ImageImage

Darko

Moderators: SD2042, VCfor3

LBusiness
Sophomore
Posts: 129
And1: 0
Joined: Aug 21, 2007

Darko 

Post#1 » by LBusiness » Sat Apr 26, 2008 8:18 pm

Do guys consider him a bad contract?
User avatar
grizzleGM
Analyst
Posts: 3,279
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 04, 2005

 

Post#2 » by grizzleGM » Sat Apr 26, 2008 8:28 pm

He couldn't be further from a PG!!! If you rely on him as a PG, your team REALLY sucks.
jefe
General Manager
Posts: 8,304
And1: 744
Joined: Apr 27, 2005
Location: memphis

 

Post#3 » by jefe » Sat Apr 26, 2008 11:25 pm

22 year old, 7 footer with 5 years NBA experience making ~7mill - nah, I wouldn't consider him a bad contract.
boogiesdad
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 9,104
And1: 52
Joined: Apr 19, 2003
Location: Memphis, TN

 

Post#4 » by boogiesdad » Sun Apr 27, 2008 1:38 am

tons of upside....................


hasn't developed yet
User avatar
GrizzledGrizzFan
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,571
And1: 161
Joined: Jul 29, 2005
Location: Just south of Memphis, as the crow flies...
     

 

Post#5 » by GrizzledGrizzFan » Sun Apr 27, 2008 2:06 am

The length of his contract is what makes it acceptable.
Image
User avatar
grizzleGM
Analyst
Posts: 3,279
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 04, 2005

 

Post#6 » by grizzleGM » Sun Apr 27, 2008 3:21 am

Nothing like changing the topic and post so my response looks stupid...

original post asked if JCN was a true PG?


No... it's not a bad contract? anymore questions?
User avatar
Cubboo
Rookie
Posts: 1,100
And1: 59
Joined: Jan 13, 2005
Location: Rollin into Mempho ...TWA

 

Post#7 » by Cubboo » Sun Apr 27, 2008 6:18 pm

grizzleGM wrote:Nothing like changing the topic and post so my response looks stupid...

original post asked if JCN was a true PG?


No... it's not a bad contract? anymore questions?


Well, it looks like there are 2 questions to answer then.
1) JCN is not a pg. He's more of a hybrid sg that can play the point in limited minutes.
2) Darko is not a bad contract for the Grizzlies.
boogiesdad
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 9,104
And1: 52
Joined: Apr 19, 2003
Location: Memphis, TN

 

Post#8 » by boogiesdad » Sun Apr 27, 2008 8:16 pm

grizzleGM wrote:Nothing like changing the topic and post so my response looks stupid...

original post asked if JCN was a true PG?


No... it's not a bad contract? anymore questions?


LMAO THATS TOO FUNNY :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
LBusiness
Sophomore
Posts: 129
And1: 0
Joined: Aug 21, 2007

 

Post#9 » by LBusiness » Tue Apr 29, 2008 1:58 pm

Would you guys do a trade of Mike Miller-Darko-Cardinal-for Anderson Varejao-Wally-Joe Smith-two 09 2nd rnd picks?

23.5 million in expiring contracts.
User avatar
GrizzledGrizzFan
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,571
And1: 161
Joined: Jul 29, 2005
Location: Just south of Memphis, as the crow flies...
     

 

Post#10 » by GrizzledGrizzFan » Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:12 pm

I don't think the Grizzlies would. Here's why - 1) Darko was a signing of the current regime. There's not ready to give up on him yet. It's a short term deal, and not terribly bad for his production. 2) The Grizz could have traded Miller for expiring contracts already. The word is that they don't want to do this. 3) Although BC has a horrible contract, he's not a bad locker room guy and gives all he has when healthy. Even though it would be great to get rid of his deal, they don't have to just dump it for anything - at least anything that doesn't make really good sense.

So, to sum it up, although the Grizz liked Anderson, they probably don't like him enough for that offer. They aren't moving MM for expirings. 2nd round picks are (95% of the time) crap. Just don't see a deal here.

HOWEVER, I do think that Cleveland and Memphis have pieces that would work for each other, it would just be a matter of matching them up and where Memphis ends up in this draft.
Image
LBusiness
Sophomore
Posts: 129
And1: 0
Joined: Aug 21, 2007

 

Post#11 » by LBusiness » Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:34 pm

Thanks for the in depth response,and I thought about offering the Cavs 2010 1rst, 2009 2nd instead, and either D.Jones or E.Snow, who are also expiring. Same package,but a 1rst a 2nd and whatever combo of players.
pardon_my_interruption
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,800
And1: 5
Joined: Dec 27, 2005
Location: Houston, TX
     

 

Post#12 » by pardon_my_interruption » Wed Apr 30, 2008 2:13 pm

For me it's a bad contract. Regardless of the length.

If Darko's isn't bad than neither is Cardinal's (they're the same length).

Talentwise, when healthy they are close (that's how terrible Darko is).

The only thing that makes Darko's contract not as bad for Memphis is that Darko actually gets minutes because we don't have any other centers.

If Cardinal were on a team where he was the #1 backup at PF, then his contract wouldn't look AS bad.

But we have Warrick...and prior to the trade Gasol.

So yes..in my opinion...Darko's contract is bad.

If he were on the Lakers behind Gasol and Bynum it would be considered a bad contract for the Lakers.

But because he's the only big man we have, it's not looked at as bad so much but in itself...the contract is.

We can shed his upside label. There clearly is very little.
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 59,258
And1: 19,266
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

 

Post#13 » by shrink » Sat May 3, 2008 1:13 am

I read the thread and was about to post something very similar to PMI.

Darko may not be a bad contract on other teams (though I think it would be a stretch for anyone to say it was a "good" contract). But I think he is not a good contract for the Grizzlies, for many of the reasons listed above. The bottom-line for me is that I don't think he provides $7 mil worth of additional value to Memphis. Hopefully MEM can get a big man in the draft/trade that would be a better use of the minutes and money.

Return to Memphis Grizzlies