RealGM

GS trades Harrington, Ellis, O'Bryant, Pietrus and a 1st to Memphis for Gasol, Miller and Navarro.
Davis/JCN
Miller/Azubuike
Jackson/Barnes
Gasol/Wright
Biedrins/Croshere

GS adds post play and rebounding. Navarro allows Davis to get 12-20 minutes rest. Miller replaces Harrington's outside threat.

Memphis trades Gasol, Miller and Navarro for Ellis, Harrington, Pietrus, O'Bryant, and a 1st.
Conley/Lowry
Ellis/Pietrus
Gay/Pietrus
Harrington/Swift
Milicic/O'Bryant

Memphis adds a home town talent and saves money. Even after resigning Ellis they should have around 8-10M for a FA. They build around Conley, Ellis, Lowry, Gay, Warrick, two draft picks and a FA. They also have some decent trade pieces in Harrington, Milicic and Swift.

This is a Gasol trade I would do as a GS fan, though I don't like the fact that Gasol's biggest down year is coming in a fast pased system...

But all of that is irrelevant because Memphis declines IMHO. Ellis is really the only significant rebuilding piece they get for Gasol, Miller, AND Navarro (basically all of their trade bait).

But if Memphis was down, I'd do it.

MEM would probaly do this.

boogiesdad wrote:MEM would probaly do this.

Really? In that case, call the GMs, let's go!

Biedrins
Gasol/Wright
Jackson/Barnes
Miller/Azubuike
Baron/Navarro

I like it

Why would memphis do this?

I break it down like this:

1st for JCN (Ok)
Harrington +Ellis for Gasol (Ok)
Pietrus/POB for Miller (Huh??)

How does this help Memphis. They get a pick back that they gave for JCN. They get some youth for Gasol I guess, but then they just give away Mike MIller for garbage????

supertruck97 wrote:Why would memphis do this?

I break it down like this:

1st for JCN (Ok)
Harrington +Ellis for Gasol (Ok)
Pietrus/POB for Miller (Huh??)

How does this help Memphis. They get a pick back that they gave for JCN. They get some youth for Gasol I guess, but then they just give away Mike MIller for garbage????

If Memphis is trading Gasol then they will be in full rebuild mode thus making Miller unnecessary. Miller has 3 years at 8.25/9/9.75 so Memphis would be gaining flexibility because both Pietrus and POB are expiring contracts. Furthermore the Warriors could sweeten the offer by including a portion of the TPE.

This is pretty similar to something that I posted on the Grizz board that nobody seemed to like.

I think you need to add Wright and Warrick to this trade to even out the value a little more though.

I think if GS want to get Gasol AND Miller along with JCN, the offer has to start with Ellis and Brendan Wright

Monta Ellis is very good combo guard but defensively he should be paired with a big point guard. If he and Conley were the starting backcourt for the Grizz, Darko is going to ask for a trade as he would foul out every game. Golden State should not try to make the trade so big(getting both Gasol and Miller). Something could be worked out getting Damon and Pau but even then it may be a hugh mistake to make Monta Ellis the centerpiece, for previously mentioned reasons.

The only reason I wouldn't do this deal (or some permutation of it) is if I was convinced that it would screw up the chemistry. I just don't think you can pass up the Baron/Jax/Miller/Gasol/Biedrins lineup with Navarro, a big and whoever's left of Azu/Barnes/Belinelli/Pietrus.

I just can't see the Griz doing this... Miller just feels like a throw in which isn't in the least bit true. BWright would have to be a part of it..

I'd do it even if Brandan Wright was added.

I just cant see Gasol keeping up in a transition system. He is a much better half court team player.

crzyyafrican wrote:I'd do it even if Brandan Wright was added.

I wouldn't...Gasol's not doing well in an uptempo system and BWright already looks really promising.

Ya Wright would have to be added to get Memphis attention... A Wright+Ellis package would be the core to a Gasol deal.

WizardsWorld wrote:Ya Wright would have to be added to get Memphis attention... A Wright+Ellis package would be the core to a Gasol deal.

Probably aint gonna happen although there's probably somebody out there who will make a run at him considering he's probably playing his best ball in the past two years right now (can thank the Warriors in part for that). It just won't be the Warriors.

Ukraine Train wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



If Memphis is trading Gasol then they will be in full rebuild mode thus making Miller unnecessary. Miller has 3 years at 8.25/9/9.75 so Memphis would be gaining flexibility because both Pietrus and POB are expiring contracts. Furthermore the Warriors could sweeten the offer by including a portion of the TPE.

Just cause he'd be "unnecessary" (which is your own subjective take that I won't address here), it does not follow that the Grizz should give him away for pennies on the dollar or literally nothing. You don't give away assets for free, you give away garbage for free.

WizardsWorld wrote:Ya Wright would have to be added to get Memphis attention... A Wright+Ellis package would be the core to a Gasol deal.

From our POV that would be the core for a Garnett deal. Gasol doesn't command that kind of value especially since his performance in the half court has been less than stellar.

A deal centered around just Ellis and filler or just Wright and filler would be interesting IMO...a deal centered around Ellis and Wright is too much.

yunggunz wrote:I just cant see Gasol keeping up in a transition system. He is a much better half court team player.

Dude just dropped like 40 against us
plus its not like we run all the time. Theres time when were in a half court

killacalijatt wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Dude just dropped like 40 against us
plus its not like we run all the time. Theres time when were in a half court

WOW...he dropped 40 on Al Harrington's studly post D? Let's give up our whole future for him because of that one data point!!!

His FG%, PPG, RPG are all down from his All-Star season, and he's made no sign that he can play a sustained period in a run and gun system.

That's why I don't give up both Wright and Ellis...one and fillers is an acceptable risk, both is not.