Buyers & Sellers
I really enjoyed USMCR's post about what the Blazers should do in the offseason. I got really excited about the possibility of bringing Kirk Hinrich over, and all that he could do for this team. And then I went over to the Bulls' blogsite, to see what they were thinking. I really don't think there's any way we're going to get Hinrich away from them. I really don't think there's any way we could get Chris Anderson, either.
The Bulls are buying. They surprised themselves by making the playoffs, then energized their fans by giving the Celtics a run for their money. They are looking to add a piece - maybe a big piece - that will take them further. They're not going to part with anything that's working. There's a good piece over there on why they should keep even Ben Gordon, for heaven's sake, after all he's put them through. No way they're going to let a team captain go.
The basic theory here is that if you deal with teams that NEED to make a change, you're more likely to get better value for your trades. Teams that like the direction they're going are going to be reluctant to listen unless you make them a heck of an offer. But teams that are desperate to change direction will listen to anything - even the craziest, most lopsided deals. Which is how LA got Pau Gasol.
As we look around at who's available and who's desirable, it seems like it would be good to factor this in. Teams looking to start over are going to be much more willing to part with good players than teams that feel like they're on their way to somewhere. Briefly, we can give up less and get more to a team that's selling than we can to a team that's buying.
So here's my list of buyers and sellers. I invite discussion and correction, especially from team ambassadors, about the state a team is in and who might be staying/going from that team.
Lakers - now that Yao is out, this will be their second year reaching the Finals. Don't expect them to be willing to trade much, win or lose.
Denver - Very excited about their team, as long as Chauncey is in charge. Definitely buying.
San Antonio - Aside from their Big Three, I think they'll be selling. Always a savvy franchise, they can see they're going the way of the Suns.
Houston - They made it out of the first round - finally. They won a game in LA. Then Yao broke his foot. Maybe next year.... buying.
Dallas - Cuban yelling at the guys in the locker room, then getting swept by Denver? Selling. Basement firesale selling. If there are 7 players on this team next year who were here this year, I'll be surprised.
New Orleans - A 58 point blowout in the first round after almost beating the mighty Spurs in the second round the year before? Tyson Chandler traded, then brought back? Selling. But probably pretty conservatively. They might be convinced that they're one or two pieces away from greatness.
Utah - Team has pretty much backed itself into a corner and has to sell.
Phoenix - has been selling since the trade deadline.
Golden State - Who knows? They don't look like even they know which way they're going. Might as well call them and float a deal and see.
Minnesota: Probably buying more than selling. Looks like McHale's trying to build through the draft.
Memphis - Not sure. No blog. They've got some good young players in Mayo, Gasol and Gay, so they may want to stand pat for a few years and see what develops. Plus, they have Darius Miles - superstar in the making.
OKC - Potentially buying, but most likely staying put. They have a good young core and just need to watch it develop.
LA Clippers - Can you remember the last time this team WASN'T selling? Or the last time they had anything we wanted to buy?
Kings - No coach means selling. They're trying to piece something together.
Cleveland - Are you kidding? They've done all the buying they're going to do, and now they're just going to reign supreme for a few years.
Boston - they can blame their playoff struggles on the absence of KG, so they're probably not selling this year.
Orlando - Forget it. On the rise, definitely buying.
Atlanta - Probably going to stay put, but potentially buying. They're young, and good, but not good enough to knock off Cleveland or Orlando in the near future.
Miami - I think they'll be selling. They know they've only got a few years left to put a championship team around Wade, and will be willing to try a thing or two to get them back in the upper echelon.
Philadelphia - Their blog page shows a lot of turmoil. Looks like they're going to be selling.
Chicago - Totally buying. Hey, they almost beat the champs. Sort of.
Detroit - They should be selling, but Dumars is stubborn and got burned with the Chauncey/AI deal. I think they'll probably stand pat this offseason.
Indiana - I'm kind of surprised by the lack of talk on the Pacers blog about offseason moves. Maybe they just really like their team, even if they don't win many games. Buying, but barely.
Charlotte - Definitely buying - look at the Phoenix trade. They'be bought in to Larry Brown's system and are expecting to be in the playoffs in the next few years.
NJ Nets - Probably selling, as they haven't amounted to much lately, and Carter was definitely on the block at the trading deadline.
Bucks - not much action on the SBNation blog makes it hard to call. They're hoping Bogut will come back and lead them back to the playoffs, so - probably buying.
Toronto - Selling. Everything must go, 24 hours only, make us an offer selling.
New York - you know, I think they might've turned a corner and are buying these days. D'Antoni made a difference, David Lee's good, Nate Robinson isn't but he won the dunk contest.
Washington - Selling, selling selling. I think there are more fanposts about trades on Wizards forever than on any other blog.
So. Where does that leave us?
IMHO, we should be looking hard at Washington, Toronto, NJ, Philadelphia, Miami, Sacramento, LAC, Golden State, Phoenix, Utah, Dallas, New Orleans (a little) and San Antonio (a little) to see what they've got that we might want. There are good players on even the worst of those teams. We are buyers in those situations.
And we should pretty much leave alone New York, Milwaukee, Charlotte, Indiana, Detroit, Chicago, Atlanta, Orlando, Boston, Cleveland, OKC, Memphis, Minnesota, Houston, Denver and LAL - there are lots of good players on those teams, but those teams are going to want too much in a trade to get anyone worthwhile away from them. We are sellers in those situations.
Please discuss.
49 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I wouldn't be so sure about Chicago buying
They already have roughly 63 million committed to salary next year, not including the fact that Jerome James will most definitely be picking up his 6.6 million dollar player option. Throw in the fact that Ben Gordon is an unrestricted free agent, and you can bet Hinrich can be had for the right price.
"Smile! You're on a poster!!" - Mike Rice
also
Denver’s owner has been very unwilling to go over the luxury tax threshold (see the Camby trade last summer). Throw in the fact that they either need to make a qualifying offer of ~2.7 million or negotiate a long term deal with Kleiza, and the impending free agency of both JR Smith and Chris Andersen, and it’s very likely that Denver will be very inactive on the trade market, unless it’s to clear space to re-sign the aforementioned players.
"Smile! You're on a poster!!" - Mike Rice
by lefty6283 on May 9, 2009 8:54 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
JR resigned last year
their major salary issues are that Andersen needs a new contract and they’re already at the luxury tax with only 8 players under contract next season.
yep, you're right
thats what I get for not looking at storytellers’ site!
"Smile! You're on a poster!!" - Mike Rice
This all makes perfect sense IF THE TEAMS ARE RUN BY THE BLOG PEANUT GALLERY
Owners are losing money. Finances matter in the front office—but not to fans.
Just like the Blazers are run by Bedge, right?
"There goes Brandon Roy... the best there ever was in this game"
by two buck chuck on May 10, 2009 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions
Exactly
The bottom line is the bottom line.
by upper left corner on May 10, 2009 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions
Miami is not selling at all
Wade is still young. They added some nice pieces with Chalmers(great defensive PG for his age), Beasley(A nice piece, may move to small forward but has great overall skillset), Cook(Their spot up, 3pt shooter). I don’t know, I think they will be really contending in the east as soon as they find a good center(Not Jermaine O’Neal). I don’t think they have to be too risky, they have a nice young core around Wade.
I want to look into acquiring Mike Conley Jr from the Grizzlies personally.
Offseason:
Trade For Mike Conley Jr
Sign Glen "Big Baby" Davis & DJ Mbenga
Draft Kevin Seraphin/Edwin Jackson(Eurostash)
It's weird..
to think of Chalmers vs. Bayless’ trade value. For instance, what’s the likelihood of the Heat accepting Bayless for Chalmers:
1. On draft day.
2. During summer league.
3. During preseason.
4. At All-Star Break
5. Now.
1 and 2 would have to be landslide “hell yes” on their part; 5, not so much.
It's = It Is
Its = Belongs to It
now, add 6
in 2 years.
Then it will be reversed.
Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash
by HurraKane212 on May 10, 2009 12:32 AM PDT up reply actions
Chalmers got time on the floor
Last year Conley was a bust. This year, Hollins gave him a chance, and everybody loves his game.
Playing PG in the NBA is about making decisions. Making good decisions on the fly requires practice.
by upper left corner on May 10, 2009 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Detroit is going to do something this offseason
Wallace and Iverson’s contracts are up and they’ll be way under the cap. It’s absurd to think they won’t be making a move or two. The question is, do they think they can compete again this year by signing a major free agent or are they going into rebuilding mode. If it’s the latter, I think we can snag Prince from them with the right combination of young talent and draft picks.
"It’s a good ol’ fashioned Rip City beat down!"
Denver can't be a buyer
Melo, Martin, Billups, and Nene make a crazy amount of money. They’ll be lucky to keep Andersen.
draft dejuan blair
Yeah, you just pointed one of many examples regarding poor critical thinking skills in this Fan Post.
that's kinda insulting
I don’t think you intended it that way, but it sounds pretty harsh.
Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash
by HurraKane212 on May 11, 2009 12:13 AM PDT up reply actions
On occasion, I can come across pretty harsh toward people.
At the same time, though, I’m cool with people who take shots at me.
hah, with your style
ya kind of have to be understanding when people get pissed.
I used to be like that, but I’m getting old and mellowing out at the ripe old age of 24.
Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash
by HurraKane212 on May 11, 2009 12:17 AM PDT up reply actions
p.s. being married will do that to ya
Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash
by HurraKane212 on May 11, 2009 12:17 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm 24, too, but unmarried myself; yet, I still totally understand the "mellowing" part.
I use to be way more abrasive a few years ago, although nowadays I realize people will always have their differences with one another and that’s exactly what makes each and every one of us unique as individuals.
Yeah, I continue to be a brash know-it-all at times; however, I nevertheless concede the times in which I’m flat-out wrong or unfairly a jackass toward others. Heck, that’s a part of tolerance.
All right, that’s enough mushy crap from me. Let’s get back to sports, which is my forte.
indeed,
you’re mostly fine, just need to sand the edge a bit.
It took me a while to learn not to be insulted when someone doubted that what I was saying was correct. Yeah, that didn’t go over well for me…
I used to be pretty socially retarded, when I get up to the Pac NW sometime we’ll have to grab a beer and talk about something else entirely.
Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash
by HurraKane212 on May 11, 2009 12:35 AM PDT up reply actions
The Bucks are selling
Richard Jefferson said before the trade deadline that one of the top salary players on that team will be traded. It’s just an economic reality.
Here is a blog entry about the state of the Bucks financially. They will have to make some moves. (I don’t like anyone on their roster, so don’t accuse me of going there.)
http://thebratwurst.com/category/milwaukee-bucks/richard-jefferson/
My favorite line from the Blog entry
“This is bad. Really, really bad. Like Herb Kohl staring a $30 million operating loss next year in the face bad.”
Estimates from insiders
say there will only be five buyers this offseason. Detroit, Portland, and OKC are three teams with cap space expected to make a deal. I also see Dallas doing something with the Stackhouse and Dampier contracts.
draft dejuan blair
Can't we use the cap?
To get a long term deal worked out with our current players?
Offseason:
Trade For Mike Conley Jr
Sign Antonio McDyess & Othello Hunter
Draft Kevin Seraphin/Edwin Jackson(Eurostash)
by TheGreatDane17 on May 9, 2009 11:28 PM PDT up reply actions
what are you saying?
Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash
by HurraKane212 on May 10, 2009 12:33 AM PDT up reply actions
Someone re-do this post
because its a great idea, but the info on who’s selling and who’s buying should be based on the current financial situation of the team, salary cap, etc – not the current mood on a fan blog site.
OK - Two things....
I kind of wish I had used different terms than “buying” and “selling” because I’m not really talking about who is willing to take on more salary and who needs to cut. That should be a different post.
“Buyers” are teams that like the direction they’re going and are likely to be reluctant to make any big changes. You will have to knock their socks off with a trade deal for them to agree to it.
“Sellers” are teams that need to change direction, and so are open to offers. They would be more willing to trade a proven commodity for potential and possibility.
Does that make sense?
And the second thing. I don’t think that owners, for the most part, own basketball teams to make money. It’s a ridiculous business to try and make a buck in. Owners, our own included, are basketball fans to want to win. They’d like to win for as cheaply as possible, but there are few owners who want to scuttle their teams in order to increase their profit margin. It’s too public – the fans would hate them, and they’re on camera and in front of media all the time.
So yes, the owner of the Nuggets doesn’t want to go over the salary cap when his team is making perennial first round exits. But when all of Denver’s excited about them and they make it to the Western Conference Finals? I expect his wallet will open a little further.
I see where youre coming from
It was a nice post and I think some of the things you mentioned are important to consider when looking at the direction some teams are going to go. But, the other 1/2 of the puzzle is the financial situation. Some teams “should” be in a buying mode, but will actually be selling because of their finances.
For example, NO should be buying, but we know with their finances they might be selling big time. I think your post addressed 1/2 the issue and if someone can put together the other 1/2, it’s exactly the type of post we need to evaluate what teams we are likely to trade with.
With that last paragraph, it appears that you're still undersetimating how badly some owners want ...
to avoid paying the luxury tax — which, by the way, is a different amount than the salary cap — so until that point you’ll continue having a very difficult time grasping which teams will be buying (e.g., Dallas, Detroit, Oklahoma City, et cetera) and selling (e.g., Chicago, Milwaukee, Washington, et cetera) this off-season.
Good attempt LicketyBrindle
This post narrowed down my thinking for a day, which is the point of a BE post. Don’t bother with AK1984, for all the knowledge that he possesses, he lacks any social skills.
by parkinglotj on May 10, 2009 8:53 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
two words
Caron Butler
We get him ill be as stoked as i could be…..also isnt Ramon Sessions a FA? K.P. has expressed interest in him in the past. Could be something to watch for.
by blazerbeliever97504 on May 10, 2009 9:20 AM PDT reply actions
Ramon Sessions is a restricted FA... 95% chance he resigns with the Bucks.
I find Caron Butler to be an intriguing prospect for us. We basically need to look at anyone on the Wizards, because they are selling like hotcakes, and anyone other than Gilbert Arenas is free game… Then again, if they get Rubio, do you think GA would be available at the right price? His contract is horribly expensive though. Do teams pay players if they are injured the whole year? don’t teams have insurance? But even if he is healthy, doesn’t he make about 20 mil a year? geesh! That said, if we had a healthy Gilbert at PG = championship. OK, I’m dreaming. Antawn Jamison will be available, but apparently he can’t guard my grandma…
Back to Butler though… A Roy/Butler backcourt sounds scary… as in scary good. What kind of role would he play? Starting 3 guard? who do we trade for him?
"There goes Brandon Roy... the best there ever was in this game"
by two buck chuck on May 10, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions
The Washington Wizards reportedly want to hold onto its core (e.g., Antawn Jamison, Caron Butler, ...
& Gilbert Arenas), while cutting costs by packaging its lottery pick with one of its overpriced contracts (e.g., Etan Thomas, Mike James, Darius Songaila, & DeShawn Stevenson). Yet, that notwithstanding, anyone who thinks Butler is the answer doesn’t properly value defense — which is an major problem with most posters around Blazer’s Edge — and doesn’t realize a small forward’s role in Nate McMillan’s high/low zone offense would be a downright terrible fit on offense for high-volume, inefficient shooter like Butler.
I'm not a fan of picking up Butler either
however, if we acquired someone new at any position don’t you think the offense would be changed to accommodate that? We wouldn’t run the same offense with Bayless at PG than we do with Blake at PG, so why would we leave Caron Butler just the corner 3.
"It’s a good ol’ fashioned Rip City beat down!"
Nate McMillan is a rigid head coach, pure and simple.
Although I’m far from being a fan of Rashard Lewis — for his porous defense and inability to pass out of double teams gave me fits when I was a Seattle SuperSonics fan — even I could notice that his offensive game of draining corner threes and occasionally driving the baseline fit well within McMillan’s offensive scheme.
Yet, except for Lewis, McMillan works well with defensive-minded small forwards who remind him somewhat of himself as a weakside cornerman — as ol’ #10 didn’t always play the point with the SuperSonics — as a result, Viktor Khryapa, Ime Udoka, Martell Webster, and Nicolas Batum have all had starting roles at that position during his tenure in Portland.
Oh, and by the way, I’m not entirely sold that McMillan will adjust his offense to appease a gunner like Jerryd Bayless. It’s one thing when McMillan coached a dribble-drive point guard like Antonio Daniels, for he was very careful with the ball — as his assist-to-turnover ratio in 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 were both greater than 4:1 — and had a sharp-shooting backcourt partner in Ray Allen to mask his mediocre long-range shooting.
it's called deal or no deal
the real story about the blazers franchise will be 14 months from now.we’ll see between pdx knicks nets thunder and pistons also the cavs.which team will these great f.agents go to.all of these teams will have over 40mil in capspace to spend next summer.b.roy is probably going to get his extension this summer.so they’ll be no excuses from blazers management or you the fans.if the blazers do not sign not 1 superstar f.agent.i don’t wanna hear from k.pricthard oh we extended our own guy(aldridge).he’ll have plenty of cash to extend aldridge next summer.you people love putting k.pricthard on a pedestal.we’ll see how much he’ll spend the big $$$ next summer.no excuses blazers fans,just 1 major f.agent we’ll see next summer.
the only way we can get a top tier talent in the summer of 2010
is if they are a veteran who sees an opportunity to win a championship in Portland, and is willing to take less money to do so, as its very likely the most we could offer a player would be our mid-level exception, due in large part to the fact we will have a ton of money committed to our books with extensions for both Roy and Aldridge.
"Smile! You're on a poster!!" - Mike Rice
i'm not taking a shot
at pricthard,all i’m saying is it"s not going to easy for the blazers like many of you believe to land a top flight f.agent.when you think long and hard,have the blazers ever signed a top superstar f.agent.b.grant and c.dudley and strickland are not type f.agents.lebron kobe shaq wade are top flight f.agents.when was the last time the blazers ever signed that type of star.with the capspace they’ll have next summer we’ll see and that’s to me is going to say all you need to know,what the nba stars really think of the blazers.if they really wanna win,they will jump on board.if they only care about endorsements,then you go lose with the damn knicks.
I thought it was a pretty big deal when we signed Scottie Pippen...
Sure, he was toward the end of his career, but he was a decent pickup and almost took us to the finals. Other than that, though, I can’t really think of any other free agent stars we’ve signed.
"There goes Brandon Roy... the best there ever was in this game"
by two buck chuck on May 10, 2009 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions
I am pretty sure Pippen was got via trade
not as a free agent
"You're welcome friend
I love you."
- Tom "Dragline" inHawaii
by 92wastheyear on May 10, 2009 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't think a huge FA star is what we need
1) We don’t have enough cap space
2) We don’t want a chemistry risk
3) We are going to be using our $ to keep our young talent
I think we are looking to bring in one or two established veterans who can be solid role players for the team.
by upper left corner on May 10, 2009 1:07 PM PDT reply actions
Toronto
Whats the deal with Jose Calderon? He was pretty well respected a year ago when the raptors were good. Could we somehow steal him? I rarely watch toronto. Would he fit with our team?
he's a more capable player offensively than any other PG on our roster
but his defense is about as bad as I’ve seen for a guy with as many years of basketball as he has under his belt. His contract isn’t horrid, but unless Nate and KP see him as our solution at PG (he will turn 28 before the start of next season), I don’t think he’ll be coming to PDX.
Blake did shoot almost 2% better from three this past season than did Calderon, but the grass sometimes seems greener on the other side. Blake just isn’t a standout guy in any one area (outside of 3-pt shooting), so its always easier to look for an upgrade if a guy doesn’t blow you away.
"Smile! You're on a poster!!" - Mike Rice
calderon can create a lot better then steve blake, better passe, better at getting inside
and would be Sergio’s replacement of Rudy’s best friend
Good thoughts
but the fans are not the GM’s, as much as we would like to be. One thing i guarantee, KP has something up his sleeve we will see on draft day

by 






















