File this nugget of information away in the file that contains examples which contradict the old adage of "the best trade is sometimes the one you don't make".
From the Great Ron Tillery:
Past interest (in Stro) indicates New Jersey might emerge as one suitor. Earlier this season, the Griz are said to have turned down a deal that would have sent Swift to the Nets for Jamaal Magloire, who is in the final year of a deal that pays $4million. (emphasis mine)
What? Am I reading this right. Am I not thinking rationally since it is late at night? Has the 27 hours of no power (or heat) at the house drove me delusional?
We were offered Magloire's expiring contract for Stro and turned the deal down??!?!?!?!?!?!!?
On what planet does that make sense?
Stro has a player option this summer and everyone is crossing their fingers that he won't pick it up (and a good conspiracy theory out there is that poor treatment, like no playing time followed by a suspension, could entice him not to pick up that player option). But still, trading Stro for an expiring contract guarantees we won't pay that money next year.
First, we turn down a Damon trade because it wasn't in his best interest. And now this.
To be fair, RealGM Trade Checker tells me Stro for Mags straight up doesn't work, so maybe the filler was what Wallace was concerned with and that caused him to turn it down. Maybe Wallace didn't take the deal because he hadn't had 50 games to fully evaluate Stro (if so, he should have asked Barone, or any Griz fan what kind of player Stro is). Stro has been disappointing during his entire career in Memphis. He has been disappointing this year. He has barely played in the last month. Have I mentioned he is currently suspended? And should I remind you that he is a certified bum!!! Turning down a trade of an expiring contract for Stro seems absolutely crazy to me.
I need Chip or Spartacus to make the case to me why not trading Stro for Magloire is a good idea. Please, guys, I'm open minded and ready to learn why Wallace would turn this trade down. There easily could be a perfectly sound reason why flipping Stromile for an expiring contract isn't a great idea. I hope.
ChipC3's Response:
First, Swift for Magliore is not a legal trade according to RealGM.com and ESPN's Trade Machine. A little bit of investigation would reveal that.
Second, I find it curious that someone who predicted that the Grizzlies would be winning more than 40 games and competing for the playoffs 'early in the season' is now questioning why a deal wasn't made that would severely weaken this season's team 'early in the season.'
I also find it rather curious that Ron Tillery would just happen to drop this nugget in the press after the one game suspension of Stromile Swift. Did he know about this previously and just happened to forget to mention it until this moment? If Tillery knew of this offer does he also know what else was included that would make it a eligible deal? And what the heck does 'early in the season' mean anyway? Was it early November or Mid-December? If he knows of the offer he should know of when the offer was made as well shouldn't he?
This type of reporting irritates me because it appears as if it was done simply to inflame passions of Grizzlies fans. While I have always believed that Swift would be perfect at New Jersey I don't believe this deal was rejected out of hand by Wallace once the season was lost. I imagine that Swift and Magliore may been pieces in a bigger deal that was not attractive to Memphis. That makes a lot more sense.
But then again I am trying to think logically and not emotionally here.
Update by Zack:
A few interesting tidbits...
--Magloire couldn't be traded until mid December because he signed in the summer, so that gives some sort of timeline.
--Assuming that no one else from Memphis was included and only filler from New Jersey was included to make it work (big assumption). New Jersey has no bad contracts under ~2 million. They have something like 5 expiring contracts and 3 good prospects under ~2 million.
Update II by Zack:
Some stuff from Verno...
--Says that a Stro-Magloire deal was never on the table. In other words, Tillery was not telling the truth. Surprise, surprise.
--Says that IF the deal of Stro for expiring contract(s) were offered, Chris Wallace or any NBA GM would be crazy and a moron for not taking that deal.
--Also says that the Nets would be crazy for offering an expiring contract for the opportunity to pay Stro 6.2 Million next year.
Update III by Zack:
Tillery checks back in with the Stro-Nets stuff. Via MemphisEdge:
The New Jersey Nets continue to make a push for Stromile Swift, and have apparently offered center Jason Collins this time. It is not known if this is a straight-up proposal. But it could be (unlike the one Memphis turned down earlier this season involving Jamaal Magloire and other players) because Collins and Swift’s salaries essentially are equal this season and next.
As of this morning, however, the Grizzlies balked at acquiring Collins. The Griz coaching staff is said to be less enamored with Collins, who is not even as athletic as Darko Milicic.
Swift, meanwhile, returned to practice Thursday ready to put his one-game suspension behind him. The 6-9 forward/center did say, however, that it’s time to move on if the Grizzlies don’t intend to play him.
Stay tuned. (emphasis mine)
No one in the right mind would want Collins over Stro. Collins is a bigger bum than Stro, makes the same amount next year for his last year on his deal, but doesn't have the player option which Stro might exercise.
But Tillery is also sticking with his information that Magloire was offered for Stro. Interesting.
And the last bolded part is interesting and could hint that if we don't play Stro he won't take his player option.
No comments:
Post a Comment