TMac, Aaron Brooks, Chase Buddinger for BD, RDavis, Mardy Collins, Sual

by Newtybar on Nov 20, 2009 1:01 PM PST Comment 24 comments

Sounds like Houston doesn't want Tmac. Would you pull the trigger on this trade?

I don't really think Houston would pull the trigger on this trade, but according to the trade machine this gives Houston +4 and us -9 (I think we know better). If anything this could get some ideas sparked up in discussion.

Houston Gets:

BD, Ricky Davis, Mardy Collins, Rasual Butler

Clippers Get:

TMac, Aaron Brooks and Chase Buddinger

Our lineup:

PG: Aaron Brooks

SG: Eric Gordon

SF: TMac (he will need to shift over)

PF: Blake Griffin

C: Chris Kaman

Bench: AT, Bassy, Smith, Camby, DJ, Budinger and we would need to pick up a vet min SG.

0 recs | Comment 24 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I would do this trade

Houston won’t. No way.

Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)

by mikey p on Nov 20, 2009 1:09 PM PST reply actions

Take Tmac and BD out and it's a go for me.

Everything starts out New, Gets Old and Dies or is Destroyed.

by HVYDRT007 on Nov 20, 2009 1:18 PM PST reply actions

Why in the world would they trade Aaron Brooks?

He’s been a revelation for them.

And if there’s any team that would stay away from Baron’s inefficient ways, it’s Houston. You know they have pages and pages of numbers showing just how badly he plays a times.

by madglove on Nov 20, 2009 1:19 PM PST reply actions

I would move Baron for

Monta Ellis straight up. No issues. I’d love having two combo guards who can score inside and out and having Blake and Kaman up front. Then I’d do whatever it took to get Battier. Of course, it would need a coaching without a 2000 pay playbook!

Bingo! Oh me oh my!

by ClippersUK on Nov 20, 2009 1:33 PM PST reply actions

Since I'm feeling nostalgic

Camby for Maggette straight up?

Anybody but me in favor of that?

by Michael White on Nov 20, 2009 1:35 PM PST up reply actions

Yuck

Why would we want Corey and the 31mil left on his contract after this year? To boot he’s a injury prone player, if anything we should trade for guys who never miss any games.

FA in 2010.

by ClipperChuck on Nov 20, 2009 1:38 PM PST up reply actions

Because Corey Maggette is a huge upgrade over Al Thornton.

by Michael White on Nov 20, 2009 1:47 PM PST up reply actions

maggete's contract is horrible

by XXDC2XX on Nov 20, 2009 1:50 PM PST up reply actions

It is that.

I’d rather go after Azubuike next summer as he only has a player option. He could be a very good player for us as a 6th man.

The SF position is still hard to work out though. We need someone to compliment what we have and I’m not sure corey is that man.

Bingo! Oh me oh my!

by ClippersUK on Nov 20, 2009 1:51 PM PST up reply actions

Upgrade sure

but huge upgrade? Not so sure. Not a big fan of trading on veteran big man with the expiring contract for a 30 year old, injury prone SF who would we would owe lots of money to. I’d rather package BD and Camby for TMac and Lowry.

FA in 2010.

by ClipperChuck on Nov 20, 2009 1:53 PM PST up reply actions

I think he's a huge upgrade

This season his PER is pretty insane at 23.6 compared to Al’s very poor 11.3.

I just think we should move Camby before the season runs out and we get nothing for him. So I have no problem with your idea as well.

by Michael White on Nov 20, 2009 1:59 PM PST up reply actions

Small sample size

Corey’s PER is more likely to settle in the 18 range, a improvement for sure but his career best has been 20.1 so the 23.6 is a likely outlier.

Al’s off to a slow start but his career PER is 12.6 so he’s just a little less productive than last year.

I much rather have Corey financial issues aside, just saying its not a huge upgrade, I reckon our drop off from Camby to DJ or even Craig Smith is much steeper. We can revisit this when BG gets back as then we would have a surplus of bigs but given our injury reports of late that’s wishful thinking.

FA in 2010.

by ClipperChuck on Nov 20, 2009 2:07 PM PST up reply actions

Point well taken on the sample size...

by Michael White on Nov 20, 2009 2:22 PM PST up reply actions

So we'd be basically giving up BD and Camby for Kyle Lowry?

Pretty sure we’d be able to get more than that for those two players. TMAC wouldn’t stay here after the season end, no chance.

Bingo! Oh me oh my!

by ClippersUK on Nov 20, 2009 2:01 PM PST up reply actions

No chance?

He’d get to play with a young talented big, EJ, Kaman. Anyways its essentially a salary dump of BD’s contract and we get a decent prospect in Lowry to play PG.

FA in 2010.

by ClipperChuck on Nov 20, 2009 2:03 PM PST up reply actions

I really can't see TMAC playing here next year and how

much would we have to spend to keep him? Whatever it is puts a risk out there because of his injury risk.

I just think looking at BD and Camby that we could get more back than Lowry. That is a decent prospect but just that for a nice expiring deal and Baron? Not enough for me.

What about moving Baron to the Bobcats for Wallace and Acie Law? Baron would get to be back with his mate jackson and we’d get an excellent SF, leaving our only weakness at PG but we’d have Telfair and Law and we could try and use Camby to get another young PG.

Bingo! Oh me oh my!

by ClippersUK on Nov 20, 2009 2:11 PM PST up reply actions

Would we want Wallace?

He’s injury prone himself and not much of a shooter, not the kind of guy we need around BG and Kaman in my eyes. Not sure about Law, the Hawks gave up on him pretty quickly and he’s not a pure PG to begin with.

Anyways its more of a salary dump than anything, we’re using Camby’s expiring deal to move Baron and we get to lease Tmac for half a season.

FA in 2010.

by ClipperChuck on Nov 20, 2009 3:12 PM PST up reply actions

Clippers 09-10. Prepare for a revolution.

by iankobe on Nov 20, 2009 3:34 PM PST reply actions

they would never do that trade.

we’d be lucky to get kyle lowry, tmac, for baron. ricky is an expiring and so is collins and sual so we might as well keep them, or trade a few of them for budinger .

by hans007 on Nov 20, 2009 6:51 PM PST reply actions