To Trade or Not to Trade
by Dave on Feb 6, 2009 1:49 AM PST
Email
PrintAs we move towards the frenzied crescendo that NBA trade deadline coverage brings we're going to see more and more rumors and suggestions surrounding Portland's young talent and attractive contracts. Before we deal with all of those, however, we need to answer a basic, preliminary question: Should Portland make a trade?
This question is impossible to answer through theory alone. In fact I get frustrated with people who do, or who assume the answer is easy or given one way or another. Former professional wrestler Lance Storm has an excellent website where he takes questions and answers from fans. One of the oft-asked questions is, "Lance, what do you think is the best wrestling move ever?" Also you hear a lot of, "What do you think of this guy's move or that guy's?" He actually gets a little testy with some of these. He says, in essence, that moves don't matter in the abstract. Where, when, and why you make a move determines whether it's good or bad, effective or not. The goal of professional wrestling is to get a reaction (and thus draw interest) from the crowd. Some guys can throw a simple punch and have the audience on its feet. Others can do a triple-flip off of the turnbuckle onto the floor to a chorus of yawns. Timing and reasoning matter as much as execution or the inherent characteristics of the move itself.
This seems to me a pretty tight analogy for NBA trades. "Making a trade" isn't right or wrong, good or bad in itself. Where, when, why, and for whom are the critical questions. Make a move too early and you could stunt your growth or lose out on talent that might have otherwise flourished with your team. (Jermaine O'Neal is a painfully obvious example.) Make a move too late and the window closes. (Maybe the Blazers should have traded Kersey and Duckworth for Barkley in '92.) Hesitating can also cost you a particular move even if it doesn't miss your window as a team. (Last year's potential Devin Harris acquisition is being speculated about currently.) Sometimes it's wrong to mess with a good thing. On the other hand that cake you're baking will never turn out right if the ingredients aren't complete. All the oven time in the world won't change that.
So these are the key questions:
1. Where are the Blazers in their growth process?
2. What are they aiming at?
3. Do they have the right mix of ingredients?
4. Is the time advantageous in terms of trade value?
Only after you've answered these can you address the more familiar, "Who's available and how much will they cost?"
Let's spend a minute with each question.
Where are the Blazers in their growth process?
Obviously they're young and not yet fully-blossomed. Frankly this could be an argument for or against trading. It's hard to tell how players will turn out individually, let alone together, until you've seen them for a couple seasons. This is triply true when they're young. On the other hand if you do need to make a trade it's usually better to make serious, potentially disruptive moves before you start competing for real prizes instead of in the middle of your deep playoff runs. You don't know what you have, which makes trading a player away a riskier proposition, but it's also riskier for the receiver. Many players have higher value precisely when they're young and haven't played as much compared to when they get that 30 minutes and show they're only so-so. Just as a move has the potential to harm the chemistry that this young team has just discovered, that same move also has the chance of triggering greater production from young players who don't yet know how to get the most out of themselves or each other.
The take-away point here is that the Blazers can make a trade, but they don't have to. It's not like they're a definitive piece away from making a run at rings and their time to do so is running out. If they do make a deal it'll be to accelerate their growth process and secure their future, which is all to the good. If they don't then they have plenty of time with most of these players, which is also to the good. This luxury is rare and the team should enjoy it. It will not last forever.
What are the Blazers aiming at?
This was heavily discussed in the podcast today. The best-case scenario for the team is someone who boosts production immediately but is also viable for the next few years to help the early playoff runs. Getting someone who matches the exact age of the current group is probably not desirable unless the talent upgrade is overwhelming. Guys projected to blossom four years out won't add enough right now to balance the disruption. They will also carry most of the same liabilities as our current players between now and the time they mature. Guys who are too old, unless they make an enormous difference in the next two years, won't give enough when it matters. Ideally you're looking at guys in the early to middle parts of their prime. But those guys are also notoriously hard to obtain if they're any good.
When deciding whether to trade or not based on age, however, you have to figure out whether your young players are still going to be here and producing when they get older. In the case of some current players the answer is no. Either they won't be satisifed with their minutes or we simply won't have room to play all of them. So even though they're young their value three years down the road may be near zero. In that case aiming at someone who helps more than they do right now but won't be around later might actually be viable.
The Blazers have considerable leeway as far as talent level. They wouldn't turn down a star at a position of need but they could also use another solid role-player. The target is big in that sense.
Portland is somewhat limited by position if you assume the major players aren't being bundled in the deal. They don't need shooting guards or power forwards and they have to be particular about what small forward or center they'd take back, depending on who left the team. This narrows the field.
Even with the talent leeway, the target is fairly small for a mid-season deal. The players available in February who match all of these criteria can probably be counted on a couple of fingers. Summer is easier, but the Blazers may not have as many assets this summer. A compromise in aim may be necessary if Portland wants to trade in the next two weeks.
Do the Blazers have the right mix of ingredients?
So far the outlook has been nebulous with certain factors favoring a deal and others not. But in this category the meter swings pretty solidly towards a move. It's not that any of the Blazers are particularly bad. It's more a matter of distribution.
Portland has three point guards who could make arguments for playing time. One starts by consensus and the team is hoping at least one of the younger two will develop into a viable player. That leaves the third youngster out in the cold, needing to develop a career and not being able to here. You can carry three point guards but you want your emergency third guy to be reliable in case you have to use him in a pinch. Neither of the younger two would fit that description.
Portland has a hot mess at the forward positions. So far the team has been bailed out by the Martell Webster injury. But Nicolas Batum looks like he could have a future. Martell will not take kindly to riding the pines. Travis Outlaw, though mostly playing power forward lately, has gotten minutes and shots by swinging. If Travis is exclusively a power forward then he'll struggle to find minutes behind Lamarcus Aldridge. If he plays small forward as well then either Martell is wasted and unhappy or Nicolas doesn't develop. This assumes, of course, that Lamarcus is the answer at power forward. Meanwhile Channing Frye becomes the honorary appendix of the team and Ike Diogu never sees the light of day. That's six names trying to squeeze into two positions...more like five names shoehorned into one and a third positions if you take Lamarcus as a given. That's too much talent at too young of an age to sit with. There are too many assets there to let wither and fall away also. Some of these guys will be worth something, if only as throw-ins.
Besides that, the Blazers still have some obvious ingredients missing. Experience, individual defense, and bulk in the backcourt and at small forward come to mind without a thought. Portland is getting by on youthful inspiration and offense right now but as soon as they enter the playoffs they'll find that those don't win many series. More than anything the Blazers simply lack known quantities. You know what Steve Blake and Joel Przybilla will give you night-in and night-out and you can probably bank on Roy and Aldridge showing up. Beyond that it's a crap shoot. Reliability at almost any position would be a premium upgrade for this team.
Is the time advantageous in terms of trade value?
This is another category which offers a solid "yes" to a trade. From the Raef LaFrentz gift-wrapped money to the incredibly cheap price and untapped potential of our available guys, everything points to Portland being an attractive partner. As these players age the guys who don't pan out will become less attractive and the guys that do will get more expensive. The Blazers will never have as many opportunities in front of them that don't require their top four players in return as they will have in the next year. Some of those might not last beyond the next couple of weeks. Their ability to execute a blockbuster may get better as their stars come into their own but their ability to build around those stars without moving them will not get higher than this.
Total all of that together and you've got one factor that allows you to go either way, one that will make it harder for you to make a move, and two that could well urge that a move be made. On the balance, then, I'd say that the Blazers should indeed be interested and active in seeking out potential deals. At the very least it would be hard to argue in the abstract that a deal should not be made at this time.
I suspect if we don't see a move it will be more because the right players weren't available at the right price than because of any philosophical aversion to trading at this time. I am also in the camp that believes that "we don't want to mess with this right now" is a default, fall-back position and not a firm credo. I'm not suggesting it's a smokescreen. I'm sure Kevin Pritchard and the staff are speaking the literal truth that they'd be happy enough to keep the players they have now. Chemistry and time to gel are legitimate concerns. Not messing with things is a fine option. But it may not be the best option and I believe they know that as well.
If the right move isn't there "let the cake bake" will be a wonderful explanation and affirmation of the way things turned out. If the right move is there then those same words will be used to explain why this move was really, REALLY right and should be valued because it's better than good. I believe the team will continue with the cake-baking mantra right up to the day they make a deal but I don't believe they will hesitate for a second in actually making that deal.
I don't necessarily foresee a trade coming before the deadline but I do see Portland being active in talks up until then. If a trade does happen in the next couple weeks it would not surprise me a bit. I will be shocked if the team carries this same basic lineup into next training camp, however. Somebody south of Oden and Roy but north of Randolph and Diogu is going to get moved.
--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)
147 comments
|
5 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think
you’ve got some good thoughts here…really what you saying is wait and see because the only people that know are doing the deal and they are doing it in secret till it’s done.
That being said I hope we don’t get too crazy…and i think we could do more harm than good right now. I like this team and would like to see almost everyone stick around and develop. That being said, depending on the trade I could change my mind :)
I have my P.h.D in unreliable hyperbole.
That's about where I'm at
If someone beats down the door with an amazing trade – yes. Otherwise, bake at 350 degrees F for the rest of this season and wait for the door beat-downs in the off season.
The thing that influences this the most is the best use of RLEC. – Elgin
Since when do we need to ponder to froth? - jscot
Thnaks
for revisiting these very difficult questions…I don’t even know where to begin. The pieces of this team are hard to analyze. Many are so young. Some (Travis) we have had for so long, they feel like vets, but in NBA years still very fresh. Its hard personally to know what is worthy of giving up. Is it possible if we kept this exact group together that in 2 seasons the rest of the west would be older and/or shake things up so much that we could slide into dominance simply by developing our inherent talent? I feel that is a real possibility.
Of course fringe changes need to be made, but when was the last time you saw one of the youngest teams in the NBA fighting for home court advantage for the playoffs? Atlanta is a good example in the East. They are still very young. Took the Celts to 7 last year! This year they add one piece, Bibby, and are even better. Perhaps we need to follow that pattern. Stay cool for another season or two, no major changes. Better identify holes, and compare to the market. Just because our salary cap is free doesn’t mean the right player is there for us.
I feel pretty confident in this exact squad AND coach to challenge for a title in 2 seasons. Upgrades would be nice, but lets make sure they arent just immediate gratification. I mean what if we had Martell starting all season? Batum has been an awesome surprise but we were all prepared for Martell to break it off this year…so despite our early positive record, I for one, vote for holding out with the roster we have unless something obviously advantageous comes our way. Otherwise, we already have the advantageous pieces other teams are looking for, it just may take 1 or 2 more seasons to be full bodied. Then, they will still be OUR guys, and not some Celtics combo…Dig?
"Rudy’s flashy passes had the place whispering to each other like we were in junior high" ~BlazermaniacAndy
by courtsideerrandboy on Feb 6, 2009 2:15 AM PST reply actions
I think I'm with you on that one
ride it out….it will take a couple of years, but a couple of years of watching this team and this coach I can live with!
I have my P.h.D in unreliable hyperbole.
by Eat Politicians on Feb 6, 2009 2:17 AM PST up reply actions
I guess the way I see it
riding it out completely means losing 2-3 players simply by attrition. Channing Frye won’t play. One of the point guards won’t play. One of Martell, Travis, or Batum won’t play their full potential minutes. Even if you re-signed all of them to avoid letting them walk, that’s three pieces there that do you no (or not much) good. And you let Raef’s contract go too. Now you’re capped up and married to your lineup…a lineup which right now is full of guys we don’t know enough about to say definitively what they’re going to be like in two years.
That’s why I’m thinking that the Blazers might well strike when the iron is hot on some of these young players and contracts just to buy themselves a more condensed talent pool and more bankable players at our overpopulated positions. If, of course, that’s even possible, which it may not be because somebody has to be offering those players for us to get them.
Borrowing from another thread (without re-hashing everything that was said there) this is part of what would give a Bosh-for-Lamarcus trade legs. It’s not so much the comparative talent, it’s that you know what Bosh is going to give you now and two years from now and you’re still banking on a later Lamarcus to make good (while at the same time banking on a later Greg and later Travis and later Martell and later Batum and later Bayless and later Sergio and later Rudy).
—Dave
Dave, what would you think about Bosh for Bayless/LMA/RLEC?
I know we don’t need to completely rehash the debate, but do you think that’s too much to give up?
I’m on the fence. I would love, love, love LMA + RLEC + [anyone but Roy, Bayless, Oden, Rudy, or Billa] for Bosh + filler…
But when you throw Bayless in there, that’s a ton of upside you’re giving up at the PG spot. It gets back to the old debate about whether this team can win championships with Blake at the point. And it seems to me that it might take Bayless (or maybe Rudy) to make Toronto pull the trigger.
I’m as big of a B-Rex fan as anybody, but I would probably lean towards supporting the deal. Bosh can do everything LMA can do, except that LMA’s weaknesses (efficiency, rebounding) suddenly become strengths.
A Roy-Bosh-Oden nucleus surrounded by good role players could absolutely win a title. Maybe lots of them.
Q: Is Greg favoring his knee?
Frye: He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors.
Too much
We need a PG, and Sergio isn’t going to be the answer with the starting unit, I’m afraid. I’d give up LMA, plus two of Sergio, an SF, and our first round pick for Bosh. I wouldn’t give up Bayless.
You are giving up two future all-stars in LMA and Bayless. I wouldn’t do that. I would give up Rudy first, even though he might be a future all-star as well, just because we already have Brandon at SG. We don’t have anyone who is going to be close to what Jerryd is going to be at PG.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
For Bosh....
… I would give up LMA, RLEC and Toronto’s choice of Rudy or Rex (not both) plus Toronto’s choice of any player other player.
I would do LMA/RLEC/Bayless/Outlaw in a nanosecond.
Boomshakalaka
Bosh is not much of an inside scorer - Aldridge is about the same talent level with less experience.
Big Guys take a while to develop and Aldridge and Oden seem to have tons of talent. I wouldn’t trade them.
again look at who he was playing with
2 years ago – Mike James and Mo Peterson were the only other options, of course he looked better.
Last year – TJ Ford and Anthony Parker
He has been the #1 guy where Aldridge is not – you have to take that into consideration when comparing stats
Then Aldridge's efficiency
should be even better, because of the other threats.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
what are you talking about?
He shooting 48% – that’s not good enough for you?
fg% is irrelevant
you should use true shooting % (which takes 3s and FTs into account).
Boomshakalaka
I'm not Anti-Bosh, but too much risk in his long-term status
I really like the fact that Bosh gets to the line much more than Aldridge. But as others have pointed out, you could easily loose him in a year and then you’ve gotten nothing and have given up a bunch of young talent for a short-term benefit.
Also, Oden is not ready to do much this year, so Bosh would be a bit of a waster there too.
Doesn't matter
Bosh would be a phenomenal high post counterpoint to Oden’s low post, but so much better at going to the hoop and LMA.
Snake is crazy to include Bayless in the deal (we need a PG), but not Rudy. Bosh is the reality right now of what we hope LMA will become in 2-3 years. We are contenders this year and for 10 years at least if Bosh is here.
I’d do LMA, Rudy, and our first round pick.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Something else to consider in 'value'
is the likelihood that Bosh would re-sign with the Blazers. What does he want? I honestly don’t know. If it’s all about winning, then there’s a good chance he’d re-sign. If he’s interested in living on the East Coast or playing with a particular player (James, Wade,????), then giving up a lot of talent to rent him for a year and a half would not be in the Blazer’s interests.
I’m not saying he wouldn’t sign with Portland. I’m saying that I don’t know. And if there’s a question mark in the minds of the front office people, then the value you give up for him goes down dramatically.
When Screamin A Smith said that Bosh was leaving for sure, he might have made up the story. But he also might have decreased his trade value just a bit – because of the doubt factor.
You would want assurance he is staying
or it isn’t worth it.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
with Roy, Bosh and Oden, we wouldn't need a great PG
I’d rather include Rudy than Bayless also, but Rex isn’t so good that you pass up a chance to get Bosh.
Boomshakalaka
I love the idea of a three-way
with Phoenix. Toronto might take Amare for Bosh (or Amare and somebody besides our two guards). Phoenix might take LMA and change for Amare.
The thing nobody’s explained yet is why Phoenix wouldn’t just want Bosh.
—Dave
The really interesting thing
is if Toronto got Amare and then did that O’Neal-Marion trade that was being batted about earlier this season. Forget patterning yourself after the Suns, they’d BE the Suns. Tonight the part of Steve Nash will be played by Jose Calderon.
—Dave
That would be cool
They would win some games in the East, too.
Phoenix might prefer LMA to Bosh, if they could get another young talent as well, because he costs less. Sarver is cheap.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Portland might have to throw an extra player to both teams...
say, Bosh to Portland; Aldridge+RLEC to Phoenix, Amare to Toronto… but then also Rudy to Toronto and Outlaw to Phoenix… or something like that.
Boomshakalaka
That would be a high price
LMA plus Rudy plus Outlaw plus RLEC for Bosh. That might be a little too much. Perhaps we could plug a first round pick in there instead of Rudy. Toronto gets Amare and a first rounder for Bosh, they shouldn’t gripe too much about that, especially if Bosh has told them he is going to walk.
They’ve got a problem with Bosh, so you don’t want to overpay — they are bound to be looking for a way out of this.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
this is Chris Bosh we're talking about
Roy/Bosh/Oden would be unstoppable. I’d give strong consideration to doing LMA/RLEC/Rudy/Bayless for Bosh.
Boomshakalaka
The only real reason
If Phoenix is looking to save money, RLEC + LMA is much cheaper than BOSH.
nobody explained why Toronto would want Amar'e either.
Everyone here’s saying he has a poor attitude and is gonna opt out. You’re telling me he’s not gonna opt out in 2010 if he gets traded elsewhere—let alone to another country? And the weather going from PHX to TOR is a HUGE shock. I doubt Amar’e would be happy there and if he didn’t assure them to re-sign, then how are they better off with Amar’e in place of Bosh?
Please, for the love of all that is holy, please stop using the following: "Book it.", "FTW", "Epic" & "Fail".
...no seriously--stop.
Yeah, that's the problem
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Usually on quantity for quality trades
you pay high to get quality. That’s what you are talking about here, really, so that attrition doesn’t wipe out your assets.
We are in a somewhat unique position in that we may not have to pay high in talent to get quality, because we have the very attractive RLEC/cap space asset.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
One of the arguments Dave was making is that some guys on this roster won't be happy soon when they don't get their playing time
And they will rather lose value. To name names: Somebody from the group of Sergio, Martell/Travis, Channing/Ike (you could also group Travis with the PF group) will get antsy sooner rather than later and has to go for a guy who above all other things brings a) more (playoff) experience and/or b) more defense. Plus, while in the summer there might be other options, we will never again have the chance to move Raef’s expiring contract. In the current economic situation for many teams, that contract is more valuable on the market than say another young talent that you have to pay some million for the next few years. Teams would be willing to give up players for that that we wouldn’t get with the other assets we have, or we would have to massively overpay for them talent-wise since the contracts of our attractive players are so relatively cheap at between 1 to 4 million.
They actually added Bibby
mid-season last year. That’s why they played so well against the Celtics.
thats just it
if you give up RLEC,one of the guards and one of the forwards. that is a lot of chips. I would expect a starter type chip in return. so then we would need to send out two of the forwards or guard for starter type back.
I like the starters and our rotation. could we trade Rlec, Sergio, Frye or Ike, for chips that would expire for 2 or so years? guess all that would do is bye us time.
"I like whatever metric makes a Blazer look better." jonestr
i dont feel a trade is necessary
i like the team we have now, and my gut feeling is with more seasoning and experience the teams defensive deficiencies can improve. the teams offense is stacked with scorers, its defensively we are let down, and i feel more time and coaching will fix this.
Why not trade RLEC for at least a future draft pick?
If we do nothing with RLEC, as I understand it, all of it goes away. We could at least get some future assets without moving any players for RLEC. I think this could be the best idea out there. What does everyone think about this? Or perhaps package Outlaw and another player + RLEC for some future picks. While I’m at it, who could we give up, but still make the playoffs with? I think we can give up a lot of our second string (minus Joel and Rudy) and still make the playoffs. Perhaps the first idea is the best for this situation: RLEC for future draft picks. LA Clippers may have the #1 pick next year, let’s call them.
Future draft picks earn no salary
Who do you take back in such a deal? Two guys with an ugly long-term contract? Then we can just make a bigger package and trade for a good player.
I'm not sure you are right
If KP thinks he has all the pieces, and can’t get any that he really think help us, he could trade RLEC for someone else’s bad contract, and take a couple future first rounders off them as compensation. Kind of like the Seattle/Phoenix deal a couple years ago.
We’re not going to be getting any good draft picks on our own, so this could be a chance to get talent for the future without increasing our current logjam.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
I think that could bite us several times in the behind
- We get no upgrade. Any player(s) dealt for cap space alone is likely just bench material with a horrible contract for us. Raef is such a player, he just happens to expire and be injured now. The best we could hope for would be a 2010 expiring contract like Hughes or Wallace to be dealt again a year from now. But those teams don’t have good draft picks.
- We lose (all) cap space for 09 if the players acquired don’t come off the books to acquire a free agent. The 7-8 million calculation hinges on RLEC coming off the books with no salary coming back.
- Teams that figure to be completely bad = high lottery chances don’t deal their (best) draft picks until maybe right before the draft day when they know where they stand and who could be available in exchange.
- With a “low lottery chance”, we literally play lottery again, and then have to wait again for the talent to develop.
It's only an option
if there really are no players we want, if KP figures he has everything he wants and no one is available or likely to become available (before 2010) at his price which would make us better.
In that case, it simply a case of buying draft picks and possibly a future EC (the bad contract that comes back) rather than let the cap space go completely to waste. It means you have a bad contract hanging around, but from summer 2010 on we are not likely to have any cap space anyway.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
The problem is that teams that are looking to do that don't necessarily
have their best draft picks to give. Sure we could grab Curry, but NY’s Unprotected ‘10 pick is owned by Utah. If we were going to take back a super bad contract, it’d probably have to be for a guaranteed top 7 or 8 pick out there, and most of those teams don’t have large enough bad contracts. Memphis with Jaric and maybe Minny with Cardinal are the only real bad teams I can think of with scrubs on large contracts.
If we're looking to defer assets
to reload role players in 2-4 years, you don’t want a really bad team now, you want a team that is going to be bad then. So KP gets out his spreadsheets, and projects which playoff team now that has a really bad contract they want to dump is going to be horrible in four years.
Then, he picks up the phone, and offers them RLEC for their horrible contract and their first rounders 2 and 4 years from now.
I’m not saying he does this, I’m saying it is an option if you can’t turn the cap space into a player that will help you now.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
It's just such a gamble to project that far out
I mean, it’s not my money, so it’s not a huge deal for me, but roughly $20 million (estimated additional salary plus lux tax) seems like a high price for PA to pay betting that a team like Dallas, Phoenix or Boston will be bad enough that they’ll have a great draft pick. Plus, factoring in that almost no team would give a fully unprotected pick just for salary relief, you’d be paying a ton for something that, would probably be in the 5-10 range and potentially (if the team doesn’t tank like most well-managed teams tend not to) something in the mid to upper teens. Given that we’ve been paying $3 million for draft picks recently, that’s a huge markup.
You’re right, though, it’s definitely an option for us, but no matter how rich I am, I’m not sure I fork over that kind of dough if I’m PA.
If it isn't a gamble
the other team doesn’t do it. You don’t get a guaranteed top five pick for RLEC.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
there wont be a trade for RLEC
unless it brings back a clear quality player who suits our system, i doubt KP will use it for the sake of using it
I'm anti-trade, but I won't complain if it's for one of those "early to middle parts of their prime" guys
I think that’s the only kind of move KP would make unless he had to purge a bad apple, and I don’t think there are any bad apples right now. Basically if KP makes a move to make the team better for the next few years, I’m all for it. If he trades for a young guy or some crusty overpaid guy with only a year or two left in the tank, I will be unhappy.
It's not offensive until someone reads it.
If it's a crusty overpaid guy
with only a year or two left at PG, I could live with that, as long as we aren’t giving up key young talent for him.
Our young PGs aren’t really ready to be contenders, and it might take a year or two. If we use RLEC to get a guy who makes us a legit contender next year, it might be worth considering.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
PG youth/inexperience is not necessarily a critical factor.
Rajon Rondo and Jordan Farmar were both second-year players when they met in last year’s championship series. Tony Parker was a second-year player when the Spurs won in 2003. I’m sure there are other examples. Team success depends on the cumulative talent on the team. The distribution of that talent is less important than the fact that the team possesses it. That’s why I’m okay with Blake being our PG, if he continues to be Nate’s choice over Sergio and Jerryd. Any of our PGs are probably good enough to win with — if our Big Three really do become a Big Three.
But everybody is young
Rondo was on a team full of vets. So was Farmar.
All our guys are young, so a young PG is unlikely to take us to the top for a couple years, until he gets more experience and so do our other guys.
But an experienced (and top quality) PG could put us in the hunt right away. For instance, if Nash were on this team, he would be getting the ball to Oden (and everyone else) in the right places at the right times. If we could get him without giving away our future, you’d have to really look at it, because it makes us an immediate contender for two years while Bayless gains some experience. Then, Nash rides off into the sunset, and our dynasty goes on without him, with Bayless running the point.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
My Lakers friend wants us to trade for Kidd
I think that anyone who wants the Blazers to trade for Kidd must be a Lakers fan. He’s got his own system, and wouldn’t work here. Not that I’m saying you want Kidd. I just don’t.
It's not offensive until someone reads it.
If you have a L@kers friend
you are probably a spy. Begone, foul fiend.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Love sees no color
People from Hawaii visit LA and Vegas and normally only like California teams. If I was so bigoted to hate all Lakers fans, I probably wouldn’t have any friend here at all.
It's not offensive until someone reads it.
You have lots of friends here
You are on Bedge.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
This isn't real life
My wife loves it when I tell her about Blazers Edge. I’m being sarcastic there. This place is imagination land, I need friend to talk story to face to face like.
It's not offensive until someone reads it.
Got a bit of juicy gossip for ya tom, er drag....
The Big Island’s new Mayor Billy Kenoi personally told me a great little story about meeting this great guy who turned out to be KP, and they got to talking story. To make a long story short, there was talk about bringing the Blazers to Hawaii in the off-season for some youth training camps and the like. So maybe in a few yrs, Hawaii will be filled with locals sporting Brandon Roy Jerseys…..
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace." Jimi Hendrix
by philly420pdxhilo on Feb 6, 2009 2:49 PM PST up reply actions
So....
Will the Blazers be playing a preseason game in Hawaii every year, and stuff like that? Holding half of training camp over there? Maybe they decided not to wait on global warming to try to use better weather to attract free agents.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
:P
No, they would be holding youth camps, spending time kicking it at one of the resorts in Kona or Waikaloa, playing a lot of golf, dining on lau laus and kalua pig, that kine stuff…
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace." Jimi Hendrix
by philly420pdxhilo on Feb 7, 2009 2:13 AM PST up reply actions
A Complex Problem
Mac was interviewed yesterday on Hoopsworld about some of this, and confirmed that the Blazers are not going to trade the talent they have to attempt to improve their playoff chances this year or next. They are building for the future, and clearly understand that their window is downstream another 2 years – not today. This doesn’t mean that KP and Mac don’t recognize that we have issues related to playing time for the three PG’s and the forward slot, but the ultimate issue is whether or not a player is made available that fits into our window, and actually represents an improvement.
The irony is that even if we find a partner to deal LaFrentz, Frye and Diogu, the position they play isn’t our position of need. If we just picked up a backup PF, we’d almost certainly have to trade Travis, but that would be too much for a backup. If it’s an SF we take, then Martel is almost certainly gone. And, if we take back a guard, we’ll still have the five on the roster, and to clear that up – we need to trade two if the guard we get is considered better than those we have – with the exception of Roy. And that then takes into the area of arguing over which two of Fernandez, Bayless, Sergio and Blake we trade.
And that’s an argument that goes to potential – a very argueable area which is clearly not easy to resolve.
Frye, Diogu and LaFrentz are not likely to be here next year. But any player we receive – assuming they’re not just a cap dump or a draft choice, will trigger the trade of another Forward, or of two guards.
Which, in the end, may actually be the answer. Stockpile a draft choice or two – keep the core that we have, and then deal again in the summer.
After all, we have two issues that are not very clear. One is whether or not Martel/Batum are our SF’s of the future, and the second is whether or not Bayless can eventually be the starter alongside Roy. And KP and Mac may not just want, but need, the rest of this system to try to decide those two questions.
I don't think any of the rotation players will be moved
There’s no reason to, from all the trades I’ve read none of them improve our team over the long run.
Blazer Fan
Agreed.
I’ve been pretty underwhelmed by anything said so far that seemed to have anything other than blue sky attached to it.
Underestimating the importance of winning NOW
The Blazers are built for the long term for sure. Thats why they are so compelling. That being said, we need to add a player that can help us be competitive in a playoff series this year. “Why” you may ask, look at Houston’s all star guard TMAC. He is a great player. Unstoppable at times. But he has never had success in the playoffs. Now, in the late stages in his career, every playoff series he is in has even more pressure than the year before. He just doesn’t know how to win when teams ramp up for the playoffs.
I am not saying the Blazers need to go deep in the playoffs this year. But I do think they need to be competitve, and taste some level of success early in their carreers. (Success being a big win when down in a series, or a comeback on the road etc.)
As far as “the trade,” I will only say that a trade worth doing, will need to hurt. The players that leave will probably take on more important roles with their new team(s), and put up more numbers. Fans will criticize the movement of player X or Y, especially when those players have great nights elsewhere.
A major trade doesn't feel likely given these conditions
I just hope we can ship Frye off he deserves the chance to play for his next contract..
"Slum dunk? You just go to the rim, and crush.. crush the ball in the rim."
- Nic Batum
you need a wrestling name Dave
The River City Mangler, master of the wicked Urbane Pain move.
"Bayless is awesome." -Clyde Drexler
Urbane Pain
that’s UP for short. Hey, UP! Wassup!
I think the Dallas game is evidence we need a trade...
and the New Orleans game as well. It seems like the Blazers are struggling against the upper-tier teams and they need some crafty vet to help finish the run to the playoffs.
I didn't mean to turn you on
I think it's more evidence that our young guys
just need more time to grow and they need to play better defense. The dinged-up Jazz thrashed the Mavs last night, who beat us on Wednesday. We beat the Jazz last week. We can beat the Mavs, just haven’t got over that hump yet this season. We have got over a lot of other humps so far this year.
I kept getting a sense of circlular reasoning here ...
… with you finally deciding that in the end the signs point to making a trade now.
While I generally agree with a lot of what you said, I don’t reach quite the same conclusion. I agree that right now is the start of what will probably be the most opportune window for Portland to make a significant improvement to the roster. What I do not believe is that the mid-season deadline represents a closing or narrowing of that window. I think the window extends to this summer.
I am of the opinion that the Blazer’s don’t need to make a trade, but that there is no iron clad reason that they shouldn’t. That’s a nice position to be in. They can make a deal, if a good one is out there and if the right deal isn’t, no big deal. Portland is still in a very good position.
There are only three players currently on the roster that Portland stands to lose this summer if we do nothing. Of those, the Blazers will still have much of the benefit from Raef’s expiring contract and the option to retain either of the other two guys. And there is no rush to resolve the PG or SF issue as we still control all six players through next year.
So as I run through your list of analytical questions:
1. Where are the Blazers in their growth process? – Slightly ahead of the curve.
2. What are they aiming at? – that’s pretty tough, beyond improving the team
3. Do they have the right mix of ingredients? – Yes. They pretty much have just the frosting to think about.
4. Is the time advantageous in terms of trade value? – Yes.
Based on my conclusions, I end up close to where folks like leeroy and Eben are – the pool of players that fit into Portland’s plan is rather small. About the only way to enlarge it would be to trade one or more of our seven young gems and / or perhaps one of our three key role players. Even then, the pool doesn’t expand by much. (Example: it might increase to include Chris Bosh, but not Amare, as Amare doesn’t fit Portland.)
In the end, I look at a roster having Roy, Oden, Aldridge, Webster, Bayless, Rudy and Batum and ask what more do we need besides time to grow. Beyond that, you just have to look at some tweaking and plugging in the right role player or two. And as it turns out, we already have some pretty good names to fit into that category with Blake, Pryzbilla, Outlaw and even Shavlik. Using the cake analogy, Pritchard has gathered all the necessary ingrediants to create the world’s finest Double Dutch Chocolate Devil’s Food cake. He even has some nice leftover ingrediants. Any major change now would be akin to deciding you want German Chocolate Cake with rasberry filling.
hakkaa päälle !
I did answer #1
and I don’t know the answer to #2. I’d have to be a mind reader or Pritchard’s closest confidant to know that one.
As for #1 – assuming there is an overarching plan, I think one has to conclude that this team is probably playing ahead of schedule. Which is pretty amazing when you consider that Oden’s injury last season and Webster’s this year are of significant impact to team development. Last season the team basically showed the amount of improvement reasonably to be expected from adding the top draft pick, even though they lacked his services. This season, with Oden having to come back from injury, Webster out and 4 rookies to integrate, a record similar to last season’s, with some improvement, would be a reasonable expectation. I’d say they are doing better than that.
So, if the team is performing ahead of the planned curve, the logical conclusion is the plan is working and therefore no significant changes are needed. That does not preclude a change, if the right opportunity presents itself, but it does argue pretty strongly to staying the course, lacking some major value suddenly presenting itself.
hakkaa päälle !
timg56
We’re on the same page. In part because until we get Martel back on the court – we don’t actually even know if SF is a position of need – or not. And given how unlikely it is that anyone suddenly decides to make an upper tier PG available, then we’d be tweaking for some mid-level or lower player – and not only aren’t there many of those available either, but we don’t know if Sergio or Bayless, if given some time, won’t be everybit as good as those players in a caouple of years.
The Nash/Kidd/Bibby trades are rare. Often only one every three years or so – at best. Like you, I look at our over-all team and wonder “what’s the rush?”. Pryz, Outlaw, Fernandez, Bayless, Sergio and Batum make one very good second team. Do you know of any better? And Roy, Aldridge, Oden, Webster and Blake aren’t bad either. Sure – we could try to upgrade Blake – but that’s not up to us – but to another team.
All KP can do is react to what’s out there – and fine tune where he can. Granted, Frye and Diogu are extras, and when Martel is back, Outlaw(PF), Fernandez(SG)and Batum (SF) will have fewer minutes unless we cut the starters down to 30 or so. And then, we will have to live with the Bayless/Sergio/Blake argument. But, let’s face it. If Frye, Diogu and RLEC can’t give you that PG upgrade, and if tossing in a Sergio won’t do it either, then it would be silly trading for the sake of trading – which is something KP and Mac won’t do.
Now if you had an Aldridge for Bosh option on the table, and if that only took the RLEC plus one other player at most – then maybe. But it’s not on the table.
Pryz, Outlaw, Fernandez, Bayless, Sergio and Batum. Most teams have a 7 or 8-man rotation (maybe 9 with a bit player coming in to take minutes for a stud). That means we could take 3 of those guys and turn it into 1 and we would be OK.
A Bosh or Stoudemire trade for LMA
certainly qualifies as a major upgrade resulting in increased, long-term production for the team and not some marginal improvement. The same same could be said for a Nash trade (rumor says he’s not availabe so he must be available, right) but not for Hinrich even though he’s younger. A trade for Caron Butler would also be a marked improvement at that position though someone suggested we would need to take Arenas off their hands as well. That suits me fine by the way because we kill all the birds with one stone. Gilbert makes a fine point guard given a commitment on his part and Butler is the cream of the crop at SF. So many choices, so many choices.
simple perhaps stupid questions:
What is the “trade deadline,” and what is it a deadline for doing? What is the purpose of having this “trade deadline”? Does it have to do with a team not being able to put a player on its playoff roster if it acquires said player after the deadline? Or does it have to do with the CBA and not being able to sign a player after the deadline?
If the deadline is a bright line “thou shalt not make ANY trades after this day” deadline, then what exactly is its purpose?
Someone please explain the origins and reasons behind the trade deadline.
Thank you.
The journey of a thousand miles begins beneath one's feet.
It's a hard deadline
NBA teams are not allowed to make any trades after the deadline (which is always in late February). Teams can still add players through waivers or free agency, but not via trade.
I believe the purpose of the deadline was to prevent teams who are out of the playoff race from dumping good players (perhaps ones whose contracts are ending) late in the season to teams who are in the playoff race for young players, picks, or cash.
Rule #1 of nitpicking is to get it right.
Can this team become
what Nate is trying to teach it to become? Nate talks Defense constantly, Nate talks about establishing a low post game. Right now we do not look like much more then a talented perimeter oriented team, thats not going to win you any titles now or in the future.
Trading just to trade would do nothing but disrupt chemistry and that is what Portland is getting by on, players seem like they are willing to sacrifice playing time to be apart of this unique situation. Payday is coming the chemistry thing will not last as we are currently assembled.
Looking at the fa class this summer I hope we can make a move at the trade deadline to weed out bench fodder and get the rotation player(s) that will help this team make some noise as early as next season.(maybe even win a playoff series this season)
My guess is Portland makes a major move before the deadline.
I try to help with everything," Fernandez said. "If the coach says go rebound, I go rebound. I work for the team.
""If I'm playing this game to get media and attention, I shouldn't be here," Aldridge said. "I'm here to play basketball, and do what I can do to help this team win."
+1 for the Lance Storm reference!
What’s the line, “if I could be serious for a minute!”
"I love the Spurs!" -Hitler
I think we need an upgrade of PG
but my problem is choosing the right one. I think we dont really know what kind of offense we should run up tempo or half court. I think we have all the pieces for more of a uptempo game, excluding Oden. If Oden can get back in old form then Nash would be perfect for this team untill Bayless is ready. In a half court game like now i feel Blake is the one for now. It seems to me that this team was built more for an up tempo style and either Oden or Nate is preventing a faster pace. Im not promoting trading Oden or getting rid of Nate im saying that until you know what you got with Oden ( whether he can run or not) you cant make to much moves in the trade department
I think Miller as well
And our pace is a direct result of Roy, not Oden or Nate. Oden is exactly what you need to be a breaking team- shot-blocking and rebounding. Nate likes to run at every opportunity. Roy is very deliberate, and the team has his style.
by TheThinWhiteDuke on Feb 6, 2009 2:13 PM PST up reply actions
Good call
after all, if we show that we WANT to trade, then we won’t get the best deal possible. Better to let other people show their cards first and ask us what we want. Then we only go up. We start negotiations, we go down from whatever we ask.
The goal is not to be better, the goal is to be the best.
I'm reminded of this little ryme:
when it’s hot we want it cool
when it’s cool, we want it hot
never wanting what we’ve got
always wanting what it’s not
I say stand pat.
Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave
Darn ... I screwed up my little ryme. Here's the correction:
as a rule, man’s a fool
when it’s hot, we want it cool
when it’s cool, we want it hot
never wanting what we’ve got
always wanting what it’s not
Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave
by TwoDeep on Feb 6, 2009 10:03 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
This is a great thread
It all comes down to the basics – like most things in life – doesn’t it? Dave is right on, IMO, when he says that the answer to the big question of whether the Blazers should trade or not is a logical conclusion out of how you answer those basic questions:
What do the Blazers want their team to look like in the future?
How do the current players fit into that vision?
What other players could be targeted to fill any gaps between the vision and the current roster?
When is the best time to go after those potential targets?
Ultimately, each of us probably answers those questions differently than one another – and probably even differently than the Blazer front office, either slightly or dramatically – but that’s the fun of a discussion board, isn’t it?
My personal vision for the future is a solid 9 man rotation:
Starting PG – good defender, can play off of Roy (ie, doesn’t need the ball in his hands all the time to be effective), can hit outside shots, can push the ball in fast break situations
Starting SG – Brandon Roy
Starting SF – good defender, can both drive to basket and hit outside shots
Starting PF – LaMarcus Aldridge
Starting C – Greg Oden
The reserves are a bit tougher for me to envision – they need to be able to score and play defense but I don’t have clearly defined roles. If the backup C/PF is a big scorer, then the backup PG might need to be more of a distributor, for example. Essentially, I envision the reserves complementing one another and the starters.
Evaluating the current roster is hard on some counts, easier on others. PG and SF seem to be (duh!) where the evaluation seems to be most up for debate. Of the 3 PG’s, I think that Bayless has the most potential to become what I envision, but he’s not there yet. So either the Blazers use him to get a long term solution now or wait for him to hopefully develop. My personal vote is for the latter. I’d rather trade other pieces to get a short-term starting PG and let Bayless be the other PG. Yep, I just said trade Sergio and Blake.
SF is similar. Batum has the potential to be the long-term answer but he’s not there yet. Webster might be the answer but his injury makes evaluation difficult. Ultimately, if an upgrade at SF is available that costs the team Webster, you probably have to deal him. My heart doesn’t like it, but…
Who to target? I’d go after Hinrich at PG and Butler at SF. If they aren’t available today using LaFrentz and other pieces, then the best move might be to wait until the summer to make a trade or two using the team’s cap space (understanding that they wouldn’t necessarily have to match financially because of the cap space).
by Storyteller on Feb 6, 2009 9:33 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
I just don't like Henrich
The guy is injury prone, plays horrific defense, is slow, and at best is a marginal shooter. I like Butler, in fact I love Butler.
I think Blake has done well at PG, I think Bayless will over take him, its so hard to evaluate a team where most players are only in their 2nd or 3rd seasons.
Blake's perimeter defense
is good. Both he and Sergio, though, have troubles defending the high pick and roll – especially in fighting over the top of screens. Hinrich would be a big improvement here. I think Kirk is just as good a shooter as Blake.
And what you say is right – the evaluation process seems to be where the most debate takes place. Whether it’s Blake vs. Hinrich, Bayless vs. Sergio, Batum vs. Marion, etc.
Couldn't have said it better myself
I concur. Except I’d try to get Nash to man the PG for the next 2 years. I realize he doesn’t fit the defensive bill, but I think he brings enough else to the table to make it worth it. I more inclined to sit on the SF spot at this point and see if Nic/Martell can man it next year, unless as you say, we can get a Butler for one of them and some change.
Rule #1 of nitpicking is to get it right.
I wonder
if the Suns are serious about trading Amare, if a POR-PHO-WAS deal could be done. Phoenix gets RLEC + young player(s) + draft picks, WAS gets Amare and POR gets Butler. Depends on whether they think that Jamison could play SF next to Stoudamire (assuming that Amare plays PF – I guess perhaps they could try him at center again….)
This is obviously a bit simplistic,
but my strategy might be to identify who we need to move, then put that out to the league, and take bids. We want to move Sergio, Channing, and RLEC. Who will give us the most in return? We would prefer one player. Either the offers role in, and include definate upgrades, or we wait until summer.
One point I want to make is that when opportunities arise, winners capitalize on them. This Raif thing is rare, and it is potentially a pot of gold. With these economic times included in the equation, and some hurting, losing teams with expensive assets (which become factors contributing to the teams heavy losses, instead of assets) who would love to reduce their salaries substantially and make room for free agents or other players that might help them turn things around at a reduced price. That should be our goal, but only to get someone who will help now and in the long run.
speaking of Martell...
has anyone heard anything lately about a return date? Last I heard was February. Well, it’s February….
having him back in the lineup would probably/certainly raise the pressure to make some room at SF.
March
Casey mentioned in the podcast that Martell set March as the goal for his return, and I think Quick said the same.
yeah
I think at this point the best case scenario is him returning to game action in mid March. We have our final Eastern road trip starting the 15th. If he went on the that trip and played the first game and onward, we are looking at 17 games total. If he makes his return on the 4 game homestand that follows, we are talking 12 games plus playoffs. Anything later than that is really too late to figure out the rotations and work him into playing shape before the playoffs.
The nice thing about all this is the way our SF position is designed right now, he could return to the rotation with minimal impact, Pretty much it’s stand in the corner and wait for the 3 on post kickout/rotation or guard penetration kickout and occassionally slash to the lane off a post double team.
Rule #1 of nitpicking is to get it right.
game shape is gonna be rough on him
I'm afraid Chiekh Samb's kids are going to be born ducking
by GreatOden'sRaven on Feb 6, 2009 8:11 PM PST up reply actions
Comparing Players on Other Teams and the Minutes Game
One of the toughest parts of evaluating players for a trade is trying to figure out if they will have more or less success when playing with your players. For example, a dude can look all-star on a crappy team because he gets the ball all the time. Also the style of play may make a player look better or worse.
The other issue is minutes. Will he be happy with less minutes, or does he have to be the star? And how does adding a key player affect the players that you have? Say we get a sold defensive player. Do you sit down or limit a regular player that has better offensive skills?
In terms of need, these are areas of concern:
Point Defense – pretty crappy now, but I think Bayless has the best talent of the 3
Inside Scoring – not consistent now, but getting better with Oden, Aldridge, Roy, and Bayless
Wing Defense – probably could use a bigger stronger dude that can guard taller mobile players – Batum has potential and Martel might surprise.
Inside Defense – if we could keep the little guys from penetrating, this should take care of itself.
I am reluctantly coming to the conclusion,
even though I prefer to revamp rosters in the off season, that the team needs to move, at a minimum Channing, a point guard and a small forward.
The injuries to Blake and Webster complicate this, because as long as they are injured the Blazers would almost have to get a PG and SF back, which really constricts the options.
Another problem is that it’s easy to point out the flaws in Outlaw’s game, and forget that 8 or 9 of Portland’s win came in game where they trailed going into the fourth quarter. How many of those games do they win without Travis going on a tear?
It’s like Ben Rothlisberger. He’s not pretty, his game is riddled with flaws, but he wins and the Steelers would be toast without him.
Time to straighten out your life Bedgers
The girlfriend just had twins so trade in that GTI for a minivan. What the hey; the new ones are comfortable, they get good mileage, they’re reliable cause they never break down. It’s definitely a win for the family unit.
It’s time to clean out the garage. All that precious stuff you were holding onto; well, it’s nice but it just somehow doesn’t seem so important now. Put it on Craigslist and let somebody have that can really use it.
That fine bicentennial commemorative keepsake set that’s missing it’s partner; you know, the one you bought thinking it would be a huge collectible until the other half fell off the shelf. Well I just saw the other half on Ebay. Go on now, go bid on it. It’s super nice but alone it not worth much. What do have to lose?
Sometimes it’s just time to shake things off and get cleaned up. Even young people need to constantly review and realign with their new priorities, make things ship shape.
The attic pack-rat analogy
is an interesting one. I like it.
I think another analogy might be that we, as Blazer fans, are the classic young guys dating who don’t want to settle down. We love the unknown of the dating scene. We want girls we have to chase. We date for the thrill. Multiple possibilities are far more exciting to us than a steady partner. So we love all of these “maybe they’ll be great” players even when logic says that they can’t possibly all turn out great and still remain Blazers. But if we’re ever going to have a real life at some point we have to ditch the harem approach and get married to a roster that we trust to spend our productive years with…a roster that’s going to support us, that’s a known quantity, that we can depend on. Yes, some of these girls are going to find other guys and date them. Maybe they’ll even be happy. The thought of that hurts, but really, you can’t keep them all forever and you can’t keep living the young, bachelor life forever. Time to settle down.
—Dave
yeah...
that’s kind of been the analogy in my head every time someone asks what a player’s “ceiling” is. Sometimes it’s hard to remember that not everyone becomes as good as we think they have the potential to become. This is normal. We can’t expect every one of our young players to be all that we hope they will be, even if our desires are reasonable.
eventually, it’s time to think about what’s likely – or what’s in front of you – instead of what’s possible.
by LicketyBrindle on Feb 6, 2009 12:37 PM PST up reply actions
I'm confused
A roster has 15 spots. If you are ditching the harem and marrying a roster, exactly how many did you have in the harem?
I must say, Dave is full of surprises.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
I bow down
before your wordsmithery. Smart analogies are always welcome. It’s why you work with words whereas I work with plants. They don’t talk very much which doesn’t help sharpen my writing skill. The other side of that coin is they don’t talk very much which is a blessing.
Martell presents a dilema.
Do the Blazers need a veteran SF that can defend and hit the outside shot, or do thaey have that one the roster, wearing a boot on his injured foot? IMO, the Blazers can’t move without deciding what is to happen at that position. And that will be difficult without evaluating Webster.
I am happy with a PG rotation of Blake and Bayless for quite some time. For another year or two, Blake starts and Bayless comes off the bench, than after that it reverses.
If the Blazers feel Webster is the answer, I am completely happy with standing pat. If they think he MAY be the answer, if they are uncertain and want to wait a year, I’m good with that as well.
But if they are sure he isn’t it, make a deal now. With the goal this year being to make the playoffs (nearly assured), we’re OK. But the goal next year has got to be higher. And if they don’t think Martell is the one at SF, get a deal done so they will be ready for next year.
One other factor Dave didn't mention
(though he’s mentioned it before).
Channing and Ike are assets of value right now, but they are classic examples of the attrition he describes. Those guys have declined in value this year.
So why are they assets right now? Because they are CFEC and IDEC. Once this year is up, they will not be offered the QO (unless we have an injury so one of them gets PT and plays like a star). They only stay around if we re-sign them for less than the QO as UFAs.
So it isn’t just RLEC. We can swing a trade and salary match the biggest salary dump in league history, probably, with all of our expiring contracts. That ups the salary we can take back to about $20 million.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
I don't see either getting a QO
If either are re-signed, it’ll be for much less than what their QO would be.
Me, too
So no sign and trade. Might be traded as an EC before the deadline.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
You can still sign&trade players you have renounced
Not that it necessarily will happen, but on the other hand the two guys are assets that you don’t let go to waste. Tom Penn is really good at finding things like that even if the Blazers don’t want to keep them because they have a better free agent in sight. And of course it’s entirely possible one of them is part of a deal now.
It is hard for me to figure out how/why
that would happen. Sign and trade, I mean.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
In reality
I think this goes back to what we were discussing on this site at the beginning of the year. Consolidation. We wont do a 1-1 trade unless it truly benefits us, but if that were the case, why would the other team do it? Isiah is gone.
More than likely we aren’t going to do a trade midseason. But if we DO, I think it has to be a 4-2 or 3-1 kind of deal to free up playing time for guys. I know Martell is a variable and we dont know what is he capable of, but I think if we are going for a PG or SF, its going to cost us some fan favs. It really has to. My favorite trade ideas in order are
1. Tayshaun Prince
2. Chris Bosh
3. Deng/Hinrich
I think all three of those make us a contender. Right now. We shouldn’t mortgage all of our future, but with guys struggling for playing time, we can certainly consolidate. One PG, One SF and One backup PF are certain, and possibly a #1 in this weak draft to bring one or two players back
I'm afraid Chiekh Samb's kids are going to be born ducking
by GreatOden'sRaven on Feb 6, 2009 11:29 AM PST reply actions
i would give up a lot to get Tayshaun Prince...
but I don’t think Detroit is listening. He’s so key to the way they play.
by LicketyBrindle on Feb 6, 2009 12:04 PM PST up reply actions
well if they go ahead and blow it up
they might want some younguns
I'm afraid Chiekh Samb's kids are going to be born ducking
by GreatOden'sRaven on Feb 6, 2009 8:10 PM PST up reply actions
I've grown to like this roster...
The only way way I’d push for a trade right about now is if a team gifted us a deal like Jerry West did (Gasol) to his old team, last season.
Things to consider before looking for changes:::
1) Is 4 months of experience together enough time to warrant a conclusion of this roster’s potential.
2) How will Webster affect the team when he comes back.
3) Has Rodriguez reached his potential with this team.
4) Has the team met or exceeded the expectations laid out for it during the Summer.
5) How will the new player effect this team’s chemistry.
6) Will Bonzi Wells except the league minimum.
Roy Tribute
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
1) this makes me wonder if there isn’t a way to work out a trade that just delays the “declining value” pieces – can we trade RLEC for a different contract expiring in a year or two that will be just as valuable then? Stick it in the bank, so to speak.
2) Assuming Webster keeps his starting role, behind him we have Outlaw, who can score in bunches but gets lost on defense. And Batum, who is a good defender, looks to become a smart defender, but hasn’t shown much scoring ability. They’re basically opposite. Which do we want coming off the bench – offense or defense? I would say if we keep Rudy, he’s going to be our #1 offensive option coming off the bench, and the defense looks better. So Outlaw is the piece to move. The biggest problem with that is Outlaw’s scoring has been huge in several games this year, and Rudy’s not ready to fully step into those shoes. So this might end up being a one step backward now, two steps forward later move. But I guess that all depends on who we get in return.
3) I think the “with this team” part is huge. He can continue to improve, but would he thrive better in a different system, under a different coach? Probably. This is something us fans need to keep in mind – if he goes on to be a star somewhere else, that doesn’t make it a bonehead move to trade him from here. He just doesn’t fit hand-in-glove here. Jermaine O’Neal comes to mind.
4) They’ve pretty much met my expectations already. With Marty out and Oden just learning, they are a markedly better team than next year. But then, I’m not one of these “anything short of three championships is a failure” guys. I think we are more likely to thwart our chances of future success by pressing than by sitting back and letting things develop. “Win now” does not motivate me to want a trade; “clear up the logjams” does.
5) Great question. This makes me look less at positions and contributions and more at attitude and energy. This young and somewhat soft team really could use a guy with warrior intensity, who would rather sacrifice his body than give up an easy basket. Bayless would be tickled to death to have a guy like that around. I think BRoy would play better knowing he doesn’t have to carry the leadership of the team on both ends of the floor. I think LMA would step up to the challenge – at least I’d like to see if he would. And I think Oden is dying for someone to fire him up, and encourage him to use his body and his strength to shut people down.
I know Bruce Bowen is old and his career is almost over. But he fits the bill better than anybody I can think of.
by LicketyBrindle on Feb 6, 2009 12:18 PM PST up reply actions
Excellent post
Yeah, I’m growing tired of all the speculation. There are a lot of good players to grab out there and I’m sure if we do trade we’ll get someone we’ll be happy with. I can think of at least 15 players I wouldn’t mind seeing on the Blazers, and at least four Blazers I wouldn’t be heartbroken about leaving.
I’m not expecting any huge names or groundbreaking trades, doesn’t seem like KP’s style. But I wouldn’t be surprised to see a sleeper, defensive-oriented player end up on the roster.
Life is hilarious.
WHERE IS THE "TRADE DRAWER?"
I see comments on some trade topics in fanposts & fanshots that “This should be in the Trade Drawer”….& I have seen it kicked around that we have a specific Trade Drawer….but when I look on the site I don’t see any specific place for Trade Drawer. Hook a brother up…
We all know what K*be did in Colorado to that girl. Dear Lord, please let whatever team that plays the LA Clankers beat them to oblivion. Amen.
A few things....
1) I love Blake, Rodriguez, and Bayless, but each has pretty glaring weaknesses. I don’t like the overal defense at this position.
2) No one really knows what Rip City will look like when Martell gets back. If he can return and play to the potential that everyone was drooling about in training camp before the injury, then we can let Trout go via trade. If he can’t come back, then we can’t afford to lose Trout. Trout seems to be the most valuable trade chip (if you don’t count RLEC). Love him or hate him, he does produce during crunch time, and we would miss him w/o Martell on the floor.
3) The next person who suggests getting Amare in a Blazer uniform should be banned for life from BE. His attitude is what KP and Rip City has worked so hard to rid this team of. I have NO IDEA why anyone would want to ship a class act like LMA out the door for an ingrate who puts up better numbers, but is NOWHERE near the same level of team play and basketball IQ. It would be a downgrade. LMA would be putting up the same stats as Amare if LMA was playing in Phoenix’s system.
So to sum it up, I am not sure that this year’s trade deadline is the best time to make changes, unless someone drops a HUGE (and I mean all-star quality who is not at the end of his career) piece at PG or SF, someone who can play lockdown defense and/or distribute the ball.
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace." Jimi Hendrix
by philly420pdxhilo on Feb 6, 2009 3:07 PM PST reply actions
What a tough call
The Rose Garden is selling out, prices are going to be raised. Most fans are happy with the improvement we’ve seen this year and once again have an “emotional attachment” with some of the players. Locker room chemistry is said to be very good. You still need to give these guys a couple more years to see what you’ve got. B-Rex could turn out to be a monster of a PG. I guess what I’m getting at is if a trade is made before the trade deadline it better be a no brainer, slam dunk. On the other side, sooner or later trades will be made. I’m just glad I don’t have to do it.
Dave...
am I detecting a slight lean on your part toward shipping LMA off?
Somebody south of Oden and Roy but north of Randolph and Diogu is going to get moved.
…south of Oden and Roy… ominously leaving out LMA…
This assumes, of course, that Lamarcus is the answer at power forward.
…word choice indicates skepticism…
more like five names shoehorned into one and a third positions if you take Lamarcus as a given.
…again, some skepticism detected.
You finding yourself in the “slightly down” camp on Aldridge?
"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my Grandfather did, in his sleep -- not screaming, like the passengers in his car"
by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Feb 6, 2009 4:03 PM PST reply actions
By the way...
that comment was #2000 for me.
Thank you for the wonderful site, Dave. Blazer’s Edge is internet gold!
"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my Grandfather did, in his sleep -- not screaming, like the passengers in his car"
by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Feb 6, 2009 4:09 PM PST up reply actions
Shipping off LMA????
Why would you even consider doing that now? If you get a Dwight Howard in trade, yes. That trade has to be that good.
Bosh
I'm afraid Chiekh Samb's kids are going to be born ducking
by GreatOden'sRaven on Feb 6, 2009 8:09 PM PST up reply actions
I'm not KP, but I can try to answer #2 and #3 for you.
KP’s strategy has never been in question. He has admitted several times how his method works. It is a combination of the San Antonio + Chicago models (build through the draft and acquire assets) and his own special sauce.
Question #3 is not really that important at this time. Balancing the roster is not relevant until you are in that upper tier of competition in the playoffs. At that time you seek role players that come in on moderate veteran salaries to fill holes. These are the Robert Horrys, the Michael Finleys, the Brent Barrys. We’re not there yet.
Question #2 seems hard to answer, but is not. KP has a board of players he rates highly, based on scouting reports, group input, and Jeffrey Ma’s statistics. He’s not going to mortgage the future for a guy that is not on the top of that board. If Amare and Bosh aren’t up there at the top, for whatever reason, they won’t be coming here. Period. It might not even be superstars at the top; it might be journeymen who are highly productive based on the formula. So if RLEC + whatever can’t get one of the top guys on his list, there won’t be a trade. If he can get one of those guys, there will be a trade. It’s that simple.
I believe one of the reasons they really wanted Darius off the books was so they wouldn’t have to make a trade at the deadline. By being so far under the cap during the off-season, they would have a lot more flexibility. Maybe that has changed, but I doubt it. I still feel they will challenge, and win, the cap space back, and the deal will happen during the off-season instead of the trade deadline. But I could also be full of it.
Koponen - PG of the future. For Italy, that is. Book it.
Nothing to add...
Thanks for the great read Dave.
dc
"I'm very important. I have many leather-bound books and my apartment smells of rich mahogany."
Pistons
what about we offer them anyone outside of
bayless
roy
webster
aldridge
oden
pryzbilla
for
stuckey
maxiell
+filler
guard rotation would be
roy-stuckey-bayless
small forward
webster-batum/outlaw
post
aldridge-maxiell
oden-pryz
How about this rotation
1 Bayless/Blake
2 Roy/Fernandez
3 Webster/Batum
4 Aldrige/Outlaw
5 Oden/Pryz
Wait two years and see what you get.
Dave: Can you do a piece dissecting the rules/mechanics of sign-and-trades? I would like to know more about it and I'm increasingly thinking that could be the way we improve in the future.
Please, for the love of all that is holy, please stop using the following: "Book it.", "FTW", "Epic" & "Fail".
...no seriously--stop.
I gotta think tonights loss proved without a doubt
that we need to do something. we are losing ground in bad games and we need a change.
I'm afraid Chiekh Samb's kids are going to be born ducking
by GreatOden'sRaven on Feb 6, 2009 8:09 PM PST reply actions
A possible step
The John Salmons of Sacramento rumor is likely to have some legs, and gives some insight into KP’s thinking. We could use a steady vet at the SF position for a few years. Salmons, at 29, has two years left on a contract that ends at $5.8 million, upgrades our defense and offense at the swing position (18.7ppg/4.7 rpg), isn’t likely to force us to trade any of our key pieces, and like just about every Sac player – is clearly in play. He can, in sum, be had. Right now, the issue at SF is that Batum needs a few years to develop, and Martel’s injury cost him a year of development necessary to see if he is our future starter. And coming back in mid-March isn’t going to tell us much, because he’ll be out of shape and behind the curve he would have started the season with had he been healthy. Martel would then go back to the #2 team, and Batum would move to the 3rd team where we expected him to be this year. The Blazers would be better, and we’d buy a two year window with a reasonably priced vet that would still have trade value downstream.
We’d still release/trade Frye/Diogu, and would still have the PG issue, but Travis, Webster, Rudy, Sergio, Pryz, Bayless and Batum would still be around. And one reason you don’t like to trade rookies – is because you have contracts that fit well into cap space, and, in our case, they are likely more talented with a higher upside and cheaper than lthe vets you’d pick up to replace them.
The PG issue is less easy to resolve than the SF issue, and we may simply have to live with the Blake/Sergio/Bayless controversy for another year or two. Teams just do not let go of solid PG’s that would be an upgrade to Blake. Indeed, the two often talked about are Chicao and Charlotte, primarily because both drafted their PG of the future last year, but kept Hinrich and Felton. However, Augustin’s injury has pushed a Felton trade into the summer, and Hinrich’s play has caused Chicago to likely do the same, given their three guard rotation is working pretty well – and they don’t yet know if they can keep Gordon or not.
If we did make such a move at SF, then the roster would stabilize with Roy/Rudy at SG, Blake/Sergio/Bayless at PG, Aldridge/Outlaw at PF, Oden/Pryz at Center, and Salmons/Webster/Batum at SF. The last three slots would be fillers.
And, as far as PG, I thought the Mac interview before the Thunder game on Oregon Live was very enlightening. The bottom line is that it takes time and playing experience to be a good PG. Nothing else substitutes. And both Sergio and Bayless still need to do a lot to growing to fill that position.
In the end, we have another two years of development to get to our real window. And whereas we can likely get a better wing player simply because their are more available and they are easier to get, PG may not be a slot we can do much about.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
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
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- C-a-C: This is probably as close to LeBron James working with John Waters as we’ll ever get
- Dwyane Wade’s hot pink pants: The kind of thing you can get away with when you drop 41
- Lamar Odom to New York? Dwight Howard on the move? For now, it’s all talk
- David West hilariously denies each and every one of his young fans a high-five (VIDEO)
