Trade Targets

Keith Van Horn · Post #761 » by **Keith Van Horn** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 12:00 am

Knicks targeting Kenyon Martin. Ugh.

Keith Van Horn · Post #762 » by **Keith Van Horn** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 12:01 am

jeff1624 wrote:^^Not 'til next season. Players that are claimed from waivers after being amnestied aren't allowed to be traded until a year after said player was amnestied.

I want VC. Dallas is 9 games under .500 and should be thinking about gathering up assets. Too bad our contracts range from too big to too small to make a 1 for 1 trade.

I want VC too. Fill the 6th man wing/scorer we need.

NjNeTs1029 · Post #763 » by **NjNeTs1029** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 1:06 am

Supposedly the Griz are shopping ZBo as well.. any interest?

therealbig3 · Post #764 » by **therealbig3** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 1:14 am

I don't get it, do the Grizzlies just think they can't contend with their core right now? They look like a damn good team to me, and have as good a chance as anyone out West, especially with Gasol and Randolph in the middle.

Weird.

deepblueday · Post #765 » by **deepblueday** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 1:16 am

yeah, feel sorry for grizz fans. fun team to watch with a ton of heart and talent, in a fight for a top 3 seed, and theyre looking to blow it up. sad

Ronito · Post #766 » by **Ronito** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 2:23 am

Woj reported the Grizz don't believe they are a contender.

Jersey Generals · Post #767 » by **Jersey Generals** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 2:31 am

therealbig3 wrote:I don't get it, do the Grizzlies just think they can't contend with their core right now? They look like a damn good team to me, and have as good a chance as anyone out West, especially with Gasol and Randolph in the middle.

Weird.

It's because of the new owner. They're looking to really contend, rather than do the middle of the road contending like the....well, quite a few teams do, actually.

N Ireland Nets · Post #768 » by **N Ireland Nets** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 2:41 am

Jersey Generals wrote:
therealbig3 wrote:I don't get it, do the Grizzlies just think they can't contend with their core right now? They look like a damn good team to me, and have as good a chance as anyone out West, especially with Gasol and Randolph in the middle.

Weird.

It's because of the new owner. They're looking to really contend, rather than do the middle of the road contending like the....well, quite a few teams do, actually.

Word.

No doubt Nets fans will be screaming from the rooftops to throw Hump, Brooks 2013 & 2016 1st at Memphis but people don't realise that our assets are complete trash.

The more I look at things I hope King doesn't try to make a move just for the sake of it. We might as well hold onto Hump to take advantage of his expiring next season when he actually has positive value.

The only sort of guy I think we could get is Williams from the Wolves for Brooks, pick & filler but thats basically a lateral move in general giving up a pick. Not much out there for us.

Paradise · Post #769 » by **Paradise** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 3:49 am

I don't get how they don't believe they are a contender. All they need is a Iggy type SF to compliment Allen's defense and some shooters.

But wow.

N Ireland Nets · Post #770 » by **N Ireland Nets** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 4:07 am

Like Ronito said, we should go for a backup SF instead of a PF because we just dont have the assets to move for a top player. So again like Ron said what about Hayward from Utah?

Brooks, Taylor, Stack and our 2013 1st for Hayward??

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=b8ece6z

deepblueday · Post #771 » by **deepblueday** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 4:56 am

i probably wouldn't even give up the opportunity to swing for the fences in the mid-late first for hayward. kirilenko, whose been superb at both the 3 and the 4, is our best hope i think.

bobbyc · Post #772 » by **bobbyc** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 5:30 am

There is a lot out there. Washington, Toronto, and Memphis are all going to try to get rid of salary.

It just depends on how much we are willing to spend and how much salary we are willing to take. If King has a blank check something will happen.

AntwanBoldin · Post #773 » by **AntwanBoldin** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 6:01 am

With the emergence of tele I think they might be in the backup sf market. Something like hump for prince

Post #774 » by **NyCeEvO** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 6:05 am

If it's true that they're looking to deal Randolph as well, what do you think he's worth?

N Ireland Nets · Post #775 » by **N Ireland Nets** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 6:13 am

NyCeEvO wrote:If it's true that they're looking to deal Randolph as well, what do you think he's worth?

I think they are looking to get someone like Cousins for Randolph.

We shouldn't be looking to move Hump rot now unless its a no brander trade. Hump has no real positive value right now and it would take a pick or whatever to make teams bite.

If we wait till draft night or even better next season, then Hump will have great value as a huge expiring deal. We could simple move him to a team in need of cap relief for a bad contract and a 1st which would be a real asset for us to mo e down the line.

If we trade Hump now were selling at Humps lowest point value wise.

SpeedyG · Post #776 » by **SpeedyG** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 12:05 pm

Trade for Gay and have him be our 6th man

SpeedyG · Post #777 » by **SpeedyG** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 2:05 pm

SpeedyG wrote:Trade for Gay and have him be our 6th man

In before: No we don't want Rudy as our 6th man, he's a low BBall IQ, ball stopper chucker! Keep playing Stack and Bogans! :lol:

therealbig3 · Post #778 » by **therealbig3** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 2:32 pm

SpeedyG wrote:
SpeedyG wrote:Trade for Gay and have him be our 6th man

In before: No we don't want Rudy as our 6th man, he's a low BBall IQ, ball stopper chucker! Keep playing Stack and Bogans!

LOL, I know you're being a little sarcastic, but since it's a clear reference to the way some posters feel about Marshon, I have to respond.

I don't get how you can still ask for Marshon to play, or still believe so vehemently that he's some massive upgrade over our current crop of backup wings, when every time he's actually gotten playing time...he's sucked, horribly. He makes a layup here and there, or hits a jump shot, and the rest of his time on the court is spent playing terrible defense and killing the offense with ball stopping, poor shot selection, and stupid TOs. He's absolutely worthless off the ball, and he's nowhere good enough that giving him the ball for most of the shot clock is worth it.

I originally wanted him to play over Stack and Bogans too, but he's gotten his chance a few times now under PJ and even towards the end under Avery, and he's still sucked. I don't even want to play Stack anymore, I think he's done after that one stretch where he was hitting all of his 3s. But unless you had ridiculously high expectations for Bogans, he's done a solid job: he's played good defense, and he's hit his 3s. Wanting any more than that, and you're asking too much of him.

Now, we just don't have much depth at the 2 and the 3, so I guess if it's a choice between Stackhouse and Brooks, sure, maybe Brooks can play then. Even in that case, I'd probably run with the Watson/Deron backcourt as my first choice. Or give Taylor and Toko some experience and see what they've got. Or play Tele at the 3. But Bogans is quite clearly a better player than Brooks imo, and contributes more positively to this team. And if we actually got an NBA-caliber backup wing, Brooks should be glued to the bench, imo. He's just not good, and yes, he sucks worse than Bogans.

EDIT: Who's better, Shane Battier or Jordan Crawford? That's essentially Bogans vs Marshon. A pretty accurate comparison actually.

SpeedyG · Post #779 » by **SpeedyG** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 2:57 pm

I haven't seen Nets games much after PJ, so I can't comment on how he played. But him and Mirza were credited for one of the wins for the boost they provided (Sacramento, maybe?) right?

But regardless, I just find it hypocritical how some posters here feel about Marshon. They complain about him dribbling the ball (even though the team typically gives him the ball with 8 seconds left to bail out a horrible set), yet when Watson does it...you don't hear them criticize it for him.

You hear them complain about Brooks taking a fadeaway, then Stack takes the same shot and its "HOLY **** STACK'S STILL GOT IT!"

Missing defensive assignments? Yes, clearly looking at how awesome our perimeter defense is (sarcastically speaking) that no one BUT Marshon makes bad defensive plays. Yet when he makes one every one of his critics goes "See this is why he doesn't play? smh"

There's a clear double-standard when it comes to him, and I'm just tired of it.

vincecarter4pres · Post #780 » by **vincecarter4pres** » Wed Jan 9, 2013 3:08 pm

People get to hung up on assets.

We have Brooks, we have 3 1st round picks, we have a couple Euros, one Bogs and the other Toko.

We have Tyshawn Taylor.

All 3 of the latter on 2nd round deals as of now.

All you have to do is find a third team willing to take Hump for an expiring and that's not a small task, but it's surely not impossible.

It's always more about player and agent power unless we're talking about a star on rookie contract.

Players are dealt over and over for a pile of crap and some picks.

The only thing and it's a big thing, that makes me wary is Billy King, cause whether it's a played out narrative or not, he's overpaid on every trade he's made and we don't have the assets for that. So if it rings true that rival GM's only deal with him when he overpays we're screwed. But at the same time, they maybe forced to take regular value because again, we literally can't overpay, although I'll bet he finds a way to.