Juicy Blazers Courtside Trade W/ Poll Question

by silkybrown on Jun 20, 2008 2:57 AM PDT Comment 32 comments

Listening to Blazer's Courtside tonight, Barrett and Rice mentioned what I thought would be a really beneficial trade for both of the teams involved to do. I don't know if this was just an idea, a rumor, or what. Here is what it was:

Blazers send New Jersey:

Jarrett Jack, Channing Frye, Travis Outlaw, Raef Lafrentz, 13th Pick

New Jersey sends Portland:

Richard Jefferson, 10th Pick

The rationale here is that Jefferson would fill our needs at Small Forward, and then we could use the #10 pick to obtain D.J. Augustin, improving our Point Guard position..

Our starting lineup will then be Jefferson, Aldridge, Oden, Roy, & Augustin. Our backups would be Webster, some PF (Maybe McBob will be much improved this year), Przybilla, Rudy, & Blake.

If Augustine isn't available at 10, perhaps we can get Alexander, keep Blake in the starting lineup, and sign Petteri Koppenen to fill Jarrett Jack's roster spot.

I personally would rather include Webster than Outlaw. James Jones is an adequate reserve SF. Otherwise, we could draft someone who could be a back-up forward or guard with a second round pick, or package our second round picks for a late first round pick to get one. I should mention that Jefferson does have 3 more years on his current deal, for quite a chunk of money. However, LaFrentz's contract is a big help to us in this situation, and we have Paul Allen as an owner.

What are your thoughts? I say, get it done KP.

Poll

If you were Kevin Pritchard and have the opportunity to do the above mentioned trade (with Webster and Outlaw being interchangeable), do you do it?

Yes

54 votes

No

125 votes

179 votes | Poll has closed

1 recs | Comment 32 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I certainly wouldn't do it this summer.

KP has repeatedly said that he wants to see how these players work with each other. However, when the trade deadline approaches, I think it would be worth re-evaluating.

One of Two Official Blazer's Edge Poets Laureate for the 2008-2009 Season

Chaplain of the Jarrett Jack Fan Club

"Scholars have long known that fishing eventually turns men into philosophers. Unfortunately, it is almost impossible to buy decent tackle on a philosopher's salary." - Patrick McManus

by T Darkstar on Jun 20, 2008 5:44 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I was just listening

And they’re talking about the Barbosa rumor that came out of the Arizona Republic (newspaper). They said the talks are substantial and this is the deal…....

Martell
Jack
#13

For

Barbosa
and player to be named to fill it out

Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game

by iDea on Jun 20, 2008 6:48 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

My first response is that I don't see how that's a good fit

So I’m going to think.

Barbosa is a guard and we already have Rudy and Roy.

Still, Barbosa has shown that he can come off the bench and has excellent skills. That makes a STRONG three guard rotation and Barbosa is in our window and I don’t believe he’s expensive for the talent.

At the SF position this means that Outlaw will be running it or James, and I’m not sure either is really starter material. Outlaw is EXCELLENT off the bench, but a starter with major minutes? His B-ball IQ can be dangerous with a lot of minutes.

I also see outlaw as a good PF/SF filler so that talent gets some good minutes. This means we keep Frye and Pryz and they only see about 10-15 minutes a game. I think Pryz would be okay, and maybe Frye, but Frye is better than that and that could become an issue.

To sum it up:

Outlaw is a weak starter.
Creates a KILLER guard situation
Makes the blazers weaker on defense. (outlaw starter as webster is a better defender)
Makes the blazers stronger on offense.
Eliminates Sergio

I like it but I’d rather keep Webster. I think his talent set better fills our needs and I do believe he’ll get better. Webster has had some attitude adjustment (doesn’t smile and wants to be a star) and I’d take that into consideration moving forward. It’s very possible that he needs to go and hence why he’s on the block. In that case I like what I get with him and I do it.

On the Suns end:

They’re looking to make the run now… I think it’s a DUMB idea, but jack and webster do help strengthen the team on defense and Jack will very likely thrive under Porter. It’ll slow the pace of the game down and I suspect that’ll be good for Jack.

You know… I think this trade is probably the best trade that I’ve heard so far out of all the rumors. The best as in most likely.

"We play for one thing and one thing only, and that's championships." - The Devil Spawned

by ratbastird on Jun 20, 2008 8:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know how these rumours get started

but these guys don’t do their homework. That trade definitely doesn’t work now because of Barbosa’s BYC. After July 1st, the salaries might be close enough depending on how much the 13th pick makes. Then Portland would be drafting for Phoenix at 13. But Phoenix doesn’t have any other players to include, unless they sign and trade one of their many expired FAs, none of which I think we would want…

Blazermania - It's not just for die-hards anymore.

by Blazerholic on Jun 20, 2008 10:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

You're not gonna get that player at 10 for one thing...

............................. and who wants Richard Jefferson for another?

"You don't live by the jumpshot, you die by the jumpshot." ---Charles Barkley, 2/7/08

by timbo on Jun 20, 2008 8:17 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

for once you and i see eye to eye

RJeff is OVER-RATED!!!

We don't NEED the draft. -Mortimer 6/18

by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Jun 20, 2008 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Barbosa rumor is intriguing

this one is a non starter. Jefferson doesn’t do anything for me, and that’s a lot of pieces to give away to move up three slots in the draft.

by raoulduke on Jun 20, 2008 8:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I'd say no due to the impact on salary cap position

You might get someone like RJ without giving up any pieces.

by tweener on Jun 20, 2008 8:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Richard Jefferson

I’m out of the loop on this guy as he’s fallen off my radar over the years.

Question I’d have is:

1.) What is his attitude and is he a team first player?
2.) Is he injury prone?
3.) Does his talent set fit with the blazers need?
4.) What is his age and does it fit in the window of a championship run in three years?
5.) How does Jefferson effect the salary cap and expectation of what other players are earning? (If he’s being paid like a star but isn’t a star, then you’re going to be paying star salaries for all players at his level and that can become expensive.)
6.) Do we really want that number 10 pick?
7.) Do I YEARN for Jefferson enough to shed young talent and…
8.) Is Jefferson the best I can get for my talent?

My gut is that I the answer is no because i believe he’s been around for a while and won’t really fit with my window. I also suspect he’s being paid more than he’s worth and I seem to remember that he’s had some injuries.

If I’m Jersey I do it because I’m looking to shed cash, go young, and rebuild.

"We play for one thing and one thing only, and that's championships." - The Devil Spawned

by ratbastird on Jun 20, 2008 8:42 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs

oh and 9.) because I'm KP...

9.) Can I turn that deal into a three or four way that gets me something even better so that I can Pritchslap the other GMs?

"We play for one thing and one thing only, and that's championships." - The Devil Spawned

by ratbastird on Jun 20, 2008 8:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Amen to every thing RB said

Rec’d

"Beards--they grow on you"

by prezofdeath on Jun 20, 2008 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'll try to answer some of the questions...

Jefferson, I believe, is known as more of a slasher than a shooter. He’s known as a guy who flourishes in the fast break but is a bit neutered in the half court sets. He actually does take a significant amount of jump shots though with decent results (43.1 eFG%, more Roy-level than Webster-level (50.1 eFG%).

By plus/minus, he’s a bad defender despite his athleticism. He’s also a bad rebounder for a SF.

Age-wise, he’s fine at 27 last year and probably 28 next year. It is slightly on the higher end. While he had two pretty short seasons due to injury, the rest of the seasons he’s been of perfect health (79, 80, 82, 33, 78, 55, and all 82 games this past year).

His PER has been consistantly around 17, which is pretty strong. According to HoopsHype, his contract is for 3 more years ($13,200,000, $14,200,000, $15,000,000). So, he’d be replacing the cap space.

Overall, I’m not a fan of this trade idea. The biggest concern I have is his defense and rebounding. The fact that he’s probably overpaid doesn’t help either.

by poster on Jun 20, 2008 9:06 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

That pretty much settles that

Jefferson = bad contract per talent, bad fit.

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 20, 2008 9:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Based on this information

I agree.

Defense is a concern as is the ability to hit threes. I think one or both of those items are a need at SF. To me, Webster better fits our skill needs AND I see him making a nice leap this year as he understands the role that we need from him.

As Jefferson doesn’t make me drool, I suspect that he’s not good enough to give up potential talent and risk chemistry.

"We play for one thing and one thing only, and that's championships." - The Devil Spawned

by ratbastird on Jun 20, 2008 9:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dude you haven't been here long,

but it’s posters like you and some others (Mortimer, Am1mart1, TiH, ratb, 92, jscot etc.) that always keep me reading the comments. Thanks for always putting up the numbers and supplying all that supplemental info. You and Mortimer should combine and create your own blog. He’s got great persepctive and you gots all the data.

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 20, 2008 9:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Poster is great

He don’t need me for nuthin’, he got it all down his own DAMN self.

Thanks for the compliment though, Hobobob!

I almost never consult the numbers, and I envy those who enjoy consulting the numbers and can really get into it. I understand most of the new stats, and I like a lot of ‘em, but I don’t got the patience for it.

Poster adds a lot to every thread with posts like this. He breaks it down!

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 20, 2008 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It seems like the interesting part

is the pick. If it’s high enough to solve some pt problems, then it may be worth it. However, I don’t think it will be. Augustin is not worth webster at this point. He’s too short. If we’re going to trade some of the young talent for no other reason than to improve other positions (the only reason I can see needing to trade is if they want larger roles), then we could get someone better, less risky.

Might as well saying Westbrook’s not, at this point, worth either Martell or Outlaw. Now, Mayo, Bayless, or possibly Gordon would be something worth thinking about. That minny pick is truly intriguing

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 20, 2008 9:13 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

While I'm not a big fan of short PG's

A LOT OF PEOPLE said the same thing about Paul at the time. I know he’s 6’, but still….....

Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game

by iDea on Jun 20, 2008 9:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

How many Pauls are there VS Damons?

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 20, 2008 10:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not sure what the answer is

but, let’s not get roped into some short guy that just gets dominated. Robinson’s fun to watch, but I would HATE to have him on my team.

I don’t know much about Augustin, but if he turns out anything like Paul, I would LOVE it.

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 20, 2008 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Augustin

in his defense, also has a LONG wing span that can make up for the lack of height to some extent.

"We play for one thing and one thing only, and that's championships." - The Devil Spawned

by ratbastird on Jun 20, 2008 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

or so I've read

"We play for one thing and one thing only, and that's championships." - The Devil Spawned

by ratbastird on Jun 20, 2008 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

For sure

I’m not saying he’s Paul by any means, but I don’t think we should just write him off because he’s 5’10”. Of course, his height makes me leary, but he was pretty nice in college, and from everything we hear, he’s been stellar in his workouts.

Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game

by iDea on Jun 21, 2008 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

no thank you

take out travis and its a deal

Oden...Aldridge...Roy.....THE REAL BIG THREE
Watch my brandon roy vid http://youtube.com/watch?v=RC3Byp4ID1E

by CroRupt on Jun 20, 2008 9:43 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Yes

With Webster included so that Travis stays to backup SF and PF

by Storyteller on Jun 20, 2008 10:52 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Something Similar - Gerald Wallace

Charlotte Bobcats small forward Gerald Wallace has also been mentioned as being available for trades. I would much rather do a similar deal and pick up Wallace and Charlotte’s #9 pick. Wallace is much younger, and is solid all around with a big upside. I would have no problem icluding Outlaw in this trade, eventhough I’m a big Travis fan.

by ajinoregon on Jun 20, 2008 10:57 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Richard Jefferson comes up each week

On Blazers courtside radio show.

I haven’t listened to it yet (now I listen to the podcast while runnin’ aroun’ town’), but every week Mike Rice proposes Richard Jefferson as an option to trade for. This idea above sounds like another Mike Rice idea. He is totally stuck on the idea of Jefferson as a Blazer, and makes up wacky trades each show.

Did Mike Rice throw this idea out there? If so, I wouldn’t worry about it happening.

Richard Jefferson is good, not great, probably not worth his contract, and puts up good numbers when he becomes the main dude on offense. He’s in that grey area where he is definitely, right now, an improvement on whoever we got at SF, but both of our SF could reach the Jefferson area someday soon OR OR OR just plain fit us better by NOT being a main option on offense to be effective.

I am also not that crazy about anyone in the draft that we could get at #10. I think this year’s draft is overrated a little bit. Moving Outlaw and a lot of our bench to get Jefferson and maybe someone like Alexander, ehhhhh…

Jefferson IS good, had great numbers earlier this year, but I don’t think we should trade so many assets to address a SF problem that I don’t think is a real problem. Now PG, maybe I can get behind it, if this was for Devin Harris and not Jefferson. I could ride my skateboard to the back of that truck and grab on and enjoy my trip around Hill Valley with that idea.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 20, 2008 11:27 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

4 SF's Rumored.

Jefferson, Prince, Gordon and Josh Howard are coming up in possible trade rumors. Jefferson because of salary and the need to clear cap space in 2010, as I understand. Of the 4, I like Gordon followed by Prince- if only because I’m skeptical that Dumas will trade Prince. The nice thing about the Gordon/Jefferson deal, is that it puts the option of the 9 and 10 picks out there, and the key to Augustin right now seems to be the Knicks. If they trade, or go for Lopez/Gallinari as some rumor, then Augustin should fall to the 10-11 spot.

by Eben Calder on Jun 20, 2008 11:44 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs