I've read this site for 3+ years, but have never posted.  I've researched this pretty thoroughly, but don't skewer me if I've overlooked some cap intricacies.  I'm curious what readers think of this 3-team trade, which was successful on the ESPN trade machine.  I'm assuming that means it would be successful if completed before July 1 (the current salary cap year).

Disclaimer: This trade assumes that GS wins the #1 or #2 pick in the lottery (31% chance for 3rd-worst record).

To Golden State: Chris Paul, Robin Lopez, Goran Dragic, NO 2010 1st round pick (12-14 range, probably)

To New Orleans: GSW 2010 1st round pick (#1 or #2), Anthony Randolph, Ronny Turiaf, Jason Richardson

To Phoenix: Stephen Curry, Corey Maggette, David West

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yjrdj7l

(Trade machine doesn't factoring in the picks, but they don't have dollar value for trade purposes)

My understanding of this situation is that New Orleans is looking to shed short-term payroll, Golden State is looking to stockpile cheap assets and carve out clear starting roles on a healthy team, and that Phoenix will be looking to gradually replace their older talent with younger talent (without taking on additional payroll).

 

Golden State roster ('10-'11)

PG: CP3/Dragic/Ellis

SG: Ellis/Morrow

SF: Azubuike/Morrow/Radmanovic

PF: Wright/Radmanovic

C: Biedrins/Lopez

+ 1st round pick (12-14), 2nd round pick (33), D-Leaguer X or re-sign Raja Bell on the cheap if he can play

Net payroll effects (salary numbers are from HoopsHype, with assumption that all team options and player options are taken, but disregarding qualifying offers):

10-11: $300k increase + (~$2.5m difference in rookie salary from worse pick) = $2.2m savings

11-12: $700k increase + (~$2.5m) = $1.8m savings

12-13: $2.9m increase + (~$2.5m) = $400k increase

Why GSW says yes: Chris Paul (only 3 years older than Curry) is the best PG in the league, hands-down.  He has earned All-NBA (2x) and All-Defense (2x) honors in the previous two seasons.  He is a proven talent in the league.  Dragic and Lopez are young, cheap and talented backup players.  They are both major rotation players for the Suns, and Lopez could potentially supplant Biedrins as a starter.  There are not enough minutes at the 1, 2, and 3 spots for Curry, Ellis, Morrow, Azubuike, Maggette, and a high draft pick (Wall or Turner). This reduces some clutter/redundancy.  Randolph needs to be thrown in, or else this probably isn't enticing enough for NO. Ellis and Biedrins are pretty much unmovable with deals that go through 2013-2014 (counting player options).  Ellis doesn't have to be a leader.

Hollinger's formula says this will result in 14 more losses for the Warriors.  Really? Is that team any worse than the '07-'08 NO team (CP3, Pargo, old Peja, MoPete, West, Chandler, Armstrong, Wells) that came within a game of the Western Conference finals?  Only at the PF spot, in my opinion.

Why GSW says no: Randolph and Curry are fan favorites.  What is the ceiling for Wall or Turner? Can we count on Azubuike and Wright recovering sufficiently from their injuries? Does it make Phoenix too good?

New Orleans roster ('10-'11) w/Wall

PG: Wall/Collison

SG: J-Rich/Thornton/Peterson

SF: Peja/Posey/Wright

PF: Randolph/Songaila

C: Okafor/Turiaf

...if it's Turner instead of Wall, then Collison starts at PG and this requires a little juggling

Net payroll effects

10-11: ($2.8m) + ~$2.5m from diff. in rookie salary due to better pick = $300k savings

11-12: ($16.6m) + ~2.5m = $14.1m savings

12-13: ($17.8m) + ~$2.5m = $15.3m savings

Why NO says yes: This deal saves them $30 million over the next three seasons.  This might be the best value they get for Paul, while still fielding a very competitive team.  Collision and Thornton have played incredibly well the past two months in Paul's absence. They will have lots of young assets to package with expirings (Peja, J-Rich, Peterson) at next year's trade deadline if they need a veteran star at the 3 or 4.  Tremendous upside for Wall or Turner.

Why NO says no:  Well, as one Hornets fan said in a fanpost a few months ago, "Trading CP3 would effectively murder basketball in New Orleans."  Yeah...but when LeBron leaves his team, Cleveland isn't going to get anything.  At least this deal gets major talent in return and saves dough.

Phoenix roster ('10-11)

PG: Nash/Curry

SG: Barbosa/Curry/Dudley

SF: Maggette/Hill/Dudley

PF: West/Clark

C: Stoudemire/Frye

Net payroll effects

10-11: $2.5m increase

11-12: $15.9m increase, but no more Amare ($17.7m off the books)

12-13: $14.9m increase, but no more Nash ($11.7m off the books) or Barbosa ($7.6m)

Why PHO says yes: Next year's team is stacked (offensively, at least).  Curry is the guy they've supposedly wanted all along.  He can get 20-25 min/game backing up Nash, and another 15 playing alongside him at the 2 spot.  Taking on Maggette for 3 years/$30m is not an outrageous contract for a player of his caliber.  Not much dough committed to West. They can slowly phase out Nash and Hill, gradually reducing their minutes while grooming the younger guys. Gives them plenty of room to sign free agents in 2011 or 2012.

Why PHO says no:  Team as it stands has great chemistry, and is playing winning basketball right now (41-26, but 9 of those wins are against GSW/LAC/SAC).  Suns gambled two years ago by trading for Shaq, and that didn't get them anywhere.  Couldn't make playoffs with Nash, J-Rich, Hill, Amare, and Shaq - why would this roster do better?

 

So, what do GSOM readers think? Which team says no?