RealGM

The way things are going for the Bucks, it is becoming inevitable that Redd will be moved (most likely after the season of at next year

Bulls say Yes.

Mavs say No. (Howard already >= Redd in Mavs fans eyes)

Pacers say Maybe. (Not sure how much they value Granger)

Lakers say Yes.

76ers spit in your face.

Suns say no (for cap reasons)

BTW: Rox would offer Battier+Head+Filler and a 1st for Redd...

supertruck97 wrote:Bulls say Yes.

Mavs say No. (Howard already >= Redd in Mavs fans eyes)

Pacers say Maybe. (Not sure how much they value Granger)

Lakers say Yes.

76ers spit in your face.

Suns say no (for cap reasons)

For the record the 76ers deal is viable only if they do not think they can re-sign Iggy

I looked at the Rockets when trying to come up with deals, and I started off just like you did, but the problem came down to the fillers. They have to be a combination of Rafer or James and Scola, Snyder, or Wells. Any combo of the first and last group works, but Milwaukee already had both Rafer and James and I neither one is really wanted back...at least from my perspective. Maybe Scola, Snyder, and Wells but would you guys want to do that? I doubt it.

Rox might do:

Battier+James+Scola+Snyder+Head

for

Redd + CV

The only way Scola leaves is if another Big comes back. CV could be that big...

That works money wise, and might be a deal if they do not get anything better (as far as a top end player, with Battie being the best player coming from the Rockets). James isn't really a positive, but only has one more year after this year, so it could be some help with the cap. Definately another possibility.

Mavs would say no. We already have 2 good guards in Jason Terry and Devin Harris, why would we trade our most complete player on the team for another guard? And also, Dampier being traded would leave us with only Desagana Diop at C, and I never want to see him play the bulk of the minutes. No.

dirkforpres wrote:Mavs would say no. We already have 2 good guards in Jason Terry and Devin Harris, why would we trade our most complete player on the team for another guard? And also, Dampier being traded would leave us with only Desagana Diop at C, and I never want to see him play the bulk of the minutes. No.

I was under the impression that Terry was not part of your future plans. IMO Redd would be the ideal duo with Harris. I will edit the trade because Gadz was supposed to be included. In either case you deal was the toughest sell, and as I said at least one 1st round pick would be needed.

supertruck97 wrote:Mavs say No. (Howard already >= Redd in Mavs fans eyes)

QFT

No need weakening 2 positions of strength for an upgrade at 1.

TripleDouble wrote:I was under the impression that Terry was not part of your future plans. IMO Redd would be the ideal duo with Harris. I will edit the trade because Gadz was supposed to be included. In either case you deal was the toughest sell, and as I said at least one 1st round pick would be needed.

Sure, Terry is available for an upgrade at the 2 spot, but this trade does not use Terry...it uses Howard, arguably our best player (some say Dirk, some say Howard). We are not trying to trade Terry...if Terry was a few inches taller, we would not be talking trade at all. However, we need a taller 2 guard and then we have to look at who is expendable? Howard, Dirk and Harris are not expendable.

I would love Redd btwn Howard & Harris, but not in lue of either.

fair enough, I was thinking more for replacing Terry after this year, but I definately understand not wanting to give up Howard. With Mo the Bucks wouldn't need Harris (not that you were offering) or Terry. Without Howard there is realistically no trade options with you guys.

TripleDouble wrote:fair enough, I was thinking more for replacing Terry after this year, but I definately understand not wanting to give up Howard. With Mo the Bucks wouldn't need Harris (not that you were offering) or Terry. Without Howard there is realistically no trade options with you guys.

I agree that a PG swap would not be a good idea and Terry is redundant to Mo. I also agree that Redd to Dallas has a slim to no chance at happening. If some 3-way can come about with Dallas's best player lost being Terry, then I can see a trade happening.

my two cents:

step 1: waive ruffin.

step 2: storey, noel, cash from lakers, 2nd round from lakers to charlotte for conditional 2nd round. (for cba reasons, alone).

step 2: kwame, vujacic, crittenton, ariza, mihm, rights to marc gasol (well worth a late 1st), rights to sun yue (making yi happy), 2008 1st unprotected, 2010 top 5 protected for redd, gadz.

lakers:

fisher/farmar
kobe/redd/karl
redd/walton/radman
odom/turiaf/webber??
bynum/gadz

if they play selflessly, they can contend for many years.

bucks:

this year:

williams/crit/ivey
bell/vujacic/sessions
mason/ariza/simmons
yi/cv
bogut//kwame/mihm/voskuhl

worst record anyone??

next year:

a top pick, a late 1st pick, and like 8m under the cap.

williams/crittenton
rose??/bell/sun yue
ariza/mason/simmons
yi/cv
bogut/marc gasol

select bpa with the other picks.

Has anyone from the Bucks forum chimed in on this? I can't see the Bucks trading one of the better SGs in the league along with CV for Granger, Marquis Daniels and Murphy .

speaking for the pacers, i think we'd agree

the pacers and most fans are quite high on granger. the guy has nice range and while he needs to work on it, could be quite a defender. very level-headed and a good character guy who seems to do whatever is asked of him. the main drawback so far being that he lets the game come to him too often and isn't as aggressive as he could be.

quis is tremendous to watch rarely do you see a player just toss some of the most wild shots in the direction of the hoop and somehow manages to make them. this would certainly hurt to lose him.

murphy -- most people know the story on him. he is capable of putting up a double double (and may if given minutes next to bogut) but defensively is a major liability and really has no ability to post anyone up (even earl boykins could reliably guard murphy in the post).

you mentioned swapping in dunleavy and i guess i would say this: if you want granger, i'd take murphy; if you want dunleavy take ike diogu. right now you have mason, simmons at SF and the last thing you need is to take both dunleavy and granger and try doing what the pacers have been doing for almost a full calendar year (force-fitting one of them into the 2). but i imagine the diogu deal is less appealing as you'll be wanting as many minutes as you can find for yi.

so ultimately given the pacers have been without a true starting SG for a while (you could really say since reggie as SJax is more of a 3) and our need for a more aggressive scorer, we'd take this deal.

CableKC wrote:Has anyone from the Bucks forum chimed in on this? I can't see the Bucks trading one of the better SGs in the league along with CV for Granger, Marquis Daniels and Murphy .

I have the thread in the Bucks board as well, and the trade is ok. We understand you will not get equal value back (see the Mavs fans opinions - I think that trade is slightly in favor of the Mavs, but they do not want to part with Howard and you have to send greater value to get something). These trades were not made trying to get back equal value, but rather looking at teams where a trading partner was acceptable. That deal may not be equal value, but the Bucks may not get much more. Plus a lineup of:
Mo, Ivey
Bell/"quis"
Granger, Simmons, Mason
Yi, Murphy
Bogut, Gadz

could very easily grow together.