Marcus Williams Traded To Golden State

Post #1 » by **Rich Rane** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:16 pm

Marcus Williams traded to Golden State for a future 1st rounder in 2011
http://blogs.nypost.com/sports/nets/arc ... _gone.html

The pick is lottery protected for 2011 – so the Nets get it if the Warriors are in the playoffs. If it goes to 2012, the pick is protected 1-to-11. It’s protected 1-to-10 for 2013. If it is not conveyed by 2013, the Nets s\get second rounders in 2013 and 2015.

There are some moves I don't agree with this offseason. This being one of them. Sure Marcus probably wouldn't have succeeded here, but I think we should've packaged him for something more.

NetsForce · Post #2 » by **NetsForce** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:23 pm

Ew. I mean this is probably the most Marcus could have gotten by himself, I mean maybe he could have squeezed out a young shooting guard of some sort in return but oh well... I was one of the few that liked Marcus but this system and coach (no I'm not calling for Frank's head) just weren't a good fit for him.

Preludepunk27 · Post #3 » by **Preludepunk27** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:29 pm

Dammit you beat me to it. Honestly, I wanted him out of Jersey so he hopefully could progress someplace else...I just wanted some value for him. Granted I believe the Warriors can make the playoffs between 2011 and 2013 but I'm not happy about this. I wanted SOME value for Marcus.

Now if I were the Nets, on draft night next July I'd package whichever lottery pick we get and this protected pick and move up. With all the stipulations along with this pick, I can't see the Nets actually holding on to it in any way.

VCRJKidd15 · Post #4 » by **VCRJKidd15** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:32 pm

wow this trade sucks

djsunyc · Post #5 » by **djsunyc** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:32 pm

marcus was up for an extension after this season. so instead of his value being lower at that point, thorn acted quickly and got a #1 pick for him. shrewd fiscal move. it's obvious it's ALL IN for 2010. looks like thorn/kiki want to get not 1 but TWO big time players.

jeff1624 · Post #6 » by **jeff1624** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:33 pm

We basically gave him away...

Don't like this deal at all...

Preludepunk27 · Post #7 » by **Preludepunk27** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:45 pm

djsunyc wrote:marcus was up for an extension after this season. so instead of his value being lower at that point, thorn acted quickly and got a #1 pick for him. shrewd fiscal move. it's obvious it's ALL IN for 2010. looks like thorn/kiki want to get not 1 but TWO big time players.

You're partially right. Yes he was up for an extension, but the nets could have just excercised his team option and waited till the summer of 2010...when they then could have done what they did with Krstic and just extend a qualifying offer which then could have pushed back his ACTUAL new contract to the summer of 2011. We had the cap space for 2010 so this wasn't totally needed from a fiscal stand point. You were just partially right.

No since draft picks don't have monetary value until you actually know what the actual pick is, do we get a TE for the amount of Marcus's contract?

Preludepunk27 · Post #8 » by **Preludepunk27** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:47 pm

djsunyc wrote:marcus was up for an extension after this season. so instead of his value being lower at that point, thorn acted quickly and got a #1 pick for him. shrewd fiscal move. it's obvious it's ALL IN for 2010. looks like thorn/kiki want to get not 1 but TWO big time players.

You're partially right. Yes he was up for an extension, but the nets could have just excercised his team option and waited till the summer of 2010...when they then could have done what they did with Krstic and just extend a qualifying offer which then could have pushed back his ACTUAL new contract to the summer of 2011. We had the cap space for 2010 so this wasn't totally needed from a fiscal stand point. You were just partially right.

No since draft picks don't have monetary value until you actually know what the actual pick is, do we get a TE for the amount of Marcus's contract?

djsunyc · Post #9 » by **djsunyc** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:48 pm

Preludepunk27 wrote:
djsunyc wrote:marcus was up for an extension after this season. so instead of his value being lower at that point, thorn acted quickly and got a #1 pick for him. shrewd fiscal move. it's obvious it's ALL IN for 2010. looks like thorn/kiki want to get not 1 but TWO big time players.

You're partially right. Yes he was up for an extension, but the nets could have just excercised his team option and waited till the summer of 2010...when they then could have done what they did with Krstic and just extend a qualifying offer which then could have pushed back his ACTUAL new contract to the summer of 2011. We had the cap space for 2010 so this wasn't totally needed from a fiscal stand point. You were just partially right.

No since draft picks don't have monetary value until you actually know what the actual pick is, do we get a TE for the amount of Marcus's contract?

yes, but that will only lower his value if he doesn't play alot better. nets got a #1 out of it. that's a good deal b/c if the warriors make the playoffs, they will be a fringe playoff team, which means a pick in the 15-18 range. that's not bad for basically a backup pg for the nets.

Serpo · Post #10 » by **Serpo** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:51 pm

Marcus was OK when he started , in a backup role he never really played good . And with Harris here he wasn't going to start anway .

Preludepunk27 · Post #11 » by **Preludepunk27** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:52 pm

^^^^ This is also a 2011 1st rounder at the minimum. You never know what can happen in 3 years. Ellis's knee could go out (I love how big his brace is already) or something and they can turn into a lottery team by then and we end up with 2 2nd rounders in 2013. I understand what you're saying 100%, I just think we should have either got a body for him or a pick with less restrictions.

Regardless, I believe we won't be the owners of this pick by the summer of 2010 at the latest. I also do not think we're done moving this offseason.

NjNeTs1029 · Post #12 » by **NjNeTs1029** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 5:03 pm

dont like this trade at all. If it was an unprotected pick then the trade wouldnt be as bad but the best possible pick we can get out of this trade is 11th and thats unlikely.

like jeff said, we basically gave him away. Should've packaged him and got more

Preludepunk27 · Post #13 » by **Preludepunk27** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 5:15 pm

Hell I would have rather traded him for a Euro player that was never gonna come play lol ala Fran Vasquez.

Serpo · Post #14 » by **Serpo** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 5:19 pm

Well at least we aquired an assets for a possible S&T in 2010 ...

ecuhus1981 · Post #15 » by **ecuhus1981** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 5:24 pm

Oh, man, this trade stinks.

halfHAVOC · Post #16 » by **halfHAVOC** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 5:38 pm

i said it was going to happen.

its not a bad deal, i mean its not like he was going to play significant minutes with harris, nor would he even grow as a backup, sooner or later he would prolly ask to be traded.

as for marcus williams, im happy for him actually because he can become a starter in golden state. what we got in return is solid, i mean nuggets got a 2nd rounder for camby =P

jvcn15 · Post #17 » by **jvcn15** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 5:40 pm

This is a good trade for Marcus. The uptempo style should really help his game and cover his (lack of) defensive prowess. I just don't think he would ever be able to succeed here in NJ, if he does.

I wasn't really that high on Marcus, at least not as much as some, so I'm okay with this deal. That is assuming the Nets weren't able to package him with our other tradable assets. The pick is a bit too protected from my liking, but if GS makes the playoffs they should be a fringe playoff team, and so the pick is likely in the high teens. I mean, Marcus was the #22 pick.

I like to think of it to be more of Marcus for Dooling and a 1st.

ib4 · Post #18 » by **ib4** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 5:51 pm

at first glance, i don't like it either...

but the west is freakin good, and i just don't see the warriors being one of the 8 teams playing for the title. so down the line it could go really high, who knows.

jvcn15 · Post #19 » by **jvcn15** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 5:53 pm

ib4 wrote:at first glance, i don't like it either...

but the west is freakin good, and i just don't see the warriors being one of the 8 teams playing for the title. so down the line it could go really high, who knows.

Not really... the pick is protected unless GSW make the playoffs. If they don't by 2013, the 1st rounder becomes 2 2nd rounders.

ib4 · Post #20 » by **ib4** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 5:57 pm

jvcn15 wrote:
ib4 wrote:at first glance, i don't like it either...

but the west is freakin good, and i just don't see the warriors being one of the 8 teams playing for the title. so down the line it could go really high, who knows.

Not really... the pick is protected unless GSW make the playoffs. If they don't by 2013, the 1st rounder becomes 2 2nd rounders.

oh then this blows