How would you guys feel about trading Meka

BlaZeN27 · Post #1 » by **BlaZeN27** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:00 pm

For a deal surrounding Shawn Marion?

Post #2 » by **BigSlam** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:05 pm

Not good.

Marion can't give us what Okafor does - plus he could walk for nothing after 1 year.

Put it this way: If Okafor signed for the QO only so he would become an UFA after next season, could you still want to make the deal?

BlaZeN27 · Post #3 » by **BlaZeN27** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:10 pm

Obviously not, but Marion's contract is almost 18 million. I know you got a similiar player in Crash (one of my favorite players), so you could let him expire then go after Brand or Boozer next year.

Nazr Mohammed and Emeka for Marion

That would also get ride of Nazr's ugly contract.

Post #4 » by **fatlever** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:13 pm

no thanks

freakon0mics · Post #5 » by **freakon0mics** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:13 pm

I wouldn't do it. Emeka might not live up to what others might have expected but he gives this team a defensive identity. With him on the court, opposing players know what kind of defensive ability he has and they respect it. If you look at past championship teams, it comes from defense. Emeka needs to stay here.

BlaZeN27 · Post #6 » by **BlaZeN27** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:16 pm

Yah, defense and veterans. Look at the 06 Heat, the Spurs, the Celtics. The blue print for winning a title is having a defense, low post scorer, and all-star veterans. Your telling me Brand/Boozer wouldn't make you guys a better team in the long run?

Post #7 » by **BigSlam** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:24 pm

BlaZeN27 wrote:Yah, defense and veterans. Look at the 06 Heat, the Spurs, the Celtics. The blue print for winning a title is having a defense, low post scorer, and all-star veterans. Your telling me Brand/Boozer wouldn't make you guys a better team in the long run?

You are basing your trade on the huge assumption that in a year we woule sign Boozer or Brand. That's a massive risk to take. If they didn't, then we would be pooched.

A bird in the hand.......

BlaZeN27 · Post #8 » by **BlaZeN27** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:31 pm

Pooched? The chance of at least one of them hitting the free agent market is good. Not only that but theres sure to be a few of the RFA's that take the one year tender and end up being free agents in 09 (Deng, J-Smoove, Iggy, etc).

I fail to see how having max cap space the year before LeBron, Wade, and Bosh become free agents would end in you guys getting "pooched".

Post #9 » by **BigSlam** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:35 pm

Sure, they might become UFA, but with teams like the Nets, the Knicks, the Heat etc all creating cap space you are assuming we would win the bidding war for said players and that they would even want to go to a small market team.

So we trade EO50 to you, Matrix walks for nothing after 1 year with us, none of the FA's sign here = pooched.

So, like I said, a bird in the hand. I'd MUCH rather hang on to Okafor.

BlaZeN27 · Post #10 » by **BlaZeN27** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:39 pm

Who's going to have max money next year? Hardly anyone, we won't if we trade for Meka. There will be some amazing free agents in a year, and if this trade were to happen you would be one of the only teams with max cap space. Everyone is saving for the 2010 off-season.

Post #11 » by **Walt Cronkite** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 10:08 pm

We trade you a defensive big (not an easily acquired commodity) for a guy that's 5 years older and only cares about the money. We want to get him knowing that he replicates what we already have at sf. Even though we have a hof coach, we trade for a guy that's uncoachable, immediately ending any playoff hopes. On top of it all, we get to "get rid on Nazr's ugly contract".

No thanks. If negotiations go south with Okafor, we'll consider sign and trading him to you guys for Marion, but you'd get no part of Mohammed. Blount is getting paid a gross figure nearly as much as Mohammed, except over 3 years instead of 4. If that isn't meaningful enough, consider that Mohammed is the far superior player.

Terrible.

vexco · Post #12 » by **vexco** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 10:23 pm

how would you feel about losin your virginity to shawn marion?

ccbballin · Post #13 » by **ccbballin** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:32 pm

Somebody in a previous Marion trade request said that he alongside J Rich would give us "the most explosive 2-3 combo in the league" My question then is what was the combo of him and D Wade last year? I know Wade plays a lot of point but isnt he basically a shooting guard. If that didnt work what makes you think its going to work for the Bobcats.

Marion is a good player who's best days appear to be over unless he can find his way back into the right system. But we hopefully would never ever ever trade our most important defensive piece for a guy who doesn't make up for that lack of defense.

oh yeah our coach is Larry Brown and he likes to play slow it down halfcourt ball and hardnosed defense. not 100 mile an hour shoot it as fast as you can and go do it again stuff. the type of system Marion seems to thrive in.

SteveMorrison15 · Post #14 » by **SteveMorrison15** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 12:18 am

How do you feel about Frilly Toothpicks?

I'M FOR 'EM!!!!

Post #15 » by **Walt Cronkite** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 12:48 am

They're great for holding large sandwiches together, while at the same time reminding you "Hey, don't eat me! Remember me? I'm a stick with a frill".

W_HAMILTON · Post #16 » by **W_HAMILTON** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 1:16 am

I didn't know that's what they were called, you all are so cultured.

BlaZeN27 · Post #17 » by **BlaZeN27** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:55 am

Walt Cronkite wrote:No thanks. If negotiations go south with Okafor, we'll consider sign and trading him to you guys for Marion, but you'd get no part of Mohammed. Blount is getting paid a gross figure nearly as much as Mohammed, except over 3 years instead of 4. If that isn't meaningful enough, consider that Mohammed is the far superior player.

Terrible.

That's kind of what I meant. I was only thinking about this scenario if your FO didn't want to pay him the amount he wanted like in the past. If a deal could get done I wouldn't expect him to be traded, but this was more for the idea if it gets to that point would you be up for it.

And I don't get your last part. You wouldn't want to get ride of Nazr's and his contract?

Post #18 » by **Walt Cronkite** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 7:07 am

Nazr gets paid something like 18m over the next 3 seasons. Blount gets 15m over the next 2.

Nazr is nearly twice the player Blount is. I'd say Nazr's contract is pretty fair.

BlaZeN27 · Post #19 » by **BlaZeN27** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 8:07 am

Why do you guys keep up bringing Blount for? I obviously know how bad his contract is, I never mentioned him though. I didn't say you guys take him and we take Nazr. You consider him with positive value? (no need to flame, I know he's real solid)

spectre_ · Post #20 » by **spectre_** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 11:24 am

We do consider Nazr having positive value. He had a pretty good year with us in spite of the Idiot's whacked substitution patterns and I expect more this year after getting a real coach. His salary is close to MLE and the pickings for Cs in FA are very slim.

Losing Mek AND Nazr without a viable replacement would be stupid.