I dont want to move marbury and get the #6 pick in return. anyway, I dont know about that second trade. why would we do that again?

Posted by djsunyc:

for sh ts and giggles, let's say we are able to move marbury and get the #6 pick in return.

would you guys trade frye + #6 for ben gordon + #2?

hell yes i do that trade... take Gordon, who's a MUCH better clutch player than Marbury & you either end up w/Aldridge or Ty Thomas to replace Frye... a backcourt of Gordon & Crawford would be a 4th quarter nightmare for other teams to defend.

i follow all that up w/a trade of Francis & both late picks for Al Harrington:

C - Curry / Butler
PF - Aldridge or Ty / Mo T / Malik
SF - Harrington / Woods / Jalen
SG - Q Rich / Crawford
PG - Gordon / Nate
IR - Big Turd

[Edited by - TMS on 06-05-2006 09:59 AM]

i'd do it. i like frye, but we need defense & shot blocking PF to play next to Curry. Fyre & Curry cannot co-exist.

Gordon, Craw, Ty, Curry, Butler, Woods = pretty good mix

Its a completely pointless thread since getting #6 for Marbury is an absloute dream, I don't care how many bad contracts of Minnesota's we take on, they still would not give us the 6 pick as well. Marbury has almost zero trade value.

If that deal for Gordon and #2 is on the table, I'd do it without reluctance.

Posted by Silverfuel:

IMO, Gordon is not a PG. If we work out something to bring in a PG, I'd do it.

he & Craw are both combo G's... you can alternate them at will... they both can make big shots down the stretch, & Nate is a nice energizer off the bench... all you would need is a backup playmaker... sign a guy like Jason Williams to a low risk contract, or make a trade for a veteran leader in the image of Brevin Knight.