If you were KP this summer what would you do?
by SpyderRyder on Feb 29, 2008 1:00 AM PST
Email
PrintHere is my best guess at what the next few years will be like:
After our 42-40 season we take a look at what we have.
First off, it seems around the league that Jarret Jack has some trade value and we should trade him for what we can get for him. I just do not see the consistency that is needed from him to lead us to a championship. Hopefully we can package Jack, some of our 2nd rds. and/or our 2009 1st to move into the top 10 or better in the draft to grab one of the following combo guards who can shoot the 3 and can defend quick guards:
In order
- Bayless
- Mayo
- Gordon
- Westbrook
In regards to Sergio, let him stay next year as he will help Rudy transition to the US and NBA. As well he is not costing us much and has a higher celing than Jack. His contract fits nicely with our 2009 plan as he is a team option. Keep him for next year and see if he progresses and if not let him go or trade him for what we can get.
I expect Rudy to come over but not contribute a ton but start to show flashes of greatness mixed with more meaningful minutes near the end of the season. I do like his game, but it will still take some transition to get used to playing with the level of athlete that is in the NBA.
All the while we need to keep an eye on the Paul situation. We need to look to see if he signs an extension this summer and the whole NO aspect. If NO moves in 2009 it will be good for us, as the more uncertainty around the team and NO the more uncertainty of Paul not staying with the team, IMO.
As for Webster, normally I would say let him stay for another year to see how much more he progresses, but there has been some issues raised on his extension that may screw our 2009 cap plan. I see him as a potentially good complimentary player to the big 3 but needs to get his head on straight and not get down if his shot is off. He needs to lock himself in the gym this summer and shoot thousands of 3 pters from everywhere and refine his handle some more. We need him to develop a consistent 3 pt shot. Hopefully James will be able to help him and mentor him for the future if it is with us.
As for Jones I think that he will not opt out and I would offer him a 3-4 year deal in the neighborhood of $11-15 mill. He is valuable to us when he is on the court but he has been unable to stay on the court and I would hope KP will push hard to extend him this year when he has had the injury problems, it may lower his price a bit.
I like Frye and would like to see him at PF2 and Travis at SF1. With Oden pushing Pryz into the white unit with Frye, that will help put some grit and toughness on the court, with Oden, LMA and TO on the first unit.
We need to start a new website www.RetireDaruis.com and plead with him to take his money and ride off into the sunset, that would be the only way that we would be able to have a chance at Paul. I wonder if that is what KP is thinking, "Let him try to get in shape for TC and hopefully he will decide to hang up the Nikes, then if he still wants to play, we may trade him and Raef for Marbury's 2009 expiring, but if we can get him to retire I dont have to worry about that."
In conclusion I would do the following things
#1. Trade Jack and maybe more to move up in the draft
#2. Draft a combo guard
#3. Keep Webster, Frye and Sergio, let them have one more year and then decide in the summer of 2009 and see who is avalible, Paul or Williams, if anybody, if not we will be able to trade for a good PG and a bad contract as we will be able to take back a lot more salary than we give out.
Unfortunately much like this year, (but better) the upcoming year will be one of growth again, incorpoating Oden, Rudy and our #1 into the mix will take some work and I expect to be in the thick of the playoff race, probably division champion with 50-55 wins.
So now the question I put to you fine people is what would you do?
58 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Fans
Had we gotten the Kidd trade to work out, or the Harris trade it definitely would have changed things. Kidd could have served as a mentor to Sergio and Green at he time. Harris would have been our answer at the PG spot and filled our defensive weakness.
If Rudy is as good as billed and we move Roy to PG and Blake to backup, then honestly we don't even need a traditional distributing PG and could go for a defensive specialist.
As far as Jones...I think his long term future depends with the development of Martell. If Martell is a bust, then Jones will be a priority and vice versa. I want Jones to remain in a Blazer Uniform as much as I wanted Ime. If he can accept what salary and role we give him optimistically, then I'm all for it. If not than KP will find someone better.
I like Frye as well, but I really think he's kind of the odd man out next year. Again it probably depends on what the team's long term plan is with Martell, as his minutes would effect Trout's mins (Trout taking all the PF minutes late in games). Essentially Frye would be he 3rd PF on our team and his skill set is too similar to LMA to give us a different look off the bench.
As far as CP3 goes, unless they decide to have a firesale, we will not give up anyone that will justify the trade. Even if CP3 is the better player when compared to Roy...the franchise has spent way too much time and money making him the face of the franchise to let him go straight up for CP3. You can be sure that a CP3 trade that goes thru will have one of our big 3.
The only thing that worries me is
I havent seen enough of Rudy defensively to envision him and Roy in the fourth quarter against NO and Paul with the game on the line, or against SA and Parker. Who would guard either of those two Roy? or Rudy? It would be a pick your poison as they would both shred either of them.
I say keep sergio, our 08 1st G, evaluate Petteri, save cap space and make a run at Paul in 2009, if it doesnt work we could trade Sergio and/or the #1 08 pick, for a vet PG. Or just sign the best fit FA with our $10-17 mill.
ya
by Philthyanimal on Feb 29, 2008 2:08 AM PST up reply actions
oden as 2nd team center
by blazernerd on Feb 29, 2008 8:53 AM PST up reply actions
the white unit
by Philthyanimal on Feb 29, 2008 11:22 PM PST up reply actions
I like Frye too
I think it's really short sighted to dump a big, who is a decent rebounder and a good mid range to outside shooter without a REALLY good back up plan, whatever his other faults are as a player. A really young player.
by bubba on Feb 29, 2008 10:33 AM PST up reply actions
First off
Next, I'd inquire about Calderon/DHarris/Top 5 pick/Monta Ellis. I just don't see any pg's on the tier above these players being available for anything we'd be willing to part with. Maybe LMA can be moved, but I really don't see ROY, ODEN or LMA being moved. Anyone else is fair game if the right deal came along, such as DHarris.
I think Pritchard's job is safe.
Draft Bayless. The fact he's never played an NBA game, has less than a year of college experience and whose numbers arn't any better than Jack's were in college, can all be ignored. He's obviously a much better player than Jack.
Chris Paul - who wouldn't want him? Of course for Portland to get him, Paul would have to 1) want to play for Portland more than anything in the world and 2) be willing to forgo tens of millions of dollars. Plus we'd have to wait three years before he could suit up in a Blazer uniform. I wish I'd have those 4 hour erections we're always getting warned about. About the same chance of that happening as Chris Paul becoming a Blazer.
What would I do this summer (were I in Pritchard's shoes)? I'd be going over my draft analysis worksheets with my staff, identifying guys we all liked. I'd be trying to figure out the likely order for the draft. I'd be taking calls and maybe making a few, to feel other GM's out for possible draft day deals. I'd be confirming Fernandez's status - i.e that he's definitely coming over this summer. Every player on my team (not named Roy or Oden) would be available in a trade, but any trade I'd make would be to add a player that I thought made us better, and not to get rid of someone. (One exception - I'd consider moving Miles without caring much what I got back in return.) I'd be looking at the restricted FA lists to see if anybody pops up I like. Finally, I'd be talking to my coach to ensure we are on the same page and looking forward to integrating two new, lottery caliber players into my team.
Who would I draft? I don't know. For one, I haven't been able to get interested in college ball this year, as I used to, so I don't really have a good handle on this year's draft class. It appears we will be picking around 15 - 16. Looking at the mock drafts, there appear to be some interesting candidates at SG and PF. Chris Richards (Memphis) and Courtney Lee (W. Kentucky) would interest me. Tyler Hansbrough and Richard Hendrix are PF's that could be available. Maybe Kevin Love drops down far enough (assuming he comes out). Anthony Randolph (LSU) and Nick Batum (if he's still on the board) are possibilities at SF. If I think he's better than any of the guys I currently have at PG, I might select Ty Lawson (NC). Who knows. I don't think there is anyone in the bottom half of the lottery that clearly warrant's trading up for. (The Bucks & the Pacers might be willing to trade for some of our players & picks. That's about as high up as I can see Portland getting.) But Pritchard may feel different. He's got enough picks that he can take a stab at it.
Read the post
Bayless is far the better prospect averaging 21.1 pts per game against the toughest schedule in the nation as a freshman compared to Jacks 15/game while a junior. Bayless is also 2nd scoring and 4th in assists in the Pac-10, the best conference in the nation this year.
Chris Paul will not have to give up millions as he can only make 25% of the cap which should be about $15 mill based on a $60 mill cap so money is no issue here as long as we have cap space. Read the CBA before you start throwing out wild numbers there.
If we cant land Paul then we hit the phones hard to trade our assets and use our cap space, but Paul is worth at least waiting. Like I said, if he does not extend his contract this summer, I feel it will be a hint that he is unsure that he wants to be there. If that happens then screw the 09 cap plan and go get the BPA via trade or FA.
by SpyderRyder on Feb 29, 2008 11:21 AM PST up reply actions
I did read your post.
Did you check the right Memphis? As in University of and not the Grizzlies. As to why we would need a SG - could be because that's what the best available player is when it's our turn to pick.
You are a Bayless fan, so I'm not going to argue. I'll just say that it's not automatic he will be an outstanding NBA player. I try to resist the temptation to think the bird in the bush is a better meal than the one my dog's holding between her jaws.
As for Paul's dollars. The only way, short of a sign and trade, that Paul can choose what team he wants to play for is to become an unrestricted free agent. Which means he has to play a year at the qualifying offer. Throw in the fact that New Orleans is likely to try to sign him this summer to a long term extension, and you have Paul having to forego several million dollars. Finally, while Portland can probably come up with an offer in the $10 - $12 million range under its cap restrictions in 09, New Orleans can do better than that. I'd be surprised if the total dollar difference doesn't top $10 million over the next 6 - 8 years. The CBA is designed for that to happen. It gives teams advantages (traslation - allows them to pay more) to hold on to their players.
I did read your post.
Did you check the right Memphis? As in University of and not the Grizzlies. As to why we would need a SG - could be because that's what the best available player is when it's our turn to pick.
You are a Bayless fan, so I'm not going to argue. I'll just say that it's not automatic he will be an outstanding NBA player. I try to resist the temptation to think the bird in the bush is a better meal than the one my dog's holding between her jaws.
As for Paul's dollars. The only way, short of a sign and trade, that Paul can choose what team he wants to play for is to become an unrestricted free agent. Which means he has to play a year at the qualifying offer. Throw in the fact that New Orleans is likely to try to sign him this summer to a long term extension, and you have Paul having to forego several million dollars. Finally, while Portland can probably come up with an offer in the $10 - $12 million range under its cap restrictions in 09, New Orleans can do better than that. I'd be surprised if the total dollar difference doesn't top $10 million over the next 6 - 8 years. The CBA is designed for that to happen. It gives teams advantages (traslation - allows them to pay more) to hold on to their players.
We're 13th right now
Trading up? Every team in the 6-10 position has more than one hole, and their holes aren't going to be filled by drafting one player. If they have a chance to trade a draft pick (which carries a measure of uncertainty) for a slightly lower draft pick and a decent, if not great, player that will help adequately fill one of their holes, most will give it serious consideration.
There is little doubt that, by trading Jarrett or Channing, we can move up several spots. The average difference in quality between a 9-10 pick and a 13 pick is not that great, and a team can get two players to help them rather than one. If they want a big, they can take Jarrett and draft a big with the 13, or take Channing and draft for another need with the 13.
To move up from 13 to 3-4 is a big deal, and will cost us significantly. But to move up to 9-10 should not cost heavily, if KP wants to do it.
Why do the draft boards show Portland at 16?
Granted that moving up from 13 to 9 or 10
Bucks
Pacers
Hawks
Bulls
76er's
I'll even throw in the Clips (who are currently listed at 7th).
Which team on this list needs a combo guard or a jump shooting PF?
The Pacers might be interested in Jack. (Bet they want to ship us Tinsley in return.) Philadelphia might want a backup to Andre Miller, but they have Louis Williams they are bringing along. Atlanta? Not with Bibby now on board. The Bull's? They are looking to shed Duhon and possibly Gordon. The Clips? Maybe. But I'd guess they'd want more than just Jack or Frye to exchange picks.
The fact that a team drafting in the bottom half of the lottery has more than one hole to fill does not automatically mean we have the right pieces to fill those holes. Considering that many of the folks eager to trade these two guys see them as nothing more than bench players, why do they think another team is going to value them enough to give up their position in the draft?
Besides, if there is not that much difference in quality between 13 and 9-10, why bother to trade up? I can see a team doing it if the player they've targeted is still available. Batum is likely still around at that point. Same with Love. Even OJ Mayo. If Pritchard rates say, Love, over Frye and figures none of the other PF's remaining on the come close to Love, then making a deal makes sense. Or getting Batum and leaving him in Europe for a year or two. If you really like him, it's like banking the pick and opening up a roster spot (which everyone says we need to do). But these are some pretty narrow parameters needing to be met in order for a trade to occur. The good news for those wanting to trade Jack or Frye - Pritchard has at least demonstrated an ability to make it happen, should the conditions all line up.
Oh - Mayo? He might be nothing more than Martell Webster, only two inches shorter. I'll bet on Jack being a better NBA player than OJ.
Answers
- I don't know why draft boards are showing us at 16. Perhaps this is done automatically and their software is unsophisticated.
- "Considering that many of the folks eager to trade these two guys see them as nothing more than bench players, why do they think another team is going to value them enough to give up their position in the draft?"
Ask any team whether they would have the 12 pick or #13 and either of these guys, and they will just about all say they would rather the #13 and one of these guys. Same if you ask about the #11. #10? Now the question about how well they fit begins to be asked.
3. "Besides, if there is not that much difference in quality between 13 and 9-10, why bother to trade up? I can see a team doing it if the player they've targeted is still available."
That would be one reason. Another reason is that we have an abundance of assets, more than we can really use. Our bench is already outscoring the bench of the opponents virtually every game, and adding Rudy and Greg just makes us deeper -- probably just about the deepest team in the league. How are we going to get playing time for our three quality SFs? Well, we could give Travis some minutes at PF, but then how do we get minutes for Channing? What if McRoberts improves?
So then, the question is, would you rather have Channing rot on the bench with no PT, or trade him to move up 3-4 spots, on the chance we can get a slightly better player? Maybe it gains us nothing, moving from 13 to 9, but it might, and the chance of that might well make it worthwhile to move a surplus asset (whoever that might be).
One other possible reason, and that is if KP works 2 deals. Suppose he works a deal with the team who has the #3 that if he can get the #8 pick, they'll do Jarrett and the #8 for the #3, or Jarrett and the #9 and the Knicks' 2nd rounder (which we own) for the #3. KP then goes and swings a deal with the teams who hold the #8 or #9 pick for our #13 plus Channing. He's now turned Jarrett, Channing, and our #13 into Derrick Rose.
Will that happen? Who knows? But we've got the kind of assets that could make that happen.
4. "Oh - Mayo? He might be nothing more than Martell Webster, only two inches shorter. I'll bet on Jack being a better NBA player than OJ"
Perhaps. But our worst short-coming at the point is defense, and that is a Mayo strength. We don't really need Jack's scoring (not that I mind having it). If I could have a PG who doesn't score any better than Blake, but is a really good defender, I'd take it. If Mayo never becomes an NBA scorer, but can be a lock-down perimeter defender (and he's big enough that no PG can post him up), he could be great for us. Not that I want him, particularly.
No I said a top 10 pick
PG/SG #1.
27.25min
10.56pts
4.8ast
1.87to
2.9reb
1.13st
41%fg
30%3pt
PG/SG #2.
27min
9.4pts
4ast
2to
2.5reb
.8st
44%fg
32%3pt
The reason I want to hop into the top 10 picks is that SG/PGs that are chosen in the top 10 generally do very well (yes there are always exceptions but these stats say otherwise.)
PG/SG #1 is an aggeregate of the rookie season stats of all of the top 10 PG/SG combos taken since 2002. Those players include:
Conley
Foye
Paul
Williams
Felton
Livingston
Gordon
Harris
Hinrich
Ford
All players that have had a lot of talk about us trading for/signing if we could, however IF we can get into the top 10 in a PG/SG heavy draft, we would essentially be able to get one of them for the price of Jack or Frye, a GREAT deal.
As you can see a top 10 SG/PGs in their rookie years match up well against the second PG/SG who is none other than our own Jarrett Jack. Those are his career numbers. The top 10s have more points, more assists, more rebounds, more steals and a little lower FG and 3pt% (mainly because Livingston didn't take any threes his rookie year.)
So if history holds true, Mayo, Bayless, Gordon and Rose will have a better year IN THEIR ROOKIE YEARS, than Jack has averaged his entire career with many more years of improvement to come.
Better in their rookie years
- That's an average that you posted. That means some did better, some did worse. So we could say out of Mayo, Bayless, Gordon, and Rose, perhaps two will be better in their rookie year and two will be worse than Jack's career numbers so far. And no one knows for sure which will be better and which worse (though I'm very high on Rose, and think he is likely to be better).
- If a PG takes 3-4 NBA years, typically, to begin to reach potential, we might be giving up on Jack at just the wrong time. I don't care anymore about Jack's career numbers. It's an irrelevance, especially since he's had injury problems until this year (no one ever seems to remember that this is his first reasonably healthy year). I care about what he's bringing now, and what he's likely to bring next year. That is all that matters.
- If a PG takes 3-4 years, and possibly a little longer for guys who come out after their freshman year (and that's who you are talking about here), a rookie now puts us behind the curve. We should begin to really contend in 09-10. Jack should be hitting his peak just at that time, with Sergio a year or two behind that, and perhaps Koponen another year or two later, about the time that this year's college freshmen begin to peak. By giving up and going young again at PG, we might delay title contention by 2-3 years.
To add onto jscot's comments:
I'm not adverse to trading Jack if it improves the team. I am saying that a) it is not a given that Pritchard can just decide to package Jack and our pick for a position high enough to get most of the guys you mention and b) it is not a given that any of the guys you mention are going to be an improvement over Jack. One of them? Sure, that's likely. Two of them? Still within the realm of possibility. More than that? Now we are into diminishing odds.
Perhpas it is my fault for reading more into your original comments than you intended. The impression I came away with was "We need trade Jarrett Jack." "In fact, we should just package him with our pick to move up and grab our championship caliber starting PG." I thought it sold Jack short and represented a rather low likelihood of occurring.
The sign this thread is a fantasy...
Yeah, right!
t
you don't know Jack
I wouldn't be so anxious to want to trade Jack for some unspecified deal. I agree that Jack is probably not our championship starter, but who do you think you would get as a replacement backup point guard? He is clearly the fieriest player on the team, and I think that has an overall effect on the team. He's definitely made some bad turnovers but he has also shown that he can elevate his game and lift the team when it needs it. He's apparently the only player other than Roy that can drive to the basket and finish. I think almost any player can reduce the number of unforced errors, but not every player can raise the level of their game. cf. Dan Dickau.
I think Blake has proven that he could be that steady backup point guard, but Jack gives you the added dimension of driving to the basket. Granted, he is more turnover prone than Blake, but part of that has to go with the more agressive nature of his game.
by blazernerd on Feb 29, 2008 9:06 AM PST reply actions
Jack
Anyway, if we do get rid of him, Blake is a great backup PG. Steady, doesn't make too many mistakes, and shoots well enough to keep defenses honest. We need a starting pg though.......
Not to mention
"Wait - they're just straight lines! WTF?!?"
by DonkeyShins on Feb 29, 2008 10:34 AM PST up reply actions
This is true but Jack
Also I would not consider moving up 4-7 picks in the draft "a bag of chips." With the right scouting we can get a pretty good player who can contribute right away with the 6th pick, don't you think?
by SpyderRyder on Feb 29, 2008 11:27 AM PST up reply actions
My Bag of Chips comment
In my comment somewhere in this thread, I basically said I'd package him with our pick and another player to move into the top 5.
I'd have to check, but I recall that Jack
And Martell was selected with the 6th pick, so it's not automatic that whomever is taken at that spot is going to contribute right away. Can we all say "Darko"? Or how about Kwami, or Candyman or Bryant Reese.
BTW - which teams that are likely to be drafting 6 through 10 do you see as possible trading partners?
Solve the PG problem = SIGN CALDERON!!!
Heck we could throw Sergio into the deal...seeing as so many people think Senor Rudy Fernandez will need a compatriot to make him feel at ease when he gets here, why not make it Calderon?
Lets face it, Calderon is everything Sergio will never be.
by doubledee on Feb 29, 2008 9:51 AM PST reply actions
I agree
by blazernerd on Feb 29, 2008 10:15 AM PST up reply actions
How much would I pay for him?
So based on what Toronto would be willing to offer, we would have to exceed that. My guess is that they wouldn't want another high paid PG on the team. Then again, I don't know alot.
As far as cap space goes...that's another good question. To me, having watched a majority of the games this season I can only opine that the PG position is a major deficit on our team. One that won't be fixed in the forseeable future w/ our current roster. The addition of Rudy will only fill the gap at our backup two spot (behind Roy). Our front-court however has tremendous potential in Greg Oden, LA, Outlaw and Jones.
Out of all of the positions I think we need the most improvement, its the 1. So I would be willing to pay $10M or under for this guy to come and fill that gap. I'm very interested to see what we will do at the one...I may start a diary asking more inquiry from the others here about this topic.
by doubledee on Feb 29, 2008 10:51 AM PST up reply actions
We cannot sign Calderon
Webster $3.7mill
Sergio $1mill
Frye $3.1mill
Jack $ $2mil
for Calderon $10mill
IF Tor would want to do that which is doubtful
PG: Calderon, Blake, Koponen? 08 1st?
SG: Roy, Fernandez
SF: Webster, Jones, Miles
PF: Aldrige, Outlaw, McRoberts
C: Oden, Pryzbilla, Raef
Might work but most times when you try a lot of good players for one great player it doesnt work.
by SpyderRyder on Feb 29, 2008 11:39 AM PST up reply actions
One thing to keep in mind...
Absolutely agreed...
We'll see if KP is truly a god figure...
t
Draft BEST PLAYER AVAILABLE...
B.Roy, LMA, Oden, and Outlaw; mixed with Nate and KP...
And all the rest of our roster is still seen as moveable. The key is to always draft the best available player because we don't know what all we really have AND... we always have KP and the Pritch-Slap to fall back on. Meaning, trades and moves can and will shape this roster at a few points of the Roy/LMA/Oden era. Some small and some large, but with the draft they simply need to push best player available.
Obviously if we get a chance at a great big, we take him and trade Frye. Or if we get a chance at a top PG talent, Jack is moveable, etc.
If we move these guys prior to the draft, then we are almost forced into what we use our first pick for.
I also don't think that KP should trade away all our 2nd Rounders this year, we have three, and I would like at least one more Euro-In-the-Waiting drafted for future "bonus" talent. We are not even considering Petteri Koponen from Finland when we have our PG discussion. He is developing over there and could be an impact player when he and the Blazers decide to have him come over.
I do agree that PG is our biggest need for a game changer, then it is Shooting. With Shooting though, Outlaw continues to improve, Webster is also improving, James Jones will be back someday, and Wafer might develop into something off-the-bench.
by Scotty the Mastermind on Feb 29, 2008 10:13 AM PST reply actions
KP said on the Qlive chat that
by SpyderRyder on Feb 29, 2008 11:45 AM PST up reply actions
Throw all expendable we have
We are making the pincers with which we are going to crush all teams located between Hawaii and Spain.
Dang
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricky_Rubio
by tominhawaii on Feb 29, 2008 11:27 AM PST up reply actions
high schooler vs. college player
His response was that these high school players do not have good fundamentals. His example was Martell, playing the 2 against high schoolers with his NBA body. Who needs fundamentals when your physicallity allows you to do anything you want.
He said, Travis' high school coach was terrible. Just put a bunch of kids in a gym and threw them a ball. I guess about what you'd expect from Starkville Miss.
The question I didn't ask is whether Martell would be able to overcome the lack of fundamentals? He pointed out that there is hardly any practice time for these players with the hectic NBA schedule.
Travis has obviously made quantum leaps of improvement, but there are stretches where even I can see he is kind of lost. Most of his success is due to his amazing athleticism, although I think his work with asst. coaches also shows.
Can these players overcome this lack of fundamentals?
Should we continue go after these high school level players? Other than the "can't miss" type playes like LeBron, Kobe, Garnett, (Oden?) I think maybe we should steer clear of the high schoolers. It seems pretty rare to get a lottery pick player with more than 2 years of college.
by blazernerd on Feb 29, 2008 10:31 AM PST reply actions
Maybe the best thing:
Of course, they'd have to do this in such a way where it doesn't violate the league contract rules. Maybe offer free ice cream or something. :-)
Sort of like a GED program for NBA players.
by DonkeyShins on Feb 29, 2008 10:42 AM PST up reply actions
Let me tell you how it is
KP has said, more than once, that his model for a team is three superstars. Those three guys are already on the team.
The team does not need to get any younger, and drafting a freshman point guard requires Nate to develop another unproven young guy. What they really need to do, is grab a point guard that is already in the league. One that their team will give up on in two years. Kind of like Chauncey Billups, back in the day.
A lot of other people have said we need an energy, banger guy to come off the bench and grab rebounds. I am confident that KP is going to draft Tyler Hansbrough. The only way I see KP not drafting him is if the Blazers somehow land a top three pick. KP said the other day, in the Quick Chat, that in the lottery you grab best player available. After that, you can draft to fill needs.
Why Tyler Hansbrough? I have loved the guy for the last two years. Each time I see him play, I can see that he is consistently the most energetic player on the court and his intensity is always a level above everyone else. He makes all of his teammates better, because of his desire and intensity. He will not be a perennial all star but he will be a player like David Lee from the Knicks. Probably one of the few untouchable players on that team, and not because of his stats.
In Chad Ford's NBA Dish podcast on February 26th, he spoke with David Thorpe about the draft. They compared Hansbrough's intensity with that of Michael Jordan. Actually, Thorpe said Hansbrough's intensity surpasses MJ's. Admittedly, one of them mentioned Mark Madsen towards the end, but it was not a direct comparison. It was based on utility guys that can stay in the league forever, so I choose to over look that comment. You can listen for yourself here.
Hansbrough oozes KP's culture. I think KP will draft him, not for his stats, but for his culture. Hansbrough will make the entire roster better because of his heart and desire.
What I need is moldorf to do the math and tell me how we can stand pat until after 2010 and get Lebron James. I'm not serious, but he'll be a free agent right after Darius Miles salary comes off the books. To make an honest run at LeBron, it would probably require a sign and trade of some good players, and the Miles expiring contract. Dwayne Wade is available too, but he keeps getting beat up.
Bron Bron
What does all this boil down to you ask? Brooklyn.
Brooklyn, Jay-Z, and the Nets.
That's where Bron Bron will be winning his titles.
by courtsideerrandboy on Feb 29, 2008 12:42 PM PST up reply actions
Thinking about it
Harris at the 1, Carter at the 2, Jefferson at the 3 and James at the 4. Not the biggest line-up but still tons of weapons.
And they'd have an ok bench.
Ooo.
that hansbrough...
Your true colors come out!!
2007:
Conley: 26.8min, 4.8ast, 1.6to, 9.4ppg, 44%fg, 26%3pt
2006:
Foye: 22.9min, 2.8ast, 1.9to, 10.1ppg, 43%fg, 36%3pt
2005:
D Williams: 28.8min, 4.5ast, 1.8to, 10.8ppg, 42%fg, 41%3pt
Paul: 36min, 7.8ast, 2.3to, 16.1ppg, 43%fg, 28%3pt
Felton: 30.1min, 5.6ast, 2.3to, 11.9ppg, 39%fg, 35%3pt
2004:
Gordon: 24.4min, 2ast, 2.3to, 15.1ppg, 41%fg, 40%3pt
Livingston: 27.1min, 5ast, 2.5to, 7.4ppg, 41%fg, 0%3pt
Harris: 15.4min, 2.2ast, 1.1to, 5.7ppg, 42%fg, 33%3pt
2003:
Hinrich: 35min, 6.8ast, 2.7to, 12ppg, 38.6%fg, 39% 3pt
Ford: 26min, 6.5ast, 2.5to, 7.1ppg, 38%fg, 23%3pt
There is a lot of data to suggest that a PG/SG taken in the top 10 picks will not be a project and struggle.
Funny in listening to the Olive chat KP says that their philosophy is to go BPA but also stresses that lower down in the draft like #13-30 it is more positional based drafting.
Spyder, 40 % of the guys you list
And Jack is averaging 9.8 and 4.
I'm not saying it can't happen. In fact if there really is a guy that Pritchard likes and believes is an improvement over what he has, he's just the guy to get a deal done. I just don't see it as being a high probability.
I read your original post as "Let's trade Jack and our pick to move up, so we can get a much better player." I don't think it's a stupid idea. I just don't think it's that simple and I'm not convinced we could move up high enough to get a guy that is a much better player.
Tom
Thanks
I think they should try to resign
I am Ok with either drafting a good PG prospect or getting some veteran like Hinrich. I just won't be able to stand another season of Jack and Sergio.
If minesota drafts Rose do you guys think Foye would be available?
by Bruno on Feb 29, 2008 12:56 PM PST reply actions
no
by winnerwinner on Feb 29, 2008 1:46 PM PST up reply actions
If I was KP I'd
I also think that trading Jack on draft night would be the way to go. Moving up in the draft to grab Bayless, Westbrook, Mayo would be ideal. OR we could trade Jack and out 1st round pick for a veteran PG. There are so many PG's in the West like Paul, Deron, Nash, Parker, Kidd, and Davis. Did you know that if the playoffs started today, all those PG's would be leading their teams in the playoffs? Only the Lakers and Rockets have average PG's and they have Super Duper Stars in kobe and Yao. Available PG's in the East are Hinrich, Calderon and Marcus Williams. Yeah I said Marcus Williams from the Nets. O.k he's not better than what we got now but he's worth looking into.
Perimeter defense...
An energetic defense-minded PG would inspire the other backcourt players to step it up on the defensive end and create more break-away opportunities. So who fits the bill....?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- David Stern changed the competition committee to push new rules, report says
- Nazr Mohammed films Oklahoma City Thunder fans welcoming the team back at 5:30 in the morning (VIDEO)
- The Orlando Magic finally part ways with both Stan Van Gundy and GM Otis Smith
- Mike D’Antoni breaks silence on New York Knicks exit: ‘An obstacle had to be removed’
- Adam Morrison looks great, everyone
