What's Next?
by Dave on Jul 6, 2009 1:18 AM PDT
353 comments
OK, so enough mourning (or "whew!"-ing) over Hedo Turkoglu. There's a bunch of cap space burning a hole in Portland's pockets and a whole summer of opportunity yet awaits. "What?!?" you exclaim. "Dave, all the best free agents are going or gone! Turkoglu, Ariza, Villanueva, Gordon...why, the list is staggering!" Chill out, hombre. The only thing staggering about this summer's free agent list is the popular rush for fool's gold that it presents. You couldn't trade every free agent signed so far this year for even one of next year's prime guys. The money is, and always was, in trading this year. The motto of the summer is, "Don't shop, swap." So let's get going.
Before we start, I will freely admit that I am cribbing large portions of this plan from our good friend Storyteller, who himself connected various threads of ideas and put them together in a response to one of the Turkoglu threads. Ever since he set me on the track I've been tossing these possibilities around in my head.
And despite what I said a moment ago, our new, Hedo-free plan is going to start with a bit of shopping. It won't be our only move, let alone our biggest, but it's been mentioned as being on the Blazers' horizon so we're going to give it credit.
Click through for The Plan.
Step 1: The Blazers take their cap space and make an offer to David Lee.
Now before you nay-say this to death, let me remind you that months ago when this possibility was brought up I, myself, was one of the leading detractors for the specific reason that there's no room for Lee on this roster. In a bit of scary-music-inducing foreshadowing, let me tell you that the primary reason for this offer is that the situation is going to change.
I wouldn't like Lee much as our main power forward, especially playing alongside Greg Oden. Any Mike D'Antoni-shepherded stats are going to be skewed, but despite some (Mwah! Mwah!) wonderful raw numbers of 16 points, 12 rebounds, and 55% shooting last year Lee's contributions were somewhat anemic. His net numbers ranked below seven other regular Knick contributors (understanding that the Knicks traded for extra people during the year). He was a net negative in points. He was basically a wash in rebounding. Opposing power forwards obliterated him in PER.
Why in the name of Kevin Pritchard and all the saints do we want Lee on the team, then? Because some of those numbers were system-based. He's never going to be as effective as he could be in New York. He can be here. He's a restricted free agent. The Knicks have the right to match any deal the Blazers offer him. If the offer is remotely significant, they're probably not going to match.
We also want him on the team because we're not thinking of him as our main power forward. That job still belongs to LaMarcus Aldridge. We're looking at Lee as a back-up power forward/center. Of course he can't bang with Yao but...whoops! Forgot. We don't have to worry about that anymore. He'll have a hard time handling Shaq but...whoops! Forgot. We don't have to worry about that anymore. In actuality, Lee stacked up against opposing centers better than he did against opposing power forwards.
We're not looking for miracles here. No savior is needed. We're looking for a guy to fill between 26-30 back-up minutes at two front-court positions, provide a little post scoring, and rebound like crazy. That's David Lee. You might wish the defense would be better but you can't have everything. A guy who could play like Lee and defend like Garnett would never be a reserve for you and would never be available.
"But Dave," you pipe up again, "that's going to cost us most of our cap space, if not all of it! For David Lee? Really?" Yes, Grasshopper. Really. That space isn't going to do us much good soon anyway.
"But Dave," comes your wailing cry, "part of the reason people are not clamoring after Lee is that the Knicks, by rights, could make a competing team wait on their answer until well after the free agent market has been sucked dry! What will happen to us if they do that and then end up matching the offer? Woe is us then, Dave! Woe is us!" OK, calm down Boo Boo. We didn't suddenly get dumber than the average bear here. The a priori assumption to that argument is that there are other free agents Portland wants besides (or after) Lee. I'm willing to say right now that I can't think of any. If the Knicks work us over, so be it. Then we move into Step 2 of the plan with a bunch of cap space to facilitate trades, which is (as we said) where the real traction is anyway. And we have all summer to make trades. They're far less time-critical than free-agent signings. David Lee isn't our only target here. He's just one that we can't get any other way besides using this cap space to make an offer. So his offer comes first.
"But Dave..." Oh holy hopping hornytoads! Will you never cease?!? This is beginning to sound like a bad re-enactment of 2001: A Space Odyssey. "But Dave, I much prefer [insert name of another power forward prospect here]. Why can't we have that guy instead, Dave? Why?" Well...OK. We can consider it. If, and ONLY if, you can show me a guy who meets these criteria:
- can play some reserve center as well as power forward or at least can play alongside LaMarcus Aldridge comfortably so the two can switch back and forth
- rebounds and makes a living inside but still has a little bit of touch on his release plus does other things besides just scoring so he can play with both LaMarcus and Greg
- will be serviceable as a reserve, albeit a fairly large-minute one, for the next few years of his career at least...isn't an obvious starter in the making
- a guy whose team won't match his offer if he's restricted
My guess is somewhere along the line there we took your guy out. If not, bring him up and we can talk.
Step 2: Let the Imperial Trade Probes be sent out in search of the rebel small forward. Search the ruins of Houston but don't forget the frozen wasteland of Detroit as well. Once found, turn him to the dark side...or our side anyway.
Shane Battier is one of the most unsung, yet important, players in the league. The Rockets think the world of him. As we discussed last week, he's also far less useful to the Rockets right now than he was three months ago. With the loss of Yao Ming, Tracy McGrady, and Ron Artest the Rockets go from a Conference Finals hopeful to a lottery team. If they make the playoffs next year it'll be because somebody else screwed up. Battier will be 31 when the season begins. He's still everything he always was but in Houston he's the ultimate complementary player with nobody to complement.
The first offer I'd make to Houston would probably be Joel Przybilla for Battier straight up. If that failed I'd try Przybilla and Travis Outlaw for Battier and Brent Barry. Przybilla is only a year younger than Battier but he's a center and he's got less mileage on him. With every scorer in their arsenal disappearing somebody's going to have the green light on that team. That's Travis' specialty. It wouldn't surprise me to see him add 2-3 points per game immediately, and this is on top of the Rockets already gaining 7 points and 6 rebounds in the deal. In any scenario if they want a draft pick I give them a draft pick. If they need some cash to offset Przybilla's trade kicker I do that as well.
Now granted it hurts losing Joel. We need Joel. But either Greg Oden is going to grow up or he's not. If he is then Joel's defensive/rebounding role will diminish anyway. If he's not then Przybilla won't save us. I know we might have a rocky road in the coming year but I'm hoping that Battier's defense will help lessen the need for a constant interior watchdog like Joel.
The more touchy negotiations would come if the Rockets insisted on Rudy Fernandez accompanying Przybilla. That move contains a lot more gray area for me. I'm not sure Portland can fully utilize Rudy long-term but I'm also not sure I'd move him for a shorter-term guy like Battier. You'd never be sorry having Shane on your team, but you could be sorry having Rudy on someone else's.
If Rudy is necessary to make a deal work, I don't consummate with Houston without also knocking on the door of Joe Dumars. I discuss Przybilla, Rudy, and Outlaw for Prince and Arron Affalo, whom I rely on to be a defensive, three-point shooting reserve behind Brandon Roy. If there's any way I can get them to consider Martell Webster instead of Travis I do that. If that deal has to wait until Martell is ready for full contact, so be it.
On the cheaper end of the scale these deals are pretty nice. On the more expensive end it's a matter of taste, depending on how much you value the small forward being offered. Despite the momentary pain of losing a favorite, we wouldn't be unhappy with any of those players coming in. Either Battier or Prince is a better acquisition than Turkoglu would have been. They also fit more comfortably than the players we'd be shipping out.
Step 3: Depending on what's left, you could consider swinging a deal for Kirk Hinrich.
Steve Blake hasn't gone anywhere. With a semi-revamped lineup the Blazers might be content to keep it that way. But if the Knicks matched the offer for Lee (leaving you cap space, which obviously you'd use before executing Step 2) or you didn't move Outlaw while acquiring your small forward the Hinrich option is still available. Blake and Outlaw is the only practical scenario that makes a trade work if you got Lee first. \You'd mostly pick up Kirk to shore up the defense on the other side of Brandon Roy.
Where Does This Leave Us?
The Blazers have three all-but-untouchable players in Roy, Aldridge, and Oden. They also have three young, highly valued prospects in Fernandez, Jerryd Bayless, and Nicolas Batum. Through these steps we've netted Portland David Lee, either Shane Battier or Tayshaun Prince/Arron Affalo, and maybe an outside chance at Kirk Hinrich while moving either none or one of those players. The players coming in would be capable, experienced, and have targeted minutes waiting for them.
If Portland could find any kind of deal in Step 2 that doesn't involve Rudy (not likely) this becomes a near no-brainer. The outside chance of getting Lee, Battier, and Hinrich for a total cost of Przybilla, Outlaw, and Blake plus cash or picks is enough to make you salivate. Nobody has done anything close to that in free agency. Even if you start throwing Rudy's name in there, between his position gridlock and him apparently flirting with Europe, it's worth thinking about. In whole or in part, the moves listed here legitimately work.
If nothing else, this should get rid of the thought that Portland's possibilities dried up when Hedo Turkoglu decided that Toronto was more cosmopolitan than Portland. The Blazers have not yet begun to fight.
--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)
8 recs |
353 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Joel is definitely our most attractive tradeable asset
and never more so than right now. And it sure does seem that bridges must have been burned by now with Outlaw, whatever he says to the press.
On the Hinrich front, meanwhile CNN/SI today was saying the Bulls were close to reacquiring Jannero Pargo. He’s much cheaper and has done well at either guard slot.
If the Blazers can somehow get Battier and Hinrich they would both be much improved and yet still have some room left for younger players such as Batum and Bayless to breathe — and improve.
And you’re right: Greg Oden is going to have to sink or swim.
ignacio
by ignacio on Jul 6, 2009 1:34 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I haven't seen Lee play much
So my fear is Greg swims, but we get abused around the basket when he’s not in if we deal Joel. Our biggest strength (outside Roy ;)) last season was rebounding. Having two legit centers was extremely key to this, as two seasons before it was a weakness.
"I don’t have the first clue who he is talking about, because all I worry about is Jerome." – Jerome James, on comments by coach Nate McMillan about Seattle SuperSonics players being selfish.
by Devenex on Jul 6, 2009 1:41 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I actually think we already have a deal worked out for Hinrich
and so there actually is urgency on using that cap space beforehand.
Right now, you have 8-9 million in cap space. You can use it, then make a trade for Hinrich. Or if you make the trade for Hinrich first, you only have 6ish million in cap space (basically the MLE, which puts us back in the pack for FA’s. Use your FA money now to get that extra asset.
The trade for Hinrich that I see is Blake and Outlaw. It works out perfectly and saves Chicago 30+ million dollars over the next 3 years.
by as11osu on Jul 6, 2009 2:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought the same thing.
It also explains why KP seems so hellbent on bringing in someone who can create offense for himself. Trade Outlaw and there is suddenly only one guy on the roster who can consistently create off the dribble.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jul 6, 2009 7:59 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
that makes a lot of sense
I'm going to come up with the best line here ever, something really clever.
by musicdaniel on Jul 6, 2009 8:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
creating off the dribble is overrated (pass to good offense!!!!)
but Rudy is underrated in that skill, Bayless – if worth keeping around – fits that profile perfectly, and if that skill set is truly important, you could sign a Sessions rather than acquire an Hinrich
by blacknoiseNW on Jul 6, 2009 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not to mention
Marty should be back in the lineup in the fall. If he is able to pick up where he left off when he broke his foot, he could provide some valuable offense + defense.
by DonkeyShins on Jul 6, 2009 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not overrated.
And Rudy is bad at it. He’s pretty much only a spot up shooter.
…the only way to stop Fernández is to make him pay for his relatively limited ball-handling skills, especially with his left, and slashing ability. Indeed, Rudy struggles in pure one-on-one situations if he’s pressured, as it was exposed particularly in the semifinal. Suffering against aggressive on-ball defenses, he struggled trying to get rid of his opponent off the dribble, and given his prominence in Joventut’s offense, it almost cost his team the game.-February 19, 2008</a
>
by Nick Van Excellent on Jul 6, 2009 3:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes
when I first saw Rudy on the Blazers I was disappointed in his inability to dribble and really be a point guard. He’s just not that kind of player. He’s a lot like Jim Paxson – only Paxson was bigger and could get through screens better. – Elgin
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Jul 7, 2009 9:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
the prearranged trade… I’m really thinking it’s going to come to pass.
by Cablinasian on Jul 6, 2009 9:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Makes too much sense not to happen
I think it would be shortsighted of either the Blazers or the Bulls not to make the move. Hinrich is worth the money he’s being paid if he’s your starting point guard. If he’s not, you’re better off with depth and/or cap room. Hence, the Bulls do the deal.
There is only one remotely available point guard who can do everything Blake can do (primarily, shoot the lights out on open threes and bring toughness at the point) while adding much improved perimeter D and greater playmaking skills. That’s the captain. The Blazers lose a little depth at the three, where they should sign Marvin Williams or trade for Gerald Wallace. Hence, the Blazers do the deal.
I cannot fathom which team would possibly turn this down. If the Bulls would, toss in some draft picks and/or Euro rights and make it happen, anyway.
Q: Is Greg favoring his knee?
Frye: He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors.
by KP Corleone on Jul 6, 2009 9:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
when Gordon signed with Detroit and we went after Hedo, it all started to make a lot of sense.
KP, just give me Hinrich. That’s all I’m asking for this offseason.
by Cablinasian on Jul 6, 2009 9:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Blazerd NEED to lose a little depth at the 3
it’s called “roster balancing”
by blacknoiseNW on Jul 6, 2009 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
thats because you asked hinrich every day when he left for the gym while camping out in front of his house if he had heard when he was going to be traded…
:)
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jul 6, 2009 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope not.
Weak, overpriced move to gain nothing. Blake is still improving, while Hinrich is in decline, and had his best year several years ago. That deal makes a lot of sense… for Chicago. Not Portland. Hinrich is too expensive to be Blake’s back-up, and not good enough to start in front of him. The call for this trade boggles the mind. This would be a waste of a trade. We can always do a sign and trade with one of our players later, when a better point guard comes available. Use the cap room to get David Lee or similar useful young player with years of trade value, and wait for someone better than Hinrich, which is not hard to come by in the draft most years.
by wingzeta on Jul 6, 2009 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think
“Hinrich is in decline” is a fair statement. Stastiically, yes, his best years came a few years ago. But as has been mentioned many many times on this site, there are a series of extenuating circumstances causing the statistical decline, namely playing out of position and off the bench last year and the horrible full-team implosion of 2 years before. If you watched the Bulls-Celtics series it was apparent that Hinrich still has game when in a major role. Not to mention he capably defended Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, and Rajon Rondo; something Blake would hae a small amount of difficulty doing. Hinrich is younger than Blake, and their per-minute stats last year are nearly IDENTICAL despite Blake being surrounded by a much better team who gae him innumerable open looks. Hinrich’s career numbers are far superior. Short of learning how to make a shot with a hand in his face, I’m not sure what aspect of Blake’s game you expect to “improe” next year.
Plus, do you really want us to draft ANOTHER young PG?
by momomoses7 on Jul 6, 2009 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hinrich's numbers far superior to Blake???
Not really, especially if you compare their time as starters. If you compare Blake’s time as a back up behind Arenas, you would be making the same mistake as only comparing Hinrich’s numbers this year to Blake’s this year. If you compare Hinrich 2007-08 to Blake 08-09, they are very similar, so much so, that it’s not a good trade for double the salary. Also Blake is getting better as he has more time as a starter. Hinrich’s peak was his third year, and next year will be Blake’s third year as a full time starter. They are less than a year apart in age, and graduated from college the same year, each with two Final Four appearances, and one Finals appearance, while Blake left with an NCAA title, Hinrich left with none. Blake had 11 assists to Hinrich’s 5 the time they met in the Final Four, as The Terps soundly defeated the as always overrated Hinrich and his overrated Jayhawks.
Blake can shoot with a hand in his face, and did many times when he had to as the shot clock was running down. He usually made those shots under pressure, but avoids taking dumb shots, which is good. The thing he can add to his game is more dribble drives. He has no problem driving, but as others have pointed out, he ends up dribbling back out too often. In the series against the Rockets, he had a couple nice drives by Yao for layups, that I would like to see more of. That is what he can do more of to keep defenses honest. We know he can do it, because we have seen him do it against a very tough Rocket defense. Being a pass first PG, he is looking for teammates a little too much sometimes, but with his injuries healed, I think he will look for his chances a little more. I also think he will get his foul shooting in order, which was never a problem until that Clippers game. Also, you yourself said “their per-minute stats last year are nearly IDENTICAL” The quality of the team factor is debatable, since the Blazers have no inside game, which is the bread and butter for a PG getting assists, and open looks. Chicago also had Rose, Gordon, Wallace, Thomas, and some fairly good role players, and Deng when he’s healthy. The difference between most NBA teams is not as big as we think. The thing that sets the Blazers apart, is the fact that we have Oden and Pryzbilla, and team chemistry. Every team has one or two stars. We have two legit centers, which is unusual, and the right personality. The very thing we risk with trades. We also risk our youth, which is our other special quality, which right now can be a pit-fall, but gives us a brighter future than most teams until we trade it away for Kirk Hinrich=( and any other lame “upgrades” that have been mentioned.
by wingzeta on Jul 6, 2009 5:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just a couple of points
First, I really don’t see that college results make much of an argument for guys who will be going into their 6th year in the NBA.
Second, if you really mean to compare Kirk’s 07-08 season with Blake’s 08-09, then you are comparing Kirk’s worst season as a pro to Blake’s best.
And finally, I don’t buy the argument that Kirk peaked at all. He had a really bad year in 07-08, no question. This year he was back to good – in fact, if you look at his post All-Star stats (which removes the question of coming back from the thumb injury), he shot .447 overall and .454 from 3, and his per36 numbers were better than Blake’s except for assists and TOs, which should be a given considering half his time was spent at SG (3 more points, half a block more, double the steals, and 1.5 assists less). This good play continued in the playoffs, with his per36 points, steals and overall shooting actually improving. That’s pretty darn good for a guy who supposedly peaked two years ago. And that’s without even considering defense, beyond whatever value steals have.
So you may prefer Blake on his cheaper contract, or to not risk messing up the chemistry of the team – those are valid concerns. But there’s a pretty darn good argument that Kirk is the better player in straight-up comparison. I feel that way from what I’ve seen watching them in play as well.
In honor of the dearly departed, I declare July PB&J month - everyone raise a sandwich to the memory of Ben!
by wjb1492 on Jul 6, 2009 7:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The college argument makes me want to stab my eyes out
As a Bulls fan, you might remember a certain Tyrus Thomas (and Big Baby) absolutely embarrassing LaMarcus Aldridge in the NCAAs, and yet I don’t hear too many Blazer fans calling for us to trade LaMarcus straight up for either guy.
The fact remains, that by PER, Blake has never even been an “average” player. Even factoring in some down years, Hinrich still rates his career PER as better than Blake’s career best, and this doesn’t even factor in the superior perimeter defense, which is completely unaccounted for with PER.
by Royster on Jul 6, 2009 9:12 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
My point was
Hinrich has had several years more opportunity as a starter, which has given him a chance to work his way up to his career best years, which are still only marginally better than Blake, and though the Bulls were not a great inside team, they had more guys who roll to the basket than we do, so he should have better assist numbers. Getting assists is tough on a team of jump shooters. Also The Blazers have only just become a “good” team since last year. Before that they were a below .500 team not as good as the Bulls decent middle of the pack team. So it’s hard to say Blake has been on a better team in previous years, when he has been on the Wizards as a back up, Portland as a stop gap for Telfair, Denver when they were in transition, and they wanted to keep Blake, and the Bucks where he barely played behind Mo Williams. Comparing career stats is difficult with these two, and yet Blake still compares well against Hinrich who has by contrast, until this year, had a consistent and secure roll.
So my point is we haven’t seen Blake’s best season yet, where as it is safe to say we have seen Hinrich’s. It took Blake longer to get the opportunity, and the Blazers will just begin to have an inside game next season hopefully. Had The Bulls picked up Gilbert Arenas at the same time they drafted Kirk, he might have spent most of his career as a back up rather than a starter too. Now that they have Rose, the shoe is on the other foot, but enthusiastic Hinrich fans who refer to him as “Captain Kirk” want to move him to a place where he can be a starter again. I hope it’s not Portland.
Also looking at Hinrich’s “post all-star stats” is not very revealing, and almost as bad as my college comparisons, which were only meant to show that Blake took a team all the way and Kirk came up short. It was meant to show Blake had an edge in intangibles, which I believe he does, an edge that helped the Blazers to a 54 win season, even if no one will admit he was a part of that. By your Jayhawk icon, I know where you stand on all this, and you have a loyalty to Kirk. That’s cool, but it doesn’t mean he will help the Blazers any more than Blake, but he will without a doubt cost more than he is worth, and be a risk to a very effective team chemistry as you mentioned.
by wingzeta on Jul 7, 2009 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You don't know you haven't seen Blake's best year yet
any more than I know Kirk hasn’t peaked. And I really don’t see how looking at Kirk’s most recent stats – which, by the way, were offered specifically to refute the idea that he has peaked – is anywhere near the same as considering what happened 6 years ago outside of the NBA.
I like Blake, and I’m glad he made it, so to speak. I always like the guys who make it on hard work and good attitude over athleticism or innate skill. Maybe he’s the next Steve Nash or Chauncy Billups who develops into a stud All-Star late in life – but that I’m not going to believe until I see it.
In honor of the dearly departed, I declare July PB&J month - everyone raise a sandwich to the memory of Ben!
by wjb1492 on Jul 7, 2009 3:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree. Perhaps Rudy, but Przy is valued for sure
It still hurts when I see his name on the bock lke that. I understand it, but it hurts.
I know less than half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
by haildablazer on Jul 6, 2009 5:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Most GMs would love to have the Pryz
But I’ve been cruising around other teams’ forums the last couple days to get some outside perspective, and one name always comes up. Rudy. I always see “I would trade xxxxxxxxx to Portland for Rudy” or “Yeah I’d go for that trade if you replace Blake/Trout with Rudy”. I don’t know if he’s big on GM’s radars, but as a fan favorite, he gets nationwide notoriety. HAHA, he’s ours (at least for now), suckers!
An Oregonian in Texas.
by NoiseMekanik on Jul 6, 2009 7:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you.
I understand Joel’s value on the trading block, but it does hurt. He is one of my favorite Blavers and has been for so long. When he turned down Detroit and San Antonio to stay a blazer, he made himself untradeable in my mind. I mean he turned down a nearly golden chance to put a ring on his finger to stay and play in portland. That is the kind of loyalty that is missing from professional sports these days. i would love to see the Blazers repay that with loyalty of their own.
But I do understand that it is a business and sentimental connections are not always best for the team.
So as I said while it looked like the blazers were going to get turkeyglu which I so did not want to see happen I will say again here.
In KP I trust! With or without Joel.
by BlazerFanFromDenver on Jul 6, 2009 3:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I might cry if Przybilla goes ...
… no, I WILL cry if Przybilla goes.
Ditto with Rudy.
(I’m a big wimp about this stuff. Trout, OK, I won’t cry. I might wimper, but for the right deal, OK.)
Honestly, I’ve seen Lee live a few times, and he’s darn good.
Battier brings awesome D, but can we get a reasonably-close wing defender for less (not having to lose Rudy or Przy)?
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jul 6, 2009 7:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're right Dave
We still have plenty of options and time. But this is a somewhat delicate series of events, and Joel may lose value once we sign Lee as it becomes obvious we’re in trouble (no minutes for Lee) if we don’t.
Hopefully DET and HOU would both be interested so the offers stay honest.
"I don’t have the first clue who he is talking about, because all I worry about is Jerome." – Jerome James, on comments by coach Nate McMillan about Seattle SuperSonics players being selfish.
by Devenex on Jul 6, 2009 1:35 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It depends
on how motivated they are right now. Neither Shane Battier nor Tayshaun Prince are going to end their careers with their current teams. But that doesn’t mean the timing is right for them to move now. The door has just opened on the prospect of either being traded. As time goes on, these deals make less sense for the Blazers, as they’d have fewer disposable assets and get less benefit for them. Nicolas Batum might be ready to start in two years, for instance.
These moves provide a solid boost in the present, continuity for the future, and ease the transition between the two. But the future is coming whether we make moves or not.
—Dave
by Dave on Jul 6, 2009 1:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Detroit and Houston would be interested, no doubt
But I think you’re overvaluing both Tayshaun and Battier. These are both Ben Wallace-type players (albeit on the perimeter) who were severely undervalued for years, and then somehow the tide turned and the pendelum swung, and they have become even more severely overrated. Tayshaun, in particular, played like crap this year on the defensive end of the court, was a net negative to his team in the area that’s supposed to be his specialty, and looks like he’s lost the quicks that once (along with his length) made him an elite defender.
I would never ever in a million years consider including Rudy in either of these deals, and I would probably not give up Przy either. If the Blazers are giving up Rudy and/or Przy, they should be getting back a guy who actually is still an elite defender, like say, Gerald Wallace – not a guy who was an elite defender two years ago.
Q: Is Greg favoring his knee?
Frye: He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors.
by KP Corleone on Jul 6, 2009 7:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't find my self agreeing
with you all that much Mr. Corleone ….. mostly I think because you’re such a big Bayless fan. But your thoughts here regarding both Prince and Battier almost exactly mirror my own …. especially about Tayshaun who I have always thought to be overrated. I’ve seen him have some pretty bad spells in recent playoff during the last season or two or three.
Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave
Also: COMCAST SUCKS!
by TwoDeep on Jul 6, 2009 9:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great minds think alike...
Having not seen Storyteller’s ideas, I posted a very similar plan on a different website earlier this afternoon.
It seems like Portland wants to add another play maker whether at PG or SF. Since Prince is a Point-Forward, it would make sense to acquire him and a PG who doesn’t need the ball in his hands to be effective (Kirk Hinrich).
If Portland acquired Battier, they would only have Roy as a play maker which means they may go after a guy like Andre Miller in a S&T
Scenario 1:
Sign Lee
Trade Przybilla and Outlaw to Detroit for Tayshuan Prince
Trade Blake and Webster to Chicago for Hinrich
Scenario 2:
Sign Lee
Trade Przybilla and Outlaw for Battier
Trade Blake and Webster for Andre Miller
Either scenario would be amazing, but I definitely prefer scenario #1
The best part though… With Lee as the backup PF/C, there would be no true backup Center behind Oden which means the team would have to sign… STEVEN HILL
Tony Bennett reports that Minnesota and Portland are swapping draft picks -- Roy to Portland, Foye to Minnesota. That's it? That's the trade? None of the ESPN guys seem remotely fazed. I knew Kevin McHale couldn't just pick the best guy in the draft without somehow screwing it up. I would have bet my Ndudi Ebi rookie cards on it.
by Salem Stephen on Jul 6, 2009 1:46 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
You're close with that expression but it actually goes
“great minds run off the same track” …. at least in this scenario.
Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave
Also: COMCAST SUCKS!
by TwoDeep on Jul 6, 2009 9:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
dollar wise
I dont think these trades work out unless Lee is signed for a fair chunk of change less than what he has been asking for.
Pryz and Outlaw for Battier will definitely not work (hence Dave’s throw in of Brent Barry)
Life is exhausting when you are this stupid.
I will talk about DeJuan Blair no more forever
by jonestr on Jul 6, 2009 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So very many flaws...
not even worth getting into.
by as11osu on Jul 6, 2009 1:50 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
since you asked
All Dave’s complaints that he mentions +
Lee in place of Przybilla – When Oden is on the bench defense isn’t important in the post?
Lee has no shot at all, and thus ISN’T a fit with Oden. That’d be a problem.
Przybilla + Rudy + Outlaw for Prince (or the Rudy trade for Battier) – Aren’t you admitting by trading Przy that the timelline doesn’t start this year? I think you are, and if that’s the case trading for 30 year old small forwards that rely on their athleticism to play great defense isn’t a solid bargain.
Not even David Lee meets the requirements for the PF/C free agent.
rebounds and makes a living inside but still has a little bit of touch on his release plus does other things besides just scoring so he can play with both LaMarcus and Greg
by as11osu on Jul 6, 2009 2:09 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, David Lee's shoddy mid-range face-up game on offense is verified by his 35.2% eFG on ...
jump shots — which constituted 32% of his overall field-goal attempts — plus, all of the defensive +/- metrics indicate that he’s an inferior low-post defender. Also, Lee’s rebound percentages from last season (9.6% on offense & 27.9% on defense) are markedly worse than Przybilla’s numbers (12.8% on offense & 33.1% on defense).
While I’m not a Brandon Bass fan such as yourself, as11osu, I at least recognize that his mid-range jump shooting prowess would complement Przybilla’s stout defense on the second unit frontline. So, even though Bass is a substandard defender and average on the glass, he’d come at a fair cost and not force the team to foolishly trade away its most underrated commodity in Przybilla. Notwithstanding Bass, though, I truly feel Jeff Pendergraph could be a solid contributor backing up LaMarcus Aldridge for 12 to 16 minutes per game next season.
Oh, and if improving the small forward position both offensively and defensively is so important to the brass upstairs in the front office, then I’d suggest swinging a trade of Martell Webster and filler (e.g., Victor Claver, Joel Freeland, & Petteri Koponen’s draft rights) in a lopsided trade to the Washington Wizards for Mike Miller — which’d help aid Abe Pollin in slashing payroll a bit next season — and later signing Ime Udoka to a one-year, minimum-level contract.
Batum for 16 minutes per game and Miller for 24 minutes per game — along with Udoka getting spot minutes whenever Batum can’t physically go against a stronger opponent defensively and, moreover, Rudy Fernandez receiving 8 minutes per game over in the weakside corner offensively — would be a fine rotation at small forward. Fernandez would get another 16 minutes backing up Roy at the ballside wing, too, so his overall minutes wouldn’t be an issue, while Travis Outlaw would be shipped out with Steve Blake, the draft rights of Patty Mills, a 2010 second-round draft pick, and a cool $3,000,000 in cash considerations for Kirk Hinrich.
by AK1984 on Jul 6, 2009 2:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If we're valuing Tayshaun Prince on his "point forward" status
based on the assumption he’d do the same things Hedo does, that’s just not at all part of his game. He can bring the ball up and pass it to someone, but he doesn’t get bigs easy looks inside like Hedo did. Mike Miller is by far the better player for that game, and is much closer offensively to Hedo in that respect.
As far as Bass is concerned, I feel he’s the best of all worlds for our vacant backup 4 spot. Especially when you consider he’d be playing next to Przy, although he also would fit perfectly well next to Oden. You don’t have to pay him much at all above the MLE, and he’s a player that knows his role, and will come off the bench for 15-20 minutes and give you exactly what you need. By saving the extra 2-3 million from what he’d require to what Lee would require, you’’d have more than enough to sign a 3rd point guard, or another specialty player of your choosing. Although I’m not sure it’d require much more than the veteran minimum, I have to advocate Tyronn Lue. I’m higher on Bayless than you are, but at the very least you have to have insurance on him being as he was last year.
by as11osu on Jul 6, 2009 2:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, Mike Miller is much more equipped stylistically to perform the side screen-roll with ...
Greg Oden. Miller, moreover, can also effectively play off the ball, which definitely isn’t the case with Hedo Turkoglu. The differences in Turkoglu and Miller’s usage percentage last season — which was 23.0% to 14.5% — essentially verifies that.
http://www.cybersportsusa.com/hooptactics/sidescreen.asp
Kirk Hinrich can effectively play the 3 (i.e., weakside corner) in that above set, too, which is one of several reasons why he’s such a unique player on both sides of the ball. Yet, because that’s a play wherein Brandon Roy plays off of the ball, it might be a challenge to get Nate McMillan to employ it with any regularity.
Then again, you and I are on the same page about McMillan; though, I’d want to hire a veteran head coach whose staple is the pick-and-roll and employs a slow-paced offense — such as Jeff Van Gundy, Mike Fratello, et cetera — while I think you’re more into an up-tempo, run-and-gun style of basketball.
Oh, and on a final note, I’d rather target Anthony Carter than Tyronn Lue. Unlike Lue, Carter can actually play defense. Carter’s not a terrible shooter, either, which is a ginormous shortcoming for other defensive-minded veteran point guards like Kevin Ollie and Brevin Knight.
by AK1984 on Jul 6, 2009 3:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Then again, you and I are on the same page about McMillan; though, I’d want to hire a veteran head coach whose staple is the pick-and-roll and employs a slow-paced offense — such as Jeff Van Gundy, Mike Fratello, et cetera — while I think you’re more into an up-tempo, run-and-gun style of basketball.
I’ve always liked JVG, but I’d prefer SVG. Larry Brown is another favorite of mine. It’s not that I want to run and gun, it’s just that I don’t want that style to be summarily absent based on the coaches flaws. Sometimes you have to go small, and sometimes you have to run. Based on personnel we’re going to have that option at different points during a game.
by as11osu on Jul 6, 2009 3:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd somewhat like to swap out Nate McMillan, Dean Demopoulos, Monty Williams, ...
Maurice Lucas, and Joe Prunty with Mike Fratello, Brian Hill, Lionel Hollins — so long as he’s unjustly canned as head coach of the Memphis Grizzlies by the moronic Chris Wallace — Wayne “Tree” Rollins, and Eric Musselman, respectively, since the offense would go from moving at a snail’s pace to a complete halt.
I, however, am a fan of a pick-‘n’-roll heavy offense more than a slow-paced offense — which is what Fratello and company would bring to Portland — thus, I’d target Jeff Van Gundy first and foremost.
Of course, the Hawk offense created by Hubie Brown and later used by Fratello worked wonders during its heyday — http://www.cybersportsusa.com/hooptactics/hawk.asp & http://www.basketballsense.com/DVDs/hawk_offense.aspx — plus, it’d potentially succeed with a roster wherein its ballside wing is ball dominant, isolation happy, and doesn’t do well off the ball.
Roy is much more efficient than John Drew in the ‘70s with Atlanta and Bernard King in the ’80s with New York, too, so this could be a perfect match. Neither Wilkins brother — Gerald with New York under Brown and Dominique under Fratello in Atlanta — were as efficient during the mid-’80s as Roy is nowadays, either, so that’s also a good sign.
by AK1984 on Jul 6, 2009 4:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Admittedly, though, the Hawk offense does suit a dribble-drive, yet deferential ...
point guard like Andre Miller — with “Fast” Eddie Johnson making that role his own in the late-’70s — as well as a small forward with more of a power, slashing-esque game like Gerald Wallace or Josh Childress.
I, therefore, would easily tab Jeff Van Gundy over Mike Fratello for that very reason. It makes way more sense to hire a pick-‘n’-roll head coach versus a system coach to replace Nate McMillan, since the former would have an easier time adjusting to the Portland Trail Blazers present-day roster — particularly Nicolas Batum and a Steve Blake/Kirk Hinrich type spot-up three-point shooter — in its entirety.
by AK1984 on Jul 6, 2009 4:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Listening to you and as110su get all googly over the VG brothers and Miller is pretty entertaining
I learned my basketball watching Jack Ramsay coached teams. It was all about spacing and player and ball movement. I remember all those years watching Stockton and Malone playing pick and roll and thinking how much more beautiful Ramsay’s offense was. Jerry Sloan’s offense was like watching paint dry: effective but boring. I suspect you two know more Xs and Os than I do, but I do know what I enjoy watching: movement and spacing.
I do enjoy your guy’s point of view. I may not agree, but I enjoy the knowledgeable give and take.
by upper left corner on Jul 6, 2009 7:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
JVG
hates portland. have you guys ever listened to him as a commentator for a blazers game? he seems to truly dislike this city/organization…
by retirecards51 on Jul 6, 2009 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
prefer svg?
his past players and current players saay he sucks, i think there is probably a reason for that, and its not that hes awesome
fire nate before its too late
by pipgras on Jul 6, 2009 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's nice to know I'm not the only one who gets summarily dismissed
I feel like I’m in good company when it happens to Dave, as well
But to answer Dave’s original points, yes, I think the Blazers are pursuing Lee, just like we know they were pursuing Hansbrough on draft night
No, I don’t think they’ll deal Przy, not this summer, anyway
I like the “idea” Battier and Price, but not at the cost of Rudy or Jeol
I’ve gotta go, so I’ll leave before reading this thread any further, as I can already guess what as11osu is telling you about Brandon Bass, etc
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Jul 6, 2009 7:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
With how other teams East and West have improved in the last two weeks, we won't win a title in the next two years
Even with a veteran upgrade like Battier who could help us while Nic develops. Time to invest heavy playing time in the young players (Oden, Bayless, Nic, etc.).
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 6, 2009 1:52 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
This is spot on.
I understand the need to use our cap space now, but I don’t think there’s anything we can do to be a contender in the next two years (short of landing Kobe, Pau and Odom). Since that’s not an option (nor would I want it to be), it would be better to let our young guys grow into contender territory. That’s why Hedo made no sense to me. Even with him…. heck, even if we added him and Andre Miller or something, we weren’t going to compete with LA, Boston or Cleveland for the next two years, minimum.
by fetopher on Jul 6, 2009 1:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Los Angeles Lakers as currently constructed would flat-out demolish a ballclub that has David Lee ...
and LaMarcus Aldridge playing alongside each other on the frontline for roughly 16 to 20 minutes per game.
The interior defense both man-to-man and on weakside help would be so laughably porous whenever Greg Oden was on the bench — whether it’s due to taking a break, being in foul trouble, or sitting out with an injury — that this team would be a bottom third team in the NBA regarding defensive efficiency.
No matter how skilled Shane Battier is at one-on-one lockdown perimeter defense, he could only do so much with a couple of sieves in Aldridge and Lee trying to man the middle.
by AK1984 on Jul 6, 2009 2:03 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think your forgetting something
That Lamarcus is quietly becoming one of the best power forwards defensively in the league.
by DephlatorMouse on Jul 6, 2009 2:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I respectfully disagree.
The Blazers perimeter defense is much worse than it’s interior defense. Shore up the perimeter with Battier and Hinrich and Greg can likely stay on the court for a good 30-35 minutes a game. That leaves Lee playing 16 minutes next to Oden as a PF and only 13 minutes next to Aldridge. That’s only 13 minutes with a weak defensive lineup and probably playing against a second unit no less.
Bynum plays about 30 minutes a game (which Greg could easily match) and Aldridge matches up perfectly against either Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom.
I care more about the starting PG spot than I care about the backup center spot. In a perfect world we could keep Joel, but since this might be the last opportunity to upgrade the roster I fear Pryzbilla might end up being a casualty.
Think of it this way: For roughly 35 minutes a game the Blazers could potentially field the best defensive starting lineup in the NBA.
Hinrich
Roy
Batum/Battier
Aldridge
Oden
For the other 13 minutes a game the Blazers could throw out potentially the best offensive bench in the league. (Bayless, Rudy, Webster, Lee, Aldridge, etc) I don’t see how that’s a problem. I can live with terrible defense for short periods of time so long as the second unit scores in bunches.
Losing Joel is not a problem so long as you have faith in Greg, which I sort of do.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jul 6, 2009 2:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is a heck of a starting five you have listed there....
Hinrich and Battier added to Oden 2.0 is a vast improvement from what we had last year:
Offensively: Hinrich and Battier are pretty easy to plug-in in place of Batum/Blake. Battier is a better offensive rebounder and would likely flourish with more open looks. Hinrich gives us an improved pick and roll and slightly improved penetration. Not a massive upgrade but definitely more veteran savvy. The offensive load is still going to rest heavily on Roy and LMA’s shoulders. Hopefully Hinrich would be a bit better at generating scoring opportunities for Oden off the pick and roll. Lee would be a nice fit with the second unit which I think is going to be more uptempo. He can run the floor and clean the boards and even if his jumper isn’t great, he has good hands (much better than Pryz) and would be a good target for passes off penetration from Bayless.
Defensively: Substantial upgrade on the perimeter. Even if Lee is a step back from Pryz at the 5. He is a vast improvement over Outlaw or Frye at the 4. I would be so happy to no longer watch Trout fail to block out on the offensive boards. Overall, I think even if we were talking about a small step backward on the interior defense without Pryz, I think that is more than outweighed by the substantial improvement on the perimeter.
by upper left corner on Jul 6, 2009 7:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Battier would "flourish" with more open looks???
You mean more open looks than he got while on a team with Yao Ming being double teamed, and a stud like Scola, plus Artest, Brooks and Wafer scoring in bunches?
This is just another example of people thinking everyone else’s players are an upgrade over our guys to an overly unrealistic extent. Battier is a player I like a lot, but there is ZERO chance he gets more open looks with our guys than the guys he was playing with last year. He would be good for us on defense, but not as good as Outlaw or Webster on offense. So basically he would be Batum; a guy we already have for peanuts. Hinrich is the same thing. He’s a little better defender than Blake, and not as good a shooter as Blake, but gets paid twice as much. Wake up people. Let’s not trade our guys for slightly different, but more expensive versions of the same thing. Frankly Martel is our best SF, and he is better than Battier if healthy, because he’s a decent defender, and a much more capable scorer. KP was trying to get a scorer. We already have a lock down defender with Batum, for rookie pay. I like Battier, but this whole trade idea, is basically to create a totally different Blazers for no reason, other than to move stuff around, and use cap space to replace players who are a great value, for more expensive players who do the same thing. Give it up already. Lee is the only addition that makes sense here. I’m not interested in helping the Rockets have a good season by replacing their center with talent from our team. They are in the West, and we may face them in the playoffs again. With a center like Joel, they could put together a team that can do some damage this year. They’ll have Scola, Ariza, Brooks, Wafer, Landry, Lowery, and would only be missing a quality center. Better that they keep Battier, and have a rough year with no true center. At this point holding on to Joel just to keep him from their roster, or Dallas’s would do more for our chances in the West than Battier could possibly add for us. Also why take Chicago’s overpaid back up PG to give them cap room to improve their team? It helps them and does nothing for us, but make a lateral at best move of our PG, who already fits the valuable team chemistry here. I love how everyone thinks this or that role player from another team will become a better player when they hit our team, as if our team’s success had nothing to do with the guys we have, and everyone else is better despite stats that don’t back that up. Our guys are also improving, because they are young, and learning to play together. Unless a true upgrade is available, the cap space is meaningless, and spending it just locks us into lame contracts for several years. Although Turkoglu was not the right move in my opinion, he was a reasonable move, because we don’t have a player who does what he does, he is a proven scorer, and a tough match-up for other teams. None of the other moves other than simply adding Lee with our cap space make sense.
People keep talking about this once in a lifetime opportunity with this cap space, but I don’t see the big opportunity. If the opportunity is Hinrich and Prince, or Battier, I just assume set the cap money on fire, because it’s no opportunity other than to shuffle things around. If that is the big scary championship line up, we are in the same boat as now, which is: will Oden pan out period? So why did we spend that cap and help those other teams again? Just to do it?
by wingzeta on Jul 6, 2009 3:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow
I completely agree with you on nearly every point. Maybe a bit hostile, but right on the nose in my opinion.
by BlazerFanFromDenver on Jul 6, 2009 5:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
wow
i completely disagree with you on nearly every point.
none of our guys are even close to being ready to be compared to an accomplished player like Battier. I am a fan of steve blake but he is an excellent backup, yet a substandard starter. Hinrich is a MUCH better player in nearly every facet. All you really have to do is watch a game to see that, solely relying on stats never adds up
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jul 6, 2009 9:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
gotta agree here
Gasol and Odom are too skilled to be defended by Aldridge and Lee and if Bynum ever puts it together like he did during that winter stretch last year then the L*ker front line will crush teams.
"It’s a good ol’ fashioned Rip City beat down!"
by Magnum on Jul 6, 2009 2:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Aldridge does fine against Gasol.
He’s actually gotten the better of him something like 9 out of the last 10 times. I don’t think Aldridge is the problem although I might be a little worried about Lee.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jul 6, 2009 2:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Its like a longer more detailed version
Of what myself & a few others have been saying for the past few days…. complete with nay saying. Nice work Dave
by DephlatorMouse on Jul 6, 2009 2:03 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
None of
these moves would make the Blazers better than Orlando, LA, SA, Boston or even the Nuggets, on paper at least.
by BBG on Jul 6, 2009 2:10 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Look back at how we played those teams last year...
and look at the upgrades (including defensive impact)
Yes… Portland would be better than most of those teams. Definitely Orlando, San Antonio and Denver… I would have to see how KG is playing to put them above Boston, and we were and would continue to be the greatest matchup nightmare for the Lakers.
Tony Bennett reports that Minnesota and Portland are swapping draft picks -- Roy to Portland, Foye to Minnesota. That's it? That's the trade? None of the ESPN guys seem remotely fazed. I knew Kevin McHale couldn't just pick the best guy in the draft without somehow screwing it up. I would have bet my Ndudi Ebi rookie cards on it.
by Salem Stephen on Jul 6, 2009 2:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
an eight man rotation of
Hinrich
Roy
Battier
Aldridge
Oden
Bayless
Batum
Lee
sounds pretty championshippy to me.
by Millz on Jul 6, 2009 2:22 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
That's good stuff.
http://following-thetrail.blogspot.com
by BigCelPhone on Jul 6, 2009 2:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can't ignore history.
Oden is likely to sit out a lot therefore his replacement is of utmost importance. I don’t see that replacement on your list.
Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave
Also: COMCAST SUCKS!
by TwoDeep on Jul 6, 2009 9:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry
That line up is weaker than our current line up. Here’s why: 1. no depth at center ( we currently have something that can truly make us champions, two quality legit centers, go ahead an foul one of them out, we can take it and still win, Orlando will lose Gortat, but we can keep Pryz), 2. too little scoring from the SF. Currently we have Outlaw and Batum + hopefully Webster. Batum is just like Battier. Great defender, below average scorer. If those two are our SFs, we won’t get enough production from there, and Roy and Lamarcus will be even more overworked. Hinrich doesn’t score any more than Blake, so unless you are living in Fantasy “Hinrich is the white Michael Jordan, championship PG for Portland, who will play much better than he ever has in his career starting next year” Land, like some folks around here, the points have to come from somewhere, because even a solid defensive team can’t keep the Lakers from scoring. The team would be similar to Detroit’s team in the years after they won the championship. Good team, but not enough firepower to get to the finals again. This line-up will not produce the points that our current group does since I don’t see Rudy Outlaw or Webster. Lee is the only offensive addition. Also without Rudy, who spells Roy? Battier? Again where do the points come from? Bayless is the only other PG listed, so I don’t see him playing for Roy much, nor do I think he is good enough to spell Roy for very long.
Championshippy??? No, not as Championshippy as our current roster, which is actually more balanced, and has more firepower and depth, and is a proven 54 game winner despite multiple injuries to key players all year and the youngest playing rotation in the NBA. KP, please don’t listen to these crazy people, they know not what they do, but after the Turkoglu thing, I hope you know what you do.
by wingzeta on Jul 6, 2009 4:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just say no to David Lee
I wouldn’t do Przybilla for Battier straightup and I wouldn’t sweeten the deal with Outlaw. If I were to trade Joel I would want someone that fits the timeline better. He’s just too important to the team right now. I could be more agreeable to trading Joel at the deadline, though, assuming Oden has proven he can handle things on his own.
I wouldn’t mind trading for Hinrich. I don’t buy that the Bulls won’t trade him now. They could use some cap relief, they could use Blake as a reliable back up PG and spot up shooter and if they want Outlaw too, he can back up the 3/4
It won’t be the end of the world if we don’t use this cap space this summer. We’ve still got up to the trade deadline (when many teams are eager to cut their losses) to make a move. And you know what? It wouldn’t be horrible if the cap space went unused. Cramming a square peg into a round hole isn’t the way to a championship. KP didn’t use RLEC at the deadline to get Carter/Jefferson/whoever. I see this off season shaping up to be similar to that.
"It’s a good ol’ fashioned Rip City beat down!"
by Magnum on Jul 6, 2009 2:31 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm with you on this one
I think the trade deadline may be friendly to us with regards to trades – not necessarily in terms of this year’s run, but in terms of finding a guy who fits better long term.
I want outlaw/blake for hinrich. Brandon bass or some sort of backup/veteran banger at the 4. That’s it. Those are my moves for the summer. It gives roster clarity and improves our perimeter defense.
by Montavilla Steve on Jul 6, 2009 8:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yup
if going to trade joel, better be getting back devin harris (ie, not happening)…
by retirecards51 on Jul 6, 2009 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Didn't Joel say something like...
“…it’s always nice to get some extra big bodies around…” or something to that effect? Joel and Greg have both had their injury woes and the employment of both is worth it just for the sake of insurance.
I like Lee. I like Lee a lot. The one thing I think we all despised about Channing’s game was that he never hit the glass for a back-up 4. I was floaty. This Blazers team needs its own Buck Williams. Someone who guts it out, grabs boards and makes sacrifices. I’m not sure David Lee is that guy, but he could be.
Joel represents a large portion of the heart and soul of this basketball team and I’m not convinced Lee’s presence makes Joel expendable. I’d rather overpay a different back-up 4 that meets your criteria in Step 1: Brandon Bass. Bass would be enthralled with an inflated contract and wouldn’t demand as many minutes as Lee. His jumper is equally as suspect as Lee’s but I love the way he furiously attacks the glass. If you’re going to overpay for a RFA, let’s at least make sure that player is hard-working. Brandon Bass is blue-collar all the way.
I propose: overpay for Bass, keep Joel forever and trade for other needs (if we have them) later. At this point, unless you really love L*amar O*em or Ramon Sessions, let’s make it rain for a guy who can come in here, add some meat and hustle, won’t disrupt our chemistry or cause implied forthcoming trades, and whose tenacity will rub off on others.
My mom babysat Paul Allen
by shwa on Jul 6, 2009 2:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Uh, Brandon Bass' mid-range game is his one standout quality. On two-point jumpers last season, ...
Bass shot 45.4%; that, by the way, constituted 57% of his total field-goal attempts. While Bass isn’t quite as skilled as Antonio McDyess in that regard, he performed on par with Darius Songaila and substantially better than, oh, Travis Outlaw—as well as David Lee.
Again, however, I’m lukewarm on Bass due to his plodding defense and mediocre rebounding numbers, while my inclination is Jeff Pendergraph will surprise some of y’all next season with his ability to make an immediate impact.
by AK1984 on Jul 6, 2009 2:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree w/ you on Pendergraph
I see him coming in and playing similar to Udonis Haslem…fair comparison?
by abobo84 on Jul 6, 2009 3:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Udonis Haslem has a better face-up game away from the hoop, while Jeff Pendergraph has ...
a better back-to-the-basket game on offense. Yet, Haslem and Pendergraph are both very similar on defense, as they’re solid man-to-man inside and so-so at weakside help. On offense, though, Pendergraph is like a higher usage Erick Dampier, so maybe Al Horford is a good comparison on that side of the ball. At any rate, I expect that Pendergraph will have an iFG% (i.e., inside field-goal percentage) above 65% as a rookie.
by AK1984 on Jul 6, 2009 3:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No one seems to be mentioning David Lee's most unique ability
which is how good an offensive rebounder he is.
ignacio
by ignacio on Jul 6, 2009 3:05 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Last year David Lee was 67th in offensive rebounding
He grabbed 9.6% of offensive boards. Last year LMA grabbed 9.5%.
by as11osu on Jul 6, 2009 3:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
One more example of the need to weight stats for pace
by ninjasocks on Jul 6, 2009 9:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Those stats ARE weighed for pace
That’s why they’re given as percentages. Lee grabbed 9.6 out of every 100 available offensive rebounds. LMA grabbed 9.5 out of every 100 available offensive rebounds.
by as11osu on Jul 6, 2009 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would sign a player like David Lee to see how he fit
If he doesn’t fit he has value around the league and could be traded.
To get him his minutes I would give him backup PF and have him at SF, but I would be keep Prizz, for the heart and soul.
I would pull the Hinrich deal for Blake and Outlaw
Batum, Rudy, Webster, Roy and Lee could all split SF
Hinrich 35 Bayless 13
Roy 38 Rudy 10
Lee 18 Batum 15 Webster 15
Aldridge 38 Lee 10
Oden 28 Prizz 20
Rookies fill in the injury time.
"Knowledge will get you from A to B. Creativity will get you anywhere." Einstein
by Garden of ODEN on Jul 6, 2009 3:10 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
For a full quarter and a half David Lee is playing SF?
I smell trouble. Rudy at 10 minutes? Wow…
by as11osu on Jul 6, 2009 3:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah I just threw it together
"Knowledge will get you from A to B. Creativity will get you anywhere." Einstein
by Garden of ODEN on Jul 6, 2009 3:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Injuries resolve playing time issues. Don't try to micromanage the unpredictable future.
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 9:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe less time for hinrich
"Knowledge will get you from A to B. Creativity will get you anywhere." Einstein
by Garden of ODEN on Jul 6, 2009 3:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or less time for Webster if he comes back weak
"Knowledge will get you from A to B. Creativity will get you anywhere." Einstein
by Garden of ODEN on Jul 6, 2009 3:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or this doesn't work in the first place
"Knowledge will get you from A to B. Creativity will get you anywhere." Einstein
by Garden of ODEN on Jul 6, 2009 3:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lee at SF is ugly
Lee starting ahead of Batum at SF is borderline criminal.
by ninjasocks on Jul 6, 2009 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Evidently Lee really would like to start
"Knowledge will get you from A to B. Creativity will get you anywhere." Einstein
by Garden of ODEN on Jul 6, 2009 3:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was just going to comment that
I don’t think Lee would sign a contract unless he had a good chance to start. I don’t think Portland could throw enough money at him to entice him to play backup PF/C.
by torsoheap on Jul 6, 2009 3:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rudy gets 10 minutes a game??
this idea is terrible
by Docproc on Jul 6, 2009 8:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am warming to Lamar Odom more and more.
But how will people get over Odom/Oden-TOO CONFUSING!!!1111
B.S. Liberal Studies OSU '06
Trade for Gerald Wallace!!
by TyboOSU on Jul 6, 2009 3:59 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Playoffs 2007
I had a hard time distinguishing Biedrins and Pietrus.
by ninjasocks on Jul 6, 2009 9:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Think about this
I would try to get Tyson Chandler for Martell and the exemption.
Hinrich and Tyrus Thomas for Joel, Outlaw and Blake.
Hinrich/Bayless
Roy/Fernandez
Batum/Ty. Thomas
LMA/Chandler/ Ty. Thomas
Oden/Chandler
Hinrich – starts… Duh.
Thomas – is could be released at the end of the year if he doesn’t behave but brings in Gerald Wallace quality scoring, defense and rebounding. Plus versatility being a perimeter and inside Defender.
Chandler – would bring in the inside presence and versatility at Center and PF.
We are talking about having the best Defensive team in the league perimeter and interior. Offensively this team is just as good if not better than last year.
by jnb58 on Jul 6, 2009 4:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Minutes breakdown
Hinrich 30 -Bayless 10 -Roy 8
Roy 28 -Fernandez 20
Batum 24 -Thomas 24
LMA 34 -Chandler 10 -Thomas 4
Oden 24 -Chandler 24
by jnb58 on Jul 6, 2009 4:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
it might be better if
Hinrich and Tyrus to the Bulls for Martell, Outlaw and Blake
Webster might be the SG the bulls need to fill in for Gordon
Outlaw would add the scoring off the bench for the Bulls at SF and PF.
Chandler for Joel.
Joel is less money, less injury prone at the Position the Hornets would need to fill.
by jnb58 on Jul 6, 2009 4:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
so why trade joel
for a guy who is more injury prone and costs more??
by retirecards51 on Jul 6, 2009 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Chandler can...
play both PF/Center AND can be afforded more minutes to stay happy. He covers more needs than Joel does.
He would give the roster a vast amount of flexability. He is a better player than Joel and would produce more as a backup at 30 minutes at 2 positions.
by jnb58 on Jul 7, 2009 2:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd try for the following...
- Webster, Outlaw, Blake = Hinrich and Tyus Thomas = Solves Chicago’s SG problem, gives them a servicable PG as a Rose Backup, and a nice combo forward coming off the bench.
- Use Cap Space for Lee
Hinrich / Bayless / Mills
Roy / Fernandez
Batum / Thomas / Fernandez / Aldridge or Lee
Aldridge / Lee / Thomas / Pendergraph / Cunningham
Oden / Prizbilla / Lee / Pendergraph / Cunningham
If looking for Perimeter Defense – Having Hinrich and Batum on the floor with Roy and Aldridge would be a boost.
If looking for an Inside Bang Around lineup – Having Roy and Rudy on the perimeter with Thomas Lee and Oden on the inside would be a boost.
by Jimbob91577 on Jul 6, 2009 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like it.
I like LMA at SF more than Lee. The thing is that I think Chandler is easier to get than Lee and would produce more as a player and costs the same. The Blazers need a defensive boost. Hinrich, Thomas and Chandler would easily do that without giving up any offense.
Hinrich
Roy
LMA
Chandler
Oden
No team could get a shot off.
by jnb58 on Jul 7, 2009 2:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, I think it is probably time
Time for Greg to sink or swim.
Joel is a huge luxury. One of the top rebounders in the league, and one of the best defensive centers, as a backup that is only going to get 12 mpg when Greg becomes GREG ODEN.
If we can leverage Joel into a very high quality SF, it probably makes sense. Otherwise, you have a 30 mpg asset that more than half of the league covets riding pine for 15-18 of those mpg.
We have the same problem at SG — are we wasting Rudy by not finding enough minutes for him? If we upgrade at SF, we will be. So maybe we need to use him to really, really upgrade and get Prince.
Quantity for quality is always expensive, sometimes painfully so.
Not entirely sold on Lee, though. But put Prince in our starting lineup, and with Greg’s further development I like our chances against anyone in the playoffs, even if we lose Joel, Travis, and Rudy.
Trading away a lot of our depth might cost us some regular season wins. But it might also further the development of Jerryd, Nic, and Martell. And very high quality starters are more valuable in the playoffs than being 2-3 deep at every position.
There are no back to back games in the playoffs.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 6, 2009 4:24 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
Now I don't feel crazy.
Thank you. My thoughts exactly.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jul 6, 2009 5:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If your thoughts mirror mine
then you ARE crazy.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 6, 2009 9:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
you’re right about value for players: an asset unusable is not much of an asset.
I'm going to come up with the best line here ever, something really clever.
by musicdaniel on Jul 6, 2009 8:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Joel will be a huge luxury
but I think he needs to stick around to teach Oden to play defense. Oden’s not ready to learn on his own.
by PoliSam on Jul 6, 2009 8:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
As much as I love him...
Greg has shown very little signs yet of becoming GREG ODEN. It would be nice, at this point, if Greg would become Joel Przybilla. Which is why trading away Przy would cost this team more than a few regular season wins.
Greg needs to show that he can stay on the court consistently, at least, before the Blazers should even begin to consider trading away Przy. LMA is not a good rebounder at the four, and he never will be. I am not even remotely confident that somebody like David Lee can compensate for LMA’s inadequacy on the boards, and Lee would only compound the defensive problems.
You want to see an average defensive team fall back to being bottom tier again in defensive efficiency? Trading Joel is the easiest way to make that happen.
And, notwithstanding his rep, Tayshaun would not help the D nearly enough to compensate for losing Joel. He didn’t help the Pistons D at all last year, and the evidence that he remains an elite defender at the three is somewhere between suspect and non-existent.
Q: Is Greg favoring his knee?
Frye: He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors.
by KP Corleone on Jul 6, 2009 9:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
By mid-season
one of us will probably look dumb. Either Greg will be dominating for 35 minutes, and you will be saying, “I should have listened to that guy in Scotland,” or he’ll be averaging 20 minutes and 4.8 fouls per game, and I’ll be saying, “That guy in Ohio was right after all.”
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 6, 2009 9:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hope it's me
Would (of course) love to see Greg drop 15 pounds, improve his conditioning, gain some confidence, and commence domination.
I think some of that will definitely happen. He’ll lose some weight. He’ll regain some exposiveness. No question.
But…
Many of Greg’s problems may be partially due to the microfracture and too much weight (muscle, but still) gain – but unfortunately, based on his freshman year at OSU, I would say foul trouble isn’t one of them.
His foul rate last season stayed remarkably consistent through the end of the season, and never even marginally improved. I think he has to show us some sign that he “gets it” before shipping Joel.
Q: Is Greg favoring his knee?
Frye: He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors.
by KP Corleone on Jul 6, 2009 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's my big hope
He’s working with Bayno this summer. Bayno turned Zach into an offensive machine in the low post. If Greg, with his size, becomes the low post threat that Zach was, he’ll foul out the other team’s starting and backup centers in 20 minutes. If he then fouls out as well, we’re still in good shape.
His fouls are going to go down over time, and if he’s in an offensive rhythm, they will go down more quickly, especially because an opposing center in foul trouble will often get tentative on offense as well.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 6, 2009 9:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
the problem is that Prince really declined on the defensive side of the ball last year. I’d much rather leverage Przybilla into Gerald Wallace.
by Cablinasian on Jul 6, 2009 9:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
can wallace shoot?
i don’t know too much about his game, but i picture him as seriously lacking any offensive ability, especially skills (passing, handles, and shooting).
by retirecards51 on Jul 6, 2009 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
he’s mainly a penetrator, but he does shoot 32% from three. I think it’s easy to see him shooting Batum-esque 36-37% on Portland’s corner threes.
by Cablinasian on Jul 6, 2009 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
plus he's very good at penetrating and getting to the foul line
not to mention a very effective defender of both 3s and 4s.
by jksnake99 on Jul 6, 2009 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He turns the ball over a bit more than e.g. Travis because he penetrates more in traffic, but is a far better rebounder and has twice the assist percentage. Also draws twice as many fouls and converts the FTs at a higher rate.
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 6, 2009 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
can he dribble? I mean I don’t ever remember it being bad like Trav, but I don’t recall him having moves either..
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jul 6, 2009 1:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He sometimes takes his head down and dribbles into traffic then turning it over. He is no Roy, but he is very good beating his man to the basket and/or elevating over defenders, and creating shots for himself. And most importantly for us he plays active and good defense.
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 6, 2009 1:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
so he has a little clyde in him huh, thats ok. As long as he doesnt turn it over at will.
Crash is my #1 choice at SF if we can get him.
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jul 6, 2009 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're ignoring Oden's history,
i.e., his inability to stay on the floor due to injuries, foul problems and poor conditioning. It would be foolhardy at this point to ship out Joel. Fortunately, I think there is little chance we’ll see that happen this year.
Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave
Also: COMCAST SUCKS!
by TwoDeep on Jul 6, 2009 9:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not ignoring it at all
The conditioning problem was due to injuries, and he’s recovered and working hard.
If he has to stay on the court or we get clobbered, he’s going to have that extra motivation to learn to keep the fouls under control. In the meantime, we would win enough games to stay in the hunt with LMA sliding over to center and Lee (or Millsap) coming in at PF.
Trading Joel would cost us some regular season wins, but could hasten Greg’s development, and if it greatly strengthened us at other positions, could well be worth it.
A starting lineup with Roy, Prince, Aldridge, and Oden would be devastating, no matter who is at PG.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 6, 2009 11:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ahhh, lett's wait till Greg Oden becimes "GREG OEDN"
(as in GOD ODEN !! ) ok??? Till then, we are well advised to keep our proven homeboy Joel till there is not doubt about him needing to move on. Not there yet. (not even close) .. Joel is a “luxury” we have plenty of use for till proven otherwise.
by Berkeley on Jul 6, 2009 7:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Joel is only proposed if it opens the door for a massive upgrade somewhere
Although I proposed the Prz/Lee tradeoff in order to get a vet like Battier into the lineup, everything comes with risk. I can tell you that if you hedge every bet, you are unlikely to score big. The Blazer’s need to go for it, right now. This is the off season that the Blazers can alter the roster to facilitate a change in style. I think this team is built for a fast pace, but youth has slowed progress toward that end.
From a style perspective, unleashing Rudy and Bayless and a guy like Turkoglu in the transition game would have had major impacts on pace. Roy, LMA, Batum and Oden would be the primary beneficiaries of such an increase in pace. I think Hinrich would lead to an increase in pace as well, so would Sessions. Grant Hill, as a poor man’s (wise man’s) Turkoglu, could do the same thing. Once the Blazers learn to play at a fast pace, they all the sudden create massive matchup problems against any team.
Can you imagine Gasol having to sprint for 48 minutes trying to keep up with LMA? How about forcing Kobe to play both defense and offense for 7 games against a younger, fresher tandem in Rudy and Roy? What about Bayless and Hinrich or Sessions harassing Fisher for that same 7 game series? Then think about Artest, and how his efficiency drops with increase in pace, and salivate over an improved Oden dominating Bynum….
It doesn’t take a lot to see how this Blazer team can develop into a thing of beauty.
by blacknoiseNW on Jul 6, 2009 8:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
get hinrich
poo on everything else. David Lee what? Toronto can overpay for him too…If your trying for a small forward or big point guard hurray, else no, give pendergraph minutes and your done.
I have my P.h.D in unreliable hyperbole.
by Eat Politicians on Jul 6, 2009 4:46 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't like it
I thought I’d be on board for big changes this summer but the more I think about it the less I want to give up. Adding another scorer would be great and I’m fine moving Outlaw and even upgrading the point, but I don’t like gutting the team to add a flashy name.
I don’t think we win 54 games without Joel, period. If you move him you take away the heart of our toughness and put the weight of the world on Oden, who doesn’t look ready for it. Even if he fouls half as much this year we still need Joel to take pressure off him. Sure there are guys that look better on paper but I don’t think I’d take the risk, not just for the sake of having two centers but for having the option to let Oden develop at his own pace. And there’s no way I want to see LA at center when Greg picks up his third foul!
The team isn’t perfect but there’s a lot left to discover as well. Who’s to say Batum won’t grow into our next scorer when he isn’t getting pulled for Outlaw after the first quarter? If Bayless is given as much time as Sergio maybe he will develop into a quality starter. Rudy’s only been in the NBA for ONE season; have we seen all he has to offer or is he going to grow like the other young players on our roster?
I want to see this team improve and win more games as much as anybody but in my opinion there is too much untapped potential and too much room to grow. You want a tough experienced player to show bring in some grit, then why talk about moving Przybilla? Outlaw can go and I’m not sold on Blake 100% either but when it comes to the rest I’d rather hold onto someone for too long than trade a future star too early.
by JonathanPDX on Jul 6, 2009 5:11 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I'm pretty much with you
The fact is, all these teams making moves right now are to become better right now. I know a lot of people want our window to open next season, but we’re one of the few teams with the luxury of being able to wait another season or two and let our youngsters develop. I understand that we have a unique opportunity with our cap space right now, but I say we keep it til the trade deadline if need be (obviously, if something comes our way, we take it). In the mean time, we can trade Blake+ Outlaw (that hurts me to say) for Hinrich if that makes you guys happy. Hopefully Hinrich’s defense will help Oden stay in the game an extra 10 minutes or so, which will then help towards his development. We can also see how Pendergraph does too. Also, Pryz is simply FAR too valuable to trade right now (maybe consider him at the trade deadline once we’ve seen what Oden and Pendergraph are bringing). Therefore, our line-up would like something like this:
Hinrich/ Bayless/ (Roy)
Roy/ Fernandez
Webster/ Batum/ (Fernandez)
LMA/ Pendergraph
Oden/ Pryz
That’s my word. I’m out
by SugarMoses on Jul 6, 2009 5:42 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
That's my favorite line-up!
I could maybe be talked into Brandon Bass, but that’s it. love that line-up!
by Montavilla Steve on Jul 6, 2009 8:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
One problem
Contrary to popular myth around here, Hinrich’s defense won’t keep Oden in the game any longer, because Oden fouls when players drive at him. Hinrich is good at denying the pass, or keeping a hand in the face of shooters, but he can’t stop a quick guard from driving anymore than Blake or anyone can. A drive is a drive, if it comes off a pick, there isn’t a defender in the NBA who can stop it. You might bother the drive, strip the ball, or block the shot, but only team defense thwarts drives. That doesn’t mean the drive will score, but the drive will be made, and can draw a foul against a bad defender like Oden, who doesn’t get set. Hinrich won’t change the Oden situation one bit, only Oden can do that. Leave Kirk in Chi-town, where he can fill his proper role as a back-up role player, while they are stuck over-paying for him, keeping them from making moves to become a better team. That way we can sweep them again like we did this year. That’s right, the Bulls with Hinrich, Rose, and Gordon lost every game to the Blazers this year, with Blake at the point. In fact the last time the Blazers played Chicago Rose at PG had 13pts 10assists, Hinrich who played 20mins had 4pts 3assists, Blake had 16pts, 10 assists. Now you know Hinrich was guarding Blake for part of that time, and Steve out did the #1 draft pick, and Hinrich both. I know it’s just one game, like in the final four when Blake dropped 11 assists on Hinrich’s Jayhawks to Kirk’s 5 and Kirk fouled out, to send Kansas home, while Blake’s team went on to win a NCAA championship. Blake is the better PG, but he had to wait to get a starting role for a few years, while Kirk went to a lottery team and got to ply his trade from day one in the NBA. When Blake has run a team, that team has always gotten better and started winning, case in point the Blazers. He hasn’t had as much time to build his NBA rep as Hinrich, but he is every bit as good if not better, and we have him for half the price.
by wingzeta on Jul 6, 2009 4:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I AGREE
definitely not ready to gut the team to add a guy or 2. My thoughts exactly about Joel. Sure, Greg is working his tail off this summer but who knows if it will turn into what we expect from him right away…we’ll just have to play out the rest of the summer and see what happens.
"be where you are when you're there"
by BLAZER_FAN_199 on Jul 6, 2009 6:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If David Lee is a restricted free agent, how can we possibly blow all our cap space on him?
I’m assuming the Gilbert Arenas provision applies to him as well. He may want 10 million a year, but New York is the only team that will give it to him. Otherwise he’s stuck at the average salary for the first year, with an 8% raise the second. Sure Portland can backload the contract somewhat, but by the time it kicks in, it’ll be 2011 when the Knicks have already spent their cap space. And the Knicks have never been afraid to go well into the luxury tax to pay the players they want to play.
I suppose it could be done as a sign and trade, but New York doesn’t have any incentive to do that unless we give them some of our young, cheap talent. If they want David Lee off the books, they just let him walk. Trading him for our cap space doesn’t do anything for them.
If we acquire David Lee, that means that we’ll still have 3-4 million in Cap Space to use in lop-sided trades. That may help those other trades that Dave mentioned work a little better, or we could use it somewhere else.
μὴ φοβοῦ, μόνον πίστευε.
by T Darkstar on Jul 6, 2009 5:45 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
No Gilbert Arenas provision, Lee was a first round pick but at #30 so very low rookie scale so far
That’s why he now wants to get paid.
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 6, 2009 7:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really?
Wow. Any idea how that happened?
μὴ φοβοῦ, μόνον πίστευε.
by T Darkstar on Jul 6, 2009 8:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
6'9" PF/C hustle player with no shot and a mediocre rebound rate?
Then maybe he gets PT and inflated stats playing under D’antoni?
by ninjasocks on Jul 6, 2009 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I meant how he has no Arenas provision.
:p
μὴ φοβοῦ, μόνον πίστευε.
by T Darkstar on Jul 6, 2009 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Arenas provision doesn't apply to restricted free agents whose teams have Bird ...
rights on them. Ramon Sessions, on the other hand, is a restricted free-agent with whom his team has only Early Bird rights on him; thus, the Arenas provision would apply in that case. With that noted, though, I don’t want to target either David Lee or Sessions, but that’s just me.
by AK1984 on Jul 6, 2009 4:01 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Thank you.
Good information to know.
μὴ φοβοῦ, μόνον πίστευε.
by T Darkstar on Jul 6, 2009 8:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
in the 2009 draft he would have gone #12
right before a crappier version of David Lee, tyler benchwarmer hansbrough
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jul 6, 2009 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow...
Probably the most desperate, short-sighted moves I have ever seen thrown around here on BlazersEdge. I normally have respect for what you write Dave, but this seems to be do something for the sake of doing something.
by misterblack on Jul 6, 2009 6:22 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It's actually more of a long-sited move.
Joel is getting older and he’s been injury prone his entire career with the notable exception of last year. He’s missed about 4 of every 10 games with an injury. There is no way they resign Joel two years from now. He’ll be 32 and still able to command a decent salary. The Blazers can’t pay a 16 minute a game backup that kind of money.
00-01: 33 games played
01-02: 71
02-03: 32
03-04: 5
04-05: 76
05-06: 56
06-07: 43
07-08: 77 (would have missed the postseason with a broken hand)
08-09: 82
My thinking is…. you pretty much lose Joel in two season, either to contract demands or health problems. At that time the Blazers are going to be seriously contending for a title and that could throw a wrentch in the whole thing. Seems like a better idea to trade Joel while his value is high for someone who will be around for the next 5+ years rather than two. Seems like a smart, long term move.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jul 6, 2009 8:10 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
someone that sees the obvious
if portland does sign lee it isnt to put them over the top next season. it is because he fits portlands window and if next season joel has a season anything like this season he may even not pick up his player option and get a big offer in the big summer of 2010. there are going to be a lot of teams with money going after a few guys, and most of them are going to get nothing. lee would be a great 3rd big man, has he eever demanded that he starts? or is that just speculation? i think lee and freeland after joel leaves would give portland a very good set of bigs. at the very least lee doesnt fit, and there is a lot of teams that want him so you can trade him for something else.
fire nate before its too late
by pipgras on Jul 6, 2009 9:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
a big offer?
Joel had a great year (although I think he’s considered so underrated here that he gets overrated), but how much could Joel realistically be looking at? When Chandler signed his big contract, he was like 22 and still had tons of upside, which the Hornets were paying for. A 32 year old Joel doesn’t have the same chance to improve, and even then, a healthy Chandler has much better hands on offense than Joel
The only guy who has as little offensive game as Joel that got a huge deal is Ben Wallace, and he was a perennial all-defense first teamer and DPOY candidate. Joel just isn’t on that level of game changer, especially not at age 32. I just don’t see a scenario where he gets more than like a 3 year, $24 million deal, which would be a raise, but fairly modest, and not exactly a “huge” offer.
by Royster on Jul 6, 2009 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
where do you work?
i think 24 for 3 is huge for a guy that would be a back up center for portland. i personally think 3 million for 3 years of work is huge, but all i know is the army and they pay in sand bags and push ups. but i cant see portland matching anything over the mle for joel in 2 years. you make my point for me, he is good and a fan favorite, but not someone you would want to give a raise when portland is at/reaching there window
fire nate before its too late
by pipgras on Jul 6, 2009 10:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What does what we make have any bearing
on what NBA players consider “huge”? A minimum NBA salary would be huge to me, but if Joel were to sign a deal for $800k, I wouldn’t call it a big deal. Conventonal wisdom around here is that Joel is underpaid. The deal I suggested would barely be a raise for him, so I don’t see how that would be considered “huge”. Not sure what’s wrong with that logic. If that represents a “huge” offer, a fair one is what, a massive pay cut after the two best years of his career?
by Royster on Jul 6, 2009 10:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not convinced.
The flip side of that coin is this: Is Oden able to stay healthy and out of foul trouble? How many times this year did Joel have to come in and play starter’s minutes because Greg doesn’t know how to block shots yet? Can David Lee be a reliable shot-blocker like Joel is? Can Lee fit into Nate’s half-court slowdown offense like Joel does?
The answers to these questions lead me to say David Lee cannot be half the reliable backup that Joel is for this team and system.
by misterblack on Jul 6, 2009 9:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
im against getting rid of joel
but i see lee as a player for the future. with 2 seasons playing with less minutes, or maybe not if oden doesnt become ODEN. maybe you didnt read everything, but i dont really see a reason why lee would have to fit into nates offense when i want nate gone once his contract is gone. kp may have been a horrible coach (just going by record) but he is building this team and doing an amazing job. if he thinks lee will help im sure lee will help. just like people in the past where high on morrison, kp knew what he was doing and most of us didnt. im not really sure about blair yet (i seen him as a 2nd round pick at best, 2009’s version of joey dorsey) but most of you where head over heels for his game and wanted him in portland and im sure you will once again see that we are fools and kp gets paid to make the decisions he does for a reaason. if kp is interested in lee i am interested in lee
fire nate before its too late
by pipgras on Jul 6, 2009 10:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We are playing a dangerous game
One thing we need to keep in mind is that the more moves we make the more dangerous it is to our team/chemistry and morale. I think we have two holes to fill. One at SF and one at PG. And to be honest, neither are glaring issues. Just holding us back from being real contenders for a title.
Turk turning us down has now put us in a difficult position (you can equally blame his wife and Marion for turning down a 4 year deal). Instead of having two moves to make (Turk plus trade Outlaw/Blake for a PG upgrade) we now have three.
KP is now looking to take the best player available….again. That is David Lee. But given he is restricted this is another hornet’s nest. On top of that, you are now looking at needing to make another move. Everyone is throwing out Joel (I assume Joel for a SF). I think he has done a great job for us and is not easily replaced. Its risky to give him up until you know if Oden is going to be the real deal. But on top of that, we are running the risk of potentially having to give up another asset we don’t want to give up (like Rudy) to have that “perfect” roster coming into next season.
I think KP is trying to do two things right now. Make us better at SF/PG and increase the number of assets we have before we go over the cap. After Dec. 15th, Lee is now a player you could try and put together with someone else for a trade.
Bottomline, I think we are in a tough position after getting dumped by Turk. But we need to be careful to look to make changes just for change sake. Apart from Outlaw, Webster, Blake, Pryz (assuming we get another alternative) and maybe Bayless…I am going to be pretty disappointed if anyone goes.
by oregontrail on Jul 6, 2009 6:31 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I'd like to see
an attempt to get Gerald Wallace and Kirk Hinrich.
Wallace brings a strong inside/penetration game with decent defense. We already know what Cap’n has to offer. I think these two would complement our existing roster very well.
by Arby on Jul 6, 2009 7:34 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Brian Cardinal
This whole free agent frenzy makes me think about the Grizzlies signing Brian Cardinal. The owner kept pushing Jerry West to use the cap money and sign a free agent. He constantly pointed out that other teams were signing free agents and the Grizzlies were sitting on their hands. Jerry West obliged. He signed Brian Cardinal to a horrible contract and went back to the owner and said I got you a ____ free agent. Just because the Blazers have the money doesn’t mean they have to spend it or make trades. If a deal makes sense from a basketball standpoint, then do it. But don’t do it just because you have money in your pocket. If we end up getting nothing, I’m ok with that.
by Turnout on Jul 6, 2009 7:36 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
cap space
I’m apprehensive that we will do deals that are simply motivated by a desire to use the cap space, but that leave the team no better than it was before.
Cap space is a tremendous resource, but only if you use it in a way that gives you a better team.
But if the Blazers do make what appears to me an idiotic move of acquiring David Lee, then absolutely we need to trade one of our big guys, so Joel would have to be traded.
However, I have a better approach: Chill out, cut down on the caffeine, and don’t go around doing deals like a chicken with its heat cut off.
by lsjogren on Jul 6, 2009 7:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Odom
Why don’t we offer Lamar Odom the same money that we were going to give Turkeyglu and see what happens? If nothing else it would force LA to go over the luxury tax threshold. Make ’em sweat & whine!
by Original Blazer Fan on Jul 6, 2009 7:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
agreed
Lamar Odom is the best talent on the FA market and would be a good fit. Its highly unlikely the Blazers could get him to LA, but its worth a try.
by jksnake99 on Jul 6, 2009 9:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Much better use of the FA dollars, and week of opportunity cost, than Lee
Unlike Lee, Odom is actually worth that much money.
I’d have to think KP is looking into it. Probably would be tough to get Odom to sign the deal. He’s made it painfully (for his wallet) obvious he wants to stay in LA.
Q: Is Greg favoring his knee?
Frye: He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors.
by KP Corleone on Jul 6, 2009 9:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see Odom turning down 5/50
The Lakers are only going to give him a year or two. Unless he thinks he can cash in next year, we’d probably be the highest bidder. Its just a question of whether he’d want to leave LA and a championship team.
by ninjasocks on Jul 6, 2009 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pryz
Another thing.
The blazers played like human vegetables in the playoffs EXCEPT FOR:
Roy
Aldridge
Pryzbilla
Defense, rebounds, ability to handle the playoffs. These are at the heart of what the Blazers need to upgrade to get to the next level.
by lsjogren on Jul 6, 2009 7:45 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I love the Pryz and hope we don't trade him, but.....
Yao killed him in the 1st half of that 1st game, went 8/8 or 9/9 which lead to a 62-44 1st half lead for the Rockets. Our front line got out rebounded by a large margin in the 1st and 3rd games as well. He also had a big turnover late in game 4, where he threw the ball out of bounds after a rebound.
by RABID_RABBIT on Jul 6, 2009 8:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That was based more on McMillan's decision
to not front him, but play him straight up. We fronted Yao the rest of the series and contained him (relatively speaking). If you do iso plays with just about any center in the league without fronting Yao, you’re going to get burned more often than not.
by Arby on Jul 6, 2009 8:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cap Space
Why can’t teams under the salary cap use their hard won trade exceptions or MLE’s? It seems unfair that teams that are prudent with their money are barred from using them. Anyone?
by Original Blazer Fan on Jul 6, 2009 7:45 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Oh dear God no
I know we aren’t seriously considering Joel Przybilla. He was our second most valuable player last year behind Roy. Greg Oden is nowhere near a proven commodity, and Joel is a quality center anywhere else and he is willing to play backup.
The good news is I’m 90% certain Joel doesn’t leave for anything less than an All-Star. There is nobody in this free agent market that, if it were possible, I would trade Joel for. And I certainly don’t want to trade him for Shane Battier, as much as I like Battier.
We simply
can’t
trade
Joel!
by GMan83201 on Jul 6, 2009 7:51 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Nate a factor
All of these scenarios sound good on paper but they will ultimately have to run in to Nate’s concept of basketball.
Nate’s past as a very good defensive player and long career in the NBA has instilled in him a certain view of a team player. That’s why rookies in general don’t get playing time. One has to wonder why Batum got the start over Outlaw. A personality thing between Nate and Outlaw? Why not start Rudy first then substitute Batum? This mystifyied me all last season. To me Nate has some quirks which govern his coaching decisions. He’s done well but I’m still not sold on Nate as a team builder, he’s always seemed to me to be a coach that could take a very experience team deep in the playoffs.
It seems to me KP et al are trying to get basketball talent that will both contribute to the team, retain some trade value, and appeal to Nate. I think Hinrich would appeal to Nate. But who else?
Who would fit this criteria?
by 7677maniac on Jul 6, 2009 7:53 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
or...
maybe kp is looking for 2010-2011 when nate will no longer have a contract witht the ptb.
fire nate before its too late
by pipgras on Jul 6, 2009 9:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
ahh
I hadn’t thought about that. Maybe Nate’s being assessed this year.
by 7677maniac on Jul 6, 2009 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Battier fits
exactly into what Nate wants. Great defense and then stand around in the corner on offense and hit the open 3.
Kirk fits exactly skills-wise, but rumor is he’s kind of a knucklehead at times in the community, so that might be too big a flag to ignore.
by TheThinWhiteDuke on Jul 6, 2009 1:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, you sold me.
I was following along and somewhat agreeing with each step as I was reading them. But it wasn’t until this part that you sold me:
“Lee, Battier, and Hinrich for a total cost of Przybilla, Outlaw, and Blake”
I could live with that. We’d get a lot of experience without giving up the youth or core of the team.
by Ryan_PDX on Jul 6, 2009 7:55 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Slight problem with this paragraph: Lee's agent said precisely that was the reason the Blazers didn't make an offer
“But Dave,” comes your wailing cry, “part of the reason people are not clamoring after Lee is that the Knicks, by rights, could make a competing team wait on their answer until well after the free agent market has been sucked dry! What will happen to us if they do that and then end up matching the offer? Woe is us then, Dave! Woe is us!” OK, calm down Boo Boo. We didn’t suddenly get dumber than the average bear here. The a priori assumption to that argument is that there are other free agents Portland wants besides (or after) Lee. I’m willing to say right now that I can’t think of any. If the Knicks work us over, so be it. Then we move into Step 2 of the plan with a bunch of cap space to facilitate trades, which is (as we said) where the real traction is anyway. And we have all summer to make trades. They’re far less time-critical than free-agent signings. David Lee isn’t our only target here. He’s just one that we can’t get any other way besides using this cap space to make an offer. So his offer comes first.
In order to not have the cap space tied up for a week, and not be able to make trades or free agent acquisitions.
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 6, 2009 7:56 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
it's the risk of waiting on Lee that is the problem
If Lee turns the Blazers down, then what?
by PoliSam on Jul 6, 2009 8:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trade.
Lots of time to trade, and everybody else is over the cap and thus has their hands tied.
Blazers can milk a star or two from a poor team by taking salary (which is how the Lakers got Pau Gasol).
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 9:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's why KP doesn't want to block all his cap for a week now
In case Hinrich, Sessions, Bass, etc. do become available for relatively cheap (Bass reported fro $5 million per year).
Realistically a title in 2010 is not possible if we have to go through all these teams that improved now even if we add a decent vet or another promising younger. But that’s hard to admit, and unfortunately the Blazers were trimmed to have cap space in 2009 and not later.
Maybe a team combusts before the deadline and puts a star on the market, but banking on that is hard. Until then, I hope the Blazers develop the young players and KP doesn’t do something stupid like throwing all cap space away on a player like Deng.
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 6, 2009 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's fine if the second best option (after Lee) is a lopsided trade.
if not—if for example, they think it’s best to pick up a guy like Brandon Bass, then it’s risky.
by PoliSam on Jul 6, 2009 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Grizz got Wallace’d on that deal, I don’t know if they have anyone I would be interested in for our team. I am not a huge Conley fan, but we could maybe get him for some expirings.
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jul 6, 2009 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are enough moves involved in this idea
and so much reliance on other teams agreeing to different deals that its hard to get behind the whole thing. The Knicks could match. The Bulls may not want to trade Hinrich. Who knows what it would take to get Prince or Battier. It just seems like fantasy to me.
If we are in the land of fantasy, I’d take Odom, Hirnich, and Pryzbilla over Lee, Prince, and Hinrich.
by PoliSam on Jul 6, 2009 7:57 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Hinrich is younger and arguably on Battier’s level. Odom is simply better than David Lee. Przybilla had the best defensive on/off mark in the league.
That is a beautiful fantasy.
by Cablinasian on Jul 6, 2009 9:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Odom and Hinrich would be tremendous
And your point underscores Przy’s value … when defense is your biggest weakness, can you really trade your best defensive player?
Q: Is Greg favoring his knee?
Frye: He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors.
by KP Corleone on Jul 6, 2009 9:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
exactly. We need to be adding perimeter defense to go with our interior defense…Make the minor move for Hinrich and the team is already far better. Get Odom as a 3/4 for 30 minutes a game and that’s a scary nine-man rotation.
Sadly, Odom won’t leave LA.
by Cablinasian on Jul 6, 2009 9:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bingo
If we are in the land of fantasy, I’d take Odom, Hirnich, and Pryzbilla over Lee, Prince, and Hinrich.
and I HATE Lamar Odom. But I hate the idea of Lee playing center for a significant amount of time even worse. What if Greg got injured? It is simply too soon to rely on Greg as our only true center…
The Bedger formally known as ????????
by Rudiculous on Jul 6, 2009 11:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I say
lets go after Jonathan Bender…he’s got to have some gas left in the tank, right?
by abobo84 on Jul 6, 2009 8:00 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Spurs already had that idea last year. There is no gas left. But they bring Haislip back who became a good player in Europe (albeit a poor rebounder)
Buford might have taught KP everything KP knows, but not everything he knows.
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 6, 2009 8:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
desperate dude in the bar...
Fact is we won 54 with the same team, tied for 2nd in the West. I know we want to mitigate the risk of Greg Oden’s development, but all in all he will upgrade his game. I know we got bounced in the 1st round of the Playoffs, but we should be better with improved games from LMA and GO. Why go into desperation mode, and give up our rock, to pick up on a non scoring threat in Battier. I love battier, be we should have that in two years with Batum. The reason we loved Hedo, is because how offensively dynamic that winning unit would’ve have been. Roy/Rudy/Hedo/LMA/Oden. I don’t think subbing Battier, would do much justice. I don’t mean to be critical, but search for a more dynamic 3 and it would make sense to give up Joel.
by JimmieG on Jul 6, 2009 8:15 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
We must we must we must
do something. Do anything. Right now. When I read post like this I imagine a future where the NBA season will consist of five games and 350 days a years of blogging and worrying about said games.
Trade Przybilla? Let’s see he was the foundation of the only good defensive aspects (save Batum’s contributions) of this team, he provides veteran calm and grit. The fans and his teammates love him. But let’s go ahead and move him in hopes that in doing so we can get back exactly what we trade away. Because, you know, we must do something.
by Leseid on Jul 6, 2009 8:16 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Agree
I agree with your sentiment, however, the Blazers’ brass obviously has decided that we need a major upgrade at the small forward position. To get their projected SF via trade, the brass knows that it will cost Pryzbilla. The obvious SFs are Prince and Battier. Detroit and Houston need a center. Assuming the Blazers trade Pryzbilla to get the SF, the Blazers need a third big. David Lee is the best available via free agency. In essence, Pryzbilla = Prince/Battier + Lee.
by Turnout on Jul 6, 2009 8:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you read the comments being reported ...
…. the Blazers felt they needed a proven third scoring option, not necessarily a SF. It so happened that the guy who they apparently felt fit their need the most plays at SF.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jul 6, 2009 8:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Keep it simple
thin out our SF logjam by trading outlaw and blake for Heinrich. I know that Heinrich isn’t a ton better than Blake but giving more time for Rudy/martell/batum is a benefit in itself. The Blazers need to resolve some question marks, our SF spot is one of them. We know what Outlaw is capable of, and it’s time for him to move on.
Save our cap space for the trade deadline or incase of an unexpected injury (like when Jameer Nelson went out with an injury last year)
Start out the season with Heinrich – Roy – Batum – LA – Oden
Bayless – Rudy – Martell – ?? – Pryz
That’s a nice 9 man rotation that gives everybody solid playing time – rotate in Pendegraph to alleviate some minutes in the frontcourt here and there.
After a month or two, if it appears that we need help in a certain area then we have cap space to make a lopsided trade for ANYBODY IN THE LEAGUE – not just a limited pool of free agents.
by Docproc on Jul 6, 2009 8:25 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
My thoughts exactly at this point.
If the trade for Hinrich can be done, then do it now. Even if it costs both Blake and Outlaw. Docproc is right about thining out the SF crew, moving Outlaw would accomplish that, and if Web is healthy him and Rudy will be able to pick up the scoring that Outlaw added.
Or if Web won’t be ready, then just do the Blake for Hinrich deal, it won’t eat up all the cap space, so the team will still have some wiggle room come trade time. Going into next year with the same group + an upgrade at the point, and flexability at the trade deadline that no other team might have would not be the end of the world, it would be a successful offseason to me.
Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?
by usmcr3049 on Jul 6, 2009 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i don't see chicago
giving up terrible kirk for blake and cap relief…
by retirecards51 on Jul 6, 2009 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They might not anymore
or they might. Depends on if they really want to open up space in 2010 to go after FA’s. A deal of just Hinrich for Blake would give them about $9 million more cap room next year, so it is possible if they are in that frame of mind. But who knows what they are thinking now that Gordon is gone.
Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?
by usmcr3049 on Jul 6, 2009 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you want to clear the log jam at SF, trade Outlaw.
Why throw in Blake. Trading Blake and Outlaw for Hinrich, is the same as trading Blake and Outlaw for Blake, but at twice the salary. Hinrich is a down grade from Blake, and a ridiculous trade that people on this site seem to be in love with. We would essentially pick up more salary and give away Outlaw to help Chicago, while we gain nothing on the court, and lose Outlaw, our third leading scorer. If we are trading Outlaw, it should be for a PF, or SF, who can score, because we don’t know if Martel will be ok, or if Batum will pick it up offensively. We still need a banger PF to compete against more physical opponents, and high scoring opponents, because with a strong inside scorer, we can avoid scoring droughts which lose games for us against teams that can shoot the three, like Dallas. We would be crazy to give away two good players to pick up one overpriced mediocre player like Hinrich. I know the grass seems greener on the other side, but he’s not better than Blake. He gets paid almost as much as we were going to give Turkoglu! What a joke. I hope KP doesn’t fall into the insanity that is the Blazer’s Edge Hinrich fetish.
by wingzeta on Jul 6, 2009 9:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
evidence please
Show how Hinrich is not better than Blake, cause I can’t say I know of any way to make an argument for that.
by austinpwnz on Jul 6, 2009 9:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How could our stated goal of getting "tougher" this off-season involve moving Joel?
Get Hinrich or Sessions
Get 1 of Bass/McDyess/Powe
Get the young SF more time on the floor
Have more than the Vet minimum cap space left to acquire a veteran at the trade deadline, if needed
by 52therim on Jul 6, 2009 8:28 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Lee
“If Lee turns the Blazers down, then what?”
Then we have dodged another self-inflicted bullet.
by lsjogren on Jul 6, 2009 8:30 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
This is all Darius Miles' fault.....
Or something. I’m in a pissy mood today. I’ve been on the fence all along about whether the Blazers should just stand pat and see how things go next year vs using the cap room and trying to make some moves. After the Blazers got me all excited with the Hedo thing and then that not working out, I’m back on the stand pat side again. So what if we just blow off the cap room? This is beginning to feel like someone who’s got a few bucks left over at the end of the month and instead of just chilling out it’s burning a hole in their pocket and they go out and spend it on something they don’t really need or want just to be spending it. Then next month rolls around and they start out broke again. I know the analogy isn’t perfect because cap room can’t be saved or rolled over to next year like a little spare change in your pocket can be, but you get the point. I think if Oden plays like a beast and everyone else stays healthy, that’s the Blazers’ best chance of going places in the playoffs. If not, I don’t think it will matter what moves the Blazers make.
Told you I’m in a pissy mood.
by kuhnsmith on Jul 6, 2009 8:30 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't see David Lee being good with a backup role
and I don’t see him as anything more than a backup in Portland’s lineup.
Spend some FA money going after Bibby and, just to light a fire under the wallets of our friends, the Nuggets, make a solid offer to the Birdman.
Close out those deals and then make a move for either Battier or Gerald Wallace…
Bibby/Bayless
Roy/Rudy
Wallace/Batum/Webster
LMA/Birdman
Oden/Przy
Obviously, if Battier is the guy, then Przy MIGHT have to go (although I’m loathe to even consider it). We could probably get Wallace for a package of Blake/Outlaw…have to check the numbers, but we would likely still have some scratch left over after snapping up Bibby and Birdman…enough to make a trade work, anyway…
I would also be amenable to swapping Bibby our for Sessions. It doesn’t fill our need for a veteran, but there are other vets to be had…it’s just a good idea to go for a ver PG if possible (Rose, CP3 and D-Will notwithstanding)
Are you a Mexi-CAN or a Mexi-CAN'T?
by raggmopp on Jul 6, 2009 8:30 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
i'd be more willing to trade joel
if we had the birdman as our backup Center. maybe that is what we should be looking to do, sign birdman to a similar deal as joel’s, then use joel as part of a trade (i really love joel and don’t want him to go, but birdman would at least cover the defensive/rebound aspect of joel and is a little younger).
No Bibby, he is not what the team needs at PG (even I would take kirk over bibby).
by retirecards51 on Jul 6, 2009 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, it seems that Dave has drunk the "win now" kool-ade".
I want the team to get better, I don’t know how it get better by starving young players for minutes by playing aging vets past their prime.
None of these moves get the team a championship this year and they all make the team worse in two or three years. No thanks.
by raoulduke on Jul 6, 2009 8:35 AM PDT reply actions 4 recs
Rec, rec and rec again.
Either Dave over did it with 4th of July celibrations, he was standing too close to the fireworks (and is suffering from concussion like effects) or Baby Point Guard is teething and keeping him from getting a good night’s sleep.
Not to worry. He will soon be back around to his normal incisive thinking.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jul 6, 2009 8:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trading Pryz is a very tough call
One one hand he is the heart of our interior defense and one of the keys to our team’s strength in the glass. Trading him before Oden learns how to stay on the floor is extremely risky. If Oden is injured, we will live with a lot of regret.
On the other hand, Joel is our most valuable trade asset. He is likely to loose trade value quickly because of age and reduced production as GO steps up. From a production point of view, trading Joel for a quality starter makes sense, if we have an adequate replacement coming in.
David Lee kinda-sorta fits the bill. He is not as good as Pryz on the glass but he is good enough. He is a good opportunistic scorer who generates points without needing a lot of plays called for him. He runs the floor well and would do well on a second unit that will feature Bayless and Rudy and will probably be a bit more uptempo than the starting unit. He is a good character guy.
We definitely would miss Joel’s interior defense. Joel at the 5 is way better than Lee. OTOH, Lee is a big upgrade over Outlaw or Frye at back-up 4. Overall, I think we would be stepping back on interior defense, but the big improvement on perimeter defense would more than balance out.
I would much prefer Prince to Battier in these scenarios. Prince is a much better offensive player. He has a good mid-range jumper, is a better passer, and is better in the open court. Battier is a better defender, but overall I would definitely prefer Prince.
If I knew we could have a rotation of:
Hinrich, Bayless
Roy, Fernandez
Prince, Batum
LMA, Lee
Oden, Lee, Pendergraph
I definitely would take the risk of trading Joel. I would be nervous, but I think it is the right call.
by upper left corner on Jul 6, 2009 8:36 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
raoulduke
Your point makes a whole lot of sense to me.
Getting a couple of high priced grizzled veterans might get them a little further in the playoffs for a year or two, but the long-term success of the team requires that they put their greenhorns out on the court, let them make mistakes and learn from them, and turn them into veterans.
by lsjogren on Jul 6, 2009 8:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
an optimistic not
While I believe there is good reason to believe KP and company will do some bonehead moves that don’t make the team stronger, I have a lot of confidence that they are not going to make moves that are so bad that they severely degrade the team.
by lsjogren on Jul 6, 2009 8:41 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
miltz
I don’t see Rudy in that 8 man rotation of yours.
Did you trade him?
by lsjogren on Jul 6, 2009 8:45 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
a trade
Here’s my proposed trade:
Turn in the Blazer staff’s Red Bull and replace it with Prozac.
by lsjogren on Jul 6, 2009 8:46 AM PDT reply actions 4 recs
Ha ha! Rec.
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 9:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
calm down
I have my P.h.D in unreliable hyperbole.
by Eat Politicians on Jul 6, 2009 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Please turn this green
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Jul 7, 2009 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
take some risks
The Blazers should also be willing to lose a few games as the price to pay for developing their young players.
I’d rather them develop their players to a higher level by the time of the playoffs even if it means not winning 60 or whatever games in the regular season.
by lsjogren on Jul 6, 2009 8:49 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
So hard to justify spending buckets of money on these good but not great players
when, chances are, the guys on our current roster could be better than any of these names mentioned within two years time.
Darius Miles Tribute Vid
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
by Net Ranger on Jul 6, 2009 8:56 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Less is more this year
Young players will grow, adapt and change. We have so many young, promising lottery pick players, I have to agree with those that want to change as little as necessary. Why fix what’s mostly progressing already? Even if we have to lose a few more games this season for our young players to develop, that’s an overall plus.
Maybe upgrade at PG and PF for toughness and D. I’m no expert at exactly who we need for these specific upgrades. But they gotta be upgrades and what we give up has to be what we would no longer want or need. Lose Outlaw and maybe Blake if need be, maybe throw in Freeland, Kopenen. But not Mills – I have a hunch he’s a keeper.
Other teams have to make changes from without, and those don’t always work, where many/most of the positive changes we all want to see can come from within: Oden, Bayless, Batum, Rudy. Not one of these guys will be worse or even the same next year. All four will be better, and the next year and the next, and that’s plenty exciting. Even Webster may add something strong to the mix. And let’s see what Pendergraph can offer with his 4 years of NCAA experience.
trust all is well
by retrofuture on Jul 6, 2009 8:56 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The only problem I have with both Battier & Hinrich
is it turns us into last year’s Rockets. I think we only need one perimeter defender (Hinrich). The other need is a 3rd scoring option. I don’t know enough about Mike Miller, but I don’t think he can be traded again for awhile, so we should look somewhere else.
I also prefer Milsap to Lee, although the Jazz will probably bite the bullet and match. If Lee can play center, why not Milsap?
Patty Mills - PG of the future. Book it.
by Blazerholic on Jul 6, 2009 8:58 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Milsap is 6'6'' (and a quarter)
I love him as our back-up PF, but he’s way to short to play Center. At the draft combine, he measured exactly one inch taller than Brandon Roy.
They are still saying they will match, but that is an awful lot of money, now that Boozer and Okur declined to opt-out.
All that glitters isn't chrome
by hoopla-pdx on Jul 6, 2009 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Birdman
why dot we sign birdman instead if David Lee.. Iknow he is a restricted FA but if we can give him a better deal than Denver (which we have the space to) than we could use joel in a trade and I would still feel comfortable. On David Lee i dont think he is a good fit for our system. and everyone has been saying to try for the lopsided trades with the teams falling out of the picture. Joel, rudy and outlaw for prince and afflalo that sounds like detroit is the winner in that trade.
"Good, Better, Best, never let it rest until your good is your better and your better is your best." Tim Duncan
by flynn4blazers on Jul 6, 2009 9:00 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Here is what Lee does: he hustles. He plays hard. He WANTS to rebound. He has good technique, he plays hard, he hustles, he WANTS to rebound.
He fits.
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 9:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
sounds a lot like Birdman
but a far superior shot blocker as well.
by pdxlifer on Jul 6, 2009 9:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Birdman = Pryz
Neither are offensive players.
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 9:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
.................... Lee gives you some offense, too, which is why he makes the big bucks.
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 9:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The power forward version of Joel Przybilla isn't Chris Andersen, but rather Jeff Foster.
Andersen is a shot blocking specalist on weakside help defense, while Przybilla is known for his tenacious man-to-man interior defense. Andersen’s gambling style of post defense is in the mold of Marcus Camby, Theo Ratliff, and others of that ilk; conversely, Przybilla’s ol’-school approach as a defensive anchor in the middle harkens back to the days of Mark Eaton with the Utah Jazz in the ‘80s/early-’90s.
by AK1984 on Jul 6, 2009 5:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Eaton was a mountain of a man
he was hard to get around, but you could never bump him off the block. Joel will battle, but he was nothing like Eaton when it came to holding his ground, and Eaton had nothing like Joel’s ability to help out on rotations….
by blacknoiseNW on Jul 6, 2009 8:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you forgot one thing
kp is high on character and lee has never been suspended for a season for doing a “drug of abuse.” im not saying that birdman did do cocaine, meth, LSD or PCP, but those are some of the ones that get you suspended for a year after your first positivie test.
fire nate before its too late
by pipgras on Jul 6, 2009 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can't test for LSD
short of a spinal tap…so scratch that off your list. It’s widely rumored that the “drug of abuse” in this case was meth. That said, I think the Bird more than showed what he was about last year. Put him on a team of solid guys and one of two things happens -
He falls in line
He drags the rest of the team down with him
I’m going with the first option in this case…the dude WANTS to play basketball
Are you a Mexi-CAN or a Mexi-CAN'T?
by raggmopp on Jul 6, 2009 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you would know...
an urban legand, lsd stays in urine for up to 48 hoursand can be tested but usually isnt due to the small amount pepole take. but just like most blazersedgers you get a +1 for adding to the lies.
fire nate before its too late
by pipgras on Jul 6, 2009 11:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Brent Barry?!?!?!?!?
I am with Dave through Point 1: you make as big a pitch as you can make to David Lee. If he says no, you live with that. If the Knicks string you out and match, you live with that.
The only other FA on the market who really takes Portland a step forward is Mavericks backup PF Brandon Bass — and I don’t think you outspend Mark Cuban, who can match. He’s a wild man.
PLAN B IF YOU DON’T GET LEE… (hey, that rhymes!)
You make a trade. There is no rush, you’ve got space up to the trade deadline. Somebody will fall out of the money early next year and some owner will want to pull the plug on losing multi-millions. The Blazers’ real situation will clarify over time as well — we will know WHAT we need. If Marty is back, it’s sort of dumb chasing a 3. If Rex is a failure as a backup PG, you go for a veteran 1. Etc.
No time for panic — with everybody and their neighbor and their dog and their sister and their sister’s dog over the cap, Blazers are in the driver’s seat for a skewed trade. It will just have to come later than KP likes to work.
Tough titties for 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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 9:01 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Notice I said NOTHING about trading Pryz. You get Lee and KEEP Pryz...
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 9:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lee won't come
unless we trade Joel or LMA.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 6, 2009 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's all about the money, he will come
He’s still young, we will be able to trade him 3 years into his 5 year contract.
by Sonic Boom on Jul 6, 2009 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think this is right.
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps, but I'd be surprised
I’m also not sure it makes a lot of sense to pay quality starter’s money for a guy getting 15 mpg (max) behind Aldridge.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 6, 2009 11:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Think big. We are talking about beating EVERY TEAM IN THE NBA...
Don’t think like an accountant… If you have these four: Oden, Pryz, Lee, LMA with Pendergraph coming into the league, you will be prepared for any eventuality in any game… You will be able to match up with anybody in the league where it matters, in the paint.
Then it’s a matter of Brandon and the 3 of the Day to win it for you, with Blake doing his best not to lose it.
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What about egos?
Could be a problem when a backup who gets 12-15 mpg gets more than your starting PG and starting SF combined.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 6, 2009 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No way Lee comes to play 10-15mpg behind LMA
I don’t care if you pay him mad $$$$. The reason you like Lee so much is that he hustles, he works hard, AND HE WANTS TO PLAY. He will never be happy with 15mpg in a backup role. Never…
The Bedger formally known as ????????
by Rudiculous on Jul 6, 2009 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know about trading Joel...
what if something happens to Greg, which, face it, there’s a good chance of that happening.
by jenstcy on Jul 6, 2009 9:05 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Daily double not trifecta
1. Lee is arguable if Prz is traded. So is Nick Collison with OKC and he’s more of a banger. Prz for Collison.
2. SF or PG. Getting a SF like Turkoglu who could play PF and distribute was a good idea (the dollars weren’t). The only other player I can think of who has that game and isn’t known for his love of L.A. and pot is Diaw with Charlotte. REGARDLESS, Batum needs his time at SF (as he’s a stud) though he can guard multiple positions. Getting Lee and a SF … minutes. Okay, you say, and it’s who earns it. But do the same at point and Bayless is parked. A daily double causes fewer problems while gaining benefiits.
by HoopsFan on Jul 6, 2009 9:05 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Why are we coveting our neighbor's goods?
Where is the love for the one’s we are with?
According to many fans here, Portland needs a bruiser PF and better defensive play. Apparently that is not the conclusion of Blazer management. From what we are hearing, they believe the team could use a proven 3rd scoring option to keep teams from doubling up Alrdridge and Roy. And Nate wants a veteran who can help with on court advice and knows what to do in crunch situations.
When it comes to a third scoring option we may already have that. Why is it impossible to think that Rudy can be that option? When you are talking about a team that had 4 rookies on it’s roster last season, two of which were lottery picks, another (Rudy) who should have been and a fourth who actually started more games than any of the others, it is not unreasonable to believe that you should see at least incremental improvement in play their second season. When you are a 54 win team that is only losing one guy out of their first 8 player rotation and a bench guy at that, incremental improvement is all you really need.
Exactly who on Portland’s team do you expect to backslide? Blake? Joel? They both had one of the best seasons of their careers. Except they don’t really fit the profile. Both are still young and hitting the point in their careers where their knowledge, experience and comfort level all lead to better play. Do any of us expect to see noticable dips in the performance of Roy or Aldridge?
I’m in the minority here, but I happen to believe that Portland can compete for a title with Blake and Pryzbilla as starters. You don’t need all-stars at every position. I believe Brandon and LaMarcus are outstandingly talented players. All Portland needs is a third guy who can be relied on to score and do a lot of the little things (aka the veteran things) that tend to make a difference in a game here or a game there. I think that was what had the Blazers looking at Turkoglu. (And why I like the idea of signing Grant Hill.) So why can’t we believe that among Fernandez, Webster, Batum or Outlaw we cannot expect to get that 3rd reliable scorer? And we haven’t even really touched on the big guy in the middle- Mr. Oden.
So yes, with the right addition, Portland could possibly turbo boost it’s chances. But let’s not loose sight of the fact that we are still in the race with or without any addition. And who knows, any addition could be like a performance enhancing drug. Effective in the short term, but not necessarily good for our long term health.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jul 6, 2009 9:09 AM PDT reply actions 3 recs
............... Because we are Americans, silly pants!!!
Why are we coveting our neighbor’s goods?
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Speak for yourself
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 6, 2009 9:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not so sure it's all about scoring.
Martell can score. Outlaw can score. I think what Nate and KP are looking for is someone who has good handles and can create their own shot, and make others better through assists, side pick and roll, etc. If it was just about scoring, I think you’re right, we’d be set.
Patty Mills - PG of the future. Book it.
by Blazerholic on Jul 6, 2009 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also, 54 wins = first round bounce.
If you want to go further than the first round, like getting to WCF, you’ll need more than incremental improvement.
Patty Mills - PG of the future. Book it.
by Blazerholic on Jul 6, 2009 9:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
54 wins does not equal first round bounce
…first round bounces typically have more to do with matchups, and most people agree that we ran into the worst possible matchup (aside from maybe the Lakers, but even that was debateable) in the Rockets. There’s no indication that this team has reached the pinnacle of its development, not even close. So I respecfully disagree with your conclusion that 54 wins = first round bounce, and the implication that we will never get by the first round if we don’t change who we have on the team.
"HA HA HA HA HA
I'm not laughing, I'm just listing the five ugliest Blazers ever."
- rockingharder
by jamon51 on Jul 6, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, there's the rub...
Do we have the personnel to create favorable matchups? Batum’s still a couple years from possibly attaining that. Blake doesn’t really create matchup problems. That leaves Roy (who we know does, except when he’s doubled), Oden (who is still developing) and LMA, who may or may not outplay his opponent.
54 wins (or more) in the regular season doesn’t guarantee you anything (look at the Suns & Jazz for the last few years). It took one game for the Blazers to lose the homecourt advantage. This is not a great road team right now…not bad, but not that good either. Incremental change isn’t going to improve that.
To get to the next level, you’ll either need more than incremental improvement, or some roster tweaking.
Thanks for respectfully disagreeing, though. I understand your line of thinking…
Patty Mills - PG of the future. Book it.
by Blazerholic on Jul 6, 2009 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're right
that 54 wins doesn’t guarantee you anything in the playoffs. For better or worse, the playoffs demand a different style of play and player.
I think offensively we’re fine. We had a very efficient offense last year, and the personnel to create matchup problems:
- Brandon Roy: Goes without saying, a nightmare to guard by anyone at any position.
- LaMarcus Aldridge: Getting better by leaps and bounds every year, added a low post back-to-basket game this year and still shoots an incredible percentage on jumpers for a 6’-11" guy—should be able to score on anyone. He’s strong enough to overpower smaller forwards and has enough range to shoot over tougher forwards.
- Travis Outlaw: I’ve been up and down on Trav but there’s one thing he’s good at—creating scoring opportunities for himself and converting those at a high rate. Had a horrible series but his scoring does create problems for a second unit forward trying to defend him.
- Rudy Fernandez: He’ll only get better next year and take on more of a role, and his dead-eye shooting means you have to keep someone on him at all times, whether he has the ball or not. And he moves without the ball as well as anyone in the league. So that’s a matchup problem.
Defensively, we have two of the best defensive centers in the league, an improving defensive player in Aldridge (granted, with a ways to go, but he’s got the tools), a highly skilled but raw defensive talent in Batum, an unknown but decent prospect in Martell Webster, and even Bayless has some potential with his lateral quickness (Roy isn’t going anywhere so his defense doesn’t matter for purposes of this move-or-no-move discussion). Lots of potential, some realized, some almost seems inevitable (Oden/Batum). So that’s the defensive side of the ball.
I just don’t see a hole in this squad that absolutely has to be addressed through trade or free agent signing.
Agree/disagree Blazerholic?
"HA HA HA HA HA
I'm not laughing, I'm just listing the five ugliest Blazers ever."
- rockingharder
by jamon51 on Jul 6, 2009 10:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's absolutely true
Most teams with 54 wins don’t lose in the first round.
And without changing personnel, we win more this year just by via development of our rookies.
You don’t make a change out of desperation because we lost in the first round. This team wins at least 57-58 games this year, probably 60 or more, as currently constructed. That means a higher seed and a weaker first round opponent.
You only make a change if you are sure it improves your team without damaging long-term prospects for success.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 6, 2009 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Uh... Denver won 54 games too
WCFs bounce?
The Rockets won 53 and bounced Portland, and then got bounced by the Lakers in the second round. More likely 54 wins = good playoff spot in any given year. I would love to have 54 again next year, but I want to see a better playoff performance. I wouldn’t care if we slid back a little, as long as we made the playoffs and show up ready to play this time. You never know what might happen in an 82 game season. Roy could go down for an extended period, and we might just squeak into the playoffs, but if he is healthy in time for that, and we are in form for the playoffs, we still have a better shot than we did this year, now that the guys have experience.
by wingzeta on Jul 8, 2009 5:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1, ditto, totally agree, on the mark, my thoughts exactly, great post,
spot on, bitchin, rec, rec rec, timg56 for king et cetera!
Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave
Also: COMCAST SUCKS!
by TwoDeep on Jul 6, 2009 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
TimG56 for prez
right on. Seriously, I so rarely disagree with you that it’s a little scary.
"HA HA HA HA HA
I'm not laughing, I'm just listing the five ugliest Blazers ever."
- rockingharder
by jamon51 on Jul 6, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Aldridge got offended
Because Roy forgot to ask him if he wanted to come with him to a freakin’ restaurant so I don’t know how he would react to the Blazers paying top dollar for a FA PF.
by neutroticblazerfan on Jul 6, 2009 9:13 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Przybilla's Quote of the Year: "You can't have enough bigs..."
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 9:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Joel also wanted crappy players in the draft
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 6, 2009 9:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The point is the point. Bigs can only play limited minutes because it is rough. Bigs get hurt. Bigs get blown for a lot of fouls.
He who controls the paint wins the game and the way to control the paint is to have the biggest squad of warriors…
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 9:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Spurs try that next year
But their lineup will look something like Duncan, Blair, Haislip, Big Baby, Bonner. Not Duncan and three starters.
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 6, 2009 9:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You forgot to mention: Duncan — every other game, maybe. And a bunch of nobodies...
Spurs are sunk.
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not at all. Spurs are reloading. And next season with Splitter dangerous until Timmy retires.
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 6, 2009 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
lets stand pat and save our oney for say next trade deadline
"Good, Better, Best, never let it rest until your good is your better and your better is your best." Tim Duncan
by flynn4blazers on Jul 6, 2009 9:15 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Sort of right — chase Lee but if you don't get him, don't cry, wait patiently...
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 9:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If we are going to trade Pryz...
then why don’t offer him to a team that’s desperate for a big and get something good in return.
Offer Houston Pryz and Blake for Brooks, but that’s after you’ve landed David Lee. I’d be happy with that trade.
by jenstcy on Jul 6, 2009 9:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
pryz and blake for brooks?
im not saying your a homer for the ducks, but no thanks. and i dont think you can trade 10m for 1 m. i know very little to none about contracts, but im sure you cant trade 10m for 1m to a team over the cap
fire nate before its too late
by pipgras on Jul 6, 2009 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Too bad BE doesn't have a penalty box........ That's double 5 minute majors right there, my team would score about 3 goals...
Offer Houston Pryz and Blake for Brooks
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 11:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for some clear thinking
Long time reader, first time commentor, Dave. Gotta say i like the Battier trade. If nothing else, it brings back a legit (complementary) championship piece in S Dot and i’m not at all opposed to the idea of giving Oden the chance to sink or swim for an extended period — even if that does cap our potential for the ‘10 or ’11 season(s). I’d hate to see Joel go just like everyone but you tell me another time/trading partner who’d put such an attractive value on him.
Rudy in the deal might kill that one for me, though…
The real take-away for me, though, is the bottom line of 3 untouchables and 3 exciting, “highly valued prospects”. Outside of the big dogs, not many in the league can say that
by 3mil cash on Jul 6, 2009 9:24 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Houston grossly overvalues Battier. They haven't even figured out yet that Ariza duplicates him...
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 11:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't get it...
why is pryz on the block? Oden hasn’t played 1 full season yet. i agree GO is the key to the future success, but i am not willing to trade a starting C when we don’t know for sure that we will have a healthy and productive one.
Battier is a nice piece, but i wouldn’t give up Rudy or pryz in a deal to get him (same for TP). The hinrich talk has got to stop. HE REALLY IS NOT THAT GOOD AT DEFENSE! he isn’t going to be the PG stopper that BE writers/readers seem to believe that he is. he is a slightly better version of blake at twice the cost (sorry regular readers to constantly harp on the badness of kirk, but someone needs to try to talk some sense into these people).
There should be 6 untradable blazers for this year (roy, la, oden, rudy, batum, and pryz). the rest should be moved only if there is a move that makes sense (not just making moves to make moves). Unfortunately the blazer championship window is still likely 2 years away (ie. can probably get to the WC finals this year as a top end scenario), so why not let these kids continue to improve and grow together instead of blowing it up so that we can get a redundant player (lee/millsap), an overpaid PG (hinrich, maybe miller), or a solid defensive wing (which batum will likely fill that role if given the opportunity). Let us not forget how often the blazer announcers would comment on how Batum spent all available free time working on his game at the gym, and how much Batum improved throughout the year (developed a decent 3 point shot, showed a little bit of baseline aggressiveness, and towards the end of the year we even saw a little shot fake/dribble/midrange jumper from him)
by retirecards51 on Jul 6, 2009 9:36 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Pryz is NOT on the block, other than the fact Dave suggested it. Now some New York Post doof reads BE and tomorrow we see all over the web that Joel is going to NYC.
That’s how these things work…
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If it is on the internet
It must be true. Nobody obfuscates on the internet. Honest.
by DonkeyShins on Jul 6, 2009 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
prz
If Houston wants Rudy, can we expand and get Brooks? Rudy, Bayless, Joel, and Outlaw for Battier and Brooks?? I’m in.
by shallwemaui on Jul 6, 2009 9:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I detest that trade
We give up the three best players in that trade for a 30 year old defensive specialist and an undersized PG. No thanks.
I might trade Pryz for Prince, if I knew we could land Lee and Hinrich, but there is no way I make your trade.
by upper left corner on Jul 6, 2009 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a terrible trade.
Throwing away all of the defense and pretty much all of the offense on the 2nd unit for a player who Batum will surpass in a couple years and a good point guard is a bad idea. Plus, for all we know, Bayless could be every bit as good as Brooks when he learns the ropes. Keep in mind that Brooks had a much longer college career than Bayless.
by Benjamanic on Jul 6, 2009 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think I just threw up in my mouth...
a lot
Are you a Mexi-CAN or a Mexi-CAN'T?
by raggmopp on Jul 6, 2009 11:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
please please please
stop thinking of crazy ideas that will screw pdx over
by These Refs Suck on Jul 6, 2009 9:40 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Reportedly he didn't want him enough to make an offer
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 6, 2009 9:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
KP does his homework and realizes that David Lee is a decent fit and a banger!! :)
by Luanne on Jul 6, 2009 9:54 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Testify, sister!!!
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
KP does his homework and realizes that David Lee is a decent fit and a banger!! :)
by Luanne on Jul 6, 2009 9:55 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Amen!!!
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
so nice she had to say it twice...
Although I can’t agree he is a good fit unless he is strictly a backup 4…
The Bedger formally known as ????????
by Rudiculous on Jul 6, 2009 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't trade Joel!
Look, I agree that Oden has to sink or swim eventually, but NOT YET! Remember, Oden’s a guy who goes to the bench in foul trouble EARLY. Without Joel, we are screwed! David Lee cannot do the things that Joel does such as block shots, intimidate/change shots, and REBOUND. Getting rid of Joel before Greg shows more progress is just plain wreckless.
Also, the Blazers need someone other than Brandon who can get the the rim and score (or help others do so). Hedo would have been such a guy, but unless we pick up a player like this, we should not trade Travis either. Battier and Hinrich are not that guy either, not is David Lee. They are good pieces and I like what they bring to the team in terms of the role they can play, but we really need that 2nd scoring threat.
We need help at the back up PF — but only if we get a workhorse/banger type.
We need help at the point — but only if it is a CLEAR upgrade from Blake such as Devon Harris or Chris Paul. Hinrich is not clearly an upgrade. Get Hinrich and keep Blake and I’d be happy too.
We need an upgrade at the SF — but unless the guy is a get-your-own-shot kind of player I would prefer to let our existing talent develop and give Webster a chance to become a star.
I think KP is going to shock us with a bigger upgrade than we are expecting…Think Harris or Paul or Rondo.
by mlsinpdx on Jul 6, 2009 10:00 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
what's next?
KP and the band will trade for a player if:
that player adds to the team
or
positions the team to make more cap room through a mid-season or off-season trade.
We still need a good third option on offense without giving up any defense.
by 7677maniac on Jul 6, 2009 10:08 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Lamar Odom would kinda mess up the Lakers
If you have to spend the money or lose it, why not make an offer to Odom? Even if the Lakers match it, it could screw with them in their salary cap.
If the Blazers get Odom, he has tremendous skills and versatility- just lacking in consistency.
But what Odom brings over any of the other players mentioned, is the ability to change the game and create mismatch problems.
by ralphzillo on Jul 6, 2009 10:34 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Odom has to be EXCITED about playing with his friend Ron-Ron from Queens...
……………………….. He’s been to the NBA Finals TWICE in a row, won a World Championship, lives on the beach, and the Lakers are gonna pay him $8+M per year.
He is not coming to Oregon for $9M, not for $10M, and that’s all the money KP can muster without slashing.
Take that name OFF THE LIST.
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
nobody is suggesting its likely that Odom would come to Portland, but you absolutely offer him 5 years/52 mil or whatever you can
and hope the Lakers refuse to offer more than 3/24.
Its admittedly a hail mary, but well worth the attempt.
by jksnake99 on Jul 6, 2009 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If KP would want him, I agree
Worst that happens is he goes back to LA and says, “Portland offered me $10 million for 5, so either increase it to $10 million for 3 or at least give me four years at $8 million.” They would give him something more, and we would hinder them a little bit down the road.
The only reason you don’t do this is if KP is convinced he’s such a nut case that we wouldn’t want him. He has taken some cheap shots at people in the past. He’s the idiot that said he didn’t leave the bench after the Ariza foul on Rudy. He’s Artest all over again except he just hasn’t quite made such a big mistake as Artest — yet.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 6, 2009 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
disagree
I think Portland has as good a chance as any… this beach stuff is nonsense, playing with ron means playing BEHIND ron, and again this is his last chance to make money and get playing time. Aint gonna happen in LA.
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jul 6, 2009 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i have an idea.
sign lee, trade for hinrich, then trade lee, hinrich, outlaw, blake, webster, and the right for claver, kaponen, and freeland for lebron and cp3
fire nate before its too late
by pipgras on Jul 6, 2009 10:35 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
More for less
I don’t see why the Blazers are going after Lee, or why you, Dave, have converted. That cap space may go away if we don’t use it, but only for now. In a couple of years, when we’re trying to either get over the hump or add some young quality to keep the dynasty going, we’re going to need space.
For backup PF, I’d much rather go after:
1. McDyess
2. Paul Millsap (how much can Utah offer him now that Boozer and Okur are staying?)
3. Oberto
4. Bass
5. Odom (probably wouldn’t want to move to Portland, but it would sure make life hard on LA to have to match)
I’d be happy to go after Battier, but Pryz seems like over-paying. Of course, I wouldn’t go after Lee, so with Oberto as the only potential back-up 1 that I’ve got on my PF list, we’d still need him.
All that glitters isn't chrome
by hoopla-pdx on Jul 6, 2009 10:46 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
There is no evidence whatsoever that the Blazers ARE going after Lee.
Pure speculation, probably driven by Lee’s agent…
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bad plan(s) .... Dave!
KP has enough cred that if he signed Steph Marbury tomorrow a majority of fans would support the decision after it was done. KP gets that trust from many fans because they believe he’s earned it.
Quote the Ben
Some posters are jumping on YOUR bandwagon for Lee and giving away Prez…… not me.
by spencerbutte on Jul 6, 2009 10:49 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Keep Pryz, trade Prez, ha ha!
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'de rather have Prince than Battier
Prince has more experience and scoring ability. Really, all battier is just a perimeter defender. i wouldnt trade joel for him straight up
by axel360 on Jul 6, 2009 10:49 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
But Battier loves the corner 3...
He makes his money from the corner, which is where the 3 spends most of their time in Nate’s system. Battier is a much better fit than Prince IMO….
The Bedger formally known as ????????
by Rudiculous on Jul 6, 2009 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why are we trying to adapt players to fit our specific system?
Maybe we should be adapting our system to fit the strengths of whomever we bring in? Small forwards are severely underutilized in Nate’s style of play – But it’s hard to say, it could be a chicken or the egg issue: Is Nate’s system like that BECAUSE he’s only had Webster and Outlaw to work with?
by Arby on Jul 6, 2009 12:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the safest way to improve a young team that won 54 games is to get players that can execute the same system more effectively...
That is why I am so high on swapping Hinrich for Blake. We lose nothing offensively, as he does everything Blake does and probably does it better. And he provides better defense to boot. You aren’t changing what won you 54 games, you are just getting somebody that can execute that system better.
Battier is Batum X2 at this point. Batum was a good fit with the starters, and Battier is a better defender and 3 point shooter than Batum(Batum’s two most used skills in Nate’s system). The problem is, you need somebody to step in off the bench and fill the scoring void that Outlaw leaves(assuming you get Battier, Outlaw is likely gone). I think that is where Rudy, Webster, and even Bayless steps in. You don’t lose anything offensively, and you upgrade defensively without having to change an offensive system that produced one of the highest efficiencies in the league.
I am not a fan of Nate’s offensive system, I think there is far too little ball movement and far too much pressure on Roy to make things happen. But it worked last year very well. If it isn’t broke, don’t fix it. Improvements and upgrades are welcome though…
The Bedger formally known as ????????
by Rudiculous on Jul 6, 2009 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But it makes for good reading.
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Absolutely.
It’s better than Dave posting something like:
Well, now that we didn’t get Turkoglu, I guess we’ll just not talk about anything. Anyone up for Scrabble™?
μὴ φοβοῦ, μόνον πίστευε.
by T Darkstar on Jul 6, 2009 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rudy
If they trade Rudy, how soon can we get Claver in so he could replace Rudy’s as the heartthrob for the female fans?
by lsjogren on Jul 6, 2009 11:20 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
David Lee conditions
I would be ecstatic with Lee if; 1. Lee is happy with a backup role, 2. Aldridge is not threatened/upset by it. Overpaying doesn’t seem to be a problem. I say go for it if it fits these two conditions and not worry about the Knicks matching because Lee seems to be the last viable option anyway.
by neutroticblazerfan on Jul 6, 2009 11:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Just sign Lee and leave the trades for Battier and Prince/Hinrich out of it
"I didn't know I was going to score 52 so I didn't think to Tivo it or nothin." -B Roy
by Dodoh on Jul 6, 2009 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Lee seems to be the last viable option anyway"
Not even for a back-up PF. Check out Brandon Bass.
by spencerbutte on Jul 6, 2009 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hollinger with an interesting take. Maybe KP does have an advantage now for waiting, as long as he is willing to still spend some of that Hedo money
Which takes us to trend No. 3. Because as much as teams are spending in pursuit of unrestricted free agents, it stands in sharp contrast to those of the restricted free agents on the market. Gortat struck a deal for an offer sheet from Dallas, but desirable commodities like Lee, Paul Millsap, Marvin Williams, Josh Childress, Ramon Sessions and Nate Robinson have barely gotten a sniff.
Moreover, the market for those players to get anything above the midlevel exception is basically gone. Unless they can persuade one of the above teams to join in the bidding, somebody like Lee or Millsap could end up settling for the midlevel exception or playing on a one-year deal for a scandalously low qualifying offer — $1.03 million for Millsap, $2.68 million for Lee.
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 6, 2009 11:34 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
By my mental count (i.e. check my math), the only teams in a position to compete for FAs above the MLE at the moment are OKC and PDX.
I have a hunch Portland is a more attractive destination for most FAs…
"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
by timbo on Jul 6, 2009 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And Memphis and ATL (once Toronto really takes Hedo for all that cash)
But we are likely the only team willing to spend.
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 6, 2009 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But...but...OKC is like the Riviera!
When compared to Death Valley…or Detroit.
by DonkeyShins on Jul 6, 2009 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
All I ask for at this point:
Outlaw’s minutes going to someone who doesn’t need the plays explained to him as they’re setting up out of every time out.
by Free Bayless on Jul 6, 2009 11:56 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I have to agree with everyone that doesn't want to give up Joel...
When defense is your biggest problem, you don’t essentially swap your best interior defender(Joel) for a guy that plays little to no defense(Lee). Going after Lee makes basically no sense to me. A front court of Lee and Aldridge would be atrocious on the inside defensively. There is no way I can assume Greg will be A) healthy enough to play significant minutes, B) able to stay out of foul trouble even if healthy, C) able to fulfill his potential. You can win a championship with Joel as your starting center, double that probability if you have Greg Oden coming off the bench providing the same production as Joel(or vice versa). It is too soon to trade Joel, far too soon. I need to see some improvement out of Oden as far as staying healthy and staying on the floor when healthy before Joel can be moved. The vanilla gorilla is just too valuable to this team until Greg becomes GREG ODEN, we don’t even know if that will ever happen. My fingers are crossed but it is too soon to tell…
The Bedger formally known as ????????
by Rudiculous on Jul 6, 2009 12:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Bucher now says Blazers not interested in Odom
I don’t understand this. There is no reason not to go for the hail mary here.
by jksnake99 on Jul 6, 2009 12:26 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Makes us look desperate I think.
Not that it matters – but once we start reaching out to every free agent, it devalues our existing trading assets even further.
by Arby on Jul 6, 2009 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No trade Joel
Little man trading Joel make Donkeyshins angry. Must smash!!!!
by DonkeyShins on Jul 6, 2009 12:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Lee's bad defense is like a pitcher's ERA at Coors Field
He plays for the Knicks. His defense on a different roster, for a different coach, is going to improve.
I’m not saying Lee is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but just to point this out.
"I didn't know I was going to score 52 so I didn't think to Tivo it or nothin." -B Roy
by Dodoh on Jul 6, 2009 12:42 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Trade Joel for Battier ?
Time to pass whatever you’ re smoking Dave……
Hedo was too much smoke fom the beginning. It’s not time to panic. KP has back up plans for his back up plans.
I like the Lee idea, but wouldn’t mind Bass or Millsap either.
by FrenchieFan on Jul 6, 2009 1:53 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Something that hasn't been said.
I think I should add something that doesn’t seemed to be treated as the logical choice in this equation. All of the options mentioned above are silly in light of the fact that the Western Conference has made itself weaker in relation to the Portland Trailblazers. Without any free agent moves we’ve watched the LA Lakers become weaker through the acquisition of Ron Artest and the departure Trevor Ariza. We watched Houston deconstruct. Yao is likely done for the year, and they’ve traded away from a bunch of untested talent. I could go on about the other teams but I won’t. The reality here is that we may have picked up a game or two in the regular standings merely from the actions of other teams.
Why make the mistake of trading away our advantage? We could just stay under the salary cap this year and develop talent further, which will be FINE. I tire of this argument that we MUST trade or purchase something! If we do pick up Captain Kirk, I hope he is the backup to Blake. It would be foolish to replace Blake, and frankly Bayless has yet to prove he can play at the NBA level in the regular season. I don’t care what he has done is practice. Keep him, but don’t depend on him for anything. Make more use of Rudy and Roy at the point. They can play together at times. If you need that banger use Jeff Pendergraph and/or bring in Joel Freeland. I think Pendergraph will pan out well enough.
If we must sign someone they should consider signing someone with an expiring contract in 2010. They don’t have to be desirable in a trade, just a warm body that occupies the team in practice and summer league.Then you put yourself in a position for next year’s free agents while more teams fall into economic disrepair.
by wa_conner on Jul 6, 2009 2:06 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
in order to get Hinrich we would most likely have to trade Blake. And it is a pretty hefty step up
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jul 6, 2009 2:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I dare to disagree. I think contenders like LA and the Spurs just got stronger and won't move out of the way without a hard fight.
I wouldn’t write Houston off, at least not for the mid-term. Utah could be much better if they keep their main guys healthy this time. OKC and the Warriors got stronger through the draft. In the East Orlando reconfigured to get better at inside scoring and not rely so much on jumpshooting. Cleveland is unclear how much Shaq can help but they gave up little for him and rely on LeBron’s daily form anyway. Boston could be back in the discussion if KG comes back healthy.
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 6, 2009 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So Ron Artest and Ariza swapping places
make both teams worse? How does that make sense? If Yao is healthy for the playoffs, that’s all that really matters. As we saw in the LA series, that team is still a playoff team without him, and Brooks, Lowry, and Landry all figure to be much better and I don’t think anyone’s sleeping on Morey’s snags in the second (plus T-Mac in a contract year). Regardless of what we think of Artest, he’s a MUCH better player than Ariza right now, and any predictions of a Laker demise basically rest entirely on the assumption that he blows up the team.
Utah battled a ton of injuries last year and will come back stronger if everyone’s healthy. Same with NO, who finally have a passable backup for CP. If Chandler’s toe is healthy, they’re back to the team they were in 2008 rather than 2009. Denver was able to snag potentially a top 3 or 4 PG from this draft at 18 for free and Melo looked unstoppable in the playoffs. I defy anyone to assert that the Spurs are somehow weaker with Jefferson and potentially a healthy Manu and Tim (who still put up monster numbers in the playoffs).
The only playoff team that figures to be worse at all is Dallas, and Cuban’s still wielding a huge expiring contract and the legendary Mark Cuban wallet so it’s hard to imagine their finished. As for the rest of the teams, Phoenix and potentially Memphis (only because of Zach, everyone else on that team will be better) will be worse, but Sacto can’t lose any more games, adding a number one pick typically adds about 10 games to a team’s win total, so the Clips figure to be much better. OKC and Minny both have young cores that figure to improve.
Portland may figure to be better next year as guys improve, but so does basically every other team in the west, and of course, all it takes is one Roy 20 game injury, and we’re right in that mix of bubble playoff teams again. It’s not like any of these teams are just going to disappear.
by Royster on Jul 6, 2009 2:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
one could argue that LA got worse by getting Artest (I actually believe Ariza's a better fit there than him)
and Houston got a lot worse— not due to Ariza/Artest but due to Yao’s injury.
I agree with the rest of your thoughts though.
by jksnake99 on Jul 6, 2009 2:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, Artest is still a better player than Ariza
Neil Paine broke it down. Artest is just better at beasically everything that Ariza does, Trevor happens to be younger. The only real way to argue that the Lakers will be worse is by arguing that Artest is going to cause their chemistry to explode, which seems unlikely being surrounded by two good friends in Odom and Kobe. Plus, you have the healthy Bynum there.
Personally, I think Houston’s worse off in the swap, even before Yao, but I wouldn’t bet against Taylor or any of those 2nd rounders reloading, and it’s not like Yao has retired or anything. There’s still a decent chance that he’s back for the playoffs, alongside all the presumably improved guys I mentioned above. In which case, Houston could be better than they were last year. Then, we’d still be looking at Dallas as the only playoff team that figures to be any worse in the postseason next year, and isn’t that what we’re thinking about? Who cares if we finish above them in the regular season.
by Royster on Jul 6, 2009 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the chemistry issue is potentially a big deal
Artest is not a guy who looks to keep the ball moving, which is desirable in the triangle. He tends to go on his own quite a bit, which is fine if you are efficient like Kobe but an issue if you are Artest. We’ll see. I also think Artest has lost a step on D— I’m wary of raw on/off defensive numbers— it sure looked like Roy and Kobe had more trouble in the playoffs with Battier than with Artest.
You may be right. We’ll see.
by jksnake99 on Jul 6, 2009 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The issue
isn’t “who’s a better defender: Battier or Ron?” (obviously Battier right now), but who among Ron and Ariza is a better defender, which the stats imply is still a huge advantage in Ron’s favor. Obviously, Melo is Melo, but in the one game where Ariza was his primary defender the entire game (game 1), he was just lit up. While Melo had some decent shooting nights against Ron last year, he never was able to march to the FT line like he did in the LA series. (obviously hard to say whether Battier or Ron was guarding him).
Nearly all of the same “chemistry” questions about Artest were asked last year with Houston, and nothing ever surfaced. The guy isn’t a Z-Bo type who has taken down every team he’s been on. Sure, there are questions about his usage, but I just don’t buy that it’s an inevitability that there will be issues there like so many posters. If Ron accepts the Ariza role, the Lakers are probably MUCH better next year. Even if he chafes a little, they’re probably still better. Outside of an outright mutiny, it’s hard to imagine the team being worse.
by Royster on Jul 6, 2009 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a quality take
I’ll just not that those same on/off court defensive stats say Artest was a much better defender than Battier last year, which I don’t buy. There’s a lot of noise in them. I’m of the opinion that Ariza and Artest are pretty close defensively going forward. However, I still think your take might be dead on— I’m just a little higher on Ariza and lower on Artest than you are.
by jksnake99 on Jul 6, 2009 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ariza is a good defender, and
a more dynamic scorer than Artest. Artest can shoot the three, and drive to get fouled. Ariza has an all around SF game where he can create off the dribble, and go baseline. Ariza is the guy who got his hands on quite a few inbound passes at game changing moments in the playoffs. He has great length and anticipation. Artest may be the better hard nosed defender, and a good scorer, but Ariza is young, and has a lot more to offer. That was a good pick-up for Houston, and a good hole patch for LA. If LA can keep Odom, they will be fine, if they lose him, they will lose a lot. Houston will be okay for the regular season without Yao, but will have a tough time against the elite teams. If Dallas has picked up Gortat, they can be a contender. All they were missing was a consistent inside threat. Gortat is more of a defender, but I think he has some offense. I don’t think the West has gotten weaker or stronger really, it’s just been reshuffled a bit, which is mostly to our advantage if we don’t reshuffle, as we can take advantage of these other teams in the first part of the year, before they figure out what they are doing. The sub .500 teams getting better is the biggest difference. It may mean fewer wins gets us a playoff spot, if the Clippers or GS steal a few from everyone.
I think the implication that the Blazers won 54 games in a weak year for the Western Conference if totally false. The Spurs and Utah were less of a factor, but the Rockets and Nuggets stepped up big time, while the Spurs and Utah took their spots as lesser playoff teams. N.O. overachieved in ’08 with no depth, but they may be improved next year. Portland has taken the place of Phoenix for the foreseeable future, because the Blazers have become a good team, while Phoenix fell off.
by wingzeta on Jul 8, 2009 6:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's a new trade idea, one I haven't seen posted anywhere
It’s based on the rumor that UTA would like to trade Boozer. Yes, I know that there’s talk about getting Rip Hamilton, but if they were content to let him walk and fill his spot with Millsap, then do they really want a player under contract for another 3 years plus a partial guarantee for a 4th? Wouldn’t they rather get salary relief in order to stay below the tax threshold?
If so, then this trade makes sense to me:
POR sends Steve Blake to CHI
POR receives Kirk Hinrich
CHI sends Kirk Hinrich to POR and Tyrus Thomas to UTA
CHI receives Carlos Boozer
UTA sends Carlos Boozer to CHI
UTA receives Tyrus Thomas
What am I missing? It can’t be this easy, can it? Portland gets the upgrade at PG. Chicago gets the low post scorer that they desire (fans on the Bulls boards are posting left and right about trying to get Boozer). Utah saves $7.5 million in salary and ? in luxury tax, while still getting a young backup PF.
by Storyteller on Jul 6, 2009 2:12 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
thats a pretty good idea..
im only curious to see how UTAH fans will accept it. Tyrus isnt very good yet, and Boozer is an all-star and olympian..
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jul 6, 2009 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
hmmm
there’s something I’m missing because I don’t quite understand how the Hinirich for Blake swap is connected to the the Boozer trade.
by PoliSam on Jul 6, 2009 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Boozer makes too much money. Chicago would quasi need to find a taker for Hinrich to absorb his salary, and that would be us
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 6, 2009 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tyrus Thomas doesnt seem like a lot of compensation for an all star in Boozer....
Maybe if Utah is convince Boozer is leaving in a year and they can retain Milsap to take his place?? Its interesting, I like anything that gets us Hinrich without giving away more than Outlaw and Blake…
The Bedger formally known as ????????
by Rudiculous on Jul 6, 2009 2:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A couple of weeks ago
Utah was conviced that they’d probably lose Boozer for nothing this summer and seemed OK with that. In this scenario, they get a little less $$$ savings than just letting Boozer go for nothing, but they also get Thomas to play backup PF.
If Utah is not interested in saving $10+ million in salary and tax, then you’re absolutely right that the deal makes no sense. My feeling, though, is that they are interested in that, to facilitate the signing of Millsap to a multi-year deal.
by Storyteller on Jul 6, 2009 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a fair, well-balanced trade proposal for all three of the teams included in it.
by AK1984 on Jul 6, 2009 8:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Utah was prepared to let Boozer walk
if he opted out. Now assuming they keep Millsap, they’re looking at something like $12 million in luxury tax payments. Swapping Tyrus for Boozer saves them about $12 million in payroll (~$6 million in salary plus the same in tax payments), while at the same time addressing their need for some interior defense. It’s hard to imagine both Boozer and Millsap in their long term future, so this would give them a chance to pick up a decent young piece to evaluate over the next year instead of just letting Boozer walk for nothing next summer.
by Royster on Jul 6, 2009 9:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm aware of that part of it...
what I mean, is why now that Boozer has opted in, would they take such weak return on a player of Boozer’s caliber.
by as11osu on Jul 7, 2009 1:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It'd free up funds to match any offer sheet signed by restricted free-agent Paul Millsap.
Tyrus Thomas isn’t a Jerry Sloan type of player, however, so I could see this turning into a four-team trade whereby Thomas is sent to Oklahoma City and Nick Collison heads off to Utah; consequently, that’d leave the Jazz with the following roster.
C: Mehmet Okur
PF: Paul Millsap (RFA)
SF: C.J. Miles
SG: Ronnie Brewer
PG: Deron Williams
C/PF: Nick Collison
SF: Andrei Kirilenko
SG: Kyle Korver
PG: Eric Maynor
C: Kosta Koufos
C: Kyrylo Fesenko
PF: Goran Suton
SF: Matt Harpring (Injured)
That’d be playoff caliber team right there, although Matt Harpring will likely retire and Kevin O’Connor should probably sign a couple of third-string guards to replace unrestricted free-agents Morris Almond and Ronnie Price.
In the Jazz’s first summer league game this year down in Orlando, the team was crushed by the Boston Celtics squad. So, even though there’s a ton of hard-working guards on the roster — which includes D-League standouts Cedric Bozeman and Kevin Kruger, as well as undrafted rookie free-agents Dar Tucker and Wesley Matthews — I think that the team would instead be better suited inviting a couple of experienced veterans like Keith Bogans and Kevin Ollie into training camp.
http://origin.nba.com/media/magic/bosuta_boxscore_070609.pdf
Anyway, any idea that involves dumping Carlos Boozer for salary relief and re-signing Paul Millsap is a good one for Utah.
by AK1984 on Jul 7, 2009 2:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because Boozer's value is fairly low around the league
due to his impending FA and desire for a large extension. Same way teams aren’t beating down the door to trade for Amare, teams aren’t beating down the door to trade for Boozer. That team minus Boozer and plus Thomas is still a playoff team if healthy, so why spend the extra $12 million? It’s a virtual certainty that Boozer isn’t the difference between a title this year, anyways.
by Royster on Jul 7, 2009 5:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um... so we get Hinrich, while CHI gets Boozer?
How about we get Boozer, and win a championship, by having the most devastating power line up ever. I’m not looking to help Chicago. In other words, keep your Hinrich, and your David Lee, and give me Boozer, who I will use as a PF, and occasionally as a center. I will not worry about LMA’s minutes, because I will often play them together. Lamarcus can run the floor as well as most SFs. Joel and our SFs minutes will suffer, but so what? Whatever combo we use for a second unit will be insane. All of the sudden Oden’s development is just icing on the cake, rather than the lynch pin to our championship hopes. You want our team to place first in the West, and beat Labron and Shaq, or a healthy Boston. I said get Boozer a long time ago, but I figured we couldn’t afford him. If we are talking about three team deals though, we could work Joel into that deal. That is a real game changer. Hinrich and Battier etc are a joke. Considering this is so unlikely, we are better off standing pat, and letting our guys grow. I’m always amazed by how much some fans around here want to help Chicago or even worse the Rockets improve. It’s one thing to join in the strip mining of Detroit, or the below .500 teams, but we have to play these guys. It’s a competition, let’s not be too charitable taking on other teams bad contracts for no reason, and sending them good players. I wouldn’t trade Joel if I didn’t have too, just like I would keep him even if we got David Lee. Boozer would be the banger PF we need times 10, and would make the Blazers much more of a force than Boston was two years ago. Yes I know this is not going to happen, but I like how in this scenario we are helping CHI put Boozer and Rose together, to become a real contender, while we get their back-up PG. We help them make a major improvement, while we make a worthless tweak. Yeah… I think I’ll hold onto my cards this round, and wait for the iron to get a little hotter.
by wingzeta on Jul 8, 2009 11:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
YES! DO IT KP!
Jason Quick says Blazers inquire about a trade for Gerald Wallace
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 6, 2009 2:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Did Jason say who Portland would be willing to give up?
by Storyteller on Jul 6, 2009 2:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Outlaw, and at the deadline the Bobcats asked for Nic
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 6, 2009 2:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He said Outlaw Batum and cap space
he also mentioned Bayless as an alternative, I’m assuming to Batum.
by as11osu on Jul 6, 2009 3:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Outlaw and Batum both?
Wow— they must feel Webster will be healthy enough to contribute next year to make that deal.
by jksnake99 on Jul 6, 2009 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not necessarily
With Rudy and Roy that’s 66 minutes at the wings taken care of. Wallace would get the remaining 30 plus some at PF. Webster wouldn’t NEED to play, although it’d be a nice luxury.
by as11osu on Jul 6, 2009 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have trouble seeing Pritchard parting with Batum
I would absolutely sign off on the deal, but I don’t know if he would.
by jksnake99 on Jul 6, 2009 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Outlaw and Bayless for Wallace would be a good deal
With Batum it’s still a good deal, but if they would take Bayless, it would be hard to turn down. I hate to lose Batum, but Wallace is a proven player, and unlike Battier, who some people are talking about, he is a legit scorer, which would fit the desire to take pressure off Roy. Battier can’t do that. Gerald also is strong around the basket, which Prince is not, so Wallace doesn’t duplicate the skills sets of our current guys, especially if we can keep Batum, who is a lot like Prince. Wallace picks up Outlaw’s scoring, but also plays defense, and can score inside, which we desperately need. This would be a sensible trade, and not an expensive lateral move like others proposed.
by wingzeta on Jul 9, 2009 12:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Now it's also a fanpost
http://www.blazersedge.com/2009/7/6/939846/gerald-wallace-unbalanced-trade
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 6, 2009 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Instead of Lee...
Could we make a move for Paul Millsap?? I believe he’s desperate to get out of Utah and play for a team on the rise. Plus, unlike Lee, his numbers weren’t inflated due to a D’Antoni try-to-get-as-many-possessions-as-possible system. His numbers as a starter were a solid 16 and 10 (more impressive than Lee’s inflated 16 and 11, or whatever). Plus he actually adds some toughness on D (1 blk and 1 stl off the bench, even though he is slightly undersized). He is not a jump-shooter per se, but his range has improved since his rookie year, and is offensive game is much further along than Lee’s off the dribble.
If we just HAVE to spend money on a frontcourt reserve this off-season, wouldn’t Millsap be a better fit than Lee? Just sayin…
by xxReeSe247xx on Jul 6, 2009 3:37 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Please Stop
We do not need a small forward.
Storytellers trade (involving Utah) for Hinrich is cool.
by Rick_D on Jul 6, 2009 3:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Lee
Doesn’t seem prudent to put any dealmaking on hold for 10 or whatever days just so you can find out whether you can pay big bucks for a player you don’t need.
In fact, it doesn’t seem prudent period.
by lsjogren on Jul 6, 2009 4:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Blake and Outlaw for Hinrich
Does anyone honestly believe this is a good deal for Portland? I don’t mean to overvalue our guys but gimme a break Hinrich is not a difference maker.
by Frankrizzo on Jul 6, 2009 9:49 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Quality over quanitiy
we need to consolidate anyway, and this is a move that improves the point guard spot in every aspect, which is desperately needed.
by as11osu on Jul 7, 2009 1:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Defense wins championships.
As it is, Kirk Hinrich is quite possibly the best one-on-one lockdown perimeter defender in the NBA today.
by AK1984 on Jul 7, 2009 2:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Come on, AK
the best one-on-one lockdown perimeter defender in the NBA today? He’s a great defender, but let’s lay off the hyperbole a little bit. Give me any healthy one of Iggy, Prince, Marion, Battier, or Kobe over Hinrich if we’re talking solely about their ability to defend the perimeter.
by Royster on Jul 7, 2009 5:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We don't need
to add a one dimensional role player. Turkoglu was attractive only because he could play with skill at multiple positions, handle the ball, create his own shot from inside or out, play decent defense, run the offense, distribute, etc. In short, he could take some pressure off Roy and LMA—with value mainly at the offensive end of the floor. Unfortunately, he cares about his retirement package a lot more than another opportunity to play for a championship. Not a good motivational fit. If we can’t get someone who can do more than just add some marginally better defense, we should stand pat. Blazer defense improved a lot over the season and even during the playoffs this year. Defense is mainly about athleticism, attitude, and BBIQ. Even Trout, a late bloomer in the BBIQ dept, has talent in the other areas and improved on D this year.
by oldguyoldfan on Jul 7, 2009 7:04 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Not saying we couldn't trade either Trout
or Blake and some cash for a serious upgrade at SF or point. Just not excited about trading a bunch of our talented players for a marginal improvement at any single position. Adding an FA is fine if only to use the cap space—but why even waste the money on a non-impact player.
by oldguyoldfan on Jul 7, 2009 7:10 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think a cheaper version of Lee
Would be Big Baby, and he is likely very available.
"Brian (Outlaw is Rejector) is now on the fan saying he put this on to see what would happen " - 123_G.O._RipCity
by Outlaw is Rejector on Jul 7, 2009 10:18 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
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
Certain photos copyright © 2009 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.
