RealGM

RealGM Trade Checker

ATL out: Marvin Williams, Zaza Pachulia, 2010 1st round pick
ATL in: Ryan Gomes, Andris Biedrins

GSW out: Andris Biedrins, Devean George, cash**
GSW in: Zaza Pachulia, Damien Wilkins, 2010 1st round pick (from ATL)

MIN out: Ryan Gomes, Damien Wilkins
MIN in: Marvin Williams, Devean George*, cash

*Agrees to trade b/c Minnesota will buy him out, allowing him to sign with a contender
**Enough to cover buyout and nothing more

ATL Salary changes:
2010-11: +1.19M
2011-12: +0.18M
2012-13: -0.81M
2013-14: -0.80M
TOTAL: -0.25M

GSW Salary changes:
2010-11: -3.64M
2011-12: -3.06M
2012-13: -2.47M
2013-14: -6.70M
TOTAL: -15.87M

MIN Salary changes:
2010-11: +2.45M
2011-12: +2.87M
2012-13: +3.29M
2013-14: +7.50M
TOTAL: +16.12M

(*) Assumes 25th pick of 2010 draft at 120% scale.
(**) Assumes that Gomes' team options for 2010-11 & 2011-12, Gomes' player option for 2012-13, and Biedrins' & Williams' player options for 2013-14 all are exercised.

Why for Atlanta:
1. They upgrade their big rotation without adding any major long-term salary.
2. Biedrins fits the Hawks' athletic approach and gives them a better defensive rebounder off the bench.
3. Gomes, while a downgrade defensively, fills Marvin's limited offensive role at ~2/3rds the price.
4. Biedrins' "flat scale" contract minimizes potential hazard of paying luxury tax next season.

Why for Golden State:
1. They add $16M in long-term flexibility, making sale of team more feasible.
2. Zaza replaces Biedrins' offensive rebounding and size at 1/2 the price, giving them a cost-effective, complementary center rotation (w/ Turiaf).
3. A late first-rounder gives them an opportunity to add more youth to their rebuilding process.
4. Wilkins gives them a usable body for their depleted roster. (Although buying him out would open up the possibility of his signing with Atlanta).

Why for Minnesota:
1. They add upside to their SF position for the average cost of ~$4M/season.
2. Marvin's athleticism and jumpshot fit the Wolves' core and style (post scorers & up-tempo, ball-dominant guards).
3. Allows them to focus more directly on wings with upside in the draft and lessens the need to overpay for a SF in the summer.
4. Frees up a roster spot to dip into the NBDL.

Thoughts?

Interesting idea. Is Biedrins in the doghouse enough to be peddled? I don't think the Hawks are willing to risk chemistry to make a major move like this, but I kind of like it.

evildallas wrote:Is Biedrins in the doghouse enough to be peddled?

Perhaps. The bigger issue for the Warriors is that their owner is desperately trying to cut long-term salary (hence the Crawford trade). They will have to move one of Ellis, Maggette, or Biedrins. They shouldn't move Ellis, but they may. Maggette is the one they'd like to move, for sure, but doing that will be tough.

BTW, I'm getting ripped for this on the Trade Board by W's fans. I can't blame them, but it doesn't make the trade unrealistic...

mrhonline wrote:Maggette is the one they'd like to move, for sure, but doing that will be tough.

If it's Maggette, is this trade would make ATL better ?
Maggette+Turiaf
for
Marvin+Zaza+Evans (maybe need to adjust with pick or something)

Link: http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachi ... Id=yjghnsh

We keep our pick (but I admit that if we can't take a player making a little impact, we have better to trade this pick), if the pick is added, maybe another player can be added from GSW.
It could be a good thing to add a player since we lose some depth on this 3 for 2 trade.

The problem for me is that I like the fact that Maggette can get some points without taking lots of shots, but with getting FT's and adding more fouls on the opponent, something I hoped Marvin could do more often, but in the same time, I don't see the real impact he can have on a team.

One more problem IMO, Turiaf, like Biedrins, is good on pick & roll, but it's not something we run enough. Can we get all the benefit from these kind of C, if we don't play the way they need to be efficient.

Maggette isn't a good fit unless JJ doesn't re-sign. He needs too many shots for a team with two dominant wings.

GSW out: Andris Biedrins, Devean George, cash**
GSW in: Zaza Pachulia, Damien Wilkins, 2010 1st round pick (from ATL)

Come on... this is bad. Biedrins is worth a ton more than that. Zaza has more negative trade value than Beidrins does.

^^^I suppose someone could offer them an expiring contract. Kenny Thomas from the Kings, maybe. But I think people are going to be REALLY shocked at how few teams are willing to take on long-term salary between the 2010 bonanza and the looming lockout.

Not really sure what "negative trade value" is, but I understand that Zaza isn't worth as much as Biedrins. That's why the deal offers the Warriors $16M in savings over the next four years and a late first rounder, something you yourself said has some value.

http://ken-berger.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/view/11838893

The Warriors continue to peddle Andris Biedrins (four years and $36 million left) to achieve cost-savings

Take it for what it's worth.

To me if someone has zero trade value then it means you could get an expiring contract for that player. It means that another team would voluntarily take on the rest of their contract. A player has positive trade value if you could get an expiring contract plus something else you want- whether it be a player, draftpick, or something else. A player has negative trade value if you would have to sweeten the pot in order to get an expiring contract for the player. You would have to bribe another team to take on the salary already owed to that player. Expiring contracts are just the common currency in the NBA.

To me Zaza has negative trade value- No team would voluntarily take him wihtout sending back salary baggage of their own. I htink that Biedrins has positive trade value- I do think they could easily get an expiring contract plus something useful for him. SO to me this trade is just disconnected- you are giving the hawks the better player with the better contract. Yes its also a bigger contract- but I think more teams would take the Biedrins Contract straight up than would take the Zaza deal.

I agree that Biedrins is available and that the Warriors should be looking to deal. (though personally I'd much rather trade Ellis) I just think you took the idea too far. I really don't know that this package could even get the Hawks Dalembert.

KB, let's be specific.

You can rule out these teams as sellers, not buyers:

DET
IND
NOR
NYK
PHI
WAS

You can rule out these teams as not needing to take on long-term contracts in the frontcourt (due to better or "comparable and cheaper" talent already in place):
BOS (Perkins/Garnett)
CHI (Noah)
CLE (Varejao)
DEN (Nene)
HOU (Yao)
LAC (Kaman)
LAL (Bynum)
MEM (Thabeet/Gasol)
MIL (Bogut)
MIN (Jefferson/Love)
NJN (Lopez)
ORL (Howard)
POR (Oden/Przybilla)
SAS (Duncan)
TOR (Bosh/Bargnani)
UTA (Okur/Millsap)

That leaves just 7 teams:

ATL --> Not sure they want to interrupt their chemistry, but there is a need for better DReb

CHA --> No way to know how Brown values Biedrins. However, they do not have expirings to offer and are more likely to target a PF than a CR.

DAL --> They could offer Dampier/1st straight-up. Definitely something for GS to consider, although their long-term CR depth is hurt.

MIA --> They have expirings, but aren't going to use them on anything less than an All-Star due to Wade's pending FA.

OKC --> The team with the most to offer, if interested. They have Kristic, Collison, Harpring, Thomas, etc. and picks.

PHX --> If the Warriors are willing to pay Amare long-term, this makes sense. I'm skeptical that they are. The Suns will want more than just Biedrins, so a salary dump wouldn't work here.

SAC --> They can offer an expiring (Thomas), but not a pick.

In terms of value, I would rate only OKC and DAL ahead of my fictional ATL offer of Zaza/1st.

mrhonline- I think that Detroit would take Beidrins in a heartbeat if he were offered. Biederins is young enough that teams can build for the future with him.

I think we disagree on the initial premise. To me Bogut/Biedrins woudl be a perfectly fine frontcourt. I think you are crazy to think that at team like the Nets wouldn't be interested- Beidrins could pair with Lopez. Biedrins is on a reasonable contract for a good young center. I mean if you weren't trying to sell a bill of goods wouldn't you have just put ATL- (Horford) on your list for why the hawks wouldn't be interested?

I think you are grossly misvaluing him if you think that Zaza's bad contract at a first is even CLOSE.

KB, a team like Detroit or NJ will wait to see how they land in the draft before they make a move adding long-term salary. If GS can wait until the offseason, they can get something decent for him.

To me Bogut/Biedrins would be a perfectly fine frontcourt

Perhaps if you view them as capable of playing together. I'd think a team would want proof of that before taking on $36M.

I thnk you are grossly misvaluing him if you think that Zaza's bad contract at a first is even CLOSE.

I think you're confusing trade value for talent. In the NBA, those are NEVER the same thing. 90% of the deals that get done are lopsided in favor of the team willing to take on long-term salary.

Zaza is also owed long term salary but you are trying to trade him as salary relief. Zaza is a worse contract than Biedrins by a signifcant margin.

ONce again- why would the Hawks be more willing to bring Biedrins in as a sheer backup than the other teams you listed? Seriously- Horford and Josh Smith are bigger problems than pretty much all the teams you listed.

If you don't think that Bogut/Beidrins can play together why on earth do you think the Hawks would spend $36 million to see if Horford and biedrins could play together? To me at least 3/4's of the teams you listed should value Biedrins more than the hawks but you waved them off with a trivial reason. That somehow Bogut is an impediment to bringing in Biedrins but Horord and smith would not be?

And As I'm sure you know, the Hawks bringing in Biedrins would be even more costly for the hawks because of the luxury tax.

And you can argue all you want- but I seriously doubt you can find anyone who thinks that this is a fair trade.

killbuckner wrote:Zaza is also owed long term salary but you are trying to trade him as salary relief. Zaza is a worse contract than Biedrins by a signifcant margin.

ONce again- why would the Hawks be more willing to bring Biedrins in as a sheer backup than the other teams you listed? Seriously- Horford and Josh Smith are bigger problems than pretty much all the teams you listed.

If you don't think that Bogut/Beidrins can play together why on earth do you think the Hawks would spend $36 million to see if Horford and biedrins could play together? To me at least 3/4's of the teams you listed should value Biedrins more than the hawks but you waved them off with a trivial reason. That somehow Bogut is an impediment to bringing in Biedrins but Horord and smith would not be?

And As I'm sure you know, the Hawks bringing in Biedrins would be even more costly for the hawks because of the luxury tax.

And you can argue all you want- but I seriously doubt you can find anyone who thinks that this is a fair trade.

Horford and Biendrins could play very well together, and Josh is still athletic enough to play the 3. So it could easily work. That would let Al take on smaller guys, who he could tool offensively, and wreck defensively, and the Hawks get a real center to go against the likes of Bynum/Pau.

However, if getting a center means losing Josh, Teague, or Al, it had better be a DAMN good one.

evildallas wrote:Interesting idea. Is Biedrins in the doghouse enough to be peddled? I don't think the Hawks are willing to risk chemistry to make a major move like this, but I kind of like it.

The further from the actual GSW team,FO the more there's the notion GSW gives away the best C they have had in a few decades. Biedrins,at age 22,averaged 11 reb. GSW NEEDS more rebounding,not less.
He had an injury of a type that kept him from most conditioning,practicing,so,on his return it took awhile to get his skills,get stamina. He has not been in the doghouse. He's a good guy with a good attitude.

Local beat writers don't see any deal,His agent, felt Biedrins is happy and no trades are in the works. Riley didn't seem to expect a deal now,but was listening in case GSW got a GOOD offer...which this misses being by a lot.

Bloggers, writers for the NY post,for some other NON Bay Area papers jump to conclusions. Biedrins is a C for a decade. That's big for GSW,a team that had trouble filling the role. He's paid what he deserves,and I like that it's a multi year,flat rate deal. Short dealsare only better when you DON'T want the player.

mrhonline wrote:KB, a team like Detroit or NJ will wait to see how they land in the draft before they make a move adding long-term salary. If GS can wait until the offseason, they can get something decent for him.

To me Bogut/Biedrins would be a perfectly fine frontcourt

Perhaps if you view them as capable of playing together. I'd think a team would want proof of that before taking on $36M.

I thnk you are grossly misvaluing him if you think that Zaza's bad contract at a first is even CLOSE.

I think you're confusing trade value for talent. In the NBA, those are NEVER the same thing. 90% of the deals that get done are lopsided in favor of the team willing to take on long-term salary.

All of which may matter to another team. GSW wants Biedrins to be here,playing center for ten more years,along with young guys like Randolph,Curry,Ellis,Azu,Morrow,and the next lotto rookie.
I see nothing on the Bucks I'd trade Beans for except maybe Bogut. I like Biedrins more on D, on the Boards....and that's what we need the most.

killbuckner wrote:Zaza is a worse contract than Biedrins by a signifcant margin.

I'm sorry, but sometimes things like this crack me up. We seem to completely ignore the fact that $21 MILLION (read: 21 million $1 bills, or 210,000 $100 bills) is a TON of money.

mrhonline wrote:

killbuckner wrote:Zaza is a worse contract than Biedrins by a signifcant margin.

I'm sorry, but sometimes things like this crack me up. We seem to completely ignore the fact that $21 MILLION (read: 21 million $1 bills, or 210,000 $100 bills) is a TON of money.

Funny- I sort of see you waving away the 19 million dollars to a mediocre player like Zaza and trying to use him as salary relief.

Go on the trade board and see if you could get an expiring contract for Zaza. Now go and see if you could get an expiring contract for Biedrins. Then it will be clear that Zaza is the worse contract by a significant margin.

mrhonline wrote:KB, let's be specific.

You can rule out these teams as sellers, not buyers:

DET
IND
NOR
NYK
PHI
WAS

You can rule out these teams as not needing to take on long-term contracts in the frontcourt (due to better or "comparable and cheaper" talent already in place):
BOS (Perkins/Garnett)
CHI (Noah)
CLE (Varejao)
DEN (Nene)
HOU (Yao)
LAC (Kaman)
LAL (Bynum)
MEM (Thabeet/Gasol)
MIL (Bogut)
MIN (Jefferson/Love)
NJN (Lopez)
ORL (Howard)
POR (Oden/Przybilla)
SAS (Duncan)
TOR (Bosh/Bargnani)
UTA (Okur/Millsap)

That leaves just 7 teams:

ATL --> Not sure they want to interrupt their chemistry, but there is a need for better DReb

CHA --> No way to know how Brown values Biedrins. However, they do not have expirings to offer and are more likely to target a PF than a CR.

DAL --> They could offer Dampier/1st straight-up. Definitely something for GS to consider, although their long-term CR depth is hurt.

MIA --> They have expirings, but aren't going to use them on anything less than an All-Star due to Wade's pending FA.

OKC --> The team with the most to offer, if interested. They have Kristic, Collison, Harpring, Thomas, etc. and picks.

PHX --> If the Warriors are willing to pay Amare long-term, this makes sense. I'm skeptical that they are. The Suns will want more than just Biedrins, so a salary dump wouldn't work here.

SAC --> They can offer an expiring (Thomas), but not a pick.

In terms of value, I would rate only OKC and DAL ahead of my fictional ATL offer of Zaza/1st.

All of which is irrelevant since GSW does not really want to trade Biedrins and play minus a center and their only proven rebounder. Only if GSW got a young C,who's getting equal rebounds,plays D is there any point, and that's a short list.