KOTB: DEN/PHX - Chandler for Beasley

Dr Positivity · Post #1 » by **Dr Positivity** » Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:29 pm

Phoenix gets:
Wilson Chandler

Denver gets:
Michael Beasley

Why for Phoenix? Beasley situation is going baaaaaadly. They get more of a true wing player in Wilson and a shorter contract.

Why for Denver? If Beas is going to be salvaged it'll probably be as a pure PF and in a smaller role. He adds some spacing to Denver at PF

Post #2 » by **HartfordWhalers** » Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:51 pm

My first thought was Denver has to be able to do better. But looking at just how badly Chandler has been pooping himself on the court, coupled with his continual regression since leaving the Knicks and his contract, I'm now wondering if Phoenix could do better?

Okay, take a yes vote from me. Both players need something new. Both teams need something new. Its similar money, although Chandler has a 3rd year after this or a buyout of 2m.

nykballa2k4 · Post #3 » by **nykballa2k4** » Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:55 pm

I can not see either team saying "no"

can't see either team saying "yes" either...

Suns basically get a poor mans Jared Dudley to back up the real Jared Dudley. Nuggets get someone to sit next to Air Randolph to remind people how little George Karl cares about "potential"

I guess I lean towards thumbs up, only because Chandler has regressed to the point here he is DNP-CD (Wilson looked nice before the lockout. After the trade he looked like a STEAL) PHO gets a chance to add a good defensive player.

YouTube · Post #4 » by **Kerrsed** » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:08 am

You get a yes from me!

Post #5 » by **HartfordWhalers** » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:10 am

Trader joe is looking in serious trouble!

youngthegiant · Post #6 » by **youngthegiant** » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:37 am

denver says no

Manimal · Post #7 » by **Manimal** » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:41 am

Can't see the Nuggets moving Chandler right now. His value is as low as it possibly can be since he really hasn't played the past two seasons and is still injured. Maybe if he could be moved for a solid bench player who would provide steady production, but not for a headcase who's skill set does little to nothing for the team. I think the Nuggets will just wait for him to get healthy and see how things work out with him before moving him. And at least then he can raise his value a little bit.

phx#7 · Post #8 » by **phx#7** » Tue Dec 11, 2012 2:00 am

Neither player helps the Suns as a rebuild so I'd rather stick with the shorter contract.

Jase · Post #9 » by **Jase** » Tue Dec 11, 2012 2:09 am

I don't get it at all for Denver. Actually, it's awful for Denver. This is a team based on ball movement and unselfish play. Beasley takes a liquid dump all over that. It was also mentioned that you put him at PF. Okay, at the expense of Faried? Do you cut into his minutes? Move him to the bench? Do any of you really think Karl is going to put up with Beasley's crap?

HornetJail · Post #10 » by **HornetJail** » Tue Dec 11, 2012 2:54 am

If the "Beasley is toxic" thing hadn't come out today, I would've probably said yes to this deal, but Denver probably shouldn't take a chance on Beasley at the expense of Chandler anymore. After that, Phoenix essentially killed Beasley's trade value and would be lucky to get more than just expirings for him.