PDA

View Full Version : Chicago trade idea


Nowitzki 4 3!!
01-24-2004, 01:06 AM
Chicago trades: PF Antonio Davis (9.3 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 1.6 apg in 32.8 minutes)
C Eddy Curry (12.5 ppg, 6.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 26.9 minutes)
Chicago receives: PF Antoine Walker (16.4 ppg, 9.6 rpg, 5.4 apg in 38.2 minutes)
PG Tony Delk (6.6 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 16.3 minutes)
Change in team outlook: +1.2 ppg, -3.7 rpg, and +3.8 apg.

Dallas trades: PF Antoine Walker (16.4 ppg, 9.6 rpg, 5.4 apg in 38.2 minutes)
PG Tony Delk (6.6 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 16.3 minutes)
Dallas receives: PF Antonio Davis (9.3 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 1.6 apg in 41 games)
C Eddy Curry (12.5 ppg, 6.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 35 games)
Change in team outlook: -1.2 ppg, +3.7 rpg, and -3.8 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED


thought????

EricaLubarsky
01-24-2004, 01:33 AM
http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/flamethrower-vietnam.jpg

swoosh

LRB
01-24-2004, 02:07 AM
I want Chandler over Curry to do this and he'd have to pass the physical with his back.

Poindexter Einstein
01-24-2004, 02:37 AM
Whats with the repeated use of the flamethrower pic whenever someone drops a trade idea on this board?

This is a trade and draft board, a place where people go to toss around what are always going to be wild guesses.

If you dont like people offering up trade concepts, why are you even here? We all know that the likelihood of the stuff proposed here is very small, no matter what it is. If you dont like wild trade talk, why are you even here?

I consider the flamethrower nonsense to be rude and jerk-like, when someone is tossing out a wild idea for discussion. The proposed trade at times may be a silly idea, but if you dont think it is a good one, express what you think is lacking, rather than just spew what is equivalent to pictorial venom. The flamethrower doesnt invite talk, but rather stifles it - that is troll-like behavior in a chat venue, IMO.

Poindexter Einstein
01-24-2004, 04:56 AM
Re: Davis-Curry for Walker-Delk ....

Chicago admits to be shopping its young big men. (Paxton confirmed as much in Chicago's Wed paper, and said that on a 12-29 team, no one is untouchable.) Would a willingness to take the hideous contract of ADavis, plus send back excellent talent, make Curry available to Dallas?

I like this trade idea.

For Dallas- I think Walker's value is at a peak, and that Curry would be a good value in return. Curry has question marks, but he is a young big man.

For Chicago - Chicago gets a proven all-star to build around in this trade, and would still have Chandler to pair with Walker. Getting Delk would allow them to move the more popular Crawford for even more help. Walker's contract does not require the long-term commitment that scares away teams (like Jamison's). Getting rid of Davis's bloated contract would be a huge plus to Chicago.

Both teams would be taking a risk and would get something of excellent value if things worked out as hoped. For Dallas, at worst they would get a defensive minded big man to pair with Bradley. If he improves in time, then they finally have improved the middle. And Walker helps the current Mavs team, but I dont think he can rein his game in enough so that they can counteract the lack of a true center.

LRB
01-24-2004, 12:53 PM
And Walker helps the current Mavs team, but I dont think he can rein his game in enough so that they can counteract the lack of a true center.


Ah no truer words. i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif

Dirkenstien
01-25-2004, 02:32 AM
personally, I love this trade Idea. Walker isnt easy to give up but to get this type of size back in return is well worth it.

Nicky31
01-26-2004, 12:43 PM
Dallas trades: PF Antoine Walker (16.1 ppg, 9.5 rpg, 5.3 apg in 38.2 minutes)
PG Tony Delk (6.6 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 16.3 minutes)
Dallas receives: PF Antonio Davis (9.2 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 1.6 apg in 32.9 minutes)
C Eddy Curry (12.4 ppg, 6.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 26.9 minutes)
SG Jamal Crawford (16.7 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 5.5 apg in 34.7 minutes)
Change in team outlook: +15.6 ppg, +7.0 rpg, and +1.8 apg.

Chicago trades: PF Antonio Davis (9.2 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 1.6 apg in 32.9 minutes)
C Eddy Curry (12.4 ppg, 6.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 26.9 minutes)
SG Jamal Crawford (16.7 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 5.5 apg in 34.7 minutes)
Chicago receives: PF Antoine Walker (16.1 ppg, 9.5 rpg, 5.3 apg in 43 games)
PG Tony Delk (6.6 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 29 games)
Change in team outlook: -15.6 ppg, -7.0 rpg, and -1.8 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED

Due to Dallas and Chicago being over the cap, the 15% trade rule is invoked. Dallas and Chicago had to be no more than 115% plus $100,000 of the salary given out for the trade to be accepted, which did happen here. This trade satisfies the provisions of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.


I would only absorb A. Davis's contract by having Paxson throw in J. Crawford into the deal..RealGM said because of A. Davis being recently traded might block this from happening. Chicago would do it because after A. Walker's contract expires next season they would have tremendous fexibilty. I think if Dallas does this they are looking at the future not winning this season, but having Curry with the right kind of motivation could be a force in the west.

uberfan
01-26-2004, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by: Nicky31
Dallas trades: PF Antoine Walker (16.1 ppg, 9.5 rpg, 5.3 apg in 38.2 minutes)
PG Tony Delk (6.6 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 16.3 minutes)
Dallas receives: PF Antonio Davis (9.2 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 1.6 apg in 32.9 minutes)
C Eddy Curry (12.4 ppg, 6.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 26.9 minutes)
SG Jamal Crawford (16.7 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 5.5 apg in 34.7 minutes)
Change in team outlook: +15.6 ppg, +7.0 rpg, and +1.8 apg.

Chicago trades: PF Antonio Davis (9.2 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 1.6 apg in 32.9 minutes)
C Eddy Curry (12.4 ppg, 6.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 26.9 minutes)
SG Jamal Crawford (16.7 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 5.5 apg in 34.7 minutes)
Chicago receives: PF Antoine Walker (16.1 ppg, 9.5 rpg, 5.3 apg in 43 games)
PG Tony Delk (6.6 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 29 games)
Change in team outlook: -15.6 ppg, -7.0 rpg, and -1.8 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED

Due to Dallas and Chicago being over the cap, the 15% trade rule is invoked. Dallas and Chicago had to be no more than 115% plus $100,000 of the salary given out for the trade to be accepted, which did happen here. This trade satisfies the provisions of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.


I would only absorb A. Davis's contract by having Paxson throw in J. Crawford into the deal..RealGM said because of A. Davis being recently traded might block this from happening. Chicago would do it because after A. Walker's contract expires next season they would have tremendous fexibilty. I think if Dallas does this they are looking at the future not winning this season, but having Curry with the right kind of motivation could be a force in the west.


Jamal Crawford and Curry together would be intriguing, but I am not sure it worth moving Walker just now.

MightyToine
01-26-2004, 01:34 PM
Sorry Pointdexter but Erica was right :











http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/flamethrower-vietnam.jpg


While Curry does show some promise and is young, what is Walker? 36?

Please! i/expressions/rolleye.gif

He's 27 and entering his prime. He's got mad skills and despite what you say, IS reining in his game(with Nellie's help). The Mavs want to win NOW. Not in the future 'cause Dirk and Nash aren't getting any YOUNGER, my friend.

Walker (along with Jamison) gives them that real chance...that real "shot", as they call it. Cuban is NOT Danny Ainge. He does not worry about the FAR Future(Curry, for example)....He worries about the NEAR Future(winning a championship) and it doesn't look like it will involve Walker going anywhere for a long time.

I wonder if Jamison and Walker's contract situations were reversed, would you be saying the same thing? Proposing the same deals? Probably not. Walker is the least-liked player on this Mavs team for some reason by some here on this board, that's no secret.

Poindexter Einstein
01-26-2004, 02:12 PM
MT - what I objected to is the pic without any reasoning or input. It is equivalent to a 3-yr-old calling names in a sandbox, rather than discussing or debating.

Obviously your bias is that everyone gets traded except Walker.

Here is what I see as the benefits to Davis-Curry ...for Walker-Delk
(1) Curry is a C and size matters in the NBA.
(2) I never said Walker was old. I know his age. I know Jamison's. But Curry is VERY young - and he is a C. It is the fact that he is a C (with years left to play) that makes the age so relevant.
(3) Walker is a F, and the Mavs are well stocked at that position. You try to trade your excess, for your need.
(4) Walker is probably more desirable to Chicago than Jamison because of contract differences.
(5) You ask - "what if the contracts were reversed?" ....Frankly, the trade numbers work with EITHER Jamison or Walker, so I would do either if thats what it took. I am not a Walker-hater ...I just think the Mavs truly will NEED a C for the long run.
(6) If I had the choice I would keep Jamison. Why? Because (a) he is a better COMPLEMENTARY player than Walker - ie, he doesnt need the ball to be effective, he can fit in and contribute away from the ball, and (b) I am not convinced that Walker will rein in his shot selection or work on his FT shooting - he needs to shoot from 10-ft in, and work desperately on FT's, but I am not convinced he will. When he clanks up the casual quick jump shot in the offense, which he does regualrly, he hurts the team. (c) The outward attitude of Walker is a constant scowl, while Jamison seems to bring an attitude where he likes everyone. I dont know what Walker is like behind the scenes, but my GUESS is that Jamison would be someone that would be more enjoyable to the chemistry of the team off the court.
(7) If Chicago wanted Jamison to do the trade, and Dallas keeps Walker, BAM done deal. No hesitation. I think Walker could have a long-term role here, but I also think he can hurt the team. Depends on if he will rein in his game and improve his FTs. Only time will tell - so no way to know yet.
(8) If the Mavs cant get a GOOD young center like Curry, I think in the summer they will be able to grab one in FA for the MLE. So they may be able to keep both Jamison and Walker.

Poindexter Einstein
01-26-2004, 02:19 PM
MT - by the way, I agree to an extent with your analysis of Cuban. I dont think he will do a deal just to do one, and I dont think he will do a deal unless he improves the team talent wise.

I do disagree with your analysis that Cuban would see the potential addition of Curry and Davis as something that might hurt now but help somewhere way out in the future. On this team, both could definitely contribute NOW, even if Curry never got any better than he is currently. Of just as much relevance is - can WALKER improve, or have we seen the best he has to offer in terms of shot selection and FT shooting? If Cuban thinks Walker has already maxed out at this point (and no one knows what his opinion is), then moving Walker on down the road wouldn't be any great loss in Cuban's mind. Keeping Walker may be even more of a bet on "improvement" than trading him for a good young C like Curry would be.

Jamisonite
01-26-2004, 02:19 PM
Originally posted by: MightyToine
Sorry Pointdexter but Erica was right :


He's 27 and entering his prime. He's got mad skills and despite what you say, IS reining in his game(with Nellie's help). The Mavs want to win NOW. Not in the future 'cause Dirk and Nash aren't getting any YOUNGER, my friend.

.

I beileve Dirk is younger than Toinei/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif

MightyToine
01-26-2004, 10:40 PM
Obviously your bias is that everyone gets traded except Walker.



NO!

My "bias" is that everyone STAYS TOGETHER for Continuity's sake. Do I prefer that Walker signs a long-term deal with this team? Of course I do. I'm a fan of his so of course I want him to stay.

Now if Walker say is dealt, that would simply get rid of the Mavs *BEST* passing big man for a promising but not-as-skilled youngster in Curry. Sorry but If I was Cuban, I'd hold off of any trade involving ANY of the Big 5 until they give me a reason to Break them up.

Now is not the good time to stir up trades like this even though you did point out that this is just trades people make that obviously won't happen....


Oh and Curry may be a Center and is young but why trade away a player who is just starting to grasp the Point-Forward role for a Young Center who "may" or "may not" pan out as a top-flight center. When I look at Curry, I see a big strong POWERFORWARD, of the Karl Malone mold. Not A Center.

But that's just my opinion.

MightyToine
01-26-2004, 10:43 PM
Originally posted by: Jamisonite

Originally posted by: MightyToine
Sorry Pointdexter but Erica was right :


He's 27 and entering his prime. He's got mad skills and despite what you say, IS reining in his game(with Nellie's help). The Mavs want to win NOW. Not in the future 'cause Dirk and Nash aren't getting any YOUNGER, my friend.

.

I beileve Dirk is younger than Toinei/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif

Details...details... i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif

Jamisonite
01-26-2004, 10:51 PM
Originally posted by: MightyToine

Obviously your bias is that everyone gets traded except Walker.



NO!

My "bias" is that everyone STAYS TOGETHER for Continuity's sake. Do I prefer that Walker signs a long-term deal with this team? Of course I do. I'm a fan of his so of course I want him to stay.

Now if Walker say is dealt, that would simply get rid of the Mavs *BEST* passing big man for a promising but not-as-skilled youngster in Curry. Sorry but If I was Cuban, I'd hold off of any trade involving ANY of the Big 5 until they give me a reason to Break them up.

Now is not the good time to stir up trades like this even though you did point out that this is just trades people make that obviously won't happen....


Oh and Curry may be a Center and is young but why trade away a player who is just starting to grasp the Point-Forward role for a Young Center who "may" or "may not" pan out as a top-flight center. When I look at Curry, I see a big strong POWERFORWARD, of the Karl Malone mold. Not A Center.

But that's just my opinion.

Now this may be shocking...but i have to agree with MT on this one

Why trade a proven player for one who hasnt even started to show what he could become. If i trade walker i want to know exactly what im getting.

Poindexter Einstein
01-26-2004, 11:05 PM
Re Curry, as a C he will be better than what they now have without him. They are thin, and Bradley has skills but also has limits.

"why trade away a player who is just starting to grasp the Point-Forward role" - in my opinion, a solid C is of more value than a solid point-forward. At their current levels, Walker has just as many flaws as a F (lots of turnovers, awful shot selection, horrendous shooting %, terrible at FTs) as Curry does as a C. Both also have pluses. I would prefer to have a C with pluses and minuses than a Pt-forward with same.

Also I think that it is harder to find a decent C than to find a decent F. So that would also weigh in favor of such a trade.

And if they are going to do it, I say "sooner the better" just for the sake of continuity, getting that final piece in place now rather than later. They go back a half step for 03-04, but get a head start on 05 and beyond, which would be the rationale to make a "final trade"

MightyToine
01-27-2004, 09:33 AM
Cubes WILL go after a Big man, Pointdexter.

But it won't be a young stud like Curry. It's probably going to be a serviceable big man to back up Bradley like maybe Loren Woods(he's young, too) or maybe Pryzbilla.....

Poindexter Einstein
01-27-2004, 10:43 AM
MT - I agree that at this point in the season Cuban is likely to make a tweak (adding on a "free" backup type C) at the most. I have seen the list going around, with names like Scott Williams and all. But I see such a move as something just to get them through the season, and not the long term approach.

But if the bigger trade was OFFERED right now, i bet Cuban would have a hard time turning it down. If that appears to be THE DEAL for the long-term C solution, you cant let it get away. Dont forget, the trade we are discussing includes ADavis who would be a HUGE help in the short term to complement Bradley. The problem with Davis is that you cant rationally take him from Chi (cause of the size of the contract and the players you have to send back) without getting young underpaid talent (like Curry or Chandler) in the same package.