Which team lost the most out of the 3 big trades?

asuseee · Post #1 » by **asuseee** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 2:05 am

People criticizing all 3 trades but which team got pwned the hardest?

NOTE: I'm only putting the teams that got criticized bad in the poll.

The_Hater · Post #2 » by **The_Hater** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 2:13 am

Good question. I think that all 3 come out huge losers in these deals but considering the Suns and Mavs made these deals trying to get better and both come out clearly looking worse, one of those 2 is the biggest loser.

I'll go with the Suns because I think they could have won the title with the roster they had pre-trade.

j3yuen · Post #3 » by **j3yuen** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 2:18 am

i'm going with the mavs... they gave up half their team for a point guard who struggles to score... its not like they really struggled to pass the ball or grab rebounds in the first place

gcsw · Post #4 » by **gcsw** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 2:32 am

Mavs. They are worst than before now. And their future is worst too. Thorn is a genius.

Vlade Divac · Post #5 » by **Vlade Divac** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 2:52 am

Mavs no question! But I am happy because of that.

Viperstrike · Post #6 » by **Viperstrike** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 3:01 am

I am going to have to go the mavs because they losted half their players for one point guard.

Buyaka · Post #7 » by **Buyaka** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 3:43 am

I think all 3 did.

Man, most GMs will be shy to pull the trigger on any future deals with Jersey after this robbery (coupled with Carter's)

ToffKobe · Post #8 » by **ToffKobe** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 3:49 am

Buyaka wrote:I think all 3 did.

Man, most GMs will be shy to pull the trigger on any future deals with Jersey after this robbery (coupled with Carter's)

New Jersey really hasn't gone anywhere since that deal anyways.

ToffKobe · Post #9 » by **ToffKobe** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 4:00 am

I can't believe some of you are saying Suns/Mavs. At least they get something in return that might be able to put them over the top.

Memphis lost big time. They gave up Gasol for Kwame freaking Brown!

mintsa · Post #10 » by **mintsa** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 4:02 am

Mavs, they gave way to much.

canguy20m · Post #11 » by **canguy20m** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 4:12 am

how can you say the mavs lost this, they need to win now with D.Nowizki and J.Howard are still in their prime.

D.Harris was not the answer. Ager, Stackhouse, Harris and expiring contracts was not a lot to lose considering Phx replaced an all star in his prime with S.O'Neal.

With Gasol going to LA (with LA losing none of their core players) and S.O'Neal going to Phx (for this playoffs at least that makes them better) Dallas had to do something. They kept their core and added a very good pg (someone who can pass the ball like S.Nash who also plays defence).

The_Hater · Post #12 » by **The_Hater** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 4:20 am

canguy20m wrote:how can you say the mavs lost this, they need to win now with D.Nowizki and J.Howard are still in their prime.

D.Harris was not the answer. Ager, Stackhouse, Harris and expiring contracts was not a lot to lose considering Phx replaced an all star in his prime with S.O'Neal.

With Gasol going to LA (with LA losing none of their core players) and S.O'Neal going to Phx (for this playoffs at least that makes them better) Dallas had to do something. They kept their core and added a very good pg (someone who can pass the ball like S.Nash who also plays defence).

Because many people think that Harris is almost as good as Kidd right now. He's definitely better on the defensive side of the ball.

Because Kidd's poor shooting may be a terrible fit for a team that plays at a snails pace like Dallas and likes to run most of their plays through their forwards, not their PG's.

Because they also lost a very key defensive Center and one of their best bench scorers in the deal as well.

Because their depth, always one of their strengths, clearly too a hit.

Because Jason Kidd isn't even close to the same player he was 3+ years ago. Meanwhile Harris, under the radar and only 24, has improved a ton over the past 2 years.

Count me as one person that thinks the Mavs just like the Suns, are immediately a worse team post trade than they were pre trade.

asuseee · Post #13 » by **asuseee** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 5:03 am

ToffBosh wrote:I can't believe some of you are saying Suns/Mavs. At least they get something in return that might be able to put them over the top.

Memphis lost big time. They gave up Gasol for Kwame freaking Brown!

+1

The other teams got old superstars at least.

memphis is just stupid

Meursault · Post #14 » by **Meursault** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 5:06 am

if we're talking about aggregate loss, then the Mavericks definitely take the cake.

if it's relative, giving up a 27 year old all-star center for absolutely nothing was by far the greater hit. at least Kidd can give you 2-3 seasons of championship-contention when paired with Nowitzki and Howard. aside from cap relief, which is no guarantee that they won't overpay to get a fringe all-star free agent, Memphis got garbage in return.

Hank_Scorpio · Post #15 » by **Hank_Scorpio** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 5:22 am

Memphis, hands down.

Seeing as how the Mavs are going to get Stackhouse back, I am not sure how anyone can argue they lost "half their roster".

whoknows · Post #16 » by **whoknows** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 5:55 am

Mavs lost nothing if trade doesn't go through...

However, I don't see Suns as any better with Shaq. They lost their best rebounder and the most versatile player in Marion. He could've played 3-4 positions as required by matchups.
Call me crazy, but I do believe that Shaq trade will expose the Suns.
Suns are the ones who IMO lost the most. Shaq is a has been.

Lakers are the ones to beat followed by Spurs.

Seasontickets · Post #17 » by **Seasontickets** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 7:43 am

Frankly,

I still don't think Dallas will win the Championship. So they lose.

Memphis wants to rebuild...so they dumped their best and most expensive player. It's only criticized because they gave him to the Lakers, and all the Western Conference GM's are going WTF.

Boogie! · Post #18 » by **Boogie!** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 8:03 am

definitely the mavs.

the grizz are rebuilding. and the verdict's still out on the shaq trade. could the suns have won with their current roster? probably. but it's been 3 years now with those same core pieces and they just haven't gotten it done and their window is closing. big gamble, but if shaq comes to play i think it may work out well for them.

I_Like_Dirt · Post #19 » by **I_Like_Dirt** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 2:46 pm

The_Hater wrote:Good question. I think that all 3 come out huge losers in these deals but considering the Suns and Mavs made these deals trying to get better and both come out clearly looking worse, one of those 2 is the biggest loser.

I'll go with the Suns because I think they could have won the title with the roster they had pre-trade.

If the Kidd trade ever goes through I'd suggest the Mavericks got burned worse than the Suns, who's pre-trade chances at a title I disagree with you over.

Still, I suspect that after a few trades the Grizzlies will look the worse for wear unless they've dumped Chris Wallace. Not that the Pau trade in and of itself was worse than some of the other value, but what it symbolized in terms of the direction the Grizzlies are going to be managed towards.

For all the times somebody has tried to justify Babcock's Vince Carter trade by citing other trades of disgruntled star players the list of GMs who made those trades reads like a who's-who of overwhelmed and failed GMs in the NBA. Billy King (and still got a better package for Iverson), Chris Wallace (got more for Kwame), Allan Bristow (sure didn't last long after dumping Baron Davis), etc. Now we finally get to see what happens when competent GMs are selling their stars. If they don't get a quality package then they don't trade them. Yeah, Shaq and Kidd were bigger stars in their primes but at this point I don't think it's out of this world to suggest that their value wasn't outrageously higher.