Topic of the Day: Would you do it?

or

exchange nocioni for Deng and toss in that draft pick.

I do disagree with some of the sentiments mentioned here that we would only have Miles' contract left to get rid of. I've said it again and again--LaFrentz is the worst contract on this team. Two years left after this season at 12 mil/per, and unlike Miles, we KNOW he's not going to get any better. If we had Chicago's draft pick, I wonder if that gives us an opportunity to move LaFrentz's contract. We could trade LaFrentz and the pick for a veteran instead of having another team full of rookies. Personally I would rather use the pick, but it's a thought ...

if Andres is the type of player that can fit into an offense and score consistently and at least hold his own on defense, I say yes.

Great players alone do not bring instant success, as we've seen from the Whitsett era. It's more about chemistry and team goals. If a major trade happens, work these things out in the training camp and preseason. This season is still very redeemable as far as learning how to win and gaining respectability again (if only in the player's minds).

It would not break my heart to see Zach go. Let's just not be too hasty. I have a lot of confidence in Pritchard to find the pieces we need for success. There are better options down the road.

If Nocioni is the prize, though, my concerns:

• Would he stick around after this season, and how much would it cost us?  PJ Brown is little more than an expiring contract.  Nocioni, as a young player who can guard people, is something the Blazers need--but if he doesn't want to stay here, that could be an issue.  Also, it's a bit risky to trade for someone (that you might want to re-sign) in their contract year for another reason--it's hard to evaluate them.  (See Miles, Darius for what can go wrong; Nocioni fortunately has a better head on his shoulder than Darius does).

• Our D would improve, but where would scoring and rebounding come from?  Nocioni is decent but not great on the boards; he's not a major offensive threat.  And who starts?  Noci and LA?  Noci and Ime?  Ime and LA?

Let's face it, he's had a great season, but do you feel his play over the last month to month and a half has increased or lowered his trade value?  I think it has lowered his trade value, his stats have gone down across the board during that time, and even when he puts up numbers like he did on Saturday night he is doing it with an unbeliveable number of shot attempts w/ a low shooting percentage (granted some of these attempts are putbacks that are part of the same sequence, so consequentally the shot attempts lie some).  If his trade value is at his highest this season we should deal by draft day at latest, and if he doesn't pick up his performance to that of the first couple of months of the season we may get more for him prior to the trade deadline than at draft time.  I fear that if he is on the team next season we will continue down the same road as we've struggled to free ourselves from next year... not enough minutes for the future of the team, not the style of play that we want to be involved in, but forced into it due to the genuine talent that Zach does have.  If he's on the team he's too good to not play, but if he's hurting most of our players enough we'd be better off without him, deal him while his value is high!

Gasol or KG

I don't think the Blazers would really mind getting younger.  Nate has said he'd like more veterans because they'd help him win now, which is always the focus of coaches (since it's the standard by which they're judged).  But as a whole I get the impression that the Blazers are fine with building even more through this draft and wouldn't mind losing some veteran role-players, or even their star, to make that happen (and to achieve the cap flexibility that would come with it).

--Dave

--Dave

2) Love the no-long-term-contracts aspect.
If we waive Darius now, where does that put us in committed payroll for next season?
Something like, what, $15 mil under the cap or so?
That's before signing draft picks and re-signing existing free agents (certainly Ime, maybe Nocioni or Trout), but still.
We could actually be a player in the free agent market.

3) I feel like if you don't trade Zach before training camp next year, you've gotta keep him for his contract's duration.
You can't pass up the current opportunity and hit something as good or better later.
And given his contract numbers and past off-court behavior, I just can't commit to that.

Fisrt: Is Zach (or can he be) a player in Portland's 2-year future? My answer is no. That's not to bash Zach. He's had an outstanding year and he's demonstrated a growing leadership ability. He's a player, and he'll make some team with the right system very happy, but that team won't be the Blazers.

Second: Will this deal move the organization the direction it needs to go? Yes. The Blazer organization has used the "broken economic model" enough, and cut cost and personnel enough for them to jump at this deal. In one relatively minor trade, we could clear a significant amount of cap space over the next two years, and in the process we'd get another lottery pick.

To Nate I'd say, "sorry bud." He'll have another year to develop young players, but this should be the last year we try to build from the draft. After this, we should have the future players in place to begin growing team chemistry in ernest. As long as the core group stays in tact a couple years, we should see a steady increase in the win column. After that, we'll see if the roster should be tweeked to take the next step. I'm betting we'll be able to win with the players KP gets us in the draft, but at least we'd have the "flexability" to get that one coveted free-agent to put us over the top.

How many cliches did I just use? It seemed like I just cut and pasted them together.