Dalembert for Joe Johnson? If I'm PHOENIX, there's no way I do this. Swingmen are a dime-a-dozen; so are centers with "potential." This is the kind of deal that DESPERATE teams make - not division leaders. (And yes, I'm aware that Philadelphia is a division leader. And I think they're the perfect example of why I was opposed to going to 6 divisions. As it stands right now, they'll get a number 3 seed - AND HOME-COURT ADVANTAGE, BECAUSE IT'S THE FIRST ROUND - with a losing record - the worst record of all 16 teams to make the playoffs. But I digress.)
Dalembert mentioned in the same breath as Amare Stoudemire? Talk about over-valuing potential. Not only is Stoudemire a better player - PLAYING CENTER - but he's YOUNGER, with MORE UPSIDE.
Dalembert for Joe Johnson *AND* Amare Stoudemire? Heck, why don't you just ask them to throw in Nash, Richardson, and Marion while they're at it. Jerry Colangelo is probably sore enough after prostate surgery...no need to try and make it worse for the poor guy.
In order for Phoenix to deal Joe Johnson, they need to get a reasonably good big man and a quality back-up point guard. Plus, Phoenix has traded much of their depth away to get Jimmy Jackson, so they don't have a lot to throw in.
What MIGHT have been a fair deal would have been Stephen Hunter, Joe Johnson, and a conditional draft pick for Dalembert and Eric Snow.
And the scary thing is I'm NOT a Joe Johnson fan, and I *AM* a Samuel Dalembert fan!
If a Joe Johnson for Samuel Dalembert deal is offered, I refuse it if I'm Phoenix - because it's robbery - and I refuse it if I'm Philadelphia - because it won't help me win a championship, although it will help me win games.
If an Amare Stoudemire for Samuel Dalembert deal was offered - straight up - I jump on it if I'm Philadelphia, and I refuse it if I'm Phoenix. If it's Dalembert and two first round draft picks for Stoudemire, I jump on it if I'm Philadelphia and refuse it if I'm Phoenix. Dalembert and the Philly roster minus Iverson isn't worth Stoudemire.
Right now, Phoenix is in contention - despite their inability to beat their former whipping boys of San Antonio, in a strange reversal of fortune. Right now, Philadelphia is on the fence as to whether they're a playoff or a lottery team. I think the Philadelphia team has some real problems: power forward, depth of compatible talent (rather than depth of similar talent), lack of depth at point guard, and a very mediocre coach. Philadelphia is where it is based on the will and ability of Allen Iverson - and given the punishment this guy takes, at 29 turning 30 in June, he's going to start showing age soon. When that happens, Philadelphia tanks unless someone stands out; Iguodala seems to be the person most likely to develop into that player, but is he a top 10 kind of player in the league, like Iverson is? I have my doubts. I think the future looks brighter for Phoenix.
Philadelphia has a lot of similar talent. They need to deal some of it for the pieces that they're missing. But their similar talent is mostly POTENTIAL, and potential generally doesn't get you much in return. And if it's not dealt, much of that potential will be wasted potential, because I firmly believe that you can only develop so much of the same kind of potential on a team.