What is Eddy Curry's trade value ?

isekii · Post #1 » by **isekii** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 12:47 am

What do you consider his value to be currently ?

Would you consider.

Mags (expiring) + Collins ( 1 year ) + top 10 protected 1st (2008) ?

Post #2 » by **moocow007** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 12:51 am

isekii wrote:What do you consider his value to be currently ?

Would you consider.

Mags (expiring) + Collins ( 1 year ) + top 10 protected 1st (2008) ?

Top 5 protected.

Immortal King · Post #3 » by **Immortal King** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 12:54 am

TBQH, I would do either of those trades.

king_k4life · Post #4 » by **king_k4life** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 12:56 am

moocow007 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Top 5 protected.

And expirings

Also solid middle range guys

Like If Artest wasn't a headcase we could trade Curry for Salmons I believe

Bill Bradley · Post #5 » by **Bill Bradley** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 1:07 am

I would do it.

StutterStep · Post #6 » by **StutterStep** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 1:16 am

That's too high --

Curry's value right now is a young big who has not worked out and has a few years on his contract. No one is going to give us a top 5 or top 10 pick AND shorter contracts for Curry.

If that deal was offered, I would jump for joy. Even last year that deal would have been too good to be true.

DocZaius · Post #7 » by **DocZaius** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 1:21 am

Done.

xAIRNESSx · Post #8 » by **xAIRNESSx** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 1:28 am

I don't think a lottery team would trade their pick for Curry. You might be able to get a top 20 protected first rounder.

KnicksScholar24 · Post #9 » by **KnicksScholar24** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 2:05 am

Top 20 protected?? After what NY traded for him, you think a top 20 protected first rounder is what his trade value is? LMAO.

hustlenflow · Post #10 » by **hustlenflow** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 2:10 am

Magloire and Collins straight up for Curry I would do in a heartbeat even without the pick. (If that works salary wise).

We get some defensive presence, free up the block for Zach, and more minutes for Lee.

In addition we shed more cap space earlier.

Its a trade that would be more feasible for the Nets now that they have Sean Williams, whose beast enough to cover up for a lot of Curry's defensive inabilities.

StutterStep · Post #11 » by **StutterStep** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 2:16 am

hustlenflow wrote:Magloire and Collins straight up for Curry I would do in a heartbeat even without the pick. (If that works salary wise).

We get some defensive presence, free up the block for Zach, and more minutes for Lee.

In addition we shed more cap space earlier.

Its a trade that would be more feasible for the Nets now that they have Sean Williams, whose beast enough to cover up for a lot of Curry's defensive inabilities.

Yes, but that's too low because there's no value in it for us. If the Nets were in a different conference, YES but not to a team in our division.

Curry/Crawford

for

Darko/Swift/Stoudamire (young player with 2 contracts that end in 2009)

OooSplendiforous · Post #12 » by **OooSplendiforous** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 2:23 am

getting a player of value back isnt even important at this point, you got to find a team who is at that upper tier level in the league who wouldn't mind adding another piece of talent to their roster and take one of their expirings. Theyd do it because most teams on that top level are capped out and letting a contract expire wouldnt benefit them

hustlenflow · Post #13 » by **hustlenflow** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 2:23 am

StutterStep wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Yes, but that's too low because there's no value in it for us. If the Nets were in a different conference, YES but not to a team in our division.

Curry/Crawford

for

Darko/Swift/Stoudamire (young player with 2 contracts that end in 2009)

I understand your point, but the value is there, and its not in the value of the players returned, but its in the weight shed...pun intended.

This team is better without Curry or without Randolph. One of them has to go. It frees up Lee's minutes as well, and gives us a guy in Collins or Mags to come off the bench to provide some defense when needed.

I would make the move without question if it presented itself.

And I think the Nets are the ideal swap at this point because they could use some inside presence and Williams has made Collins/Magloire expendable.

GuyverADL · Post #14 » by **GuyverADL** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 2:24 am

StutterStep wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Yes, but that's too low because there's no value in it for us. If the Nets were in a different conference, YES but not to a team in our division.

Curry/Crawford

for

Darko/Swift/Stoudamire (young player with 2 contracts that end in 2009)

Thomas isnt going to give Curry away.

XcalibuR · Post #15 » by **XcalibuR** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 2:27 am

KnicksScholar24 wrote:Top 20 protected?? After what NY traded for him, you think a top 20 protected first rounder is what his trade value is? LMAO.

it doesn't matter what NY traded for him.

Post #16 » by **moocow007** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 2:32 am

XcalibuR wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

it doesn't matter what NY traded for him.

Not the point. Curry's value is more than just a top 20 protected pick and crap regardless of how frustrated we are with him.

Post #17 » by **duetta** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 2:38 am

If Curry comes back and puts up big numbers, he has the chance to recoup his value. He's not a bad guy, and does one thing extremely well. Randolph's trade value is a terrible contract and Channing Frye. It will likely never be much higher - for reasons that we should by now understand. That's why it make senses to unload Randolph, and try to rebuild Curry's value.

tommydee10 · Post #18 » by **tommydee10** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 3:00 am

StutterStep wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Yes, but that's too low because there's no value in it for us. If the Nets were in a different conference, YES but not to a team in our division.

Curry/Crawford

for

Darko/Swift/Stoudamire (young player with 2 contracts that end in 2009)

Now that's somewhat reailistic, but why would Memphis trade those contracts for curry/craw?

mildred · Post #19 » by **mildred** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 3:04 am

duetta wrote:If Curry comes back and puts up big numbers, he has the chance to recoup his value. He's not a bad guy, and does one thing extremely well. Randolph's trade value is a terrible contract and Channing Frye. It will likely never be much higher - for reasons that we should by now understand. That's why it make senses to unload Randolph, and try to rebuild Curry's value.

How do you rebuild a guy that has no heart ? Besides, Zeke already tried to rebuild him after Chicago with "love" and pampering ad nauseam and look where it got him.

Keep him and use him in a reserve roll if you don't like the offers or just deal him for whatever and move on. But please .... no more Curry rebuilds. :noway:

Post #20 » by **duetta** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 3:08 am

mildred wrote: How do you rebuild a guy that has no heart ? Besides, Zeke already tried to rebuild him after Chicago with "love" and pampering ad nauseam and look where it got him.

Keep him and use him in a reserve roll if you don't like the offers or just deal him for whatever and move on. But please .... no more Curry rebuilds.

He was a completely different player last season. But he is what he is, and needs to be surrounded by active, energy type players. Having Lee and Artest flanking him, with Jeffries coming off the bench, is a very good situation for Eddy. And if you could somehow bring in a Noah or Sean Williams, that would be ideal. Randolph is, was, and will forever be, the wrong type of player to put alongside Eddy - for all the reasons that everyone now understands.