpurs21 wrote:there's no way Maggette will get any playing time with Phil Jackson at the helm

Why?

Post #7 » by **FNQ** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 3:42 am

Luke Walton's 4th year makes this an easy no... if it was 3 years, perfect...

HotSpurs21 · Post #8 » by **HotSpurs21** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 3:44 am

DS1 wrote:
HotSpurs21 wrote:there's no way Maggette will get any playing time with Phil Jackson at the helm

Why?

1)his negative basketball IQ
2)his lack of range doesn't help either.
3)can't imagine a ball-hog can co-exist with Kobe

JES12 · Post #9 » by **JES12** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 3:49 am

510Reggae wrote:Luke Walton's 4th year makes this an easy no... if it was 3 years, perfect...

Just out of curiosity, what's the difference between 3 years and 4 years?

Post #10 » by **FNQ** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 3:54 am

Our basic cap situation... 2011 is the first time we'll have any kind of break, so its the ideal time to aim for when looking in a Maggette trade suitor.

We will still have Jackson (9.6m), Monta (11m), and Andris (9m) locked up, in addition to Turiaf (4.3m - a likely decline), Wright (4.5m), Randolph (2.9m), and Belinelli (3.3m). That keeps us in the 40m range, paired with a couple likely 1st rounders (add 5m) and we still have room to offer for a MAX FA in 2011.

Basically a big part of trading Maggette, IMO, is getting that cap-break down the road while trying to accrue more value... I dont see any point in getting expirings.

For example, if Walton could be swapped out to, say, PHI, for Willie Green, the deal looks a lot better for the W's future...

old rem · Post #11 » by **old rem** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 4:03 am

Maggette just turned 29 late November.....so "almost 30" is false....next season he's Almost 30. He expires at 33..not 35..also false. Yes Phil Jackson would happily start him since there's no illusion Vlad is even near as good. Neither Vlad nor Walton has ever rebounded above Maggette's current 5.7....so as PF's....we use 'em..we lose. No...Walton's no 3 pt deadeye. ##% is,at most,okay,and that's his career %..which he's currently below.

For GSW ..unless they slow down enough that these guys can play SF....they have no position. Neither rebounds and both are well under half Maggettes point+ reb production, but until Vlad expires....GSW spends MORE on 2 guys who are only usable when Nellie F's us and plays one of them at C...in which case we'd be screwed. They waste 2 roster spots. So...no ...they do not fit, they do NOT make any sense financially....this whole concept is just absurd.

GSW gets A starter or a scoring 6th man in Mags. With this deal...all they do is waste money totally and waste 2 roster spots. NOT CLOSE ENOUGH TO SALVAGE

old rem · Post #12 » by **old rem** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 4:07 am

HotSpurs21 wrote:
DS1 wrote:
HotSpurs21 wrote:there's no way Maggette will get any playing time with Phil Jackson at the helm

Why?

1)his negative basketball IQ
2)his lack of range doesn't help either.
3)can't imagine a ball-hog can co-exist with Kobe

Fine...CAUSE IT SUCKS FOR GSW.....still......compared to Vlad? You thing Vlad has all that...or much of anything?

old rem · Post #13 » by **old rem** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 4:12 am

510Reggae wrote:Our basic cap situation... 2011 is the first time we'll have any kind of break, so its the ideal time to aim for when looking in a Maggette trade suitor.

We will still have Jackson (9.6m), Monta (11m), and Andris (9m) locked up, in addition to Turiaf (4.3m - a likely decline), Wright (4.5m), Randolph (2.9m), and Belinelli (3.3m). That keeps us in the 40m range, paired with a couple likely 1st rounders (add 5m) and we still have room to offer for a MAX FA in 2011.

Basically a big part of trading Maggette, IMO, is getting that cap-break down the road while trying to accrue more value... I dont see any point in getting expirings.

For example, if Walton could be swapped out to, say, PHI, for Willie Green, the deal looks a lot better for the W's future...

Seriously.....you can't see how this is actually a worse idea than trading for Eddy Curry?
If this happened....I have to write off the franchise as simply an embarrasment to the Bay Area. This is worse than the crappiest lowballs from Toronto.

DS1 · Post #14 » by **DS1** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 4:39 am

Luke and Vlad are quality overpaid role players for the Lakers. However it is would interesting to see the Lakers with another player for the first time since Van Exel has left that can creat his offense besides Kobe. Thus if the trade did have to happen, Maggette may be a blessing. Especially as the third or fourth or fifth option.

don nelson · Post #15 » by **don nelson** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 8:22 am

DGrangeRx33 wrote:
VintaGe36 wrote:GSW should wait out for expirings, or NOT a long term contract like walton.

They'll be waiting a good 2-3 years.

Regardless of whether the Warriors trade Maggette's contract for expiring contracts now or in the next few years, Golden State still will not have any significant amounts of cap space until at least 2011. So from a Warriors cap space prospective waiting 3 years really isn't an issue.

Effigy · Post #16 » by **Effigy** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 8:30 am

Buss is too cheap to take Maggette's deal. He's going to let Odom walk if he can't get him at a discount. He's not going to bring in Maggette.

Mamba Venom · Post #17 » by **Mamba Venom** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 9:07 am

Vlad Luke & Magette are ALL bad contracts but its easier to move a 5 mil contract to a contender than a huge contract like Magettes.

The Warriors just gad cap space and were to anxious to spend it. Please dont mention the 4 year wait for the Warriors to be in the position they were in a few months ago. The possibilities are endless to what they could have done with young pieces and flexibility. Isnt that what teams want when they move allstars.

KG
Allen
AI
Artest
S O'Neal
J O'Neal
TMAC
...

The Warriors were set. They need to get back to what they had. Ellis is a knucklehead thatfiled a grievance for his bad judgment and Magette isnt a good fit. I wish I could take over the Warriors and fix the team. This trade works for my 2 fav clubs but there may be better options out there. I do know the Warriors don't need to waste time. Look at the Cavs, they make a lot of trades and finally they have a good mix. The Warriors need to move Mag for tradeable pieces and get back in a great position.

DanTown8587 · Post #18 » by **DanTown8587** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 9:19 am

wouldn't the Raptors counter with Kapono (fits the 2011 plan) and Parker (expiring to boot) and wouldn't the Warriors accept? This deal, as constructed, is TERRIBLE for the Warriors.

St.Nick · Post #19 » by **St.Nick** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 9:29 am

Kapono making $19M over the next three years is not an improvement over Maggette making $26.5M.

If anything, the W's hold onto their 20ppg guy rather than add the 8ppg, one note, 3pt specialist. A buyer will come along eventually. The same thing can absolutely not be said for Kapono.

Post #20 » by **dockingsched** » Fri Jan 2, 2009 9:58 am

St.Nick wrote:K
If anything, the W's hold onto their 20ppg guy.

magz isn't really a player u want getting 20 ppg. he can be advertised as such, but its just a function of being on a bad team. many players could be 20 ppg scorers if their teams needed them to because of their lack of legit scoring options.

magz 20 ppg season records: 28-54, 37-45, 23-59

the only season magz played on the a good team (05-06, 47-35), he came off the bench and didn't score 20 ppg. he was moved to the bench because his offense is conducive to freezing out the rest of the players on the court. with the starting line up that included brand/cassell/mobley, thats a problem. off the bench where he has the freedom to be a bit more selfish, he can succeed. problem is, he isn't paid like the non-star he should be on a legit team.

i guess the point is that this whole "we'll hang on to our 20 ppg" is just shallow arguing. he shoots 41% from the field, including 18% from 3. he averages more TOs than assists. heck, he doesn't even score 20 ppg, and thats for one of the fastest paced teams in the league missing their best scoring option. he's just not very good at anything besides drawing shooting fouls after holding the ball for most of the shot clock.