SNT for Al

[Traceman]

I don't know if that has been offered or not because I don't see DET giving up McDyess but I'd do it in a heartbeat. I like McDyess either starting at PF or backing up Shelden (if Shelden is good enough to start over McDyess as a rookie look out). Also, I think Shelden could play a lot of Center beside McDyess. Adding Davis would be good too. We get two veteran leaders and MAYBE a lotto pick (likely depending on how good D Howard is this year). I like McDyess (and his contract) better than Foster and I think the ORL pick will be better than Indy's pick. I haven't heard a better offer yet. I'd do it.

Zaza/Davis

McDyess/Shelden

Smoove/Marvin

JJ/Chillz/Salim

Speedy/Lue

I think that team makes a strong run at the playoffs AND we get a possible lottery pick from ORL.

[DrReality]

I wondered the same thing, whether Detroit would want to give up Dyce especially since they lost Ben. But the talk on the Detroit board is all for the trade. That doesn't mean that Dumars is. I think Dyce could be a beast for us and teach all the young guys the ropes.

[bird_dirt]

this is the best option i've seen so far, which means i would be absolutely shocked if it actually happened. it's the only thing that comes close to helping us MAYBE get an 8th playoff seed, but even that's a stretch imo.

[sturt]

***Assumed DET Objectives***

1) Get Wallace and Nazr some low post help with younger players

2) Back-up PG

***Assumed IND Objectives***

1) Get Harrington to play on a front line w/ O'Neal + Granger

***Assumed ATL Objectives***

1) Add depth to low post with veteran players, with relatively short-horizon contracts

2) Improve PG depth

3) Obtain a 2007 1st round draft pick

=========================================

ATL GIVES: Harrington, Lue, Batista (13.8 mil)

ATL GETS: McDyess, Davis, Tinsley, DET (their own, not ORL) 2007 1st Round Pick (14.3 mil)

---

DET GIVES: McDyess, Davis, 2007 1st Round Pick (8.9 mil)

DET GETS: Foster, Batista, Lue (8.6 mil)

---

IND GIVES: Tinsley, Foster (10.1 mil)

IND GETS: Harrington (10.0 mil)

=========================================

Hawks 06-07 Depth Chart

PG Rotation: Claxton/Tinsley

SG Rotation: Johnson/Stoudamire/Childress

SF Rotation: MWilliams/Childress/Smith

PF Rotation: Smith/SWilliams/McDyess

C Rotation: Pachulia/Davis/SWilliams

Bench: Ivey (PG), Grundy (G), Jones (PF/C), Andersen? (PF/C), Edwards ©

=========================================

Commentary: Accomplishes everyone's objectives, if the assumptions are valid.

[Seano]

I have no idea how realistic that trade is, but I'd be pretty happy with it. Dale Davis is older than dirt, and I'm wondering why he only played in 28 games last season. I'd love to get Dice, but I'd think he would be a sticking point as I'm not so sure Detroit is ready to let him go so easily- in fact I believe they're planning on him being a big part of the program this season. Tinsley, everybody knows there's a risk he'll end up getting hurt, but in the interim he makes a helluva backup point guard.

I just look at all that veteran depth added, and it looks very good to me. We'd go 2 sometimes 3 deep at every position- except C, which is still somewhat questionable but not terrible by any stretch in my opinion. You can make do with this, cause there's talent everywhere else.

[mockhawk]

I think we're overrating Al's value in a sign and trade. Dyess plus a 1st (especially the Orlando 1st) is not going to happen. Hell, I don't think they'd bite if it was that ORL 1st plus filler.

I'd expect Al's value to be equivalent to a mediocre 1st or a serviceable starter/6th man. No chance for Magloire plus a 1st (IMO) - they have Simmons signed long-term at the 3, and just traded for Villanueva at the 4. Makes no sense for them to do that type of a deal.

Can't see Indy giving up their starting point guard, despite his poor contract, plus another asset like Foster. Those are two positions of need for that roster.

I just don't think the demand for Al is all that high, and I don't see many teams throwing us a bone and handing over a tonne of value via a sign and trade.

[mockhawk]

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews...ts/14998579.htm

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?

[Cwell]

Quote:

---

I think we're overrating Al's value in a sign and trade. Dyess plus a 1st (especially the Orlando 1st) is not going to happen. Hell, I don't think they'd bite if it was that ORL 1st plus filler.

I'd expect Al's value to be equivalent to a mediocre 1st or a serviceable starter/6th man. No chance for Magloire plus a 1st (IMO) - they have Simmons signed long-term at the 3, and just traded for Villanueva at the 4. Makes no sense for them to do that type of a deal.

Can't see Indy giving up their starting point guard, despite his poor contract, plus another asset like Foster. Those are two positions of need for that roster.

I just don't think the demand for Al is all that high, and I don't see many teams throwing us a bone and handing over a tonne of value via a sign and trade.

---

You forgot about Bogut at the 5 that's why they're trying their hardest to trade Magloire

[Cwell]

Quote:

---

***Assumed DET Objectives***

1) Get Wallace and Nazr some low post help with younger players

2) Back-up PG

***Assumed IND Objectives***

1) Get Harrington to play on a front line w/ O'Neal + Granger

***Assumed ATL Objectives***

1) Add depth to low post with veteran players, with relatively short-horizon contracts

2) Improve PG depth

3) Obtain a 2007 1st round draft pick

=========================================

ATL GIVES: Harrington, Lue, Batista (13.8 mil)

ATL GETS: McDyess, Davis, Tinsley, DET (their own, not ORL) 2007 1st Round Pick (14.3 mil)

---

DET GIVES: McDyess, Davis, 2007 1st Round Pick (8.9 mil)

DET GETS: Foster, Batista, Lue (8.6 mil)

---

IND GIVES: Tinsley, Foster (10.1 mil)

IND GETS: Harrington (10.0 mil)

=========================================

Hawks 06-07 Depth Chart

PG Rotation: Claxton/Tinsley

SG Rotation: Johnson/Stoudamire/Childress

SF Rotation: MWilliams/Childress/Smith

PF Rotation: Smith/SWilliams/McDyess

C Rotation: Pachulia/Davis/SWilliams

Bench: Ivey (PG), Grundy (G), Jones (PF/C), Andersen? (PF/C), Edwards ©

=========================================

Commentary: Accomplishes everyone's objectives, if the assumptions are valid.

---

Grundy doesn't play for us anymore he's playing with Dallas in their summer league,I think.

[sturt]

Quote:

---

I think we're overrating Al's value in a sign and trade...

I'd expect Al's value to be equivalent to a mediocre 1st or a serviceable starter/6th man.

---

18 points and 6 rebounds @ age 26 does not equate to a "mediocre 1st or a serviceable starter/6th man."

McD has long ago seen his best years pass, and he's always been an injury risk.

In fact, I was thinking the reaction might be that Indiana -- the actual recipient of Harrington in this trade -- isn't giving up enough.

[Peoriabird]

Quote:

---

18 points and 6 rebounds @ age 26 does not equate to a "mediocre 1st or a serviceable starter/6th man."

---

There is a difference between someone averaging 18/6 on a championship team and 18/6 on the 3rd worse team in the league. If we get a 1st for Al, thank your lucky stars.

[sturt]

I'm all together with the "let's not overvalue Al" sentiment.

But, then again, let's not overvalue the #25-#30 area of the draft, either, which is what the Pistons, conventionally speaking, would project to offer with their own pick.

[sturt]

Quote:

---

Grundy doesn't play for us anymore he's playing with Dallas in their summer league,I think.

---

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought I understood (a) Grundy is still under contract to the Hawks, and (b) occasionally players under contract to one team may play on a summer league team belonging to another... ???

[tmac13]

No, Grundy is not under contract with the Hawks..We only signed him for the remainder of last season.

[Duff_Man]

Quote:

---

No, Grundy is not under contract with the Hawks..We only signed him for the remainder of last season.

---

Interesting. Shame though, because I thought he had some potential last year. He was aggessive and energetic.

[mockhawk]

Quote:

---

You forgot about Bogut at the 5 that's why they're trying their hardest to trade Magloire

---

Of course Magloire is on the block. That doesn't mean that they trade a decent expiring contract plus a 1st for Al when they already have their starting 5 in place, with Simmons locked up long-term at the 3. If it was Magloire for Al straight-up, then it is more plausible. But I don't see them giving up much for Al. Doesn't make sense to throw money for a backup 3/4, or to send one of Simmons or Charlie to the bench.

[Peoriabird]

Quote:

---

But, then again, let's not overvalue the #25-#30 area of the draft, either, which is what the Pistons, conventionally speaking, would project to offer with their own pick.

---

First of all you don't know where these teams will be picking. Secondly a draft pick is one of the highest assets you could have besides a superstar player.

[sturt]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

18 points and 6 rebounds @ age 26 does not equate to a "mediocre 1st or a serviceable starter/6th man."

---

There is a difference between someone averaging 18/6 on a championship team and 18/6 on the 3rd worse team in the league. If we get a 1st for Al, thank your lucky stars.

---

I'm all together with the "let's not overvalue Al" sentiment.

But, then again, let's not overvalue the #25-#30 area of the draft, either, which is what the Pistons, conventionally speaking, would project to offer with their own pick.

---

Given more thought, Atlanta's 2nd round pick would be projected to be in the neighborhood of Detroit's 1st rounder... so if a modification is necessary, the ATL pick could be included.

I think the point of the matter is simply to get into the 1st round, in order to have some options come next June -- anticipating that a Marcus Williams-like-scenario happens in most drafts, and you want to be in a heightened position to take advantage of those kinds of opportunities.

[mockhawk]

Quote:

---

18 points and 6 rebounds @ age 26 does not equate to a "mediocre 1st or a serviceable starter/6th man."

McD has long ago seen his best years pass, and he's always been an injury risk.

In fact, I was thinking the reaction might be that Indiana -- the actual recipient of Harrington in this trade -- isn't giving up enough.

---

I think you're forgetting the fact that Al is a free agent. You won't get equivalent value in a sign and trade for him... it's that simple. If both Al and our management know he won't be back, other teams know that we aren't in a position to be tough negotiators. Toronto could come in and offer Al a contract for all we know [meaning he leaves for nothing].

As far as McDyess' value... it's in the eye of the beholder. Dyess is a valuable 6th man on their roster, who is familiar with their system and content in a backup role. They don't add quality assets (like the ORL 1st) for a minor upgrade, while adding contract in the meantime. Doesn't make sense.

[sturt]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

But, then again, let's not overvalue the #25-#30 area of the draft, either, which is what the Pistons, conventionally speaking, would project to offer with their own pick.

---

First of all you don't know where these teams will be picking.

---

Yes, that's correct.

Not to be condescending, but is this somehow new substantive information that wasn't previously understood?... *scratching head*

I guess what you're trying to say is "there is risk involved to Detroit, that they may not do as well next season w/o Big Ben, and therefore they would not be inclined to jump on this."

To which I would reply, while that may be true, they would not be the first club to make a trade involving draft picks with an uncertain eventual concrete slot... and in fact, it happens all the time since obviously one cannot possibly know where they are going to finish.

Now, if they'd want that pick to be lottery protected in order to reduce their risk, that's certainly an option in my book.

Quote:

---

Secondly a draft pick is one of the highest assets you could have besides a superstar player.

---

Yes, but (and again, not to be condescending and at the risk of stating the obvious)can we agree that it is an asset to the degree that it is a higher pick?...

And thus, that given the history of the success of later round picks, that those picks' value is substantially less than those higher slots in the draft where, historically on average, superstars are selected?

Bottom line, fwiw -- I'm good with lottery protection. I'm good with, essentially, switching our 2nd for Detroit's 1st. I think that's all tweaking that can be considered to the overall trade on the table.