Hoopsworld thinks Millsap is likely replacement for LMA

There is an interesting response in chat yesterday with Steve Kyler, Publisher of Hoopsworld about LaMarcus Aldridge and Millsap's leverage: "Frank in Sacramento: Hi Steve, 1)Where's BOOZER end up? 2)If MILSAP goes to PORT, does that mean LaMarc. is moving? 3)Are the latest repts. on CURRY enough to make some GM want him? Thanks. Steve Kyler: Lets get them one at a time... 1)Where's BOOZER end up? - good question, Utah is aggressively shopping him. I think Miami wants him but does not have the assets to make a deal... Not sure we've seen the team that gets him. 2)If MILSAP goes to PORT, does that mean LaMarc. is moving? - A lot of LaMarcus' future is tied to his price tag, at $12 million he's pricing himself out of the picture... I have been told they would go $9 to $10 on lamarcus, which means that might go to an average of $11 million, but you have to think about Greg Oden and Brandon Roy - the Blazers want to keep this core together, but if laMarcus' camp plays this thing hard he could be the odd man out if they land Millsap - I like the notion of adding Milsapp for toughness, but do you really think a team is gonna carry two forwards making $10 million a season... neither guy gets enough minutes. I think if LaMarcus is reasonable, he stays - but at this point its so early in the talks to know where things go... three weeks ago the landscape as totally different" So while everyone is stressing about Roy's contract LMA may be the real problem forcing the team to take the harder line with Roy. Of course Millsap is not getting $10M every year but the economy is forcing all players to reassess their contact demands. Reality for Blazer fans? Food for thought and discussion. Do you think this week may bring LMA to the table if Millsap comes to us?

over 2 years ago lee3022 32 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Here is the link

to the Hoopsworld Chat

by lee3022 on Jul 15, 2009 12:55 AM PDT reply actions

I think LaMarcus will be a Blazer for a long time

The NBA: Where amazingly bad officiating happens, is encouraged, and rewarded.

by The Roybot on Jul 15, 2009 12:59 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs

Given the make up of the last championship team

it’s unreasonable to think that having 3 quality big men is a bad thing. Each of these players brings a different skill set and match up challenge to the table, and should make us more competitive. Sending away LMA would be foolish. I want both, and I want both to receive over 30 MPG, wether it means a little of one playing at center, or millsap at SF. Most likely it would mean having LMA use his endurance to spell oden at center, while millsap comes on, then replacing LA with Oden when LMA needs to breathe, and keeping millsap in as PF.

by lurtsman on Jul 15, 2009 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions

I dont get this reasoning

I understand it might be hard to carry 2 PFs for 10mil each, but obviously that is not the case as Milsap is actually signing for reasonable money then it seems like the argument does not hold a lot of water.

Also, it will be hard to talk LMA off 12mil looking at the contracts that lesser front court players than him have gotten in recent years

Life is exhausting when you are this stupid.

I will talk about DeJuan Blair no more forever

by jonestr on Jul 15, 2009 1:30 AM PDT reply actions

If I remember right after the signing bonus he basically makes between 6.5 and 7 mil a year the way it’s paid out after this year.

by Cory2669 on Jul 15, 2009 1:48 AM PDT up reply actions

I guess if Paul Allen is really worried about his short term cash flows this could make sense.

But it makes absolutely no basketball sense.

First LMA is much much better than Paul Millsap. Better players lead to championships or more recognition. The further the Blazers make it in the playoffs the more money they will make. I think this is the way to make a truly successful club in terms of cash. Either that or don’t even pretend to be good. Just act like the Grizz.

There would have to be a seriously amazing trade out there set up for LMA if this went through because that would be a pretty big downgrade at PF. We’d have a worse offense, a worse defense, and maybe bag a couple of extra rebounds.

*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.

by staylost on Jul 15, 2009 1:50 AM PDT reply actions

Oh!

And I think Hoopsworld already showed how worthwhile their stuff is this past week. And that is, it is pretty worthless.

Here is my rumor. We are hoping to sign Millsap so we can include him in a trade for Luis Scola because he is so awesome.

*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.

by staylost on Jul 15, 2009 1:52 AM PDT up reply actions

Too ugly

When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.

by jscot on Jul 15, 2009 8:16 AM PDT up reply actions

This actually makes sense from a standpoint of fiscal prudence.

Stupid people have stupid ideas.

by AK1984 on Jul 15, 2009 2:16 AM PDT reply actions

Signing Milsap would certainly give the Blazers greatly increased leverage in their negotiations with LMA.

I’m surprised that we haven’t had more discussions about the long range salary picture for the team. After Roy and LMA this summer, we have Oden next summer. Then in the summer of 2011, we have Rudy, Batum, and Bayless. If these guys develop as we hope they will, extending all these contracts is going to add up to a huge pile of money.

Allen may be willing to subsidize the team to a certain extent, but there has to be a limit. Everybody has been so focused on using our cap space to acquire more talent, that we have ignored the much larger issue of trying to keep the talent we already have.

It is cool to agree with you for a change.

by upper left corner on Jul 15, 2009 8:30 AM PDT up reply actions

I don't know if it gives them any added leverage.

I would think it would do so only if LaMarcus really wanted to remain in Portland. If maximizing his earnings is his primary objective, the presence of Millsap on the Portland roster has no impact.

I see it more as an insurance policy. It allows Portland to make their best effort to resign Aldridge without being held hostage.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Jul 15, 2009 9:12 AM PDT up reply actions

Yes it does.

Especially if you are anticipating trying to resign both Joel and Oden.

by Nick Van Excellent on Jul 15, 2009 8:59 AM PDT up reply actions

Trade value

I believe KP when he says LMA will be a Blazer for a long time. To do otherwise would be a “slap” in the fans faces. To trade LMA for anything less than a superstar would cost KP his job.

Millsap, on the other hand, is a great player at a decent value. He may be starter material, and (if he comes to Portland) we could get some wins from his production, and trade him for a bigger need in a year or two.

makes no sense to mention LMA’s future, and I think it undermines fan morale. IMO Hoopsworld is stretching the truth for the Bedge-bump, ie page-views, and/or is a terrorist.

by hobbyshop_hero on Jul 15, 2009 2:22 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs

What he said

by LaoTzu on Jul 15, 2009 2:49 AM PDT up reply actions

I think you are probably right, but don't discount the value of leverage

The team can’t really afford max contracts for Roy, LMA, and Oden. If we max all three, we won’t have enough money left to pay our role players without going massively over the tax threshold.

Signing Millsap would give the team leverage. If LMA insists on max money, it gives us the alternative of trading him. If he is reasonable, then it probably plays out the way you said in your comment. Having alternatives is a good thing.

by upper left corner on Jul 15, 2009 8:35 AM PDT up reply actions

To trade LMA for anything less than a superstar would cost KP his job.

Not if Paul Allen signs off on the deal

everyone should read Dwight Jaynes latest column

http://www.dwightjaynes.com/the-real-truth-about-the-way-leagues-handle-home-fieldcourtice-advantages-in-the-postseason

I guarantee you that fans don’t get GMs fired, unless they cancel enough season tickets or stop buying luxury suites. Writers, reporters and bloggers can only “spread” discontent, but if the bean counters don’t feel the pinch, the beat will go on

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Jul 15, 2009 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions

wrong link

here’s the right one

http://www.dwightjaynes.com/inside-kevin-pritchard

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Jul 15, 2009 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions

I trust nothing on Poopsworld, except when Maxey writes about the Blazers

If you want to trade our spare parts for Devin Harris, I have three quarters I would like to trade for your dollar

by Norsktroll on Jul 15, 2009 2:55 AM PDT reply actions

complete bs

by Falcao on Jul 15, 2009 5:17 AM PDT reply actions

Maxey and Fleming

for Blazer news. All else is dubious at best on rumors. I’ve been reading the chats for a few months now. Eric Pincus knows his LA stuff, the Joel guy knows the Bulls ok, the coaches can talk about prospects a little bit, but as far as Blazers news, Maxey and Fleming know what’s up.
The other ones keep rambling about Andre Miller and LO here.

Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash

by HurraKane212 on Jul 15, 2009 6:53 AM PDT reply actions

I understand his thoughts

but Milsap isn’t signed to a $10 million per year deal, it is $8 million per, that is a big difference. LMA will get $12 million + avg per year, because of the recent signings pushing his market price up, if he doesn’t get that then I think he will play out next season and go into RFA, where the Blazers will have to match an offer after trying again to extend him on their own. Hopefully if that happens, LMA proves he is work the near-max or even the max next year.

Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?

by usmcr3049 on Jul 15, 2009 7:33 AM PDT reply actions

LMA is getting most of his money upfront

In the future years, the balance will be paid. That further reduces each seasons cost on THAT years bottom line. The cap ramification is still 8 mil. but the actual payout is less. I think this is important because Paul Allen is able to spread the cost to THIS year. Instead of 3 years from now, when Roy, LMA and Oden will be getting their raises.

by parkinglotj on Jul 15, 2009 9:06 AM PDT up reply actions

??

you lost me, are you talking about Milsap?

You must be now that I re-read that again, and I totally agree. I don’t think many people have thought of that part of the deal.

Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?

by usmcr3049 on Jul 15, 2009 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions

I am not sure that LMA could get that as an RFA

with the market dropping rapidly the market value will have to go down every year. Having Millsap on board allows the Blazers to squeeze his deal into 4 years and $10M or even $9M and be more than he can get on the market. His RFA coincides with the huge market opening next year but who wants to tie up $12M of cap space on a RFA that the Blazers may match anyway while there are so many unrestricted FA available? Also much of that vaunted cap space will be swallowed by teams on danger of insolvency. If LMA does nor sign an extension would there be a better value available as a FA for the Blazers?

Not advocating losing LMA. Only trying to see things from the team’s viewpoint.

by lee3022 on Jul 15, 2009 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions

lma moving

has got to be a bad rumor. the skills that lma posses for a big man are a rare commodity in the nba. blazers would be insane to move him.

by elconquistador on Jul 15, 2009 8:32 AM PDT reply actions

Speculation

Don’t know why people put so much stock in stuff like this.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Jul 15, 2009 9:13 AM PDT reply actions

LA is not going anywhere...

Hoopsworld? Serious?

by AndricLee21 on Jul 15, 2009 9:31 AM PDT reply actions

I don’t know, I think LMA is a great player like the rest of you, but was I the only one who was frustrated by how he played last year in the playoffs? In some ways he reminds me of ‘Sheed: a big, tall guy that you want to get in the post, but who prefers to stay outside and shoot jumpers. That is nice when the jumpers are going in, very frustrating when they are not. In the Houston series, the Blazers lacked rebounded and interior toughness, not more missed jump shots. Millsap would have given the Blazers more in that series, than LMA did. I’m not saying Millsap is better than LMA, I am just saying I get frustrated with LMA not playing in the post more, and Millsap would certainly fill that void. I like my basketball players to play “traditionally,” for their position: center should swat shots and stay in the lane, point guard should look to pass first, not stand out top, pound the ball, and shoot first, and pardon me but I like my power forwards to go in the paint and bang, not stand outside and jack up 20 footers.

by kalahari on Jul 15, 2009 10:57 AM PDT reply actions

was I the only one who was frustrated by how he played last year in the playoffs?

two words:

Yao Ming

If Portland had faced any team except Houston in the first round, you’d have a better opinion of LMA (and probably a few other Blazers)

Travis doesn’t get a “pass” though. When Outlaw was most needed his jumper went AWOL and he had nothing “else” to offer

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Jul 15, 2009 2:26 PM PDT up reply actions

You can't have too many good bigs. LMA's staying, Millsap or not.

The Blazers are serious about putting together a top-notch basketball team. Rotation-wise, signing Millsap and retaining Oden, Pryz, and LMA gives them one of the best front lines in basketball. Injuries will happen, everybody will get their share of minutes, and you can’t have too many good bigs.

Aside from the initial signing bonus, the Millsap offer isn’t that much for a player of his caliber. I seriously doubt that the Blazers are entertaining thoughts of getting rid of their only big who is a consistent scoring option.

by Benjamanic on Jul 15, 2009 11:20 AM PDT reply actions

completely agree

Nate does such a great job of getting everybody to play at such a high level that we don’t worry as much about positions … we don’t get caught up in that. We worry about getting the best players and the best people"

KP’s recent comments about getting the “best players” supports your train of thought. The Blazers are hoping to get Millsap, and if by some chance Utah doesn’t match, they will keep those “4 quality bigs” and Nate will create matchup nightmares for the opposing coaches with a “big” lineup, for at least 12 mpg

There is no reason that Millsap and LMA playing the hybrid “3~4” positions can’t guard the opponent’s backup SF/PF for 6 minute stretches in the “middle” of each half. Especially if they’re communicating well with their teammates in a defensive rotation

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Jul 15, 2009 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions

More on the economy and its impact today from the NY Times

N.B.A. Has Tough Year and Tough Talks Ahead

LAS VEGAS — Commissioner David Stern said Tuesday that less than half the N.B.A.’s teams turned a profit last season and that some owners had argued that a worst-case decrease in the salary cap of 5 percent might be too optimistic.

The speed of the decline suggests caution to the teams on long-term deals and that maximum salaries will decline instead of increase in future years. For LMA and Roy now the market is likely as good as it will get for an extension and next summer will only be worse. Taking a 4 year deal might also be better than taking a 3 year deal next summer.

I am wondering if the reports of Hedon’t being offered less than a 5 year contract were accurate and that is the real reason he jumped to Toronto for a full 5 years? Given that Roy is being offer 4 years it is more and more plausible that the organization wants to limit length of contracts with all of these guys.

by lee3022 on Jul 15, 2009 4:22 PM PDT reply actions