Rockets/Warriors

[inactive-HOU]

Rockets Receive:
Corey Maggette (82) $8,275,862 $8,937,931 $9,600,000 $10,262,069 $10,924,138
Stephen Jackson (88) $7,140,000 $7,140,000 $7,650,000 $8,450,000 $9,260,000 $10,060,000
Anthony Randolph (79) $1,709,280 $1,837,560 $1,965,720(TO) $2,911,231 (TO) $4,049,522 (TO)
C.J. Watson (77) $711,517
Acie Law (70) $2,071,680 $2,216,160 $2,940,844(TO) $4,026,015 (TO)
Rob Kurz (68) $442,114
Jermareo Davidson (70) $434,815
#7 pick in 2009 draft

Total $20,785,268
Salary Cap after trade $68,322,906 (-$5,332,625)

Warriors Receive:
Tracy McGrady (88) $21,126,874 $23,239,561
Luis Scola (83) $3,142,800 $3,142,800 $3,375,600
Von Wafer (75) $797,581
James White (65) $237,172
Dikembe Mutombo (74) $813,466
#14 pick in 2009 Draft (From Phoenix)

Total $26,117,893
Salary Cap after trade $63,661,865 (+$5,332,625)

I accept. Took awhile to get the numbers to work. I move up in the draft, I get Stephen Jackson a great wing who's signed to a long term deal that I like, I also pick a good youngster in Randolph, another good wing in Maggette and a couple of young guards in Law and Watson. Kurz and Davidson will be cut to keep my roster at 15.

[Golden State Warriors]

I accept. I get McGrady and barring any injuries hes going to rip it. I also get Luis Scola where I need help at the PF and a good backup in Mutombo to give Biedrins a good rest. I also believe I can get the player I want at #14

[Los Angeles Lakers]

PLEASE, put all the years of the contract, and all the options if there is any with it.

[inactive-HOU]

Sorry, fixed

[inactive-OKC]

Declined.

I'm sorry fellas but you are over rating T-mac here. He will continue to decline in ratings every year, and right now you have Stephen Jackson! He is better than McGrady at this point in their careers.

Also you give up the 7th overall pick...

Scola is nice but for Randolph and Maggette? Randolph is believed to be a future star and Maggette is a great role fitting into any team.

I'm sorry GSW but for me to accept it will have to be remade. Just trying to help your team.

[Los Angeles Lakers]

same here.

waaay too much for T-Mac.

I know your trying to get rid of some bad contracts GSW particularly Jackson and Maggette.

BUT you don't need to involve 7th pick AND Randolph to do so.

Randolph is a very good young prospect, and 7th pick who know's Flynn, Hill, or Curry could be available.

And on top of that there are PLENTY of teams in this league that would give up expiring contracts for S. Jackson just to have a chance to win a championship.

[inactive-OKC]

Jul 7, 2009 17:13:56 GMT -5 Los Angeles Lakers said:

same here.

waaay too much for T-Mac.

I know your trying to get rid of some bad contracts GSW particularly Jackson and Maggette.

BUT you don't need to involve 7th pick AND Randolph to do so.

Randolph is a very good young prospect, and 7th pick who know's Flynn, Hill, or Curry could be available.

And on top of that there are PLENTY of teams in this league that would give up expiring contracts for S. Jackson just to have a chance to win a championship.

IMO Jackson for that cheap is a good deal, not bad.

The guy gets 20/5/6 in real life, for only 7 mil going up to 10 over a few years. Its a great deal.

[inactive-LAC]

I really probably overvalue T-mac more than anyone, but the picks and Randolph don't make sense to me. You take those 3 out and I would say it's a good deal, but I mean what are you trying to get from this GSW? Scola is very talented, but other than that you get cap space and Von Wafer.

I decline this

[inactive-HOU]

Well then what would make it fair?

Apparently y'all value McGrady way below what Golden State and I do. The video game doesn't know that McGrady's back and knee are complete crap, so you can't say for a fact that his ratings will drop.

I respect that y'all want the trade to be fair, but ya'll overanalyze a bit too much. If you want it to be like real life, then explain to me how the Lakers swindled Gasol from Memphis 1 1/2 years ago and got that trade approved by the league, but ya'll deny this one. IMO, y'all should take a looser stance at trade approval and just let GMs do their thing.

[inactive-LAC]

Well I mean Pop (Spurs coach) was saying the league should have a trade committee, 2 wrongs don't make a right.

Though like LA is saying, that trade may not have turned out so bad for Memphis.

[Los Angeles Lakers]

Jul 7, 2009 17:37:32 GMT -5 inactive-HOU said:

Well then what would make it fair?

Apparently y'all value McGrady way below what Golden State and I do. The video game doesn't know that McGrady's back and knee are complete crap, so you can't say for a fact that his ratings will drop.

I respect that y'all want the trade to be fair, but ya'll overanalyze a bit too much. If you want it to be like real life, then explain to me how the Lakers swindled Gasol from Memphis 1 1/2 years ago and got that trade approved by the league, but ya'll deny this one. IMO, y'all should take a looser stance at trade approval and just let GMs do their thing.

huge difference between this and that.

this is sim league and RATINGS are the main basis for all trades.

and in real life the Lakers didn't swindle the Grizz as bad as people thinks, they got Marc Gasol, Darrell Arthur a future 1st and plenty of cap space, and also by them sucking it gave them a chance to get OJ Mayo, and only way to do that was to lose Gasol in a trade.

you remove EVERYONE from the trade accept the main players

Maggette (82)
Jackson (88)
Randolph (79)
7th pick

for

T-Mac (88)
Scola (83)
14th pick

Jackson=T-Mac

BUT

Maggette, Randolph, and 7th pick>>>>>>>>> 14th pick and Scola

[inactive-HOU]

Well I can't speak for GS, but maybe he values 2010 summer cap space very highly, and this trade puts him roughly $28,000,000 million under the cap at that point. And the difference in the #14 and #7 in such a weak draft are miniscule. There was only one sure bet in the entire draft.

Jackson = T-Mac
Scola > Maggette (based on ratings)
Randolph, 7th pick > 14th pick (I agree)

But theres $18,000,000 in cap savings in 2010 for GS. And he may personally favor T-Mac over Jackson, I personally am the other way around.

Whatever, if y'all still think it's that unfair, so be it.

[inactive-LAC]

Okay so if the difference between 7 and 14 is so "miniscule" then take it out, that'd be a smart.

[inactive-HOU]

Jul 7, 2009 18:04:05 GMT -5 inactive-LAC said:

Okay so if the difference between 7 and 14 is so "miniscule" then take it out, that'd be a smart.

So you're saying you'd approve it based on that? I know that's probably not the case, but if it is, that seems a little ridiculous that you'd decline the entire trade over 7 spots in a draft. This just makes me feel more strongly that y'all are overanalyzing these trades.

[inactive-LAC]

Jul 7, 2009 18:08:57 GMT -5 inactive-HOU said:

Jul 7, 2009 18:04:05 GMT -5 inactive-LAC said:

Okay so if the difference between 7 and 14 is so "miniscule" then take it out, that'd be a smart.

So you're saying you'd approve it based on that? I know that's probably not the case, but if it is, that seems a little ridiculous that you'd decline the entire trade over 7 spots in a draft. This just makes me feel more strongly that y'all are overanalyzing these trades.

I can't believe you really want to debate this, Are you kidding me? 7 spots in the draft is the difference between a lot, there are only 60 picks in the whole draft so you are moving up almost moving up almost 1/6 of the whole draft. Difference in 7 picks? That is a dumb statement to make and shows you are extremely bias in this matter.

Now I'll tell you what Houston, if you take out the picks and GS gives me a good explanation why he's doing it...I will strongly consider passing it. For you to say we over think trades is absurd, OUR JOB IS TO THINK ABOUT TRADES!