Tradeability
by Dave on Jun 16, 2010 11:39 PM PDT
in News
Email
PrintOne of the things Casey and I talked about in the shortly-upcoming podcast is how "tradeable" various players are, in response to the deluge of trade suggestions which will no doubt ramp up over the summer. Casey offered some interesting thoughts on the likelihood of the Blazers making a major deal and then we got down to business discussing each player. I thought it would be an interesting question to open up to all of you. As a discussion piece here's my assessment of each player's trade prospects, ranked from most tradeable to least. This is based on three factors: How much the Blazers want/need to retain the player, how much value the player has on the market, and a nod to contract status.
1. Rudy Fernandez
Where there's smoke, there's fire. And there's enough smoke surrounding Rudy to keep Vlade Divac soothed for at least a month. Rudy may not be the most obvious Blazer to trade in terms of talent, skill, or fit but his status is more volatile than anyone's right now. His low contract and offensive potential help his tradeability factor.
2. Joel Przybilla
This is a contract trade more than anything. He's got one year left. His status is questionable. The Blazers have at least two other centers. They'll want to shop him around. He's also a prime candidate for cap ballast if they go crazy and want to take on a higher salary. Only his injury keeps him from the #1 spot on this list as other teams won't want a whole year with him on their cap if he can't play.
3. Jerryd Bayless
Talent, low salary, and an odd fit make Jerryd an attractive prospect for trade.
4. Martell Webster
One of the things we mentioned on the podcast was that you'd have to be careful trading both Webster and Fernandez as you'd lose outside shooting galore. But Webster plays behind Batum who is also distance-capable. Nic will eat plenty of minutes. If the Blazers retain Fernandez they might look to see who is interested in Martell. Reception around the league is likely to be mixed but his mid-range contract might open up possibilities.
5. Jeff Pendergraph
There's no particular reason to advocate a trade for Jeff or not but he's the closest thing to a true throw-in contract the Blazers have.
6. Dante Cunningham
It's likely that Blazer fans are more excited about Cunningham's potential than most GM's around the league. But Dante would make an interesting throw-in for a major deal. Putting his name in there is more palatable than talking about Batum. I assume the Blazers like Cunningham but I'd also assume he could be package for the right price.
7. Andre Miller
The only way this happens is as part of a package bringing back a younger point guard. That's not likely at all. But it's possible.
8. Marcus Camby
The only way this happens is as part of a package deal in which Camby's salary and talent played an irreplaceable role. But again, it's still marginally possible.
9. LaMarcus Aldridge
LaMarcus is base year. Even in a summer favorable to trading base year status players that's a tough sell. Plus he's the second most talented player on the squad and the second-leading scorer. The only way you could consider a trade is if you were sure you were upgrading his position. It's hard to find a clear upgrade that works.
10. Greg Oden
Some people are speculating (hoping?) that the Blazers might make a move with Greg out of frustration. The team can't afford to be frustrated though. They're married to the guy. You could not get equal potential back for him. If he has the potential to be a championship-level player the Blazers need to keep him. If he doesn't they'll have a hard time finding someone to take him.
11. Nicolas Batum
The remotely available players you'd trade a Batum-intensive package for can be counted on about three fingers at this point.
12. Brandon Roy
This is a similar situation to Oden. If he's healthy the Blazers need to keep him. If he's not you'll never get value for him. Besides, trading Roy would signal an enormous change in direction. The Blazers aren't ready for that yet.
That's my ranking, what's yours? And does your ranking of players you'd like to see traded differ from your ranking of players likely to be traded? Weigh in below.
--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)
174 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I almost asked what happened to 13-15
But then I remembered that Mills, Howard, and Deiner are all about to expire.
I would have felt dumb! But now I feel smart!
Blazers win!
Yeah, well I'm sure you know a GM's job is
1/3 inspiration, 1/3 perspiration, and 13/30 expiration. But only if, like KP, you give 110%.
#52
Yeah, there's no way that Nicolas Batum is below Greg Oden regarding tradeability.
Unlike Oden, Batum lacks the potential to be a franchise cornerstone for a championship caliber team. Yet, I realize that some folks flippantly toss around Scottie Pippen’s name as a comparison for Batum; however, Batum is not now nor ever will be on Pippen’s level.
How can you say that?
How are you able to determine how good he will become? Pippen was a great player, but Nic has all the tools that Pippen had and is still very young.
Andre Miller is the old guy in the corner at the YMCA who gets picked last and then wins the game singlehandedly with sky hooks from the deep right corner. - dwaynebillybob
It's not really an insult to say he won't become as good as Pippen
Pippen is unfairly labeled the greatest side kick of all time. No doubt he was, but he was a great player himself. Much more so than just a sidekick.
Batum’s potential is high but it’s less crazy to say he won’t become like Pippen than to say he will, and this is coming from a big time Batum homer.
I think it's pretty simple
Pippen is a HOF guy and was probably the best perimeter defender of the 90s and you could make a case for him being one of the best defenders of all time
Batum has loads of potential, but any comparison to Pippen is very premature.
"In fact you might say that Ugly is the Blazers' secret weapon this year."
-Dave
As for the Blazers...They are officially the NBA equivalent of a movie serial killer
-basketbawful
Batum is good and I love him
but take a look at Pippens stats when jordan left and imagine batum playing as the teams number one.
g gs mins fg% 3% ft% off def tot ass st bl
93-94 CHI 72 72 38.3 .491 .320 .660 2.4 6.3 8.7 5.6 2.9 0.8
to fls pts
3.22 3.20 22.0
Now I am a believer that Batum will be part of the lineup if we can win the championship, but I just don’t see him being Pippen. If he was given the reigns as a number one I can’t see him putting up the above number. 22/9/6/3 is pretty monstrous if you ask me.
by NDREXLERDRIVE on Jun 17, 2010 3:33 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm not sure that's a fair comparison.
You are looking a Pippen in the prime of his career. If you look at his numbers his first two seasons, they aren’t dramatically better than Batum’s, especially when you consider that Pippen was older than Batum at the same point.
The comparison is really due to their similarity in body type, and that they are both outstanding defenders. Note that McMillan has challenged Batum to become the best perimeter defender in the league next season. I like the comparison not so much to suggest how good Batum is now, but to suggest how good he might become in the next 2-4 seasons.
I suspect Dave has defined Batum as more untradeable than Oden because of the injury issue. They both have huge potential, but we just don’t know if we can rely on Oden to stay on the court.
especially when you consider that Pippen was older than Batum at the same point.
At 22 years-old was Scottie in the NBA or still at Central Arkansas?
I’ll bet it was close
Let’s get Frenchy up to Tayshaun Prince level first, then if he’s still young when he’s reached that stage he can shoot for #33
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
It's the injuries
Otherwise he’d be last on the list. As it stands his future is a lot murkier here than Nic’s
Incorrect - Batum is absolutely in the right spot
The reason Batum is where he is on the list has nothing to do with whether or not he is the next Scottie Pippen. It is because he is a young, talented, showed plenty of improvement over his first two seasons, has plenty of upside, and most of all – he’s only costing the team around $1 million a year.
The upside will come, and the Blazers will eventually have to pay for it, but right now, you just don’t get Batum’s talent and production very often for the cost. It is his contract right now that allows the team to go out and sign a Camby, or extend a Roy and Aldridge, and still have a team salary in the mid $50 million range (mid $60 million next year).
Do people realize that the Blazers are competing against the best teams in the west at a team salary significantly less?
I see Batum as more of a Tayshaun Prince
than a Scottie Pippen
"Precious in the sight of the Lord, is the death of His Saints." - Psalm 116:15 Rest In Peace, Nick.
we're good,
although I’d like to see Rex grow up here for a while longer. he could turn into quite the scorer.
Like to move, and likely to move are a bit different
I’d like to keep Rudy, but he’s kind of digging his own way out. I may not be as high on Bayless as others, and if he stays, I hope he turns out better then I think.
I would question trading both Martell and Rudy, unless you got an outside shooter in return – would make more sense to deal Rudy and Bayless if you were making a 2 for 1 type of deal (if it didn’t include Joel).
Love what Joel has brought to the team, but his health, the addition of Camby, and an expiring contract makes him a strong candidate to be dealt.
I mostly agree.
I agree on both accounts with Rudy. He is good to stay, but wants to go, so he is good to go.
Martelland Rudy could be replaced if Batum continues his growth, as I believe and hope he can be the outside shooter on the starting team and can be the back-up 2 when BRoy needs a rest and Dante can play the three. especially when we need to boost our defense.
If Batman can learn to be a PG or 2guard in France this year then when Nate wants a three guard lineup he already has them in the game.
My concern with Camby is his age and he has as injury prone as Joel and Greg, but Joel is a good prospect for a trade becuase of what you said.
So my only disagreement would be that you could trade Rudy and Martell for somebody that could also be a shooter with BRoy, Batum, JBay and even LMA. that should be enough outside shooters.
Of course that doesn’t mean I would like to move Both Rudy and Martelli. I would like to see Martell have one more year after his injury to see what else he can bring to the table when he becomes cold from beyond the stripe.
hg
I fully agree with this ranking
Might put Martell ahead of Jerryd in any trade that brings back a wing player who can shoot. And as Dave said Nic can too especially if he keeps working on shooting off the dribble as he said he would – which never was Martell’s strength. But that’s details.
…Also Martell’s deal and Joel’s deal must likely be included in any move that brings back a player earning 10+ million. The likes of established players like Parker, Iggy, etc. alone or in taking on a big bad/long deal for a young asset.
The likes of established players like Parker
Parker is making 13,650,000
Miller+Webster+Rudy = 13.3 mil
Joel’s contract would not be required to match salaries. The real sticking point is that Buford would insist on Batum
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
pick your poison on that deal
That trade eliminates nearly all of our outside shooting
vs.
giving up big man depth on a team with injury prone centers
"In fact you might say that Ugly is the Blazers' secret weapon this year."
-Dave
As for the Blazers...They are officially the NBA equivalent of a movie serial killer
-basketbawful
Raja Bell and Keyon Dooling
could replentish the roster’s outside shooting. (And Parker > Miller, but that’s faint praise)
Rudy and Martell were not that great shakes as outside shooters this spring, anyway. I’m ready for another brace of cannons, those “old” ones don’t shoot straight
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Bell
People played him close on the three as his drives were gutsy, but ineffective. As a role player I like him but he’s got limitations.
he'd be a role player
catch and shoot only, he’s a Nate kind of wing
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
he made 5+ mil last year
so it’s going to take a chunk of the MLE to sign him. I doubt you’d get lucky and he’d accept just the BAE
it’ all depends on if he can pass the physical and if his wrist is OK
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
old and experienced
you mean, like Derek Fisher?
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Bell has never been a great offensive player, but he hasn't real dropped off in that regard.
His output has pretty much been the same for the past 7 years. I know he’s dropped off a little on defense, but I’m betting money he’s still better than Rudy for the next 2 or so years.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jun 17, 2010 2:37 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm not a Rudy Fernandez guy by any stretch of the imagination and will admit ...
that Raja Bell may rack off a couple more serviceable years like Bruce Bowen did in the not so distant past. Yet, if the ballclub wants a veteran swingman to come handle the old Ime Udoka role (i.e., play sound defense and hit the corner three), then there are younger, cheaper options available — with a one-year, minimum-level contract being a fair deal — such as Keith Bogans, who’s 4 years younger than Bell.
Keith Bogans might be a good option.
Martel Webster would actually be fine at backup SG if he only had a little more ball handling/passing.
For me Bell would come down to price. I’m guessing he would rather play for a contender, so I doubt he actually comes to Portland.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jun 17, 2010 3:07 AM PDT up reply actions
I could actually see Raja Bell going to the San Antonio Spurs, which'd ...
open up Keith Bogans potentially joining the Portland Trail Blazers here.
such as Keith Bogans, who’s 4 years younger than Bell.
how many superstars has Bogans stared down in a playoff series?
Bell is chippy, if he’s healthy he’s a pain in the backside for the players he’s guarding. The Blazers could use a perimeter defender like that. Think what he could teach Nic re: getting into the head of the opponent; Batum could start “sending a message” to his opponents instead of getting his shoulder re-tweaked, every spring
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
in the same way
sign a big body to a contract as AK1984 pointed out.
At least we have Pendy to plug in as an emergency back up if stuff goes wrong again and we can’t sign another big, but no one is left on the wing if we trade both Webster and Rudy.
"In fact you might say that Ugly is the Blazers' secret weapon this year."
-Dave
As for the Blazers...They are officially the NBA equivalent of a movie serial killer
-basketbawful
You don't trade Webster and Rudy unless you get back a 2/3 6th man shooter.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 17, 2010 1:13 AM PDT up reply actions
I do not understand this way of thinking
Przybilla is not a stiff like Nesty or Zoubek. He was the backbone of Portland’s defense, for years. The selective memory of this forum is staggering at times
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I don't think people are arguing that Pryzbilla needs to be dealt because he's outlived his usefulness.
Except for those who don’t think he’ll come back this time. Zoubek is a stiff?
there's no selective memory
he’s our third center and thanks to an unfortunate accident he might not be healthy for a good chunk of the year.
We don’t need a guy of Joel’s caliber as the 3rd center. We can’t let last year’s injury parade unduly influence our roster this year. If poo hits the fan again, we aren’t going on a playoff run anyway.
"In fact you might say that Ugly is the Blazers' secret weapon this year."
-Dave
As for the Blazers...They are officially the NBA equivalent of a movie serial killer
-basketbawful
You're way underrating Brian Zoubek's tenacity on the glass — especially on the ...
offensive end — and ability at Duke to anchor the defense from the low-post. With the 44th pick, Zoubek would be a fine replacement for Joel Przybilla if the “Vanilla Gorilla” — who we all love — must go for financial reasons in a much-needed consolidation trade.
Zoubek could only play D in college because he was so much bigg...
oh wait. He was horrible at D in college.
You probably like Zoubek because his Autism manifests as an obsessive compulsive disorder to foul.
Must foul again. Gotta make sure I get that foul in. Hey did I foul yet? Better foul this guy to make sure. Never can have too many fouls. Foul Foul Foul. I know coach told me to uh…, well better foul just in case.
dinasour type of guys choir boys
by mittsabishy on Jun 17, 2010 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions
The Blazers already have a shorter version of Z
his name is Jeff Pendergraph
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Brian Zoubek anchored a Duke defense that ended up 4th in defensive ...
efficiency last season. And, even though Zoubek did commit a high rate of 7.4 fouls per 40 minutes, his 21.4% ORB% and 24.8% DRB% were tremendous numbers on the glass.
http://kenpom.com/rate.php?s=AdjDE
http://kenpom.com/team.php?team=Duke
Zoubek is also a beast when it comes to setting monster screens, as well as a defensive stalwart by sealing off the paint against fellow bigs in man-to-man matchups. Without question, Zoubek is the second-coming of Joel Przybilla. If y’all can’t see that now, then you’ll find out soon enough.
I'm sure Nate remembers #2
if McMillian would sign a pledge never to play Blake more than 20 mpg (unless 2 of his other guards are unavailable) then I’d be in favor of the Blakerang
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I keep trying to forget him...
but people keep bringing up his name in this forum, all the time!
I’m going to change my sig to: “Sign a young healthy Bill Waton”… remember him?
Joel Przybilla…This is a contract trade more than anything. He’s got one year left. His status is questionable. The Blazers have at least two other centers. They’ll want to shop him around.
I think this is a Bedge assumption that is based on the premise that “3 centers are 1 too many and there won’t be enough minutes to go around.” I think it’s shortsighted for a couple of reasons
Camby is more of a 4 than a 5. He will play “behind” LMA almost as much as Oden
Greg and Marcus are not likely to play 70 games, much less 82. Dealing Przy away this summer will leave the front court thin, no one at Blazer’s HQ wants a repeat of last year
Having 4 quality big men allows for rest time during the regular season, this keeps each player fresh and (hopefully) healthy for the playoffs
There’s no reason to assume that Joel will not resign with Portland at the end of his current contract. He’s a loyal guy who agreed to resign in 2005 and help the team build towards a championship team, so why would he leave when they’re on the verge and perhaps find himself in another rebuilding situation, 5-6 years later?
And most importantly, finals teams need extra big men. Look at L*A with Bynum and now Boston with Perkins. It’s tough to make it through 2 grueling months of playoff basketball without your bigs getting dinged up and missing games. Even if you dodge the injury bullet, there is foul trouble that crops up in every game, and the more quality big men you have in your toolbox, the better chance you have of overcoming the excess Dick Bavetta whistles and winning a title.
If the team is playing well and getting ready for a deep playoff run next February, why would you trade Przy? For what, a younger player who might contribute in the future? Look around yourselves Blazer fans, the future is now. Portland has enough youngsters already, what they don’t have in abundance are tough veterans like Joel who will play hard every night and not back down to anyone. Don’t be so quick to toss that advantage away for hypothetical fears that may not even be reality.
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Jun 17, 2010 12:28 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I'm a diehard Joel Przybilla fan, but there's not one bit of doubt in my mind that you move his contract ...
in a consolidation trade that obtains an established player in the wing to pair with Brandon Roy and Nicolas Batum in a three-man rotation. If anything, the team can then sign a low-cost free-agent center (e.g., Rasho Nesterovic) or go draft a defensive-minded pivotman in the second round (e.g., Brian Zoubek) to fill the hole at the third-string center position. Oh, and for what it’s worth, I’m not too comfortable with Jeff Pendergraph as the third-string center, for he’s undersized and will be outmatched by bigger post players throughout his career.
I agree about getting the 3rd guy in a Roy/Batum/3rd man rotation.
As you were writing that I was writing nearly the same thing below. But I’d also do the deal for a can’t miss future starting PG.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 17, 2010 12:49 AM PDT up reply actions
I'd love to get Darren Collison, but it'd likely be at the cost of Martell Webster, Rudy Fernandez, ...
Jerryd Bayless, the 22nd pick in the 2010 NBA Draft, $3,000,000 in cash considerations, and taking back James Posey’s overpriced contract.
I’ve seen the name Ty Lawson mentioned before here, too, but I don’t like his diminutive size and subpar defense; plus, I don’t think that the Portland Trail Blazers and the Denver Nuggets are good trading partners.
If anything, I could see the Nuggets trade Lawson to the Indiana Pacers for the 10th pick in the 2010 NBA Draft — which’d be used to draft a backup power forward (e.g., Patrick Patterson) to bolster its somewhat thin, injury prone frontline rotation of Nene, Kenyon Martin, and Chris “Birdman” Andersen — as well as salary filler (e.g., Josh McRoberts and A.J. Price).
Upon further review here, it may take a third team to make that Darren Collison deal occur ...
with the New Orleans Hornets. As Storyteller mentioned earlier somewhere, Martell Webster’s contract is a bit cost-prohibitive for the Hornets; thus, he’d likely need to be moved to a third team — along with the 22nd pick in the 2010 NBA Draft — such as the Cleveland Cavaliers for Delonte West, whose salary is only partially guaranteed for $500,000 next season.
No, Delonte West would be traded to the New Orleans Hornets in the above scenario.
West, who’s salary for next season is only partially guaranteed for $500,000, would then be immediately waived by the Hornets, so as to slash payroll for next season.
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=2fqvjnx
The Hornets, by the way, would receive the $3,000,000 in cash considerations from the Portland Trail Blazers, while the Cleveland Cavaliers would receive the 22nd pick in the 2010 NBA Draft as a form of payment for taking on Webster’s long-term contract.
I would rather have West than Collison.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jun 17, 2010 7:43 AM PDT up reply actions
Wow, I think only you and LeBron's mom feel that way
haha, just kidding buddy
3rd guy in a Roy/Batum/3rd man rotation??
Get Paul George in the draft.
You might have to give you Webster or Rudy to move up but,
you would have a cheap contract (not a MLE) going forward when you need CAP room to extend Batum and/or Oden.
by spencerbutte on Jun 17, 2010 11:01 AM PDT up reply actions
I have to agree with AK on that one
$24 million just for our centers is a lot of money, as is $7.4 for a third string player, especially when there are so many big men in this draft.
I hate to see Joel go, he’s got the toughness that our frontline really needs. But with two centers who are better than he is, and making more money, I don’t see how we don’t try to move JP.
Love Joel
But his injury is carreer threatening, gotta move him for the greater good .
by doomsdaymachine on Jun 17, 2010 2:42 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Well,
You trade him as a contract if he’s not recovered enough to play.
One trade might be a Joel for Varajao swap if Lebron leaves the Cavs and they want to blow it up and rebuild.
"In fact you might say that Ugly is the Blazers' secret weapon this year."
-Dave
As for the Blazers...They are officially the NBA equivalent of a movie serial killer
-basketbawful
I love Anderson Varejao, but I don't see the Cleveland Cavaliers rebuilding under any circumstances.
And, if LeBron James bolts Cleveland for greener pastures, Dan Gilbert will just order his minions in the basketball operations department to simply retool rather than blow it up completely.
retool with what though?
An aging Jamison?
Mo Williams as your primary perimeter option?
the 30th pick in the draft?
I think dealing long term contracts for expiring contracts is about the only thing to do. Save some money, get in line for a top 5 pick next year and clear cap space for a free agent. Maybe make a push for Carmelo? He’s a FA in 2011, right?
"In fact you might say that Ugly is the Blazers' secret weapon this year."
-Dave
As for the Blazers...They are officially the NBA equivalent of a movie serial killer
-basketbawful
For marketing reasons, Dan Gilbert must at least put a quasi-competitive team on the floor ...
if LeBron James demoralizes the citizens of Cleveland by leaving for elsewhere. Oh, and without James, the Cleveland Cavaliers aren’t a destination where big-name free agents will go flock to in droves.
a quasi competitive team won't sell in Cleveland.
i’m from Ohio, and Cavs only get support when they are great.
above average won’t cut it. without James they will go back to being an 80% capacity team, and the locals will just keep doing what they love more anyways, which is supporting the Browns/Buckeyes/Fishing.
dinasour type of guys choir boys
by mittsabishy on Jun 17, 2010 10:14 AM PDT up reply actions
A quasi-competitive team at least won't cause a complete economic collapse like ...
a full-on rebuilding effort. Alas, it’s a good thing you’re not a marketing consultant for Dan Gilbert; otherwise, he’d probably be in a world of financial hurt.
So, even though the Cleveland Cavaliers will no longer be a championship caliber team if LeBron James departs elsewhere, Gilbert must at least promote the façade of a decent team. There are people who’ll still keep their season ticket packages if they think winning is at least a possibility, which is of the utmost importance apropos of the bottom line.
You trade him as a contract if he’s not recovered enough to play.
You certainly don’t trade Joel before his rehab is compete and questions about his future mobility have been answered. If Przy is deemed ready for medical retirement next winter (unlikely, but possible) then sure, use his contract as a trading chip.
But if he can play anywhere close to his former ability, he is a valuable rotation member on a final’s team. Unless the roster has a huge hole next February and there’s a deal in place that requires Przy to complete the trade…then you consider it, carefully. But you don’t “shop him around” as Dave mentioned. That’s not a productive use of your time or asset management, until he’s been cleared for basketball activity and is showing the rest of the NBA how successfully he’s recovered.
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I think you do shop him around. It's just smart basketball to see what you can get for him
You don’t trade him just because, but a 4th big who may or may not be in basketball shape by February (dang shower) isn’t that crucial. Sign a body to min contract if we need another center.
"In fact you might say that Ugly is the Blazers' secret weapon this year."
-Dave
As for the Blazers...They are officially the NBA equivalent of a movie serial killer
-basketbawful
playoff scenario
your team is on a run to the finals. Oden or Camby are injured. Who do you want coming off your bench, Przybilla or Nesty/Zoubek?
It’s not the size, it’s the veteran experience and hard-nosed passion. I’m not even considering Joel in a trade proposal until mid-Feb. It’s silly to move him until his health status in known (selling low = bad) and it would be tragic to deal him and then watch Oden or Camby suffer another long term injury
The Blazers have depth at center, that’s a good thing. If they had 3 Dwight Howards that would be an embarrasment of riches and I’d agree that they should flip one of them. In reality, the Blazers have 3 injury-prone centers and no assurance that any of them will survive from November until June
Be smart. Keep Przy. Find another way to fill the other roster needs
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
we aren't on a run to the finals with Oden injured
No camby….that’s a different story, we could do a deep run without him, but if we’re depending on Joel Przybilla giving us the “edge” as a back up center to win a playoff series we’re already in deep trouble.
"In fact you might say that Ugly is the Blazers' secret weapon this year."
-Dave
As for the Blazers...They are officially the NBA equivalent of a movie serial killer
-basketbawful
look at the L*ker and Celtics
Bynum’s been hobbling, Perkins is out
taking the Blazers into the playoffs without Przy would be like setting off across the desert without a flask or emergency flares
defense, rebounding, shot blocking, these are the things that win playoff series. You can never have enough length and toughness, 18 fouls >>> 12
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Who's the Los Angeles Lakers version of Joel Przybilla?
The answer is that there isn’t one, with D.J. Mbenga being the lateral comparison concerning roster spot. The Boston Celtics lateral comparison would be Shelden Williams, who’s certainly not an integral part to that team.
For whatever reason, you’re vastly overvaluing Przybilla’s importance from a rotational standpoint going forward from here. This franchise needs two things, which include a healthy Greg Oden — for without him the team is screwed regardledss — and roster consolidation. Unfortunatley, the latter doesn’t bode well for Pryzbilla’s future here.
You certainly do ....now
You certainly don’t trade Joel before his rehab is compete and questions about his future mobility have been answered. If Przy is deemed ready for medical retirement next winter (unlikely, but possible) then sure, use his contract as a trading chip.
by spencerbutte on Jun 17, 2010 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions
Little value
Prez will have little or no value if we put him on the market after the GMs think we know the results of his rehab.
They will assume (right or wrong) that Prez is damaged goods.
by spencerbutte on Jun 17, 2010 11:08 AM PDT up reply actions
same thing as with Webster and Outlaw in 2008-2009
their trade value was nil when they were rehabbing their broken feet
but as soon as they were cleared for BB activities and the GMs/scouts saw them moving around on the floor as good as new…their value returns to “normal”
Joel is 4-5 months away from that change of status, from all accounts. So you hold onto him, because his trade value can only increase. If it’s determined that he can’t play NBA ball anymore at some point this fall/winter, then his expiring contract will be just as valuable as it is right now. There is no advantage to selling him low this summer
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I agree with all of that.
Joel, Oden and Camby have played in only 65% of their team’s games in a total of 24 NBA seasons. So we basically need all 3 to get 2 man-seasons from them. i.e. if they play 65% of the games this year we only get 160 of 246 total games (82 × 3) from them. And Joel is likely to miss 20 or more games just to start this season.
That said, I would gamble and trade Joel in part of a package deal if and only if we got back a starting quality SF/SG (a super 6th man – the last piece for a contending team) or a future, can’t miss starting PG (because we are going to need one badly in a year or two).
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 17, 2010 12:46 AM PDT up reply actions
I'll discus that possibility the third week of February
and not waste one phone call “shoppng Joel around” before then
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Calm down. I didn't say anything about shopping him.
I’m with you on Joel, and always have been. But I’d have to trade him if someone came offering the super 6th man we need, or that elusive starting PG will we need in two years. It would just be too much to turn down.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 17, 2010 1:09 AM PDT up reply actions
re-read Dave's OP, point 2
that’s what set me off, the rest is clarification
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Agreed 100%
At a minimum, I think it is prudent to wait to trade Pryz at the trade deadline.
1) If everybody is healthy and the PG situation appears to be working, then you have the luxury of keeping Pryz for the playoffs and hoping you can resign him.
2) If Oden or Camby is hurt, having Pryz could be the difference between problem and disaster.
3) If Oden and Camby are healthy but Bayless is not developing, then we could combine Pryz’s expiring contract with other assets to bring in a quality PG.
For the rest of my thoughts, see my long post below.
by upper left corner on Jun 17, 2010 7:54 AM PDT up reply actions
This is compelling,
and right on the mark.
long season
too many games
months of playoff basketball
injuries
foul trouble
and you’d rather have a prospect?
by damonrayhymer on Jun 17, 2010 10:43 AM PDT up reply actions
get your wings for $.50 a piece
good big men- priceless
by damonrayhymer on Jun 17, 2010 10:45 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
thanks,
but it makes a good deal of sense, as well.
A budget is not an unreasonable restriction. This franchise only takes in so much money. If I was the owner, I’d want to spend less than whatever that amount is.
You simply can’t have 10 or 12 highly paid players and make a budget work.
You have to find value somewhere.
by damonrayhymer on Jun 17, 2010 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions
This is true!
Although you do need to consider the distribution of that budget across your entire team and all positions. And, on this team, you really need to think about how to distribute value after the big 3 and (for at least one more season) the old 2. It only makes sense to let Joel go somewhere else if we are getting back someone we can really use. And even if we didn’t have Bird’s rights we could still make a bid on his services after the season was up.
It only makes sense to let Joel go somewhere else if we are getting back someone we can really use
Portand is over the cap, the budget is the budget all year long. If Przy is held onto and dealt in February it makes no difference to next season’s payroll than if he was traded on July 1
Wouldn’t you rather see how badly you need Joel (once he’s healthy again) than flip him beforehand just to save a few bucks at the center position? “We could really use him” next spring if for some reason Oden or Camby can’t play
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Since the playoffs are a foregone conclussion,
I would be hard pressed to trade Joel at all. Wait his injuries out, grow Oden, and use Camby. There’s no doubt the team will need Joel, or at least more so than anyone they could get for him.
If the chip fall right, when the playoffs arrive, teams will look at Portland and say, “That’s not fair.”
by damonrayhymer on Jun 17, 2010 9:50 PM PDT up reply actions
This would happen even more.
If we were able to KPslap someone into giving us a young star for Przy and parts and then get a health Przy back through FA.
That's a pretty elaborate scheme
Young stars? Hard to come by, and generally coveted, which brings up value.
We have a couple of fine young players. How many broken down Pryz’s would it take to get LMA?
Sure, there are always a couple weak GM’s out there, but most of them know what they have, and they ain’t giving it up. After all, that big GM conference was about young stars, and cheap contracts, finding value and understanding the measurements, not broken veterans w/ 5 year, multi-million dollar contracts. Like the one Joel is going to want.
Assuming he regains his health, Joel is a starter for all but a handful of teams in the league. Not Oden, Howard, Lopez, or Yao, but he start over Camby in most instances. He’s a real center, and there just aren’t that many of them. He can’t score as well as Kaman, but he has far greater impact on any given game. He’s hurt, but I would suggest that he’s been far and away more dependable than Bynum, Oden, or Big Z.
I could go on and on.
by damonrayhymer on Jun 18, 2010 9:44 AM PDT up reply actions
Elaborate schemes are the best.
You speak from a place of speculation though. As do I . We can’t guess the status of his rehab. And it would take a lot and a ridiculous weak GM for me to get enough to make it worth gambling with Przy. But if that was possible? If someone just went dumb and wanted to give us something genuinely valuable, I’d say risk it.
But in all cases, I agree with you and have forever in regards to Przy. You just can’t get value like where he was and commitment and dedication. In many regards, he was the #2 Blazer for me while Greg remains uncertain.. in terms of value and importance. I’m just willing to buy in to some risk because a major consolidating trade involving Przy’s contract, and two of (Bayless,Rudy,Marty) (or even Dre if the return was a great backcourt fit with Roy) could take this team to the next level. And Przy, if healthy, will be in line with the other great vetFAs trying to jump on the Portland championship train.
I don't agree.
If you look long and hard, I think you will realize that there is no one who could be more useful next year than Joel, at least no one we could get. Stuff happens, and even if it doesn’t, could you imagine the lane closure with that many fouls to give.
Shot blocking, overall interior defense, hard nosed play: I say no.
Go w/ three centers.
by damonrayhymer on Jun 17, 2010 9:55 PM PDT up reply actions
The chances of us keeping Camby and Przy past this year.
Are unlikely regardless of Przy’s immediate fate. And I love having extra good Cs. But if we can get something (and like two4larue suggested, I’d also hold off until Feb to do this unless it’s for Cp3 or something) amazing then I’d still take it and hope we can get Przy back (IF he can even make it back!) for the MLE next season.
Yet again, Patty gets short shrift.
Shucks, if he’s ship shape in September, Nate shouldn’t shave his shifts.
#52
Patty will be an unrestricted free agent on July 1st
Unless the Blazers make him a qualifying offer to restrict him, for which there are no signs or statements so far.
yes, there have
MIke Born mentioned the other day that Portland is going to make the QO to Mills and then it will be up to Patty and his agent to accept it prior to joining the summer league roster
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I guess Paul wants to see him play in Vegas
since he missed the chance last July
Born was interviewed on the radio, BTW. Probably why you missed it
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
MIlls isn't even under contract
he’d have to accept the qualifying offer AND play his little Aussie heart out in Vegas to be considered trade bait
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I shaved my shifts once
but it made me itchy when rotating.
by unemployedreflection on Jun 17, 2010 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions
An excellent shooting, SG/SF veteran scorer is our priority for this summer. No rookies.
1. Rudy – he’s gone, period. It’s just a question of finding the best deal. Burnt his bridges. His whining is a distraction. Some teams will dismiss his poor shooting last year as the result of his injuries and not being used enough when he was healthy. But his low contract means he needs to be traded with another player to get back a veteran with value. Who goes with him depends on who we can get, i.e. how much salary needs to be included. It’s probably Webster but it could be Joel for a veteran who’s currently overpaid. We’d also include our #22 draft pick for the right SG/SF.
2. Webster – he’ll never be more than Batum’s backup and he doesn’t have the handles to play backup SG. i.e. his minutes will become very limited. He probably goes with Rudy for that SG/SF we need.
3. Bayless – he’ll never be our starting PG, but he can stick it out as backup PG for a year if necessary. But if we can make a great deal substituting Bayless for Rudy or Webster above then do it. We can get a new backup PG with the MLE if necessary.
4. Joel’s contract – but only if we can get a starter quality SG/SF for Joel+Rudy/Webster, or somehow a future starting PG (I doubt that). If we somehow got the PG we still have the MLE to get a backup SG for Rudy or back SF for Webster.
5. Pendergraph – he’ll never be more than 9th or 10th guy. He’s filler in a trade if we need it.
6. Cunningham – he could make it on another team, but he’ll always have limited minutes here.
7. Miller – but only in some weird package that returns a future starting PG.
8 Camby – only as part of a huge package deal for a starter, and only if Joel came back healthy.
9. Batum – only as part of a huge package deal that returns a starting SF.
10. LMA – BYC, really hard to trade and again only as part of a huge deal (i.e. returns an all-star in a package deal).
11. Oden – too much potential, too little return in a trade.
12. Roy – BYC, FACE of the FRANCHISE
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 17, 2010 12:32 AM PDT reply actions
I think Bayless has a shot at the starting gig when Miller leaves
He improved greatly from his first year even after the back court chaos that was the first half of the season.
"In fact you might say that Ugly is the Blazers' secret weapon this year."
-Dave
As for the Blazers...They are officially the NBA equivalent of a movie serial killer
-basketbawful
He improved as a player, but not enough as a playmaker, IMO.
I just don’t think it’s his nature. In the end, the scorpion will sting us.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 17, 2010 12:52 AM PDT up reply actions
he's not a classic playmaker, no
but next to Roy it’s not as important as it might be on another team. He needs to get his jump shot down and know when he’s gonna get blocked inside, though.
"In fact you might say that Ugly is the Blazers' secret weapon this year."
-Dave
As for the Blazers...They are officially the NBA equivalent of a movie serial killer
-basketbawful
I argued the same thing the year we drafted him. And during his first year.
But I’m not believing it anymore. We need a playmaker in the starting lineup to get the ball to Batum and Oden.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 17, 2010 1:04 AM PDT up reply actions
eh
Rondo-Pierce is about the only playmaking PG and Brandon like 2 combination that I can think of.
When you have a guy like Roy (or Lebron, Wade, Kobe) a play making PG isn’t a necessity. It’s teams like Utah, Dallas, New Orleans that need a play maker at the point. They don’t have a guy who can get shots for other people.
"In fact you might say that Ugly is the Blazers' secret weapon this year."
-Dave
As for the Blazers...They are officially the NBA equivalent of a movie serial killer
-basketbawful
Ok, you convinced me. Sit Miller and start Bayless next year.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 17, 2010 1:50 AM PDT up reply actions
Oden's going to love that.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 17, 2010 1:51 AM PDT up reply actions
Nice attitude
Perhaps Brandon could throw the ball in there now and again…. If he wants the ball in his hands then he should be able to run the offense in more than one way (drive and kick).
This argument seems to go in circles whatever people say but we need to be more open minded surely.
Nobody is saying Bayless is ready to take over the starting job yet.
It is not a choice of starting Bayless or miller this year. It is fine to disagree about Bayless’s future, but remember he has been in the league 2 years. Dang how much development do you expect? Not every player drafted can have the immediate impact that Broy did and expecting them to is way beyond ridiculous.
by BlazerFanFromDenver on Jun 17, 2010 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions
especially when you consider
Bayless has probably played fewer minutes than any healthy member of his ’08 lottery class. By a lot, in most cases
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I said this at the start of our conversation
I think Bayless has a shot at the starting gig when Miller leaves
Miller is clearly the better PG right now. Two more years of development should give Bayless ample time to develop into a solid, if unspectacular, point guard. We might be able to land a better point guard, but I wouldn’t bank on it.
"In fact you might say that Ugly is the Blazers' secret weapon this year."
-Dave
As for the Blazers...They are officially the NBA equivalent of a movie serial killer
-basketbawful
Regarding Boston
Watch how they play, Rondo and Pierce take turns initiating the offense in exactly the way I envision Bayless playing next to Roy.
A lot of folks argue that PGs are born, not made. Take a look at Rondo’s stats his AST% his rookie year was 26.3 this year it was 43.7. 26.7 is slightly lower than Bayless’ 27.9% in the playoffs this year . I doubt that Bayless will ever get anywhere near Rondo’s 40+, but significant improvement is certainly possible for a 21 year old who played SG in college.
by upper left corner on Jun 17, 2010 8:35 AM PDT up reply actions
Lie%, D%mn%d Lies, and AST%
I’m solidly in the “true PG’s are born” not made camp. It begins with a
set-up-the-other-guy-first mentality that Jerryd has rarely shown.
And Rondo is so far >>>>>> Bayless in the natural point guard skills department (vision, balance, creativity), that I don’t think he’s a guy you want to compare JayBay to.
I think Bayless can learn to be a spark off the bench, an instant offense and full court D pressure D kind of guy, and I don’t want to trade him.
But not in my wildest dreams of the future do I ever see
Jerryd+Roy > Rondo+Pierce.
But I’d like to see it in the finals! (If we’re there next year, it’s because Oden is healthy and you’re right and I’m wrong and Jerryd is an all-star… And I’d gladly buy you a round if that happens…)
Tery Porter wasn't a natural playmaker when he was 21, either
I think Bayless has earned the benefit of the doubt before being he’s compared to a poisonous desert creature
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
He is egotistical, and he did go to school in Arizona...
But seriously, how long did it take Porter? I started watching NBA in 90 for the most part.
You'd take Bayless' 2nd year over Porter's 2nd year?
Porter is 100x Bayless as a PG.
Porter had 8.9 assists per game his 2nd year, 10.1 his 3rd year. He shot 49% from the field his 2nd year and 52% his 3rd year. He also added more than 4 rebounds a game.
Bayless shot 41% his 2nd year, 2.3 assists, 1.6 boards.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 17, 2010 1:24 AM PDT up reply actions
you should at least prorate Bayless' stats to 36 minutes
"In fact you might say that Ugly is the Blazers' secret weapon this year."
-Dave
As for the Blazers...They are officially the NBA equivalent of a movie serial killer
-basketbawful
Ok, he shot 41% per 36 minutes too. Just kidding.
Bear in mind the fact that Porter earned 34 MPG his 2nd year, which indicates his ability to run the team as a PG in only his 2nd year (and he was a center !!!! in college so he had to learn the position even more than Bayless).
Nevetheless, here’s the 36 MPG stats:
Bayless per 36 minutes – 41%, 4.7 assists, 3.3 rebounds, 17.4 pts on 13.3 FGA.
Porter (2nd yr) per 36 minutes – 49%, 9.5 assists, 4.5 rebounds, 13.9 pts on 10.2 FGA.
Porter (3rd yr) per 36 minutes – 52%, 10.0 assists, 4.5 rebounds, 14.7 pts on 10.7 FGA.
Here’s some more comparisons – Porter also had 2.1 steals per 36 minutes and Bayless 0.7
Porter only committed 2.5 fouls per 36 minutes and Bayless had 4.2
i.e. Porter was a much better defender as well.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 17, 2010 1:47 AM PDT up reply actions
Bananas and pineapples
A. You can’t really compare Bayless’s stats, prorated for 36 minutes to Porter’s, in which he actually played 36 minutes. Most players, as we’ve seen, do better given a steady diet of sufficient minutes. They’re more warmed up, more in the flow, are getting more actual game experience with the other guys, etc.
Deux. The game has really changed in ways that make it difficult to compare the best guard defenders of old with anybody today. You used to be able to hand check and muscle guys in ways that simply aren’t available now.
#52
Yes, and you only actually get 36 minutes at PG if you prove you can run the team successfully.
Porter did, and Bayless hasn’t.
This is ridiculous argument.
Porter was a great point guard. The best the Blazers ever had. An all-star PG twice.
Bayless has had his best moments playing SG.
Enough said.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 17, 2010 2:07 AM PDT up reply actions
Cauliflower and prickly pears
When Porter was drafted the only other reasonable point guards on the team were Steve Colter, a lackluster player as I recall, and Darnell Valentine, who could create some things but was very small. The next year (86-87), the Blazers had gotten rid of both the other players and added Michael Holton. Yes, that Michael Holton. So, there was nobody remotely comparable to Andre Miller to compete for minutes with TP.
Finally, I don’t hear anybody disagreeing with you that “Porter was a great point guard”, etc. And probably Bayless will not rise to that level. However, you should take into account these various factors that have been brought up here when you do compare the two players. Not to do so would result in a ridiculous argument. Enough said.
#52
I didn't bring up the comparison between Porter and Bayless, I just responded to it.
That was 2for’s comparison.
Now you’ve brought up Porter’s teammates, what does that have to do with anything?
Did Porter get to start because his teammates weren’t as good as him? Yeah, that’s how it works. But he was 5th in the NBA in assists his 2nd season and 4th in the NBA in assists his 3rd year. So there’s a good chance he would have beat out a lot of other PG’s too for playing time. But enough about Porter. Again, I wasn’t the one that brought Porter up. It is a ridiculous comparison.
Bayless wasn’t good enough to beat out Miller or Blake. That’s is very much to the point. This is just the same old Sergio argument. If you just give him more playing time he would be better. There’s almost 300 players not starting in the NBA making that same argument about themselves. Very few of them will ever become starters.
I defended drafting Bayless. I hoped he would be a good (somewhat unique) complement to Roy. I also defended him during his rookie season for the same reason. But I haven’t seen enough progress in his playmaking ability or mindset to still support that. He’s become a better player, but in my opinion no closer to becoming our future starting PG (even playing with Roy). That’s just my opinion. I respect that you have a different opinion.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 17, 2010 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Not to mention
that Porter played 4 years in college, 3 as a starter. Bayless would be a senior in college this upcoming year. If your going to compair the two then you’d have to start by comparing Porter’s rookie year to Bayless’ 2011-2012 season.
Bananas to pineapples indeed.
Terry Porter's unique career arc is a major outlier, so it's rather useless ...
to use him in player comparisons. Jerryd Bayless isn’t Porter, Nicolas Batum isn’t Scottie Pippen, and Luke Ridnour was never going to be Steve Nash — as I argued tooth and nail with Seattle fans back in the day — thus, it’s best to avoid using them completely. Oh, and if anything, Bayless is Louis Williams and Batum is Tayshaun Prince. Batum could even turn out better than Prince, but still nowhere near Pippen status.
As someone who watched the 76'ers a lot the past few years I can tell you that Bayless is already a much better defender than WIlliams could ever dream.
Whatever shortcomings Bayless has on defense are nothing compared to Williams who can’t fight though screens at all and doesn’t really seem to care that much about defense in general, other than steals. At least Bayless tries hard and stays in front of his man relatively well. He’s also cut back on fouling some (just like I told you he would)
They do have a similar style and both are terrific at getting to the free throw line, although Bayless was actually better at drawing fouls his ROOKIE year than Williams was in his 4th.
I’m not a big Bayless supporter or anything, but his potential is sooo much higher than Williams. To me that’s about what he is now only entirely better on one half of the court.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jun 17, 2010 3:17 AM PDT up reply actions
Apples and oranges
Porter played 4 years of college ball — 3 as a SG, the last one as a PG. Even so, his 2nd season numbers are not that much better than Bayless’s, although Porter was distributing the ball a bit better perhaps. But he was starting and playing a lot more steady minutes, too.
Here are Porter’s first couple of season stats:
Season Age Tm Lg G GS MP FG FGA FG% 3P 3PA 3P% FT FTA FT% ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF PTS
1985-86 22 POR NBA 79 3 15.4 2.7 5.7 .474 0.2 0.5 .310 1.6 2.0 .806 0.4 1.0 1.5 2.5 1.0 0.0 1.3 1.7 7.1
1986-87 23 POR NBA 80 80 33.9 4.7 9.6 .488 0.2 0.8 .217 3.5 4.2 .838 0.9 3.3 4.2 8.9 2.0 0.1 3.2 2.4 13.1
#52
You’d take Bayless’ 2nd year over Porter’s 2nd year?
First of all I said age 21, not 2nd year in the NBA
Second, compare minutes played for their first 2 years, Terry received an opportunity because of injury to Valentine that Bayless didn’t, because of Spanish guards on the roster
Porter was not a premier PG until his 4-5 season, Bayless has barely played one season’s worth of NBA games
their usage time is apples-oranges, yet you want to fail Jerryd because he’s not already up to snuff?
Impatience
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I appreciate having you reiterate what I've just said 1 post above and 6 hours earlier, 2-fer!
I might as well be writing in my secret diary, whereas they’ll probably listen to you. (Boo Hoo)
#52
I try not to step on other's takes
but sometimes the emphasis is necessary
comparing Bayless at age 20-21 to Porter at age 22-23 (when TP played 3928 minutes to JB’s 1959) in their first 2 NBA seasons would appear to be the definition of a red herring, would it not? (Not to mention that every Blazer fan remembers Porter as a 30 year-old all-star, and probably not as a 23 year-old heading into his 3rd NBA season)
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
You brought up Porter to "prove" something about Bayless.
I didn’t bring up Porter, and I don’t think they are similar in any way. You could pick other players that grew into good PGs, but there are plenty that tried and didn’t. So it isn’t convincing to just pick one that succeeded.
If you want to say Bayless is only 21, or has only played 2 years, so give him more time, that’s fine. If you see something in his game that makes you think he will eventually become a great point guard (since you compared him to a great point guard) that’s your opinion. I don’t see it, that’s my opinion.
Although the players are quite different, this argument is much like the ones that occurred over Sergio a couple of years ago. He had some moments, and a lot of fans liked him a lot. So they argued passionately with anyone that didn’t think he would be a great PG to just give him more time, just play him more, etc. They compared him to PG’s that succeeded after a few years (not those that failed). If another fan didn’t see the same promise in his game, then they just weren’t being patient enough. So on and so forth. There will always be players that stir up the fans like this. Some eventually make it big, some don’t. Sergio didn’t, Bayless may or may not.
My point is that these types of arguments are simply not convincing, they are mostly emotional. It’s the nature of fandom to pick favorite players, and to get all excited when another fan says they don’t think your guy is going to be “the one”. All the stats and comparisons in the world don’t really matter. Eventually some guys end up starting and playing in championship games, and some guys end up with the Clippers.
When Bayless was drafted I thought he could eventually play the point beside Roy, because Roy creates his own shot so much, and can make plays for other players. I also defended him with the same logic during his rookie season. But I don’t see it anymore, and that’s my opinion.
Porter was not a premier PG until his 4-5 season,
Well, I don’t know what your definition of a premier PG is. Terry had 2 triple doubles and 30 double-doubles his 2nd year. He had 2 triple doubles and 33 double-doubles his 3rd year. He averaged 8.9 assists his 2nd year, and 10.1 assists his 3rd year. He shot 49% his 2nd year and 52% his 3rd year. He was also 10th in the NBA in steals his 2nd year.
His assists were #5 in the NBA his 2nd year, and #4 in the NBA his 3rd year. What do you consider premier?
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 17, 2010 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions
What do you consider premier?
NBA all-star 1991, 1993
That’s what people remember when they think of Porter. I said he wasn’t a natural playmaker at 21 (when he was a forward/center at WISP) and you started comparing his first 2 NBA seasons against Bayless’. Porter played twice the number of minutes in his first 2 seasons, and was 2 years older than Jerryd. It’s apples and oranges. You’ve lost faith in Bayless as a future playmaker based on the first 1% of his NBA playing time, when he’s barely been given the opportunity to play alongside Roy without another PG also being on the floor
I say give him at least half a season of regular PT before calling him a scorpion who will turn around and sting the franchise
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I honestly thought you were trying to compare Bayless after his 2 years in the NBA
to Porter after his 2 years in the NBA. Hence the reason I dug out Porters stats. I did not realize (I should have) that you were trying to compare the 21 year old Bayless with 2 years in the NBA to the 21 year old Porter when he was in college. My mistake. My apology to you for messing up the context of your point.
Nevertheless, your comparison is the red herring. What Porter was as a 21 year old in college and later became in the NBA, has absolutely nothing to do with Bayless. If your point is that some players can learn to be a point guard, then yes I agree completely. Some players do (you picked one of several that did), many don’t (shall we make a list of all of them?). Can we not disagree about the likelihood of Bayless becoming our future starting PG? I’ve seen enough to draw my conclusion, you haven’t. That’s fine, maybe you are right and I’m wrong. It wouldn’t be the first time I was wrong about a player. Nor the first time I was right.
There’s nothing inherently impatient or wrong about evaluating and deciding what to do with players after they have been around for 2 years. We evaluate and decide whether to draft players when they have never been in the NBA. We get some of those right and some wrong. I think sitting and letting the cake bake too long in order to evaluate our players is a mistake. But how long to wait is a judgment call. There were plenty of fans that wouldn’t have traded Sergio when we did. Just give him another year. There are also fans that would still be keeping J. Jack, or Outlaw around to give them another year. Sometimes we wait too long, sometimes we don’t wait long enough. It’s a judgment call, and there is no magic time line that fits all players.
It’s kind of insulting when you are called impatient just because you come to a decision before someone else. I do feel in general, that fans become too emotionally attached to our young players, tend to over-value them, and tend to hold on too long, instead of looking for veteran help as we become closer to becoming a contender. But that is a generalization.
Lastly, sorry if I offended you with the scorpion joke. It was in reference to my comment preceding it when I said that I don’t think it’s in Bayless’ NATURE to be a PG. Hence, my reference to the old joke about the scorpion stinging the frog after he carried him across the river. That was scorpion’s NATURE. Sorry you didn’t like my intended humor. Peace.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 17, 2010 11:27 PM PDT up reply actions
A couple of other things I thought about
If were’ using Porters assists for his first 2 years in the NBA and saying that Bayless hasn’t measured up in his first 2 years
Terry played on the fastest-paced Blazer teams in history, under Mike Schuler. Passing the ball to teammates like Clyde and Kiki scoring 25 ppg and only looking for shit shot when he was wide open (not a good 3-pt shooter, he had to work on that)
Bayless has played mostly SG with another PG on the floor. He’s almost never played PG with Roy and LMA, and the Blazers have the slowest-paced team in the NBA
Give the kid a chance, don’t write him off just yet
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
6. Cunningham – he could make it on another team, but he’ll always have limited minutes here.
Limited minutes doesn’t mean limited usefulness. If I were GM the respectful, team minded role players would only get dealt under duress.
But limited minutes here means he will ultimately be worth more to us in trade than playing here.
It’s the fate of backup role players, no matter how good they are at that role.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 17, 2010 12:54 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, Dante Cunningham's career will likely be defined as a journeyman role player. Thus, for the ...
time being, Cunningham’s place — whether he likes it or not — is with the Portland Trail Blazers on an admittedly meager contract and limited playing time. That’s fine by me, too, and I bet it’s also totally fine with Cunningham, who seems like a consummate professional.
I don't follow your Point Guard logic, Dave.
When assessing Miller you write:
7. Andre Miller: The only way this happens is as part of a package bringing back a younger point guard. That’s not likely at all. But it’s possible.
Yet when assessing his young apprentice you say:
3. Jerryd Bayless: Talent, low salary, and an odd fit make Jerryd an attractive prospect for trade.
Basically, the logic of your first statement seems to contradicts the logic of your second. Miller is going to retire; we all know that. He isn’t a perfect fit next to Roy, particularly with Nate fixated on the need for outside shooting. Who is going to take Miller’s place?
Right now, the leading candidate has to be Jerryd Bayless. Certainly, there is a ton of controversy over his ability to develop as a distributor, but he is definitely the one guy on the roster who has real potential to succeed. We know Roy doesn’t want to play the point. We know Rudy can’t defend the point, makes too many turnovers, and doesn’t have the handle to play the point. Mills is doubtful defensively, and he is no more proven as an NBA distributor.
It is inescapable, Jerryd Bayless is the easiest and cheapest answer to the question of, “who will succeed Miller?” If you don’t think he is up to the job, go ahead and trade him, but in return, you better be getting a better, more sure-deal successor to Miller.
In last weeks Podcast you and Casey discussed the future of the PG position for 15 minutes without ever mentioning Bayless. I wrote a comment addressed to you entitled “Pretty Bizarre.” I got no response (except from AK), so I will repost the comment here:
Pretty Bizarre
Dave and Casey discuss PGs for fifteen minutes and never discuss the lottery pick PG on our roster? WTF?
How can you discuss the future of the position without discussing Bayless?
Dave seems to assume a priori that you need a traditional PG who primarily spends their time setting up other guys on the roster. That is a set of assumptions that needs to be discussed.
Casey discusses Roy as PG, and both he and Dave discuss how Roy can’t defend the point, but neither take the next step and discuss the possibility of Roy and Bayless sharing distribution responsibilities while Bayless defends the point.
Casey even talks about the new handcheck rule and the movement towards PG who can penetrate and then fails to even mention that we have one of the best young penetrators in the league.
Having this discussion without mentioning the guy who answers most of the questions brought up in the discussion is completely inexplicable.
Taking into account your Podcast and your comments here, it appear that Dave the Agnostic is really Dave the Skeptic. You appear to be casting your lot with the 10% of the fanbase that think Bayless is a good candidate for trade.
To me, giving up on our most improved player, at age 21, the player who is the leading candidate to fill the largest hole in our long range roster, makes little sense. The only way it can be justified is if you assume a priori that we need a traditional PG. Those of you who take that position may be right, but your assumptions need to be discussed openly.
We haven’t even seen Bayless play with Roy. We have little if any basis for evaluating your statement that Bayless is an “odd fit.” Bayless may prove to be a great fit. We don’t know. To me, the prudent course of action is to find out before we trade Bayless away. Acquiring a quality young PG is going to be extremely expensive. Why pay the price when we may be able to fill the need with what we have?
To me, the prudent course of action is to wait till the trade deadline. If Bayless is not progressing as a shooter, defender, and distributor, if he does not appear to fit next to Roy, then we can put together a package of players to bring in a quality young PG. By this time, we will know whether or not GO is healthy, we will know if Pryz has returned to his former level of play. Many of the questions currently swirling around the team will be much clearer. I prefer to hang on to Bayless and Pryz until that time.
by upper left corner on Jun 17, 2010 7:40 AM PDT reply actions
You say "most improved"
Let’s be fair; he went from a disastrous rookie season to a “pretty good” second season (if you consider 41% shooting 32% from three and a piddly 20% assist rate “pretty good” for a point guard).
Bayless definitely showed he could make the easy pass, but I don’t need another year to tell me that his instincts are not as a distributing point guard and he’s not really an off-the-ball player either. He’s Corey Maggette’s younger 6’2" brother (with a better attitude). I don’t even hate Bayless, but there are better options out there in terms of an ability to either distribute, defend or play off the ball.
"Lets be fair"
At best, your comment is a case of looking at the glass as half empty, rather than half full.
Any discussion of Bayless has to start with his ability to get to the line. As I have pointed out repeatedly, he is one of only nine second year guards in the last two decades to get to the line over 6.5 times per 36. Of those nine guys, he also had the third best percentage from 3 pt range, meaning that he has a chance to become a multi-threat scorer of a type that is very rare. It is what makes him potentially very special. It is the reason that in spite of the pretty mediocre shooting stats you point out, his TS% is better than Andre Miller’s and better than what B Roy put up in his sophomore season, at age 24. It is the key to Bayless putting up the second best scoring numbers per minute on the team.
I don’t really believe in “instincts.” I believe in coaching and effort. Smart guys with physical talent and a willingness to work like dogs can learn new skills. It is true in every human endeavor. If you don’t have the physical ability, or if you are unwilling to put in extraordinary effort or if you aren’t very bright, each of those factors limits you. But from what we have heard, Bayless has all three components necessary to improve.
His TO% and AST% are steadily moving in the right direction. It isn’t a sure thing, but it is a good bet.
by upper left corner on Jun 17, 2010 9:42 AM PDT up reply actions
At this level?
Maybe if Jerryd started working on being a pass first point at around the age of 14 or 15 he’d be able to work his way toward being a true point, but the list of combo guards who have been able to transform themselves once they got to the NBA is pretty short, in fact the only one I can think of is Chauncey Billups.
My point is that Jerryd is at his best as an attacking short off-guard — that’s his game, when you ask him to transform himself into something that he is not, the chances that he’ll be able to do that new thing at an NBA level is pretty slim.
Saying that point guards can be made through hard work is a nice sentiment, but if it were true doesn’t it seem like it would happen more often?
It just depends.
Saying that point guards can be made through hard work is a nice sentiment, but if it were true doesn’t it seem like it would happen more often?
Bayless is no less a true PG than Westbrook or Rose. In fact he tied Westbrook on the “pure” PG index his rookie season and was almost exactly the same as Tony Parker. Derrick Fischer is technically more of a SG than Bayless ever was. As is Allen Iverson, Monte Ellis, Leandro Barbosa, Jordan Farmar, Brandon Roy, etc.
People forget that Devin Harris was a pure combo guard early in his career. If he can develop into a full time PG full time then certainly Bayless can do it.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jun 17, 2010 5:04 PM PDT up reply actions
One big difference
Length. Both Harris and Westbrook have great wingspans for their position which makes them much more capable defenders, Bayless is trying to get it done with a very poor-mediocre wingspan of 6’3" That makes it both tougher to get his shot off at the rim and for him to defend … it even makes it tougher to complete passes without the ball being deflected.
Maybe Bayless has got it in him to really bloom as a distributor and shooter, but I would say the odds are against him. If an upgrade (like Collison, et al.) can be obtained through a trade that more naturally fits in with Roy, Aldridge, Oden and Batum then I think you have to consider moving Bayless to get that guy.
You don't want Bayless because of his wingspan, but Collison is an upgrade?
He also has a 6’3" wingspan, plus he’s much smaller. If wingspan and physical ability is a concern then Collison is not your guy.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jun 17, 2010 10:00 PM PDT up reply actions
Good post
Well since Blazer Maniacs love to have at least one whipping boy around, Bayless is like blood in shark infested waters.
I remember the day when Clyde Drexler was that boy. He’’ll never develop into a decent shooter and team player. All he could do was dunk.
I remember those criticisms as well
Paxson was the skilled all-star SG who was better in Ramsay’s offense, etc
Then came the Dallas playoff series and everyone saw what Clyde could do with the ball in his hands, and the rest was history
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
the prudent course of action is to wait till the trade deadline… I prefer to hang on to Bayless and Pryz until that time.
I agree. The only exception I can think of at this time is if Tony Parker becomes available, then Miller is on the table. A Parker-Roy-Bayless 3 guard rotation is less desireable because Tony and Jerryd would not have enough size to defend most NBA backcourts, but the possibility of acquiring an NBA finals-MVP-caliber PG in his prime would be too difficult to pass by
I would include Bayless in a deal to fetch Parker if it was necessary, but not Batum. Sending Miller to San Antonio would appear to be a given, even though if the Spurs were thinking about “rebuilding” and starting George Hill at PG, Pop will run into the same conflict with Andre that Nate did, last year. But maybe they’d prefer the Miller “headache” more than having the fallout of having to tell a franchise hero like TP to take a back seat to Hill?
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Tony Parker is a high-usage, defensively weak guard who can't spread the floor, so Brandon Roy ...
and him would clash together. Again, there’s a reason that Gregg Popovich avoids playing Parker with Manu Ginoboli as much as possible; it has to do with their only being one ball on the court at a time.
Dude, you got all kinds of stuff working here,
but I’d hang on to them as well.
I’d listen, but I would only look to move Martell and Rudy. And I would be desperate to move neither, although I’d be reluctant to keep Rudy without having a direct face to face first.
No unhappy players.
by damonrayhymer on Jun 18, 2010 11:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Rudy FIRST, finally.
Forbidden to forbid!
by amlmart1 on Jun 17, 2010 9:00 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
What if Rudy goes back to Europe, to Madrid for example
Would the Blazers get anything back for him ? I’m not sure the Blazers can get a good trade if Rudy is not in
Cash for a buyout maybe if it would happen before his contract is over (the Blazers can still pick up an option for 2011-12)
There is no common CBA, so it would have to be individually negotiated. I doubt Madrid would give up a player for Rudy. And not sure who the Blazers would want. Sergio maybe ;)
Bayless Groupthink
AP48M:
Bayless in the top 30 at 6.7. Derrick Rose who is probably considered the top young point guard is only at 8.1. Miller is at 8.2. Consider the fact that Bayless plays a lot at the 2 guard makes this look even better.
Will Bayless be the point guard of the future, hard to tell, but to continually read posts on this site that say he cannot distribute the ball is wrong.
I'd probably switch
Nic and Greg. At least for the next couple years. Nic’s salary means he could be part of a package to a team looking to dump a star. Greg just won’t get enough in return until he can stay on the court. Now, this might all be moot if Allen is going to be the new GM.
One step to Blazers success
Acquire a top tier point guard. Trade Rudy/Martell/Bayless/Andre (even Joel or Camby if needed). Target a Tony Parker or Devin Harris or Steve Nash.
Check this starting lineup (think over the next 3 years)
Devin Harris, Tony Parker, Steve Nash (Pick one. I like Harris for his youth.)
Brandon Roy
Nicolas Batum
LaMarcus Aldridge
Greg Oden
Off the bench you’ve got whoever’s left after acquiring the point guard. Need veteran shooters like Steve Blake (yes, bring him back!). Solid backup center like Camby or Joel. Smart contributors like Cunningham/Pendergraph. And a knock down 3 point shooter to compliment Batum (I’d love to keep Martell for his newfound defensive ability).
If we stay patient with Bayless and waste our time on him
he has a good chance of becoming a poor man’s Vinny “The Microwave” Johnson.
As the song goes, “The future’s so bright, I gotta wear shades.”
LOL
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
Good list, Dave, but...
I think most of the posters are arguing placement of people on this list by assuming something other than Dave’s starting assumptions:
This is based on three factors: How much the Blazers want/need to retain the player, how much value the player has on the market, and a nod to contract status
I define trade value based on – (net benefit), so I give much more than a nod to contract status, I give it equal footing with the difference between how much another team values the player, and your team does.
I also think teams look at the – when evaluating players, so a guy with 4 years and a huge contract has one humongous cost..
In other words, guys like Rudy, Bayless, Pendy, Dante, and Batum are so tough to trade: they are good already, have plenty of upside, and are cheap.
However, I agree that Rudy has expressed a desire to try another team and style out, and I can’t say I can blame him. His value is so high relative to his cost that he’s at the top of the charts of net value. So be it. That’s the most likely guy to be traded because other teams value him more than we seem to.
- is Pryz, for insurance reasons (so you can trade him now), and salary cap reasons (so you can trade him at the deadline). If we’re going to get a really good player in return, he is very likely to be the 1.
I don’t think other teams think much of Martell, so we’re unlikely to trade him unless we need contracts to match. He and all the other cheap guys mentioned above are aonly going as trade balancers.
I don’t see Batum, Oden, Roy, LMA, Dre or Camby going anywhere next year.
Bayless, Pendy, Dante, and Batum are too cheap to trade except as filler.
That leaves KP with only Rudy to dangle as an enticing bait for a team that wants a player, and Joel for a team that wants to have cap space next year. And you shop Martell to see what interest you get.
Geez, I almost missed it… GO CELTS!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Blazer's Edge
Related FanShots on Blazer's Edge
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.
