trades and chemistry

by bustabucket18 on Feb 9, 2009 1:12 PM PST

I've noticed a lot of people are saying 'no' to a trade before the deadline. Most people are saying the reason for their 'no' is because a trade would mess with the teams chemistry. My question is, how would a new player change the chemistry any more than injuries change the chemistry? When Oden missed time after opening night, the team was used to playing with joel, then Oden came back, and they had to get used to playing with him again. Then Roy went down and the team had to get used to playing more with Bayless. Then Roy returned and the team had to get used to playing with him again. Now Blake is down and the team has had to adjust to more of Sergio and Bayless. When Blake comes back and Martell comes back, the team will have to again, adjust and regain that chemistry. Now this is a lot of adjusting and rebuilding. And a lot of these guys (oden, sergio, bayless) are young inexperienced guys, which makes it even harder for the rest of the team to feel comfortable with them. Making a trade and getting used to playing with someone new wouldn't be that big of a deal.

The trade would definitely be for an experienced player, likely a veteran. Someone who could contribute towards securing a playoff spot. I don't think bringing in someone like this would throw off the chemistry any more than the numerous injuries have.
What do you think?

Tweet Comment 26 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

It's not a one-for-one scenario.

But, I think you make an excellent point. Just as it takes time to work someone into the rotation dur to injury, a brand-spanking-new person can also be worked in. Now, the brand-spaking-new person does not have the advantage of knowing everyone as well, as say, Shavlik Randolph would, but hopefully they would be more talented than the Shav as well.

Current Titles:

Official Blazer's Edge Poet Co-Laureate for the 2008-2009 Season
Official Blazer's Edge Ambassador to the Milwaukee Bucks
Unofficial Blazer's Edge Grammar Magister
Unofficial Blazer's Edge Grumpy Ol' Curmudgeon
Chaplain of the Jarrett Jack Jump-Pass Memorial Fanclub

by T Darkstar on Feb 9, 2009 1:21 PM PST reply actions

This guy not that guy

Its funny reading people idea’s about to trade or not to trade, if you are an proponant of a trade its great unless"hypothetically" Outlaw is included in the deal or Sergio if they are your guy. This team is so likeable that its hard to break it up. My theory on making a trade is were going to lose a couple players a year the next couple years anyway’s get something in return for them now. A good 2-1 or 3-1 would help set up the roster or at least pair it down a little.

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."

by Dragonage on Feb 9, 2009 1:25 PM PST reply actions

I for one..

Think we should make a move in order to capitolize on RLEC. I mean I suppose just having that money come off our own books could be good, but at the same time if we can use it to help get a player we wouldn’t otherwise get from a cash strapped team…. we have to do it.

by tmundal on Feb 9, 2009 1:35 PM PST reply actions

chemistry...and playoff exits

Chemistry is good, playing together and getting along is great. Aw Shucks. Lets get real though. Oden, Batum, Rudy, Bayless. All NBA rooks that havent experienced the wall, or NBA playoffs, and Rudy has been playing ALOT with his oversees and Olympic schedule. Lets look at playoff experience on the roster. BRoy, LMA, Trout, Martell and the rooks have none. Blake has 9 games with only 5 as a starter and Pryz has an hefty 35 Min in 5 games. I like this team and want to see a move made to bring in an experience player with quality playoff experience AND attitude. Yes, its great to have a young core and have them mature together. But, I dont see this team running the table in the west for years and years. Lets get real. Contracts and economics will pick people off one by one. So, bring a bruiser or a Big D pg in, to show the kids how to do it down the stretch. Do we really want to watch them learn how to lose in the first round and wonder “what if they had brought someone in with RLEC+”. I dont.

by nofx42025 on Feb 9, 2009 2:24 PM PST reply actions

Depends on the guy

Nobody’s going to convince me that bringing in a me-first malcontent like Amare is going to create good chemistry.

But a different guy could work.

Blazer Fan

by leeroyjenkins on Feb 9, 2009 2:26 PM PST reply actions

how about...

Caron Butler…

by bustabucket18 on Feb 9, 2009 5:06 PM PST up reply actions

this is one of the few trades I'd really like

if they can get him cheaply enough. I don’t think the wizards will do it, but it would be a serious upgrade, and remain consistent with the kind of players we have.

by lurtsman on Feb 9, 2009 8:00 PM PST up reply actions

not enough balls to go around IMO

assuming we keep LaMarcus in a Butler trade scenario we are stunting Oden and Bayless’ growth adding another 20+ ppg guy.

UDOKA!

by CLRNCE. on Feb 10, 2009 12:26 PM PST up reply actions

not to say I don't like Caron

I do. but we need more of a role player type…major move before the deadline not necessary this year

UDOKA!

by CLRNCE. on Feb 10, 2009 12:27 PM PST up reply actions

I have a follow up question.

Why is it people think adding one guy is going to make a difference in the quality of Portland’s defense?

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Feb 9, 2009 2:55 PM PST reply actions

he'd have to be really, really good

Since when do we need to ponder to froth? - jscot

by 22baylor on Feb 9, 2009 4:38 PM PST up reply actions

Well, you can see how adding a vet to a playoff team like

Jason Kidd to Dallas, Shaq to Phoenix, Vince Carter to the Nets, Ben Wallace to the Bulls and Cavs, and Iverson to the Pistons put them over the top and took them to the next level.

It stands to reason it will work the same for the Blazers.

by raoulduke on Feb 9, 2009 3:22 PM PST reply actions 1 recs

oh your witty!

It took me a minute.. i gotcha tho. So not in favor of a trade huh?

It was "mascot night" at the Rose Garden, which apparently translates to a dozen inflatable versions of various NBA mascots being chased around the arena by Portland's "Blaze", which is some breed of rapist dog. -PostingandToasting

by GreatOden'sRaven on Feb 9, 2009 4:22 PM PST up reply actions

Suppose we agree that, for example

Amare is better than LMA, Nash is better than Sergio, and Shaq, right now is better than Oden – if that is true, why isn’t Pheonix a better team than the Blazers?

Oh, and Barbosa is better than Batum and J Rich is better than Travis.

Either Phoenix is a better team than the Blazers, or one or more of the above assumptions are, well, wrong.

by raoulduke on Feb 9, 2009 3:28 PM PST reply actions

Yeah

and Richardson is better than Roy
and Lopez is better than Pryz
and Barnes is better than Rudy
and Dragic is better than Bayless

so that’s really obvious.

Comparing apples to oranges ain’t going to cut it.

by boppitywop on Feb 9, 2009 3:53 PM PST up reply actions

Sure it will. All trade talk is apples to oranges. If two players were exactly alike

there would be no reason to trade.

by raoulduke on Feb 9, 2009 4:05 PM PST up reply actions

oranges > apples

Since when do we need to ponder to froth? - jscot

by 22baylor on Feb 9, 2009 4:38 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs

Depends, I think only satsumas win over apples. Otherwise, definitely apples.

by peseme16 on Feb 9, 2009 5:03 PM PST up reply actions

That's easy

Shaq made Phoenix older, slower, less athletic. His experience was unnecessary of a veteran team.

Kidd made Dallas older and slower, less athletic. His experience also went begging on an already mature team.

We, on the other hand are super athletic but unseasoned and unwise. A great veteran player like Vince Carter, Richard Jefferson, Prince, etc….. can’t damage us athletically and will instantly improve our ability to manage the floor. That tier of veteran knows every play and scenario in the game of basketball and can instantly react correctly to the situation. We need that badly.

by oregonslee on Feb 9, 2009 6:35 PM PST up reply actions

Agree

I think it is important to get to the playoffs this year. I just am not convinced that the team is mentally tough enough to grind out some tough March games. A vet would help them, I think. I think we can part with some young talent to get that vet – after all, KP has shown he is good at getting more young talent. I think we can re-stock in June at the draft.

by Woodduck on Feb 9, 2009 6:48 PM PST up reply actions

If the only reason to trade is to get to the playoffs this year

that’s not a good enough reason.

If trading will make you better in two or three years than you would have been by not trading, that’s a good reason to trade.

by raoulduke on Feb 9, 2009 8:35 PM PST up reply actions

Here is what this team needs...

its a fact this team is young…..we have One young Smart Player and that is Roy, he plays like a vet….he is a smart player….we need to find another young star smart player….or a vet player to help teach the young players how to play smart on the court…some players understand by listening to the coach…while others understand by learning on the court ….the question is do we have the time to watch them learn on the court….We got a lot of players that have a lot of learning to do….if we can’t wait then lets trade some young players for some 24 to 28 year old vets that know what it takes to win….I like it both ways because young players are fun to watch….while older vets will get you a win but not as exciting….

by BigMoney on Feb 9, 2009 7:31 PM PST reply actions