Should I Stay or Should I Go?
by Dave on Aug 24, 2009 11:50 PM PDT
Email
PrintHanging out with Gavin and Chad on 95.5 The Game this morning I got asked about Travis Outlaw and his quote about getting paid after a breakout season this year. The illustrious hosts wanted to know what kind of chance Travis had to get his phat check, or whether he even had a chance to stick. Normally questions like this make me itchy. I'll answer them to the best of my ability, of course, as they do make for great conversation and speculation. But I have a strong bias towards accurately explaining what is going on with the team over tossing darts at the "what might happen" board. The future is where most media folks make their money but I still prefer the present.
Nevertheless as I sit down to post this evening I am confronted by the fact that absolutely nothing is happening with the Blazers in the present that we haven't already chatted about. So I thought I'd take the liberty of expanding on the fine radio question, jumping blithely on the future bandwagon by trying to guess which Blazers will still be with the team three years from now at the start of the 2012 regular season (or so). I'm simply going to go down the list, take my best shot, and explain my reasoning. You can feel free to add, counter, or contradict in the comments...definitely part of the fun of us all future-guessing.
Brandon Roy
Brandon isn't going anywhere. Only a LeBron-level deal would pry him out of our hands and that ain't happening for a host of reasons. Brandon is the most likely Blazer-for-Life on the roster right now. The fact that his contract will be huge in three years doesn't hurt.
LaMarcus Aldridge
LaMarcus isn't quite as iron-clad as Brandon but he's still going to be with the team three years from now, if nothing else because you'd have a hard time finding a better complement for Greg Oden in the frontcourt. You could posit the Blazers picking up a more traditional power forward banger but such a star would take up space in the low post and duplicate Oden's rebounding. The only way LaMarcus would get traded is in an acceleration-type move, where a bona fide star of young-ish age with LMA's skills and a proven track record were available. That trade would have to happen within the next year or two to make sense. Those type of players aren't on the horizon. So there you go.
See the rest of the roster after the jump.
Travis Outlaw
Travis isn't going to be here in three years. In fact if you want my gut feeling Travis is going to have a hard time making it through this year. That isn't because he's a bad player. To the contrary, he's shown more control, court understanding, and outside shooting ability than we've ever seen. Paradoxically that's going to make him too valuable to sit, too valuable to let walk for nothing, but also too expensive to pay for what he's giving the Blazers. I believe his inclination will be to stay in Portland because he's comfortable here. But I also believe he and his agent will see his ceiling on the current roster, know that it's nearly unbreakable, and also determine that his head is starting to push up against it already. They're going to demand extra money to play under those handicaps. The Blazers aren't going to be willing to dish it out. If he plays well Travis will garner enough attention on the market to be trade-worthy. If he doesn't play well or doesn't get enough minutes he'll still find enough money in the free agent market that Portland won't match. Either way, I don't foresee a long, lucrative contract with the Blazers in his future.
Steve Blake
Steve is one of those funny cases. On the surface he could probably be replaced. Like Travis, his contract is up after the season, which makes him an easier let-go. Unlike Travis, though, Blake isn't the kind of guy you have to make tons of room for. He's able to contribute in any number of roles and situations. He's also going to come relatively cheap. Plus Andre Miller isn't a long-term solution at point guard. Blake makes a nice insurance policy. My gut says three years is too long to project having Blake around. The back of my brain says he could easily sign a low-wattage contract for at least that long and become a lifer around here. You certainly wouldn't be ashamed to have him. OK...I've talked myself into it. I've got to go against the easy pick somewhere in this list. The point guard landscape is going to be pocked with craters over the next couple of seasons but out of the dust you'll see Blake emerge standing tall, still in scarlet and black.
Rudy Fernandez
I believe Rudy could be traded at some point but unless it's part of a superstar package (which again doesn't seem in the offing) I don't think that's going to happen soon. The Blazers are going to want to run experiments with their talented backcourt. They're also going to want to give Fernandez time to develop. Three years isn't a long time to do either. The only monkey wrench in the ointment (hah!) would be Rudy himself demanding a trade or threatening to go back to Europe. I think it'll work out though.
Greg Oden
Greg Oden may not be the next coming of Hakeem but there's no way he goes anywhere in the next three years. He won't even have hit his prime yet. This one's nearly as big of a lock as Brandon.
Joel Przybilla
Love Joel. Appreciate Joel. Joel's not staying this long. Either this year or next his contract is going to end. He'll have opportunities. He'll command more money than the Blazers will want to spend. Fans could hope for a repeat of his last contract signing where management convinced him to stay rather than to flee to Detroit or San Antonio. But the offer was a combination of cash and a role. The cash won't be equitable and the role will be diminished. Joel would really, really have to love the Blazers to make it this far or the Blazers would have to come out of the blue with a can't-refuse offer.
Nicolas Batum
Yeah, Nic is staying. He'll still be cheap. He'll still bring that nice defensive wrinkle to the small forward position. Hopefully his offense and shooting will be improved as well. You're not going to find that combination from any move, nor do the Blazers have any incentive to let him go.
Andre Miller
Miller probably won't get another contract with the Blazers. Portland will need to settle their point guard hash going into the prime championship runs. Miller won't be a long-term starter at that point. If the Blazers want a back-up they'll probably stick with Blake. Hopefully Andre will do great things in the next couple of years but he'll be a hired gun for the duration.
Jerryd Bayless
It's hard to figure out what young guys are going to do, which is one reason we're not going to include rookies on this list. Jerryd is still a rookie of sorts, not measured by seasons but in terms of responsibility given. He's still looking for that first major, consistent job. He'll have a hard time getting it this year too with Miller and Blake on the roster at point and Roy and Rudy at shooting guard. I'm going to guess that both his and the Blazers' patience run out before he's fully developed into whatever he's going to be. I'm going to guess he'll also have value in trade. Therefore I'm going to guess that he's not here in 2012.
Martell Webster
If guessing about young guys is hard, guessing about a coming-off-of-injury Martell is near impossible. This is compounded by the fact that the Blazers have a team option on Martell for the exact season in question. Let's assume that Martell can play and isn't a victim of chronic foot problems. Speculating that Travis departs leaves some honest room for Webster at small forward. Webster also replaces some of Outlaw's shooting and scoring. Given that situation it's hard to imagine Webster playing poorly enough that he simply gets cut. It's easy to imagine him playing well enough to earn his keep, getting the final year of his contract picked up. If he plays even better than that the Blazers have even more incentive to keep him, thus avoiding for an extra year the exact situation they face with Travis currently. So unless Martell is forever injured or just plays like Bill Shatner's toupee, he'll still be here bombing away in 2012.
That's my best shot. What's your take? Respond below.
--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)
150 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Blazers in 2012
Yes
Roy
Martell
LaMarcus
Greg
Nic
No
Outlaw
Pryzbilla
Miller
Maybe
Rudy
Blake
Bayless
If you ever hear of someone punching out a girl scout and stealing her Samoas, it was me
- Mortimer
by Clevelander among roses on Aug 25, 2009 12:02 AM PDT reply actions
I agree with all but Joel-- but anything is possible!
I sure hope Joel retires as a Blazer!
The Dude: Hey, careful, man, there's a beverage here!
by cavejunctionblazer on Aug 25, 2009 12:16 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Rudy and Pryz will be gone.
If Pryz can prove that his injury-free season was not a fluke, he will get many, many offers for more minutes and money than the Blazers will be willing to spend. He is just too talented and good at what he does to accept 10-20 minutes a game, which is what he will be playing if Oden develops to where he should be. If Pryz is averaging more than that, the Blazers are in trouble.
As for Rudy, I would love to see him embrace his role of the spark off the bench, getting 20-25 minutes per game, ala Vinnie Johnson of the Bad Boys days in Detroit. Unfortunately, I have a feeling that either Rudy or his agent will eventually realize that he can (and maybe should) be starting and playing 30+ minutes per game. He won’t be starting for the Blazers anyiime soon, unless he decides he can be a point guard, which is not gonna happen.
The good news is that both Rudy and Pryz will be very valuable trade chips, and I could see plenty of teams giving up, say a top tier pg for a package involving one or both of them. Throw Outlaw into the mix, and KP should have plenty of chips to play with for the next few seasons.
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace." Jimi Hendrix
by philly420pdxhilo on Aug 25, 2009 12:48 AM PDT reply actions
3 Years From Now
.
Definitely Still Here
Roy
Greg
LMA
Blake – Cheap and reliable veteran presence. He’ll get a another contract,
Batum – Likely our future SF, or backup SF. He will grow into a better all-around player than Webster.
Joel – He will opt out this summer, but re-sign with Blazers. We must have a backup for GO and we couldn’t replace Joel because we will be over the cap. We will over-spend, but so would we for a less capable replacement.
50-50 Still Here
Rudy – Still here if he can play 10-12 minutes at backup PG with Roy at SG. That gives him 30+ minutes as our super 6th man SG/PG/SF(on offense in 3-guard lineup). Otherwise he is probably traded 2 years from now because he will have high trade value as a SG and we don’t have 30+ minutes for him.
Miller – Could be traded after one or two years in a package with Webster and/or Bayless for another PG.
High Likely Gone
Webster – Backup SF. Gone if Rudy still here since Batum and Rudy/Roy get all SF minutes. Also gone if Rudy traded for quality SG/SF.
Definitely Gone
Outlaw – Only gets 11-12 minutes at PF. Gone by trading deadline (probably early this year) for backup PF. We must trade him else he walks for nothing this summer.
Bayless – No playing time to develop him. Packaged in a trade with Webster or Rudy sometime after this year.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 25, 2009 1:20 AM PDT reply actions
In 2012 Nico is still here, after that he is leaving if the Blazers can't give him a significant starring role and money
Same with Rudy. They aren’t particularly bound to the team or the region and would feel just as good playing for the Lakers. There, I said it. They both won’t sign the QO and expect to get a nice big deal and big minutes. One of them will be the odd man out, like Travis seems to be now, looking for a better spot on another team. Could be Rudy, but might be Nico. If it’s Nico, his replacement Claver is training in the wings. If it isn’t, we might never see Claver in a Blazers uni (he won’t come over to be the 2nd or 3rd backup option).
Joel, Blake, and Travis are gone either quietly for no return in free agency 2010/2011 a la Channing or in a deal at the respective deadline. Especially Joel and Travis could get overpaid offers that the Blazers are unlikely to match. Maybe Joel F replaces Joel P in the future, but the timeline might not converge (rather in 3 years than in 2). Martell and Jerryd stay one more year as the backups before their future gets decided playing mostly spot minutes and injury insurance. Their ability to play SG might become important if Rudy gets disgruntled before his contract is up. Or Batum sees playing time there, as he does on the national team.
I predict one more point guard project before Andre Miller’s contract is up. That could be Bayless replacing Blake, or another rookie/player on rookie contract.
Too much young talent looking for playing time and money to keep together forever once the next contract for each one comes around. Consolidation trades or players just leaving will happen.
We can't afford to let Joel get away, because we will be over the cap and can't replace him.
We couldn’t get Freeland or anyone else close to Joel’s ability at the MLE or minimum salary and that’s all we will have to spend. Also it’s unlikely we can trade for a decent backup Center. We must have a good backup for GO and that means we should over-spend to keep Joel.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 25, 2009 1:44 AM PDT up reply actions
agreed
If the team (read: Paul Allen) wants to win as bad as he says he does, he will not let Przy walk away
(But if the Vulcans won’t let him pay the luxury tax in years to come, then all bets are off…and Portland will become like the Jazz)
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
You mean Mormon?
I support the Tornado Release [See: Joakim Noah]
We'll have Kyle Korver for interior defense?
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
no, the Miller family doesn't like to pay the luxury tax
so they have a competitive team every year, that never wins a title
I really don’t want to “go there” with the Blazers, but it depends on who’s in charge of the purse strings going forward, Paul or the Vulcans?
San Antonio is another example of frugal management that has led to sustained success, but I’m not sure KP is as savvy as RC or that Nate has the coaching chops when compared to Pop
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Three reasons why San Antonio succeeded frugally
Timmy, Manu, and Tony. When you’ve got those guys, you can be frugal at other positions and still succeed.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
^^^ I messed up my wording above.
What I wanted to say: I don’t see anyone that is close to Przy’s ability that we could get at the MLE. Freeland isn’t close to Przy’s ability yet, however we could probably get him for the MLE, but not the minimum salary.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 25, 2009 3:28 PM PDT up reply actions
^^^ I should add the CBA isn't clear that we can use the MLE on Freeland.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 25, 2009 1:47 AM PDT up reply actions
Not sure I follow you:
That is because I don’t know the rules. Why can we over pay Joel, but not over pay Freeman? Another thing, could Pendergraph possibly be a back-up for a while? He is a banger and the only way to get experience is to go in and get your feet wet. I do realize that if Greg gets in foul trouble he would have to go in against their starting centers and that could be bad. We could use LMA, but I don’t even like to go there.
Oh by the way, I think you are right we have to find a way to keep Joel. But, if we can’t keep him we must have some good options.
I have also been a Blazer fan since 1970. But I couldn’t follow them closely because of no TV and radio over here where I am is bad.
hg
Well, Freeland
is a special case given that he was drafted with the last pick in the first round. We can bring him over essentially whenever we want, but his salary is fixed for his draft slow, which is basically just above the minimum for 4 years. The issue with getting him over isn’t us being able to pay him under the cap, but him being willing to accept probably less money than he could get in Europe to come play here, similar to Rudy.
No, we can pay Freeman anything we want within our cap "Room".
This is because he was drafted more than 3 years ago. However, we are over the cap so we have no cap “Room”. However, we will have a Mid Level Exception. The CBA seems unclear as to whether you can use an exception as “Room” in this case. I didn’t elaborate on the issue but see Storyteller’s comments below. If we can use the MLE, that would probably be enough to get Freeland to come over.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 25, 2009 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions
yeah, lazy journalism on my part
been too long since my coon refresher. Sorry about that.
I expect a ruling on this CBA matter in the next year, if it hasn't already been made
Next summer, it is anticipated that San Antonio will want to use their MLE to sign Splitter. If that turns out to be the case, a clear interpretation of the CBA will have to be made before then.
Right now, the CBA says in Article VII that a team can use “room” to sign a 1st round pick who hasn’t signed for 3 years after being drafted. “Room” is defined in the CBA – but elsewhere (Article I) – in such a way that it includes both cap room and use of exceptions. Most discussions I’ve read seem to point to the MLE being able to be used to sign Freeland now that the 3 years has passed, but clarification is needed.
A clarification ruling may actually have already happened. I’m putting together a list of CBA questions for Tom Penn that I hope to be able to run by him at some point in the future, and this is on the list. If I can get an answer from him or anyone else, I’ll let you know.
by Storyteller on Aug 25, 2009 9:18 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
and that is why, Storyteller, you are one of the best!!!!!!!
Thanks.
PER has to be useful...I'm sure it helped determine to keep Batum after Summer League
That was my interpretation as well, though the Spurs could also create cap “room” in the form of cap space in excess of the rookie scale next year without having to use an exception. But they probably would like the clarification and flexibility to use either option.
Could you also ask Penn if they have cleared those 4 old unsigned second round picks off the books :) At least the 2 that likely have retired (Nicolas, Sheffer, with Kammerichs and Sinanovic still active).
Seems like a ruling will allow the MLE to be used.
Article 1 (eee) "Room" means the extent to which: (i) a Team’s then-current Team Salary is less than the Salary Cap; or (ii) a Team is entitled to use one of the Salary Cap Exceptions set forth in Article VII, Section 6©, (d), (e) and (h) (Disabled Player, Bi-annual, Mid-Level Salary and Traded Player Exceptions).
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 25, 2009 3:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Right
A literal reading of “room” would indicate that an exception can be used to sign Freeland now that the 3 year period has passed. However, since no team (to my knowledge) has used an exception in this manner to sign a 1st round pick, it would be nice to have formal clarification.
Agreed about Nic and Rudy
I almost see Nic’s situation as being similar to Hedo’s in Sacramento or San Antonio. Hedo was obviously a solid player on both of those teams, but they just weren’t able to give him a large enough role to satisfy him given their roster make ups and couldn’t afford to pay him $5+ MM to sit on the bench and play 15 mpg. If Nic keeps emerging and becomes a star internationally, I can’t imagine him being willing to come back here after every summer and be willing to just be a glue guy and a 4th (or 5th) option offensively.
A lot of it depends on how the next CBA shakes out, but given that we’ll probably have a sizable contract for Oden to add to Brandon and LaMarcus’s deals, if a team comes in with $9-10 MM/year offer for Nic in his RFA year, do we match it? That’d be roughly $50 million a year tied up in 4 players alone, so if Paul Allen is serious about keeping the payroll semi-reasonable, I don’t see how we can pull the trigger on that.
While there are obviously injury questions now, Martell seems to be a much better bet (if somewhat worse prospect) to be happy playing in Portland as a 4th guy behind the big three. He has some strong connections to the northwest, he’s locked up for longer, and I’d imagine he feels more attached to the rest of the team than Nic does right now, having been teammates with many of these guys for 3+ years.
Still, you never know.
I meant San Antonio
but Orlando works as well now that I think about it.
Look it up. Little known fact that Hedo was on that 03/04 Spurs team.
Blazers in 2012
Yes:
Roy
LaMarcus
Greg
Nic
Blake
Martell
Miller (in the “beloved player-coach” role)
No:
Rudy
Outlaw
Pryzbilla
Bayless
It seems like if anyone leaves it will be trouble
but if everyone stays it’ll be double
"It’s a good ol’ fashioned Rip City beat down!"
by Magnum on Aug 25, 2009 1:59 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
The Blazer roster always changes by the year no matter how much we like our own players.
I don’t see Outlaw or Bayless on this team in 2 years. It’s so hard to say though. It was easier when we knew Jarrett Jack, Sergio, and Frye were going to be shipped out. The pieces we have now are all valuable and we are keeping them for cheap.
What I expect
is not the same as what I want. Barring injury:
Sure things: Brandon, LMA, Greg, and Nic will be here in 2012. They all have roles to play, and will be paid for playing them.
Strong probability (I’ll be surprised if these guys leave):
1. Blake probably stays, even if Jerryd develops. Steve will get a decent contract this year, and take it. He might be able to make more money elsewhere, but he’ll have a rotation spot on a championship contender — if Jerryd develops, we can trade Andre as an expiring contract. Blake is a good backup (even if he “starts”) for the next 7-8 years, at a reasonable cost.
2. Martell probably stays. If he plays well enough to justify his contract, he’s a solid role player. If he exceeds that, he might be a starter or even a star for us. In either case, he stays. If he doesn’t play well enough to justify the contract, he might possibly be traded as an expiring contract in the summer.
Probable (I think these guys will stay, but won’t be overly surprised if they are gone):
1. Joel. There’s a good chance Joel can make more than Portland will be prepared to offer. It is unlikely to be a huge amount more, and the prospect of championships will be appealing, as will the prospect of keeping his family in Portland. So he may stay even if he is offered more elsewhere. If Joel stays for less money, he may ask for a no-trade clause, which probably won’t be given. He may also be offered more per season elsewhere but take less per season in exchange for a longer contract in Portland.
2. Rudy. Rudy is a big enough talent that we are likely to work extra hard to find ways to keep him well-utilized. He is easy to trade, though, and could get frustrated. I think he’ll probably be here, but there are many scenarios in which he wouldn’t be. One is that he plays out his rookie contract, and then (three years from now) goes back to Europe. I think Paul Allen will pay him (he won’t be in a David Lee situation), so if he does go back it will be because of frustration with his role.
3. Jerryd. I think he will succeed and become our PG. It won’t be a shock if he doesn’t succeed, or gets frustrated before he succeeds and asks out. But I think he will probably be here.
Probably gone:
1. Travis. Too bad, I wish it weren’t the case. I think the handwriting is on the wall. I think Travis needs to come back to camp a rebounding machine, and have improved both his passing and his defense, or we’re going to end up saying goodby. It’s a shame, he could have been so much more for us. He’ll be missed if he goes.
2. Andre. Only way he stays is if he is a hero having taken us to two championships, we have the PG situation sorted going forward, and he wants a cheap two year deal as a bench player on a sort of farewell tour, preparatory to becoming an assistant coach with Portland. His signing was the classic “rent a player” for a couple of years to open your window of contention early.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
Wait, what?
we have the PG situation sorted going forward
I agree Jerryd gets some unfair stick on this board, but I don’t see any way that the PG situation could be called “sorted”. I’m not terrified of it either, but I can’t say I’m super comfortable with going back to a 31 year old Blake as a starter (has a team ever gone back to starting a guy after demoting him to the bench for two years?).
Besides, barring injury to two guys who have missed a total of 14 games to injury in the past 3 years, it’s entirely possible that Bayless doesn’t see almost any meaningful minutes this year or the next. Amid all the Aaron Brooks comparisons, people forget that the Rockets shipped out their backup PG the summer after Brooks’s rookie year. We, on the other hand, have brought in a new starter. Guys need to play to develop, especially a guy like Bayless who has obvious physical talent, but just can’t seem to get it together in the actual games.
I believe you missed the "if"...
I take it to mean he’d only stay if we have the PG situation sorted out… not that we do now…
Yeah
There was one “if” before a series of possibilities. It would have been clearer if I had put an “if” before all three of them.
If Andre is a hero, if we have the PG situation sorted, and if Andre is happy with a cheap deal, etc. Then he might stay. Otherwise, we’ll be looking for a real replacement, and using roster spots for guys who at least have the potential to be that replacement.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
Fair enough, I read the second two items on the list as being a completely separate clause
i.e. “the only he stays around is if he is a hero having taken us to two championships;” For some reason I read the comma as a semicolon. Interpreting it as you actually wrote it makes actually makes sense, strangely enough.
That would be strange
There was nothing “wrong” with the way I wrote it, it just could have been clearer. I can see why you misunderstood.
Internet communication can be a pain.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
RT: Webster...traded as an expiring contract in the summer
you’ll have to explain this to me, I thought his contract is for another 3 years, with a team option in 2012
How can this be “expiring” in 2010?
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
In the summer three years from now
I didn’t know about the team option for 2012-13, I thought it was guaranteed. In that case, he could be traded as an EC the year before, even if he isn’t playing well.
I was talking about summer 2012 — that’s the subject of the discussion.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
To many questions
If Rudy wants out Martell can play 2 and 3. That depends on his injured foot. But I think the Blazers will give Rudy enough minutes and a bigger role to keep him. Therefore If Claver comes over in 2 years, I see him and Batuum taking all the minutes at 3 and Martell will be expendable.
If Mills pans out, he already got the skills at pg and doesn’t have to be trained. That puts JBay on the trading block because he couldn’t stand to be the 3rd stringer for that long. I think JBay’s attitude will take over and he will be traded.. But as Dave said you can’t know what rookies are going to do so you can’t predict where they might be in 3 years.
It is hard to say about Joel. We have some prospects in Freeman and Pendergraph, but we are talking backup minutes at center. Joel would be my choice to keep if possible because he is getting at the age that being back up on a championship team that he helped build through blood and sweat and patience whether then go to another team for a few more dollars and few more minutes of playing time for a lesser team.
I think Travis will want to move on. He is a good enough player to play more minutes. But, if the second unit becomes a running team with miller, I think Travis value for the Blazers will sky rocket and possibly make him an All-star Travis’s game would strive on a run and gun team. I don’t think you will ever get lots of D from him, but if rebounding means he can get out and run that might give him the incentive to rebound.
Of course I would love to keep them all, but we can’t sit on that much talent.
hg
by BBK on Aug 25, 2009 4:36 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I think of Martell as important to this team as Terry Porter was to the Drexler Blazers. Yeah Roy is the man
but he needs that guy hitting 3 after 3 like Porter did. Webster is only 22, we really haven’t seen his full potential yet.
lol, when did we draft Webster?
when he was 12?
by In Walks Rudy on Aug 25, 2009 6:25 AM PDT up reply actions
Crazy huh?!
It seems like he’s been around for a very long time, and he’s still the age of some rookies.
by pdxer in dfw on Aug 25, 2009 6:44 AM PDT up reply actions
He is less than 5 months
older than Cunningham and Pendergrass.
I hope that foot is okay. Martell can be an All-Star someday with his athletic ability and his great attitude.
Stu Inman: a soft-spoken, witty and brilliant basketball guy -- who had so much to do with Portland's only championship. He believed that you won with not just great players, but with great people. (D Jaynes 2-2-07 Portland Tribune)
What I hope for: the Big 3 + Nic + Rudy + Bayless
Nic: I think Nic is the most likely to succeed and the most important outside the big 3.
Rudy is locked in for the next 3 seasons and will be RFA after that. He is too good, and too cheap, to be going anywhere. Besides, I think the team will be elite level and deep into the playoffs from here forward. Just like Ginobli, I think Rudy will find it better to be the 6th man on a team “in the hunt,” than starting for a loosing team.
Bayless is the biggest question mark on the team in my mind. If he develops, he is the most logical heir to Miller. Bayless certainly has better odds of being a long term answer at PG than Blake, Koponen, or Mills. The team is going to have late picks and be in lottery tax hell from here forward. Developing Bayless is the most cost effective option available for the teams biggest future roster hole.
I don’t think there is much doubt that Bayless will begin to find his outside shot this season. Most recent comment from the Blazer shooting coach was that he is shooting as well in practice as Blake or James Jones ever have. I also don’t think there is much doubt that he has the talent and the mindset to be good on defense. He just needs time on the floor. Whether or not he can learn to score and dish, whether he can make the right decisions on the fly, is the real question, IMHO.
Most folks here seem certain that Miller and Blake are going to get all the PG minutes this season. Maybe, maybe not. If Bayless can use his strength and speed to become a better defender than Blake, and if he shoots well enough that he is a legitimate scoring threat, I think he will earn some time. We need someone who can at least slow down the growing list of ultra-quick PGs in the league. Nate is the guy who will make the call. On one hand, he is impatient with young PGs and Blake is his security blanket. On the other, Nate likes defense, and Blake is only adequate against about two-thirds of the PGs in the league.
I hope Pryz stays, but won’t be surprised if he doesn’t. Hopefully, he continues to value loyalty, and understands that less minutes may help him to play more years. Better to be an important part of a winning team for the next 5-6 years, than a starter for a mediocre team for the next 2-3.
Martell is another big “?”. Not so much because of his foot, which I think is likely to be OK, but because his fate depends both on his own development as well as the development of Nic and Rudy. Martell could beat out Nic for the starting 3 spot, or he could end up buried on the bench.
Trout’s fate may already be sealed, or it may still be in his hands. If he can demonstrate some ability to rebound and reduce the frequency of his defensive lapses, Trout may reestablish his place on the team as the primary back-up to LMA. Trout’s game continues to improve. He learns slowly, but he does learn. On the other hand, Cunningham may replicate enough of Trout’s offensive skills without the rebounding and defensive lapses, that he makes Trout increasingly expendable.
Steve’s future depends on Bayless. If Bayless shows rapid improvement, Steve may be expendable. If Bayless and Cunningham develop, I could see KP trading either Trout or Blake, or packaging both, for another big man at the trade deadline.
by upper left corner on Aug 25, 2009 7:53 AM PDT reply actions
I think Blake probably stays
Even if Bayless progresses as we think he will, Andre is only a short term solution, and we need a long term PG backup. Steve is very good for that role, fits the team, and won’t be expensive.
I think the Bayless question has more to do with whether or not Andre lasts past his second year here. If Bayless becomes a legit PG by that time, KP may tell Andre, “Thanks, but now we’re ready to move on.” If Bayless surprises us and becomes legit this year, we could even see Andre traded in the summer or before the next deadline — because of the team option, he can be an expiring contract.
In other words, I don’t think Bayless determines Blake’s fate. The only thing that determines his fate is his willingness to stay on in a reduced role for decent money, IMO.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
RT: Just like Ginobli, I think Rudy will find it better to be the 6th man on a team "in the hunt,"
For this to happen, other players (and Nate) will have to make some concessions
A couple of wing players (Outlaw, Webster) will need to be traded
Roy will have to agree to play 10-15 mpg at the SF position. Brandon has said he and Nate want to keep his playing weight between 205-210, this summer. I see that as a major problem when it comes to #7 guarding most opposing SFs
Or, Roy or Rudy will have to play minutes at PG, but if this was an option I doubt Miller would’ve been acquired.
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
OR
Brandon and Nate will concede to Brandon only playing 30 mpg.
Which I would love to see. Keep him healthy and fresh, even if it costs us 3-4 regular season wins. Reduce injuries, possibly extend his career, and increase the likelihood that he is healthy and at the top of his game when the playoffs hit.
I’ve probably beat this dead horse to death enough times. But when you have a backup the quality of Rudy, you don’t need to play your superstar 40 mpg unless you are struggling to stay in the playoff hunt. And that is not going to be the case with this team, barring huge injury problems.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
I think Rudy's minute increase depends on how well he plays with Miller.
If Rudy and Miller start to light things up in the back court, I could easily see Nate lowering Roy’s minutes. If they struggle playing together, Nate will go with what he knows and that is Blake and Roy.
Old habits are hard to break.
PER has to be useful...I'm sure it helped determine to keep Batum after Summer League
And old successes are hard to throw off
Blake and Roy have been very successful.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
Alot of people are saying Andre will take a year to fit in.
I don’t agree, yes as the season goes on he will get more aclimated to his teammates.However a PG of his experience will gel sooner then many expect, from what I have heard he spends alot of time in the film room which will help him know where his teammates like the ball almost as much as court time will.
He did it! Yes he did!
I don't see it taking a long time
but I do see Nate being hesitant to break up the Roy/Blake tandem.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
closer to 35 mpg
Nate/Roy will always want to win every regular season game, and the rest of the Blazers won’t be dominant enough to get Brandon those extra 5 minutes a game of rest, over the course of a season
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Maybe they'll learn from San Antonio
It will make a difference if we start winning some tough road games, so Nate isn’t afraid of going into the playoffs without homecourt advantage in every series.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
Roy already played more than 10 minutes a game at SF (defensively) last year,
so I don’t think that is a problem. I don’t think his weight is near the issue that you do. Getting minutes for Roy/Rudy at SF won’t be a problem either. Trout will be gone, and until then he will be a backup PF exclusively. Webster and Nic will battle over the 36-38 minutes available at SF.
I definitely think we will see Rudy “try out” at PG this year. Last year he and Roy played about 4-5 minutes at PG/SG together in most games. Roy usually handled the ball more than Rudy, but it’s easy to let Rudy handle the ball more and see if it works out over the year. That doesn’t have to be an instant success because Roy can always handle the ball as needed (in fact it can be hard stopping him sometimes).
The big thing is whether Rudy can guard the opposing PG as well as Blake (that’s not setting the bar real high) and bring the ball up the floor because Roy does not like to do either. I’d guess there is about a 50% chance that Rudy could learn to play PG (Blake style) in the next two years. But it’s worth giving this a good try for 4-5 minutes a game this year. If two years from now Rudy could play 10-12 minutes as a PG with Roy his minutes problems are solved. He could become our Super 6th Man with about 33 minutes a game (10-12 at PG with Roy, 10-12 at SG/SF with Roy, 11 at SG with Roy resting).
A don’t think Miller has anything to do with this. He was bought in as a hired gun for a couple of years. He isn’t a long term solution so we should still try out Rudy at PG for a few minutes a game this year.
OT: I think expectations over Miller are getting too high. This always seems to happen a few weeks after we get a new player. Despite KP’s usual hype, this time that Miller is such a winner, Miller has never been out of the first round of the playoffs. He’s played in 27 playoff games in 10 years. Yes, he’s going to help this team, but he isn’t the missing piece that gets us to the finals. Oden will be the factor that eventually gets us to the finals or not.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 25, 2009 4:41 PM PDT up reply actions
sorry
but I don’t see Nate cutting into Miller or Blakes’ minutes at the PG to give Rudy 4-5 minutes in the backcourt alongside Roy every night. Last year was last year, there wasn’t overwhelming motivation for Nate to play Sergio or Bayless much at PG when the team needed a win, and one of the main reasons Roy played so much at SF was…because Martell was hurt. It seems so obvious, Brandon at 207 pounds is not built to be guarding SFs who tip the scales at 225-235 pounds and like to post up shooting guards…that’s just not a good idea for Roy’s long-term health or production. If the other team wants to play a 3 guard lineup—fine, then Nate can counter with PG-Rudy-Roy, but that’s still the exception, not the normal rotation.
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
So your normal rotation has Rudy playing 11 minutes a game?
If Roy/Rudy don’t play SF and Roy/Rudy to don’t play PG/SG in your “normal” rotation, that leaves Rudy with 11 minutes a game while Roy is resting. Not gonna happen!
Nate uses a Rudy/Roy backcourt and 3-guard lineups because it gives Rudy minutes and more Rudy minutes makes us a stronger team. i.e. Rudy was better contributor than Outlaw (as a SF – Outlaw played better at PF) and he will contribute more than Webster. Can he eventually contribute more at PG than Blake? I don’t know, but 4-5 minutes a game is well worth the investment to find out.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 25, 2009 7:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Like we've beem saying, for awhile
KP needs to thin the herd. If Nate has to play funky lineups to get Rudy enough PT, and to make sure Travis gerts enough shots, and to give Nic enough time to continue his summer improvement, and to re-integrate Martell into the rotation…then no one is going to get enough PT to keep everybody happy. Adding Miller to Blake at the PG position, that’s 48 minutes combined, every night. Batum and Martell at SF, they’re also worthy of 48 combined minutes. Rudy and Outlaw may be “better” wing players but something’s got to give, because a consolidation trade or at least one serious injury are the only things that can break up the logjam at the wing positions
KP said on 95.5 earlier (check the fanshot, in the sidebar) that there’s going to be “competition” at every position (PF?) and that’s something they’re looking forward to…but it’s really going to test the character of his young players when some of them are getting the short end of the stick when it comes to their minutes and roles in the rotation. We’ve been through this “too deep” scenario before during the Whitsitt era and it didn’t turn out too well, eh?
I’m hoping KP has a little more sense than to let this potential PT discontent linger too far into the season. The best-made rosters will always have some veterans who don’t care if they play a whole lot during the regular season, mixed with rookies who are just happy to be there surrounding a core of young vets who are getting the bulk of the PT. If there are too many young vets fighting for not enough PT there will be trouble down the road, no matter how “close” and mature the players are when the season starts.
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I agree the time is coming to thin the herd, but not quite yet.
The key competition this year is between Webster and Nic. Nate seemed satisfied (54 wins) with his 3 guard lineup and a few minutes with Roy/Rudy at PG/SG to get Rudy 25.5 minutes last year. I don’t see that changing this year except to increase by 1 or 2 minutes.
I don’t see any problems with Blake. He will accept whatever role he is given, but he’ll give Miller a good run for his money. It could be about a 24-19 minute split with Miller getting the higher minutes.
I think Webster and Nic will battle for the 36-38 minutes left at small forward. I can see them sharing that about evenly for 4-5 weeks and then one of them will probably end up with something like 24-25 minutes and the other 12-13 minutes as long as Rudy is playing well.
By next summer we may have a decision on whether Rudy or Webster remains, assuming Nic beats out Webster for the starting SF spot. Unless Miller looks like he can take us to a championship, some combination of Webster, Bayless, Blake, or Miller could net the final piece at PG and thin the herd. Or substitute Rudy for Webster in that list if we can’t eventually find 30 minutes for Rudy. (Outlaw will already be gone no later than the trading deadline, hopefully for our backup PF.) Thus one way or the other the final PG piece will be filled and the herd thinned.
If Webster should beat out Nic, Nic should remain because he is cheap and we can afford to take more time bringing him along behind Webster. However, my money is on Batum to win that competition over Webster. I think he is going to be something special.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 25, 2009 11:08 PM PDT up reply actions
I think you are right about PG minutes this year
I suspect it is a matchup decision. If Rudy can be as effective as Blake at defending the point, he’ll take some of Steve’s minutes. Can Rudy bring the ball up court? In general, if we have Rudy, Brandon, and Nic on the court, I don’t think we’ll have trouble getting the ball up court. Can Rudy defend PGs? Well, I think he can defend PGs like Blake and Fisher and a few others, so when we’re playing that kind of PG, he might play at the point a lot. Against Parker and CP3, he might not play the point at all.
I also think there is some overrating of Andre going on. He’s good, but he’s not an all-star, or even close. He may put us over the top, but only because Greg and others have put us right there. We’ll be over the top anyway in a couple years, Andre might get us there sooner.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
RT: there is some overrating of Andre going on
Miller is going to help at both ends of the floor, and he will be playing more than 24 minutes a night, every night
And unless he “defers” a lot more with Portland than he has with his previous teams, he will be the team’s #3 scorer
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
That's the overrating again
I don’t think Andre helps on the defensive end.
I also don’t know whether he’ll average more than 24 mpg. He’ll probably play more than that in the playoffs, how much more remains to be seen. In the regular season, I don’t know that it will be the same story.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
defensive end
not as an individual defender as much as a smart team defender who studies tape on the opponent and then takes them out of what they do best, by always getting into the right position. For example, Philly neutralized Roy last spring because Miller doubled quickly on Brandon every time he spun and changed directions. Roy was unprepared for this tactic and his Blazer teammates didn’t know what to do, so the offensive set broke down.
I expect Miller to make a huge difference in the Blazer’s cerebral approach to the game, at both ends of the court. You can underrate this rare ability if you want…some folks need to see the difference before they’re convinced. 30 minutes and 15 ppg, and like with Roy everyone will be saying “when did Andre score those 15 points? They came so easy and in the flow”
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Do you really want BRoy playing 3?
I read this in one of the older blogs, maybe from Dave’s. It was said that he is our main man. he is most productive at 2 and more comfortable at 2, or in Nate’s scheme a utility guard. Playing 3 would open season for the head hunters that would love to get their big bodies or flying elbows into his body.
Anyway I don’t think you need to put BRoy or Rudy in that situation except when we are going small against another team that went small.
So, i agree with what was said earlier by jscot play Roy less minutes to reduce stress on his knees.
hg
He was actually more productive at the 3 last year
Probably because that meant Rudy was on the floor and helping to spread the court.
I don’t mind seeing him put in 5-10 mpg at the 3, depending on how much production we are getting from Nic and Martell. I’d like to see 22-24 mpg at the 2 and 5-10 at the 3, personally.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
Its hard when we're in love(they say)
We are in love with all of our players, rightfuly so! But If I were to let go of someone to balance out our DYNASTY roster it would be….
Rudy-He didn’t leave overseas money to play a back-up role behind Roy. He doesnt excel at the 3 spot and cannot play the point. He is a shooting gaurd only!
Travis-This is a guy that I have wanted gone for a long time now…too long of a story to explain
As much as I hate to think it
or admit it, we need to remember role players have specific roles, at certain prices. If the Blazers are to become a championship team, and continue to compete for championships, the team will probably have to follow the SA model of keeping your core 3 or 4 guys, and letting the other guys go when they want/need more money or minutes. The only players that I feel SURE will still be Blazers in 3 years are Roy, Aldridge, Oden and MAYBE Nic.
It doesn’t mean none of the others will still be Blazers, but rather that KP will be constantly evaluating how to build/maintain team competitiveness…often willing let a person leave for more $/minutes elsewhere, or even trade them for a piece that he thinks will fit better and is cost effective.
"I'm a man, but I can change.....if I have to......I guess." - Red Green
by antediluvian on Aug 25, 2009 9:12 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Surety is tough to get on something like this, huh?
Yeah, barring any career-ending injuries, I agree that the only ones sure to be on the Blazers are Roy, Aldridge and Oden.
If I had to venture guesses on the rest, I’d say:
Yes – Batum, Bayless, Webster
No – Fernandez, Outlaw, Blake, Miller, Przybilla
Fernandez is probably my ‘surprise’ pick to not be on the roster in three years. It’s not that he’ll be ‘too expensive to keep’ after his rookie deal runs out. And it’s certainly not a knock on his playing ability. In fact, it’s the opposite. I don’t think he’ll be happy as a perpetual 25 MPG player off the bench for Portland. He’ll ask to be traded to a team where he can start and have a greater impact. Hopefully by then, he’ll have won an NBA title with the Blazers so that he can move on to a new set of challenges with another team.
What happens depends on so many variables:
- Does Jerryd put it all together at PG? Or does a lack of PT cause him to fall apart?
- Can Rudy find happiness in the arms of three different positions?
- Is Andre playing at such a high level in two years that we cannot drop him?
- Does Martell’s foot prove to be made of glass or iron?
- Will Nic reach another level this year, then climb to even greater heights after that? Or is his ceiling more crop-duster than satellite?
- Can Joel be happy enough with a smaller feedbag in Portland or will he seek greener pastures elsewhere? (BTW, he’s averaged less than 25 minutes per game for his career, so I think his game will stay at least at its current level well into his thirties.)
- If the team wins a championship this season or next, does Paul Allen celebrate by keeping the party going, or do our young, talented RFAs become such hot commodities that he decides to sell short?
- Will a career-ending injury shoot-down any of our guys or will they dodge that bullet like Keanu Reeves in The Matrix?
- Can our rookies and Euros grab the brass ring or will they fall off the NBA carousel?
To find out
tune in next week;
Same bat time,
Same bat channel.
Good analysis -- I generally agree
Outlaw is as good as gone after next season, maybe even during the trade deadline. I also suspect Rudy is gone in the next off season because he’ll be worth a lot and will want more minutes.
B-Roy and GO are probably Blazers for Life, and LMA might be one. This could be Batum’s make or break year for that category too, and I suspect he makes it. He’ll be here three years from now.
Miller will probably leave after 3 years — he’ll be 37, and unless he is prepared to be a back-up, I think his career is close to over at that point.
Not sure if Blake lasts beyond this year. I rather suspect someone will offer him more money than Portland is willing to pay for a back-up.
This will open up a slot for Bayless. I think he is still here in 3 years, in a back-up role, nearly ready to move into the starting slot.
Joel will still be here. As much as we all love him, and see his value as a player, he is a largely one-dimensional player.
I’m taking Webster off the board because of he missed last year.
3 big reasons Rudy's here in 3 years
Merchandising:
Beside BRoy is there any jersey or t-shirt that you saw more than Rudy’s.
Female factor:
Due to the presence of ‘sexy time’ at the RG hot woman came out in droves to the support the team (the young female demo is a marketer’s dream – see above).
Bromance:
Mine and every other hetero male Blazer fan’s man-crush on Rudy demand that he stay on the team (see above). My worst nightmare is the L*kers snag him in the FA markey and he kills us for years to come.
by The Mallorcan Rocket on Aug 25, 2009 9:40 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
This is me looking for reasons why Rudy will still be a Blazers in 2014:
AK brought up some silly clauses in Roy’s contract about some non-guaranteed stuff in case of big time injury. If they care enough to try to save pennies if Roy goes down by being rude, they might care to be nice and spend for Rudy as injury insurance on the court.
Actually, that is another reason for me to want us to play Rudy more. Roy can save his knees/ankles a few minutes for a comparable young guy.
I’m really biased of course, as my dream back court rotation is Batum, Roy, Fernandez, PG?.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Can we define our parameters?
I’ve read several posts that seem to imply that Rudy or Batum will still be under their current contract in 3 years and have upcoming RFA status, which is not true.
If Rudy, Nic or Greg are still on the Blazers in 3 years, it will be under a new contract signed in 2012 or under an extension signed in 2011 or they will be playing for the qualifying offer and will be an UFA in the summer of 2013.
Right now, the only players whose current contract will still be in effect in August of 2012 are Brandon Roy and Martell Webster (if the team option for 2012-13 is picked up). Everyone else, if they are still on the team, must be either re-signed to a new deal, extended or will be playing on a 1 year qualifying offer.
Have I missed something? Let me know if I have (it won’t be the first time). I just want to make sure that we’re all on the same page of knowing what it will take for players to still be on the team in 3 years.
Correct
We will still have rights to Rudy, Nic, and Jerryd in three years time unless we trade them or renounce them. Greg is different, because he theoretically could sign a QO in two years and then leave as UFA. The other three will only be under contract if they sign a new contract, but we will still have their rights barring a trade or renouncing them. The only way we would lose them without our agreement/approval in three years is if they go to Europe. Otherwise, they’ll be playing for us under an extended contract, an RFA matched contract, or a QO.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
Or they (not all, but one of them) won’t play for us, because we didn’t match a big RFA offer in the summer of 2012. I highly doubt any one of them signs the QO to become an unrestricted free agent the following season thereby risking a lot of long-term security if they get hurt that season. The most prominent player to do so was Ben Gordon, and he had the problem that he had a bad relationship with his old team management after not signing an extension and no good offers in the year his old contract was up. But they could all get good offers on the open market that a capped out Blazers team close to or in the luxury tax won’t want to all pay.
That’s the old problem of consolidating your money into 3-4 top guys, with cheaper role players around them.
But in effect, by not matching
it would be with our agreement/approval. If we are determined to keep them, they’ll be on the team three years from now, unless they go to Europe.
Your point is valid, Paul Allen may not want to pay what they can get on the open market as RFAs. But ultimately, it is still the Blazers’ decision (assuming nothing major changes on this front in a new CBA, of course). Paul Allen will have the money to pay them, so it just comes down to whether we want to retain them badly enough.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
Been wondering about all of this
Dave and others are writing about Greg Oden as a sure thing, but shouldn’t it at least be mentioned that he will have the option to walk? It is not obvious to me that he is happy in Portland, and the homesickness factor may prove non-trivial.
If I understand correctly, it is his next contract that will make Greg a long term Blazer, and thus his future is TBD.
The option to walk is risky
Especially for a guy who has had injuries.
This summer, assuming no disasters this year, Greg has the chance to sign an extension that makes him a very rich man, even if he hasn’t made the case for a max contract. This would make him our player for at least three years after his rookie contract ends in the summer of 2011.
He can wait another year until summer 2011, risking a career-ending injury, to make the case for an even better contract. Still ours, if he chooses to take that risk.
At that point, he’s an RFA. He can then sign a new contract with us, or sign with someone else, and we match — and he’s a very rich man, and ours for at least three more years, probably four, perhaps five.
Or, he can take yet another risk, and sign the Q.O. and play another year for us. This means that he makes a much smaller amount his fifth year than he could have had if he had signed a new contract. And he plays yet another year with the risk of disastrous injury preventing him ever having a big contract,
If you are Greg’s agent, do you tell him to take the risk of playing two years without a mega-contract just so he can be free to go wherever he wants? Or do you tell him to sign a three year extension, make the money now while you can, win some championships, and then in 2014 or 2015, if you really want to go somewhere else, you’ll be in a great position — and, you’ve made a pile of money even if disaster happens?
If I’m his agent, I tell him to sign an extension this summer. He wouldn’t have talked about this being a contract year if he wasn’t thinking extension this summer. Any player who stands to make at least double their rookie salary is probably being foolish not to extend after their third year, unless the franchise is so dysfunctional that they just have to get out. This kind of player should always extend, and then issue a quiet “please trade me” if they want to go somewhere else.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
Do we need to get to the finals in two years?
Paul Allen is unimaginably rich. If we can get to the finals in two years, there is no telling how much he might spend to get a championship and create a potential dynasty. If not, he could tire of losing money and move on to other hobbies.
Almost certainly we will try to extend GO next summer, and unless bad things happen this year it’s going to be a max contract. In this case, you have to pay full price for potential or someone else will. We will also extend Przy next summer if Paul seriously wants to win a championship (Przy will opt out to get a long term security contract rather than risk playing another year and get injured). That will make two max contracts (Roy and GO), one huge contract (LMA), and two very large contracts (Przy and Miller).
Two summers from now Nic and Rudy come up for contract extensions. Both will be looking for big contracts and will probably have the market value to get them. If we haven’t been to the finals by then there could to be tremendous pressure to start cutting the payroll. The easy way to start doing that would be to trade their cheap contracts or only extend qualifying offers. We would still have them for two more years to pursue a championship as they signed the qualifying offers, but they could also refuse them and become an RFA (that we probably wouldn’t match) after only one more year.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 25, 2009 5:35 PM PDT up reply actions
looking back 3 years, to the start of 2006-2007, 5 players on that roster remain: brandon roy, travis outlaw, lamarcus aldridge, martell webster and joel przybilla. do you expect more or less roster turnover in the next 3 years?
Less
Because:
A) We don’t have old guys who will be retiring.
B) We don’t have guys we want to dump because of character issues or legal trouble.
C) We have actually good players who are worth retaining.
At the start of 06-07, how many players did we have that A) were good enough to be rotation players for a contender B) weren’t nearing retirement and C) didn’t have significant character issues? I can think of three, and they are still here — Brandon, LaMarcus, Joel. Four other young players might be considered to have the potential to be good enough, and two of them are still here — Travis and Martell.
Today’s roster is full of players good enough to be rotation players for a contender, young enough to still be good in three years, and without obvious character issues. I’ll be surprised if at least seven of them are not here in three years, and it could be more.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Aug 25, 2009 10:28 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Less, but not much less...
I would say six will remain
Roy, LMA, Oden, Nic
1 of Rudy, Webster Bayless, and
1 of Blake, Pryz
PER has to be useful...I'm sure it helped determine to keep Batum after Summer League
Technically
But in reality, Rudy was part of the deal that brought us Channing, too.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
I think the only thing we can say with certainty about this team 3 years hence is that Travis Outlaw will not be here.
I have a hunch that Rex will get fed up and want out also, barring an injury to iron man Andre Miller or Steve Blake getting fed up and leaving first.
If Andre stays healthy and plays well, he might stay around. But I would think it rather more likely that he chooses to end his career in purple and gold, even if he has to pay for the privilege. Wouldn’t YOU want to play with Kobe if you were a Point Guard from LA???
Blazers will definitely TRY to keep Blake around and I don’t think they’re dumb enough to let Pryzbilla go. They would have to get totally cheap to lose him, they have all the financial advantages plus he likes it here. Centers are rare birds, just because there are so few 7-foot humans to pick from, and they’d be complete idiots to wave to him. So he’ll be here.
Marty’s a Northwest guy and he’s not going anywhere. Will Nic be able to keep the ego in check? Here’s hoping.
Rudy strikes me as the wild card. If he’s having fun and the team is doing well, he might stick around. The playing time dilemma he represents for the Blazers would be replicated in many, many teams around the league — it’s not like he’s suddenly going to come in built like Shawn Marion, he’s still gonna be this gangly little wing that’s out of his element matching up defensively on certain body types… How many teams are going to see him as the Shooting Guard of the Future??? The answer: zero or some really small number.
Blazers have too much invested in Oden so far, financially and emotionally, to let him go, so he will be extended for way too much money — $13M-ish…
LMA and Roy are untouchable.
Who does that leave?
"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
timbo -
Rudy’s situation reminds me of Drazen Petrovic. They both had length but were underweight as SGs. Both were international players stuck at backup SG behind an All-Star in Portland. The Nets took a chance on Drazen and found a starting SG. Not every team would go after Rudy in a year or two, but he’ll have suitors. More than ‘zero or some really small number’, IMO.
by Storyteller on Aug 25, 2009 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions
I think so, too
If Andre doesn’t help us play Rudy’s game, I think he becomes unhappy and we lose him. If it does happen, I hope it comes out in a private talk with KP rather than the Spanish media, so we can get value for him.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
Steve Blake’s contract situation is a good gauge for how high the Blazers are on the development of Jerryd. If he quietly goes away next offseason a la Channing and Jerryd becomes the default backup, that is that. Same if he gets dealt at the deadline. If he gets re-signed this offseason already, that’s more than a sign. If he gets re-signed next offseason again, the writing is also on the wall.
RT: How many teams are going to see him as the Shooting Guard of the Future?
The current possibilities are Minnesota, Houston, New Jersey and possibly the Knicks. To multiply his endorsement opportunities and “get back” some of the 12 mil that he left on the table (CSKA offer was 20 mil for 4 years, evidently) in Europe, I suspect Rudy and his agent would prefer that he eventually lands on the east coast
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Same principle by which we all knew Sergio and Channing were going away...
"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
We guessed that Channing and Sergio was going to ask to be traded.
Is that what you plan for Travis? cut his time until he yells uncle.
KP is already talking about Claver and Freeland (see Fanshots)
Makes me think he plans for a fallback when Travis/Martell and maybe Joel P will be gone.
Neither is a center, really
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
at some point
KP will have to stop adding multiple rookies to the roster, and use some of them for trading chips
I understand the cost effectiveness of having a couple of Euros earning peanuts to keep the payroll out of luxury tax hell…but for a contending team, it would be better to add (or keep) experienced veterans making at or near the league minimum in the future, so Nate doesn’t have to keep teaching a new crop of rookies every year when the team is trying to play into June
For an example, Webster may prove to be “more valuable” than Claver in 2-3 years, for what the Blazers will be trying to accomplish, then. We need to stop thinking like this team is back in 2005 and the goal is to continually develope several young players each year in the hopes of returning to the playoffs. This is a new chapter, the expectations need to be higher, and the roster needs to be getting “older” and more experienced
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Then why did the Spurs grab Blair?
A contending team should always be looking to keep one or two young guys (note I said one or two, not 7 or 8) coming through.
Role players do one of the following:
1. Become good enough to demand huge salaries in free agency, and go away to be stars elsewhere.
2. Become good enough to replace one of your stars who is aging and declining.
3. Retire.
4. Turn out to not be really that good, and fizzle out.
5. Get injured.
If you want to stay in contention, you need to be continually bringing new talent in at low cost, and rookies are a great way to do that.
Your point is right on the money to an extent. Webster may indeed be more valuable to us than Claver in 2-3 years. But that doesn’t mean it won’t make sense to bring Claver over. We might well bring him over as a third string SF for the first year. He gets acclimated, plays in blowouts, gets used to the NBA game and season, provides injury cover — and then steps into a major role, not as a rookie, but as a European vet who now has a year of NBA experience.
Note that Martell has three more guaranteed years on his contract, and that Nic becomes RFA in three years. Maybe one of them goes away at that time.
There is nothing wrong with having multiple rookies in the 9-15 roster spots. Not a good plan to have more than one in your top 8, and if you even have one there, he needs to be a real talent. In the playoffs, you often only play 8 deep anyway. On a well constructed championship team, this year’s rookies are human victory cigars, injury cover, and developing role players (at a cheap cost) for 2-3 years down the road.
Your point that rookies aren’t for contention now is sound. But I don’t mind if you have five of them in roster spots 11-15.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
two newbies at the most, from here on out
drafting a couple of 4 year seniors like Pend/‘Ham was OK, but the days of drafting/developing teenagers and having 4 first year players on the roster should be over. (Notice I said “first year players” because you couldn’t really call Rudy a “rookie” last year, due to his international experience)
Everybody liked to talk about how great it was that the Blazers were the (2nd) youngest team and won 54 games while playing 4 rookies…well, that was an aberation and it shouldn’t be the goal, every year. If KP selects one college player and stashes a Euro in every draft for the next 5+ years that should be plenty of new prospects “in the pipeline” as well as accumulated assets that can be dealt for veterans who will help fill roster holes due to injury, or replace Blazer veterans who’s contracts have expired
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I really don't care
if there are 2 or 4 rookies in the 9-15 roster spots.
And I’m not bothered by playing 1 or 2 first year players if they are good enough, either.
The Celtics roster a year ago when they won it all had 3 rookies (only Big Baby played), and two second year players (Powe, Rondo) among their 14 players. When your top players are experienced and set the tone, young players will usually be fine if they are good enough, and it really doesn’t matter who is in the lower roster spots very much.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
I'm never gonna remember this argument later, but
it’s easy to say “I don’t care how many rookies there are” in August but during the season if there’s an injury to one of the 1-10 vets who would you rather use as a replacement, another veteran or a rook? How about when there’s foul trouble in a playoff game?
4 rookies on a rebuilding team is fine. Too many rookies on a contending team is OK if you never have any injuries and/or your rotation players never get into serious foul trouble.
Go ahead and leave home for your vacation without a spare tire in your trunk, the odds are you won’t need it, anyway…
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
What's really interesting about this
Is that Dave makes the case that Travis is too good for us to be able to keep on the cheap, and everyone else here, says something on the order of well if ‘Travis could just rebound’ then we could keep him.
As far as anyone else I think it is completely dependent on what we accomplish in three years. We win three championships and this team is a multi-faceted weapon they could all be back.
If this team has a shockingly different record from last year, then we’ll see some changes. If this team is riddled with injuries, we’ll need to keep more high-dollar back-ups etc. etc. Three years is a long ways out, especially for such a young team.
"The faster you begin an opponent’s blow-out, the more shots everyone will get." - El Blog Ilusorio de Rudy
"The cake was a lie..." -blazeraddict
It's another way of saying this: Travis expects big bucks to stay, Blazer fans say Travis needs to improve skills A, B, and C to merit those big bucks to stay...
"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
But it was pointed out to me
The fan’s opinions don’t count when it comes to retaining a player, IE Bonzi Wells.
hg
right
we can all “guess” which players will be the next to move on (Jack, Sergio, Frye) based on their play and coaching comments (and whenever trade rumors are made public…) but only KP and Nate know who the real “keepers” are.
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Travis...
Is too good offensively. He can elevate over just about any 4 in the league. He takes them outside, and provides a huge mismatch. However, he A) Can’t Rebound, and B) Can’t defend the post. If he developed a solid flop, then maybe he wouldn’t get posted up and annihilated. But, that has yet to happen. Whenever I see him in the post he’s always getting pushed backwards, and then if a dish off happens, he isn’t coming over with the help side Defense. That, compounded with the fact that he can’t rebound, makes him a defensive liability. The worst part of it is, is that he is athletic enough to be a solid rebounder. Defensively, I don’t think he’ll ever be strong enough to defend the 4, but at the very least he could do a little better job pushing them to the help.
The 2012 Blazers...
Brandon
Lamarcus
Greg
Nicolas
Martell
Pendy/DC (One or the Other)
Rudy
Gone:
Joel (To Dallas, where he will replace Dampier as the Low Post Defensive Presence)
Miller (To Free Agency, because the Blazers found a younger PG)
Blake (Traded for that Younger PG)
Outlaw (Honestly, who really cares how he leaves any more?)
Bayless (Traded for Cap Space, because it wasn’t going to work out)
That is what I envision happening. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the Blazers pull a trade with Outlaw and Blake/Bayless for a younger point guard. I’m really surprised the Blazers never went after Ramon Sessions. The guy is sitting on his thumbs, waiting for an offer but noone is going to give him one. Yeah, Milwaukee made the qualifying offer to keep him restricted, but they haven’t indicated that they will resign him, and he’s a young guy, who is fairly solid.
Of the players on the gone list, the only one I will really miss would be Joel. But, unfortunately, if he hits the market, there will be teams that will be more than willing to pay up big for a solid defensive Center, that is proven. Especially in a league where there are so many Centers who are just tall, but scrawny and spend all their time sitting around bombing 3’s. A guy like Joel could ease the defensive pressure, and allow teams to move their other big to the 4, where he could play a Nowitzki-like position. For that reason, I don’t think the Blazers will be able to match offers made by other teams. And if we did, I would believe we’d be overpaying, and it would hurt us in the long run.
Who do I think we’ll replace these guys with? Well, obviously my gone list has all 3 of our Point Guards. So, we’re going to need a new Point. The New Jersey Nets always seem to enter Fire-sale mode around halfway through the season. So, they might be willing to take Blake and Outlaw, maybe Bayless too, for Devin Harris. Simply because Outlaw and Blake have expiring contracts. And even if they did resign them, it’d be for cheaper than Harris would get when his contract is up. Maybe I’m being too wishful. Actually… there is no maybe to that statement. Oh well, gotta dream big!!!
The thing is, even if you're right that a lot of teams WOULD LIKE to take on Joel, with the entire league over the cap and able just to use MLE, who CAN pay him megabucks???
Of the players on the gone list, the only one I will really miss would be Joel. But, unfortunately, if he hits the market, there will be teams that will be more than willing to pay up big for a solid defensive Center, that is proven. Especially in a league where there are so many Centers who are just tall, but scrawny and spend all their time sitting around bombing 3’s. A guy like Joel could ease the defensive pressure, and allow teams to move their other big to the 4, where he could play a Nowitzki-like position. For that reason, I don’t think the Blazers will be able to match offers made by other teams. And if we did, I would believe we’d be overpaying, and it would hurt us in the long run.
He’s NOT a $10M guy given his age and career stats. David Lee is the benchmark — he’s younger, with waaaaaaay better offensive numbers, and even HE hasn’t proven to be a $10M free agent in this market, in this league.
The only way the Blazers will lose him is if they overthink things and try to economize.
"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
In 2011 a number of teams could be under the cap as well – some of course depending on what they do in 2010. Mavs, Rockets, Nets, potentially even the Knicks, …
There will always be A FEW teams with more than MLE value under the cap (as we've seen this year, gotta be like $10M+ under to have any clout...)
But of those, how many are “OH MY GOD, IF WE PLAY OUR CARDS RIGHT WE COULD USE OUR $40M TO LAND JOEL PRZYBILLA!!!!!”
This is not even a worry to me and I’m as big a Pryz flack as there is… There will be 4 or 5 teams under the cap by $10M — MAYBE — and of those I feel sure that nobody is going to throw “toxic” levels of cash at Joel.
Would you if you were the Knicks or the Nets? The fans would roast the GM alive.
The Blazers are in a commanding position to be able to resign Joel, like 5 chances out of 6. Roll a die and let me know how it comes out, would you?
"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
Much of your stuff makes sense
though I suspect you are wrong about Joel.
But Bayless won’t go for cap space. Cap space is going to be of no value to us, because we’re going to be over the cap forever anyway. He may go, but it will be for a draft pick or as part of a package for another player.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
Devin Harris for cheap/expiring contracts
I think this is one player that KP would actually deal Blake and/or Rudy and/or Bayless for, but why KP didn’t deal Jack, Frye and Outlaw for Harris back in ‘07 is still one of life’s great mysteries
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Harris isn't as good as you think
He needs to dominate the ball to put up numbers. He’s kinda like Danny Granger that way.
Fine, the OLP album grew on me. It's defiantly change.
all I know is
Quick said that KP has Devin on his short list of “special fit” players to acquire (1080 radio interview, last June)
OTOH, I think Nate will be very content with Miller and Blake for the next 2 years, at least…
(I have no idea who the Blazer’s starting PG will be in 2012, and it’s ’way too early to really lose sleep over the decision)
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Devin Harris was a very effective PG
in Dallas as a 3rd/4th option. He’s probably not an all star if he stays there, but he’s still light years ahead of anything we have now.
Rudy, Outlaw, Bayless, Przybilla will be gone
Outlaw: Dante Cunningham will show enough and Martell and Batum will continue to develop enough that Travis will be expendable, especially considerign his trade value and the contract he will likely command. After paying BRoy and LA, and Greg Oden soon, not to mention Nicolas Batum eventually, we simply can’t pay Travis what he wants.
Bayless: He’s not a PG. You either are or you aren’t, and he’s not. He’s an undersized 2 guard, and on another team he can play a big role (think Ben Gordon in Chicago), but not for the Blazers. With Roy and Rudy at the 2, and Andre Miller and Blake at the point, there’s no way he’s going to see enough minutes to justify keeping him around. Plus with his age and talent level, there will be a bunch of teams willing to trade for him.
Joel: I love the guy, and wish he could be here, but there’s no way we are going to pay a backup center any kind of money. God willing by the time this decision comes up Greg will have shown us he is capable of playing at a fairly high level and is able to stay healthy, and it will be easier for us to deal with his departure. The only way I see him staying is if he decides he really wants to be in Portland no matter what, and takes a deal around the MLE.
Rudy: I know everyone loves him, but Ithink Rudy’s going to be gone. The guy can make $10 mil a year in Europe as a starter. And we just resigned our franchise player for the next 5-6 years at the same position. Rudy does have a very affordable contract right now, which is why I can see him packaged with Outlaw or Bayless in a trade. It would be the ultimate “pot sweetener”, a quality rotation guy on a miniscule contract. I just don’t see Rudy getting the minutes, the role, or the money he wants and probably deserves here in Portland.
My prediction: I think we’ll see a nice trade. Some combination of Outlaw, Bayless, and Rudy, maybe a draft pick, to net us something we really need like a Millsap-ish forward or a younger starting PG. The move would clean up our rotation, and stabilize us at our weaker positions. And it’s totally plausible, since the players we are sending out are young and talented, they actually hold trade value. A couple guys to keep an eye on: Rajon Rondo, Devin Harris, and Jose Calderon. All play in the Eatern conference, and on teams where, should their current rosters faulter, could go into rebuilding mode and would welcome an infusion of young talent on the cheap.
by rip_city_swagger on Aug 25, 2009 11:08 AM PDT reply actions
We'd have to see
either Martell, Nic, or Jerryd show us they can be highly effective at backup SG before we trade Rudy, I would suspect.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
I have no idea
Based on past behavior patterns, The big three of Roy, Aldridge, and Oden will be around and the remaining parts will be swapped out on an annual to biannual basis. This assumes Oden does develop into a reliable defense minded center who doesn’t foul out in 15 minutes. By that logic, I don’t expect the team to look anything like it does today in 3 years.
I can say with 100% certainty (barring an industrial accident causing his face to be chemically burned off) that Rudy will be making women scream and making men question their orientation for the next 10 years SOMEWHERE in the NBA.
P.S. Now that Marty has taken a class at Portland State, he is a Viking. He is now my favorite Blazer to inexplicably and irrationally root for. He just became the greatest athlete to attend my alma mater since Neil Lomax. GO MARTY!
Fine, the OLP album grew on me. It's defiantly change.
by SuperDave on Aug 25, 2009 11:15 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Rec for the Rudy comment....
… count me among the screamers!
While I would love to have Rudy in a Blazer uni for a long time, I’ll root for him wherever he goes….
Fixed.
WhileI would love to have Rudyin a Blazer uni for a long time, I’ll root for him wherever he goes….
tee hee, I could have made that a lot naughtier, but I’ll leave bad enough alone…
"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
My $.02
Stay-
Roy
Oden
Aldridge
Batum
50/50-
Rudy
Webster
Bayless
Go-
Przybilla
Blake
Miller
Outlaw
What you have to keep in mind is
there is a ton of turnover in the NBA. Think of even the best teams in the recent era. Who is left on the Cavs from three years ago? The Lakers? Spurs? Most only keep 3-5 core guys and swap out other parts as necessary
This team has not been constructed "like other teams" though...
This team is a puzzle, a painting… Everyone else is running around willy nilly and KP is stashing Euros for 3 years from now… Everyone else is playing the latest game for Wii and KP is reading books and playing chess…
"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
So is Oklahoma City, by the way.
"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
Yeah, they scare me a little bit
Not now, but 4-5 years from now.
Presti knows what he is doing. Their big problem — does Durant walk away? Does he really want to stay in OKC?
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
To me the main guy in all of this is Rudy...
I don’t think Rudy is going to be “happy” (I use that word loosely) with a long term role at back up. He doesn’t make much sense to move to the pg or sf position so something has to be done with him. Pritchard assuredly will not let Rudy walk for nothing so he is going to have to be traded sometime….but when?
My prediction is end of this year. The problem is his salary won’t bring much impact talent back in return, so he will have to be packaged with someone to bring the salaries up to get a decent impact player of Rudy’s caliber in return. Who is he packaged with? Bayless for a starting PG? Martell for a quality SF? Pryz for a backup quality PF? Someone else?
Whomever is packaged with Rudy will totally determine who is and isn’t here in 3 years.
PER has to be useful...I'm sure it helped determine to keep Batum after Summer League
If we trade Rudy this summer
he ($1.2M) will have to be packaged with Webster ($4.8M) or Miller ($7.3M) to return someone of value unless it were for a player still on a rookie contract.
I think the key to Rudy being happy is reasonable minutes (30 would probably do) but more importantly his role. I don’t think he wants to stand behind the 3-pt line exclusively for 30 minutes a game. If he could transition to PG with Roy for 10-12 minutes a game (I think he will get a try-out there this year), and get the opportunity to play more of a point forward on offense (not unless Nate changes his offense) I think he would be plenty happy here. No better than 50-50 chance this happens though.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 25, 2009 5:58 PM PDT up reply actions
Agree with Dave
I pretty much agree with Dave. I will be sad to see Joel go. I was going to write more, but can’t get my thoughts together, and lunch is over. I have to start work.
by desperationshot on Aug 25, 2009 1:28 PM PDT reply actions
Add me to the chorus saying Rudy will be gone
and that fact doesn’t really bother me that much. I like Rudy but I don’t think he came over here to play 20 mins a game in a small market.
Outlaw goes without saying barring some sort of rapid-fire miraculous improvement this season. I think on a team with strong veteran leadership and a different sort of coach, he might be a solid piece. I always wonder what Pop and the Spurs could do with him.
Blazer Fan
RT: I always wonder what Pop and the Spurs could do with him.
I think a coach like Pop or Slaon would pull their hair out re: Outlaw, and Travis would soon be tweeting about not understanding why he isn’t being given the “green light” to shoot like he had with Nate
Lionel Hollins in Memphis would be TO’s ideal “next” coach. Or maybe D’Antoni in NY.
I’m not sure who’s the coach in NJ or how he and Trav would coexist
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Competition for minutes
1) Point guard
Miller > Blake > Bayless > Roy > Rudy (distribution of minutes, people – minutes!!)
2) Shooting Guard
Roy > Rudy > Martell > Blake > Bayless
3) Small Forward
Outlaw > Batum > Webster > Roy > Rudy
4) Power Forward
Aldridge >> Outlaw > Cunningham > Pendergraph > Oden/Prz
5) Center
Oden > Prz > Aldridge > Pendergraph
Based on the current roster, the dynamic for change will be whether incumbents require more minutes, fewer minutes, or can stay the same.
Every single player currently on this roster could potentially need more minutes – except Roy, Aldridge and Miller. Blake is likely to find equilibrium with his 2009/2010 minutes. He isn’t good enough to not warrant an upgrade, which shouldn’t be that difficult to accomplish.
Unlikely to be replaceable with equivalent talent/skill:
1) Brandon
2) Oden
3) Aldridge
Difficult to duplicate:
1) Batum (defense, spot-up threes, pull up 2’s, off the dribble in the half court, back door cutter in the half court, transition finisher – hmmm….)
2) Rudy (more complete than he showed last year – dynamic playmaker – complements starters – stars against reserves)
Unknown factor:
1) Webster (more than one offensive dimension??; defensive ability on the wing/post?)
2) Bayless (3-point shot?? Miller clone??)
Likely to be replaceable (lower = harder):
1) Miller
2) Blake
3) Outlaw
4) Bayless
5) Prz
6) Webster
7) Rudy
8) remainder of bench
That's essentially the whole remaining team
and that’s not gonna happen on KP’s watch. Bayless, Webster and Rudy are primo young players and they are only leaving as part of a major trade. One of their ego’s may explode thus causing a trade, but they won’t go because the GM simply feels like moving the chess pieces around. Along with Nic, those three with Claver, Freeland, and Cunningham comprise the next core generation of Blazers.
sharp logic in this comment
Nice attribution of minutes crunch as the long term driver of roster change. A secondary effect of lean minutes MAY be morale issues which are hard to predict.
“Unlikely to be replaceable” is more to the point than “Very likely to be here in 3 years.”
Thus you do not speculate on what the players’ wishes might be. Someone like Oden will have the agency to leave if he wants to. Rudy, too, may not want to stay in Portland.
assessment
I agree 100% with Dave’s assessment of who will be here in 2012 and who won’t.
Of those probably the iffiest is Pryzbilla. If his family has gotten comfortable in Portland and don’t want to be uprooted, and if he is more interested in being on a familiar and winning team than getting a large contract for the last years of his career, he and the Blazers may be able to reach an accomodation that keeps him here.
my .02
Stay-
Roy
Oden
Aldridge
Batum
Blake
Miller (on the coaching staff after he retires as a player)
Webster
Cunningham
50/50-
Pryzbilla
Rudy
Go-
Bayless
Outlaw
Farm Team
Claver
Mills
Koponen
Pendergraph
Freeland
Can't argue with anything you say, Dave
But my heart (if not my mind) says that Przy will decide he wants to stay on for the Blazers’ championship run.
As you say, that would mean Joel signing for less than he could make elsewhere. But Joel’s not a glitzy guy; he could decide he doesn’t need a 20,000 square foot home or 20 fancy cars. Right?
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
"I know what gold does to men's souls."
Walter Huston as Howard in the Treasure of the Sierra Madre.
Yeah
but we’re talking lots and lots of gold vs. lots and lots and lots of gold. For some people, other things are more valuable than that last “and lots”. It isn’t just the Beatles that figured out that money can’t buy you love.
Joel will be at the point in his career where a lot of veterans start to settle for less money to have a chance to get a ring, even if only as a role player. They’ve made their stash, they want to win. The chance at championships (more than one) is worth something.
Add to that his home is now here, his family is happy here, the satisfaction of being part of the bedrock on which this has been built and wanting to see it through, friendships formed, etc., etc.
I think to lure Joel away someone has to give him five years and at least a million a year more than we’ll pay him, probably more. Since we’ll pay him 1-2 million over MLE, that means very few teams will be in a position to do that.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
By the way, Joel's contract seems to have a 15% trade kicker
Making it even more expensive for another team to own him ;-)
After listening to the podcast at the Blazers website
I think it is safe to assume that the Blazers will put out the extra money to keep Nic.
hg
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
