Remake the character of the team (2 trade plan)

[paulpressey25]

I figured everyone gets one vanity trade thread before the deadline, so here is mine. It supposes that our guys aren't worth as much as we think they are. i.e. Obviously I wouldn't propose this if better things were out there.

Trade 1: Mo/Simmons/Gadz to the Cavs for Hughes/Gooden.

Trade 2: CV to Memphis for Lowry

I'd gladly trade Redd but don't see us getting any value back for him.

This trade does a few things:

a) It gets rid of the guys in the locker room who are most vocal about the team's situation. (CV, Bobby, Mo)

b) It dumps our two worst contracts (Gadz/Simmons)

c) I have no clue if Kyle Lowry is an answer at PG or worse than Mo. But it is a fresh start there.

d) Gooden and Hughes are guys that people don't get excited about, but you can plug Hughes in at starting SF and Gooden at starting PF and this team is instantly better. Maybe not by a lot...but it's better.

This team can now win next season and still have good upside with the hope that Lowry, Bogut, Yi and the 2008 lotto pick give us some upside. In the meantime, Redd, Hughes and Gooden can all contribute.

[LUKE23]

No way I do the first one, second one I do but am not thrilled about.

Just say no to anyone on the Cavs minus LeBron. And why do you talk about us dumping bad contracts in this deal when we take on one of the worst contracts in the NBA (Hughes)?

I'm all about blowing this up. If we aren't getting fair value at the deadline, just wait until the offseason when teams are not in such a win-now frame of mind. It's not like we are under pressure to get a deal done now to gain a few extra wins, in fact the more losses the better.

[okanoho]

so.. .option 1 give us two Michael redd
oh wait.. Redd is better

[yoyomayoma]

Absolutely on #2. I think Lowry would help this team out immensely.

On #1, it's a tougher call. Trading two bad contracts is good; getting one awful contract back is bad. But at least the one bad contract player is contributing, albeit on a level nowhere near what he's being paid. I don't see Hughes as the type of guy who would take to being a bench player real well. I like the idea of adding a high energy guy like Gooden to improve the rebounding. Honestly I think I'd do this deal as well.

Lowry/Bell/Ivey
Redd/Hughes
Mason/Noel
Yi/Gooden
Bogut/Voskuhl

[Chuck Diesel]

I'd rather send MO Williams and our most overpaid junk to Cleveland without getting long term deals back. Cleveland has a lot of guys who only have one year left on their deals, and they could come in handy next season when teams are looking to dump salary.

The one I like is Mo, Simmons, Gadzuric, Noel and Storey to the Cavs for Donyell Marshall, Eric Snow, Damon Jones, Sasha Pavlovic, Ira Newble and a first round pick. Newble's deal is up after this season and can be waived. Damon Jones, Marshall and Snow have one year left. Pavlovic could fit in well here as a versitle guy coming off the bench.


I love that Lowry deal.

[Debit One]

No way I do the first one, second one I do but am not thrilled about.

Funny, I was about to post that I couldn't see Cleveland doing the first one.

First, I'd say that the Simmons contract is worse that Hughes'. At least Larry produces something on the court.

Second, while he's no Tim Duncan, Gooden produces FAR more for his $7M per season than does Gadz.

I don't think that Cleveland would give up their starting PF and starting SF just to get Mo Williams.

[msiris]

Hughes contract is bad. What position will he play?

[InsideOut]

I don't think Cleveland would make that trade. For $6 million Gooden has better numbers than the $15 million combination of Simmons and Gadz.

The wild card is Hughes. When healthy he's a little better than Mo. Hughes was first team all NBA D in 04-05. Mo doesn't know what D is. I feel if he's healthy Cleveland wants Hughes but if he's not then Milwaukee doesn't want him. Due to Hughes health this is a tough one.

[paulpressey25]

I'd rather send MO Williams and our most overpaid junk to Cleveland without getting long term deals back. .

That is the fallacy here....those Cleveland deals aren't long term. Gooden has one year left at $7.1 million. Hughes has only two years left at $12.8 and $13.6.

Gooden is the perfect stopgap for one more year to see what we have with Yi. I don't see acquiring him as a negative but a positive. He's clearly worth that $7.1mm left on his deal.

Then it comes down to Hughes at $25mm total left versus Gadz at $20 million total left and Bobby at $20mm total left. Don't we get more out of Hughes than either of those two guys? Hughes can play SF or Redd can play SF.

I agree that Cleveland might not do the deal.....but since they've now lost out on Kidd and Bibby and LeBron is screaming for help, send them Mo. It is one of only 3-4 teams where Mo would thrive. If they have to take two bad deals to get him, that is the price. But they lose Hughes deal. And I'd bet Bobby shapes up playing under LeBron.

But now we've got a legit starting lineup that can compete next year:

Lowry
Hughes
Redd
Gooden
Bogut

Bench
Bell
Yi
#1 lotto pick
Desmond
Ivey
Jake

[midranger]

I don't see how #1 does anything to help anything. We'd get 2 more low BBall IQ guys at positions we're already strong at.

And, it still leaves Michael Redd as our best player, on a max contract, meaning that we'll go no where soon.


There are 1 of 2 acceptable positions at this point.

1. Trade Yi, CV, or pick, maybe Bogut for actual productive players. This ship has sailed though, as almost everyone has now been traded.

2. Trade Redd. Get rid of that deal, that culture, and then sort the rest out. If that means Mo, Bobby, Gadz, etc.... so be it. But if you're making direction changing moves you have to start with Redd.

[europa]

No to the first one. I don't see how an argument can be made that Redd needs to be moved because of his contract and then have the team trade for Larry Hughes who is in my opinion one of the most over-rated and overpaid players in the league. I've never been a big Gooden fan either.

Love the second one and that was one of my trade proposals in my 3 Step Thread. But again, the Grizzlies will need to include more than Lowry in a trade for Villanueva and that's where it could get dicey. But I do think they'd definitely consider a Villanueva for Lowry/filler deal.

[Chuck Diesel]

Alright I'm in

[trwi7]

The obsession with Larry Hughes on this board is becoming frightening.

[midranger]

"Only 2 more years at 12+ and 13+ million dollars."

For Larry Hughes? Where do I sign up?

Lets put the rebuild on hold for another 2 years with a revolving door of untradeable deals.

[Sigra]

I love it. Especially first trade. People on this board seriously underestimate Hughes. He is great defender and good offansive player who is just in bad situation in Cleveland. Hughes is better than Redd in my book and better than Mo too.

[Baddy Chuck]

Just wondering what you guys though bout this (itd have to be done later most likely due to Varejaos contract and might have to be tweaked but)

Redd, Gadzuric
for
Varejao, Snow, Marshall, Brown, First

Cleveland gets a great #2 for Bron
Milwaukee gets a nice young player, some vets, and a first for Redd. Brown is expiring and Snow, Varejao, Marshall all expire in 2 years along with Mason.

[InsideOut]

So two years of Hughes at $26.4 million or three years of Redd at $51 million. How many less games do the Bucks win the rest of the season with Hughes instead of Redd?

[europa]

The Cavs are poor trade partners for everyone - and that's why LeBron is so frustrated. They have a very weak talent base, they can't offer an appealing draft pick and they have no expirings. They're stuck.

With Atlanta getting Bibby and the Cavs having nothing to offer in my opinion, the market for Mo is shrinking. I'd go to Houston and offer the trade I proposed in the Insider thread or I'd go to Miami and offer something along the lines of:

Mo/Dez/Gadz for J.Williams/Davis/Alexander Johnson

[paulpressey25]

No to the first one. I don't see how an argument can be made that Redd needs to be moved because of his contract and then have the team trade for Larry Hughes .

Because.....you are dumping Gadz and Simmons...who are two worse players than Hughes. And who have worse contracts.

And at least Hughes gives us some athleticism and defense if he's healthy.

Take a look at Hughes numbers in February (far superior to anything Bobby or Gadz can do combined while healthy):

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/g ... ayerId=356

As for Gooden, I'm not planning on him being the long-term PF. He's simply a guy who can get you a double-double, bang a bit and only has a year left. All these other PF's we talk about trading for are guys that would threaten and stunt Yi's development with the minutes and salary they'd require.

And remember Europa, this deal keeps Redd. So if it doesn't work, you then send Redd packing somewhere.

Midranger...this deal does change the culture. Mo, CV and Bobby have their own culture going on right now in that locker-room. And it's not good.

[europa]

The deal does keep Redd but I don't see how you can advocate trading Redd on the grounds of his contract and then trade for Hughes, who in my opinion isn't close to the player Redd is and has a considerably worse contract.

Again, this isn't just an issue with the Bucks. The Cavs are struggling badly to make a trade with anyone right now because Hughes' contract is terrible given his talent and few teams think that highly of Gooden. They really are stuck and it's pissing LeBron off. But this is part of the consequences of the team foolishly signing Hughes when Redd and Allen spurned them three seasons ago. Now they're stuck with an OK player on a huge contract that few people have any interest in.

I just don't like Larry Hughes all that much. Never have.