Steve Nash and Hedo Turkoglu are coming to Portland

by explicator on Jun 25, 2009 10:20 PM PDT Comment 39 comments

Obviously this is just speculation, but I think it has a high likelihood of happening.

Phoenix didn't make the playoffs last year and know the Shaq trade for Marion was a bust, and they know it won't be any better next year, so they traded Shaq for salary cap space two years from now, when all the big names are free agents. Now they are shopping Amare, their best player. In fact, it is rumored tonight that Amare is going to Golden State for, among others, Stephen Curry, who just happens to be a PG.

This would leave Nash, who is near the end of his career, on a team of rookies and young players, getting beat by 20 every night. It makes no sense for Nash to want to stay (and no sense for Phoenix to get nothing for him), so they will look to trade Nash. Nash, who previously did not want to leave, will now want to go to a contender. How many contenders need a PG for a few years and have the talent and draft picks to obtain him? Enter Portland.

KP wants to get a PG to bridge the next few years until Bayless is ready, so look for Nash to be dealt to a Portland for Blake, Outlaw and the $3M trade exception.

For the small forward spot, the Blazers have a lot of young potential but more questions than answers, so the Blazers use their cap space to sign free agent Turkoglu outright. Only a few teams have the cap space to offer Hedo anything, but only Portland is a good team, so Hedo doesn't have a lot of options if he wants to win.

Hedo is a significantly better ball handler, shooter, and player than Batum is today, and he can create his own shots when teams sag on LMA or Roy is off, plus Hedo is clutch and has experience in the playoffs. It also frees up Batum to come off the bench, which I think he is more valuable as a super sub who can exploit a matchup on a given night or shut someone down who starts hot.

Hedo is the outside shooter the Blazers need and can count on (Webster is an unknown entity at this point, and still has injury concerns), Nash is the PG they haven't had since Terry Porter, and if Oden can improve just on the defensive end by staying out of foul trouble, Nash alone will give him 4-5 dunks/easy layins on offense by breaking down his man in a way that Blake cannot.

A team of Nash, Roy, Hedo, LMA, Oden starting, with Bayless, Rudy, Batum, Webster, Joel off the bench, is an NBA title waiting to happen in the short-term and is still set up well to win in the long-term with Bayless stepping in for Nash, and Batum becoming a super sixth man who can play multiple positions as needed. Pendergraph will be the eventual replacement for Joel, but can also back up LMA.

Two questions: First, regardless of what you think, does my logic hold up? Is my understanding of the cap accurate and is this possible? Second, asuming it is, what do you think if this happened? Getting all-stars at the two need positions and only giving up Blake and Outlaw to do so seems pretty good to me.

0 recs | Comment 39 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

2 reasons this shouldn't happen

1) The Blazers need to improve on defense
2) The players you name are not good at defense

by jksnake99 on Jun 25, 2009 10:22 PM PDT reply actions 22 recs

+1

Gimmicks don't make dynasties

by WarEaglePDX on Jun 25, 2009 10:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

rec'd

Go Green.

by JordanLeDoux on Jun 25, 2009 10:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

what he said ^^^^^

by david1978pdx on Jun 25, 2009 10:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

absolutely agree

Turkoglu is, at best, an average defender. Nash’s defense is just atrocious!
Also, would we really want to deal both Blake, Outlaw and a $3 million trade exception for a guy who would only be on the team one year and doesn’t play defense?
I wouldn’t hate having Turkoglu as much as Nash, but I can’t see us offering him the kind of money he’d want, especially since that would hinder, or completely eliminate Batum or Webster’s minutes.

"Smile! You're on a poster!!" - Mike Rice

by lefty6283 on Jun 25, 2009 10:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

funny

Portland shouldn’t trade Blake and Outlaw for Nash because of defensive concerns? No, we wouldn’t want to lose two outstanding defensive players like Blake and Outlaw.

As for the length of contract, Blake is gone in two years anyway as well.

by explicator on Jun 25, 2009 10:32 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

either Blake or Outlaw on their worst day

are better on ‘D’ than Nash on his best day. Nash has no desire to play defense, which is basically a necessity from PG’s under Nate. If you read my post carefully, you’d realize that I’m not implying that Travis or Blake are great defense players…far from it. The fact is that I believe (as I’m sure many others do on this site) that Nash is a worse defender than either of those two.

"Smile! You're on a poster!!" - Mike Rice

by lefty6283 on Jun 25, 2009 10:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nash is no different than Blake on defense but a hundred times better on offense

and Outlaw and defense don’t belong in the same sentence either…. so I could argue just as well that this trade just leaves Portland no worse than last year on defense, but 20 points a game better on offense, so since the point of playing is to outscore your opponent, I don’t see that validity in the argument.

by explicator on Jun 25, 2009 10:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

you think Nash is going to bump us to

nearly 120pts/game a 20% increase in scoring? That seems like a tall order to say the least. I agree that Blake and Outlaw are not defensive stalwarts, but that doesent mean we need to trade them for more of the same.

Life is exhausting when you are this stupid.

by jonestr on Jun 25, 2009 11:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

was just gonna say

how bad on defense do we want to be? we think Oden fouled a lot this year? Starting 3 guys who are below average at their position on defense is not a recipe for playoff success

How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009

by douglast on Jun 25, 2009 10:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nail on the head

You forgot the part about how both of those guys have to control the ball to be effective on offense. There is only one ball right? We still have BRoy and LA right?

by Chris-8ally on Jun 25, 2009 10:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

If Steve Nash could play defense he would have an NBA title.

by RipCityRoyCity on Jun 25, 2009 11:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

rec

Roy is the best player in the world with the exception of Incarcerated Mike from Queensbridge .

by Nick Van Excellent on Jun 26, 2009 12:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

yes.

by dario argento on Jun 26, 2009 9:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Chris Paul

make it happen KP

by rolo_poloo on Jun 25, 2009 10:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

it may be fun to ruin a franchise. at least they’ll still have the Saints.

Life is about growth. People are not perfect when they're 21 years old. - Bill Walton

by NEP on Jun 25, 2009 10:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ain't no big thing hsppening. We'll see a couple of middlin things and that'll be it.

This is still a growth year.

by raoulduke on Jun 25, 2009 10:29 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Even if you are right, it doesn't mean moves shouldn't be made

If it is a growth year and winning isn’t the highest priority, then why keep Blake? Start Bayless now. We know Blake isn’t the starting PG in five years, so if you are throwing away the year, give the experience to people who will be here fighting in the playoffs years from now. I would also look to move Joel for a younger center or PF, and start Oden.

However, I don’t think fans who say it is a growth year are really going to tolerate another first round exit, and I don’t think the players and org are either.

by explicator on Jun 25, 2009 10:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree and said above that moves will be made and the team improved. I just highly doubt that they will be

big exciting blockbuster moves.

by raoulduke on Jun 25, 2009 10:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nash is a possibility, we are the closest team to his hometown in BC

by cavejunctionblazer on Jun 25, 2009 10:36 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Maybe

but he spends his offseasons in NYC (and he and D’Antoni are raising a little baby girl they adopted from China together).

by ninjasocks on Jun 25, 2009 11:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I say no to Hedo to much $

by cavejunctionblazer on Jun 25, 2009 10:36 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I like Paul Milsap for backup PF

by cavejunctionblazer on Jun 25, 2009 10:37 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I'd love to have that guy

but I believe he’s a restriced free agent, which means Utah can match any offer they receive. It may largely depend on what Carlos Boozer does with his ETO. Should he opt out, as I’m sure most everyone in the Jazz organization does, then Millsap will most definitely be staying right where he is.

"Smile! You're on a poster!!" - Mike Rice

by lefty6283 on Jun 25, 2009 10:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Milsap is gonna start at PF

and he’s not leaving SLC.

by ninjasocks on Jun 25, 2009 11:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

A trade for Nash would be the wrong message to the team.

The message would be: KP has lost his mind!

I will not be surprised if the Magic don’t re-sign Hedo, though they’ve said they will.

by MiledAnimal on Jun 25, 2009 10:38 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

A trade for Nash would make LMA and Greg all-stars. He makes sense as a one-year rental.

good luck dejuan blair

by Cablinasian on Jun 26, 2009 12:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

how can we afford to get both of them with only 8 million in cap space?

by ggassen85 on Jun 25, 2009 11:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Magic!

it’s also the mechanism whereby these guys get incorporated into the Blazers’ offensive system without destroying the defense.

by ninjasocks on Jun 25, 2009 11:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

We can't unless

we to the Turk glue first then trade half our team to phoenix

"Knowledge will get you from A to B. Creativity will get you anywhere." Einstein

by Garden of ODEN on Jun 26, 2009 1:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nah gah hah pen

Nash is incompatible and Hedo (though less unlikely) would be pretty expensive.

by ninjasocks on Jun 25, 2009 11:05 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I hope not.

Neither is likely to make us more efficient. Nor can Nash make a team run. He needs runners with him.

Nash = worse defense.

Turk = worse offence + defense.

by staylost on Jun 25, 2009 11:10 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

When you make the titles for your fanpost...

Please don’t say stuff that isn’t true. I literally almost had a heart attack when I saw that title. So, for everyones safety, if the post is about a rumor please list it as just a rumor.

I went to the malls and I balled too hard
'Oh my god, is that a Black Card?'
I turned around and replied, why yes but I prefer the term
African American Express

by Claire on Jun 25, 2009 11:14 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

agree

I was furious for about 5 seconds until the page loaded.

* Building a Greg Oden Fanboy Treehouse Clubhouse this summer...

by OdenFanBoy on Jun 26, 2009 4:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I actually am starting to have my heart set on Hinrich. I guess I'd rather see the Blazers try Bayless

and Mills.

by BRoyInThe4th on Jun 25, 2009 11:30 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I love all 3 players...but it wouldnt work

in the closing moments of the game…all 3 players (hedo, nash, and roy) have the offense run through them. if we had all 3, then who gets the ball? i guess you could still have roy initiate and use hedo and nash as spot up shooters if that was the case.

Senior Asian ambassador of Blazers Edge

by Philthyanimal on Jun 26, 2009 12:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Sorry but your Nash idea doesn't work

You cannot use a trade exception like that. You cannot add the amount of a trade exception to outgoing player salary to get a more expensive player.

Here’s the simple rule about trade exceptions: a $3 million trade exception can only be used to get a player who makes $3.1 millon or less (or a combination of players who make less than $3.1 million).

And personally, I wouldn’t want the Blazers throwing a lot of money at Turkoglu. In 3 years, some team is going to be paying him $12-13 million and frantically searching for a way to remove his ‘lousy’ contract from off their books because he simply won’t be worth that much.

by Storyteller on Jun 26, 2009 7:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs