Redd trade ideas...

TripleDouble · Post #1 » by **TripleDouble** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:32 pm

I posted a number of possible Redd trades in the trade board, I am wonder how you feel about your teams trade idea (they are supposed to be starting points not final deals). I tried to be fair, but obviously my opinion from Milwaukee may vary greatly from yours (please note on you trade that I included that at least a 1st would be included).

The topic is here:
http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=750419

JES12 · Post #2 » by **JES12** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 6:13 pm

We are not giving up Josh Howard and Dampier for Redd.

TripleDouble · Post #3 » by **TripleDouble** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 6:27 pm

While I knew Howard would be a tough pill for most Mavs fans, but I did not realize Damp was that valued?!?

I responded to your post in the other thread, and if Howard is too valuable the Mavs are not good trading partners. That is exactly what I was looking to find out. Thanks!

Post #4 » by **catalyst** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 7:35 pm

That trade got ripped there by non mavs fans. Why do you think mavs fans would want it? Howard is slightly less than Redd on O,and MUCH more on D. damp is a valuable but criticized piece in Dal. He has a function, and will always frustrate us. at least he plays, unlike Shawn Bradley. Stack serves a role too, but I view him as a trade piece.

TripleDouble · Post #5 » by **TripleDouble** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 7:44 pm

"Mavs say No. (Howard already >= Redd in Mavs fans eyes)"...

...isn't exactly what I would call being ripped, but whatever works for you. When I grade it out with the >< symbols it is something like:

Howard > Redd (just like you said Redd is better on O, but Howard is better all around)
CV > Hassell
Gadz > Dampier (only because his contract is smaller)
a first round pick (at least one) > nothing

I was trying to find out if those other improvements make up for Howard. You have answered that it was not, that was all I was looking for. Thank you.

BobbyLight · Post #6 » by **BobbyLight** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 8:17 pm

If I was a Mavs fan I'd think this is crazy as well. But I am a Bucks fan so I love the deal. I just have no idea why the Mavs wouldn't hang up the phone instantly.

TripleDouble · Post #7 » by **TripleDouble** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 8:31 pm

2ss2ls wrote:If I was a Mavs fan I'd think this is crazy as well. But I am a Bucks fan so I love the deal. I just have no idea why the Mavs wouldn't hang up the phone instantly.

I knew this trade was the most slanted towards the Bucks, but I did not think it was that outlandish (I actually thought the Bucks were giving more talent, but unsure if it was enough to make the Mavs want to make a move). Oviously I was very wrong. Again thank you for the answers.

Post #8 » by **catalyst** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:56 pm

No need to take the criticism personally. You did bring a trade favored to your team to another team's site. Did you expect us to welcome you in with a parade?

TripleDouble · Post #9 » by **TripleDouble** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:10 am

catalyst wrote:No need to take the criticism personally. You did bring a trade favored to your team to another team's site. Did you expect us to welcome you in with a parade?

I don't take it personally. I came to find out how it would be viewed. I did not think it favored my team more than yours (just that it was the most favorable out of all the trades I thought may be viable). I knew you valued Howard, just not to this extent. When I realized how much you did I thanked you and moved on. I thought that would be the end... just a poor judgement of Howards value to you on my part. You and the other Bucks fan decided to keep it going. I thought I had politely asked and left, but apparently not. In any case, thank you for the info.

SaintofKillers · Post #10 » by **SaintofKillers** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:11 am

TripleDouble wrote:While I knew Howard would be a tough pill for most Mavs fans, but I did not realize Damp was that valued?!?

Dampier (or any center with a similar or better skill set) is very important to this team which is why his contract isn't really as horrible as the media or any other armchair inter-web poster thinks. He sets screens, he rebounds, the only one who dunks, and provides some semblance of protection in the paint from our shoddy perimeter defense.

I'd say he's top 4 or 5 at worst in the pecking order.