From Foster's blog:

http://info.detnews.com/terryfosterblog/index.cfm?blogid=529


Here is one more thing to chew on. The chatter around Chicago and Indianapolis is the Pistons are trying to work out a sign and trade to bring in Al Harrington. Is a deal in the works with Atlanta?

I have no idea. But there is a buzz.

The only deal that makes sense is Dice and maybe a pick for Al.

IMO, trading Dice for Al would accomplish three goals: We'd get a stud off the bench that we know will put a lot of points on the board, we aquire a player that can play SF at a high level besides Tayshaun, and in trading Dice we create more room to play Max at PF.

If Atlanta asks for a pick in addition (which they will), I think a line has to be drawn: We agree to send our 2007 first, but not Orlando's.

As for the downside, we lose a player that can play center in a pinch, and we rely more heavily on Mohammed and Dale to hold down the fort.

As for the downside, we lose a player that can play center in a pinch, and we rely more heavily on Mohammed and Nazr to hold down the fort

I'm afraid Nazr and Mohammed are the same people.

I love this trade but I really doubt it happens. Dice isnt in his last year of his contract and I dont think he has the option of opting out, not sure about that.

I thought he was in the last year of his deal.

In the event he is untradable, that leaves Dale.

Sicne Atlanta is under the cap, would the salaries have to match?

He is in his last year actually, so that means he can be traded ... or no?

I dont want to go 2 bigs for one, so no DD and Dice for Al please!

ACtually, I honestly think Indy's out of the Al Harrington race. unless they can offer more money, then can only trade Anthony Johnson, and they wont be needing another pg.

GS has...Peitrus and Zarko, but they dont need another swingman. Actually, I think Detroit MIGHT be able to snag AL.!

Assuming their is truth to the Al rumors; First of all, Atl needs a veteran C so DD will be included. Secondly let's look at ATL situation, they will soon have a sole owner who did not want to overpay JJ, so he probably isn't looking to add too much salary. Next the owner is pissed about losing two future draft picks in the JJ deal, and is looking for a way to get picks so he doesn't have to use his, so it is logical to assume two picks from us are appealing regardless of it being late in the draft since he wouldn't be using them. Next up look at the CBA we don't need to send equal salary in just players, we can use a TE (1.5 from Mo) or (1.2 from Dupree which expires at the start of the season) and can take back up to 125% of the value we traded. So we can give Al a 5 or 6 year deal starting at 6.25 million worth between 38.5- 49 million while keeping Dice. Thought on that being Dice is the 6th man Al starts, Nazr is a back up to Sheed at C.

Also As much as Indy and GS are being talked about for Al they don't have anything that fits the above criteria. GS and INDY have GM's that won't part with 1 pick yet alone two. GS has no expiring contracts that are helpful persay and Troy Murphy is the name being tossed around why would you not just over pay Al who is relatively healthy instead of taking on a highly overpaid and injury prone PF Murphy? No one else on GS roster even makes sense for the Hawks based on their draft their needs and not wanting to overpay.

So then you have Indy; who does Atl want from Indy for Al? Sure Granger sounds nice but what about JJ, Smith, William and Childress two will play SG and two will play SF why do you need Granger? Foster is the only big guy on INdy's roster outside of Harrison and JO so doubt he would be included, plus he injury prone. I doubt Tinsley's brokedown ass is exciting anyone nor is Sarunas "the Savior" Jasikevicius making the phone ring off the hook. Jackson was already there and is a SF. Fred Jones is a dime a dozen guy, and AJ doesn't make enough.

I see DD and picks as a more viable option considering it doesn't take back major salary you get a couple of useful picks and still have 22+ million to spend in FA for 07.

I am not being a homer either, I am saying if I was the GM and knew I owed two picks to PHX and had the choice between a veteran C with 2 picks that keeps me cap flexibale or Tinsley and a future pick or Murphy and future pick, I would take the deal that gives me the best chance at getting Oden. I can't draft Oden if I don't have an 07 pick because PHX has it. The Detroit deal gives me a late first to give PHX, and a pick the year after to do the same.

Speaking of homers....

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/basketball/nba/golden_state_warriors/14998579.htm

This guy fills a lot of space but says basically nothing......


Kawakami: Harrington a good bet for Warriors

Tim Kawakami
Mercury News
LAS VEGAS - If I wanted to bet big on a hunch, I'd circle Al Harrington's name in bright ink and prophesy a Warriors news conference by the middle of this week.

I'd plop the free-agent combo forward -- and former Indiana Pacers teammate of Warriors chief Chris Mullin -- right into the Warriors' starting lineup as an instant point producer and tempo-changer.

And I'd leave the minor niggling details, such as how the deal exactly unfolds and how many millions it will cost, up to Mullin and others to debate and conclude.

If I lost myself to Casino Fever, I'd tap into the signs and suggestions percolating at courtside of the Vegas Summer League and I'd risk a bold, high-roller's proclamation.

Hey, wait, I'm here anyway, so let's take a shot: The Warriors appear to be reasonably close to acquiring Harrington from Atlanta in a sign-and-trade deal, though weird complications can always obliterate such a transaction.

``Give us a few days,'' Mullin said when I asked him in general about the likelihood of any deal in the near future.

I'm not waiting. Not my nature. Just deal the cards!

Of course, I must warn that Harrington isn't the A-plus low-post monster the Warriors have been missing and chasing for years and that, because the Warriors are over the salary cap, his acquisition probably will cause the departure of Troy Murphy or Mickael Pietrus or both in the deal.

Some will weep more than others over those last two names.

But the 6-foot-9 Harrington is an accomplished, slashing scorer (18.6 points per game last season) perfectly fit for this NBA Dribblers Era, a decent rebounder (6.9) and he's still only 26. (He's an eight-year NBA veteran, but he's only a few months older than Murphy.)

Harrington is a career 45.2-percent shooter, which doesn't seem great unless you compare it to what the Warriors' top six scorers shot last season: Jason Richardson (44.6 percent), Baron Davis (38.9), Murphy (43.3), Derek Fisher (41.0), Mike Dunleavy (40.6) and Pietrus (40.4).

And Harrington might not be excruciatingly expensive to sign and acquire, since Atlanta is frozen in a bitter ownership dispute, since Indiana wants him but also has Danny Granger, and since many tall forwards have recently changed hands and it is no longer a seller's market.

With Fisher already traded to Utah as a prelude, this is what the Warriors' roster looks like if you add Harrington and subtract Murphy and Pietrus, which is the worst-case scenario:

Center -- Patrick O'Bryant, Andris Biedrins and Adonal Foyle.

Power forward -- Ike Diogu, Chris Taft and maybe Zarko Cabarkapa.

Small forward -- Al Harrington, Mike Dunleavy and Devin Brown.

Shooting guard -- Jason Richardson and Monta Ellis.

Point guard -- Baron Davis, Will Bynum and Keith McLeod.

Plus, Harrington, Dunleavy and possibly Biedrins can play power forward, Dunleavy and possibly Ellis can back up the point and Richardson can play some forward.

If this deal does happen, that's as balanced a roster as the Warriors have had in over a decade, with plenty of room to grow.

OK, if O'Bryant continues to struggle as a rebounder (three total rebounds in two summer games) and because Diogu is no sure thing, there are still problems inside.

Unless Harrington unleashes unknown levels of personal defensive ferocity, the Warriors still will have difficulty preventing the other side from scoring at great frequency.

And it all still rides on Davis, who may or may not be worth the ride.

It's not a guaranteed playoff roster, and the disappearance of Murphy and/or Pietrus could hurt the Warriors' dreams of landing Kevin Garnett when and if the Minnesota superstar truly hits the trade block.

But the Warriors can't wait around forever for Garnett, and they won't. That's what this summer is about: Moving ahead.

The true benefit of trading Fisher, beyond the future salary space it provides for Harrington's potential big contract, is that it forces Coach Mike Montgomery to depend on Ellis.

In the same way, moving Murphy in this deal, in addition to adding an athletic scoring forward, will forcibly prompt Montgomery to play Diogu and to experiment with Dunleavy at multiple positions.

For all those reasons, I expect this to happen and guarantee many years of ridicule if it doesn't. So I could be quiet and wait for an official announcement, but what's Vegas about that?

BTW, GS optioned Pietrus for 2008, so he can't really be dealt to Atlanta, either.

Diogu and Biedrins have team options after this season, so I believe both can be dealt. That's pretty much it, though.

I assume you guys all saw the Atlanta ruling that they are not allowed to sign any players to their roster that have contracts that extend beyond one year. I couldn't find the source offhand, but basically it was Steve Belkin again who is screwing them from the inside. Anyway, the ONLY player they can accept from Golden State is Mike Dunleavy, and Golden State doesn't even have a pick in next years draft to give them. We actually have a better deal than that. They cannot accept Dice unless he exercises his player option now for after this season(not going to happen). Thus the only players we can offer them are Dale Davis, Maxiell, or Delfino. They already have Childress, who is similar but better than Delfino. My guess is Joe is offering Dale, Maxiell, and our TE, and a pick (hopefully one of ours after next years draft). That should start somewhere around 7 mill per season. I assume we would then resign Cato for two seasons to be a backup dude.

If we did do this move, Dice could be move by the all-star break if we are not contending.

You have to admit that having Tayshaun, Rip, Billups, Sheed, and Harrington starting is a good 5. I love this starting 5 simpy because they should excel in Flip's system. We have big men, a SF, and a PG that can all post and shoot, and are all above average defenders. We need some youth in the post, and this move is the best way to get it done. Not sure if I would use the Orlando pick in this trade though.

trade the orlando pick for harrington? would you have traded darko for harrinton?

i know i would. i would have traded darko for al last year, and the year before that. joe should have made this deal 2 years ago. still, harrington is likely better than any guy the pick would land us, plus he would help now, plus we wouldnt have to develop the pick.

obviously, you want to gt all you can for that pick. but i dont see a better trade coming allong. that pick might not even be ours next year, or much more likely, its going to be 15-20 range (not THAT valuable). this is all assuming that atlanta can make a trade like this, but stern sent his legal team to fix this, so im sure atlanta will be up and running again soon.

b-diddy, I do agree with you, but also consider that the draft pick will come to us at a far more salary cap friendly number, and if that player does pan out, with restricted free agency you could hold onto them for even 9 years after they come out. With the new CBA, I think that high draft picks have a lot more value than they used to. I guess in the end, I would rather move our pick than Orlando's, but I could certainly live with it.

Until Joe does anything, I am going to hope that he can pull off a deal without the pick, but I can't say that I would be disappointed if we did deal it.
I am still not sure that Orlando is going to make the playoffs. My guess is probably late lotto. Something will screw them. Maybe the Knicks will become average. But IMO Chicago, Miami, Cleveland, Detroit, Indy, New Jersey, and Washington are in for the playoffs. Should be a tight race with Boston, Milwaukee, and others for that last spot. I wouldn't bank on that pick being so late quite yet.

Um, how can they trade Dunleavy? He has like 6 years left on his deal.

Oh yeah that's right, forgot about that. I guess their only moveable pieces would be Pietrus, Cabarkapa, Biedrins, and Diogu. Not bad pieces, but Diogu is likely off the table.

good point, the east is suddenly not so crappy anymore. i just think howard is about to have an out of this world season, so i cant bet against him. i'll take orl over indy next year (yep), and i dont think NJ or washington are locks to be better.

your right about the orl pick having a cheap salary, but if we can sign al to a 5 or 6 year deal at ~the mle, he'd probably be an even better bargain.

pietrus just picked up his option for next year, i believe, so hes out too.

Assuming their is truth to the Al rumors; First of all, Atl needs a veteran C so DD will be included. Secondly let's look at ATL situation, they will soon have a sole owner who did not want to overpay JJ, so he probably isn't looking to add too much salary. Next the owner is pissed about losing two future draft picks in the JJ deal, and is looking for a way to get picks so he doesn't have to use his, so it is logical to assume two picks from us are appealing regardless of it being late in the draft since he wouldn't be using them. Next up look at the CBA we don't need to send equal salary in just players, we can use a TE (1.5 from Mo) or (1.2 from Dupree which expires at the start of the season) and can take back up to 125% of the value we traded. So we can give Al a 5 or 6 year deal starting at 6.25 million worth between 38.5- 49 million while keeping Dice. Thought on that being Dice is the 6th man Al starts, Nazr is a back up to Sheed at C.

Also As much as Indy and GS are being talked about for Al they don't have anything that fits the above criteria. GS and INDY have GM's that won't part with 1 pick yet alone two. GS has no expiring contracts that are helpful persay and Troy Murphy is the name being tossed around why would you not just over pay Al who is relatively healthy instead of taking on a highly overpaid and injury prone PF Murphy? No one else on GS roster even makes sense for the Hawks based on their draft their needs and not wanting to overpay.

So then you have Indy; who does Atl want from Indy for Al? Sure Granger sounds nice but what about JJ, Smith, William and Childress two will play SG and two will play SF why do you need Granger? Foster is the only big guy on INdy's roster outside of Harrison and JO so doubt he would be included, plus he injury prone. I doubt Tinsley's brokedown ass is exciting anyone nor is Sarunas "the Savior" Jasikevicius making the phone ring off the hook. Jackson was already there and is a SF. Fred Jones is a dime a dozen guy, and AJ doesn't make enough.

I see DD and picks as a more viable option considering it doesn't take back major salary you get a couple of useful picks and still have 22+ million to spend in FA for 07.

I am not being a homer either, I am saying if I was the GM and knew I owed two picks to PHX and had the choice between a veteran C with 2 picks that keeps me cap flexibale or Tinsley and a future pick or Murphy and future pick, I would take the deal that gives me the best chance at getting Oden. I can't draft Oden if I don't have an 07 pick because PHX has it. The Detroit deal gives me a late first to give PHX, and a pick the year after to do the same.

Very logical JS. I think something like that would be appealing, but are we willing to give up the two picks? Personally I think Al Harrington is better than anyone you get in next years draft outside of a top 5 pick. So I'd be all for getting rid of the picks, besides, if Joe couldnt find someone in the '03 draft, who says he's any luckier in '07.

PS. The Hawks new owner had no problem paying JJ. He was pissed that they gave up picks + Diaw when he believed and knew that Sarver would never have matched that max offer in the first place.

your right about that. it was a pretty ugly situation, but he was 100% right.

-they overpaid for JJ
-they overcompensated phx
-phx wouldnt have matched anyway
-jj wasnt going to make a big enough diffirence to make trading draft picks sensible.

it was, imo, the worst trade i've seen in a long time. maybe worse than the shaq trade.

True, but you can't tell me Belkin knew that Diaw was a gem.

As for JJ, I still don't think they overpaid. He's an excellent SG.

BTW, who did GS trade their pick in 2007 to?

your right about that. it was a pretty ugly situation, but he was 100% right.

-they overpaid for JJ
-they overcompensated phx
-phx wouldnt have matched anyway
-jj wasnt going to make a big enough diffirence to make trading draft picks sensible.

it was, imo, the worst trade i've seen in a long time. maybe worse than the shaq trade.

but NOT worst than the Villanueva for TJ Ford trade. That's going down in history.

Denver has the GS pick next year. The Sheed trade was pretty bad. The Dirk for Traylor comes to mind as the worst ever.

In any case, I also think that Al is not only better than many of the prospects in the draft, but that he is also ready to contribute and get calls from the ref.

My argument to this is that in 2007, a superstar will be drafted outside of the top 5. I can guarantee it. This fits so many of our needs. A chance to get a top player with an average pick (or two), a chance to draft a player that exactly fits what we need, rather than acquire one available who mostly does. Lastly, a chance to get someone that will draw the love from the refs, which Al will do, but not at a superstar level.

Maybe I would promise Atlanta a pick, and then depending on where our picks may land, moving Dice to another team for a late first rounder. We wouldn't keep him if we had Al anyway.

bbf, i was wrong about denver having the GS pick. they have a pick from GS, but the pick is dallas's. just clarifying. i'd hate to ruin our pristine internet reputations.

The Dirk for Traylor comes to mind as the worst ever. Common misconception here - that wasn't a trade. It was a prearranged situation where the Mavericks promised to draft Traylor if the Bucks promised to draft Nowitzki at 9 and Garrity at 19. The reality is they traded a 9th and 19th pick for a 6th. If the Bucks didn't agree to the deal the Mavericks would have just picked Nowitzki at 6 anyways. The Bucks never had a shot at Nowitzki regardless.

^^^I wish more people(reporters) knew this

I see Irony has returned to claim his "King of the Gifs" throne.

And what else could Dirk do other than shoot back when he was drafted?

And what else could Dirk do other than shoot back when he was drafted?It wasn't just that he could shoot - it was that he was 7-foot and could shoot.

Mercury News is saying GS is close to getting Al via S&T.

Also...the Hawks are offering Josh Smith, Marvin Williams, and possibly Al Harrington for AI, but I dont see how thats possbible with the new bullshit that just happaned

Mercury News is saying GS is close to getting Al via S&T.

Also...the Hawks are offering Josh Smith, Marvin Williams, and possibly Al Harrington for AI, but I dont see how thats possbible with the new bullshit that just happaned


OH MY GOD....THE HAWKS WILL NEVER EVER WIN...THAT TRADE IS THE WORST THING IVE EVER READ IN MY ENTIRE LIFE....IF THAT HAPPENS I WILL CONSIDER THE HAWKS THE WORST FRANCHISE IN SPORTS HISTORY


Yeah I know it wont ever happen but to even have someone report that is straight disgusting

Mercury News is saying GS is close to getting Al via S&T.



I already showed you the article at the beginning of this thread, which shows absolutely nothing of substance, other than a fanboy putting his dreams to paper.

Oh right...that was it...

Fuck golden state!

Contrary to some reports, the Pistons are not trying to land Atlanta's Al Harrington in a sign-and-trade deal. After Ben Wallace agreed to sign with the Bulls, the Pistons had pitched a deal to Harrington. But after they signed Nazr Mohammed, the Harrington offer was off the table.



http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060710/SPORTS0102/607100407/1127

reminds me of AS Blakely screaming that McCosky's reporting of a trade for arroyo were false and were never going to happen.....

beatwriters can be very catty sometimes. Not saying it isnt true, but McCosky does seem like he's talking specificaly about foster.

I hope Harrington's off the radar. He faded in the playoffs with Indiana. He's not what we need.

LOL, he faded in the playoffs with Indiana at age 24, when he was depended on to be the 3rd-best player on a 61-win team. Are you kidding me?

Yes, a stud versatile big man off the bench that shoots at a high percentage and plays both positions isnt what we need at all....

Except he didn't in three years of playoffs with Indiana. It wasn't a one series / one playoff thing. He shot at a 45% clip during the regular season, buy a 37% clip during the playoffs -- think Corliss Williamson. He's a 70% FT shooter, except in the playoffs when he's at 56%. He's had precisely one good playoff series, and it wasn't against us.

Do you think our problem will be winning enough during the regular season to even make the playoffs?

If you're comparing Harrington to COrliss, then you probably have never seen harrington play. Ever.

and he probably wont next year, either, cuz billy pennypincher says NO MORE SALARIES. we already added ben wallace with offense this summer, no need to add any more.

yep, he's right up there with cuban pennypincher, colangelo pennypincher.....all those guys that have dumped good players to avoid the LT....

Fix your face.

cuban pennypincher? huh? like i said in the other thread, im going to stop wasting my time calling you out everytime you say something stupid. its just getting absurd. if theres one guy in the league that has proven time after time after time that he'll spend the money to win, its cuban.

christ, i would rather argue with gutz than you. atleast he usually makes reasonable points. cuban...?

Yep, apparently he wants to win so much he dumped a quality player like Marquis Daniels to Indiana for shit, just so he could be under the LT in 2007.

He wants to win so much he let Steve Nash walk.

He wants to win so much he released Michael Finley to go to his most bitter rival.

But hey, he wants to win, right? Certainly money means nothing to him.

I feel like I'm telling a child there's really no santa claus. On some level, I feel bad.

Your man-crush doesnt want to pay the LT either.

ok, one more time.

he replaced steve nash with players who better fit his system (and imo, are better players).

ditto with finley. or maybe not. you may have a point here. cuban opted not to pay 50 million in tax for a player that wasnt even worth 5... that makes him a scrooge if there ever was one.

and its only your opinion that daniels (who was in a logjam) was moved to croshere for lux tax purposes. i think its much more likely croshere gets moved for martin, or atleast will have a role in dallas.

and even if he does let croshere walk for nothing, and this was just a cost cutting move, dallas will still be well over the tax next year and the year after (not to let facts get in the way of your stupid argument, though). unless of course, cuban pulls a billy penny pincher and lets dirk walk away and sign with his team's rival for a few extra million next year. but most people arent stupid enough to do that.

not trying to interfere or takes any sides in this debate, but i just have to point out that cuban had to scramble to get terry after he let nash go; it's not like he had him in the fold already. he has even said this before, that he was fortunate to be able to work out a deal for terry when he lost nash.

as for the mavs- yes, they will be over the cap. so will the pistons. and most every other team.

but being over the cap and being over the luxury tax are 2 different things.

and its only your opinion that daniels (who was in a logjam) was moved to croshere for lux tax purposes.

lmao

How many years has Cuban paid 20+ million in luxary or even paid lux tax compared to Davidson? At least what four or five times compared to Billy D's zero?

I hate getting invloved in other people's pissing contests but any calling of Cuban cheap is stupid or comparing his recent spending habits to Davidson's is like only looking at a picture and thinking you understand the full context.

Here is where the logic of the argument falls apart Cuban has tried spending beyond silly money and paying huge lux penalties it got him to the first and second rounds at best. So he decided that was not working, and decided to cut back on payroll if the deal was going to help him for 2 or 3 years but he had to pay for 6 or 7, plus he was no longer willing to take back contracts that would not play for him. When he adopted that Philosophy he realized he was able to maintain the playoff status of the team. He was then given the opportunity to save 50 million on 1 contract. Instead of paying 100 miilion for Finley he could cut him and pay 50 million over 5 years for a guy that was maybe worth 5 milion per at that point. With all the "price cutting" Cuban still paid 95 million or more the last 2 seasons plus 22 million or more in lux penalties. Comapred to Billy D's 52 and 55 miilion dollar shopping spree.

The difference is Cuban has tried doing it both ways and feels that paying the lux tax is worth winning, but overspending for the sake of spending is not.

Davidson has cut salary not because the deals were stupid, or not worth it he has cut salary to save money and not pay the tax. There is a huge difference , Bill Davidson has never tried to win both ways, if he did pay the tax for 3 or 4 years and it didn't get the team very far fine he tried and it didn't work. Don't sing me the praises of Davidson or compare him to Cuban when Davidson will only do things his way. I know it is unfair probably to call anyone who spends 50 million a year on 15 salaries cheap but we are talking about a guy in the context of an unreal world where he is one of the richest men and has more ability to spend than most.

With that said coming off a Championship season or finals appearence Cuban would not be looking at how to save money to re-sign a guy or two. He would give his core the money they need and try to upgrade the roster either way. Cuban would have realized that he had a bargain for a few years but the time to pay was here and he would and should.

Cuban would not have traded Corliss for an expiring deal because it saved money, Darko and Arroyo would not have been traded to try to sign Ben. He doesn't care about his bottomline as much or more as he does about winning.

...any insinuating that Darko was traded with arroyo to re-sign ben isn't any more informed....

he was traded because he wanted out.

Not to mention "overspending for the sake of spending" is EXACTLY what re-signing Ben would have been.

LMFAO @ KStat's dumbass. You can't compare Davidson's cutting of salary to Cuban's. Each time the Mavs have let a player go for money reasons they've either already had proven players to take their spot or the went out and added a proven player.

They let Nash walk but they go out and add Terry, draft Harris and already have Daniels and Armstrong.

They waived Finley but had Stack, Daniels, Griffin, Howard, Harris, and Terry who can all get minutes at the 2/3.

Not only have the Mav's not missed a beat after these moves THEY'VE IMPROVED.

The Pistons? They've lost Ben, given away Corliss, Darko, Evans and Arroyo. They've replaced those guys with Nazr Mohammed. We've gone from NBA champs to barely squeeking out of the 2nd round against a team with no experience. See the difference? Probably not with Davidson's loose skin and old balls covering your eyes.

Yep, how could we ever do without the crucial role Corliss played in our 2004 title run....truly a travesty to let him go....

And Mo Evans. Man, how could I forget his contributions to our team last year. He was worth much more than a 2nd round pick.

I love revisionist history.

Fucking moron.

...any insinuating that Darko was traded with arroyo to re-sign ben isn't any more informed....

he was traded because he wanted out.




It's just a coincidence he was traded for an expiring contract. LOL

...any insinuating that Darko was traded with arroyo to re-sign ben isn't any more informed....

he was traded because he wanted out.




It's just a coincidence he was traded for an expiring contract. LOL

...and a 1st round pick

LOL

...or were you expecting more value for a guy who essentially quit on his team and nobody in the NBA was going to give up much for?

Yep, how could we ever do without the crucial role Corliss played in our 2004 title run....truly a travesty to let him go....

I love revisionist history.

Corliss was a decent player that caused match up problems. And we replaced him with................................NOBODY.

His stats might not have shown it but Corliss was a positive factor in the playoffs. For example many times LB putting him in at the 3 forced the Pacers to switch Artest off of Rip Hamilton allowing Rip to abuse Weggie. Could've done the same thing for us against the Spurs. Could've forced Bowen off of Rip. Instead Rip was Tay's back-up. Fucking pathetic little bitch.

Yep, how could we ever do without the crucial role Corliss played in our 2004 title run....truly a travesty to let him go....

I love revisionist history.

Corliss was a decent player that caused match up problems. And we replaced him with................................NOBODY.




...matchup problems with...toni Kucoc?

Nope. Got his ass kicked.

Rodney Rogers?

Nope. Got his ass kicked.

Al Harrington?

Nope. Got his ass kicked.

I don't know about you, but that was $6 million well-spent....

He was a factor in being a complete no-show until the finals, and was a main reason why we struggled vs Indy and NJ, because his fat ass couldnt score on taller player, and he couldnt guard them on the other end.

But hey, spending for the sake of spending is ok, right?

...any insinuating that Darko was traded with arroyo to re-sign ben isn't any more informed....

he was traded because he wanted out.




It's just a coincidence he was traded for an expiring contract. LOL

...and a 1st round pick

LOL

...or were you expecting more value for a guy who essentially quit on his team and nobody in the NBA was going to give up much for?

Hold on to him and use his expiring contract in a sign and trade. There was no reason to make that Orlando deal at the deadline other than to save money.

...any insinuating that Darko was traded with arroyo to re-sign ben isn't any more informed....

he was traded because he wanted out.




It's just a coincidence he was traded for an expiring contract. LOL

...and a 1st round pick

LOL

...or were you expecting more value for a guy who essentially quit on his team and nobody in the NBA was going to give up much for?

Hold on to him and use his expiring contract in a sign and trade. There was no reason to make that Orlando deal at the deadline other than to save money.


Yes there was, he wanted out and he was visibly quitting on the team.

If you think his value was low when he was a quitter, try imagining a quitter with a bad attitude.

And if he was really traded to save money for ben, we would have gone over the already-idiotic $48 million we already offered him.

Give me a break, a pick for Darko is your big selling point on why it was a good deal.

Corliss was traded for a non contributor (expiring), Arroyo and Darko were traded for a non contributor (expiring) Evans traded for nothing but a pick who liley won't contibute.

You can't tell me we got better or stayed the same with our moves when we got nothing back.

Okay so Darko wanted out he wanted out long before that but wasn't moved so why is that? Could it be because if we would have landed an Al Harrington you couldn't simply let him go like Cato, because the public was have scorned him beyond belief.

Idiotic is defending an organization letting an all-star walk after spending 3 years cutting players loose to avoid the luxury tax for when we re-signed him

I'll conceed for a second Ben's deal was bad and he wanted out but from everything we have read, Joe would not agree to a S&T or could not, not that there wasn't a chance. He says that he didn't want to, but I then say why not?

Joe built a championship team on cast offs and bad deals but now all of a sudden he wasn't game for a challenge? Sure there is an awareness of Joe D's ability but Jerry West has been doing it for 25 more years and his rep hasn't hurt him, so there must be something else. Could it be Billy D's plan to take his billions to the grave?

Okay so Darko wanted out he wanted out long before that but wasn't moved so why is that? Could it be because if we would have landed an Al Harrington you couldn't simply let him go like Cato, because the public was have scorned him beyond belief.

Darko was kept because there was still hope that he'd come out of it and get playing time.

When it was time to cut bait on him in 2006, harrington wasn't on the market anymore.

Okay so Darko wanted out he wanted out long before that but wasn't moved so why is that? Could it be because if we would have landed an Al Harrington you couldn't simply let him go like Cato, because the public was have scorned him beyond belief.

Darko was kept because there was still hope that he'd come out of it and get playing time.

When it was time to cut bait on him in 2006, harrington wasn't on the market anymore.

We didn't have to cut bait at the deadline FOR NOTHING. There were obvious holes on the roster and we trade Arroyo and Darko for an expiring contract and a so-so pick. We hold onto Darko and we have another expiring contract to use in a trade. Instead we got nothing except a pick in the teens a year or two down the road.

i shouldnt get involved in this again, but...

corliss wasnt THAT important, lets drop his salary.

darko: same. arroyo: same. mo: same.

now we're stuck with only 6 relevant contracts, a million dollars to offer a FA, and table scraps to put together a trade. sure, we COULD S&T cato--but we wont. unless we are willing to move one of the top 6, we could trade all our other contracts combined and not come up with close to 10 million. meaning we cant go out and make a play for a harrington without completely (COMPLETELY) emptying our bench. even if those guys we dropped were malcontents, they might have been helpful in a trade.

and one last thing: you (kstat) talk about revisionist history, but how bout all your bs about darko. what kind of inside scoop do you have. did he run over your cat or something? all this 'darko was a problem' talk is pure conjecture, and in fact, the team fell apart soon after darko and arroyo (who was reportedly a favorite in the lockerroom) were traded. care to explain? or are you going to just quote half of one of my sentences again and make some half-assed remark?

We didn't have to cut bait at the deadline FOR NOTHING. There were obvious holes on the roster and we trade Arroyo and Darko for an expiring contract and a so-so pick. We hold onto Darko and we have another expiring contract to use in a trade. Instead we got nothing except a pick in the teens a year or two down the road.

Yeah, we did. His value would have been worth even less as a no-effort cancer than it was a no-effort bum.

We didn't have to cut bait at the deadline FOR NOTHING. There were obvious holes on the roster and we trade Arroyo and Darko for an expiring contract and a so-so pick. We hold onto Darko and we have another expiring contract to use in a trade. Instead we got nothing except a pick in the teens a year or two down the road.

Yeah, we did. His value would have been worth even less as a no-effort cancer than it was a no-effort bum.

Cancer? LMFAO! I'm sure his mumbling in Serbian would've torn the team apart. 3 more months on the team wouldn't have lowered his value anymore. We could've used his expiring contract to make a deal to improve the roster this summer. With the problems in Atlanta for example we might've been able to revive the Darko for Harrington talks. We'd certainly have the chips to pull it off (davis and Darko's expiring contracts). A team like say Sacromento that is desperate for size might be willing to deal Wells for him instead of possibly losing Bonzi for nothing.

Cancer? LMFAO! I'm sure his mumbling in Serbian would've torn the team apart. 3 more months on the team wouldn't have lowered his value anymore. We could've used his expiring contract to make a deal to improve the roster this summer. With the problems in Atlanta for example we might've been able to revive the Darko for Harrington talks. We'd certainly have the chips to pull it off (davis and Darko's expiring contracts). A team like say Sacromento that is desperate for size might be willing to deal Wells for him instead of possibly losing Bonzi for nothing.

Yes, I'm sure Joe had the crystal ball to see that the hawks would get a court order not to trade for any non-expiring contracts....

Otherwise, no way would they even consider a darko trade for harrington

Cancer? LMFAO! I'm sure his mumbling in Serbian would've torn the team apart. 3 more months on the team wouldn't have lowered his value anymore. We could've used his expiring contract to make a deal to improve the roster this summer. With the problems in Atlanta for example we might've been able to revive the Darko for Harrington talks. We'd certainly have the chips to pull it off (davis and Darko's expiring contracts). A team like say Sacromento that is desperate for size might be willing to deal Wells for him instead of possibly losing Bonzi for nothing.

Yes, I'm sure Joe had the crystal ball to see that the hawks would get a court order not to trade for any non-expiring contracts....

Otherwise, no way would they even consider a darko trade for harrington

You still haven't said anything to validate dumping Darko and Arroyo for NOTHING. Teams always want 3 things size, youth and expiring contracts. Could've had all that as a bargaining chip this summer. Instead we got nothing and we'll have to settle for getting a FA with the vets min.

Nothing?

We got a decent draft pick in a very good draft.

If we get the pick it will be in the mid teens and Dumars sucks at the draft so yeah we got nothing other than higher proft margins for your boy.

If we get the pick it will be in the mid teens and Dumars sucks at the draft so yeah we got nothing other than higher proft margins for your boy.

Yes, DUmars has no chance of ever improving. You're right.

He hasn't made a good draft pick since Tay and you're banking our future on his ability to get a steal with that pick.

He hasn't made a good draft pick since Tay.


..meaning he's due.

Great reasoning. I think Ben is due to shoot 80% from the FT line this year since he's been so bad over his career.

So...I guess we aren't getting Harrington through S&T after reading through 3 pages of Kstat and WOd bitching at each other. cool.:)

It should've been pretty obvious that without the MLE and only Dale's expiring contracts to deal that we don't have the assests or leverage to get Harrington. There is no reason to have this thread other than to talk about how we wound up in this situation.

We could offer Dice and the Orlando pick for Al, but we all know its not happening.

We could offer Dice and the Orlando pick for Al, but we all know its not happening.

The thing is Atlanta would probably do that, and we could get Harrington for a similar contract to Prince. And we'd still be about $10 million under the luxury tax to sign Chauncey.

If Atlanta's pick isn't in the top 3, it goes to Phoenix, so there's a decent chance that they don't have a pick in next season's draft. And I think Orlando will make the playoffs next year (albeit at about a 7th or 8th seed).

There's speculation that Dupree may give the Pistons another athletic player off the bench in case they deal Delfino in a sign-and-trade package. Atlanta's Al Harrington, one of the top free agents still available, is a player the Pistons might pursue.


http://www.mlive.com/pistons/stories/index.ssf?/base/sports-1/115318141542821.xml&coll=1

I don't think we get Al Harrington. The Hawks dont need another athletic swingman in Delfino unless there is to be a multi team trade involved

We could offer Dice and the Orlando pick for Al, but we all know its not happening.

The thing is Atlanta would probably do that, and we could get Harrington for a similar contract to Prince. And we'd still be about $10 million under the luxury tax to sign Chauncey.


10 million AINT gonna cut it for Chauncey in free agency.

$10 million under the tax?

I gotta check that.

According to Hoopshype:

Sheed: $12,540,000
Rip: $9,750,000
Dice: $6,373,900 (opts in)
Delfino: $1,868,141
Maxiell: $1,041,360

They don't have Tay, so I'll add another $9 million to be safe

Billups will count against the cap @ 150% of his last salary so holding his Bird Rights costs us $9,546,600

They don't have Nazr, so you can add another $6 million approx
They don't have Flip, so you can add another $2.5 million approx

Add Hunter @ around $2,250,000 too

Don't forget any rights to Acker, Amir, Blalock (add $1mil to be safe)

Throw in the 2 first rounders in 2007 (add $3 mil to be safe again)

NOTE: All estimates are on the high side so the final figure will be kind of like a "most expensive scenario" type thing.

Total Salary: $64,870,001

ABOVE the luxury tax threshold.

Of course, the tax threshold should go up a bit in 2007.

And Billups is on the books for $9 mil+ so we wouldn't have to pony up much more cash to pay him "fair market value"

All my "estimates" could be way too high, which means our situation isn't as bad as it looks.

BTW, I did not retain the rights to Davis, since I figure he'll retire (or leave) after this coming season

And those cap numbers mean we shouldn't expect a major trade, and certainly no trade involving Davis' expiring contract.

If we have this "no tax" order from Davidson then expiring deals are what we want to acquire

In fact, now that Dupree is here moving Delfino for some kind of pick might actually be on the horizon.

ANYTHING to avoid taking on more long-term salary.

And even if Dice is included in the package for Harrington that adds a lot of payroll to our future. Remember that Dice basically has 2 seasons left with us before his deal runs out while Harrington would likely get a 5 year contract.

Things are not looking good salary wise for us.

Trade Sheed for Jalen Rose and their youth. It solves a ton of problems (at least until the young guys need to be extended)

According to Hoopshype:

Sheed: $12,540,000
Rip: $9,750,000
Dice: $6,373,900 (opts in)
Delfino: $1,868,141
Maxiell: $1,041,360

They don't have Tay, so I'll add another $9 million to be safe

Billups will count against the cap @ 150% of his last salary so holding his Bird Rights costs us $9,546,600

They don't have Nazr, so you can add another $6 million approx
They don't have Flip, so you can add another $2.5 million approx

Add Hunter @ around $2,250,000 too

Don't forget any rights to Acker, Amir, Blalock (add $1mil to be safe)

Throw in the 2 first rounders in 2007 (add $3 mil to be safe again)

NOTE: All estimates are on the high side so the final figure will be kind of like a "most expensive scenario" type thing.

Total Salary: $64,870,001

ABOVE the luxury tax threshold.

Of course, the tax threshold should go up a bit in 2007.

And Billups is on the books for $9 mil+ so we wouldn't have to pony up much more cash to pay him "fair market value"

All my "estimates" could be way too high, which means our situation isn't as bad as it looks.

BTW, I did not retain the rights to Davis, since I figure he'll retire (or leave) after this coming season

I dont think Tay makes 9 mil but anyways, but it does look fucking bad that way.


Trade Sheed for Jalen Rose and their youth. It solves a ton of problems (at least until the young guys need to be extended
I agree. We should trade Sheed come deadline for some expirings/youth

ummm no thanks on sheed trades(especially with Ben gone) for atleast 2 years. no point in trading the contracts we have locked up. Billups is the one who can leave as he pleases.

well, that might mean picking sheed over billups. i dont think billups would leave (if we give equal money), do you? i'd much rather trade sheed, who i wasnt too happy with anyway, than give up chauncy. However, trading chauncy now, or waiting on a sign and trade, would probably get back more than trading sheed. i guess its hard to say without knowing the options.

Cross: Hoopshype has Tay's salary for THIS season @ $7,851,240

Naturally he'll get a raise after the season. The question is how much?

I think counting him at $9,000,000 is a pretty good estimate.

And Gutz: I'd much rather have Frye, Nate or Collins and the ability to retain Billups without going into the tax.

Sheed is cool and all, brings a lot to the team and shit but at the end of the day he's not worth $12mil. I'm sure Zeke would take him.

The problem with the Jalen/Frye/G deal is not that Sheed goes. It's that Dice is included to make the salaries work.

Of course, we could always just take back Mo Taylor instead of Jalen, which means we keep Dice.