Matt52 wrote:
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Lakers failing experiment - trades might be coming... with Toronto??
Collapse
X
-
-
I would trade Bargnani for a bag of balls, just to get out from under his contract and get the rest of our bigs more minutes on the court. If the Lakers would do it, I would pull the trigger on Gasol (plus maybe duhon?) for Calderon and Bargnani in an instant.
Comment
-
There is ZERO reason to trade bargnani "just to get out from under his contract". We can do that as we like with the Amnesty clause (at least for cap purposes). Therefore if we're going to trade Barg we won't be taking back any bad contracts or bad players.
Comment
-
-
koncept wrote: View Posthonestly i'm all for getting rid of bargs. but calderon is a pretty valuable PG, i'd like to see another trade than this.
Jose plays good the first 3 quarters and totally loses his mojo in the 4th. Bad inbounds, bad passes, bad defense.
Comment
-
CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View PostIf a deal could land the Raptors a good, young SF to become part of the long-term core of this team, then I could bring myself to accept dealing away Bargnani & Calderon. However, I don't view Gasol as an improvement over Bargnani. He's much older, making way more money, much more injury prone (ie: bad knees) and clearly on the decline. The only way I would support a Bargnani/Calderon for Gasol trade, is if it's a multi-team deal that results in Gasol going someplace other than Toronto and a young stud SF (ie: Gay, Iguodala, Josh Smith) coming to Toronto.
I just don't see Memphis trading away Gay (they have no use/room for Gasol, unless they flip Z-Bo in another trade), or Denver trading away Iguodala (they are building a good young team to really contend in the next 2-5 seasons, not in win-now mode). Rumors also swirled that said Atlanta turned down a straight-up Gasol/Smith trade, so that doesn't make much sense either (apparently they want to preserve cap space and keep Smith on roster, both to lure D12 in the offseason).
I'm just not sure what other team(s) could be brought in to give Toronto a reason to pull the trigger on a deal like this.
I think BC should do this trade. Get the team to win a couple of games to mask the need, downplay the need then try to work a trade for an SF. IMO, Gasol is a definite improvement over Bargnani. If JV was already playing to his potential, then Bargnani would be the perfect compliment to him, but right now, they still need that interior presence that Gasol can definitely provide.
With Calderon, he is playing good and helping the team, but i think he's making it hard for Lowry to play his actual game. Not by fault of his own, but because Casey feels the need to give Calderon heavy minutes since he is orchestrating the offense well. Id rather put the ball in Lowry's hands and get him to work the offense.
Comment
-
KHD wrote: View PostThere is ZERO reason to trade bargnani "just to get out from under his contract". We can do that as we like with the Amnesty clause (at least for cap purposes). Therefore if we're going to trade Barg we won't be taking back any bad contracts or bad players.
I dont get the reasoning behind "reasonable contract" when it comes to Bargnani, even if he's paid $20 per hour, if his play is not resulting in wins, why deliriously hang on to a "reasonable contract"?
Comment
-
thegloveinrapsuniform wrote: View Posti for one am not in favor of trading bargnani to get away from his contract, im in favor of trading bargnani to get away from him, period. If there's a better deal that colangelo can get for bargnani than gasol, then go for it. But if that is one of the very few, i'd take it. Contract wise, gasol will be an expiring next year, which could be a good trade bait. Even at 32, gasol is no lame duck. On a team like the raps, easy 20-10. Would be a good mentor for jv, and not locker cancer.
I dont get the reasoning behind "reasonable contract" when it comes to bargnani, even if he's paid $20 per hour, if his play is not resulting in wins, why deliriously hang on to a "reasonable contract"?
Comment
Comment