Trade Idea

BBen · Post #1 » by **BBen** » Wed May 21, 2008 8:45 pm

Riley mentioned he'd be open to trading the #2. What do you think of a trade like:

Chris Wilcox + #4

for

Mark Blount + #2

Miami would be getting rid of an albatross contract with an under-performing Blount and picking up a stud in Wilcox who could run in a system with Wade, Bayless (or Mayo) and Marion. Would you do it? Is it realistic?

Edit: Sonics can include whatever combination of picks and future picks desired.

djthesonicsfan · Post #2 » by **djthesonicsfan** » Wed May 21, 2008 9:03 pm

Sign me up. But only if it's D Rose available at #2.

rhp1990 · Post #3 » by **rhp1990** » Wed May 21, 2008 9:21 pm

are u on crack? Miami would never do that!

BBen · Post #4 » by **BBen** » Wed May 21, 2008 9:23 pm

No I'm not on crack.

Edit: I hate Laker's fans.

BenjaminH · Post #5 » by **BenjaminH** » Wed May 21, 2008 10:37 pm

I don't see why Miami would trade down. I don't doubt that Riley said that (and I'll look through Hoops Hype for the quote). But either Rose or Beasley would be a great fit for their rebuild, a much better fit than any deal I can think of, including this one.

big L · Post #6 » by **big L** » Wed May 21, 2008 10:51 pm

No way Miami does this.

Sonics3408 · Post #7 » by **Sonics3408** » Wed May 21, 2008 10:58 pm

Does Miami need a Power Foward?

What do people think Chicago is going to do with their pick? If they don't get Rose, I heard that Miami was excited for a Rose/Wade backcourt.

If that's the case, they would probably only trade Beasley...?

What if we traded both of our first rounders + an expiring for #2 + Blount?

Thoughts?

Sonics3408 · Post #8 » by **Sonics3408** » Wed May 21, 2008 11:02 pm

Would the Bulls ever consider:

#4 Seattle Pick
#24 Seattle Pick
Collison (we know they want him...or at least have in the past.)
Expiring contract (blanking on who comes off the books next year?)

For

#1 Bulls
Bad contract

...And would it be worth it?

S0yb3anB0y · Post #9 » by **S0yb3anB0y** » Wed May 21, 2008 11:22 pm

Sonics3408 wrote:Would the Bulls ever consider:

#4 Seattle Pick
#24 Seattle Pick
Collison (we know they want him...or at least have in the past.)
Expiring contract (blanking on who comes off the books next year?)

For

#1 Bulls
Bad contract

...And would it be worth it?

let me ask you this, was it worth it in 2003 draft when Miami was willing to trade the 5th pick for our 12th, 14th, and Brent Barry? Well this is kind of a different case though. The 4th pick is not that bad because this draft is top 5 heavy very simular to 2003 draft. It was Labron and Darko who were the clear cut 1 & 2. Melo, Bosh, and Wade didn't turn out bad at all.

Ex-hippie · Post #10 » by **Ex-hippie** » Thu May 22, 2008 1:50 am

Sonics3408 wrote:Would the Bulls ever consider:

#4 Seattle Pick
#24 Seattle Pick
Collison (we know they want him...or at least have in the past.)
Expiring contract (blanking on who comes off the books next year?)

That would be Donyell Marshall...

For

#1 Bulls
Bad contract

...And would it be worth it?

Larry Hughes, come on down! You're the next contestant on The Price Is Ridiculous!

This will work under Trade Checker once Collison isn't a BYC player anymore. Wonder if CHI will go for it?

Patches Pal · Post #11 » by **Patches Pal** » Thu May 22, 2008 1:51 am

I actually think where we are drafting at 4 is a better fit for our needs. If we did trade up for Rose or Beasley I would not offer nearly as much as you are to go two spots. This is a deep draft. There are alot of good players. The extra picks later in the draft could also turn out to be All Stars. Remember Kobe went #13. A pick at #4 may turnout better than #1 in five years.

dre_1614 · Post #12 » by **dre_1614** » Thu May 22, 2008 3:09 am

Patches what do you think of Lester Hudson?
I am really high on him and I would be excited if we took him at #24.

BBen · Post #13 » by **BBen** » Thu May 22, 2008 3:57 am

I agree Patches, that's why I would offer CWil and the #4 for Beasley basically. It clears out Cwil and adds a reasonable if expensive backup center with Blount (just because I know Miami would love to get rid of the contract). Miami gets a good player now so that they could unload Haslem while his value is still high and they get a slightly lower tier prospect while converting to a very athletic run and gun team. Sonics get to clear out a spot for Beasley.

colombianbrew · Post #14 » by **colombianbrew** » Thu May 22, 2008 4:05 am

This would have to be part of a bigger picture. For one, Haslem would probably have to be moved, though Orlando apparently wants him. On top of that I think they would only do it if Rose were not available at #2 and Marion were signed to an extension.

Patches Pal · Post #15 » by **Patches Pal** » Thu May 22, 2008 4:10 am

I like Lester Hudson alot. I think we can get him in the second round. There are alot of good guys that are going to be available in the first half of round 2. We should be able to add two players to our depth. Hudson could contribute with his shooting off the bench while working on his PG skills. I like Kyle Weaver, too. Pick one.

I think Wheezy and the #4 is too much for Beasley. If we swap Beasley for Wheezy we really haven't improved much. We still have no front line center, PG or SG and a log jam at SF and PF. I was all for Beasley if we got pick #2. I thought we could trade Wheezy for another lottery pick and get two guys. I think you need to come out of it with two lottery picks to make it worthwhile.

Dick Tate · Post #16 » by **Dick Tate** » Thu May 22, 2008 4:23 am

Wow! You really think quite highly of Wilcox. Wow!

BBen · Post #17 » by **BBen** » Thu May 22, 2008 4:25 am

Wilcox is a legit proven offensive force. He also runs the floor like a sf.

Edit: But that's not too much for Beasley.

Patches Pal · Post #18 » by **Patches Pal** » Thu May 22, 2008 4:38 am

Wilcox was a #8 pick. I cannot see him going any lower if he was drafted today. He is affordable and a proven commodity at PF. He runs like a deer and has no off court issues. At 26 he is just coming into his prime.