Raptors Assistant GM interested in Belinelli
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 3:20 am
Could you make a trade to ensure a higher draft pick?
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 3:33 am
For Calderon or Ford? I'm all for it.
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 3:35 am
Beli for #17
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 3:36 am
I'm sorry, but Belinelli is in the plans for our future, so he is basically untouchable.
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 3:41 am
I don't think Beli meshes with Monta, not as backcourt mates in the future.
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 4:01 am
-bob- wrote:I don't think Beli meshes with Monta, not as backcourt mates in the future.
Maybe because their both Shooting Guards???
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 4:06 am
because neither can guard shooting guards.
atleast Monta can guard PGs.
atleast Monta can guard PGs.
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 4:15 am
-bob- wrote:Beli for #17
+1
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 5:43 am
I want Anthony Parker..Screw the 17th pick...Look at the horrid list of players projected to go 14-20...It's going be tough enough getting the warriors through the 1st minefield at 14.
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 6:16 am
nismolos wrote:For Calderon or Ford? I'm all for it.
me too
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 6:19 am
We can't give Calderon or Ford what they want..The starting PG job..No chance..Ford-Ellis or Calderon-Ellis starting backcourt? 
Ellis is our PG.
Ellis is our PG.
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 2:40 pm
Sid the Squid wrote:I want Anthony Parker..Screw the 17th pick...Look at the horrid list of players projected to go 14-20...It's going be tough enough getting the warriors through the 1st minefield at 14.
Marco & Al
for
Parker, Garbs (and a 2nd?) works in the trade checker.
Both are exprings. It's hard to tell what Garbs would get comming off an injury season, but he played well last year. Parker is going to cost them some coin to retain, and Marco would be a low cost replacement assumming they can get him in shape to play. Al, Bosh and the big Vermicelli is a very softish/perimeter front line, but also very skilled (assuming Bargs grows a sac.)
For us, obviously, we shorten Al's deal, we get to audition Garbs as a 3rd year player, we get Parker for a one year audition next to Monta (and we have Baron's impending capspace to retain him.)
Fantasia is being fueled and readied for intesnse trade negotiations.
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 4:23 pm
It would be ill advised to trade Marco without seeing what he does (or doesnt do) in year two.
How often do guys get traded in their first offseason?
Exactly.
How often do guys get traded in their first offseason?
Exactly.
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 4:34 pm
St.Nick wrote:It would be ill advised to trade Marco without seeing what he does (or doesnt do) in year two.
How often do guys get traded in their first offseason?
Exactly.
True..but he's not exactly a can't miss phenom either. He can be replaced and if Toronto wants him, it's worth seeing what they're willing to give up.
Honestly, I think Rush could step right in and outplay Marco, which is why I don't mind trading him for a pick. And there's plenty of other talent that could be had that could do more for us than him.
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 5:08 pm
St.Nick wrote:It would be ill advised to trade Marco without seeing what he does (or doesnt do) in year two.
How often do guys get traded in their first offseason?
Exactly.
I'm not hating on Marco in this trade, but Parker would almost certainly be a better pairing with Monta into the future. Shooting is a push, passing edge would go to Marco with more experience, but parker is (and in all liklihood always will be) a better defender, larger and already today is NBA ready.
Have you watched Parker play? I'm sorry, but he's already Marco's best case scenario when you factor in the rebounding and defensive differences. Marco has more offensive upside, but this is a bird in the hand and a more complete player.
We cut Al's contract in the process.
It's not much different than trading Ike to move Murpleavy. I'm fine with it.