ok, first off, does that work under the trade checker?
Dunleavy is NOT a sg, he's a sf folks, it's that simple. He lacks the speed and athleticism to even attempt to play the 2. I'd love to see GRob and Jamison duke it out on the same team, now that's comedy.
They would like to get rid of Foyle...true enough; but they'd rather be rid of Fortson, he's the biggest chemistry killer they have. I'd rather try drafting a sg than insert Dunleavy there. Dunleavy's an interesting prospect - he's a nice fit sf for a team that plays a lot of halfcourt or has outstanding athleticism at the 2 and 4 spots. He'd be a nice matchup with JT (point forward type of role) if we had someone like D. Jones at sg.
0
Two trades to change the face of the Hawks
Started by
Dolfan23
, Jun 23 2003 08:32 PM
19 replies to this topic
#17
-
- Squawkers
-
- Join Date: 10-June 02
- Post Count: 7,744
Assistant Coach
- Location: Tupelo, MS
Posted 24 June 2003 - 09:44 PM
The guy the Warriors would really like to move is Erick Dampier. They like Foyle. He's cheap for them, so I see no reason why they would attempt to move him.
Dampier has an undesirable contract. Jamison has a very undesirable contract. They would love to move Fortson, who has another undesirable contract.
The problem is, no one else wants those contracts. They probably wouldn't mind getting the players, but not at the price they are at.
Those contracts are hurting their chances of keeping their good players, like Gilbert Arenas.
In now way would I trade for Jamison though. I think Shareef is a better player overall and is closer to being worth the money he is making than Jamison is.
I definitely wouldn't move Shareef for just Eddie Jones and the #5 pick, saddling us with another undesirable contract.
These trades don't help us at all. They only prolong the suffering. All you do with those two trades is move contracts that are up in 2 years for contracts that are up in 5 years. We aren't going to get better that way.
The best way to approach this is, if a good deal comes along that makes us better, make it. Otherwise, let the talent this team already has jell and build behind them with an eye for the 2005-06 season when those contracts are up.
Dampier has an undesirable contract. Jamison has a very undesirable contract. They would love to move Fortson, who has another undesirable contract.
The problem is, no one else wants those contracts. They probably wouldn't mind getting the players, but not at the price they are at.
Those contracts are hurting their chances of keeping their good players, like Gilbert Arenas.
In now way would I trade for Jamison though. I think Shareef is a better player overall and is closer to being worth the money he is making than Jamison is.
I definitely wouldn't move Shareef for just Eddie Jones and the #5 pick, saddling us with another undesirable contract.
These trades don't help us at all. They only prolong the suffering. All you do with those two trades is move contracts that are up in 2 years for contracts that are up in 5 years. We aren't going to get better that way.
The best way to approach this is, if a good deal comes along that makes us better, make it. Otherwise, let the talent this team already has jell and build behind them with an eye for the 2005-06 season when those contracts are up.
#18
-
- Political Squawkers
-
- Join Date: 12-June 02
- Post Count: 5,678
Hall of Fame
- Gender:Male
Posted 24 June 2003 - 11:08 PM
Considering that we got Reef for Lorenzen Wright/Brevin Knight and the #3, I think getting a former All Star in Jones and the #5 is certainly reasonable. Jones MAY be on the decline but he is certainly still capable of putting up solid numbers and he certainly fills a need. At #5, we could pick up Bosh, Lampe or even TJ Ford (a move that would might have JT in the Bobby Jckson role in a season or two). I think that Jones and EITHER of those 3 guys is DEFINITELY a fair deal for Reef but more importantly, the deal would fill our needs of a 2nd ballhandler, a terrific perimeter defender while still providing us with a PF (if we take Bosh or Lampe) who could very well be BETTER than Reef in 3 years.
As for Shareef being better than Jamison, I agree with you on that but the trade was not Reef for Jamison. In fact, if the Reef trade with Miami is not made, I think Reef and Jamison would make a quality frontcourt tandem. Even though he may prefer PF, Jamison starts at SF alongside Murphy in GS now. Theo/Reef/Jamison would be a pretty formidable front court in my opinion. If we could get our ballhandling SG at #21 or if DJ comes back healthy, I would like that lineup a lot. Dunleavy MIGHT be able to play some minutes at the 2 although I have to agree with Weaseldom that he is a SF without a doubt.
As for Shareef being better than Jamison, I agree with you on that but the trade was not Reef for Jamison. In fact, if the Reef trade with Miami is not made, I think Reef and Jamison would make a quality frontcourt tandem. Even though he may prefer PF, Jamison starts at SF alongside Murphy in GS now. Theo/Reef/Jamison would be a pretty formidable front court in my opinion. If we could get our ballhandling SG at #21 or if DJ comes back healthy, I would like that lineup a lot. Dunleavy MIGHT be able to play some minutes at the 2 although I have to agree with Weaseldom that he is a SF without a doubt.
#19
-
- Squawkers
-
- Join Date: 08-June 02
- Post Count: 2,299
Starter
Posted 24 June 2003 - 11:23 PM
The trade does work on the trade-checker. You're probably right about Dunleavy as well. So we draft Diaw/Pavlovic and play them at SG. Dunleavy could be a 6th man. Golden State does really want to rid themselves of Dampier and Fortson, though, so I'm not sure they'd trade Foyle.
JT/Dickau
Diaw/Sura
Williams/Dunleavy
SAR/Hendu
Ratliff/Foyle
I have to say that that is a very solid squad, though.
JT/Dickau
Diaw/Sura
Williams/Dunleavy
SAR/Hendu
Ratliff/Foyle
I have to say that that is a very solid squad, though.
#20
-
- Guests
- Join Date: --
Posted 24 June 2003 - 11:34 PM
Theo/Reef/Jamison would be a pretty formidable front court in my opinion."
We move to an even softer frontline.That doesn't help
at all.This doesn't improve the lack of toughness and
none of those three guys have any potential or none
have really accomplished anything but losing.Jamison
only a hair better than Dog is....If he even is better.
We need to stop with the AJ/Dunleavy because these
are extremely soft players.
I'm not sure we could even get Eddie/5th pick for Shareef.
Riley already said he wants no part of Shareef.It ain't
happening.
We move to an even softer frontline.That doesn't help
at all.This doesn't improve the lack of toughness and
none of those three guys have any potential or none
have really accomplished anything but losing.Jamison
only a hair better than Dog is....If he even is better.
We need to stop with the AJ/Dunleavy because these
are extremely soft players.
I'm not sure we could even get Eddie/5th pick for Shareef.
Riley already said he wants no part of Shareef.It ain't
happening.
Reply to this topic
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
