Reply With Quote
Well, I can't see them helping us out after Pop blasted them.
Dude, the owner's trying to sell the team. He doesn't give a about "prospects"... he wanted guys who come off the books ASAP. Gasol has three years left on his deal after this season at an average salary of $16.5 million per year. Kwame's $9 mil is done after this year, and Crittenton $2.6 mil over the next two years. That shift in salaries obviously makes the team easier to sell. Since you're a Lakers fan, so I'm sure you know how much Kwame sucks, and while I agree that PJax hates rookies, Javaris isn't NBA ready, and no, his strength is not as a shooting guard, hence why he shot 35% threes in college but had good assist numbers. Marc Gasol might someday be good, but he is obviously a long-term project.
You're vainly trying to convince yourself that this was actually a "fair deal," when really it was pretty ty. The Lakers took advantage of an owner who is bailing on his team, trying to cut his losses and run. I'm not saying there's any collusion or anything, and we certainly shouldn't turn this over to Congress so they can waste their time continuing to around in the realm of pro sports, but it's still slimy. Deal with it. Don't keep lying to us, and definitely don't keep lying to yourself.
Well, I can't see them helping us out after Pop blasted them.
Oh, and one more thing about this trade:
As it stands right now, the Grizz have ZERO guaranteed contracts in the Summer of 2010, which we all know is going to be the deepest, most wild and crazy free agent season of all time. Had they kept Gasol, they would have had to squeeze any signings around his $17.8 million salary for '10-'11. This has got to be a huge selling point for the team, since the owners can now pitch it as "Buy the Memphis Grizzlies! We've got a couple of potential fringe All-Stars as our core, we're so ty we'll get great draft picks every season, and in 2010, you'll have the cap space to sign three marquee names!"
Perhaps. I don't really see it as a blast though. It's been blown way out of proportion.
I'm not one to buy into conspiracies, either. My post was pretty much tongue in cheek.
BUT, if I WERE to theorize, I would think that, more than anything, West would facilitate a deal whereby one owner (really rich guy with assets and interests far beyond the NBA) would figure out a way to compensate another owner (really rich guy with assets and interests far beyond the NBA), outside of the realm of basketball for an extremely unbalanced trade within the realm of basketball. Having intimate, absolutely trustworthy, ties to link the two owners would be essential; as direct communication would be dangerous. This particular triumvirate of G.M.'s/ex G.M.'s could provide that link and trust.
Yeah, I hear that, and that seems at least possible if not plausible, but they would have to get Chris Wallace on board with it at some point, and he would have to either agree with it in principle or be very afraid of losing his job based on how he's come out defending the move in the press. However, since he has no financial stake in the team, he has no need to blow it up to make it more marketable, so he couldn't possibly think he was making his team better, even over the next two or three years, with this trade. So I don't think he could be in favor of this deal in principle, and must instead have been threatened with like the loss of his job or something in order to come out now and act all outraged that people are crying foul.
so then you're saying a deal that just sent ending K alone is better than one that sends ending K plus cheap rookie K talent and picks? you accused me of making the parameters to narrow, but dude, you just made them waaay to wide.
every team likes cheap talent. if critt and marc gasol (assuming he comes to the states next year) are on the MEM roster, that's TWO roster spots that are filled about as cheaply as you can fill an NBA roster spot. maybe a hair or two above the minimum scale. and even though they're slightly above the minimum NBA K, their talent far exceeds what you normally get in that price range.
i'm not trying to talk myself into anything. i just hear a lot of talk about all these better deals out there but i don't see anything realistic.
put up a better deal than what MEM got. just let me see it is all i'm asking.
and ivaroni has already said he's going to use critt at the 2G.
i agree he's best used as a 1 in this league. but he's got size and it gives MEM two ball handling guards who can create for themselves as well as others. javaris ripped up the summer league and had a solid camp. but phil is not going to play a rookie heavy minutes, especially when he's behind fish and farmar (who phil likes a lot and who had a great camp).
i don't expect you to believe me, but i'm getting it on record. critt can play.
Gasol for Nocioni, Noah and Joe Smith. Nocioni and Smith come off the books after this season, and Noah is in the first year of a rookie contract. All these guys are post players [EDIT: Well, Nocioni can play in the post, even though he's listed as a SF]. Seems to fit your criteria exactly. That trade would obviously have been better for Memphis if they actually intended on fielding a compe ive team, and would have cleared some room in Chicago's frontcourt, given them the best defensive frontline in the league, and would have rejuvenated their stagnant offense.
Gasol for Najera, J.R. Smith, Kleiza, cash and picks. This trade would never happen because Denver doesn't need Gasol since that would give them the three most untradable-post-player-contracts-not-held-by-someone-with-the-initials-E.D. in the league. Kleiza has one more year left on his rookie deal, and Najera and Smith could come off the books after this season. This deal wouldn't make sense for Denver, but it would be much better for Memphis than Kwame, Crittenton and Marc Gasol.
Gasol for McDyess' expiring contract, Primoz Brezec's expiring contract, Jason Maxiell, both Detroit's trade exceptions, cash and picks. This would make Detroit better than they were when they beat the HoF laden Lakers in '04 (although it would thin out their frontcourt depth just a bit). Memphis would get back some size, a rookie prospect far superior to Crittenton, and cap flexibility.
Taking it a step further, it took the league a while to figure out that one of its refs was crooked. And they were supposedly monitoring the refs for that very kind of activity. Anyways, what's done is done.
This deal also would have sent Gasol to the East; rather than setting up a Western compe or with a 27 year old PF to combine with Kobe to make life HARDER for the Grizzlies for the forseeable future.
The last word.
IMO
Gasol for Theo Ratliff, Sebastian Telfair, Rashad McCants, cash and picks. Ratliff and Telfair's deals are expiring, and McCants is actually a pretty decent player (much better at the SG position than Crittenton would be). Ratliff's expiring contract is huge though, since it's $11.6 mil and evaporates at the end of the season. Telfair is restricted, and there's no way anyone would offer him more than the $3.6 mil of his qualifying offer, so Memphis could play him this year and decide whether they wanted to keep him around as a project or let him go. Minnesota's frontline would be nasty good, and would allow Jefferson to develop his other skills (like rebounding and defense) since he wouldn't be carrying the main scoring load.
How many teams can actually afford Gasol? How many teams actually want him? Answer those two questions 1st and then you'll realize how short the list of suitors was.
Of the four teams I listed, I think only Chicago ($47.6 mil payroll in '08-'09 after Gasol trade) and Minnesota ($67 mil payroll in '08-'09 after Gasol trade) could afford him (both of those payrolls are less than their payrolls this season). I think Chicago would definitely want Gasol, especially if it meant getting rid of Nocioni (who blows), Noah (who is an immature ) and Joe Smith (who is old as ).
I found four trades that were better than the Lakers-Grizzlies trade, and I went through only half the teams in the league (A through M). The Chicago trade suits the needs of the Grizzlies much better (since they actually get some good players back), and suits Chicago just as well as the Lakers.
some of those look good on paper.
CHI is automatically out as there have been NUMEROUS articles in the Trib since the gasol trade calling out the CHI front office. word is they were simply NOT going to go into the lux tax to take on gasol . . . which adding PJ's K for trade purposes would have done. but i agree, had CHI been willing to do and had MEM wanted another 3 in Noch and had MEM wanted to add Noch's long term K this is a better trade.
That's one big NO (to using PJ as salary ballast) and a lot of if's though.
DET . . . you can't combine trade exceptions like that.
DEN . . . agree with you it doesn't make sense. so why bother with it? keep them in the realm of possibility.
MIN . . . rebuilding, so they don't deal picks. i hate sebastian's game, so maybe i'm biased against him, but another small 1 in MEM? why? mccants has had problems since UNC, is going to be due a new K soon. he could fit as a 2G i suppose, but it really comes down to is mccants a better prospect, alone, than critt and marc gasol are combined? i'd say no, but to each his own.
those deals are at least semi-realistic . . . except for CHI . . . and maybe DET if you come up with another means rather than combining the X's (can maxiell be a 4? make it amir johnson and i'd say this is probably at least on par with what LA gave up).
but again, none of those offers, even the non-doable ones, are so much better than what MEM got that it screams collusion.
oops, misread your CHI proposal . . . i'm bouncing between boards.
OK, good trade for MEM and CHI.
why didn't it happen even though both teams were talking for a year about gasol?
my guess is because CHI didn't want to give up that much for pau.
in fact i'm fairly certain that noch and the bulls #1 from last year (the NYK pick) were early demands of MEM that CHI refused.
so again, i don't think that trade, though better for MEM, was ever on the table nor would it ever be.
Arena's take on his blog :
The Gasol Trade
The Lakers stole Pau Gasol. They hi-jacked him. That should be a crime. You don’t give away Pau Gasol for Kwame Brown and a rookie. I don’t care what’s out there, you can get more than that. You gave away a $100 bill and you got back two nickels and a dime. Now the Lakers are a top four team, maybe even higher in the Western Conference. You have Bynum and the five and Pau at the four? That means you have two scorers who are 7-foot plus at the four and the five, which reminds me of David Robinson and Tim Duncan. Then you have Lamar Odom, who’s a 7-footer at the three and he gets to play free and do all the stuff he’s capable of doing, and then they have Mr. 81 at the two. You can put anybody at the one. Who cares who’s the one. I mean, they have their championship, veteran one in Derek Fisher, but that’s just a huge plus. You don’t even need him.
It seems like a pretty stupid move by Chris Wallace. No offense, I don’t know him personally, but you don’t give away Pau Gasol for what they got back. I mean, Chicago wanted Pau Gasol. They would have given something back in return. I mean, something. Ladies and gentlemen, they have Darko and Kwame at the four and the five. That’s all I’m going to say.
Shaq is back in the West and Kobe’s got Gasol - the two teams that hate each other with the two players that hate each other. Wow, how the NBA works.
so are we down to the DET trade?
comes down to whether maxiel is better value than critt and marc?
that's a pretty fine hair your splitting for all this fuss.
Now THAT'S the last word.
Because this is a board made up of NBA GM's paid to come up with the most creative ways to return value for an investment.
Grizzlies got raped. Lakers (most popular, best ratings draw team in the league) are the beneficiary. Just a coincidence. We get it, really.
some of you seem to.
i'll give you that much.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions