Washington Post: RJ A "Great" Option For The Wizards

DH34Phan · Post #81 » by **DH34Phan** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 5:39 pm

Bernman wrote:
DH34Phan wrote:I would give them future #1s to get rid of Redd or RJ to get this deal done.

I hope you're not serious

If it was RJ or Redd+2010 1st for #5+Thomas+James+Stevenson, then yes I would do it. If the 2010 1st was the thing that needed to get it done, I would.

Post #82 » by **paulpressey25** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 5:43 pm

Wizards fans, how would you feel about simply swapping picks?

RJ (or Redd) and pick #10 for Mike James, Songalia(or Etan) and pick #5?

smooth 'lil balla · Post #83 » by **smooth 'lil balla** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 5:43 pm

DH34Phan wrote:
Bernman wrote:
DH34Phan wrote:I would give them future #1s to get rid of Redd or RJ to get this deal done.

I hope you're not serious

If it was RJ or Redd+2010 1st for #5+Thomas+James+Stevenson, then yes I would do it. If the 2010 1st was the thing that needed to get it done, I would.

Count me out on this one.

Post #84 » by **Ruzious** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 5:47 pm

europa wrote:
Ruzious wrote:Sorry Bucks fans. Michael Lee is a lightweight writer - even though he writes for the Washington Post - who has yet to show any inside knowledge of trade talks. You'd think he'd be smart enough to realize the Wiz aren't going to purposely stay in lux tax land to get a player who plays the same position as Racine's own Caron Butler, but... he isn't.

Thanks for the info on Lee. What are your thoughts about the Draft Express report which said the Wizards are considering James/Thomas/5 for Josh Howard, who also plays the same position as Butler?

I think there's a chance of something happening between them if... Stackhouse is involved. Because he has a non-guaranteed contract of $7 mil, that could pull the Wiz out of lux tax next season, so it could net them something like 14 mil.

Come to think of it, the Bucks might be smart to work something out for Stackmoney. It might be a way of affording to re-sign Villa/Sessions.

Bernman · Post #85 » by **Bernman** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 5:48 pm

DH34Phan wrote:
Bernman wrote:
DH34Phan wrote:I would give them future #1s to get rid of Redd or RJ to get this deal done.

I hope you're not serious

If it was RJ or Redd+2010 1st for #5+Thomas+James+Stevenson, then yes I would do it. If the 2010 1st was the thing that needed to get it done, I would.

OK, you said first"s", plural.

But I still think it's unacceptable to trade a pick in an outstanding draft, for one in a bad draft, and take on salary for next season, making it less likely we could sign Sessions (err Felton), Villanueva at the QO, Ilyasova, etc. I mean s***, if it was for Jefferson, we'd be adding 6 million in salary for next season and would have to start selling off assets to avoid the luxury tax probably. And you could kiss our free agents good bye. Plus we're out of a great draft. What's our impetus for the deal exactly?

It would be ironic if we would have to add 1st round picks to make a deal with Grunfeld work. He treats picks like hot potatoes.

Bernman · Post #86 » by **Bernman** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 5:54 pm

Ruzious wrote:
europa wrote:
Ruzious wrote:Sorry Bucks fans. Michael Lee is a lightweight writer - even though he writes for the Washington Post - who has yet to show any inside knowledge of trade talks. You'd think he'd be smart enough to realize the Wiz aren't going to purposely stay in lux tax land to get a player who plays the same position as Racine's own Caron Butler, but... he isn't.

Thanks for the info on Lee. What are your thoughts about the Draft Express report which said the Wizards are considering James/Thomas/5 for Josh Howard, who also plays the same position as Butler?

I think there's a chance of something happening between them if... Stackhouse is involved. Because he has a non-guaranteed contract of $7 mil, that could pull the Wiz out of lux tax next season, so it could net them something like 14 mil.

Come to think of it, the Bucks might be smart to work something out for Stackmoney. It might be a way of affording to re-sign Villa/Sessions.

As if it hasn't been talked about at length.....but you are a Wizards fan and not a Bucks fan, so I guess you wouldn't know that would you.

Badgerlander · Post #87 » by **Badgerlander** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 6:04 pm

Yet another rumor

Mike (Chicago, IL): Small rumor in Chicago is the Bulls trading Hinrich and the 26th to Minnesota for the 6th pick. Who gets the sour end on this trade?

SportsNation David Thorpe: It's a good deal probably for both.

europa · Post #88 » by **europa** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 6:07 pm

T'Wolves apparently want Hinrich badly. I like that since it removes a potential suitor for Sessions. If the Blazers trade up to take Curry, the market could evaporate for Sessions and the Bucks would be in the driver's seat to re-sign him.

raferfenix · Post #89 » by **raferfenix** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 6:16 pm

Wouldn't Hinrich be a good fit for the Wizards too? Great defender, role player, and complements Arenas nicely in the backcourt.

I'd be shocked if he's worth a top 10 pick considering his contract and how bad his play has been the last few years though.

LUKE23 · Post #90 » by **LUKE23** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 6:18 pm

Wow would that be a HORRENDOUS trade for the TWolves.

mcfromage · Post #91 » by **mcfromage** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 6:29 pm

Seems like if the Bulls made that deal they'd be looking at Hill eh?

Post #92 » by **paulpressey25** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 6:34 pm

LUKE23 wrote:Wow would that be a HORRENDOUS trade for the TWolves.

We debated this in another thread last week. This situation plays into the Bucks hands to trade Ridnour to the T-Wolves.

Ridnour is about 75% the player Hinrich is. Not as good. But similar type guy. Veteran, coachable, etc. We'd give him up for only cap space. His contract expires at $6.5mm.

Kirk has three years and $27 million left and if this rumor is true, the Bulls want the 6th pick for him.

I'd take Ridnour to be that veteran stopgap PG over Hinrich all day long under those circumstances.

raferfenix · Post #93 » by **raferfenix** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 6:48 pm

The wolves must be in a win now situation if they are even contemplating taking on Hinrich. If that's the case they could be interested (SF is their weakest position after PG), maybe in something like this:

Wolves trade: #6, Mike Miller, Craig Smith, Brian Cardinal
Bucks trade: RJ, Ridnour

europa · Post #94 » by **europa** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 6:50 pm

raferfenix wrote:The wolves must be in a win now situation if they are even contemplating taking on Hinrich.

I don't think so. I think they're merely being the T'Wolves.

raferfenix · Post #95 » by **raferfenix** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 8:46 pm

Ha, touche Europa. They do have a new GM in town though, and with Al Jefferson a star already and Kevin Love on the way their plan has gotta be for a big playoff push next season.

Whether they succeed or not is entirely a different story of course. I actually think RJ would be a great addition to their young team though, as they need a go to scorer on the wing and a veteran leader in a pretty horrible way.

Post #96 » by **LyricalRico** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 8:53 pm

Ruzious wrote:
europa wrote:
Ruzious wrote:Sorry Bucks fans. Michael Lee is a lightweight writer - even though he writes for the Washington Post - who has yet to show any inside knowledge of trade talks. You'd think he'd be smart enough to realize the Wiz aren't going to purposely stay in lux tax land to get a player who plays the same position as Racine's own Caron Butler, but... he isn't.

Thanks for the info on Lee. What are your thoughts about the Draft Express report which said the Wizards are considering James/Thomas/5 for Josh Howard, who also plays the same position as Butler?

I think there's a chance of something happening between them if... Stackhouse is involved. Because he has a non-guaranteed contract of $7 mil, that could pull the Wiz out of lux tax next season, so it could net them something like 14 mil.

Also, from a Wiz perspective, Howard's salary and 2010 team option is easier to package in another deal if they want to sweeten an offer for Stoudamire or after Bosh at the trade deadline. Jefferson isn't nearly as attractive to other teams IMO.

Ayt · Post #97 » by **Ayt** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 8:55 pm

I don't see any way Minnesota gives up the #6 pick to get Hinrich. If they wanted him that badly, they could have gotten him before the deadline last year since he played like garbage for the most part and Chicago wanted to try to cut some salary to free up room to bring back Gordon.

http://www.last.fm/user/DPF55 · Post #98 » by **Buck You** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 9:46 pm

This is Wayy too good to be true.

trwi7 · Post #99 » by **trwi7** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 9:52 pm

ReddBogutCharlieV wrote:This is Wayy too good to be true.

Pretty much. They could take Harden or DeRozan at #5 and get better value.

europa · Post #100 » by **europa** » Wed Jun 3, 2009 10:07 pm

LyricalRico wrote:
Also, from a Wiz perspective, Howard's salary and 2010 team option is easier to package in another deal if they want to sweeten an offer for Stoudamire or after Bosh at the trade deadline. Jefferson isn't nearly as attractive to other teams IMO.

I agree his contract is better than RJ's. However, the argument that trading for RJ doesn't make sense because Butler is there is removed if Howard is being considered. If RJ's redundant, then Howard certainly is too. But if Howard is in the mix as the DX report indicates, then I would believe RJ would become a viable option as well. No matter what, I believe Hammond needs to be talking to Grunfeld to see if any deal for the fifth pick (and Harden) can materialize.