Andre Iguodala Doesn't Expect to Be a 76er for Long

Post #1 » by **HMFFL** » Sun Nov 28, 2010 4:44 am

Andre Iguodala Doesn't Expect to Be a 76er for Long

It all points to a trade. Cleveland, Houston and New York all have expressed interest in his versatility and athleticism, and his skill set now looks more suited to a role as a second or third option.

Should we consider acquiring Iggy? I'd want Marvin Williams to be involved, but figuring out how Iggy would fit can be debatable. Is Joe Johnson willing to play the 3, does he handicap us starting there?

Just stirring up some bball talk.

ATL DirtyBird · Post #2 » by **ATL DirtyBird** » Sun Nov 28, 2010 5:10 am

I like his defense but his offense isnt fun to watch. I would take him for Marvin and someone else but im not a big fan.

HoopsGuru25 · Post #3 » by **HoopsGuru25** » Sun Nov 28, 2010 5:46 am

Iguodala would have amazing value to a team like Orlando.Utah, or Dallas. He doesn't get hurt and actually guards the other teams best perimeter scorer unlike most big named wings.

azuresou1 · Post #4 » by **azuresou1** » Sun Nov 28, 2010 5:48 am

I'm 100% sure Philly wouldn't take just Marvin. It'd probably require picks, and TBH I'd rather use those picks on a C or a PG.

MaceCase · Post #5 » by **MaceCase** » Sun Nov 28, 2010 7:29 am

I'd give them Crawford's expiring straight up and a future pick(s). They aren't going anywhere and I doubt they want to add future longterm contracts like Marvin with Brand being pretty much unmovable already. Turner even seemed to play better when Iggy was out so they may have to make a hard choice between holding out for top value in return or developing their #2 pick maximally. Both are heavy investments cap and franchise wise.

evildallas · Post #6 » by **evildallas** » Sun Nov 28, 2010 9:49 pm

If the Sixers were to deal him they'd likely want picks, expiring contracts, and/or young talent. We don't really have coveted young talent to offer, but we do have an expiring contract in Jamal. The issue would be Iggy's large remaining contract which I don't see Atlanta taking on. Iggy wouldn't move the needle with ticket sales and while he would likely improve our perimeter D, we'd still have question marks on size and PG. The marginal gain over Jamal (defensively partially offset offensively) wouldn't justify the investment.

D21 · Post #7 » by **D21** » Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:46 pm

MaceCase wrote:with Brand being pretty much unmovable already...

Exactly like Joe looks unmovable, with 3 more years left than Brand.
Maybe we could find a way to include both and add other players, but I didn't find a trade working, especially with moving Crawford without getting the same expiring and no superstar to convince owners to pay Tax.

parson · Post #8 » by **parson** » Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:52 pm

Can you imagine Andre Iguodala with the Hornets?

But, no, he doesn't fit the Hawks - unless we traded Joe and Jamal, traded for a PG and changed our offense. In other words, no chance at all.

parson · Post #9 » by **parson** » Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:55 pm

Contract or no, Joe is not unmoveable. He's still a top-5 SG. Problem is, we couldn't get anything of value for him while he's playing hurt. And I have absolutely no interest in trading Joe for expirings. As I've said before, giving extra money to the ASG is worthless. They will not spend it on winning.

MaceCase · Post #10 » by **MaceCase** » Tue Nov 30, 2010 1:43 am

parson wrote:Contract or no, Joe is not unmoveable. He's still a top-5 SG. Problem is, we couldn't get anything of value for him while he's playing hurt. And I have absolutely no interest in trading Joe for expirings. As I've said before, giving extra money to the ASG is worthless. They will not spend it on winning.

I don't see how you can say that, if anything the ASG has proven that they will overspend on marginal talent just to maintain mediocrity. I can't really think of a legitimate instance where the team has had capspace and sat on it rather that try to coerce an actual talent to sign with them.

parson · Post #11 » by **parson** » Tue Nov 30, 2010 5:10 pm

mace, you and I are talking about different things. You're pointing out that we overpaid one player. I'm complaining that the ASG will not pay over the Luxury Tax, despite the fact that you can't contend without doing that - unless you are led by superstars still on their rookie contracts. And, even then, it'll only be a short time before you have to pay them LT-breaking salaries.

If we will not pay over the LT, we're just playing basketball for grins and giggles.

azuresou1 · Post #12 » by **azuresou1** » Tue Nov 30, 2010 5:35 pm

The Pistons were under the LT when they won. I believe the Spurs were as well for at least one of their rings.

Also, let's not pretend that the ASG isn't using any of their capspace. They don't go into the tax, true, but right now we have the 9th highest payroll in the league. And quite frankly, if I were the owner, I wouldn't pay the luxury tax for this team either, not while Joe Johnson is tying up such a large portion.

MaceCase · Post #13 » by **MaceCase** » Tue Nov 30, 2010 9:44 pm

parson wrote:mace, you and I are talking about different things. You're pointing out that we overpaid one player. I'm complaining that the ASG will not pay over the Luxury Tax, despite the fact that you can't contend without doing that - unless you are led by superstars still on their rookie contracts. And, even then, it'll only be a short time before you have to pay them LT-breaking salaries.

If we will not pay over the LT, we're just playing basketball for grins and giggles.

No, Parson, I've pointed out that nearly the entire current roster is overpaid just to maintain a ~50 win squad. This says nothing of all the other free agents that have had special jacked price tags just to open negotiations to set foot in Atlanta on a professional basis.

No, it's really you who's talking about a different thing. You are talking about the ASG being unwilling to spend into the tax for this current roster when clearly finding expirings for Joe would serve the purpose of getting this team far enough beneath the lux tax and the cap altogether where they can actually afford better players outright that would make it worthwhile to spend into the lux tax in the future.

Again you have no basis because you are off on some entirely tangential argument that has been disputed to death already. Allow me to clarify the real argument for you:
between Jamal and Mo's expirings and if we were to magically get rid of Joe for say Michael Redd's expiring deal, then add Al's extension + draft picks and whatnot...we'd have about 45 mil in salary. Are you willing to argue that the ASG would be perfectly fine sitting on that capspace rather than pursuing an impact free agent such as Melo or whatnot?
I haven't seen any indication out of them in the past of this but you seemed sure of it before you decided to go off on tangent.

D21 · Post #14 » by **D21** » Wed Dec 1, 2010 1:20 pm

azuresou1 wrote:The Pistons were under the LT when they won. I believe the Spurs were as well for at least one of their rings.

Also, let's not pretend that the ASG isn't using any of their capspace. They don't go into the tax, true, but right now we have the 9th highest payroll in the league. And quite frankly, if I were the owner, I wouldn't pay the luxury tax for this team either, not while Joe Johnson is tying up such a large portion.

Except that both DET and SAS did not have an overpaid player like Joe is.
DET did not have a max contract, and SAS had only Duncan, who is one of the only players deserving that kind of contract. They also had Parker and Ginobili for half of what Joe is getting...
Joe at 124M just killed our possibility to build a team like SAS and DET did, and the most stupid part of this story come from the fact that Sund always said he wanted to buil a teal like DET and SAS did... I don't know if the 124M was a Sund or ASG decision (I would say ASG), but well done

azuresou1 · Post #15 » by **azuresou1** » Wed Dec 1, 2010 4:01 pm

Yes, I brought up how Joe is overpaid, just wanted to point out that going into the LT is not a necessity for a winning team.

td00 · Post #16 » by **td00** » Fri Dec 3, 2010 10:04 pm

All I can say is if Arenas can be moved, anyone can be moved...that albatross is a gawd awful contract. I am sure Philly would like to go back 2 years for a redo.

We have seen Jermaine ONeal moved...and I thought he was stuck in Indiana with year after year injury excuses.

Bad contracts are part of the makeup of the league....as bad as Joe's contract is, him going to New York probably heads up towards the lottery...and I was all for that.

When Joe was considered the guy to lead us going forward, that was it for me. I have no faith in this management team. They keep this team at 50-55 wins, a playoff appearance, and future apathy from the fan base.

How much longer will the fans accept this inept attempt at building a winner?

The fanbase excitement of brining in Damien Wilkins is nice, but talked about as much as bringing in longtime vet Joe Smith last year......much ado about nothing.

Post #17 » by **HMFFL** » Mon Dec 13, 2010 10:14 pm

I read today that Philly is still trying to include Elton Brand in the Iggy discussions, so teams backed off, and Philly is now turning to another method to make the team stronger. Philly basically has realized that no one wants Elton Brand to be included.

Philly is a run by a bunch of idiots by the looks of things. I respect Doug Collins as a coach, but I wish he never took the job.