Joel and the subjective guide to backup center desirability

He has the 2nd best rebounding rate for centers behind Dwight Howard. He also has the 8th highest true shooting percentage among centers. That’s the good news. The bad news is he has the WORST turnover ratio in league for centers who play more than 11 minutes a game. Not so good.

One thing I like about Joel is that he takes a hit and gets back up – that and he’s shown he can be an enforcer down low if needed. Given the raft of big men in the NBA these days that shun contact like the plague, that’s something I’m willing to pay for. He’s also constantly trying to improve himself (free throw shooting last year – hopefully outlet pass this year since the second unit may start running like gazelles with Rudy, Bayless and Trout in that lineup), which is very nice to see with a player who has a guaranteed contract.

Okay, Greg could one day be the best center in the league, true, but at the same time he cannot play 48 minutes a game. He cannot play 35 minutes a game, he’s going to be averaging about in the mid 20s-high 20s if he becomes the best center ever. So you need a back-up, and Joel is our only back-up center right now, I don’t see how you can see value in trading him.

 Joel’s contract is anything but huge, no one else sees his value, and you’ve got him locked up for the prime of his career (centers are best in the 27-32 age range), so what exactly are you planning to get out of this by trading him? Every team needs a good back-up center, and we have one at a reasonable price, why would we go trading him, when nobody in the league sees his value? C’mon Batum and Bayless? neither of these guys have shown that they can play in the NBA I think its a little early to start cannibalizing Joel’s salary for unproven rookies who are on contract for three more years.

Sometimes players with value should not be traded, what do you think we could get out of a Joel trade? Certainly not anybody who fits the role on our team any more perfectly than he does. If we get rid of Joel in a trade then we suddenly have a gaping hole in our second unit, and we get a very small amount of value out of it. I’m sorry for rambling and making the same point over and over, but Joel is a perfect fit for out second unit, and getting rid of him opens up a huge hole on our team, that unless we somehow were able to trade for one of the other high end back-up centers (who will certainly demand more money) this will be a glaring weakness on our team

that we should get rid of good players because other teams don’t have them. Unless you can provide any way in which we get a better player out of a deal with Joel which as it has been pointed out, the rest of the league doesn’t value Joel the way we do, then why trade him for no reason? Unless we get a “big three” style player out of the trade, then why do it? We have the money (Big gangsta PA), and the spot for him on the team (Channing Frye returning to the 5? oh please god not again) so….

Oh and GS definitely had the possibility to keep Baron Davis, they are paying it out to Elton Brand now. BD was definitely not Monte’s backup by any means, nor did they play the same position, nor is the money Joel’s making anything like BD demanded. Golden State was trying to hold out and pay less money, but instead another team swooped in during the FA period, and it was not a trade. Golden State was very interested in trying to keep BD on the team, BD wanted to go someplace else… Ummm… do you want me to keep going on how the proposed hypothetical trade and Baron Davis’ situation have nothing in common?

definitely maggette, and yea 35 minutes for when he’s healthy is a much better estimate than my mid 20s… sorry about that…

Raef doesn’t play…

We play two units not a substitution 9, we don’t have to worry about financial flexibility, BAD teams don’t have back-up centers, and Horrible teams have no center at all.

Once again its like you’re trying to make it so that we should feel bad for having two centers, or we should be guilted into trading him. We’re not about necessity on this team, and we are not being roster snobs, we are about making the best possible team. Its not like having Joel’s salary in cash helps us win a championship, having the best players helps us to win championships, and Joel is worth his salary, and a trade wouldn’t garner us a better player or a better team in general. I’m not saying ‘never trade Joel’, what I am saying is that it is very unlikely that we would get a player that would better fit our team, for as little money, in any trade.

I don’t have time to read all the comments yet, but Joel will be Greg’s daddy this year, then the son will show the dad how to take it to the next level
+1 Rec

Wilson Chandler, but if so you are seriously under-rating Joel’s 1.24 blocks per game

Tyson Chandler when you wrote Wilson Chandler (because of the youtube video), but then I realized you were just trashing Joel’s ability.

And I can’t tell if you’re joking about the snob thing, if so weird joke…

If not, I really don’t understand what you mean. Are you saying that I am acting snobbish now? Or are you saying that the Blazers should gut their team, and make bad trades so that way they can move down on your snobbish scale? Either way what I wrote and you quoted is true.

The fact that Raef literally played 7.5 minutes last season, and averaged under two points and two rebounds and is extremely obvious trade bait and so is completely useless as a back-up isn’t snobbery. Look at Minnesota, New York, Miami after Shaq was traded: no centers = Horrible teams (Its not even like this is an argument, some teams are good, some are bad, and some are horrible). Joel IS a great fit for our team…. And if being a “roster snob” in your book gets the Blazers a championship then sure we should be roster snobs. And you’ve provided no reasoning why getting rid of Joel would help our franchise aside from the fact that after his contract is over we may need cap flexibility (and once again PA’s wallet isn’t being snobbish, just incredibly lucky) despite the fact that PA has publicly said he’s willing to pay to keep this team together if he sees production (so it won’t effect the money going to LA, Roy or Oden)…

I’m really going to have to conclude that either its a bad joke; or personal insults are the only way you’re keeping yourself in this discussion.

Joel may eventually want to play somewhere else: cool, whatever, that has nothing to do with whether we want him on our team, nor does it have anything to do with trading him, until he becomes unhappy here.

Look at it from another perspective: Just because an NBA athlete is not being maximized as a player does not mean anything to the team with the contract, as long as they are being maximized to the team with the contracts advantage. Just because another team might have better use for Joel, unless they are willing to pay for that use, there is no reason to give him away.

If we had Lebron James as a reserve on some completely hypothetical amazing team, just because he wasn’t being allowed to flourish because as a reserve he was only getting 15 minutes a game, does not mean we should trade him to another team for less than his value, we don’t owe anything to the rest of the league or to that player in specific, you should build the best team you can regardless of unmaximized ability.

So we should pay instead for a guy that a trainer is justified in ignoring?

Its only nonsense if the other party realizes the value they are getting and therefore pay for it, which is what I have been saying this entire time. If we get value out of trading Joel, let’s trade him, but as it is right now he fills a spot on our team, for a reasonable amount of money, and as the rest of the league does not see Joel as valuable, there is no reason to throw him to a team like Minnesota or New York and take back another bench player, but instead at a position where we are more depth comfortable <SF, SG, or PF> and give away our reserve for one of our shallower positions .

Unless we can trade Joel for someone who starts over one of our starters, there is no reason to trade him as he is a very valuable reserve.

I think you meant to say, Jerome James is “trash” . . . :)

I surely wouldn’t trade the sandwich for my neighbor’s rice cake, just because I had to mow the lawn.

And so your grand idea is pay somebody else Joel’s salary and get them just because they are worse. Really an excellent idea, I am not sure why we don’t do this…

And I certainly don’t have to give any reason why Joel would want to be here long term. There is a story in the Tribune all about that and the ties he and his wife have to the community. But even if he weren’t happy about the ability to inflate his stats playing against other teams’ second units, and therefore get paid more in the next salary negotiations (whether with our team or another) it doesn’t matter. NBA players are mercenaries and we hold the contract.

Look, the burden of proof is clearly on your shoulders, status quo is he is here. Your job in trying to prove your point is to show why the Blazers would want to trade him.

Your reasons so far are: he’s too good to be used as a reserve, trading him provides cap flexibility (only if he is traded to a team that is under the cap themselves and can absorb the contract), and that keeping him is wasting his ability (I guess 1 and 3 are pretty similar). Number two is the only reason that from the position of the Blazers that helps the franchise, but I would argue that he has more value as a player than we could get using that cap flexibility. Numbers 1 and 3 are absolutely ridiculous reasons to trade him, from the point of view of the Blazers.

is that he’ll push GO in practice. Joel is competitive and experienced, and GO will be forced to develop by constantly being tested by a bone fide NBA center in practice. Hakeem developed his game by facing Moses Malone in summer pick-up games. OK, GO’s situation isn’t THAT optimal, but Joel will definitely help him.

Man, you are the one who won’t give any legitimate reasons as to why Joel should be traded, and makes up ridiculous metaphors that don’t work. (the mower is the team, and joel is the sandwich, and metaphors are supposed to elucidate your points instead of obfuscating them).

Look here is the bottom line: I don’t think that he should be traded just because he could start some place else, unless we are getting a starter, salary cap consideration, or a better back-up center or point guard (shallow positions) I see a lot of value in keeping him here in the reserve role.

Your points (interpreted into rational points):
 
He is going to be ignored by the trainer, so we should get a worse player so they won’t distract the trainers from Oden, Roy, and LMA (seriously).
We could get an expiring contract, or a team that has cap space could take him.
He is too good to be a reserve, and so we should trade for a worse player.
He could possibly not like it here, which would mean something.
You’re a snob for wanting good players on your bench.

My response: Tearing hair out in frustration.

+1

anyone want to create an over/under on how long it takes our attention-whore friend here to get banned?

You also have to consider how a player fits with the team they are playing on, not just stats and contracts. I don’t think Joel doesn’t fit particularly well as a back up center, so in a lot of ways that gives the advantage, in a sense, to other players. I agree with what a number of posters have said, Joel is a starting caliber center at this point and will play best with more minutes that he will get backing up Oden.

Personally I think Joel is valuable as a backup, and would be way undervalued if he was traded (which I hope he is not). As long as he is happy here, I think he fits nicely in with this team.

And once in a great while it might be nice to hose slower teams with the twin towers of doom.