10 replies to this topic

[sturt]

http://games.espn.go...tradeId=2eygsot

plus

Blatche ($3.2 mil) for our TPE ($3.2 of the $3.6 mil... or essentially all of it)

Why WAS does it

Pretty much exclusively to remedy their Arenas problem... Crawford essentially replaces Arenas, and seems somewhat better suited to playing beside Wall than does Arenas, plus his contract vanishes after only one year... Wiz sacrifice for the short-term to better position themselves for the long-term.

Why ATL does it

While Arenas is arguably only a slightly different edition of what Crawford brings to the floor, ATL gains substantial frontline strength for the next few seasons... Hawks commit to 4 years of an Arenas/Johnson backcourt in order to gain that benefit.

We end up with these rotations...

PG: Arenas and Teague

Wings: Joe, Marvin, MoEvans (+Craw2)

Low Post: Smoove, Blatche, Horford, McGee, Pachulia (+Powell or Collins?)

[EazyRoc]

I think McGee has some serious potential, but he's going to need a lot of work. However, Blatche is someone that could come in and contribute immediately off the bench. I'm still iffy about Arenas' health, but I would still take the chance.

[Spud2Nique]

Hmmmm I'm not sure about Arenas. He is a shoot first pg. I don't think he would be a good fit with the Hawks. he doesn't make anyone around him better and he has never been a winner, not in G.S. and not in Washington. Cp3 makes everyone around him much better. He made Tyson Chandler look like a all star a few years back and Ty isn't all that good. I like McGee a lot if we could get him in a seperate trade but I wouldn't want any part of Gilbert.

[sturt]

The appeal of the trade to ATL is less Arenas than gaining the services of two low post studs, one of which is fairly polished, one of which is still developing (and not in a RandMo kind of way). I agree that all things being equal, Paul is the preferable PG and for the reason you gave. However, things just aren't equal... and I don't mean that it would be impossible to put together a package of players that would get Paul, but I do mean that the package of players you're going to have to offer will necessarily take away impact players from the current roster. In other words, you do this trade largely because Arenas for Crawford (talent-wise) is a near wash, and then you end up getting Blatche and McGee for Bibby. I'm not confident that WAS does this deal. It's true that Arenas' contract is a noose around any GM's neck, but the team might consider those two to be too large a price to pay for gaining that relief. Add to that, the fact that Bibby is an older version of Hinrich, so it's not clear that he adds anything at all to the roster. On the other hand, it would have to be appealing that that salary relief would be swift, what with Crawford's one remaining year.

Here's what might be more workable from WAS' perspective if they're giving up Blatche...

Again, acquire Blatche ($3.2 mil) technically using the Chilz player exception ($3.6)

Then, make these substitutions on the second trade: Instead of Bibby, send out ZaZa who would help replace what they're losing down low. And, instead of taking back McGee, take the new guy they drafted Seraphin... by most accounts I've read, a half-step down from McGee for the time being, but with a higher ceiling. Finally, to make the numbers work, we would have to exchange Mo Evans ($2.5/1 yr remaining) for Al Thornton ($2.8/1 yr remaining). Thus, they send $21,847,490 in contracts to us, and we send $17,551,250 to them... about $100K under the 125% mark.

We end up with

PG >> Arenas, Teague, Bibby
Wings >> Johnson, Williams, Thornton, Crawford2
Post >> Smoove, Horford, Blatche, Seraphin, Powell

I might be okay with this scenario if it would simultaneously yield Shaq's signing... that would be a pretty stout group for 2010-11 and 2011-12.

[EDS]

I doubt Washington would agree to trade away their two young big men even if it means unloading Arenas. They need guys like Blatche and McGee to build around Wall.

From my perspective Arenas is a cancer and not worth the risk.

[Swatguy]

EDS, on 26 July 2010 - 10:14 AM, said:

I doubt Washington would agree to trade away their two young big men even if it means unloading Arenas. They need guys like Blatche and McGee to build around Wall.

From my perspective Arenas is a cancer and not worth the risk.

I agree Washington would balk at moving the young bigs, but I disagree about Arenas. Arenas is a flake and made a big mistake. That doesn't mean "a cancer". I have never heard or read anything destructive on the court or in the locker or among other players(outside of gungate). I've never read or heard of any thing destructive off the court in his private life.
I can't call him a cancer. Where is the cancer?
If he is to be considerd a cancer because of gungate. So would have been Payton Manning for rockytop descretions, Marino for his love of weed, for Chis Carter for "couldn't hold his liquor. People use the word cancer too loosly IMO.

Edited by Swatguy, 26 July 2010 - 10:47 AM.

[EDS]

Swatguy, on 26 July 2010 - 10:44 AM, said:

I agree Washington would balk at moving the young bigs, but I disagree about Arenas. Arenas is a flake and made a big mistake. That doesn't mean "a cancer". I have never heard or read anything destructive on the court or in the locker or among other players(outside of gungate). I've never read or heard of any thing destructive off the court in his private life.
I can't call him a cancer. Where is the cancer?
If he is to be considerd a cancer because of gungate. So would have been Payton Manning for rockytop descretions, Marino for his love of weed, for Chis Carter for "couldn't hold his liquor. People use the word cancer too loosly IMO.

Cancer was too harsh, I agree. That said, the guy is by all accounts a bit odd and his injury history does not bode well for the future.

[DrReality]

Two guards for two bigs. Very unlikely. I'd be terrified that Arenas would have Smoove carrying a gun. Just kidding.

[sturt]

DrReality, on 26 July 2010 - 02:24 PM, said:

Two guards for two bigs. Very unlikely. I'd be terrified that Arenas would have Smoove carrying a gun. Just kidding.

Very unlikely under normal circumstances, and I admit, that's probably still the case under abnormal ones...

But again, if you're going to add to the current roster w/ minimal subtraction, it is this very situation that one has to find and exploit and, then, hope the calculated risk pays off.

Btw, that exchange (2 Gs for 2 bigs) was the initial trade I'd prefer to make, but I later recanted that something more acceptable to WAS would probably substitute ZaZa for Bibby, and Seraphin for McGee, which then necessitates also exchanging back-up-level SFs...

Thus it ends up, strictly speaking roster-slot wise...

- Crawford for Arenas
- ZaZa for Seraphin
- Evans for Thornton
- Blatche for Trade Exception

Taking yet another step back and staring at that, I'm inclined to say we might back up and require McGee after all, and/or that we need a draft pick or two of some kind thrown-in as well... that, since the only thing we are acquiring that otherwise compensates for the hideous contract is Blatche... and by the time we're paying outrageous numbers to Arenas, Blatche could be gone.

[AHF]

Swatguy, on 26 July 2010 - 10:44 AM, said:

I agree Washington would balk at moving the young bigs, but I disagree about Arenas. Arenas is a flake and made a big mistake. That doesn't mean "a cancer". I have never heard or read anything destructive on the court or in the locker or among other players(outside of gungate). I've never read or heard of any thing destructive off the court in his private life.
I can't call him a cancer. Where is the cancer?
If he is to be considerd a cancer because of gungate. So would have been Payton Manning for rockytop descretions, Marino for his love of weed, for Chis Carter for "couldn't hold his liquor. People use the word cancer too loosly IMO.

I see basically zero resemblence between Peyton Manning or Chris Carter and Gilbert Arenas on or off the field.

Here was my last post on the prior Arenas thread:

Quote

GameTime, on 29 June 2010 - 02:10 PM, said:

He would of finished all of last year barring the Arenas-gate.

He didn't finish the year because of his outrageous behavior and I don't see how you can assume he would have stayed healthy considering his recent health. Seriously, he would have finished all of last year? How can anyone know this when he started 10 of 162 games the prior two seasons! Even during his "healthy" 2010, he was still suffering from the prior injuries. His TS% went from .581 and .565 his last two healthy seasons to a .511 last year. By way of comparison, that was roughly the same TS% that Speedy Claxton had with SA and GS. Who wants a ball hog who shoots like that and is a headcase to boot?

One way or another, it is 4 years ago the last time Arenas played regularly. He will be on a shorter leash than ever in terms of behavior from the league and is still a major health risk in my book until he proves it on the court. His play on the floor is a further concern after 3 years away.

I am not buying on Gilbert at all.

Pros:

* Very high volume scoring potential if healthy and if play recovers

Negatives:

* Way overpaid and for another 3 years of 20+ million when we need to extend Horford
* Big health risk
* Big behavior risk
* Ball hog at the best of times and presents an Allen Iverson-esque challenge to incorporate him into a team structure
* Was woefully inefficient shooter in 2010
* Never a good defender even when healthy

[DrReality]

ASG are hanging on to the franchise given the economics and a guy like Arenas could blow up in their face and create a marketing nightmare if he had further problems. NO CHANCE.