RE: trades

[John Lyell <Jlyell@concentric.net>]

I have to disagree with Willis being a legitimate big man.  He wasn't in 
Atlanta, and is not in Houston, and he is has mileage on him and wouldn't 
help the T-wolves future.  He has a few good games now & then but isn't 
much more a true l center than Travis is.  As far as the McDyess deal if 
that was a good one for the Nuggets they wouldn't have 3 wins to date & 
Bristow gone by year end because of it.
Minnesota has Stanley Roberts and Cherokee Parks not the greatest, but I 
can't see anyone giving up a good center in exchange for Gugliotta with the 
exception of possibly Elden Campbell (whose value is questionable) who 
Jerry West has been trying to rid himself of ever since he gave him $7M a 
year. But is Kevin Mchale smart enough to see that Elden has problems with 
motivation and coming to play just as Jerry West has ?









On Monday, January 26, 1998 9:42 AM, Alex Wang [SMTP:awang@MIT.EDU] wrote:
> The Rockets trade for Stoudamire was not fair but still a much better 
deal
> than the proposed trade for Googs. At least in that case Toronto got a
> legitimate big man (which Knight is not), a draft pick, and cap room.
> The Pheonix trade for McDyess, even though it was considered grossly 
unfair
> by many, is also a much better deal, because Gugliotta is a better proven 
> player than McDyess, and the draft picks, unlike Knight, don't come with
> seven-year contracts. In both cases the GMs are inexperienced, and the 
Toronto
> trade didn't even go off. You can believe that McHale will not be such a 
fool.
>
> As for whether Marbury will be given a big money contract, who knows? He 
may
> be the one to get traded. He's not fond of Minnesota and reportedly wants
> Garnett money. But they'll wait until the offseason to see.
>
> Let's look for realistic scenarios. If Gugliotta is truly going to be 
traded,
> I bet he'll fetch better than McDyess. Minnesota will be empty in the 
middle
> with holes at 4 or 5; that is why Riley offered P.J. Brown and Ike Austin 
> (and was rejected). Most likely they'll get offers of good second-tier
> centers like Willis, Austin, Campbell or strong power forwards in package
> deals with shooting guards. We probably have nothing to offer because we
> will not part with Antoine. A realistic offer would probably be something 
like
> Mercer, Knight, and our first round pick, plus possibly taking on some 
salaries.
>
> Alex
>
>
> > Yes anyone who wouldn't choose Gugliotta over the two might be 
questioned,
> > but if Minnesota is going to give Marbury a big $ contact, which they 
would
> > be silly not to,  they can not afford to get a player with a big $ 
contract
> > in return for Gugliotta.  If you recall the Twins have had a tough time 
> > paying players due to the small market.  Not that it is going to happen 
but
> > do you think the Rockets offer for Stoudamire that almost went through 
was
> > equitable ?  Was the Phoenix trade for McDyess equitable ?  Anything 
can
> > happen.
> >
> > On Sunday, January 25, 1998 1:59 PM, Alex Wang [SMTP:awang@MIT.EDU] 
wrote:
> > > My point was not that the situations are exactly the same, but that
> > > in both cases, Seattle and Minnesota had players that they could
> > > probably not satisfy salary-wise. Everyone knew that Seattle was 
going
> > > to move Kemp, just as many people expect Minnesota to move Gugliotta.
> > > That doesn't mean that Minnesota is inclined to practically give
> > > Gugliotta away.
> > >
> > > I think if you asked any NBA executive what they though of Gugliotta
> > > for McCarty and Knight, they would tell you that it is an obscenely
> > > unfair trade that would never happen. I don't want to get into an
> > > extended debate about this, but I would bet that if you asked any
> > > member of this list, "Would you rather have Gugliotta or McCarty and
> > > Knight?" no one would think twice about taking Gugliotta.
> > >
>
>
>