Trade Thread

[CitySushi]

And the fact that Chandler is not even as good as Dorell Wright. And Wright is already on the team. Pass.

I disagree slightly. I think Chandler is a bit of an upgrade, but not a substantial enough one to give up the #7 and Wright to get back Chandler and #20.

I actually think if the Warriors could move Jefferson and the #7(and #30 if necessary) for Chandler, Birdman and #20, that would be a great deal for us. Anderson is out of the rotation in Denver but would be a huge upgrade for us at the back up C position. Chandler and Wright splitting time at the 3 would be better than it was a year ago.

 

[Ray_Dogg]

We'd also have to send $7.5M in contracts the other way. I'm guessing we responded with a LOL and hung up the phone.

 

[Ray_Dogg]

Sources confirmed a Comcast SportsNet Bay Area report that owner Joe Lacob and general manager Bob Myers traveled to New York on Monday to watch Drummond work out. The Golden State officials also saw a Barnes workout, a surprise considering he previously had worked out for only the top four teams (aside from New Orleans, of course). But a source close to Barnes insisted that the point of the trip was for Lacob and Myers to see Drummond. It's believed that ownership is in favor of landing a big man, and Drummond offers the potential and upside that could pay dividends for years to come. But there's also a strong push for Syracuse shooting guard Dion Waiters, not to mention the fact that Barnes would be considered if he fell. Or, as I mentioned earlier, Golden State could opt to move up -- either to Sacramento's spot at No. 5 or elsewhere -- in an attempt to land either Kidd-Gilchrist or Robinson.

Read more: Thomas Robinson No. 2, Bradley Beal No. 3 in NBA Mock Draft 3.0 - Sam Amick - SI.com

 

[Heathbar012]

Chuck, my friend, you should have more of an open mind. You don't know what these guys really know. No need to try to call people out just because you have doubts. You should just take it with a grain of salt if you have doubts.

A week ago or so you tried to call me out on saying Lillard was almost a lock to go to Portland, because you hadn't heard, read or seen it on whatever it is you get your info. Now I'm sure you've read the same.

The point is that it doesn't start or stop with your public displays of doubt. People are trying to discuss and share info and thoughts. Just participate and enjoy, don't try to be the Sheriff of links. It's quite unbecoming.

Chuck, do you remember Jr23 from when we used to be on ESPN? He claimed to have a ton of inside sources, as to date everything he's claimed has came to the surface. Do you consider him reliable, even though it isn't in print?

Agreed, but those thoughts should be presented as just that. I don't care how right someone is with their predictions until they name their source. That could be a buddy in the org (I'm not one to call someone a liar because we all know the Bay Area is one big small town) or a well-respected publication. Either way, if it's just coming from the brain of a fan (like that post clearly indicates), it should be stated as such. In a world almost completely devoid of journalistic ethics, I think our board can rise above the fray and be fun and informative.

 

[Yoshi]

Rumor has it we have talked to Philly for Iggy. Iggy for #7, Wright or Rush, and Jefferson with Philly possibly giving up a couple 2nds or a future first.

Would make more sense than giving up the #7 for Deng.

 

[clyde_carbon]

Why are we even mulling a SG? Doesn't make sense.

 

[clyde_carbon]

Lots of teams calling Denver to trade for Nuggets’ young players. 1 of several moves being discussed: Wilson Chandler to G State for 7th pick

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports....gets-talking-chandler-for-warriors-no-7-pick/

 

[CitySushi]

Houston trades Sam Dalembert and #14 pick to Milwaukee for Jon Brockman, Jon Leuer, Shaun Livingston and #12 Pick.

 

[Ray_Dogg]

Talk of Houston trading the #12 and #16 pick for #7.

 

[CitySushi]

Talk of Houston trading the #12 and #16 pick for #7.

If Barnes and MKG are off the table, me likely.

Edit: I would like this because with the way the Warriors team is constructed they have 2 pressing needs, SF and Depth. If we couldn't get a top tier SF at 7, we get to address another need by getting two players who may not have as high a ceiling, but would be able to contribute right away for us. Guys like Terrence Jones and Terrence Ross could be gotten here.

 

[Heathbar012]

Talk of Houston trading the #12 and #16 pick for #7.

I hope they wait and see who slips, but this tells me that our suspicions are correct that MKG or Barnes definitely won't be there. If that is the case, that would be a great trade for the Warriors. Meyers Leonard and Moe Harkless? Taylor with 30? Gordon with 35? A euro project with 52?

 

[CitySushi]

I hope they wait and see who slips, but this tells me that our suspicions are correct that MKG or Barnes definitely won't be there. If that is the case, that would be a great trade for the Warriors. Meyers Leonard and Moe Harkless? Taylor with 30? Gordon with 35? A euro project with 52?

I think if the Warriors trade back, there's absolutely no way they keep 5 picks. If I was the Warriors, I'd look to try and package the 30th and 35th picks to get a future first for 2013.

If they got the 12th and 16th picks, I'd expect them to use the 30th on a draft and stash pick, so they wouldn't have to immediately count against the cap.

 

[Heathbar012]

I think if the Warriors trade back, there's absolutely no way they keep 5 picks. If I was the Warriors, I'd look to try and package the 30th and 35th picks to get a future first for 2013.

If they got the 12th and 16th picks, I'd expect them to use the 30th on a draft and stash pick, so they wouldn't have to immediately count against the cap.

Paging Evan Fournier?

 

[CitySushi]

Why are we even mulling a SG? Doesn't make sense.

I think there's a lot of smoke screens going on and they have to show interest in everyone in order to create a sense of urgency from other teams who are behind them and looking to move up. It creates value for their pick by showing they're willing to take the best available player, regardless of position.

A team like the Raptors who are in love with Lillard would love for him to slip to 8 but if the Warriors show that they're willing to take him, they may be willing to swap a player or cash in order to move up a spot. There are lots of teams out there who like Waiters and instead of calling the Raptors to deal, have to call the Warriors if they're willing to pluck him off the board.

 

[EKmane]

Agreed, but those thoughts should be presented as just that. I don't care how right someone is with their predictions until they name their source. That could be a buddy in the org (I'm not one to call someone a liar because we all know the Bay Area is one big small town) or a well-respected publication. Either way, if it's just coming from the brain of a fan (like that post clearly indicates), it should be stated as such. In a world almost completely devoid of journalistic ethics, I think our board can rise above the fray and be fun and informative.

The point is that a person doesn't have to name his or her source. It's not always predictions, some people really know people that are connected. They don't have to name names if they choose not to. What the ones with doubt can do is choose to ignore the post, they don't have to feel like they have a duty to try to make a source known. Take the wait and see approach, cause the fact of the matter is that not even Lacob knows whats going to happen, he can only plan a, b, c and d.

 

[Heathbar012]

The point is that a person doesn't have to name his or her source. It's not always predictions, some people really know people that are connected. They don't have to name names if they choose not to. What the ones with doubt can do is choose to ignore the post, they don't have to feel like they have a duty to try to make a source known. Take the wait and see approach, cause the fact of the matter is that not even Lacob knows whats going to happen, he can only plan a, b, c and d.

Let me clarify. Sources can certainly remain anonymous. I thought I made that clear with the sentence after what you bolded. There is a big difference between I heard this from a guy who knows a guy in the org (slightly valid) and "I (or another poster) conjured this up, and I want to see what you guys think" (great for discussion, but awful when presented as actual rumor).

I mostly do the latter and present it as such. That is all I'm saying. Chuck's request for a source was valid because, upon reading what Ray read, it became very clear that this was dreamed up by a poster. Does this mean that there has been no discussion of those trade terms? Not necessarily, but it still can't be presented as truth when it's stripped from a message board without any sort of backing information. Had Ray typed out that he trusts this poster based on other experiences it can certainly carry more weight, but that wasn't the case.

I love trade ideas, and obviously, enjoy talking basketball with knowledgeable people, such as yourselves, but we do have to do a little bit of self-policing in the internet age. The suggested trade definitely seems more feasible than others that I have read, but I don't want to see this place turn into a rampant field of wild conjecture where I have to dismiss half of the posts.

 

[wildturkey]

Why are we even mulling a SG? Doesn't make sense.

Hate to break it to you but its because its the Warriors.


I keed I keed.

 

[EKmane]

Let me clarify. Sources can certainly remain anonymous. I thought I made that clear with the sentence after what you bolded. There is a big difference between I heard this from a guy who knows a guy in the org (slightly valid) and "I (or another poster) conjured this up, and I want to see what you guys think" (great for discussion, but awful when presented as actual rumor).

I mostly do the latter and present it as such. That is all I'm saying. Chuck's request for a source was valid because, upon reading what Ray read, it became very clear that this was dreamed up by a poster. Does this mean that there has been no discussion of those trade terms? Not necessarily, but it still can't be presented as truth when it's stripped from a message board without any sort of backing information. Had Ray typed out that he trusts this poster based on other experiences it can certainly carry more weight, but that wasn't the case.

I love trade ideas, and obviously, enjoy talking basketball with knowledgeable people, such as yourselves, but we do have to do a little bit of self-policing in the internet age. The suggested trade definitely seems more feasible than others that I have read, but I don't want to see this place turn into a rampant field of wild conjecture where I have to dismiss half of the posts.

I didn't finish reading your post, I just needed to respond from this point.

The whole thing came to the surface after the poster responded to the other posters "word is". That "word is" came from a guy that said someone on the Sixers forum had inside info. That was shot down in a snobish manner because of what he doesn't consider credible. Nobody asked him for his opinion was my point. Nobody cares what he considers credible. That info was passed along for entertainment. It wasn't the first or second time I seen him trying to shoot stuff down. I was just trying to figure out what or who made his feelings the right expression? It was starting to come off as rude.

 

[Ray_Dogg]

I prefaced it with the word rumor because I didn't consider it in the same class as a report like our beat guys or media heads throw out there because they have sources. I do consider it in a class above some booger eater on twitter saying BS though. The sixers board have threads dedicated for that poster because I assume he's their version of jr23. Otherwise they would be clowning him and telling I'm to kick rocks. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[ChuckDurn]

Chuck, my friend, you should have more of an open mind. You don't know what these guys really know. No need to try to call people out just because you have doubts. You should just take it with a grain of salt if you have doubts.

A week ago or so you tried to call me out on saying Lillard was almost a lock to go to Portland, because you hadn't heard, read or seen it on whatever it is you get your info. Now I'm sure you've read the same.

The point is that it doesn't start or stop with your public displays of doubt. People are trying to discuss and share info and thoughts. Just participate and enjoy, don't try to be the Sheriff of links. It's quite unbecoming.

Chuck, do you remember Jr23 from when we used to be on ESPN? He claimed to have a ton of inside sources, as to date everything he's claimed has came to the surface. Do you consider him reliable, even though it isn't in print?

EK, I have to admit that you may have called it on Lillard. Props on that.

I do struggle with "guy x from other board x says he's an insider" as a legitimate source. 99% of the time they are garbage. Maybe I shouldn't be so critical of those, because 1% of the time they may be right.

As far as jr__23...... yes, I consider him reliable. Partly because he has also contacted me privately (i.e. off the board) and demonstrated specific knowledge of situations which ended up turning out as he said.