Somebody is gettin' traded; Otis wants a PG(Chucky Atkins?) Forget Marbury(Denton)

[Secretly Space Jesus 670]

quote:

Originally posted by Kberto:

quote:

Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:

quote:

Originally posted by Kberto:

quote:

Originally posted by Soul Bro:

TT, welcome aboard. DOM, that is what I'm thinking.

 

Guys, forget Lee and Redick for a minute and simply think value. Why would the Magic trade their 6th man (Bogans) to a worse team for their 12th man (Atkins)???

 

I don't understand why we're trading anything for Atkins in the first place. Take Cook or beat it...

 

Think of it as them giving us a protected first to take Atkins's contract off their hands. The TPE is the tool to make the trade, not really the asset being traded.

 

OK, but why do we want Atkin's contract? That seems like unnecessary salary to me. Why do Denver a favor by taking someone hat wont help? Just for a draft pick?

 

The ability to lock up a long term prospect with the pick outweighs what we'd potentially pay in luxury tax this year. But yes, that's a long way of saying just for a draft pick. The fact that we get an emergency 3rd point who isn't horrible is an added bonus.

[Shine88 89]

quote:

Originally posted by Kberto:

quote:

Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:

quote:

Originally posted by Kberto:

quote:

Originally posted by Soul Bro:

TT, welcome aboard. DOM, that is what I'm thinking.

 

Guys, forget Lee and Redick for a minute and simply think value. Why would the Magic trade their 6th man (Bogans) to a worse team for their 12th man (Atkins)???

 

I don't understand why we're trading anything for Atkins in the first place. Take Cook or beat it...

 

Think of it as them giving us a protected first to take Atkins's contract off their hands. The TPE is the tool to make the trade, not really the asset being traded.

 

OK, but why do we want Atkin's contract? That seems like unnecessary salary to me. Why do Denver a favor by taking someone hat wont help? Just for a draft pick?

 

Why not? The last year on his contract is non-guranteed, so basically he's has a expiring contract.

[Berto 338]

quote:

Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:

quote:

Originally posted by Kberto:

quote:

Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:

quote:

Originally posted by Kberto:

quote:

Originally posted by Soul Bro:

TT, welcome aboard. DOM, that is what I'm thinking.

 

Guys, forget Lee and Redick for a minute and simply think value. Why would the Magic trade their 6th man (Bogans) to a worse team for their 12th man (Atkins)???

 

I don't understand why we're trading anything for Atkins in the first place. Take Cook or beat it...

 

Think of it as them giving us a protected first to take Atkins's contract off their hands. The TPE is the tool to make the trade, not really the asset being traded.

 

OK, but why do we want Atkin's contract? That seems like unnecessary salary to me. Why do Denver a favor by taking someone hat wont help? Just for a draft pick?

 

The ability to lock up a long term prospect with the pick outweighs what we'd potentially pay in luxury tax this year. But yes, that's a long way of saying just for a draft pick. The fact that we get an emergency 3rd point who isn't horrible is an added bonus.

 

I'm under the impression we're not willing to pay any luxury tax.

[PEC 0]

quote:

Originally posted by Soul Bro:

quote:

Originally posted by PEC:

Bogans is just another expiring contract that should be used unlike the expiring contracts from last season.

 

Come on, PEC. Bogans deserves much more credit than that. He was our 5th/6th man on a 50+ win team. He still is the SG SVG wants playing in the 4th b/c of his defense and toughness. Should we trade him? IMHO, only if we get a player who will play in our 8 man rotation, for a pick, or for a young developmental prospect.

 

That was last year and this is this year and Bogans has an expiring contract that can help the Magic now. The Magic are also a business and this would be a good business deal for the Magic instead of getting nothing after his contract expires.

[magicdepth 0]

We are getting Marbury...End of story...It makes the most sense out of all this...JJ and Cook will be packaged before the deadline for what we need at that point and time...

 

My guess is Marbury joins the team mid week and plays heavy minutes in PHX to defend Nash.

[PEC 0]

quote:

Originally posted by Soul Bro:

TT, welcome aboard. DOM, that is what I'm thinking.

 

Guys, forget Lee and Redick for a minute and simply think value. Why would the Magic trade their 6th man (Bogans) to a worse team for their 12th man (Atkins)???

 

Denver is 12-7 yes worse, but not by a lot plus they play in the Western Conference which is rated much higher then the East.

Why would the Magic do this to get some value from an expiring contract and have another backup pg. We have already seen that a third veteran pg is something that the Magic are lacking and need badly.

So Bogans helps the Magic it's a win win situation for the Magic.

[Soul Bro 1,422]

quote:

Originally posted by PEC:

quote:

Originally posted by Soul Bro:

quote:

Originally posted by PEC:

Bogans is just another expiring contract that should be used unlike the expiring contracts from last season.

 

Come on, PEC. Bogans deserves much more credit than that. He was our 5th/6th man on a 50+ win team. He still is the SG SVG wants playing in the 4th b/c of his defense and toughness. Should we trade him? IMHO, only if we get a player who will play in our 8 man rotation, for a pick, or for a young developmental prospect.

 

That was last year and this is this year and Bogans has an expiring contract that can help the Magic now. The Magic are also a business and this would be a good business deal for the Magic instead of getting nothing after his contract expires.

 

No actually I am talking this year in my post, too. And I don't disagree that we might consider trading him but believe we should only do it if the deal nets us good value. For the record, I also wouldn't trade Redick for Atkins.

[PEC 0]

quote:

Originally posted by Soul Bro:

quote:

Originally posted by PEC:

quote:

Originally posted by Soul Bro:

quote:

Originally posted by PEC:

Bogans is just another expiring contract that should be used unlike the expiring contracts from last season.

 

Come on, PEC. Bogans deserves much more credit than that. He was our 5th/6th man on a 50+ win team. He still is the SG SVG wants playing in the 4th b/c of his defense and toughness. Should we trade him? IMHO, only if we get a player who will play in our 8 man rotation, for a pick, or for a young developmental prospect.

 

That was last year and this is this year and Bogans has an expiring contract that can help the Magic now. The Magic are also a business and this would be a good business deal for the Magic instead of getting nothing after his contract expires.

 

No actually I am talking this year in my post, too. And I don't disagree that we might consider trading him but believe we should only do it if the deal nets us good value. For the record, I also wouldn't trade Redick for Atkins.

 

Actually for the record you couldn't trade Redick for Atkins since their salaries do not match up.

But with Bogans and Wilks you can make this deal and the plus to all of this is that Wilks is just there to make this match up his salary wouldn't end up counting against Denver's salary cap.

So the Magic get another pg and Denver gets some more cap room and an sg to help them out.

The Magic were lucky that the only good team they played without Nelson was Boston and AJ needed help from another pg.

Considering we are talking about Nelson staying healthy that is something that rarely happens, though I really wish that wasn't a problem in the first place.

[Soul Bro 1,422]

PEC, I understand that neither Bogans nor JJ can be traded for Atkins straight up. I also agree that having a third pg is a need. However, you obviously value Atkins = Bogans, which I do not. You also obviously value Redick & Lee over Bogans & Lee, which I (and it appears the majority of posters on this thread) do not.

[Captain Hi-Top 791]

No need to wave a player to make room for Atkins if you are sending one or two guys out in return.

 

Could be coincidental, could be a sign that Atkins is coming in for the trade exception.

[Penny Hardaway's Ghost 260]

I'm thinking that a potential deal with Denver could be something a long the lines of Cook/TPE for Atkins/Hunter/Con. 1st rounder...I'm not super interested in this Atkins trade stuff really, and this deal isnt all that appealing, but a 1st, another vet PG and a big that may or may not play again. I know that Denver has been trying to package Atkins and Hunter together since the beginning of the season, not sure how willing they are to trade that 1st, but in order to cut salary, they may just do it...otherwise, unless it's a PG for the TPE or Cook solely, it's probably not a good deal...

[Nyce_1 311]

I'd agree w/ Chucky & 1st rounder for TPE, or Chuck, Hunter, & 1st for TPE & Cook. I'm just glad we'd possibly get another 1st to play with.

 

As far as Bogans, I also think he's very solid for our team and wouldn't trade him unless we really get something a bit more valuable. He knows his role, doesnt' complain, and is always ready when his number is called. Though, he's a bit selfish out there, he gets the job done and a decent price.

 

Marbury...sign me up. At some point, this organization needs to take a chance on a risky player to take us to another level; Marbury is that player.