PDA

View Full Version : Iguodala is tradable



Pacersalltheway10
01-30-2011, 03:59 PM
Philly Inquirer
By Kate Fegan
http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/sixers/20110130_Inside_the_Sixers___Pros_and_cons_of_deal ing_Iguodala.html



Determining the correct move feels a little like navigating a labyrinth: so many corners, so many decisions, and even when you get to the end you might still find yourself dropping through a hole.

It's a yes-or-no query, but the surrounding factors complicate the matter, especially considering that management's decision could be the difference between continued mediocrity and impending relevance.

They can't get this one wrong, they just can't.

As the calendar shifts from January to February, the NBA's trading deadline is no longer hidden. That deadline, Feb. 24, is like a floating neon sign over Iguodala's head.

Will they or won't they? Should they or shouldn't they? Can they or can't they?

Before we lay out the web of thoughts tangling each side of the debate, let's start with a hypothesis born from many phone calls, text messages, and research. Without this forthcoming hypothesis, there would be no need for discussion because Iguodala would be untradable. Under those circumstances, it would matter very little what the franchise did or did not want.

Our hypothesis? Iguodala is tradable.

Opportunities absolutely do exist for the Sixers to receive expiring contracts for Iguodala, although the level of "basketball value" the Sixers could find in return is probably uneven to the level of "basketball value" Iguodala possesses.

The discrepancy exists because of Iguodala's over-the-top contract, on which he is still owed approximately $44 million through the 2013-14 season.

Working forward from that hypothesis, Sixers fans must ask themselves: Do I want management to trade Iguodala for an expiring contract or player(s) who will likely be less talented? Am I prepared to give away a known asset for an unknown one?

If you've answered "Yes, it's time to trade Iguodala," then here's the reasoning: Iguodala may be a known quantity, but that known quantity has never proven capable of leading his team past the first round of the NBA playoffs.

Regardless of the value of return on a potential trade, whether the Sixers receive an expiring contract or a couple of similarly overrated players, the most important consideration is moving on from the "Iguodala era" and freeing the younger players - namely Evan Turner, Thaddeus Young, Jrue Holiday, and Lou Williams - for their chance at leading this franchise.Even if the Sixers have a shot at this season's playoffs, it's meaningless in the NBA to be the sixth, seventh, or eighth seed. The team would merely be delaying the inevitable: admitting they're not good enough to contend. Yes, trading Iguodala might make it more difficult for the team to earn one of the aforementioned playoff spots, but at this time the franchise can't concern itself with meaningless playoff appearances when faced with such a crucial decision.

A disconnect exists right now among Iguodala, the fans, and the franchise. He's ready for his ticket elsewhere. The fans are ready. The only party yet to realize this is Sixers management.

Make the trade. Make the best trade offered.

If you've answered "No, let's wait a second," then here's the reasoning: The Sixers look as if they're starting to figure things out and now is not the time to disrupt that rhythm.

Who knows what Doug Collins might be able to do with this roster? He's already exceeded expectations and has the team on a collision course with the playoffs. Losing Iguodala, especially for an expiring contract without on-court basketball value, would jeopardize what appears to be a jelling core of players.

Of course a lower playoff seed is not precisely where this franchise wants to be, but as long as Collins has things moving from bad to better, management should keep this roster intact.

The Sixers shouldn't want free-agent cap space, anyway. It's not as if the franchise can easily lure top-level talent away from other markets, so the end result might be a free-agent signing that is beneath what Iguodala already offers.

The Sixers should wait, be patient, and let Collins reassess at season's end.

Like we said, this question is tangled. The answer isn't easy.

But the decision, whatever it may be, is crucial.


Just some more Iggy trade buzz. nothing connected directly to the 76ers but offers an interesting read. him and Danny would make an awesome duo.

Dr. Awesome
01-30-2011, 04:01 PM
This seems more like a journalists opinion instead of something from the 76ers organization. I believe they would trade Iguadala, but this article is nothing significant.

d_c
01-30-2011, 04:04 PM
This seems more like a journalists opinion instead of something from the 76ers organization. I believe they would trade Iguadala, but this article is nothing significant.

Correct. It's the journalists opinion. League reports say the 76ers are keeping him this year.

And really, if you agree with the sentiments of the writer (not that I do), wouldn't putting Igoudala on the Pacers' roster right now be duplicating the situation he's in with Philly? It'd just be one of those change of scenery things.

And really, the 76ers asking price is most likely too high. Expiring contracts and a 2nd round pick won't cut it. There are plenty of teams with expiring contracts and they'd get some good offers.

Young
01-30-2011, 04:05 PM
I think Dallas should make a strong push for Iguodala. With Caron Butler out they could use another wing. I think Butler's contract is expiring and paid mostly by insurance.

cdash
01-30-2011, 04:06 PM
I don't care whether he is available or not, I don't want us to make a run at him. I've totally reversed course on this one as the year has gone on, and Paul George is very close to being untouchable in my eyes, and I assume it would take him to land AI.

BringJackBack
01-30-2011, 04:10 PM
I don't care whether he is available or not, I don't want us to make a run at him. I've totally reversed course on this one as the year has gone on, and Paul George is very close to being untouchable in my eyes, and I assume it would take him to land AI.

Same, same as always. Iggy would probably be good for us for the end of the year to try to make a run, but I get a feeling that starting next season Paul George is ready to start- even over Igoudala.

To trade for him would be somewhat shortsighted looking at his contract. Granted, he would be good for us.

Let me just say that I would only approve of picking up Iggy only if Paul George isn't included.

BobbyMac
01-30-2011, 04:10 PM
As long as he doesn't end up here.

BobbyMac
01-30-2011, 04:11 PM
As long as he doesn't end up here.

Ok. I'll take that back. I'd be happy to trade Rush for him. Straight up! no draft picks, I might include rights to Stanko.

Sookie
01-30-2011, 04:14 PM
Same, same as always. Iggy would probably be good for us for the end of the year to try to make a run, but I get a feeling that starting next season Paul George is ready to start- even over Igoudala.

To trade for him would be somewhat shortsighted looking at his contract. Granted, he would be good for us.

Let me just say that I would only approve of picking up Iggy only if Paul George isn't included.

I agree, I've backed off.

I still want Iggy, but only if we can get him without offering Paul George.

An Iggy/Granger/George wing rotation is nice..It also allows for Paul George to not have as much pressure/come along slower. And there's plenty of minutes to go around in a three wing rotation.

PacersPride
01-30-2011, 05:58 PM
I don't care whether he is available or not, I don't want us to make a run at him. I've totally reversed course on this one as the year has gone on, and Paul George is very close to being untouchable in my eyes, and I assume it would take him to land AI.

i am right there with you. changed course as well, still would like to see the pacers get AI, but then again, the cap space is perhaps more valuable to me at this time as a fan of the pacers.

there is no way the pacers should trade paul george, unless its eric gordon. rush, dunleavy, 1st would be okay, add posey and d jones. AI as a player is great, but his contract brings down any value philly would recieve in return.

owl
01-30-2011, 07:07 PM
The Pacers need bigs. Powerforwards or centers.

Infinite MAN_force
01-30-2011, 07:25 PM
I wouldn't give up Paul George for him anymore. Would Dunleavy and Rush be enough to get Iggy? It seems like his value is pretty low right now, could be a steal.

esabyrn333
01-30-2011, 07:33 PM
I wouldn't give up Paul George for him anymore. Would Dunleavy and Rush be enough to get Iggy? It seems like his value is pretty low right now, could be a steal.


I would think one of the 2 would get it done if not walk away

Dunleavy, Rush, 1st or

Ford, Rush, 1st

beast23
01-30-2011, 07:48 PM
No way would I give up a 1st in a deal for anything other than a PF or PF/C. Keep that pick until we acquire the frontcourt man we need. Then, if the pick isn't involved in that trade, the Pacers can use it however they wish, even acquiring AI as far as I'm concerned.

But DO NOT risk losing out on an opportunity to acquire the right big man for this team because we don't have a 1st round pick to throw into the package.

Pacersalltheway10
01-30-2011, 08:31 PM
dunleavy, Mcbob, and 1st rounder for josh Smith? Be able to move horford back to the 4.

BringJackBack
01-30-2011, 08:33 PM
dunleavy, Mcbob, and 1st rounder for josh Smith? Be able to move horford back to the 4.

As much as everyone would love that deal, including myself, no way that happens.


For that package we could land Kaman, Varejao (out for the season though), or maybe, maybe a Paul Milsap or Nene considering the circumstances. MAYBE. MAYBE.

Pacerized
01-30-2011, 08:51 PM
No way would I give up a 1st in a deal for anything other than a PF or PF/C. Keep that pick until we acquire the frontcourt man we need. Then, if the pick isn't involved in that trade, the Pacers can use it however they wish, even acquiring AI as far as I'm concerned.

But DO NOT risk losing out on an opportunity to acquire the right big man for this team because we don't have a 1st round pick to throw into the package.

I agree, we only have so many 1st. round picks to trade and I'd rather not trade any let alone waist one on another wing player. If we have to throw in a 1st. to get a player then it needs to be for a starting big man. I would take Iggy if it's just for an expiring contract or Rush and Posy, but his game has declined for 3 years in a row and he's overpaid for what he brings. I doubt if Iggy is available once we get our big man and I'm o.k. with that.

graphic-er
01-30-2011, 10:40 PM
I agree, we only have so many 1st. round picks to trade and I'd rather not trade any let alone waist one on another wing player. If we have to throw in a 1st. to get a player then it needs to be for a starting big man. I would take Iggy if it's just for an expiring contract or Rush and Posy, but his game has declined for 3 years in a row and he's overpaid for what he brings. I doubt if Iggy is available once we get our big man and I'm o.k. with that.

His game has declined, but thats because he has been playing with a bunch of young scrubs. Granger's game has declined a bit as well for the same reason. At some point really good players need to be paired up or surrounded with other really good players, or their game gets redundant and predictable for defenses. I'd take AI in a heart beat, and I'd give up anybody on the team except for Hibbert, Granger, DC. I'd hate to see PG go, but if you get AI, then he is your starting 2 anyways. So you can live with letting young talent go.

Eleazar
01-30-2011, 10:52 PM
His game has declined, but thats because he has been playing with a bunch of young scrubs. Granger's game has declined a bit as well for the same reason. At some point really good players need to be paired up or surrounded with other really good players, or their game gets redundant and predictable for defenses. I'd take AI in a heart beat, and I'd give up anybody on the team except for Hibbert, Granger, DC. I'd hate to see PG go, but if you get AI, then he is your starting 2 anyways. So you can live with letting young talent go.

Granger's play has declined not because who he is playing around, but because he tries to force stuff. He isn't a James or Bryant but he tries to play like he is. This leads to him taking way to many bad shots. No matter what the reason is for him trying to force it, it isn't because of who he is playing with it is because of himself. We have better talent around him now than he has had since JOB got here yet this is his worst year.

pwee31
01-30-2011, 11:09 PM
I wouldn't mind Iggy. He's only 27, even though he's having a "down year" he's still averaging 14 points and almost 6 assist a game. He defends, and is usually really active, even when not scoring.

I'm hesitant on what I would give up, but if it's just expiring contracts, I do it.

I think the Pacers go after an Iggy or Kevin Martin, and also try to get a big like David West if he becomes available

graphic-er
01-30-2011, 11:16 PM
Granger's play has declined not because who he is playing around, but because he tries to force stuff. He isn't a James or Bryant but he tries to play like he is. This leads to him taking way to many bad shots. No matter what the reason is for him trying to force it, it isn't because of who he is playing with it is because of himself. We have better talent around him now than he has had since JOB got here yet this is his worst year.

Better talent but not better players as of yet, you have basically proved my point. 2 of our starters are 2nd year players, 1 in this 3rd. How can you say we have way better players around Granger, he is playing with young guys who have no idea what to do half of the time. Thats the reason he has to try and be a Lebron! You put him with another star player like AI, and he will play much better than he is now.

pacers74
01-30-2011, 11:18 PM
I wouldn't mind Iggy. He's only 27, even though he's having a "down year" he's still averaging 14 points and almost 6 assist a game. He defends, and is usually really active, even when not scoring.

I'm hesitant on what I would give up, but if it's just expiring contracts, I do it.

I think the Pacers go after an Iggy or Kevin Martin, and also try to get a big like David West if he becomes available

I would take AI or Martin. They would both help if we really want to make a playoff push and they would take a ton of pressure off of DG.

David West isn't going anywhere right now. New Orleans is killing it right now. They are 31-17 and in 5th place in the west. No way they break up that team. If we want West we are going to have to wait until the summer and over pay for him to get him of of New Orleans.

graphic-er
01-30-2011, 11:28 PM
I would take AI or Martin. They would both help if we really want to make a playoff push and they would take a ton of pressure off of DG.

David West isn't going anywhere right now. New Orleans is killing it right now. They are 31-17 and in 5th place in the west. No way they break up that team. If we want West we are going to have to wait until the summer and over pay for him to get him of of New Orleans.

West will most likely opt out of his deal making about 7 million next year. He is looking to make atleast 10 million at season. Is 10 million a year over paying for West? I'm not sure. He is a really good player, very clutch too. Perfect pick and roll player. If you think we need a big man who can draw the defense away from Hibbert, then West is the guy, because you can't leave him open around the free throw line. I'd say thats worth 10 million a year. I'd like to see us offer him a declining salary. 4 years 44 million. Start with a larger number the 1st year to really entice him, and have it go down every year as we have to be worried about his age in the 3rd and 4th years. But that also makes him trade-able later on if it just isn't working out.

Really?
01-31-2011, 12:36 AM
trade wouldn't be worth it

Pacerized
01-31-2011, 01:00 AM
His game has declined, but thats because he has been playing with a bunch of young scrubs. Granger's game has declined a bit as well for the same reason. At some point really good players need to be paired up or surrounded with other really good players, or their game gets redundant and predictable for defenses. I'd take AI in a heart beat, and I'd give up anybody on the team except for Hibbert, Granger, DC. I'd hate to see PG go, but if you get AI, then he is your starting 2 anyways. So you can live with letting young talent go.


I think I've normally seen good players get overblown stats on bad teams such as Monta Ellis, not have their game decline, although you have a good point on the opposing teams defense being able to put a greater focus in a case like Iggy or Granger. Granger's game has declined but not nearly to the point that Iggys has. Iggy isn't an all star and I doubt if he ever will be at this point. I'd still take him even though I do think he's overpaid, I just wouldn't give up anything more then expiring contracts for him. It's not much of a leap of faith to think that PG can be putting up 14 ppg soon. We need to save our assets for a big man not a wing player.

Gremz
01-31-2011, 07:22 AM
Me thinks you'd have to be willing to take Brand off their hands. Expirings for both should get it done, whether or not it's a good idea or not is a different story.