Blazer Draft Prospects: Tyler Hansbrough
by Dave on Jun 19, 2009 1:21 AM PDT
Email
PrintThis weekend we're going to take a look at some of the Blazers' prospects if they're willing to move up in the draft. Because these players are generally more intriguing than the possibilities at #24 we're going to look at them individually or in pairs. We're going to start the weekend with the forward who has folks buzzing wherever he goes, Tyler Hansbrough.
Tyler Hansbrough 6'9" 230lb projected PF from UNC
Why He Could Be the Guy
Hansbrough fits the Blazers' culture. He's got a huge work ethic, he's aggressive, by most accounts he's not fond of losing. He's an offensive guy with a variety of moves, a necessity for Portland power forwards at this point. He was a free throw machine in college, drawing and hitting about a billion of them. That makes him quite efficient. He can rebound too. He's played at a high level and against high level competition. If they think he's serviceable I don't think the Blazers will be scared by his age or the fact that he spent four years in school. They may consider those assets. Power forward is also the sweet spot for the Blazers drafting. They have a need there but they also have a firm starter, allowing the draftee a chance to play but also progress at his own pace.
Why He Might Not Be the Guy
He's not a defender, though you do ask how much of a requirement that is at this point with Oden and Przybilla also in the frontcourt. He's strong but not quick or an overwhelming athlete. We're living in the Kevin Garnett/LaMarcus Aldridge/Josh Smith era of NBA power forwards and it shows no sign of ending soon. The prototype is 6'11", hyper-athletic, and mobile. Hansbrough is almost an anachronism in that way: shorter, less wingspan, more ground-bound. If you're drafting your back-up forward maybe you don't have a problem but as we talked about on the podcast today, it's not really a good idea to draft back-up players, especially outside of the second round. You draft guys you hope can start and play 35 minutes for you and then let them settle into the backup role if that's all the higher they end up getting. Either that or you just get a veteran to fill those minutes. It's a lot less trouble. Plus you're probably going to have to trade up to get him. Unless your trading partner wants a trade exception or second-rounders that means losing another young player with talent to pick up this one. In most cases that's going to be a lateral move at best for the Blazers.
What's your call on Hansbrough? Do you want him? If so, at what price point? What would you give up in order to move up to get him?
--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)
99 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
i think we really want defense at the 4.
a tough guy, a rebounder, and lockdown defense, or at least potential for such.
"So, then, I was like, it'd be really dirty if I put up 42. So I did!" -Brandon Roy, post-game comments after game 2 of the first round of the 2009 NBA Playoffs
4s
my current thinking on drafting 4s.
i think the blazers have a little more leniency than most teams or than previous Blazers teams in drafting a player that’s a backup qualify 4 given LMA and where he’s at in his career development. also, in this draft there are really only 2 starting-quality 4s, neither one readily attainable. if you do decide to go 4 you really have no choice but to look at a back up quality 4. ideally the guy could start for other teams but in reality he won’t start here in portland any time soon.
with that said, i don’t think you stretch your wants/needs far enough to talk yourself into hansbrough and you definitely don’t trade up for someone with the flaws listed above.
if you’re not completely confident about getting a 4 in FA or via trade, you have two good options:
1) take your favorite 4 that’s available at 24 (even if that overvalues him) or
2) cross your fingers and take him if he’s still there with the first 2nd round pick.
between ~22 and ~35 there seems to be a number of possible 4s and a lot of disagreement about who ranks where. if you’ve got 2 names you like you can almost certainly get one of them with the first 2nd round pick or by trading minor assets to bump up marginally from that position. if there’s a backup 4 in that range that the blazers covet, they should have every opportunity to get him and that would seem like a better plan than hansbrough, especially considering the likely need to trade up for him.
from a salary cap flexibility perspective the best case scenario might be trading out of the first round, drafting the best 4 you can get in the early 2nd round, see if any name 1s drop to the 2nd round and if they don’t trade off the picks for future considerations. this obviously wouldn’t involve hansbrough.
my dream scenario right now is turning this year’s 5 picks, minor amounts of cash and sergio into lawson and pendergraph (or whoever your favorite 2nd round 4 is).
by Ben Golliver on Jun 19, 2009 2:10 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
nailed it
not sure I agree about Lawson, but I admitedly don’t watch hardly any college ball. But I’ve been a big fan of trading out of the 1st round in this draft, and saving the $1 million for the offseason (assuming that’s in the plans). Grab Pendergraph with one of those early seconds, and dump the rest for future 2nds.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
Well put
I’d rather take Pendergraph in the early second round and use assets to trade up for a much more exciting player (Lawson kind of fits that description).
Moving up for Hansbrough is like trading in your car for an Ford crown victoria when a sporty little used Audi A4 is on the same lot for less money, sure the crown vic will get you from point A to point B but do you really want to be seen driving it?
I like Pendergraph too, but will he be available in round 2?
I doubt we’re the only folks who think he would be a great pick. Ben’s plan is great otherwise, though I prefer KP trade for a veteran backup PF instead of drafting yet another rookie. The Blazers are a serious team now, and our second unit needs competence, not more youth.
by MiledAnimal on Jun 19, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions
Depends on the mock
I’ve seen him as low as 37, so it’s really hard to say where he’ll go. I seriously doubt he goes in the first round, but this is probably going to be a really volatile draft so who knows.
And I agree that getting a FA power forward would be plan A, with Pendergraph just being added as a project or some emergency depth.
if he's there at #24 (not very realistic i know), draft him
otherwise focus on 2nd round options (Pendergraph, Cunningham), Freeland (even if he signed for Unicaja), or a trade/FA. I like the guy, but not that much/neither consider him essential that I would move up to get him.
by medmelon on Jun 19, 2009 2:31 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I could see trading up for him
We have three PGs and three SFs. A “lateral move” which reduces our logjam at one position to fill a need at another position is sometimes worth it.
That said, if Greg learns to stay on the court for 30 minutes, and Joel wants and earns 25 minutes, we’ve solved our backup PF situation — we can use a massive three man rotation with spot minutes going to a scrub off the bench. So I’m not entirely sure we’ll have as big a hole at backup PF as it looked.
I wouldn’t give up one of our SFs and our #24 for a 12-15 to get Hansbrough, unless we’re also getting a future pick back, or something. That’s too much to pay, IMO.
But I’ve been high on him as just the type of guy we could use at backup PF for a long time, and I would pay something to get him. If we were drafting at 15 and he was available, I would want him, so if we can move up to 15 to get him, that would be fine with me.
I’ll take Ben’s last paragraph above (turning five picks, cash, and Sergio into Lawson and Pendergraph), and substitute Psycho-T for Pendergraph. And if we have to give up a SF to make that happen and get a future pick back, I’d consider that one, too.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Nice to see your signature line again
I see you have been around for a couple of weeks now, but you have been posting in threads I haven’t followed. In any case nice to have you back.
I like your suggestion of using the “twin towers” with Pryz and GO in some situations. When we are playing teams whose PFs don’t have much shooting range, that would be a very intriguing possibility. The boards would be clean and the lane would be closed.
I’m less crazy about the idea of trading up to get a back-up 4. If we are trading players, my thought is to use those players to try to land an upgraded PG starter. I’m cool with the idea of packaging multiple picks (either ones we already own, or ones we can purchase) to move up.
by upper left corner on Jun 19, 2009 5:57 AM PDT up reply actions
I would like to see a lot of different lineups during the regular season.
During the playoffs we tried a lot of Gregzilla and we even tried starting Rudy. These were both things that the team had done little/zero during the regular season. Why would Nate expect such a serious change to just instantly work?
This regular season I’d like to see a lot more lineup experimentation including Gregzilla, Rudy/Roy starting lines, or even no center, running offenses. Then when we get to the playoffs, we can confidently swithc up the game plan based on matchups if we need. Not do what we did this year and shotgun new ideas out of desperation.
The Princess of Blazersedge
Yeah, but this year
we were just trying to ensure we actually made the playoffs.
Next year, it won’t be in doubt, and Nate can afford to experiment more.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Why would Nate expect such a serious change to just instantly work?
Because Houston had matchup advantages that Nate had tried to counter with his roster but couldn’t overcome. So he tinkered with the lineup as a last resort
I know I’m going to hear “Nate should’ve played a smaller lineup” with LMA at center and ran Yao until he was exhausted, etc. But “you are what you are” and the Blazer’s roster was not built to be be a “take the ball out of the net and run” kind of team. Roy and Blake aren’t that kind of backcourt, and even though the wing players and LMA could become a faster unit, you’d have to start out in training camp and emphasize that style all season long. And even if Nate was to do that (which he won’t) the chances of winning in the playoffs with the small-ball aproach are poor.
Rather than change styles, the Blazers need to improve their roster, especially at the backup PF position and starting PG position. The team’s strength was in rebounding at the center position during the regular season. Yao neutralized that by keeping Joel and Greg busy. So it was up to LMA (and Travis/Frye…yikes!) to compete for rebounds against Scola, Hayes and Landry. Oops, now Portlan’s rebounding strength is suddenly turned to a weakness—and that “bit” the Blazers big time in the 4th quarter of game 4. No rebounding help was forthcoming from the SFs and guards, and defensively Portland had no answer for Artest and Brooks, much less Von Wafer.
Nate’s “conservative” system will win playoff series, he just needs players with more experience, toughness and BBIQ. Some of that will come with the maturity of the current players, but some of it will have to come from acquiring veterans from outside the organization.
I don't think we're going to have to worry about Oden staying on the court for over 30 minutes a night unless he becomes a Blazer Dancer...
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
The dancers are on for over 30 minutes?
Haven’t made it to a game for a while (the commute is a killer), so these details escape me.
Maybe not this year, but the following year, all this foul stuff will be under control.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Definately Trade
He is worth it. I agree with Jscot that we have logjams at two positions and could reduce it by trading for a backup 4. I personally would trade away a PG as there is one great on available in Andre Miller. However, it really will be hard to do this and not land the key FA.
not sold on the brough
i honestly can’t tell you why but when i watched him play in college i didn’t see a player that is going to be a successful pro player(i know go ahead and bash me for not citing stats). Really outside of griffin im not very high on any of the pf’s in this draft. I think blair will be a rotation player, hill won’t be much of anything(i watched him play against oregon and was not impressed at all, and oregon was really really bad), and the rest will the ok at best(although pendergraph could become a really nice rotation player for a contender depending on who drafts him)
I agree
He’s never passed the eyeball test for me either. Don’t worry about posting stats either because it’s not like Hansbrough has had to face a lot of elite big men in his college career; if they are elite they are one and done or they skipped college all together before the NBA age requirement kicked in. Hansbrough has been successful because he’s been a man amongst boys.
I don’t think I’d make a big move to get him, but I’d shed a second-rounder or two. You can teach defense, but you can’t teach size and work ethic. This would be a great situation for Hansbrough, and as the article points out, playing in the Blazers frontcourt can help mask some defensive deficiencies.
"I take the little gummy bear Flintstones vitamins…I try not to eat the lady. I try not to eat the man. Just give me the car. I try to find the car. Yea, worst case scenario, I eat the lady." - Ron Artest, 2009
Could KP use PAM (Paul Allen's $) to move up?
Most of our discussion about moving up has involved the possibility of trading players and our #24 to a team higher up. I think there are other possibilities.
Given the economic situation, there is a possibility that teams might be willing to sell a mid-late first rounder or trade a mid-late first rounder for one of our early second rounders. Then, perhaps KP could combine our pick at twenty four with this second first rounder and trade the package to a late lottery team in a two for one deal. Another possibility would be to throw in the rights to one of our overseas prospects as a sweetener
Seems to me that this year, there may be possibilities that would not usually be available. It also seems possible that KP may work out trades for a targeted veteran that include acquiring a pick or picks desired by the other team. KP uses PAM to buy picks, selects the player desired by the trading partner, and then executes a trade of the shiny new rookie along with some of our young talent for some targeted veteran.
Bottom line, there are owners hurting for cash and salary relief, who might trade a veteran if they can get fresh, cheap, young talent. We have the ability to acquire the picks to get that talent.
.
If this is possible, we could move up without
by upper left corner on Jun 19, 2009 5:41 AM PDT reply actions
This draft feels weak.
I’m not sure if that’s true or not, but it does feel that way. I imagine many teams would be happy to sell a late first round pick in this draft.
I think when it gets dubbed as weak
it means that it does not have franchise guys in it, but it may prove to be loaded with role players, granted they may be going higher than they would in years past, but it will not take a lot to get up to get them either. I would hate to be a high lotto pick team this year as you are not going to get historical production from say a 5 pick, but you could definitely get your money’s worth in the mid teens, which seems to be where we are looking to get to.
Life is exhausting when you are this stupid.
I admit that something about him leaves me questioning his eventual value
However, he has always produced at whatever level he has played at and produced well. There is something intangible about him that leads me to believe that at the very least he will have some very positive effects on every game he plays. He came into the ACC as a freshman big and established himself immediately. No learning curve whatsover. Granted the NBA is a different bird, but it isn’t like he is a tweener, he is a solid 6’9, 230 with a motor that won’t quit.
How wouldn’t we love him on our team? He plays exactly as we would like LaMarcus to play? Maybe his craziness would rub of on LMA? And at the very least you know you are going to get effort and solid play. I wouldn’t hesitate to move up some to get him. Would I give up the farm? Probably not, but if you felt you could get him at 10-15 and had to give up some of our depth to do it, I think I would.
Think about the second team with Bayless and Hansbrough and Pryzbilla. How irritating would that be in practice and to opposing teams. How much tougher would that make our starters. They would have to fight for everything.
I think this is a culture guy with a strong pedigree and a strong work ethic that we shouldn’t take a pass on because we think we can get the same value later in the second round. I just think you go with the almost sure thing.
"I saw him in the face" Sergio's quote on the latest alley-oop to Rudy.
19?
I think you might have to give up too much at the 10-15 level to get him, but if he’s available at say, the T-Wolves 19 slot (Just ahead of the Jazz, who will take him at 20 if he’s still there) and you can move up without giving up the farm, it’s a good move. Hansborough has a host of intangibles that you just don’t see often—the buzz, so to speak. He makes players who play around him play SO much harder. This is immeasurable stuff, beyond wingspan. I think we see him on the rookie team of the All-Star game next year…
at 24 sure
moving up to take him seems silly
i would never underestimate a guy who brings it every night, they tend to be more productive overall than slightly more talented guys who don’t
Blazer Fan
I’m a huge fan of what the ‘brough brings and I would take him in a second at 24. I’m not sure he works any higher than that. However, he has something that our bench needed during the playoffs…heart and hustle. What he lacks in athleticism he more than makes up for with passion. I could see trading one of the Small Forwards to go up slightly to get him. He may end up falling to us regardless, it all depends on how the top 5 play out.
Just sit back and imagine a second team lineup of Pryz/Oden with Hansbrough and with Bayless and Rudy attacking. That sounds like a pretty awesome second unit that would give others fits especially on the boards. Then you have Rex and Psycho T intimidating players into just giving us the ball. Game over man
I think Portland already has it's backup PF.
His name is Shavlick Randolph.
I happen to be a bit of a Hansbrough fan (dispite his being a Tar Heel), so I have no problem with seeing him get drafted. But I also don’t think it is critical that we use our top pick on a PF. Keep in mind that Randolph had earned starters minutes in Philly prior to going down to injury. In very limited time with Portland last season (including preseason) he performed well – extremely well in at least one instance. I happen to believe that he could step into the backup PF slot and the Blazers would be none the worse for it.
Overall, I’m not all that excited about the draft. I am interested in seeing what Pritchard and the Blazer brain trust do, but there isn’t any specific outcome I am hoping for. At a guess, I am thinking this draft and off season should be fun for Portland. They have a lot of options available to them and don’t really have any major holes to address. Rather they can tweak the roster or reshuffle the back 5 spots, maybe finding a nice new talent to add that fits better than the nice young talent they have (Sergio, Frye) that isn’t quite the right fit. (Actually I would rwally only classify Channing as that. I think Rodriguez fits well enough.)
Or they can add a veteran or two with their exceptions.
Or both.
hakkaa päälle !
Shavlick is Garbage
He of the bad haircut didn’t do anything at Duke and he won’t do anything in the NBA
"Tommy like wingy"
by Terry Gamble on Jun 19, 2009 8:03 AM PDT up reply actions
Randolph
is garbage. all the way back to me seeing him in HS in Raleigh, the kid may be cool, but he’s a LONG way from being anything other than the poster boy for “why K can’t teach basketball fundamentals”.
by apoxonbothyourhouses on Jun 20, 2009 10:23 AM PDT up reply actions
calling Shav garbage?
Harsh for arguably one of the coolest dudes on the team. Even if he doesn’t play a lot, he’s still a really cool cat.
by prezofdeath on Jun 19, 2009 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions
go back and look at when he was doing in Philly
pre injury
He is NBA talent when healthy
Life is exhausting when you are this stupid.
Anyone know the status of his injury?
Shav and Martell… get well, guys.
by MiledAnimal on Jun 19, 2009 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions
Hans Down
Couple notes about Hansbrough,
Terrifc college athlete, proven worker, all american, has size and skills at PF, great coach and program and knows how to win ball games. The guy is Charlie Hustle.
The only thing I worry about Hansbrough, is whether he is athletic enough to guard other PF’s in the league. He translates well as a backup. If he is a starter in the NBA he’s going to have to prove it but I see him coming off the bench and being a guy who will crash the boards and get some put backs. He could bang with some other players although I see a thick dude like Boozer pushing him around….. Although Boozer pushes everyone around.
"Tommy like wingy"
Run through walls
KP has repeatedly said he wants role player guys who would run through walls.
Give me Mongo!
“Mongo only pawn in game of life”
The Oden Era, Day 729
Feed him some beans, put him in the front court
"Oh yeah? You can Derelique my balls."
"I can Shavlick my own balls."
by Terry Gamble on Jun 19, 2009 9:10 AM PDT up reply actions
Psycho "T"...
is such a great nickname. Is that a good enough excuse to move up and get him? To me the most impressive stat is the rebounding numbers. Rebounding usually translates pretty well from the college game to the NBA.
I do not want 2 picks in the first round. If we move up, I think we find a team trying to save money, give them our #24 and $$. Sergio won’t be included in this trade as he’ll be gone to the Knicks for the TPE already. If we can move up, we look at what PG’s are still available. I’d rather see us replace Sergio with Lawson or Maynor if we can move up, then get a backup pf in the 2nd round. If we don’t like what we see at pg, “T” is a decent option.
Question
He’s not a defender, though you do ask how much of a requirement that is at this point with Oden and Przybilla also in the frontcourt. He’s strong but not quick or an overwhelming athlete.
What does it mean to say he’s not a defender? Does that mean he’s not a shot-blocker? The Blazers get shot-blocking galore from the center position. It doesn’t look to me (having never seen him play that I recall) like he’s the type of guy who will just get pushed around on the low post. What kind of defense do you require of a PF?
"Just kidding"
Forget about Brian Cardinal- err I mean Hansbrough
Too small, too slow, no shot.
If you are going to go out and get somebody Terrence Williams would make a great complement to Roy in the backcourt. Not a great scorer now, but a very solid playmaker with the ability to get much better.
"Just because we're not AT the lottery doesn't mean we're not IN the lottery..."
— St. Kevin
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
No. Definitely don't trade up for him. Think next Darius Songaila (size, skill) or Eduardo Najera (hustle)
Quality role players, work hard, decently skilled, can give you the occasional double digit scoring or rebounding when getting 20+ minutes, but not much more. My problem is: Najera was a #38 pick, Songaila #49.
Hansbrough might be a tad more skilled, so taking him at the end of the first round sounds fair. His biggest asset might be that he is so irritating that it might disrupt opposing players. But no way would I trade up all the way to 10 – 15 to take him in the lottery.
I'm on the fence
But Najera nor Songaila ever dominated anything ever. Maybe dominated is too strong a word. How about never averaged close to 20 and 10 at a major college for all four years. Too me that is more than a “tad” bit more skilled. Believe me I really struggle with thinking that he may or may not be a good plug in to the Blazers, but I have to admit how he got to where he is and how has proven himself on every level so far makes me not doubt that he will be a good NBA player.
"I saw him in the face" Sergio's quote on the latest alley-oop to Rudy.
by blazermaniac32 on Jun 19, 2009 9:06 AM PDT up reply actions
It could go either way. Trajan Langdon, Adam Morrison, J.J. Redick all were top scorers in college.
Problem is they were not good defenders (neither is Hansbrough), not all that quick or incredible leapers, etc. I could see a lot of troubles for Tyler to get into the same positions he got in college against physical NBA defenders (Najera has much more strength especially in the upper body) and get his low-release shot off.
He is similar in size and wingspan and such to Kevin Love and David Lee so that could be his upside, but despite his long experience in college they seemed more NBA ready/skills translated well.
Apples to Oranges
Langdon, Morrison and Redick are all primarily perimeter players. Hansbrough isn’t. And while he may not be as physical as some of the other NBA players (although I think he is more physical than quite a few), he definitely will outwork a majority of them. Being a good NBA rebounder isn’t always about strength, it is about hard work and positioning. Guys with motors who don’t quit (Rodman being the extreme example – he wasn’t that strong).
Maybe I am all wet here, but I think he will pan out.
"I saw him in the face" Sergio's quote on the latest alley-oop to Rudy.
by blazermaniac32 on Jun 19, 2009 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions
I kind of agree
but at the same time, I hate the idea of a spot being “too high” for a player. If you can get a player who can contribute, you take him where you’re picking. Sure, Songaila and Najera were taken in the second round, but if you had to do 2000 over, would Najera really go behind most of those mid-20’s guys (Donnell Harvey, Bagaric, N’Diaye, Brezec, Barkley, or Madsen)? You could pretty easily make an argument that there isn’t a single player between 24 and 38 that had a better career than Najera (although Eddie House at 37 makes it dicey).
Same with Songaila, although it’s a little different since most of the awful picks in 2002 happened before him, with contributors like Salmons, Mason, Boozer, Flip Murray and Matt Barnes being drafted between 24 and him. But when you look at the guys drafted before that, you see some huge misses (Jacobsen, Borchardt, Qyntel, Haislip, Humphrey, Ely, and Welsch), so it’s not out of the question that Songaila could be considered the 24th best player in that draft, too.
We constantly hear about the “hits” in the late lottery, but for every Rondo there’s a Frank Williams and a Dan Dickau, and for every Rudy there’s a Casey Jacobsen and a Kareem Rush. If I know with 90% certainty that I can get Eduardo Najera or Darius Songaila in the early to mid 20’s, I’ll take him, regardless of whether it’s considered a “reach”.
Definately trade up to get Hansbrough
Use the trade exception to acquire a 25/30 pick.
Use the 24 and next year’s pick to acquire the 18 – Draft Hansbrough at 18, Collison at 25/30 – and call it good.
Use other assets (Players, Cap Space or 2nd Round Pics) to acquire a veteran SF – al la Caron Butler / Gerald Wallace type.
Any remaining 2nd Round Picks should be focused on Heytvelt. Otherwise resign Frye.
Gives Portland 2 Bang-In-The-Paint PF who will not demand minutes from Aldridge. Solves the SF problem if you trade Outlaw and/or Webster. Potentially frees up the PG problem if they trade Rodriguez. Gives PDX a PG that can match up with the Chris Pauls, Deron Williams’s of the NBA – without changing the underlying dynamic of the team.
can't get a pick for a trade exception
and don’t need to. picks have a trade value of $0, so a trade exception is not needed at all. if you want a pick in the 25-30 range, you will have to just buy it for cash (if any are available), or by including it in another trade.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
Technically, you are right
However, couldn’t they use the Trade Exception to acquire the pick after the pick was made. Couldn’t say Portland and LA work a trade out before the draft that says LA will receive the trade exception and Portland will acquire the rights to the 29th pick? LA would then choose who Portland asks for and the trade would be complete?
http://www.blazersedge.com/2009/2/19/763939/ruffin-and-finances
by Jimbob91577 on Jun 19, 2009 10:14 AM PDT up reply actions
Trade exceptions aren't something you can give to another team
You can just use them to take back salary.
But there’s a way to use a trade exception to get a pick: take back a player the other team doesn’t want using the exception, and have them include the pick. So using an exception, you can get a pick and a bad contract.
Thats not the way it sounds in the attached link...
It seems to indicate that a team can trade the exception for a player.
“2. We could do the same with a draft pick, though the pick would have to be made first.”
http://www.blazersedge.com/2009/2/19/763939/ruffin-and-finances
That sounds like we could give up the exception to acquire the player another team chose. If that is the case, then why couldn’t Portland work a trade with say LA prior to draft night saying “Well give you the trade exception if you use your 29th pick for us”?
Why doesn’t this work?
by Jimbob91577 on Jun 19, 2009 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions
until they sign a contract, all draft picks have a trade value of $0
so, there is no need for any kind of “exception” to acquire them. So, in theory, the team could just Give you the drafted player. Except that isn’t allowed. SOMETHING has to go back the other way. Trade Exceptions don’t get sent back to the other team, they are just a mechanic that allows you to absorb salary you otherwise couldn’t under the CBA rules.
If we want to use the TPE to absorb the player the L*kers pick at #29, we would have to wait until he signs a contract. Otherwise, we have to send back something – future draft pick, anything.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
but that trade wouldn't involve the TPE at all. The TPE is irrelavent in dealing with draft picks or unsigned drafted players
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
I could tolerate selecting Hansbrough at 24, but I'd be far from thrilled with it
I would go crazy if Portland trades up for him. He’s just not worth it.
agreed
It’s hard to know what KP/Penn have planned for the potential cap space we’ll have this summer, but any trade up (or acquiring of another 1st round pick), eats into that amount quickly. Why hamstring yourself this summer to move up and grab a guy to play 10 minutes a game?
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
He's an up-grade from Frye that's for sure....
Plus GO needs a banger like that to lean on in practice.
2-4 the who
You are underestimating Frye
He is significantly taller than Hansbrough, and has at least the same shot range on a higher release. Greg dominated Frye and a taller and equally hard working Steven Hill last year in summer training. He wouldn’t have a lot of problems with Hansbrough.
For what it’s worth, here are their combine measurements:
Channing Frye – 2005 6’ 9.5" 6’ 10.5" 244 7’ 2.5" 9’ 2.5" NA 27.5 11’ 6" 31.0 11’ 9.5" 19 11.60 3.38 33 8
Tyler Hansbrough – 2009 6’ 8.25" 6’ 9.5" 234 6’ 11.5" 8’ 10" 8.5 27.5 11’ 1.5" 34.0 11’ 8" 18 11.12 3.27 NA 22
The comparison of the two is less about stats and more about attitude
Frye is a classic underachiever, all the size and skills but he’s soft. Hansbrough has less of both qaulities but he’s the kind of player you can go to war with.
2-4 the who
I'd be happy with Psycho T at 24.
I wouldn’t even mind a cash offering to move up a few slots (no higher than…18th). Or, even better, if we could find a way to move up as well as pick up a valuable asset via trade. Way too much speculation for that, though.
"Respect everyone, fear no one." -TP
anyone that watched the Rockets series knows we need a guy like this
I’m not saying he’s a prototype player or will be a star, but Lamarcus is not a banger,, and we can definitely use a guy like that
If we can move up to get a guy like Steph Curry instead (Wizards at No. 5), then we should do that, but Hansbrough is not a bad fall-back
dude’s name is Psycho T, nuff said
by rip_city_swagger on Jun 19, 2009 10:19 AM PDT reply actions
Przybilla doesn't want no one to bleed
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinal’s Dan Manoyan visits Blazers C Joel Pryzbilla during the latter’s boxing lessons.
Przybilla, whom former Bucks coach George Karl projected as a 270-pound space eater when he came into the league from the University of Minnesota in 2000, is about 30 pounds leaner, at around 235 pounds, than he was in his playing days in Milwaukee.
But a mean, fighting machine? Forget it.
"I’m not going to be getting in any fights," said Przybilla, who at 25 is already a five-year veteran of NBA wars. "I’m kind of a wuss.
"I’ve gotten in little tussles here and there, but I don’t plan on using (the boxing training) in the NBA. I don’t want to get suspended. I don’t need my wife on my case, so I won’t be throwing any punches."
Przybilla’s wife of three years, Noelle, apparently laid down the law on fighting when she learned that her husband planned to take up the sport at the suggestion of his personal trainer Todd Troxel.
"She told me if I throw a punch (in a game), I’d never come back to boxing," Przybilla said.
Offseason:
PG Options: Terrence Williams(D), Rodrigue Beaubois(D)
SG Options: Mickaël Piétrus(T)
PF Options: Ronnie Turiaf(T) - Taj Gibson(D), Kevin Seraphin(D)
C Options: Alexis Ajinca(T)
The French Invasion !
by TheGreatDane17 on Jun 19, 2009 11:48 AM PDT up reply actions
Haha that's awesome
I bet she’d a made an exception if he’d a punched Ariza though!
The Princess of Blazersedge
Yea
And we probably would have beat the Spurs in the first round(because of him being suspended, we drop a few spots in the seeding)
Offseason:
PG Options: Terrence Williams(D), Rodrigue Beaubois(D)
SG Options: Mickaël Piétrus(T)
PF Options: Ronnie Turiaf(T) - Taj Gibson(D), Kevin Seraphin(D)
C Options: Alexis Ajinca(T)
The French Invasion !
by TheGreatDane17 on Jun 19, 2009 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions
I love Curry
If we could somehow not trade Bayless, A Curry/Bayless PG duo is a perfect compliment to each others game. Except I like Curry over Bayless as a starter next to Roy.
Offseason:
PG Options: Terrence Williams(D), Rodrigue Beaubois(D)
SG Options: Mickaël Piétrus(T)
PF Options: Ronnie Turiaf(T) - Taj Gibson(D), Kevin Seraphin(D)
C Options: Alexis Ajinca(T)
The French Invasion !
by TheGreatDane17 on Jun 19, 2009 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions
To advance in the playoffs
we need a veteran PG upgrade. There’s no way Coach Nate is going to start a rookie PG.
if they're willing to move up in the draft.
you have got to be kidding me… you would never move up in a draft to get a guy for your bench. This would be a waste. If he is available at 24, that is different.
I do like Tyler though. I just fear that he’ll injure LMA or Oden in practice.
I like any draft scenario that doesn’t involve the words “Curry” or “Hansbrough”… I see both as great college players and nice guys but neither one seems like a sure enough thing.
Pendergraph would be a great fit in my eyes.
"The brownies,'' Fernandez said after the game. "The brownies are good for me to make three-points.''
- from Quick's Behind the Blazers Locker Room Door, 4/16/09
This just seems like one of those things you'll look back on and cry
“I like any draft scenario that doesn’t include the words ‘Josh Howard’ or ‘Mo Williams’.
Travis Outlaw would be a great fit in my eyes."
These are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others. -Groucho Marx
Curry
Is a better fit along side Roy then Bayless is.
Offseason:
PG Options: Terrence Williams(D), Rodrigue Beaubois(D)
SG Options: Mickaël Piétrus(T)
PF Options: Ronnie Turiaf(T) - Taj Gibson(D), Kevin Seraphin(D)
C Options: Alexis Ajinca(T)
The French Invasion !
by TheGreatDane17 on Jun 19, 2009 11:48 AM PDT up reply actions
Next to Roy
Curry’s excellent shooting, consistently being able to get separation from his defender, coming off screens & excellent off ball movement is perfect next to Roy. Bayless provides the opposite of that, average shooting, dominant ball handler who is not good at moving without the ball.
If you don’t see that you are looking awfully like a Bayless homer. He simply doesn’t bring as much to the table as a compliment to Roy. Bayless is going to be the same age as Curry before training camp starts, except Curry has a lot more experience in clutch situations/big games.
Offseason:
PG Options: Terrence Williams(D), Rodrigue Beaubois(D)
SG Options: Mickaël Piétrus(T)
PF Options: Ronnie Turiaf(T) - Taj Gibson(D), Kevin Seraphin(D)
C Options: Alexis Ajinca(T)
The French Invasion !
by TheGreatDane17 on Jun 19, 2009 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions
short answer
no… no thanks.
even at #24.. i’ll pass
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 19, 2009 10:45 AM PDT reply actions
Conforming to the thought
that we can pick up back-up players in the 2nd round, I will expose myself to a barrage of criticism and ridicule by stating that I think we can get an effective,15 min per game banger PF by drafting Jon Brockman with the Blazer’s last available pick in the second round.
He IS a run through the wall type of player……has the same positive character attributes as Hansbrough, is 2 inches shorter, but can still jump, and as he showed at the Portsmouth tourney, is a beast on the boards.
Yeah, yeah, I’ve heard all the knocks….but he IS productive, often against larger players.
Sounds like a plan. If he is there at #56 or likely to be undrafted, I would expect the Blazers to invite him to summer league/training camp
They could still pick up another project they like to stash in Europe at #55, and cut Brockman later if they feel it doesn’t work.
Is there really anything in this draft for the Blazers?
Hopefully KP will just move all the picks and a player or two and get us the veteran help we need at PG and back-up PF. Moving up in the draft looks to accomplish nothing. We don’t need another “project” point guard or big stiff, no offense, foul machine PF.
This draft is so weak that
Hansbrough would have been lucky to go in the first round last year,not worth trading up for.
by southern oregon on Jun 19, 2009 11:32 AM PDT reply actions
I agree 100%....
On why he would NOT fit. LOL on the comment ^^ " someone for Greg to lean on in practice. " Frye may be soft, but he’s the right size.
To get to the next level, on offense…… the Blazers cant stand around watching Brandon, on defense they shouldn’t depend on Greg being behind them. They all have to play both ends.
Joose it up
Maybe this is why they call him Psycho T?
I’d like to see him get in there and rough some people in the post. Lamarcus doesn’t create contact but Psycho T is strong enough and tall enough to post people up.
"Oh yeah? You can Derelique my balls."
"I can Shavlick my own balls."
Normally I like players who were productive in college
I’m not very excited about Hansbrough though. Not only is Hansbrough a senior, he is actually a year older than his class. I wouldn’t be too worried about that if he were a “Brondon Roy” type player who significantly improved every year he was in college, but Hansbrough is a 23-year old who is basically the same player now that he was 4 years ago. It looks like Hansbrough is basically at his peak already, and probably won’t improve very much in the future. Do we really want to draft someone who has no upside?
Not a big fan of his
He always struck me as a meathead, and not athletic enough for the NBA. However, the guy is pretty polished offensively and would be a great practice partner for Greg. I say sure if he’s there at 24, take him. And take Darren Collison at 35.
"Sasha? That's a sissy name." -Mike Rice
We need a forward with a high basketball IQ and can pass
Those are just as important as rebounding on this team.
34 inch vert 185 benched 18 times
Thats pretty good last time I checked.. Dont label this guy as ground bound, come on dave your better than that.
we need a backup PF with some balls
I’d be happy to see psycho t fill the role..
What did Griffin do to Hansbrough?
I see someone didnt watch the game or is confusing Tyler Hansbrough and Tyler Zeller. Hansbrough and Griffin were matched up for MAYBE the first 10 minutes of the game… Griffin had 0 points while Hansbrough was on him. Griffin didnt score untill Thompson and Zeller started guarding him. Ed Davis shut him down and made him look silly a few times.
The next time I read " What Griffin did to Hansbrough ".. I will track that person down and slap them with a trout!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
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
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
