Put me in the camp that says it isn't as simple as "Amare is better than Biedrins." That is true. But I think making that swap straight up makes us better in areas where we're already strong, and weaker in areas where we already need help. We could get the better player but not make the team much better. But we aren't talking about them straight up. When the internet rumor mill ramps up and has us including Wright, Marco, Curry, Azubuike, Jim Barnett, Jessica Alba, Kandy the ex-Warrior girl, etc. etc., then clearly that starts to matter. If the deal otherwise made sense, I don't hold it up over losing Marco or Kelenna, because I think in the end they are very replaceable. I'd be open to trading Curry, but note that he has real value as we sit here today. I'd be open to trading Wright, but the rumored deal leaves us with a big man rotation of Amare, Turiaf, Randolph, and... Jermareo Davidson. That is an issue. Trade all of them at once, and you've butchered your depth. You also traded a bunch of cheap guys for one very expensive guy, making it more difficult to add any depth you can stand to put on the court. And for the icing on the cake, if Amare walks in 2010, you have a total mess.
I love Biedrins, but I'm open to the idea of trading him for Amare. The adage is that an NBA team really needs to have 3 stars, and I think in a year or two you could legitimately say the Warriors had that with Monta, Randolph, and Amare. Something like Biedrins, Marco, and Kelenna for Amare would be scary but I couldn't argue with it. But keep adding in people, or add in more valuable people, or add in another big man, and it starts to make me squirm.