Aaron Gray to Blazers - Trade Proposal
Bulls fan here looking for feedback. I suggest the Blazers acquire Aaron Gray for a 2nd round draft pick (since Gray's salary is less than the Blazers' cap space, no player needs be sent back to the Bulls).
Why the Blazers do it:
- Oden is out for the season, so the Blazers could use another center to backup Pryzbilla.
- Gray can provide some post offense and rebounding, and while not a great defender, is a huge body with 6 fouls to give.
- The Blazers give up very little, since Gray's contract expires at the end of the season, and Paul Allen can always buy another 2nd round pick from a financially struggling team.
Why the Bulls do it:
- The Bulls do not have enough salary space to sign a badly needed 3-pt. shooter and/or reserve PF, and Jerry Reinsdorf will not go above the luxury tax. Trading the little used Gray would open up $1M to sign another player.
Why Gray approves the trade (since he is on the qualifying offer):
- A chance for more playing time, which will increase the probability of getting another NBA contract next season.
Your thoughts?
50 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I saw 12 on the roster here:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/POR/2010.html
Can someone tell me if there are injury exemptions, or could Mills or Pendergraph be assigned to the D-League?
"Then you need a center so if the ball gets stuck between the rim and backboard he can reach up and knock it loose instead of having to spend 15 minutes trying to hit it with a broom stick." – Sam Smith
by Granny Waiters on Dec 7, 2009 7:43 PM PST up reply actions
You only let 12 dudes be active yeah?
Mills, Pendergraph, and Batum are “inactive” meaning that they don’t suit up
--
by CaptainSexyJacob on Dec 7, 2009 7:51 PM PST up reply actions
Also, D-League players still take up roster spots on their parent clubs.
37-33. Pasadena. Roses. Bliss.
"We will guard thee on and on."
I've always thought that Aaron Gray is not as bad as he sometimes seems.
He’s a foul magnet, and can’t jump, but he actually has some skills. He could be worse.
ignacio
lock Gray and Jaren Collins in a gym, playing 1 on 1
and 30 minutes later will they have scored a single basket?
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Aaron Gray is way, way better on offense than Jarron Collins, although that really isn't saying much.
Dear Paul Allen:
Fire Nate McMillan & hire Jeff Van Gundy.
Sincerely,
AK1984
xtra roster spot
we are applying for a hardship injury exemption so that we can get another roster spot.. just as the rockets did with yao
I can see why Aaron Gray would fit but...
Maybe the Blazers should go after Troy Murphy. If you’re talking about providing offense and rebounding, Murphy can do both. I don’t know what his contract status is and what the Blazers would have to give up to get him. He would definitely have a bigger contract then Gray and the Blazers would probably have to give up more. So depending on what the Pacers would want and depending on his contract, if all that is good then I’d say go after Troy Murphy.
you don't want Murphy
he’s due 23+ mil over the next 2 years
http://www.storytellerscontracts.info/resources/09-10salaries.htm
On the Pacer’s roster I like Jeff Foster. (But that was back when Portland had a healthy team that had a chance to go somewhere in the playoffs…) KP could probably get Josh McRoberts back, on the cheap
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I like Foster as well.
But then, what’s not to like? He is Australian for beer.
by xedubx on Dec 8, 2009 1:15 AM PST up reply actions 3 recs
Not only is Troy Murphy an insanely overpaid 4 who can't play the 5, he's also one of the worst interior ...
defenders in the entire NBA. Hell, I’d even take Andrea Bargnani over Murphy when it comes to man-to-man low-post defense. The one guy who’d be helpful for Portland on Indiana is Jeff Foster, but I dobut he’s going anywhere.
Dear Paul Allen:
Fire Nate McMillan & hire Jeff Van Gundy.
Sincerely,
AK1984
when it comes to wrong handed free throw shooting skills i'd take the retired Jack Haley over Foster
dinasour type of guys choir boys
What would you guys be willing to deal for Lu Deng? Is there any interest?
I think Deng’s defense and rebounding could be a good compliment to Aldridge and Roy.
Or how about John Salmons?
by Basketball Smurf on Dec 8, 2009 12:49 AM PST reply actions
We need a PF/C
much more than we need a SF.
#52
I would love to get Deng
but I get a feeling that the Bulls would ask too much.
What would YOU want for Deng? If it includes the big 3 then no…
fernandez probably
Just a minor setback for a major comeback.
#52
Now it's YOUR time.
#7
by GreatOden'sRaven on Dec 8, 2009 7:36 PM PST up reply actions
You can have Kurt Hinrich
for Fernandez.
"Then you need a center so if the ball gets stuck between the rim and backboard he can reach up and knock it loose instead of having to spend 15 minutes trying to hit it with a broom stick." – Sam Smith
by Granny Waiters on Dec 8, 2009 8:00 PM PST up reply actions
Why?
I understand that a lot of folks like Hinrich, me included. But we have FOUR PGs on the roster already.
Rudy is young, cheap, and talented. I would trade Blake + money, picks, Euros (depending on the +) for Hinrich in a heartbeat. But I would be reluctant to see Rudy go.
I would guess that Hinrich would start. Miller should be the backup. What happens to Blake and Bayless? Bayless could take Rudy’s spot as Roy’s back-up, but he would struggle defending SGs rather than PGs.
Not saying I categorically reject the idea, just curious how you and others think this would work.
by upper left corner on Dec 9, 2009 8:23 AM PST up reply actions
Hinrich can play SG.
What’s the difference? He defends bigger guards better than Rudy, so even though he looks like a traditional PG, it’s really defense that matters.
Start him at PG, then play him as a SG next to Miller in the second unit. Give Bayless some burn. Whatever.
by Nick Van Excellent on Dec 9, 2009 8:49 AM PST up reply actions
If we're looking for defense
maybe we shouldn’t trade away the guy that’s been the best perimeter defender on our team this year. Just a thought.
I would be happy with a Hinrich for Blake and/or Bayless trade.
Heck, if the Blazers had enough cap space, they could have Hinrich for a bag of basketballs as far as I am concerned.
(Bulls fan bitter over keeping Hinrich and letter Ben Gordon go for nothing.)
"Then you need a center so if the ball gets stuck between the rim and backboard he can reach up and knock it loose instead of having to spend 15 minutes trying to hit it with a broom stick." – Sam Smith
by Granny Waiters on Dec 9, 2009 12:42 PM PST up reply actions
Trading Bayless to get Hinrich is a no go with me and reportedly with KP
Seriously, what is with you folks that you can’t see what a monster Bayless is going to become?
Trade him for a 29 year old solid journeyman with a career PER of 14.6?
Makes absolutely no sense to me.
by upper left corner on Dec 10, 2009 4:19 AM PST up reply actions
You guys get the cap room next summer,
and you can have Hinrich for a single basketball that leaks.
We miss you, Ben Gordon!
by Granny Waiters on Dec 10, 2009 10:06 AM PST up reply actions
so what WOULD you want for Deng?
I am curious, I too think he would be an EXCELLENT fit on this team..
obviously we wouldnt give you Roy for anyone, Rose included.. Trading Aldridge back to you would somewhat make Deng irrelevant
Just a minor setback for a major comeback.
#52
Now it's YOUR time.
#7
by GreatOden'sRaven on Dec 9, 2009 2:44 PM PST up reply actions
Since Deng apparently has a problem playing with Derrick Rose,
he needs to go. However, Deng’s large salary and Portland having mostly lower salary players makes the trade difficult.
For trades that work, I would take Bayless, Outlaw and Webster for Deng, or Deng and Tyrus Thomas for LMA, Bayless and Webster.
We miss you, Ben Gordon!
by Granny Waiters on Dec 9, 2009 11:13 PM PST up reply actions
I would be tempted
We’d have to let Patty Mills go.
I’d probably wait until mid-January, unless someone else goes down, to see how Pendergraph is doing for us.
#52
Rather than go trade for Aaron Gray, I advocate waiving Patty Mills and signing D-Leaguer Dwayne Jones.
Dear Paul Allen:
Fire Nate McMillan & hire Jeff Van Gundy.
Sincerely,
AK1984
You're confident he's better than Gray?
In either case, you’d have to waive Mills.
The second round pick is largely irrelevant.
So it comes down to which of the two is a better player in our system.
#52
Dwayne Jones plays nice defense and rebounds proficiently, so he's good to go as a backup center.
Dear Paul Allen:
Fire Nate McMillan & hire Jeff Van Gundy.
Sincerely,
AK1984
It could be 2011 instead of 2010.
"Then you need a center so if the ball gets stuck between the rim and backboard he can reach up and knock it loose instead of having to spend 15 minutes trying to hit it with a broom stick." – Sam Smith
by Granny Waiters on Dec 8, 2009 10:06 AM PST up reply actions
the big picture fix
- GO is easily my favorite Blazer, followed by Rudy, Batum, Bayless and Joel. Everyone else is expendable for the right price, a point upon which reasonable minds may differ. And one last preface, none of this is intended to “dis” anybody; it’s not personal. IMO the most conspicuous disappointments of this year are: BRoy is not the white hat hero I believed; LMA is “soft” given our need of a hard banging Scola, Kenyon Martin type of forward, Travis is totally unreliable, Martell is an unknown
we’d love tohave succeed, but for whom evidence is far too thin; Blake lacks all his well chronicled deficiencies; Miller is a talent who fits well with the right kind of team (as we have no idea concerning our true identity – who we are upon exiting the phone booth) so KP needs to decide upon where and how to go. I like Howard, but liked Shavlick more. They do not much matter to this discussion. P Mills is a semi-complete unknown crap shot, as a replacement for Rubio, Brooks et al he does not yet count. Pendergraph the same. Dante seems to have heart, will, strength and skill; is he of an advantageous size?
- Now then what to do. Target # 1 is CP3. For him we trade B Roy and one more up to TO’s level. Works for both sides. Darn close to even. CP3 has the single strongest WILL to win I have ever seen, along with obvious talent.
- The new 4 could be any one of a number who fit by reason of age, health, strength of will and body and talent. For Mr. 4 we have LMA to offer and perhaps one more; Martell would be agreeable.
- So the line up now becomes: CP3, Rudy, Batum, Mr. 4 and Joel/Greg. I like the fun and the surpassing skill of it.
- Regrettably Nate who has many virtues is not the coach for the new gang. He wants to play too slow and error free to bring out the best of what we might have. Who; I don’t know – a quality fundamentals, sensible risk taker, coach buy don’t control the players guy. Jackson would do nicely, but almost certainly would not trade Canon Beach for Malibu.
- The new # 6 is Bayless aiming for 25 minutes a night. Miller, if he fits backs CP3.
- That leaves us with need of a strong offensive 3, a combo 4 and a 3d back up 5. Behind those we have need of five, well seasoned skill players. Viola the 10/11 Blazers.
- To fine tune in addition to playing together enough to know when and where the passes and moves are coming, it might help if Joel had a term at sticky hands school and Batum at pull the trigger on open shots school. OMO that should be enough to compete with anyone. No doubt there will be some other ideas, so let’s hear them starting with who is essential and who is expendable on the right terms please.
Except that it is impossible
under salary cap rules. Because CP3 is BYC and Roy is Poison Pill this year, they cannot be traded for each other.
Oh, and also N.O. wouldn’t do it.
Oh, and Rudy and Batum are both out for a while.
And it is trading two healthy players (LMA and Martell) for a new PF (unspecified), and we can’t afford 2 for 1s of healthy players right now.
And he hasn’t identified which PF is better than LMA and would be available.
And he hasn’t identified which coach who is available he would get.
And we have no depth in case people get injured, and people do get injured, in case no one has noticed that.
And he fails to acknowledge that if Joel doesn’t have sticky hands by now, it isn’t going to happen.
But other than all that, it’s a great post.
#52
by jscot on Dec 8, 2009 11:42 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
respect for correction
In my mind jscot is a top of the ladder regular contributor to whom I happily defer.
I suppose the sudden collapse of the famous depth in the house of blazer changes everything. Perhaps realistically we are frozen where we are until and if health returns.
My primary angst arises from the perception that our Blazers are a house divided pulling in different directions. Ideally we should sort that out so there is one team with one direction. In my mind unfortunately that is seeming unlikely and so it is the Oden branch and the Roy branch which make our tree crooked. Instead of agonizing away for a year or two with no guarantee of an advantageous outcome, my thought was to solve the conflict peremptorily. My personal preference was for the Oden branch.
Much recent posting casts solid doubt that we can foreseeable rely on Oden as the trunk of our tree. He may just not be blessed with the right kind of wood. Whereas two days ago I imagined trading our way into harmony, that no longer seems realistic. That means to me we do the best we can with what we’ve got and hope to be as good at is as Houston has been with their 6’6" center.
by blazer_believer on Dec 8, 2009 4:48 PM PST up reply actions
You are right as to the problem, IMO
We do not seem to have things together at all, nor did we before the injuries. Even before the Travis injury.
Solution? Your solution won’t work, I’m afraid, for some of the reasons stated. Nor even if it did work, would it necessarily be desirable.
I’m not ready to give up/blow up the team. This team has been constructed with a vision in mind. There are really only two problems on the roster.
The first is at starting PG. The second is lack of big man depth. That’s all, really. We need to find a starting PG who fits well with the guys we have, and we need another quality big man.
There are lots of other problems, but they aren’t personnel problems, they are execution, etc. Someone needs to teach Brandon how to actually run the pick and roll, to hit the man rolling to the hoop when the defenders double him. LMA needs to continue to improve his defensive rebounding. And we need a coach or a veteran (I nominate Joel) to knock some heads together and say, “You idiots, this isn’t working.”
The whole Oden branch/Roy branch thing would be ended if we just used them in a pick and roll run effectively. Then, instead of this silly “this time down it is Brandon’s play, next time down it is Greg’s play”, we’d be running a play where both of them are involved, and we let the defense pick their poison.
Is Brandon going to mind getting 15 assists in one game and only 12 points because they keep deciding to stop him and he feeds Greg? Of course not. Is Greg going to mind if he’s setting the picks that set Brandon free to score 35 points, and so he only gets 8 that game? No. Neither of these guys are really selfish. But neither wants to just be a spectator while the other operates, either.
These are all decent guys who ought to be able to work this stuff out. And I still think we have that starting PG on the roster. So it is way premature to blow it up.
And if we do blow it up, it is going to cost us and leave us with a weaker team. It always does.
#52
another well reasoned position
You’re a hard guy with whom to argue. Appreciate we agree on the nature of the problem. Your approach seems far less disruptive and logically ought to work out. Logic has not seemed our best thing so far this year, but hey, let’s give it a chance. When did you say the rules permit a CP3 option?
by blazer_believer on Dec 9, 2009 2:09 AM PST up reply actions
Not this year, for sure
Brandon is almost impossible to trade this year because of the poison pill provision. I’m too lazy to look it up, but if I remember correctly, this means that Portland can only count his salary for this year as going out, while the other team has to count his salary for next year as coming in.
Now, I’m also too lazy to look the numbers up, but let’s say Roy makes $4 million now and $13.5 million next year. That means Portland can only take back $4 million in salary (that’s all they send out under the rules), but the other team has to send out $13.5 million, since they are taking back $13.5.
So can Roy be traded at all this year? Yes, under two scenarios. One is if a team that has cap space is involved. If a team had $10 million in cap space, they could send us $4 million in salaries, and we’d have a salary match, and they could take Roy — they’d have $14 million in space to take his contract after sending us that $4 million. Only OKC has significant cap space, and Roy isn’t going there.
The other scenario is a massive trade. If we add another $16 million in salaries, then we are sending out $20 million. Under the 125% rule, we could bring back $25 million. The other team would be sending out $25 million, which would allow them to bring back $31 million, and we would be sending them $30 million, so the trade would work. Effectively, to trade Brandon anywhere except to a team with cap space, we would have to trade another $16 million in salaries (Joel, Andre, and Jerryd, perhaps) and take back $25 million.
So, that’s Brandon.
Now for CP3. He’s BYC. That means his team can only count half of his salary as going out, but the other team has to count all of his salary as coming in. CP3 makes about $14 million. That means to trade him, N.O. can only take back $7 milliion, while the other team will get $14 million. This is much more doable.
Again, there is only one team with that much cap space, OKC. However, there ARE teams that have trade exemptions. Someone is going to have to absorb some salary, and a team with a trade exemption could, in a three team deal. Suppose that the team that gets CP3 sends $5 million in salary to a team with a trade exemption and $7 million to N.O. They have sent out $12 million and taken back $14 million, within the 125% limit. N.O. has taken back and sent out $7 million.
CP3’s salary complications can also be solved with a blockbuster trade. Suppose they send out, in addition to Paul, an additional $10 million, and take back $20 million. Now, they’ve sent $17 million, within the 125%, and the other team has sent out $20 million and taken back $24 million. This also is within 125%.
So both of these guys can theoretically be traded this year, but practically, it is very difficult. And to trade them for each other is probably impossible even if you lumped in the entire rosters. Portland in trading Roy would be sending out $4 million, and taking back $14 million (CP3). N.O. would be sending out $7 million, and taking back $13.5 million (Roy).
If each team added in $20 million more in salaries, N.O. would barely be legal, but Portland still wouldn’t. You would have to add in an additional $30 million plus in salaries to get this one legal, which would take Joel, Andre, Martell, Travis, Steve, and someone else.
If it weren’t for the Darius chunk out of our cap space, we’d have a shot at making this work, but otherwise, it just won’t fly.
Next summer, two things change. First, CP3 won’t be BYC anymore. That means his salary can be traded straight across. Second, Brandon stops being Poison Pill and becomes BYC. That makes it hard to trade him, but much more practical. See the discussion above for how tradeable CP3 is now, while he’s BYC. Basically, next summer, we would have to add another $10 million in salaries and they would have to add another $6 million or so.
Another significant issue here is that LMA is Poison Pill right now, and BYC next year. So that means that we can’t really include him in any of these deals, or he just makes them harder to work out.
#52
Oh, one more comment
My approach is only less disruptive and logically going to work if we actually implement a real pick and roll or other approach that goes away from so much isolation offense.
We could use the iso in the fourth, if that really is our most efficient play, but my guess is it would cease to be our most efficient play if we learned to run the pick and roll well.
#52
Give Kirk Hinrich a try. Please.
We’ll take whatever you offer, as long as it reduces 2010 salary.
We need to find a starting PG who fits well with the guys we have…
"Then you need a center so if the ball gets stuck between the rim and backboard he can reach up and knock it loose instead of having to spend 15 minutes trying to hit it with a broom stick." – Sam Smith
by Granny Waiters on Dec 9, 2009 3:02 AM PST up reply actions
At this point, shouldn't the Blazers be selling their own 2nd rounders for cash?
We already have 10 legitimate rotation players (if they are even healthy at the same time), and if you count all the guys in Europe, we have another 10 guys on the fringe trying to get on the court. The last thing we need is to start piling more fringe dudes into the mix.
Since I know nothing about Gray or whether we need another C, this is a bit unrelated to this post, I know. Sorry.
Two points scored by GO’ = "thunderdunk"
If we can turn one of them into some injury cover
that is better than selling for cash.
We could certainly use another C right now, though ideally one that is better than Gray.
#52
Gray is a legitimate NBA 3rd string center,
who is worth the veterans minimum salary wise. As I pointed out in the FanPost, he would be a temporary body at the 5 until Oden (hopefully) returns for the 2010-2011 season.
Since I know nothing about Gray
"Then you need a center so if the ball gets stuck between the rim and backboard he can reach up and knock it loose instead of having to spend 15 minutes trying to hit it with a broom stick." – Sam Smith
you mean HOPEFULLY returns for 2009-2010
he will CERTAINLY be ready to play next season.. possibly even in time for the playoffs if we make them
Just a minor setback for a major comeback.
#52
Now it's YOUR time.
#7
by GreatOden'sRaven on Dec 8, 2009 7:38 PM PST up reply actions

by 






















