The trade to end all trades (drawer)?
by Norsktroll on Jan 13, 2009 5:38 AM PST
64 comments
Joke, it won't stop until KP really has made his move and the deadline has passed. But in light of the latest rumors around a swap of Conley for Sessions and more, guess what, our complete solution could be sitting in Milwaukee (and we could anger the Grizzlies a little bit more to boot). The Bucks owner seems to start looking out for cap relief more than for his promising playoff position, worries about the luxury tax, and is willing to give up assets. We can help him.
Raef LaFrentz expiring contract, Travis Outlaw, Sergio Rodriguez, Channing Frye (plus maybe a first round and two second round picks and cash) for Richard Jefferson, Ramon Sessions, and Dan Gadzuric. Portand gets the small forward and point guard (backup, later potential starter) they need. While the Bucks get adequate replacements on all positions and a ginormous cap relief as soon as next year and especially in total to become a major player in free agency in 09 and 10.
Here is how it could look on the trade machine.
Jefferson (SF): Fits the descriptions of the rumored-to-be-acquired player almost exactly. He is 28 and a major upgrade on the wing who can really drive it to the rim with his athleticism yet also can score from three point territory. And while not technically a former All-Star he comes close (dunk contest and rookies-sophomore game participant). To have Butler (who is in a shooting slump btw), Prince, Wallace or even younger star small forwards would be nice, but if it's just not happening this straightforward trade instead of complicated multi-team dealings would address many issues at once. He is signed through 2010/11, with an ETO for the last year which he is pretty unlikely to use since his current deal is very good - unless he banks on a team missing out on LeBron would be interested in him instead for consolation. But by this time Nic and/or Martell could be ready to take over for good.
Sessions (PG): He and Gadz are described here in more detail. Restricted free agent next off-season.
Just a little quote from ESPN's performance coach David Thorpe: "Ramon Sessions has terrific court sense and timing. He’s the closest thing I’ve seen to Chris Paul on ball screen action, patiently reading the defenders but ready to make his move (pass, dribble burst, or shoot) in the blink of an eye. His on-court demeanor screams veteran, despite his age."
Gadzuric (C/PF): Ugly contract also running through 2010/11 on the salary level of Joel. But unlike many similar contracts teams want to get rid off he is not useless at least as a third string backup. An athletic player who works very hard on both ends of the floor. Maybe not yet the backup banger we would like, but it's a start and that position can be fairly easily addressed next (Freeland, smaller free agent acquisition).
Waddayathink? There is always the small version next off-season: If Sessions goes to Memphis for Conley, word out of there is that the Grizzlies might also be inclined to not match big offers and let him walk.
2 recs |
64 comments
Email
Print
Comments
I think Milwaukie
is probably a playoff team this year. They seem to be on an upward trend.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
by jscot on Jan 13, 2009 5:48 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
That’s what I thought too. Until they shipped out Mo Willams (whom they had signed to his ridiculous contract) and started these Sessions rumors.
by Norsktroll on Jan 13, 2009 5:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And finances get more and more important, everyone needs to budget (even PA?)
“I think what it tells you is that as we get to the deadline, we’re going to see a ton of deals that are solely financially driven,” said one league executive with knowledge of the Thunder-Mavs-Bobcats discussions. “Teams are cutting the bottom line, especially in light of the economy, the fact that the cap might stay flat this year and go down the following year, which means the luxury tax number will go down, too. If you have escalating deals and a de-escalating tax, that’s the trend you’re going to see.”
by Norsktroll on Jan 13, 2009 6:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, but...
If you are a playoff team, there’s revenue in that, right? And if you are a playoff team, but not with a whole lot to spare, it’s going to cost you in another way if you do a deal that cuts salary but it knocks you out of the playoffs.
In other words, I think this would be more likely if Milwaukie were 4-5 games over .500 or 7-8 under, rather than 2 games under. With their current team, they are probably a 7 seed, but I suspect this deal would knock them out of the playoffs entirely.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
by jscot on Jan 13, 2009 8:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That a good looking trade
Jefferson’s a nice player. All thoose years in New Jersey with both good and mediocre teams taught him a lot about the right time to get things accomplished. Let’s do it.
by oregonslee on Jan 13, 2009 7:04 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I don't like it...we'll be ....ike at back up 4.
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out burns out farms and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
by faith on Jan 13, 2009 7:19 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Ike or Shav
or KP would swing another deal for someone else. We’ve got draft picks, etc. It shouldn’t be hard to pick up a reasonable backup PF. But I’m not sure Ike wouldn’t be ok.
And occasionally we could do the twin towers (Greg/Joel) thing, too.
I think this trade would strengthen us. I’d be very, very surprised if Milwaukie would do it, though.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
by jscot on Jan 13, 2009 8:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Bucks are 8th and improving
Having a good team and competing for the playoffs is important to generating revenue.
I think the Bucks just aren’t willing to pay Sessions (or Sessions doesn’t like Wisconsin) and they want to make sure and get something for him. But trading Sessions and trading Jefferson are two totally different things from a competitive standpoint.
by matthewcc on Jan 13, 2009 8:16 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Like it
I have been lusting after some way for Sessions to join our lineup all season. Sessions v. Bayless would be a good competition for the future. It would make Blake expendable in the right time frame, or gives us another bargaining chip if we want to keep Blake as a backup. Finding minutes to develop both Sessions and Bayless will still be a problem.
Jefferson would be a good mentor for Martell and Batum, and a great player in the meantime. Again, finding playing time to develop Batum would be a question mark. The Bucks might view Travis as an acceptable replacement for Jefferson, but Travis has played better at the 4 than the 3.
I don’t know Gadzuric’s game. Either he or Ike would have to step up and become a servicable backup to LMA. Travis has been our most effective backup at PF, and backup PF has been one of our weakest positions this season. But maybe we don’t have to find the long term solution this year.
I don’t see why Milwaukee would do this deal right now, as they are a borderline playoff team in the east this season, and this messes with a couple of key components. Maybe if they implode between now and the trade deadline…
by jaywalker on Jan 13, 2009 8:27 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Not particularly excited by that deal.
In fact, no way I make it. I happen to be a pretty big Sessions fan and would definitely prefer getting him to any of the other PG’s frequently mentioned here (Hinrich, Conley, Felton, etc.) But Richard Jefferson is overrated in my estimation. I’d rather give the playing time to Martell and Batum.
As for Gadzuric, I have nothing against him, after all he’s just filler. But I loved this line – "he is not useless at least as a third string backup. " – I could possibly fit that description, assuming I was able to do things like keep every one loose in practice and on the bench, act like an assistence coach at times, be a good role model off the court and occassionally be called on to come into a game and foul someone.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 13, 2009 9:13 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I like this trade better
I know we would have to pick up a bad contract but at least it would be a fan favorite plus we get to solid pieces that we need. A starting three and a POWER forward. What do you think?
by PDX1979 on Jan 13, 2009 9:17 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
i never want the stache on this team, so no.
honor rasheed wallace
i like ike
by Zaron5551 on Jan 13, 2009 9:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't really either
The stache has a contract they want to rid themselves of but it also expires next year so KP could probably package him to a team like Indiana, Boston or even Minny in the summer or at the draft. All three of those teams have shown interest in him according to Hoopshype.
by PDX1979 on Jan 13, 2009 9:42 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah the stache seals the deal
No
"Rudy’s flashy passes had the place whispering to each other like we were in junior high" ~BlazermaniacAndy
by courtsideerrandboy on Jan 13, 2009 10:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Try to put yourself in your LazyBoy the morning of the 2006 draft
Would anybody have thought we would hate on the Stache so much? What a turn around!
Brandon Roy is the Shawn Kemp of monogamy
-BE poster whose name I can't remember
by TheTinfoil on Jan 13, 2009 5:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Can't say I would have been so down on him.
But I can accurately say that I was completely against Portland drafting him and a Brandon Roy advocate from the get go. Of course it helped working up here in Seattle and getting to see him a fair amount in Husky games.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 13, 2009 5:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
no thank you
terrible! – Elgin
If you smile at me I will understand, because that is something everybody everywhere does in the same language. - Crosby/Stills/Kantner
by 22baylor on Jan 15, 2009 4:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I like Martell Webster
"Rudy’s flashy passes had the place whispering to each other like we were in junior high" ~BlazermaniacAndy
by courtsideerrandboy on Jan 13, 2009 10:26 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I like Nicholas Batum
We have the youngest team in the league. You can’t give it any more time?
"Rudy’s flashy passes had the place whispering to each other like we were in junior high" ~BlazermaniacAndy
by courtsideerrandboy on Jan 13, 2009 10:27 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
I don’t understand why so many people think they can “fix” the Blazers by getting a new SF. We have two guys that look like they can develop into upper half quality players. We also have the personnel to run 3 guard lineups, plus there is Travis. Call him what you want, but he’s a forward who will get time at either position.
With just the smallest amount of imagination I could not only come up with a starting five that would make even the most jaded fan drool (D Williams/Roy/Prince/Aldridge/Oden), but a second and third unit, plus I’d need a D league team to play all the guys I like. But that’s not the real world. In the real world, we are looking just fine. There is not a single position in the starting lineup that is so glaringly weak (and which we can’t fill from within) that it demands making a trade.
The question becomes, is Gerald Wallace so much of an improvement that he warrants trading away all of Portland’s extra assets. I don’t think the answer is an obvious yes.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 13, 2009 12:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm more worried a trade might cost some chemistry initially than about keeping all players because they are so good
That’s e.g. why I’m not a fan of shipping Blake out during the season, and also would only give away Travis if a serious upgrade comes back. The talent level is high, but we might be fooling ourselves to think it’s so high that we are safe from dropping out of the playoffs in a crazy Western Conference especially defensively. And thats what this team really needs, a success by reaching the playoff and the experience to battle opponents in a series or two to grow into the next tier. A “young veteran” in the starting lineup and a smaller tweak to make the backups a little more dangerous could do the trick. We might be able to do it without, but it could lead to a very bitter disappointment to miss a clearly defined goal. Also we have stated time and again that this year is the best chance to make changes, after that we are capped out with little chances of changing gears without a lot of luck.
by Norsktroll on Jan 13, 2009 12:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, it is still possible that Portland falters ...
… and fails to make the playoffs. But as each game goes by, that possibility appears to be getting smaller, barring the loss of a key player. The Blazers have a very real chance at being 27 – 14 at the half way mark. By my count 20 of the 41 games in the 2nd half are against sub .500 teams. They could play sub .400 ball against the teams with winning records over the 2nd half and still have 50+ wins. If that misses qualifying for a playoff spot, I’ll be disappointed, but not too much. It will still represent a significant improvement from last year. And best of all, there will be little reason to believe that in 09 – 10 the team won’t be able to improve further.
All in all, I just don’t see much out there in the terms of tweaking that is a clear cut case of reward over shadowing risk.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 13, 2009 1:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Chad Ford repost
Jake (Israel): Lovin the chats Chad. How seriously does the Darius Miles situation affect the Blazers? assuming he plays two more games.
Chad Ford: (1:22 PM ET ) Seriously, which is why the Blazers ended up making that desperate, pathetic threat over the weekend. The plan was to be a major player in the free agent market this summer. While the Blazers will still have room this summer, their better bet, now, is to use Raef LaFrentz’s expiring contract (which is really a sweet deal since insurance picks up 80 percent of his salary) and some of his young talent to try to get another big piece or two. Ideally they’d to get a franchise point guard and they need a small forward. There’s been interest in Mike Conley and I know they love Luol Deng. All in all, expect the Blazers to be very proactive at the trade deadline. It’s the best chance of landing another impact player.
Interesting take. Could be that the Blazers were after some major free agent, maybe even something in a sign and trade (Turkoglu, Marion, Kidd, …). Now they have to be a mover and shaker before the trade deadline if they want to make something big happen. By the way, I’m not at all high on Luol Deng. Never was, he does nothing extraordinarily well. And now he has a pretty high price tag. The only thing is that he would probably accept to stand back behind two or three other players since he is really not a franchise player.
by Norsktroll on Jan 13, 2009 10:33 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
This sounds like Chad mouthing conventional wisdom bs.
I have yet to see anyone mention a player who appears to meet even a slightly reasonable threshold of availability, who represents a major upgrade for Portland. Neither Kidd or Conley are that at PG. (Mike Bibby is a better option than either of these guys.) Gerald Wallace or maybe Turkoglu might represent a real improvement, but nothing falling out of the Miles situation prevents Portland from going after them or forces them to take action before this season’s trade deadline.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 13, 2009 12:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's been my thought this whole time
Its clear the Blazers much preferred the option of letting RLEC expire and having cap space. With the Miles contract almost certainly going back on our books, the cap space option (while still there) is less desirable since we won’t have the bucks to go after a top notch FA.
Thus, I expect RLEC to be moved. I’m surprised Ford didn’t mention Gerald Wallace. I think he’d be a better target than either Deng or Conley. Hinrich would be a good target also.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Jan 13, 2009 12:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not bad.
I think we’d certainly take a shot at it. And, I wouldn’t worry too much about the backup PF slot. I happen to believe that as Oden consumes more time, that we’ll see Pryz becoming the first backup off the bench for both Aldridge and Oden. And, let’s not forget that we’ll still have Martel and Batum at the 3, and that could also give us some leverage. Jefferson, after all, is an upper tier player at that solot.
by Eben Calder on Jan 13, 2009 10:34 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Other than Raef – I don’t really see the Blazers taking some of the shots some seem to think they should take. For the life of me, I can’t see why people like Ford keep bringing up “Conley” as a “franchise” point guard. He can’t even nail down the starting role effectively on a bottom feeder like Memphis. Nor, do I see them getting all that excited about Deng. As far as Kidd or his ilk – come on now. What’s the point?
by Eben Calder on Jan 13, 2009 10:38 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
He is in the wrong situation, and is still young enough to grow a lot
In Memphis, it’s pretty clear Mayo will be the the star and a lead guard a la Roy handling the ball in the final minutes to make shots, he could be even much more of a point guard than Roy. Conley is a distributor with very good handles and athleticism (quickness, leaping ability), yet he is pretty useless when standing around as the off-guard waiting for shots (what Blake can do very well). He also has the tools to be a good defender. But for the same reasons he is not ideal next to Mayo, I think he would be less than ideal next to Roy. He would fit well in our second unit, but for that he might be too good. I think he could benefit from a trade to a team that needs a very good ball distributor, and the Bucks with Redd could be such a team.
As far as trades for expensive aging veterans: I’m also not a big fan of that. Turkoglu would barely fit the window, many others are out of it. But Portland planned for a while to have cap space in 09 instead of in 10, so that whole Darius situation really must have hampered more than some minor side-plan and not just Paul Allens piggy bank.
by Norsktroll on Jan 13, 2009 10:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
defense defense defense
Any trade we make must improve our defense. That is all.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Jan 13, 2009 12:27 PM PST reply actions 3 recs
Yes
With required disclaimer about Hollinger stats, we have been among the top 3 teams in offensive efficiency all season long, with LA and Cleveland. But Cleveland and LA are both in the tope 5 in defensive efficiency… Blazers have been around 20th. If we want to get to that next level, it will be by improving our defense.
by TimG on Jan 13, 2009 3:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
By the way
I think Wallace could help with this, but Batum can also develop into an excellent defender, and we haven’t seen if Martell has continued improving in this area… whereas our point guards still aren’t good defenders, and sometimes have been horrific, which is why I would leans towards a solid defensive point guard, like Hinrich, who is not only a good one on one defender, but perhaps more importantly, a great defender within a system—I think he would improve our team defense even more than he would simply improve defense at the PG position alone.
by TimG on Jan 13, 2009 4:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm intrigued.
From a Bucks’ perspective, we’ve been so worried about tax stuff that it’s bizarre to even think about the possibility of having cap space (or moving Gadzuric).
The obvious concern is that the Bucks come out on the short end of the talent stick, but this move definitely helps add some frontcourt depth while providing a very athletic group of small forwards in Outlaw, Mbah a Moute, and Alexander. RJ has been solid on both ends but he’s not a $13.2 million player, so losing him isn’t the biggest loss in the world (though I’m sure Skiles would prefer to keep him).
by Frank Madden on Jan 13, 2009 12:50 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Thanks. But aren't you a bit disappointed that the team can't seem to decide whether they want to save money or make a real playoff run
This is just my little idea of how we could get into the talks. But giving up Sessions AND Alexander for Conley (and maybe a pick) sounded like a downgrade in the short run with the hope that Conley blossoms mid-term in a new system. And all that without getting major cap relief. Wouldn’t the team rather try to find a good deal for Redd or Villanueva and build around the young guys?
by Norsktroll on Jan 13, 2009 1:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m hoping the Conley deal doesn’t happen, for the same reasons you mentioned…if the Bucks are ever going to be good then I’d rather be acquiring young players with upside vs. using them to cut salary. Yes, Conley certainly has upside and may turn into a really good player, but I’d rather have both Sessions and Alexander than just Conley.
Besides, I don’t think Sessions will get a full MLE offer sheet this summer anyway, and if the Bucks do move somebody I’d prefer it be Villanueva, who doesn’t seem like he’ll ever be a full-time starter for a Skiles team anyway.
by Frank Madden on Jan 13, 2009 1:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
T Darkstar said you were still very convinced of Sessions
You think no team looking for a good point guard will offer Sessions more than $5 to $6 million? I hope KP reads that and rescues some cap space ;-)
Heck, I could even see teams like the Mavs and Spurs try that to get a solution for their aging star point guards.
by Norsktroll on Jan 13, 2009 1:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If you love Sessions
You should hope we ain’t 5 million under the cap, but anything OVER it, so we CAN throw the MLE at the kid… if we’re under the cap only a little bit with Raef’s deal expiring, we can only offer Sessions whatever we are under the cap.
I am not convinced Sessions is a guy we need to go for, but I’m willing to BE convinced, and I could see him getting Beno Udrih money from someone who really likes what they see. And that sort of MLE type money can come from anyone over the cap, as we know.
Charlie V is an incredibly frustrating player. Seemingly able to score on anyone some games, rebounding, blocking a few shots, but with little to no defense and huge jumps in quality of play from game to game (I guess you can say "inconsistent"). I would want to move him also, before he becomes known as a Tim Thomas type, and not a young guy with still a quite a bit of potential left.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 13, 2009 2:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
minor point but you really don't understand the relationship of cap and mle
There is a test involved to see if there is any cap space available at all. If no space is available the exceptions are allowed. If any space is available neither the mle or the low exception(forgot the name) are allowed, but that space will be larger than either of these combined because of the math of the test. The test is all your commitments plus all other potential committments including cap hold space for players to be potentially resigned as aptly described by Dave, the mle, the lower one, any trade exceptions, all unsigned draft picks. Am I leaving anything out? So being under the cap, even just a little, means you have more the the MLE to throw at free agents.
Regards,
by mrwonderfulone on Feb 6, 2009 4:03 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Here's my trade
Bulls In:
Channing Frye
Ike Diogu
REC
Blazers In:
Kirk Hinrich
Drew Gooden
This works for both because all of the contracts the bulls are receiving are could potentially be expiring, if they don’t pick up options on Ike & Channing. The Blazers get Kirk who would be a dramatic improvement at the Point Guard spot and Gooden could be a solid back up power forward and is an expiring contract as well.
honor rasheed wallace
i like ike
by Zaron5551 on Jan 13, 2009 1:50 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Man I hate Gooden
Or maybe I just love to hate him… or at least love to make fun of him…
But I have to love this trade for us, don’t think the Bulls would do it though, I think they’d push for Przybilla, and need at least someone who could be a better contributor, probably Travis, though he is so much like a poor man’s deng… I think a deal with chicago would probably have to be a three team deal, where they end up with a decent big man.
by TimG on Jan 13, 2009 4:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think they would just be happy to get expiring contract
honor rasheed wallace
i like ike
by Zaron5551 on Jan 13, 2009 4:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I prefer this one
I think this is totally doable, and realistically it might work for both teams
Drawbacks to this trade: We lose short term flexibility, but lets face it, this miles thing has killed our cap next year anyway. We have to play Ike at backup PF. We get heavy at SF
Bonus: We get a bonafide all-star at SF, we get cap relief in 2010. We have trade bait possibility at SF that we can move for a starting PG if Bayless doesnt pan out, or another backup PF.
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 13, 2009 1:55 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
i don't want the blazers to have anything to do with Hughes and I personally thing Deng is pretty overrated
honor rasheed wallace
i like ike
by Zaron5551 on Jan 13, 2009 2:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I would take hughes and put him where Shavlik is
And enjoy that 12 mil expiring contract in 2010 right when Greg, LMA and Broy are up for new contracts. Deng is a great all around player in my mind. And I am sure Chi has a pretty good view of Outlaw.
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 13, 2009 2:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I always liked Deng
And perhaps it is because he’s often coming off an injury, but his defense has been pretty bad on individual matchups.
I’d blame his surprisingly slow lateral quickness, which makes him too slow to guard SFs and he’s too small to guard PFs. I always thought he was going to be a really good player, an allstar even, but his career thus far has been sidetracked by numerous reoccurring injuries.
He’s still only 24 (feels like he’s been around forever), and these sort of things can happen and then improve drastically and a player gets over the unlucky streak of injuries.
I worry about his defense, his lack of a long range shot, no penetrating/playmaking ability, and that he hasn’t developed a post up game— and with his length and good SF size, he really should.
Right now, he’s a kinda slow mid-range shooter. I thought he’d be more, so I hope he does become more, even if he doesn’t become a Blazer. I always liked Deng…
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 13, 2009 2:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He has a great all around game
Brandon esque if you will. I worry a little bit about his defense too but at the same time the guy played his first game back last night. He has a great midrange shot, can score on his own and is willing to rebound/pass.
I would REALLY love that money off the books in 2010 though.
Wade and Roy Backcourt?
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 13, 2009 3:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I never liked Deng
He does everything good and nothing really well. Josh Howard does everything good and more things well. Deng can’t really drive to the hoop like some more athletic forwards and guards, he can’t shoot from outside like Prince and others, he doesn’t steal a lot. And if I am not mistaken by what the guys on Blogabull write, he has a nasty tendency to disappear in fourth quarters and overtimes. Not the kind of guy I would like to commit over $50 million to just so he can be maybe the third best player on my team.
by Norsktroll on Jan 13, 2009 4:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Howard also likes the wacky tabacci more than Darn/Damn/Deng
by Bust a Bucket on Jan 13, 2009 4:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't worry about him, KP has enough PR drama this year
And the Mavs can’t seem to decide if they are still very high on J-Ho or willing to ship him out for scrubs like Bargnani, who is essentially a much worse version of Dirk. In other news, also forget any trades or signings for Ron Artest.
by Norsktroll on Jan 13, 2009 4:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
if he ever got banned from the NBA
J-Ho could go try to play in your neigborhood… Amsterdam (or Amsterdeng, when talking about children). I’m not sure if J-Ho is a morning person or likes lattes, but there are certainly plenty of coffee shops there to keep him amused.
by Bust a Bucket on Jan 13, 2009 6:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
In other words ...
… he’s nothing that Webster can’t equal or improve on.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 13, 2009 5:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That is what Deng has become, very true
But a few years ago he was a high potential, super young wing who most felt would improve one of the things he does good into something really good. Like you say, he hasn’t. I blame injuries, but even without injuries he’s too slow to be a good defensive SF and hasn’t expanded his range or inside game at all.
He is WAY overpaid, but you could do a LOT worse than Luol Deng as your 3rd or 4th best player.
I wouldn’t mind him, but he is not in the top 10 of guys I would want. I wouldn’t mind Kirk Hinrich, but again— not at the top of guys I’d want. BUT, if we went through all of this with the cap space and ‘09 wheeling and dealing, and the best we got from it was Deng or Hinrich, I wouldn’t be bummed.
Especially since it seems we could maybe get them for ultra cheap.
Obviously, there are guys I’d rather have… but Deng’s lack of improvement has surprised me, and I hope that contract doesn’t become a noose around his neck.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 13, 2009 9:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If you want an expiring contract ...
… why not keep Raef? You get the added benefits of
a) his deal coming off a year sooner
and
b) insurance picking up 80% of his salary.
You also don’t have to deal with the potential disruption of Hughes not getting playing time and becoming unhappy. Finally, I agree with Zaron. I’m not of the opinion that Deng is a dramatic improvement. He could be a very nice fit, but then you have to ask where Martell is going to get minutes. At least Travis offers some flexibility by being an option at the 4.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 13, 2009 5:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
ugly, ugly trade.
Very repulsive. – Elgin
If you smile at me I will understand, because that is something everybody everywhere does in the same language. - Crosby/Stills/Kantner
by 22baylor on Jan 15, 2009 4:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
How about
seems good on all sides — Larry Brown gets his vets, Chicago gets serious salary relief and young talents, and we get our upgrades at 1 and 3.
by BrailleTaser on Jan 13, 2009 2:00 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I'm not big on trades, as I like the team we have.
But your proposal is – in my opinion – easily the best one suggested so far. You can argue that every team gets something of value, with the one caveat that Charlotte is looking to a) move Wallace and b) shed contracts. They get two bigs they can audition for the remainder of the season, with the option to retain Frye with a qualifying offer.
Chicago gets Rose’s backup at a much lower price than Hinrich and potentially a player in Travis that offers more than Nocconi.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 13, 2009 5:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
umm...and why would the bobcats do that?
why not try to cut chicago out of the deal. we don’t NEED hinrich. and I would love to start off Gerald Wallace. Or, hell, we could just look for a PG only.
I’m not really the “keep the team as it is” kind of guy but its hard to look at our roster and not say lets just wait and see. I’m salivating at the potential that this line-up brings:
Roy
Bayless
Martell
Aldridge
Oden
With the bench of:
Sergio (or blake)
Rudy
Batum
Outlaw
Pryzbilla
I love Frye, but if we don’t trade him this year and he’s not OK taking a LOW ball offer for his skills, I don’t see a spot on this team for him long term. I really really like the guy, but he’s not the best baller on the squad. His defense is a liability and he simply does not make up for it in offense/rebounding. I think he could be a great player in the right system (i.e. Golden State or back in D’Antoni’s NYK) but he’s not gonna develop here. We’re having a hard enough time getting Oden the touches he needs to build an offensive repertoire.
by nima on Jan 13, 2009 7:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I favor no big trades,bring over Freeland next year
And home grow a championship team
by southern oregon on Jan 13, 2009 7:52 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/traderesult?players=130~3003~558~454~2015~3025&teams=22~22~22~16~16~16&te=&cash=
Hate to lose trout but Foye is looking so goooood, who knows if Minnesota would give him up…
by broyoftroy on Jan 13, 2009 7:53 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
You must like Foye
a lot better than I do. – Elgin
If you smile at me I will understand, because that is something everybody everywhere does in the same language. - Crosby/Stills/Kantner
by 22baylor on Jan 15, 2009 4:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Blazersedge
Related FanShots on Blazersedge
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
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
