Miami interested in Blake?

From today's ESPN Insider NBA Rumors:

"Ira Winderman of the South Florida Sun-Sentinel writes that one possible destination for Blake is Miami.

"Keep in mind, as well, that the trade exception the Heat holds from last February's Shawn Marion-Jermaine O'Neal trade also would accommodate Blazers point guard Steve Blake, a player who long has interested the Heat. The trade exception would allow the Heat to then include Daequan Cook or another lower-priced player in such a deal with Portland.

"The trade exception is worth $4.26 million and was generated from Marcus Banks' contract."

Link to the original Sun-Sentinel article.

Would that net us anything? Other than freeing up some cap space, I fail to see why the Blazers would be interested.

about 2 years ago DC Blazer 48 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

If it would net us a ham sandwhich

, I say make the trade. Free up PT to see if Miller is the starting point guard for 2010/11, and what Bayless can do with a consistent 20+ minutes of burn per night.

the best way to describe the crowd's support for Oden: It's like watching 15,000 parents rooting for their kid, only all 15,000 parents fathered the same kid. -Bill Simmons

by stevecolterssocks on Dec 16, 2009 7:16 AM PST reply actions

Unless you have an eating disorder ...

… why give Blake away like that when you can just as easily free up time by sitting him?

This is the sort of reasoning that makes me question just how much fans understand the game. Steve Blake is not the root of Portland’s problems. And his spot on the roster does not prevent either Miller or Bayless from playing. So why all the hate directed toward him?

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Dec 16, 2009 10:18 AM PST up reply actions

we would gain cap space in this deal that might be useful around the trade deadline.

get well soon, big guy.

#52

by Cablinasian on Dec 16, 2009 12:16 PM PST up reply actions

I won't argue whether $3.5 mil is that significant.

But doesn’t this assume that Portland has to then trade someone else from the roster to take advantage of gaining said cap room?

And doesn’t such a trade still have to fall under the 25% rule? Say we trade Travis. What can we take back in salary? $5,000,000? I would have to check, but isn’t Portland already close at or close to a million under the cap? In other words, has anybody even thought about whether the additional cap room means anything to Portland?

If Pritchard has something in the works or has identified a couple of scenerios – just potential possibilities mind you – where this cap space could be useful, then, sure. Lets consider trading Blake. However what I see here is a bunch of folks who have scapegoated Steve Blake and having done so believe it is critical that he be moved. Simply brilliant.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Dec 16, 2009 1:12 PM PST up reply actions

No,

We are still slightly under the cap, so this could potentially put us 4 to 5 million under. No 25% restriction unless you’re over the cap. From a team trying to dump salary, you could end up netting an 7-9 million player for someone like Outlaw and his also expiring contract.

An Oregonian in Texas.

by NoiseMekanik on Dec 16, 2009 4:43 PM PST up reply actions

Well, that would give us almost 6 million in cap room

that would allow us to absorb a contract someone needs to dump for ’10, or make a lopsided trade.

Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash

by HurraKane212 on Dec 16, 2009 7:20 AM PST reply actions

Miller for the trade exception and Dorell Wright

by tominhawaii on Dec 16, 2009 7:33 AM PST reply actions

can't combine exceptions with players to match salary

by kickbrass on Dec 16, 2009 11:47 AM PST up reply actions

get us haslem for blake and a first protected top 10

Odenized

by CroRupt on Dec 16, 2009 8:04 AM PST reply actions

haslem ftw

bayless leaves over my dead body
Start Bayless (in a 2 guard lineup)
if you should strike Oden down he will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine
#52
#4
Can someone give a rational explanation of why blake plays 36 minutes a game?

by thomasikehara on Dec 16, 2009 8:10 AM PST up reply actions

And while you are at it ...

… lets jump start the economy and solve global warming by creating 6 million new “green” jobs.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Dec 16, 2009 10:19 AM PST up reply actions

might as well get Wade in the deal too. lolz.

by WakeUpOden on Dec 16, 2009 9:20 PM PST up reply actions

I would only see us doing this deal

if it led to another deal. For example, the Blazers might make this trade, to free him about $6 million in cap space to make a trade for C.Butler of Washington. Lets say the Wizards just wanted Outlaw in return for Butler, the Blazers could do that trade if they had the extra cap space, and doing a deal like this with Miami would give them the room. Not sure I really like that deal, but it is just an example.

Basically making this deal, would allow the Blazers to package a contract like outlaw’s $3.6 million with another $6 million to bring back a player who’s contract is around $9-10 million.

Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?

by usmcr3049 on Dec 16, 2009 8:15 AM PST reply actions

I agree with this.

I think that the cap space is very valuable in our current situation.

Like what you like, enjoy what you enjoy,
don't be afraid to make slurping sounds,
and don't take crap from anybody

by DaNoose on Dec 16, 2009 8:55 AM PST up reply actions

I say do it.

I know not having to go through the constant feeling I get when I see Blake substituted into the game would probably give me a few years back. Cook would take some minutes from Webster, but Cook can shoot the ball and Webster has been inconsistent. The cap space would probably be the biggest plus in this deal though, after not having to watch Blake play.

by Coastie07 on Dec 16, 2009 8:30 AM PST reply actions

Obviously Cook is shooting so well that he's worked his way into the ...

… most remote seat on the bench.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Dec 16, 2009 10:21 AM PST up reply actions

Cook wouldn't be the reason to do this trade.

Acquiring cap space and getting rid of Blake would be.

by Coastie07 on Dec 16, 2009 10:55 AM PST up reply actions

you forgot the other thing

reuniting Cook with his former Buckeye teammate…then KP can swing a deal for Conley Jr and keep working on reassembling the “Thad 5”

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Dec 16, 2009 6:08 PM PST up reply actions

Kind of off topic but when do we try and unload Webster?

Do we give him the full year to prove himself since he missed a year? He sure does miss a lot of shots for a guy that is supposedly a deadly shooter. Is he even really tradebale with his injury history and long contract?

by Escrote on Dec 16, 2009 9:30 AM PST reply actions

unload him before Feb

if we can

Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash

by HurraKane212 on Dec 16, 2009 1:47 PM PST up reply actions

sell when high

there’s no reason to deal Martell at this time, unless another GM wants to overpay for him

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Dec 16, 2009 6:09 PM PST up reply actions

I would do it for Joel Anthony and a 2nd rounder

If we got more cap space + Joel Anthony and a 2nd rounder I would do this trade in a heart beat, we wouldn’t be able to use that cap space next year but we could use it this year to help other teams stay under the Luxury Tax, or to facilitate trades, we could do what memphis does all the time get a whole bunch of picks and money as a service charge for facilitating trades and taking crap contracts.

Draft Cole Aldrich 2010

by jlarose78 on Dec 16, 2009 10:11 AM PST reply actions

Yahoo sports just reported that:

Nate wants Blake gone so he doesn’t feel obligated to play him for Roy. They seriously reported this.

by Coastie07 on Dec 16, 2009 10:56 AM PST reply actions

Yahoo Sports is sketch

If Nate is asking to have him traded, he can just as easily sit him on the pine.

by DC Blazer on Dec 16, 2009 11:02 AM PST up reply actions

Their little two paragragh article....

…is full of inaccurate statements and is stating lesser rumours as facts to back it all up. And it’s very poorly written. I’m not saying it isn’t true, but I certainly wouldn’t trust the source.

An Oregonian in Texas.

by NoiseMekanik on Dec 16, 2009 11:24 AM PST up reply actions

They probably got the idea

from the comments section of a Blazersedge post.

#52

by jscot on Dec 17, 2009 2:09 AM PST up reply actions

I agree Yahoo Sports is sketch, but

they are saying that Nate feels obligated to play him as long as he’s on our roster because he doesn’t want to make Roy mad. If Blake is gone, then Roy can’t get made at Nate for not playing him. Who knows where their sources are from though.

by Coastie07 on Dec 16, 2009 12:16 PM PST up reply actions

if Nate feel obligated to play Blake big minute in order to avoid making Roy mad

then we have much bigger problems…

How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009

by douglast on Dec 16, 2009 12:42 PM PST up reply actions

Stop for a second and look at what you just said.

Does it sound even remotely plausible that McMillan would even think something like this, let alone give voice to it?

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Dec 16, 2009 1:00 PM PST up reply actions

It definitely sounds plausible that he could at least think that.

I don’t trust Yahoo Sports, but Roy has a big influence on the coach’s decisions and Nate definitely cares about making Roy the happiest. Add that to the fact that Roy has said Blake should start Yahoo is probably full of it, but if they made it up then they made it up because it was a believable possibility from the a lot of the things that have already happened and been said.

by Coastie07 on Dec 16, 2009 2:13 PM PST up reply actions

No, it doesn't

Yahoo got it from the yahoos on the Internet.

#52

by jscot on Dec 17, 2009 2:09 AM PST up reply actions

link?

Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash

by HurraKane212 on Dec 16, 2009 1:52 PM PST up reply actions

I'm sure Blake wouldn't mind too much.

Seeing as how he grew up in Miami, and played in high school with Haslem. If he’s gonna get traded, that’s the place for him to go.

An Oregonian in Texas.

by NoiseMekanik on Dec 16, 2009 11:13 AM PST reply actions

it would make me happy

to see Steve land in his hometown. He has served us well and it would nice to see us do right by him as we let him go.

by kickbrass on Dec 16, 2009 11:49 AM PST reply actions

Kinda like Channing Frye

I’m totally happy to see he found a perfect fit in Phoenix. Can’t wait til we crush them Thursday (err, maybe..)!!

An Oregonian in Texas.

by NoiseMekanik on Dec 16, 2009 4:58 PM PST up reply actions

I wouldn't mind grabbing

James Jones and a pick (for the trouble of his contract?).

We’d eat a little money but JJ would give us another shooter that could space the floor and is a decent defender, it would at least add some balance and free up some minutes for Bayless.

by darkhelmit54 on Dec 16, 2009 1:36 PM PST reply actions

miami won't trade james jones

cook is the only guy impacting their cap space this summer. jones’ deal calls for team options over the next few years. there’s no way they pick those up.

they can simply release jones to free up cap space. blake is attractive to them simply for the ability to unload the 2.2 mil they owe cook next year.

miami looks to be positioning to go after lebron or bosh.

besides why in the world would anyone want to pay 5 million a year to james jones? i realize that people in portland overrate him based off the great run he had in november / december during the 13 game winning streak. however, that year was a total outlier. he doesn’t shoot the ball much better than rudy or martell and brings little beyond that.

by colinmarsh on Dec 16, 2009 8:32 PM PST up reply actions

He would give us someone to play SF with Martell

freeing Roy from so much duty at the 3.

And he is a decent defender as well.

It would leave us only three guards, so we’d need to grab another at least short term until Rudy comes back.

#52

by jscot on Dec 17, 2009 2:15 AM PST up reply actions

problem is we have a full 15-man roster

"There are a few teams you have to watch out for in the fourth quarter."
"Yeah, but Portland definitely is not one of them."

-New Orleans Hornets broadcasters at the end of the third quarter with the Hornets leading 74-59. Portland later ends up winning 97-89.

"They don't mind him shooting that shot at all. Rudy Fernandez is not that great of a 3pt shooter."

-New Orleans Hornets broadcasters right after a Rudy Fernandez missed 3pter. Rudy Fernandez finished the game with three 3pters on six attempts.

by Tofu Anonymous on Dec 17, 2009 2:38 AM PST up reply actions

Right

Well, now we have 16. But to do this, we’d probably have to cut Mills.

#52

by jscot on Dec 17, 2009 11:35 AM PST up reply actions

I like James Jones or Joel Anthony

either one is good.

by iverigma2 on Dec 16, 2009 2:34 PM PST reply actions

Completely agree with you.

by Iwvelez on Dec 16, 2009 3:48 PM PST up reply actions

I know it's probably unreasonable, but...

I’d love to see a trade for cap space, and then a trade involving 1 or 2 of our SFs for someone like Granger/Butler/G.Wallace. Wishful thinking…

An Oregonian in Texas.

by NoiseMekanik on Dec 16, 2009 5:02 PM PST reply actions

should have made that deal this summer.

I realize the blazers wanted to get something for nothing, but i think we should have gave up batum for Wallace. Batum will turn out to be a very good player but I think that is a deal the blazers are regretting (if it was really on the table).

by jcoop85 on Dec 16, 2009 8:03 PM PST up reply actions