SAC / ATL - Crawford & Bibby

stock01234 · Post #1 » by **stock01234** » Sun Aug 29, 2010 5:58 am

Sacramento
Incoming Jamal Crawford, Mike Bibby
Outgoing Samuel Dalembert, 2011 1st
Why
1. Kings add a solid SG in jamal. Free agents are and will be difficult to come-by from sacto unless the team is regularly playoff-bound. Cisco might have a solid season returning from injury. But it is a question mark. Jamal will get a starting role with kings which he didn't get in atlanta playing behind johnson.
2. Kings bring back one of the glory-day icons in bibby. Sure they take his contract/salary for two yrs and they don't really need a PG with tyreke/beno already in the mix. But I am pretty sure that even today there would be many fans who would just come to see bibby back in kings uniform. And dumping bibby would be one of the reason ATL agrees to deal crawford.

Atlanta
Incoming Samuel Dalembert, 2011 1st
Outgoing Jamal Crowford, Mike Bibby
Why
This will be a good salary dump for ATL. They are already paying luxury tax. Having given johnson a max contract, they might not be able to give crawford good money/minutes. They dump bibby's contract which would save them 10mx2=20 mil(2 yrs). Plus they get a expiring in Samuel. They can use him at trade deadline or if he has a good season, might as well give him a contract.

Link http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachi ... Id=2c5xhoq

wiltchamberlain · Post #2 » by **wiltchamberlain** » Sun Aug 29, 2010 6:46 am

stock01234 wrote:Sacramento
Incoming Jamal Crawford, Mike Bibby
Outgoing Samuel Dalembert, 2011 1st
Why
1. Kings add a solid SG in jamal. Free agents are and will be difficult to come-by from sacto unless the team is regularly playoff-bound. Cisco might have a solid season returning from injury. But it is a question mark. Jamal will get a starting role with kings which he didn't get in atlanta playing behind johnson.
2. Kings bring back one of the glory-day icons in bibby. Sure they take his contract/salary for two yrs and they don't really need a PG with tyreke/beno already in the mix. But I am pretty sure that even today there would be many fans who would just come to see bibby back in kings uniform. And dumping bibby would be one of the reason ATL agrees to deal crawford.

Atlanta
Incoming Samuel Dalembert, 2011 1st
Outgoing Jamal Crowford, Mike Bibby
Why
This will be a good salary dump for ATL. They are already paying luxury tax. Having given johnson a max contract, they might not be able to give crawford good money/minutes. They dump bibby's contract which would save them 10mx2=20 mil(2 yrs). Plus they get a expiring in Samuel. They can use him at trade deadline or if he has a good season, might as well give him a contract.

Link http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachi ... Id=2c5xhoq

I posted a response in the other Crawford thread but I might as well respond here too.

stock01234 wrote:Kings bring back one of the glory-day icons in bibby. Sure they take his contract/salary for two yrs and they don't really need a PG with tyreke/beno already in the mix. But I am pretty sure that even today there would be many fans who would just come to see bibby back in kings uniform.

This quote shows a complete and total disregard for the Kings needs as a team, as well as a misunderstanding of the fan base. We trade a likely high first round draft pick as well as one of the better starting NBA centers defensively, in Dalembert for Crawford and a Mike Bibby, who you correctly point out is near useless to us. So essentially you have us trading a lottery pick and a starting Center for Crawford. This is laughably bad.

ADoaN17 · Post #3 » by **ADoaN17** » Sun Aug 29, 2010 7:46 am

Yeah I wouldnt waste a potential high draft pick for Bibby or Crawford.

DickVitale · Post #4 » by **DickVitale** » Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:39 pm

I don't understand why people are so willing to give beno's starting job up, after how well he played last season. Trading for a crawford to essentially be a slap in the face to beno - imo. Obviously if it were a higher caliber player then beno would understand. And giving up a 1st round pic for him? that's madness.

RoyalCourtJestr · Post #5 » by **RoyalCourtJestr** » Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:11 pm

A 1st AND we give up more capspace for next season all to take on an overrated chucker and an old slightly washed up fan fav? Nah.

Silver Man · Post #6 » by **Silver Man** » Sun Aug 29, 2010 6:39 pm

Yeah no. Give up a lottery pick, and Dally before the season begins for two players that one will hurt our cap and another person who's ship as sailed for us. Dally will not get traded until near the deadline if at all. Plus adding in a lottery pick?

OGSactownballer · Post #7 » by **OGSactownballer** » Mon Aug 30, 2010 1:10 am

That's just HORRIBLE!

Giving up big for small and paying a draft pick for the right to do so?

People fall in love with flashy awards and numbers way too fast around this site.

Bac2Basics · Post #8 » by **Bac2Basics** » Mon Aug 30, 2010 1:15 am

F**K NO!

twoolfork1 · Post #9 » by **twoolfork1** » Mon Aug 30, 2010 1:56 am

No way we give up a lottery pick lol. We are following the Thunder's path of rebuilding through the draft. It took them three lottery pick drafts before making the playoffs (Durant/Green in 07, Westbrook in 08, and Harden in 09). We are prolly still another year off and another lottery pick off from the playoffs

cl24 · Post #10 » by **cl24** » Mon Aug 30, 2010 2:43 am

We're rebuilding and we've been doing well on that, no reason to trade away a young Dalembert or a first round pick for one old washed up fan favorite and a chucker. I don't see why it'd be beneficial for the organization. Although I love Bibby, one of my favorite players of all time, I just don't want him near us right now, even though it might work. Crawford is another story, a good bench player but age is catching up with him, I can imagine him chucking up threes all the time and not passing to others. He's also undersized, 6'5 SG with no muscle whatsoever, and he's just a so-so defender. I'll pass.