|
Post by Toronto Raptors on Jul 31, 2007 23:10:20 GMT
San Antonio trades: Tony Parker (80) 9,450,000; 11,550,000; 12,600,000; 13,500,000 Robert Horry (73) 3,310,000; 3,630,000 Bruce Bowen (70) 3,750,000; 4,125,000 2nd Rounder in ’07 2nd Rounder in ’08
Outgoing Salary: 16,510,000 Incoming Salary: 18,162,766
New Total Salary: 64,018,766
For
Toronto trades: Shane Battier (78) 5,393,300; 5,883,600; 6,373,900; 6,864,200; 7,354,500 TJ Ford (76) 2,929,466; 8,000,000; 8,000,000; 8,500,000 Jorge Garbajosa (72) 3,750,000; 4,050,000; 4,350,000 Eric Snow (67) 6,090,000; 6,700,000; 7,310,000
Outgoing Salary: 18,162,766 Incoming Salary: 16,510,000
New Total Salary: 42,995,071
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Jul 31, 2007 23:14:55 GMT
I accept
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Jul 31, 2007 23:27:57 GMT
Woah, that's totally one-sided to Toronto's benefit. I reject.
|
|
|
Post by redstorm177 on Jul 31, 2007 23:37:07 GMT
Looks fair to me. Toronto gets the best player (who will only be better in the new game) in Tony Parker along with a couple of solid, soon to be retiring players in Bowen and Horry.
San Antonio gets the 2nd and 3rd best players in the trade in Battier and Ford. They also get Garbajosa who will fill the void of Horry, and is a little younger than him as well.
Seems fair talent wise, but I just don't see the reason why San Antonio would want to mess up their chemistry this much when they are currently the top seed in the west.
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Jul 31, 2007 23:45:05 GMT
Ok my reasoning goes:
Parker > Ford Bowen = Battier (IMO) Horry < Garbajosa Draft Picks > Eric Snow
My main reasoning is that San Antonio just wouldn't touch this deal in real life, for chemistry reasons (in real life and in-game), and the league is atleast loosely attached to reality.
Plus TJ's great, he's a good guy, but Parker just won Finals MVP! The list of guys who've done that is scary.
I must remind you guys as well that it states in the rules to not badger the staff to deal with your trades with PMs, we're always aware of what's going on and you can do it in these threads.
|
|
|
Post by Toronto Raptors on Jul 31, 2007 23:54:48 GMT
I dont know if Battier is equal to Bowen. Both of them are good defensive players. Bowen is better though. I think that Battier's offensive game equals if not surpasses that difference. Battier is 28 where Bowen is 36, that is 8 years younger. Another thing is Battier's rating is 78 where Bowen is only rated at 70.
|
|
|
Post by Utah Jazz on Aug 1, 2007 0:36:31 GMT
Yea San Antonio probably wouldnt do this in real life, but it seems pretty fair to me. I accept
|
|
|
Post by jerry on Aug 1, 2007 3:27:12 GMT
What Utah said. I don't see San Antonio moving Parker for anything right now obviously, but I think the trade is fair. I thought it favored Toronto, but when you factor in future salaries with TJ's extension, and Battier and Snows contracts, it makes a lot of sense for San Antonio. Toronto loses a lot of flexibility and future cap space in this deal.
Parker > Ford Bowen < Battier, given age, off ability and ranking Garbojosa > 2x2nd picks Snow < Horry, given ranking and contract
J
|
|
|
Post by Erik Lassen on Aug 1, 2007 4:02:38 GMT
I say no for the same reasons as Boston. No need for the Spurs to do this.
|
|
|
Post by gocats55 on Aug 1, 2007 4:05:08 GMT
if san antonio were to do this it would in the offseason, especially since they just took the lead in the toughest divison
|
|
|
Post by Utah Jazz on Aug 1, 2007 7:45:36 GMT
Even though there really isnt any reason for the Spurs to make this trade, we should still allow GMs the freedom to make a trade if they want to, as long as its fair obviously.
|
|
|
Post by jerry on Aug 1, 2007 8:01:34 GMT
I agree, personally I think the Spurs decision to restructure midseason while they are winning is peculiar, but I think if a trade is balanced, and I think this one is, we should let teams run with it. The trades we need to block are the one sided ones that are so imbalanced they hurt the competition by leaving either one team in the crapper, or elevating another one out of reach.
J
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Aug 1, 2007 11:55:52 GMT
I agree, personally I think the Spurs decision to restructure midseason while they are winning is peculiar I'm not convinced that San Antonio even took this into account. I'd like to hear more from them before this trade is made. It's 2 accepts, 2 rejects so far and Utah still gave us this with his acceptance:
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Aug 1, 2007 14:13:29 GMT
As some of you already know my bench has been pretty weak this season. This move gives me some more depth on the bench with Garbo and Snow. Parker and Ford will be pretty close in ratings next season IMO. I'm also getting an upgrade at SF in Battier.
|
|
|
Post by Toronto Raptors on Aug 1, 2007 19:40:59 GMT
What if we submitted a new trade? Where the 2nd rounder from '08 would be taken out. Everything else being the same.
Tony Parker Robert Horry Bruce Bowen 2nd Rounder in '07
for
Shane Battier TJ Ford Jorge Garbojosa Eric Snow
|
|
|
Post by jwal717 on Aug 2, 2007 4:09:42 GMT
\Parker and Ford will be pretty close in ratings next season IMO.\ They absolutely will NOT be pretty close in ratings. Live always bumps players up on their playoff performance.
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Aug 2, 2007 8:43:16 GMT
I'm sorry this trade is taking so long. It's a tough call, especially with a 2-2 accept/reject and San Antonio not actually answering what I was asking in his reply. As some of you already know my bench has been pretty weak this season. This move gives me some more depth on the bench with Garbo and Snow. Parker and Ford will be pretty close in ratings next season IMO. I'm also getting an upgrade at SF in Battier. 1. Your bench isn't weak. You have one of the deepest teams in the NBA. If your bench underperforms it's probably because your lineup is so great, the lineup that's only just recently put you on top of the West for the first time this season. The lineup that'll be screwed chemistry-wise after this trade. 2. Your small forward will be a little better than the last. You'll be getting a little more depth... but in exchange for an instant downgrade at Point Guard is hard to understand, clearly this is your year to win?! Parker will still be better, a lot better, than TJ Ford next season anyway and that is what perplexes me about this deal. If, San Antonio, you can read all that^^ and tell me you're ok messing with your team's chemistry a few days after taking the lead in the West. And if you can tell me you're OK with trading down at starting point guard in exchange for a little bit of bench fodder. Well... I'll be surprised I suppose. I'll be surprised and I'll accept. I don't understand how this benefits the Spurs. Toronto, I'm sorry to put you through this too.
|
|
|
Post by bigben - SEA on Aug 2, 2007 17:11:34 GMT
I would be willing to offer you alot more for parker than you are currently getting in a deal that would include ben gordon
|
|
|
Post by redstorm177 on Aug 2, 2007 18:23:43 GMT
T.J. Ford is more valuable than Ben Gordon IMO. I'd rather have a traditional point guard than an undersized shooting guard. Ford brings much more to the table, while Gordon scores, and that's it. Besides, San Antonio would much rather have Malik Rose back.
|
|
|
Post by bigben - SEA on Aug 2, 2007 20:18:23 GMT
gordon wouldn't be the only player SA gets, but if he wants to know what i would add then i would be happy to tell him...in a private pm lol
|
|
|
Post by Erik Lassen on Aug 2, 2007 23:06:34 GMT
I just don't like the idea of Parker getting traded at all.... Makes no sense what so ever. Especially since he's going to be dynamite in the new game.
|
|
|
Post by jerry on Aug 3, 2007 2:48:59 GMT
I hope you said dynamite in your best Lionel Richie voice.
Just checking, that's all. Carry on.
J
|
|
|
Post by Erik Lassen on Aug 3, 2007 3:29:46 GMT
DIE-NO-MIGHT!!
|
|
|
Post by jerry on Aug 3, 2007 8:06:30 GMT
Yeah, there it is. lol
J
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Aug 3, 2007 10:17:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Aug 5, 2007 14:05:30 GMT
Hmm well San Antonio is ignoring this topic now anyway, it seems (he even gave me a PM trade offer for Charlie Villanueva yesterday, who I don't have on my team...). So that makes it a rejected (and complicated) trade.
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Aug 5, 2007 19:25:34 GMT
Sorry about that lol
|
|