Wesley Matthews: Will the Jazz Match?
by Dave on Jul 12, 2010 12:05 AM PDT
in News
Email
PrintMost of the debate surrounding the Wesley Matthews contract offer centers on how good he would or wouldn't be for the Blazers and whether he's worth almost $7 million per year. Short answers: He'd be great for Portland in the abstract. He's a good shooter, good defender, a really nice back-up shooting guard bringing exactly the qualities the Blazers need to add in the backcourt. Whether he's worth $34 million to Portland depends on your view. If the Blazers are in the "adding final pieces" phase then yeah, why not? If he has the right mix of abilities you go out and get him and make your team as good as it can be. If you're in the "pieces aren't here yet" phase then you start to squirm. That is an expensive contract for a back-up at a position where you pray you don't need much help. If you start worrying about things like luxury tax, retaining other players, and adding another star somewhere along the line then this is a pricey move without the flashy payoff. Andre Miller makes about what Matthews will make under this deal and Matthews isn't going to bring nearly the kind of lift that Miller does, nor could you trade him for a Miller-level player when he's making that kind of money. Personally I would be quite happy to get Matthews but I would have preferred the originally-reported offer of $5 million per year because that's only spendy and not potentially outrageous. Portland had to have this guy targeted in order to make that offer but I wonder if watching the free agent parade roll by without anyone stopping at their booth made the Blazers jump hard when maybe they should have shopped around more.
Leaving that aside, the question of the hour is whether the Jazz will match Portland's offer. Here, too, you could go either way. Utah has lost plenty of last year's roster already. Carlos Boozer, Ronnie Brewer, and Kyle Korver are all gone. That leaves the cupboard bare, particularly at shooting guard. In Matthews' absence they are looking at Othyus Jeffers as their only legit two. Jeffers has played 72 minutes of NBA basketball in his lifetime. When you look at the list of the remaining free-agent shooting guards Matthews starts to look plenty attractive, especially when you consider that $7 million per isn't out of line for a decent starter. The mass departures may make absorbing that contract easier than it would have been. The Jazz are at $58 million in salary without figuring in Matthews. Even a front-loaded $9 million year would not push them over the luxury tax threshold. [Edit: And as our friend Storyteller points out that $9 million wouldn't all count against the cap anyway.] In a year they lose Andre Kirilenko's exorbitant $18 million salary. Retaining Matthews would still leave them under the (presumed) cap after that. On the face of it, it's not a back-breaking deal.
On the other hand, is Matthews really starting shooting guard material? Utah has around $43 million locked up in their three most expensive players next year. That drops to $35 million the following year once Kirilenko is gone. They can afford to make a mistake maybe, but only one. They don't want a reserve guard suitable for 20 minutes per game costing them as much as Paul Millsap does, which is pretty much what Matthews would be making. Not only does it clog the cap, it makes extending Millsap himself much more expensive. (Never mind what that contract is going to do to Portland's salary structure with Matthews as a reserve.) Warriors guard Anthony Morrow, whose game is flawed but who until this off-season received far more attention than Matthews, just signed a 3-year, $12 million (total) offer sheet with the Nets. If that's the going rate, Matthews is at a severe premium. If he's going to turn out like another defensively-minded guard the Blazers tended an offer sheet to--Trenton Hassell, who made bank and was never the same player again--the Jazz have to make Portland bear that cost. This contract may be so out of whack with Matthews' potential and production, a view espoused by this Salt Lake City Tribune writer, that Utah may decline on principle, figuring they could find four guys to audition to be the next Wesley Matthews for a cheaper price.
The Jazz can afford this deal but sticker shock alone is going to cause them to take a long, hard look at Mr. Matthews and decide whether they're ready to be married to him for the next couple of years. For better or worse the Blazer brass have decided that this is their guy. They have to hope the Jazz don't reach the same conclusion, either because Portland is right about his potential and Utah is wrong or because Portland deems him perfect as a reserve while Utah can't commit to him as a starter. Either way, the bet is sizable here for both teams. Utah can't be feeling comfortable right now.
A couple of people have asked whether the Blazers might have made this offer specifically to mess with the Jazz. If so, they're playing a crazy-stupid game of chicken. I cannot imagine that they raised the offer artificially thinking Utah would match. I have to assume that if Matthews becomes a Blazer the Portland hierarchy will be slapping high fives because they really do like him that much. If they don't value Matthews enough to celebrate that contract they're world-class dolts because even succeeding in a scheme like that brings marginal pain to just 1 of 29 opponents...not anywhere worth the risk.
Do you think the Jazz match? See what they think over at SLCDunk. (Please be nice.)
345 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Just a point of clarity
Regardless of any signing bonus or upfront payment, the most that Matthew’s contract will count against either the Blazers’ cap or the Jazz’s cap will be the amount of the MLE, which is $5.765 million.
I don’t think they will match – my sense is that they consider Portland’s offer to be overpaying him and they will seek to use their MLE to get other players (like Brewer?) to replace him.
That should be 'count against either' cap in 2010-11
by Storyteller on Jul 12, 2010 12:10 AM PDT up reply actions
Which begs the question:
If they won’t pay $5.765 million for the guy as their starter why would the Blazers want to pay him that much to be a reserve? Portland must think he fits to a “T”.
—Dave
I guess so.
Maybe they just really want to trade Rudy.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jul 12, 2010 12:20 AM PDT up reply actions
A couple of reasons
1) Because the Jazz might be looking to use their large trade exception (from the Boozer trade) later this year, meaning that they need to ‘save’ space to take on the extra contract. Portland is in no position to do so – any trade they do to take on long term salary will probably involve expiring contracts and not a trade exception. Different perspectives.
2) Because the Blazers know they are indeed overpaying him, as you sometimes have to do in order to get a RFA.
3) Because Portland is looking to fill either the last spot on the roster or the next to last spot. Utah has to sign two more players just to get to the league minimum of 13 and might just look to sign one more than that (if not two). Again, it’s managing how you use your signing assets – their plan might be to use the MLE to sign 2 players instead of all just towards one.
by Storyteller on Jul 12, 2010 12:20 AM PDT up reply actions
For the Portland Trail Blazers, using the full MLE on a guy,Wes Matthews, who projects stylistically ...
to be a backup 3 — since he’s relatively similar to Martell Webster, especially regarding the similar lack of poor handles, middling efficiency on spot-up three-point shooting (i.e., below the 40% threshold), and overrated on-ball defense — is fiscally imprudent and a poor use of financial resources.
It, moreover, is another reason why I hope that the MLE — which I abhor with a passion — is abolished in the next CBA.
Shoot, I hope that the Utah Jazz match this offer sheet for everyone’s sake. Notwithstanding the negative monetary impact and imbalanced roster construction that the addition Matthews would bring to the Trail Blazers, he’s better suited to be a 2 in Jerry Sloan’s contemporary version of the UCLA high-post offense — as it includes a ton of flex cuts and off-ball movement that fit this kid’s skill set — while being stuck at the weakside corner chucking bombs from downtown as a 3 within Nate McMlllan’s simplistic high-low zone offense would be an unwise way to utilize him.
Oh, and for anyone who thinks that Matthews can effectively play the 2 under McMillan, Matthews sloppy handles and inability to create scoring opportunities for himself in iso situations makes him ineffective at that position. That, of course, is why I’d’ve rather gone after a cheaper, more apt fit in a guy like Roger Mason, Jr, who’s a combo guard with a versatile skill set on offense.
by AK1984 on Jul 12, 2010 12:38 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
how does one abhor the MLE
with passion?
Abhor? Really?
Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash
by HurraKane212 on Jul 12, 2010 12:44 AM PDT up reply actions
I was wondering the same thing.
I think it’s a good tool to have for teams over the cap to be able to have to tinker a bit between seasons in order to not remain stagnant.
"I come to you now, at the turn of the tide." -- Brandon "Gandalf" Roy, April 24th, 2010
If NBA frachises were fiscally prudent and not so inept regarding the use of financial ...
resources, then cap exceptions such as the MLE, BAE, and even TPEs and DPEs wouldn’t be necessary. I’m down with Bird rights, Early Bird rights, minimum-level player exceptions, and rookie exceptions; however, the aforementioned exceptions are things that allow teams to waste money in an unwise manner. So yeah, I do say keep Bird rights, Early Bird rights, et cetera; yet, it’s time to kill off the MLE, BAE, et cetera. And yes, the middle-class in the NBA is laughably overpaid in this day and age.
I think the much greater cause of the lockout
is the way the soft cap allows top teams to send out expiring contracts for long-term, crappy contracts. This feature of the current CBA has two problems:
(1) It creates two tiers of teams: teams that are trying to get under the cap, and teams that are over the cap and don’t care. Since with a modicum of creativity, the latter teams can basically spend whatever they want, some NBA teams are playing under the baseball CBA while others are under the football CBA.
(2) The expiring contract/salary cap phenomenon prevents teams from being accountable for the contracts they sign. Since you can usually find a contender to take on the crappy contract you give a guy (and sometimes get a fairly decent return), teams put very little care into thinking about the long-term implications of their signings.
I do agree that stuff like the MLE is part of of the problem, though.
38% three point shooting is "middling"?
Kirk Hinrich shot 37% last season. (38% for his career) Have you ever once called his three point shooting middling?
I would call it good at the very least.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jul 12, 2010 2:29 AM PDT up reply actions
As you know, I care more about Kirk Hinrich's defense than his 3PT%.
At the 3, it’s not too hard to cheaply pick up defensive-minded guys who can drain it from beyond the arc; however, defensive-minded 1s with long-distance range — such as Hinrich — are a way tougher find currently.
Still, 38% is not bad by any stretch of the imagination.
For a rookie to come in and play great defense while draining 38% of his looks from deep? That sounds Batum-ish to me.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jul 12, 2010 3:45 AM PDT up reply actions
Except Martell
was always inconsistent. That was the real issue with him. Matthews seems much more consistent to me. I see him as Portland’s sixth man after a consolidation trade. For short stints, he could play the three alongside Roy (as Batum’s backup). I also think he could play the 1 for short stints, since he runs the fast break decently, and Roy would handle the half court sets. In essence, I think the plan is still to upgrade the starting 1 and have Matthews and Camby as multi-positional subs earning near starters minutes. Dante will probably also earn some decent minutes this season.
by Rodney Gustafson on Jul 12, 2010 7:38 AM PDT up reply actions
I also think he could play the 1 for short stints, since he runs the fast break decently
No, Matthews is not a candidate to play PG, even a “Steve Blake kind” of PG who plays “off” of Roy
Wes is a backup 2-3, he would ensure that Roy never has to defend another SF, which is exactly what the Blazers needed to add this offseason
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
not to mention a good option if
Roy or Batum are ever out and we need to plug someone into the starting lineup
by sammymohawk on Jul 12, 2010 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions
except Martell was a 5th or 6th year guy...
and Mathews is coming into his second. big difference! Martell hit his ceiling, one of those players who are serviceable but never reach their full potential.
The thing with Mathews is that its about his defense. and his aggressiveness. thats what Nate likes and needs for this team. Mathews will add toughness for our team. and its not like we have had the best health at the 2 and the 3 spots recently. he would be a perfect utility guy who can be a stop gap for injuries and fill minutes between the 2 and the 3, while bringing more of a defensive presence.
Potential and ceiling much higher with Mathews than with Martell at this stage in both of their careers.
hopefully, if he does come to the Blazers, there won’t be a sophomore slump or a “first year of big payday” slump.
I'm no expert, but I advise more caution
Martell has been in the league longer, but they are about the same age. We might ask why it took Wes so long to make an NBA roster if he really is that good, and if it took Matthews that long to figure it out, why can’t Martell? Just because he came into the league earlier means he has no upside? He still has all the talent he came into the league with, although he has some problems with the mental aspect of the game. But there is no reason to believe that, at the same age as Matthews, Webster still won’t do a Steve Nash and figure things out later.
Also, Matthews looked a lot more consistent last year in Utah, but Sloan’s system does that to players. Like Larry Brown, Sloan is one of those old-school coaches who get a lot more out of their players than should reasonably be expected out of them in another system. Wes looks good under Sloan, but will he look as good under Nate? It’s very possible that once you subtract out the over-achievement factor, he won’t look any better than Martell, though it is really to soon to tell.
hit his ceiling at 23?
really?
BB players hit their primes at what 28 yrs old usually? jeeesh
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
What about Travis? I think he is about 25. Some say he's hit HIS
ceiling. I think when some say this, they refer to learning curve more so than physical output.
Matthews is only in his 2nd NBA year. Martell is in his 4th (going on). He did miss a full year.
Webster may learn more as time goes on. He will be better on a team where he can start. He freaks out with any competition.
They can both improve on their talents
they won’t round out for several years yet, is my main point.
Writing off a 23 year old in a sport that people typically don’t typically hit their peak performance until 5 years later. martell has more to bring to the table.
He was inconsistent, but so were the conditions he faced on the court. He went from getting 48 minutes a game to about 12 in just over a week.
Some nights he would get 30 and the next 10. If you are an inconsistent player it will be hard for you to develop that consistency in that environment. I think Minny will be a great fit to allow him to move to his next level of development.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
let me put it this way
he will actually have some consistency in his playing time in Minny, he will get a chance to show something there that he never eally got here. I think the timing of his injury is what killed his chances here.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
too easy a target
particularly after drafting 30 point guards in last years draft
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
TS% of .592
How is that middling efficiency? Come on AK, once again you are grossly overstating your case.
by upper left corner on Jul 12, 2010 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Furthermore, your lack of consistency makes me crazy......
……Isn’t Mathews exactly the kind of low usage, high efficiency player you have been advocating ad nauseum?
by upper left corner on Jul 12, 2010 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions
nothing inconsistent about what he wrote— even if you like Matthews the pricetag is too high and isn’t an efficient use of resources.
regarding the middling efficiency, AK’s post refers only to his efficiency on 3 point shooting— the TS% is good because of his strong finishing in transition, something that he’ll likely be less effective at playing at the plodding Portland pace.
38% from 3 as a rookie is not middling
If he was 28, you might justify that comment. As a rookie, that is excellent.
by upper left corner on Jul 12, 2010 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions
on the plodding portland pace
i can not imagine Nate maintaining that style, not with Bickerstaff as his prime target as 1st assistant. That is a definite signal things will pick up pace wise on offense.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
I’ll believe it when I see it. Nate’s teams have always been among the slowest in the league, and Bickerstaff’s have often been pretty slow too.
bickerstaff's revolved more around his talent
and not his system. definitely not like nate’s. I do believe nate wanted his guys to run more last season (i remember hearing him over the mike’s mics yelling run or push it more than once) but his system was drilled so far into the team it never worked. Bickerstaff might be targeted to inject some flexibility in system and players. That would be my hope anyway…
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
Not so...
Nate’s Seattle teams did a lot of damage in transition. If the fast break wan’t there, then he would slow it down.
That is what Nate has been working towards. For year’s, he has been trying to improve the half court game to a point he is happy with. Now they are there. So now he wants to add the running game. He has said as much more than once this summer. He wants shooters, and he wants more transition points. He also wants the 2nd unit to RUN. That’s part of why he likes Mills.
I can actually see a 2nd unit playing small ball with Mills-Bayless-Matthews-Cunningham-Camby at times. I don’t really like that lineup, but it wouldn’t surprise me in the least to see Nate send that out to try it.
by Rodney Gustafson on Jul 13, 2010 11:17 AM PDT up reply actions
My point is that AK loves him some Mike Miller
and Mathews stats have more than a little in common with Miller.
by upper left corner on Jul 12, 2010 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions
Don't forget rebounder.
I’d much rather have Miller than Matthews but I also think AK and maybe you are understating Matthews’ abilities.
"One of the bright spots of the young season has been rookie point guard Jonny Flynn, whose name sounds like he should be the lead character in a Broadway Musical. "What are you doing here, Jonny Flynn?" "Why I'm here to court trouble, and woo a girl, and build the most fantastical contraption the world has ever seen!" -- Dave, Game 7 Blazers versus Timberwolves preview
"It was bad reffing...but not rip apart the fabric of time bad." -- The Arkitect, Game 79 Blazers versus Mavericks Post-Game Thread
by BlazersOrBust on Jul 12, 2010 1:05 PM PDT up reply actions
I like this signing in the context of having our sights set higher.
If this isn’t the first step of swinging a significant trade I’ll be very unhappy.
"One of the bright spots of the young season has been rookie point guard Jonny Flynn, whose name sounds like he should be the lead character in a Broadway Musical. "What are you doing here, Jonny Flynn?" "Why I'm here to court trouble, and woo a girl, and build the most fantastical contraption the world has ever seen!" -- Dave, Game 7 Blazers versus Timberwolves preview
"It was bad reffing...but not rip apart the fabric of time bad." -- The Arkitect, Game 79 Blazers versus Mavericks Post-Game Thread
by BlazersOrBust on Jul 12, 2010 1:12 PM PDT up reply actions
like I said below, if we’re doing a significant trade, we should do that first. You never know what the vagaries of the trade bargaining table will bring. I’d rather make the trade first, then plug the holes. Wes Matthews at 7 mil/yr is not such a great fit or bargain that we have to jump on it right now. There are other players that do what he does at that price.
I think you can just as easily make the argument that it's better to plug the holes first.
The Blazers aren’t so desperate to swing a trade that it’s worth gutting the roster and then swinging and missing on the plugging. Not saying that I necessarily think that, just that one could easily make the argument that the Blazers do. People are definitely risk-averse, especially when potentially risking their jobs and livelihoods.
"One of the bright spots of the young season has been rookie point guard Jonny Flynn, whose name sounds like he should be the lead character in a Broadway Musical. "What are you doing here, Jonny Flynn?" "Why I'm here to court trouble, and woo a girl, and build the most fantastical contraption the world has ever seen!" -- Dave, Game 7 Blazers versus Timberwolves preview
"It was bad reffing...but not rip apart the fabric of time bad." -- The Arkitect, Game 79 Blazers versus Mavericks Post-Game Thread
by BlazersOrBust on Jul 12, 2010 8:58 PM PDT up reply actions
sure
you can go either way. This course of action is reasonable. I just think the downside (Babbitt getting some minutes) isn’t really that harmful.
I won't argue your points, as I generally agree, however....
Mathews TS% is higher than anything Miller put up in his first four years in the league. Mathews can reasonably be expected to get better, while Miller is likely on the way down.
I still hold to my basic observation that Mathews is the kind of low usage, high efficiency player for whom AK has been evangelizing.
by upper left corner on Jul 12, 2010 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Miller's just a better pure shooter is all.
Look at their percentages from 16-23 feet (you can find it at hoopdata). Miller is one of the best in the league from that range; Matthews couldn’t hit the ocean from a boat at that range. I agree with you that the Matthews deal is a better one than AK is giving it credit for.
"One of the bright spots of the young season has been rookie point guard Jonny Flynn, whose name sounds like he should be the lead character in a Broadway Musical. "What are you doing here, Jonny Flynn?" "Why I'm here to court trouble, and woo a girl, and build the most fantastical contraption the world has ever seen!" -- Dave, Game 7 Blazers versus Timberwolves preview
"It was bad reffing...but not rip apart the fabric of time bad." -- The Arkitect, Game 79 Blazers versus Mavericks Post-Game Thread
by BlazersOrBust on Jul 12, 2010 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions
As a backup 2/3
I’m not sure how much we want him shooting from mid-range.
Get to the rim on the break or occasional cuts. Hit the three when open. D-up!!!
Matthews game fits favorably whether on the court with Roy, Batum, Miller, Bayless. Of course, we still don’t know for sure who the PG will be, but I think Wes is an ideal fit in this role under Nate’s system.
by Rodney Gustafson on Jul 13, 2010 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions
Precisely, I'm looking at this less from a statistical standpoing and ...
more from a stylistic standpoint.
Wes Matthews isn't at all like Mike Miller, however, especially when you ...
factor in their differences in skill sets — for M&M has much better handles, as well as can create shot opportunties for himself and others — so I don’t quite get the comparison.
If Matthews is like any Caucasian American on offense at the 2 — as that’s the side of the ball we’re discussion here — then it’s the long-range shooting and occasional transition scoring of Chase Budinger.
And, while I’d be fine with Budinger as a cost-effective third-stringer here in Portland, it’d have to play the 3 instead of the 2. Unlike in Houston, Budinger wouldn’t have Rick Adelman’s rendition of the Princeton offense to mask his certain liabilities as an iso player at this level; thus, he’d be strictly a 3 under McMillan’s simplistic high-low zone offense.
Exactly, Mike Miller is a vastly superior ball handler, can create for himself, ...
and also thrives as a spot-up shooter. Unlike Wes Matthews, Miller doesn’t need an offensive system that caters to his skill set to make him a productive, efficient player.
While Wes Matthews TS% was nice last year, I assume it'll decrease with him moving from ...
Jerry Sloan’s modern-day version of John Wooden’s UCLA high-post offense — which includes a multitude of flex cuts, staggered screens, and off-ball movement for wing players, as well as an opportunity to score in transition at times — to being a stationary long-range shooter sitting in the weakside corner as a 3 in Nate McMillan’s high-low zone offense. Under McMillan, Matthews will essentially be used in a Martell Webster esque role. That, without question, isn’t worth a five-year, $32 to $34 million price tag.
I understand the physical, racial, and stylistic difference,.....
…..but do you see the basic similarity that I am attempting to point out?
I’m not trying to say that Mathews’ game is just like Miller, given that there are a host of differences. But both guys have some similarity in terms of how they produce within the overall team game: both guys are low volume, high efficiency players; both are guys who don’t need the ball, but who can help spread the floor.
I just thought is was a little over the top for you to be calling a guy with a TS% of .592 and a 3pt % of .383 as a rookie, “middling efficiency”. Those are pretty darn good numbers for a rookie, better than Miller had as a youngster.
Actually, I am trying to agree with you in a sort of backhanded way. You convinced me a long time ago that Miller would be a good fit for the Blazers. Obviously, that isn’t going to happen. I was just trying to point out that despite the different skill set and stylistic differences, maybe Mathews could provide some of the same kinds of production for the Blazers.
You may be right about the differences in tempo and system. Sloan’s system is so vastly different from Nate’s, it is difficult to project how a player from Utah would fit in here in Portland. I’m genuinely interested in your opinion. I don’t follow the NBA, as a whole, as closely as you seem to. How do you think Mathews would fit as a 2-3 back-up?
by upper left corner on Jul 13, 2010 6:59 AM PDT up reply actions
Matthews could play stretches of 2 next to Roy at 1
I can’t disagree with the part about potentially overpaying the guy, but if Wes can continue to develop as the Blazers expect that he will, a lineup of Roy, Matthews, Batum, Aldridge, and (Center) could pose a match up nightmare for opponents. Nic Batum and Matthews could easily handle the guards, or Roy takes the 2nd best guard if they have a star SF and put Nic on him (Melo, Bron). Wes Matthews has the potential to be a huge X factor, a la Batum last year when he was really starting to hit his stride.
by Three Match Ban on Jul 12, 2010 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Question
If Wesley Matthews is that good as a freshman and Rudy is “Rumored” to going back to Spain wouldn’t he be an excellent SG. What would they have had to pay Rudy for his next contract? Even is he did not set the world on fire, it would be about the same Right. Plus Rudy isn’t really interested in backing up BRoy.
hg
right
matthews seems to ‘fit’ better. content with some court time, not worried about being a star….that is what you need behind Roy, someone able to step in and take a good hard 4 minutes off of Roy per half and pick up some time from Batum.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
Additional brainstorming ideas
4) Portland actually plans on starting Matthews and has plans to trade another starter
5) Portland put his name into the player analysis program that KP left behind and it popped out that Matthews is actually worth the contract. Meanwhile Utah, which might not have such a program, does not value him as highly.
by Storyteller on Jul 12, 2010 12:26 AM PDT up reply actions
tell me more about this player analysis program....
Elitism - It's lonely at the top. But it's comforting to look down upon everyone at the bottom.
by thankyouforblaze on Jul 12, 2010 1:25 AM PDT up reply actions
Excellent bargain if Matthews turn out similar to young Sprewell.
I’d think “improving handles” would be the first thing he needs to do if that is his career path, though.
"I think he’s been doing some good things. I think he’s been doing some good things. He’s had to play a lot of minutes lately with Blake being out. I think he’s been doing some good things." -Nate McMillan
I don't think any player would try to choke Sarge
Nate looks like he’d open a can-of-whoop@ss on the first player who tried.
That's the really interesting part of this -- figuring out why Portland made this move.
They absolutely didn’t do it just to mess with the Jazz. I think that notion is just silly. There is too little to gain (messing with the Jazz) and you don’t want to get stuck with Matthews at this price unless you have a real good plan to use him.
So what is the plan? 5 years, $33M is way too much to pay for someone to back up Roy for 10-11 minutes a game. That would be way beyond even a last-piece-of-the-pie scenario in my mind. So I think it’s a given the Blazers plan to play him at least 27-28 minutes a game. And that means Matthews has to either start, or backup both Roy (10-11 minutes at SG) and Batum (16-18 minutes at SF) to get enough minutes to justify his price. (Keep in mind that we couldn’t trade Matthews until Dec 15, so he isn’t going to be used in some bigger trade already in the works.)
So starting with the least likely possibility:
Plan A. Matthews would be a starter.
The Blazers would have to already have a pretty solid deal in place to trade Roy or Batum, or they would have to be satisfied using Matthews as the 6th man (Plan B) if such a deal fell through or never materialized.
A1) Trade Roy, start Matthews at SG. - Not going to happen. Not even worth talking about.
A2) Trade Batum – Well, we’ve talked about that enough here in the last couple of weeks. I think the consensus is that Batum would only be traded in a blockbuster deal for just a handful of potential players. That seems very, very unlikely, but if it happens then presumably we would be getting someone so special (not another SF, else we wouldn’t be starting Matthews) we’d soon have a lot more to talk about than Wesley Matthews.
Conclusion: starting Matthews is either such a remote possibility we can forget about it, or it means something incredible is about to happen (don’t hold your breath).
So if the unrealistic option above is really unrealistic, then the only other reason to get Matthews at this price is:
B. Matthews would be our backup SG/SF, our primary 6th man, and gobble up nearly all of the quality playing time behind Roy and Batum. My #1 hope this summer was to get a reliable veteran in that 6th man role, and I expected we would trade some sizable pieces for the right guy if the MLE wasn’t enough. So I question if Matthews is good enough for the job, but what’s done is done now.
If option B is correct, what is the rest of the story (as Paul Harvey would say)?
That’s where the Matthews offer gets interesting. What is the Blazers plan for Bayless …?
B1) Bayless gets backup PG minutes only – (because Matthews gets the backup SG minutes)
Bayless handled getting only 18 minutes a game last year very well. But how would he handle that again in his 3rd year? And do the Blazers really want to use Bayless exclusively as a backup PG? I don’t think so, but others will probably disagree.
B2) Trade Miller and start Bayless – I’m sure there are people that would like that scenario, but I’m not one of them. I think it would be a huge step down from Miller as the starting PG to Bayless as the starting PG. Adding Matthews as our 6th man would not make up that difference, IMO.
B3) Trade Bayless for a young backup PG – This is basically “the we’ve given up on Bayless scenario”. Try to grow a PG of the future that would be satisfied with 16-18 minutes this year and perhaps not much more next year (depending on whether we want to try to get a 3rd year out of Miller or dump him at the end of this year). The variations on this would include trading Bayless for something else and using Mills or Johnson as the backup PG.
So what is the rest of the plan behind making this offer for Matthews? Forget about Rudy, he isn’t coming back if we get Matthews (and probably not even if we don’t). What is the plan for Bayless if we get Matthews?
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jul 12, 2010 3:17 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
I don't know about this.
Conclusion: starting Matthews is either such a remote possibility we can forget about it
If Matthews can guard Melo (a bunch of Jazz fans think he can) then he can guard just about any SF.
If you were trading Batum for a really great PG then I could see starting Matthews at the 3. Maybe trading for someone really great like Harris, Rubio, Curry, etc. might make some sense. It’s a stretch, but not as much of a stretch as paying Matthews that much money to play 15 minutes a game.
A Harris/Roy/Matthews lineup is probably better defensively than Miller/Roy/Batum.
I’m not saying it would or should happen, but it wouldn’t be the craziest thing if it did.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jul 12, 2010 3:56 AM PDT up reply actions
he didn't really guard 'Melo that well though
Melo scored 31/game on 56% TS in the playoffs. And the refs were letting Matthews get away with murder, something he couldn’t do against Kobe. Kobe lit him up.
In my mind...
…Wesley has proven, as a 6th man type, he can definitely play the 2 and the 3 effectively…
…meaning the Blazers do expect him to fill out all of those back up minutes…the fact that Melo & Kobe lit him up doesn’t mean anything…he’s a good fit at those positions, and a good defender…
…Roy “lit up” Artest and Battier in last years playoffs…the NBA is different than the MLB…good offense will beat good defense…at least at the individual level…when you start getting great team defense…then you have a different monster…
…Matthews can be a part of that good team defense…he can hit the 3…and the plan seems simple enough…
…continue the transition of Bayless to pg…Miller can play about 30 minutest this year…Bayless can get about 18 there and…
…when injuries undoubtably crop up, or when he is simply hot, Rex can play a little bit more….
by irish3 on Jul 12, 2010 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
you always make quality, smart points
but the “…”s distract me like crazy.
Gimmicks don't make dynasties
rec
Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash
by HurraKane212 on Jul 12, 2010 11:58 PM PDT up reply actions
Add to that...
Matthews defense is intended for when Batum sits.
I think the plan is to make sure either Batum or Matthews are always on the court to guard the opposition’s best wing player. This frees Roy up to focus more on the offensive end of the floor. Smart plan, IMO.
Matthews may not completely stop Melo or Kobe. But between he and Batum, those guys will have to work for theirs.
by Rodney Gustafson on Jul 13, 2010 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions
Interesting
What if there are plans to begin curbing Miller’s minutes as he gets older? Start Miller, bring Bayless in early, let him play next to Roy, bring Miller back with the second unit in Q2 to give it some play making, Bayless goes back in with the starters, and Miller comes back to finish up in Q4. You could play them the way that Pryz and Oden were played in Oden’s rookie year (minus the foul trouble), with each player getting in the neighborhood of 24 minutes per game.
I’m not saying that’s what they should do or will do, but it’s one possibility, and would indicate that the Blazers believe that, barring a trade for Chris Paul, Jerryd is our Point Guard of the future.
I expect Bayless to play a lot of PG minutes at the beginning of the season
Andre usually starts slow and rounds himself into shape, there’s a tradeoff because he hasn’t missed a game in forever, so there’s no sense expecting Dre to change his “conditioning program” now
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
he did say he intended to pass that first day physical this year
so he will do a little more than he did last summer….but probably not much. I would not either if I were him with his health record in this league.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
maybe 'Dre will bring rollerblades to the first practice?
that should help him reach his time
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
What is the plan for Bayless if we get Matthews?
There’s no doubt that Bayless will receive fewer minutes if Matthews becomes a Blazer
but the depth at the 1-2-3 will be improved, and the bench will be fortified well in case of injury to the starting guards or Batum
I could also see Miller-Bayless-Matthews playing some minutes at the 1-2-3 when Roy and Batum are out of the game (especially against smaller backcourts)
I don’t mind “less of Bayless” if it means the team’s perimeter D will be improved, and because it adds another floor spreader to the regular rotation
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
My pet theory:
The Blazers intend to sweeten the CP3 deal for another go… and they are stocking up on replacement parts with the expectation that they’re going to have to gut their bench to make it happen.
With the acquisitions we’ve made, you could hypothetically trade Batum+Bayless+Fernandez and/or mills and/or Pendergraph/Cunningham and you’d still have a roster behind them you can work with.
IMHO, it would be stupid to deliberately overbuild their roster and then have to cut guys in training camp and not gain anything back for the talent… so if this is the right theory, then I wouldn’t be surprised if there is some kind of plan B trade not quite as hot as CP3 but still soemthing we’d have to drain our reserves to make happen.
Like the Whos down in Whoville they did it without boxes or ribbons or bows, they did without centers or posting down low. They won without All-Stars and Spaniards and Frenchmen. They won with old geezers and sub-par defense-men. They won playing rookies from deep off the benches. They won with their grit and their guts in the trenches. And some who observed them have been known to say that their hearts grew three sizes (at least!) on the way. One hopes with their poise and their passion now proven that once they are healthy their game will be groovin'.
by conspirator5 on Jul 12, 2010 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions
my thoguths exactly
I see the original CP3 rumored guys pryz, miller, rudy, batum with the addition of Bayless as our next run at CP3 if we sign matthews. Mills and Johnson are a good solid 3 deep at PG behind .
Here is a straight up 3 deep in that scenario:
Paul – Johnson – Mills (not sure on the order yet for the backups)
Roy – Williams – ?
Matthews – Cunningham – Babbit
Aldridge – Camby – Pendegraph
Oden – Okafur (he would likely need to be picked up to land CP3) – ? (Ibekwe)
Matthews can swing down and play some 2, Dante can swing and play some 3 or 4. pendy is 4 or 5, Camby is 4 or 5, Okafor would be a 4 or 5, johnson (1 or 2) and babbit (3 or 4) look somewhat flexible at first blush
if Ibekwe continues to perform in Summer league he would be a nice 3 deep add and then the only position we do not have a straight up 3 deep would be at the 2.
It is not quite as cool sounding an acronym, but I think RAMPO could be pretty darn productive on the floor!
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
Roy is going to be injured some
Based on his career so far, you have to assume that Roy is going to be injured some. You need to have a backup 2 that you can live with as your starter for 10-20 games. Rudy showed last year that he couldn’t do that (with Nate’s system/Miller at the point).
With that need in mind, it makes sense to pay at the high end for a backup. I just hope that he’s worth it.
All that glitters isn't chrome
Actually, Bayless was the starting SG when Roy hurt his hammy
that’s the main reason why Rudy lost confidence re: his future as a Blazer
Fernandez didn’t get a chance to start at the 2 until during the playoffs (ironically, the other time Nate started him was game 6 versus Houston, and he struggled)
Rudy came to the NBA with a big game Euro reputation, but he hasn’t been able to deliver for Portland. He probably blames it on Nate’s system, but this is the NBA, where nothing is given and results are demanded
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
his family and girlfriend went back to Spain when that happened
not only was he mad, but lonely. a bad combo that led to a bad finish to the season.
either he clears his head or he needs to move on…
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
yes, it's hard not to feel sorry for him
he could’ve been traded in Feb if Paul Allen would’ve OK’d it
the Matthews offer made it clear that the Blazers don’t expect Fernandez to be back, but his agent is making if difficult for Portland to find any teams who will give up much of anything to acquire him
I saw it in 1990 with Drazen and it came around again 20 years later with Rudy. It’s like watching an accident just about ready to happen and screaming at the drivers who can’t hear you or couldn’t react in time even if they did
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Nice analysis... and the answer imo are B and B1.
It is interesting to me how shocked people are that we are willing to pay $7M/yr to a guy that backs up the 2 and 3 positions,but all were thrilled when we paid a guy $10M/yr to back up the 4 and 5 positions. “But we did that because of Oden’s health history!” Have you looked at the health histories of our starting 2 and 3?
by 52therim on Jul 12, 2010 9:18 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
They are going to match it
He started too many games for them last year… I don’t see how they could let him leave. Although they will have to overpay him… hmmmm and we did this to them with Millsap too? I bet there won’t be any trades between Utah and Ptown for a long time.
by the-L-train on Jul 12, 2010 12:29 AM PDT up reply actions
I think they are going to look at Ronnie Brewer and see how cheaply they can get him.
If they can’t get Brewer at a good price, they will almost have to match. So I’m guessing they will match.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jul 12, 2010 1:43 AM PDT up reply actions
Vance spoke to John Lund this AM
John used to be on the radio in PDX, but he’s been in SLC for years
Lund is 50/50 re: the Jazz matching the offer. He thinks Utah has 2 needs and matching WM would prevent them from filling 1 of them adequately (backup PF, I presume)
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
It seems it costs more for Portland
to entice players to play here. Perhaps he’s going to be packaged with Rudy.
Bad signing
Best case scenario: Utah matches and is forced to overpay Matthews thanks to Portland. He’s still a great fit in Utah.
In Portland though? What’s his role going to be? Even if Rudy AND Bayless were moved, Matthews would be playing <20mpg. That contract is starter money. With Roy around, throwing that much money at a young 2 guard doesn’t make sense.
Maybe Roy’s knees are a lot worse than we thought.
Matthews could easily get well over 20 mpg even with Roy starting
No one is paying anyone this much to sit on the bench…people have also pointed out that this would allow us to limit Roy’s regular season minutes, keeping him healthier (something that Rudy has not allowed us to do effectively)
I bet Rudy and Bayless will not be around. Especially if this goes through. And
I think this guy plays better defense than Roy. May be able to teach Roy a few things on defense….also I think that he could start when Roy’s knees do give out. Which they may, given his style of play and the current fitness/training staff.
If he is playing backup 2-3....
…..how do you come up with a max of 20 min? Looks to me that it could easily be 24 minutes which is pretty standard sixth man minutes.
by upper left corner on Jul 12, 2010 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Matthews is a SG. He’s too small to be a SF and doesn’t have the ballhandling skills necessary to be a PG. Unless Roy is forced out of position, Matthews will only play when Roy is on the bench. Roy averages 37mpg. That leaves 11 for Matthews. And that’s assuming Rudy and Bayless are gone by the time the season starts.
I don't think the Blazers would be making the offer if they didn't think he could play some 3
Mathews is only listed at 6’5", which makes him pretty small for a SF, but he is 220 which means he is strong enough to defend the 3.
by upper left corner on Jul 13, 2010 7:06 AM PDT up reply actions
the Jazz had him guarding Melo
that tells me all I have to know, you arent going to find a bigger more physical SF than Anthony this side of LBJ
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Here's the Math(hews)
Matthews + Babbitt >>>>>>> Rudy + Martell
Pricewise, it’s only about 1.6 mil more expensive.
I do think there’s a possibility that Bayless is shipped out if we sign Matthews, especially since Armon Johnson and Patty Mills are both looking good (and cheap).
I like your post, but I think Bayless is just way better than either MIlls and Johnson.
by BRoyInThe4th on Jul 12, 2010 2:31 AM PDT up reply actions
yup
and you can’t talk about shipping Bayless out unless you also talk about what comes back – and where that piece would fit….
by blacknoiseNW on Jul 12, 2010 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions
Exactly
It’s not like we’re going to trade Bayless for chopped liver. I’ve noticed several people talking about moving him and Rudy for a pick; this coming less than a week since there were rumors that we could have gotten Luol Deng for him. Trading Bayless for anything less than a decent starter would be lunacy, imo.
i posted this above
I still think CP3 is our main target and adding Bayless into the previously rumored pryz, miller, batum, rudy group might be viewed as what is needed to get it done.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
I'm officially sick of Chris Paul
All the talk of gutting the entire bench and one of our top 4 (Batum) to haul in one player is just silly. It feels like New York clambering after LeBron. I would have been devastated if that first offer had been accepted.
Sure, I would have gotten over it when the season started, but Batum is my fav and it should serve as an indicator of how high his ceiling is that any deal to bring in a superstar has been shut down as soon as we’ve taken Nico off the block.
Stealth > Wealth
You may sick of Paul
and I personally would prefer to keep Batum myself. I am just reading the tarot cards hear trying to feel out what the blazers are up to. I come to my conclusion for the following reasons:
1. the initial trade offer reporting that included pryz, miller, rudy and nic (an offer, reportedly, New Orleans almost took before backing out right before the trigger was pulled).
2. our draft picks
3. this wes matthews move
knowing that Paul is the likely target of a possible move by the blazers and knowing the above three things leads me to believe what I posted above.
This is not about my preference, this is just my guess based on the snippets of information we have.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
Bayless unfortunately is a better 2 guard than either of them
they are better point guards…
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
The Blazers seem to be mechanically following the "plan" they had in place a month ago before the draft.
Dave said:
“Portland had to have this guy targeted in order to make that offer but I wonder if watching the free agent parade roll by without anyone stopping at their booth made the Blazers jump hard when maybe they should have shopped around more.”
I like Matthews, but I have the same discomfort that Dave expressed. In the absence of real leadership, the Blazers seem to be mechanically following the “plan” they had in place a month ago before the draft. To change this plan and requires a leader in place who can analyze and change with the changing free agent market.
hmmm, I was browsing the SLC Dunk website (good fanbase, if not a little upset with Portland right now) and...
scrantoncity33 from SLC Dunk makes an interesting list of potential free agents to get with the MLE if we (he was referring to Utah, whereas I’m referring to the Blazers) were unable to sign Matthews:
Josh Howard, Wizards; Nate Robinson, Celtics; Brad Miller, Bulls; Tracy McGrady, Knicks; Ronnie Brewer, Grizzlies; Shannon Brown, Lakers; Craig Smith, Clippers; Roger Mason, Spurs; Earl Watson, Pacers; Eddie House, Knicks; Larry Hughes, Bobcats; Antoine Wright, Raptors; Raja Bell, Warriors; Bobby Simmons, Nets; Rasual Butler, Clippers; Kwame Brown, Pistons; Joe Alexander, Bulls; Oleksiy Pecherov, Timberwolves; Javaris Crittenton, Wizards; Ian Mahinmi, Spurs; J.R. Giddens, Knicks; Hilton Armstrong, Rockets ; Adam Morrison, Lakers; Josh Boone, Nets; Sasha Pavlovic, Timberwolves
None of these guys are nearly the player Matthews is. I really hope we get him.
by the way, this is PA’s money, not ours, and so what if we overpay, if PA is willing to spend to win a championship?
Elitism - It's lonely at the top. But it's comforting to look down upon everyone at the bottom.
by thankyouforblaze on Jul 12, 2010 1:54 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Raja Bell is a more seasoned and proven version of Wes Matthews.
A veteran, just a slightly aging one.
The one thing I like about Raja is that I don’t think he’d mind playing shorter minutes behind Roy.
Being a Blazer fan is not exactly healthy.
Which is the point: Matthews is not aging, he fits into the core of the rest of the team
Whereas Bell can already see Juwan Howard riding into the sunset ahead of him
by Norsktroll on Jul 12, 2010 6:03 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Oh no...
I really hope this doesn’t happen, but if I’m Raja Bell, I’d take a long hard look at whatever kibble they put in the bowl.
I don’t know if y’all listened to Barkley’s reaction to the Miami signings, but he ripped into LeBoshade for making a move traditionally reserved for a group of vets—shaking the last of the Crackerjacks out, hoping for a prize (and hoping that little paratrooper doesn’t stab you in the freaking eye!).
Bell is in a place in his career where this is an honorable move. Of course, I would argue that Portland offers the same opportunity with less wear and tear (fewer minutes for an injury-raddled vet), but more pay. Depends on if he sees the Blazers as contenders in this climate.
There exists a quality which is nameless.
And then next month Charles announces he's coming out of retirement to join the Heat. ;)
Followed by Payton and Malone.
I dunno...
I saw a clip of Charles trying to dunk—failing, then trying a layup—failing again.
Stealth > Wealth
Depends on if he sees the Blazers as contenders in this climate.
Besides money, this is always the main consideration for a veteran FA. Since the Blazers haven’t advanced in the post season yet, all the front office has to sell is potential
The reason they got Camby to buy in was because he was acquired via trade at midseason and Marcus had the opportunity to “test drive” the Portland team and area. There is no such opportunity to do this with FAs in July, and the best example of Portland’s sales job slash welcoming committee was the sight of Jay Jensen at the airport with the boombox and the friendly banner
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
you were part of "the area" that I was talking about
I have that M-C chant as my ringtone, and I think I can hear you
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Yeah, I'm that one dude.
You know, that guy that keeps shouting after everybody stopped, then the janitor starts shouting at him to get the heck out of the arena, then the cops showed up and that’s why I can’t leave the house anymore.
Stealth > Wealth
Problem with upside is that it takes time.
Matthews was a rookie playing for a contract. No guarantees he plays better or even on par with last season after leaving a great performance extracting coach in Sloan.
These are the pros and cons when comparing the two but Raja’s been to the Finals/ECFs in 2001, WCF in 2002 and the WCF in 2006. I’d take that in spurts than try to find some one for the long haul, especially a backup.
There are several arguable ways to build a team. I believe that if we are looking to win now, we get a player like Raja Bell. If we are looking to win in a few seaons then by all means, Wes Matthews. I don’t urgently want to win now if it means we make the wrong choices and lower our chances of creating a dynasty. But I think bell can last for a few years, by then we regroup and find a replacement for him whether or not we’ve won a chip or not.
Being a Blazer fan is not exactly healthy.
right, I was hoping for Raja because of his veteran leadership
but Matthews is a young tenacious defender who could be a Blazer SG throughout the Batum-Oden era (in other words, beyond Roy)
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Oooohhh, no you di'in't!
Yes you did!
Batum-Oden era, eh? I value Batum over Roy, but Oden needs to give the team one decent season (one over three years doesn’t count) before I put him there. Maybe you meant the Batum-Cunningham era?
Stealth > Wealth
Blazers Big 4 post 2015
Cunningham, Batum, Bayless, and Oden. Wes Matthews is our Bruce Bowen.
by HailOden! on Jul 12, 2010 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
To really put it in perspective, I consider that one season in a possible two.
What people forget is that Oden’s micro-fracture surgery was preventative, not injury induced.
Not to mention he was still recovering his first year in, before Derek Fisher twisted his ankle. Yes, watch the replay. Oden stepped on Fishers foot, Fisher then turns his foot resulting in Odens foot twisting in the direction of the turn. Bad luck. Then Oden’s left knee running into Corey Maggette’s knee, caused a fracture that wasn’t repaired which then snapped apart the following season. I can’t say that Maggette’s knee bones are superhuman and Oden’s are not but Maggette is kind of a physical freak. Unlucky accidents and coincidences.
Also, something that’s yet to be proven. The only other NBA athlete than is relatively close to Oden’s size and had undergone similar surgery is Amare Stoudemire. Whom needed 2 years to regain true form. It’s possible that Oden is undergoing the same recovery time. The only subsiding factor is Oden’s left knee and it’s recovery timeline compared to his right knee. But from my understanding, people are quick to say that broken bones heal stronger. Which is speculative, though the consensus being that they may not break in the same location because of healing. I believe it to be true, the knee cap is small in size and I doubt that it will break in any other part.
/rant
Being a Blazer fan is not exactly healthy.
I expect Greg and Nic to play at least 10 more years, hopefully all with Portland
I can’t say the same thing about Brandon. I think he’s got about 5 more years on those knees. Hopefully he’ll bust through that estimate
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Why do you prefer a guy who is 34 to a guy who is 23?
The appetite for aging veterans in decline never ceases to amaze me. The team is trying to acquire players who fit a five year time line. Bell doesn’t fit.
Camby and Miller are short timers who give us large expiring contracts. Bell would be at most a two year player and we would have nothing at the end of the two years.
by upper left corner on Jul 12, 2010 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Matthews was a rookie playing for a contract. No guarantees he plays better or even on par with last season after leaving a great performance extracting coach in Sloan.
These are the pros and cons when comparing the two but Raja’s been to the Finals/ECFs in 2001, WCF in 2002 and the WCF in 2006. I’d take that in spurts than try to find some one for the long haul, especially a backup.
There are several arguable ways to build a team. I believe that if we are looking to win now, we get a player like Raja Bell. If we are looking to win in a few seaons then by all means, Wes Matthews. I don’t urgently want to win now if it means we make the wrong choices and lower our chances of creating a dynasty. But I think bell can last for a few years, by then we regroup and find a replacement for him whether or not we’ve won a chip or not.
Being a Blazer fan is not exactly healthy.
there's a couple of reasons
for the experience he provides. Similar to Howard last year, there are things that Bell knows about perimeter defense that he can pass along to Batum and Cunningham. Could the team hire an assistant coach to do the same thing? Maybe, but Raja could demonstrate his technique on the practice floor and take the floor during the postseason as well
Evidently, the Blazers don’t think they’re close enough to the finals to justify adding another 30 year-old to the bench. If Randy Pfund is hired as GM, the front office’s philosophy could quickly shift to desiring more veterans and fewer youngsters
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
And there are some names on your list that would be bad acquisitions
Robinson, McGrady, Hughes, Kwame Brown, and Morrison jump out.
they're all bad!
Elitism - It's lonely at the top. But it's comforting to look down upon everyone at the bottom.
by thankyouforblaze on Jul 12, 2010 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions
I love that Jazz fan thinks they can jack Oden from us next year.
They are also gripping over this offer. I doubt it was the Blazers motivation but I do like them putting the screws to the Jazz.
by SerenityNow! on Jul 12, 2010 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions
Matthews a solid signing
If this were next season, I don’t think there would be any debate about Utah matching. I believe the only reason they need to think hard about this is the circumstances they find themself in – that is having a lot of salary already committed this season and probably wanting to find a way to use their trade exception to help fill some of the slots they now have open. Even so I think it would still be smart for them to match simply because paying MLE money to a starting guard is a bargain, especially one that was able to show what he did as a rookie.
I think the deal isn’t as much of a bargain for Portland, but I think it has to be viewed in the light of other potential moves. If Utah doesn’t match, I don’t think it’s a stretch to suggest that there will be other moves to clear out some of the guards we currently have, namely Rudy Fernandez, and considering the departure of Webster, Matthews makes perfect sense. He replaces the perimeter defense lost by Martell leaving and provides all the backup minutes Rudy would have played. Is that worth the MLE? I would certainly think so – we’re talking about your backup shooting guard and small forward and someone who would start either of those positions in the case of injury. How much would Portland have to pay Rudy on the open market next offseason? We already know how much they paid Martell, and that certainly didn’t make him a overpaid, hard to move contract, so why would that be the case for Matthews?
by James Donaldson on Jul 12, 2010 1:56 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
This is purely a set up move
for future transactions. Gives us flexibility to move someone we otherwise would not (Batum) if it were the blockbuster deal we are probing for (CP3).
Batum, Miller, Pryzbilla, Rudy and maybe even Bayless for CP3 may be in the offing considering it appears that NO almost bit on Batum, Miller, Pryzbilla and Rudy earlier.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
My question is: Does this mean a Rudy trade is already on the table and they are waiting to pull the trigger, or are they waiting to engage in serious Rudy trade talks until they lock up Matthews? I just don’t see any way we make this move and keep Rudy on the roster. To make this investment AND keep Rudy on the bench makes absolutely no sense, especially after drafting a bunch of young guards and wings.
Or maybe Allen’s new plan is to turn Portland into Golden State.
I believe they fully intend on making some trades and that means Rudy. I think this is part of why they keep talking about wanting a GM who is adept at making trades because they want something done. It was one of KP’s failings that he just couldn’t get a deal done that utilized the depth and young talent we had to bring in another impact player and I fully believe Paul Allen expects his next GM to do just that. Now whether they’ll be able to get who they want or not is an entirely different subject for debate, but I expect this to be the marching orders for the next person in charge and they won’t have the hindrance of being too enamored of the players they brought in, namely because they won’t be the one that brought them in. I wonder too if they already have a deal in place contingent on signing Matthews (my guess is no) but I think it would be a failure to get Matthews then head into next season without clearing the duplication that currently exists.
by James Donaldson on Jul 12, 2010 2:20 AM PDT up reply actions
When Paul Allen decides who he wants
He will pull out the checkbook and get him.
by doomsdaymachine on Jul 12, 2010 2:53 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
How does it impact Rudy’s value to bring in his replacement before you move him? If we sign Matthews we really force our own hand on moving Rudy. Before this we could keep him as a backup to Roy and use him in our small lineup, we do gain something by keeping him around. But with this move plus the draft we’re completely loaded with guards and wings, everyone in the league is going to come in knowing that we need to move him AND we have no GM. That does not sound like a good way to maximize value, especially for a guy who’s both cheap and very talented.
I think the league is not overly impressed with Rudy. And they also know he wants OUT
of Portland. Which devalues him further as they know Portland wants to trade him…or should want to trade him.
So I think the Blazers figure they are not going to get much in return for Rudy regardless of what they do.
They would rather he sit on the bench than have to depend on him as a back up.
If they get Matthews they don’t HAVE to trade Rudy…well except to make space for someone they’d rather have on the roster.
I think this is a smart move and I hope Utah waives him.
They may as they also need other players at the “big” positions right?
because Rudy's contract is tiny
(and assuming the Matthews signing goes through) then Portland loses ZERO leverage when dealing with trading Rudy. Paul Allen can easily eat that contract and we would have a more than capable backup ready and waiting.
I think the Blazers figure they are not going to get much in return for Rudy regardless of what they do.
Sadly, this is true. There is a limited number of teams what will meet the criteria that Rudy’s agent is allegedly interested in. At this point the Blazers would probably have to accept a draft choice for him like the Heat recently did with Beasley. Hopefully, Fernandez will play well in the Worlds this August and refurbish some of his trade value.
The Blazers shouldn’t be in a big hurry to flip him even if Utah doesn’t match on Matthews. Let Rudy and his agent rotate on the spit over the fire for a few months
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I don't know about the rest of the league, but the Lakers fans around me sure think he's the real deal...
Based pretty much solely on how he played opening night in ’08 against them…
he can be a much better player than he was here
he needs the right system, and a coach who will play to his strengths. Then he needs a refreshed desire to play for his coach and team, and renewed confidence. None of that is possible here in Portland.
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
Canis Hoopus thinks there is a deal in the works involving Rudy and Sesions. They would love Rudy
since they think he is part of enticing Rubio over.
I'd do that deal
Sessions isn’t bad at all.
Didn’t think Minnesota was on Rudy’s list of teams he would play for though… but maybe Kahn is the type of GM who would take a flyer and hope it would work out. It could help him sell MInny to BOTH Rubio and Rudy.
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
hey, if you can get him for Rudy, then why not?
not saying he’s any kind of long term answer for us, but he’s a better asset to our roster at this point
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
Didn’t think Minnesota was on Rudy’s list of teams he would play for though
That is a definite non-starter as far as Rudy’s agent is concerned. Quick said that the Wolve’s contacted Andy Miller and were told that Rudy wanted to play starter’s minutes for a contender in a large media market
Dont you just love it when an average NBA reserve guard is dictating trade terms?
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
It would be extremely foolish to NOT acquire a backup to Roy
Then Rudy has you over a barrel, and the team is in desperate mode when Rudy decides to hold out or mail it in like those playoff games.
You have to go into things understanding that Rudy will never suit up for Portland again, and plan accordingly. Anything you can get for him later is the best you can hope for at this point – and that maybe a good showing in Turkey will pump his value up a bit.
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
Without even reading this post or SLCdunk, I think Utah will match. They already are going to be pathetic without Wesley Matthews.
They aren’t the kind of franchise to tank, they need this guy. They are going to match,
lots of research went into the above post. NICE
Elitism - It's lonely at the top. But it's comforting to look down upon everyone at the bottom.
by thankyouforblaze on Jul 12, 2010 4:56 AM PDT up reply actions
hahaha....yes, I'd suggest reading the SLC site. It has some interesting takes on their situation.
They should know more about how Utah thinks than we do! I found information/viewpoints that I’d not thought of prior to reading the site.
A fans gotta do, what a fans gotta do...
I’m just going to cop out of the debate right now. Seems to me the next step in the Wesley Matthews scenario is entirely in Utah managements hands. What good if any is the debate over whether they will sign him or they won’t? We will know in less than a week. Once we know the critical aspect to this, which is whether Wesley Matthews is a Blazer, then I think we can revisit many of these debates, such as cost, role, talent, and what it all means. But at this point? Aren’t we getting way ahead of ourselves?
Fans hate to wait. We want instant answers and instant resolution and definition. But in this case, whatever happens it’s going to be a process, in the Wesley Matthews story, we started the process by tendering the offer, but now the next move is Utahs. I will simply exuse myself from specific debate until we get the answer from Utah.
"Mother Nature started this fight, I think it's about time we ended it!"
Jazz will match
This is merely the Blazers misguided plan to take the starch out of Utah’s competitive spirit against them. I mean, how hard can Millsap and Matthews play against the team that made them rich?
by LaughingJon on Jul 12, 2010 6:43 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I think Farmar signing with NJ is a sign.
If his agent thought Utah would match, then he might have waited for Portland to offer a contract to Farmar.
Maybe his agent believes Utah will not match, and that influenced his decision to sign with the Nets.
"I've hacked into your brain. You're throwing a party and no one's showing up."
Another thing about NJ
it would not surprise me if Devin Harris is on the block again, and/or soon to be traded.
"I've hacked into your brain. You're throwing a party and no one's showing up."
if Utah matches....
they will f them selves up…
they may not be over the luxary but they have
the trade exception from boozer.
I think this was a move to mess up utahs future plans. imagine utahbusing that full exception, they can still do that but if Utah matches it Fs up Utah financially…
Portland can afford to take this contract bcuz it declines and plus portland hasn’t payed luxury tax in yrs.
I believe mattews is worth the money.
he can start he has proved that. he can defend n shoot the 3.
he’s not a good back up to Roy he’s great.
he can fill the void if Roy goes down. as well he can absorb mins from Roy to give him rest.
by Hoi on Jul 12, 2010 6:51 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
all good points
also Wes can defend the SFs that Brandon has had to guard when Rudy has been in the game for the past 2 years
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Jazz won't match.
this is a complete overpayment for a skill set that is rampant throughout the league. I don’t understand how you can defend paying a backup the full MLE right before the CBA runs out.
Athletic swingmen are out there in the league, what does Wes Matthews give you that you couldn’t get out of Matt Barnes for 1/2 the price (he signed a 2 yr / 4mil contract with Orlando 2 years ago). Josh Childress is getting signed to the Suns for the same exact contract which puts the size of this contract into perspective.
I am obviously not a native of Blazers nation but as a Kings fan who has seen the MLE doled out far too often (Beno, Garcia, etc.) this move is confusing.
There now I've met the 75 word count. -pookeyguru
the blazers are probably going to be capped for however many years they keep their core of oden, roy, and aldridge together.
they have deep pockets, and i think they can afford to spend the MLE on whomever they believe to be the BPA.
"I've hacked into your brain. You're throwing a party and no one's showing up."
Ask yourself
If Barnes could start under Jerry Sloan… Plus Barnes is much older. Matthews is going to continue to improve over the next few years.
Childress may be a better player overall, but Matthews outside shooting is a better fit for what the team needs when paired with Miller/Bayless/Roy
by don maxingly on Jul 12, 2010 8:55 AM PDT up reply actions
overpaid
I am tempted to say we overpaid for Wes Matthews, but we can’t know for sure if that is the case until we see where this leads. I can’t believe that we bring on Matthews and keep Rudy/Bayless so we’ll know better if this is a good deal once that second shoe drops. Also, Matthews gives us a high-quality backup so that we don’t have to ride B-Roy like a pack mule through 82 games and multiple playoff series.
by billyrybates on Jul 12, 2010 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah I'm just confused with this move. There must be a trade coming down the pipe. We're drafting guards and targeting guards in free agency.
SLCDUNK fans seem pretty divided as whether to match. I think the consensus right now is to let us have him and go get a cheaper player, but I think Utah matches. They’ve just lost too many players recently.
"What people need to know is that those pictures were taken a year and a half ago, and I've grown since then." - Greg Oden
it doesn't seem smart to get Wes merely to facilitate a trade
Trades are a delicate ecosystem in the NBA, and the whole landscape might change in the week Utah has to match. The downside of getting Wes and not being able to make a trade and having your hottest prospect (Nic), the sixteenth pick in the draft (Babbs), and your big new acquisition (Wes), all playing the same position is higher than missing out on him and having to scrape something together for a few months while we find a replacement. Jerryd could pick up the minutes behind Brandon at SG, and Babbs could play backup SF. I find it hard to believe that this arrangement would cost us anything in terms of wins. And if Babbitt really looks out of his depth, we could get someone like Roger Mason off the scrap heap relatively cheaply.
I don't really know
a wing corps of Nic/Babbs/Wes/Rudy/Roy/a little Bayless for two positions is overstocked either way.
Matthew is a SG. Not a SF. He would play behind Roy. I'm sure Bayless and Rudy may
be history if Matthews becomes a Blazer. I like him. He’s 6’5" and can DEFEND…also can shoot 3s..from what I’ve read.
Rudy, yes
Bayless, maybe. It depends on how much faith the coaches have in his potential to become a serviceable distributor. If the Blazers can’t land a PG of serious quality, they don’t want to be caught with an antique who’s only backup is a Armon Johnson.
Unless the Blazers value Johnson very highly or they’re targeting a big name, they’ll keep Bayless.
There exists a quality which is nameless.
In the high-low zone offense, Wes Matthews will have to be a 3.
The kid doesn’t have the handles nor the ability to run iso sets effectively enough to play the 2 in this system.
If Batum is in the game with Matthews
Nic can take care of the ball-handling requirements. The Blazer coaching staff has said many times that they consider the 2-3 positions to be interchangeable in the offense
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
besides, the previous backup Blazer 2 guards were Bayless and Rudy
these are not exactly shining examples of SGs who “have the handles to run iso sets effectively” and yet the team managed to win 104 regular season games during the last 2 years
Any news on Roger Mason getting a FA offer? He could be the fallback if Utah matches Matthews
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Jerryd Bayless has the handles to create for himself, so he could play the ballside ...
wing rather easily in the high-low zone offense. In fact, that’s the best position for him. As it is, there’s a clear difference between creating for one’s self (e.g., Bayless) and creating for others like a distributing floor general (e.g., Andre Miller). At the 2 in this offense, only the former trait is needed by a player — which is why Bayless could handle the position and did fine in dribble-drive iso situations — however, Wes Matthews is shoddy in every aspect of ball handling.
Again, there’s a vast difference between having good handles — although I do agree that Rudy Fernandez was poor in that regard, whch is why you mainly saw him play either as a weakside cornerman at the 3 or as an off guard at the 1 in set plays — and being able to facilitate for others, score in 1-4 isos, and whatnot like Brandon Roy.
Matthews, unfortunately, is a lot like Martell Webster offensively, which is why I bet you’ll see him used exclusively as a 3 on offense. So, unless Luke Babbitt magically becomes a point forward or Nicolas Batum makes miraculous strides — as the comparison of him to an enormous outlier like Scottie Pippen is a farce — and logs heavy minutes with the reserves, the offense will sputter with a second unit backcourt of Matthews and Bayless or Elliot Williams.
Anyway, I’m not sure what’s up with Roger Mason, Jr. As it is, I’d argue that Mason, Jr. is superior to Matthews and, moreover, run-of-the-mill small forward Keith Bogans is equal to the now overpaid second-year guy. Bogans could do everything that Matthews does at a fraction of the cost, as the minimum-level salary for someone with 7 seasons tenured is just $1,146,337.
I'm amazed the Blazers haven't interviewed you for the GM job yet
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
the offense will sputter with a second unit backcourt of Matthews and Bayless or Elliot Williams
No more than it would’ve sputtered with Bayless and Rudy at the 1-2, and the improved perimeter defense that WM will provide will lead to more transition opportunities.
Marcus Camby will also provide some post entry passing for the 2nd unit this year.
Matthews is a backup 2-3, he can defend the SG or SF and play the wing in Nate’s system just fine, that’s why he was targeted and offered the MLE. If the second unit needs more “handles” then Nate will have to sub Roy or Miller in, which I expect will be the case rather than complete 5 man “line changes”
Batum is going to surprise you with his handles in coming seasons, he doesn’t have to be compared to Scottie Pippen to (over) emphasize how good he’s going to become in a few years. Nic might be the 2nd best “SG” on the team, right now
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
So if trying to mess with the Jazz isn't anywhere worth the risk.
What were the Grizz thinking when they signed Miles to a couple 10 day contracts and hung Paul Allen with a 9 miilion dollar check to pick up?
2-4 the who
The Grizz didn't commit
to pay Darius Miles $34 million over five years. They committed to pay him a couple of 10-day contracts.
—Dave
AND they stood to benefit financially because Memphis was getting a luxury tax kicker for being under the cap, so simply signing Miles to 10 days brought his salary back onto Blazer books, turning Portland to a team that would have to pay out and increasing the amount that teams under the cap would receive.
While it had little to do with actual basketball, Memphis profited from that deal, at a huge expense to Portland.
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt." -- Bertrand Russell
I guess that's my point
By signing Miles they RISK Paul Allen’s wrath. Only the richest owner in pro sports, who is used to getting his own way. He’s eventually going to want revenge…..Risky indead.
2-4 the who
That sounds great on paper.
But really, what can PA do to the Grizz for “revenge”? Within the league anyway? I mean I suppose he could afford to hire a hitman… or buy the Grizz owner’s favorite restaurant in Memphis and then close it down. But in NBA terms, what the Grizz did was only risky in the sense that the Grizz might want to do business with the Blazers in the future and we might not do deals with them as a consequence. It didn’t even really hurt their reputation because we blew the PR side of that when it happened.
No, I’m much more worried about us letting Greg go RFA and having the Jazz tit-for-tat with us when AK comes off their books…. not VERY worried… but it’s far from impossible, depending on how this fall goes.
Like the Whos down in Whoville they did it without boxes or ribbons or bows, they did without centers or posting down low. They won without All-Stars and Spaniards and Frenchmen. They won with old geezers and sub-par defense-men. They won playing rookies from deep off the benches. They won with their grit and their guts in the trenches. And some who observed them have been known to say that their hearts grew three sizes (at least!) on the way. One hopes with their poise and their passion now proven that once they are healthy their game will be groovin'.
by conspirator5 on Jul 12, 2010 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions
For Jazz fans, the question of whether to sign Matthews is a coin toss...
They like him as a player, a lot, but see the Blazer offer as highly inflated and question whether it was the system that made the player (in which case they could just make another).
There is a conspiracy-theory tendency among some that think the Blazers waited so long just to be sure all Utah’s options were gone and that they would HAVE to match…
I think given the losses the team has suffered and the difficulty of landing an experienced replacement with a similar skill-set for letter money, the Jazz WILL match. But this is by no means certain, obviously…
"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
read: LESSER
"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
totally agree!
Jazz look at WM and say they like him, but he’s not worth that…
Then they look at the options at SG… and say “where’s my pen? Give me that offer sheet again!”
by 52therim on Jul 12, 2010 9:33 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Asked-Answered
For those that thought that Allen’s sister or the Vulcan’s were going to exert more influence over spending when it comes to one of Allen’s toys – the Blazers – I’d suggest that this move indicates otherwise. Allen’s a vastly wealthy man – and what we think when it comes to money doesn’t even rise to the level of pocket change for someone with $15 billion – and the annual cash flow from wholly owned companies like his Cable Company in SoCal. He could drop $100 million a year on the Blazers, lose $50 million/yr, and after 20 years, he’d still have $14 billion. His 3 yachts don’t make money – and the Blazers don’t need to either – obviously. As far as the move – Travis picked up $7 million a year, and it seems the season of insanity (from our view), is proceeding nicely – if you’re a player. Overpaid? – from my view yes. A decent piece – apparently from Allen’s view the answer is yes. The rest? Speculation.
And Matthew’s? For a second rounder – he must be absolutely elated. After all, none of those top picks in his draft year will get these kind of checks for awhile. Given, after all, those wonderful guaranteed rookie contracts.
Absolutely right.
For those that thought that Allen’s sister or the Vulcan’s were going to exert more influence over spending … I’d suggest that this move indicates otherwise.
Not only this move, but the Camby extension too. We way overpaid for Camby to keep him (I’m glad we did). I wouldn’t be surprised if Paul’s health has made him more willing to spend on the Blazers than ever before.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jul 12, 2010 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Not even 2nd rounder. Undrafted!
Like the Whos down in Whoville they did it without boxes or ribbons or bows, they did without centers or posting down low. They won without All-Stars and Spaniards and Frenchmen. They won with old geezers and sub-par defense-men. They won playing rookies from deep off the benches. They won with their grit and their guts in the trenches. And some who observed them have been known to say that their hearts grew three sizes (at least!) on the way. One hopes with their poise and their passion now proven that once they are healthy their game will be groovin'.
by conspirator5 on Jul 12, 2010 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions
There's plenty of time for the Blazers to get back under the luxury tax threshold
they could trade an EC next February to avoid paying the tax, if that’s important to them
if money wasn’t an object, they could’ve kept Webster and still made the full MLE offer to Matthews. (That logjam would’ve been a Trader-Bob like “chemistry experiment”)
but they didn’t, they traded Martell to move up in the draft and dumped Gome’s contract rather than using if to acquire another player. Those moves helped provide the payroll flexibility to make the full MLE offer to WM this week
Paul isn’t going broke due to the Blazers, but he has been forced to run the team at closer to a break-even point, since 2004. When the team is ready to compete for a championship he may be able to spend even more, but they aren’t at this point yet (1 round and out, the last 2 years)
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Miller vs Matthews
This is actually a good way to view this trade. Both are a bit below average as NBA starters for their positions. Matthews is without question a starting caliber NBA guard, as he played starters minutes by the end of the regular season and certainly in their two playoff series (he has deeper playoff experience as a rookie than most of the Blazers it seems). The difference is that Matthews is young and on the rise while Miller is the opposite. In addition, Matthews skill set is a much better fit with the rest of the roster. Miller is a good player but an awkward fit. His signing made sense because he was a bargain. Matthews isn’t far off as an overall player, but he’s an excellent fit. I’d contend he should be in to close out games instead of Miller, even with the current roster situation at it is (Roy-Matthews-Batum).
Moot point though, as the Jazz will resign and a year from now we’ll say the offer to overpay a backup in fact looks like a great bargain, just like with Millsap.
additionally
The Jazz are in a very serious state of flux right now. They only have three above average starters, and no matter how much he rebounds, Paul Millsap is still 6’7". Kirilenko is still made of glass. As constructed, it’s a borderline playoff team. Do they have a route toward contention before Deron can opt-out in two years? Possibly. But it’s unlikely paying a below-average starting shooting guard 7 mill/yr is part of it.
is it possible
that we get matthews as an additional piece in a trade for a better player? I don’t know if it’s even possible to do that, but could we package him with other guys in a trade to say, a New Orleans, for one of their players?
sloan and developing young players
one talent that jerry sloan does have is developing young players that were basically out of the public eye. whether it be a paul millsap, ronnie brewer or a wes mathews type. sloan has always valued hard work and defensive effort over flash. for mathews to play as much as he did for an undrafted rookie, says a lot about sloan’s view of his “talent”. even williams didn’t play a ton of minutes as a rookie.
as to the poster who suggested, that mathews got away with stuff guarding anthony in the denver-jazz series, we must have been watching different games. anthony gets away with murder when the ball is in his hands. just because he whines so much, doesn’t mean that mathews was fouling him. watch carmelo’s offhand when he has the ball, its continually pushing off.
mathews should only get better. saw him play maybe 5-6 times last season and it seemed that each game he was a bit more fluid. he is a willing defender, a decent spot-up shooter from the 3, and very aggressive going to the hoop. it seems to me that portland can use all of the above. in the jazz system he really bought into the help defense idea, and was an able defender against other teams top scorers. he got lit up some, but guarding a kobe or melo that is going to happen. isn’t having a willing defender a major weakness at the 2 for the blazers?
mathews and the mcmillan mindset? that is where the real issue might be. mathews is not an isolation type player at all. i would argue, that the blazers would be better if they didn’t run so much isolation, but with macmillan is that really going to change? the blazers have the talent to be an uptempo team, but the coach isn’t an uptempo coach!
is this overpaying for mathews and will the jazz match? the jazz matched on miles a couple seasons ago which really surprised me, and mathews game is way ahead of what miles was at the time. if you take out the frontload, this may be close to market value for mathews (disregard that he wasn’t drafted). the jazz would have matched 5 million after losing korver, but they may not match this.
as an aside to all of this, wouldn’t korver have been a better value for the shooter that the blazers need? he went to chicago for 5 million per!
by utahcoyote on Jul 12, 2010 9:01 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
wouldn’t korver have been a better value for the shooter that the blazers need? he went to chicago for 5 million per!
You’d think so, but perhaps the Blazers made overtures to Mike Miller and/or Kyle’s agent and found out that they weren’t in the running for reasons other than $
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I'm sure Korver expected more PT in Chicago
by 52therim on Jul 12, 2010 9:37 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
yeah, and not every FA wants to come and play for Portland
Hey it’s their loss, especially on days like today
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Well, I went over and read the SLC blog and it is interesting. They have several points of view.
Many were discussing the option with the incorrect $ amt. But the more recent posts had the correct #.
They point out something that hadn’t occurred to me. The upside of Matthews for the FUTURE. If Brandon’s knees end up being a problem…..which I think is a possibity given the fine preventative training staff the Blazers have in place…then Wesley Matthews is a great option for the Blazers AND with that same thought in mind….CHEAP as a starting point guard for either team.
Did you mean to say "point guard"?
I'm just not crazy about player nick names...
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Jul 12, 2010 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions
right, Roy is 26 (this month) and his knees make him older in BB years
Matthews is closer to Batum-LMA-Oden in terms of NBA career longevity
Obviously Matthews =/= Roy, but teams have to look down the road, and Wes can definitely help out in all the years that Brandon is still active, as well
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Suns adding Childress and Hedo
I think those are two good pickups and both will put up nice numbers playing with steve nash. well done suns.
Hedo got a lot of crap last/this year,
and he deserved most of it. Thing is, he’s still a good player. I was pretty excited to see what Hedo was going to bring to the Blazers. I wasn’t heartbroken when he went to TOR (Batum’s my fav) because the money was wrong and his character was low, but that doesn’t make him lousy.
I think he’ll fit in well in PHX, and the move most definitely eases the sting of Amar’e leaving. The Suns may actually be a better team next season.
There exists a quality which is nameless.
How ugly is Hedo's deal going to look the last 2 years of that deal?
WM’s deal is going to look like a bargain relatively. That said, Hedo could have a good year or 2 in Phx but that team looks soft as a baby’s tush.
by 52therim on Jul 12, 2010 9:41 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
OK, it's time for a rare morning rant.
Lots of smart people on this blog, die-hard fans and analysts have been entirely misled about the financial crisis facing the NBA. How many times have I read the now mindless repetition of owners not having the cash to stay afloat. Not have having the resources to pay the talent and make a buck; not able to participate financially fully within the association because of the crisis affecting the pocketbooks of the world’s richest men and their exclusive club. It’s all quatsch and far removed from the machinery of the entertainment industry. Miami can afford to pay the new big three they would be stupid to pass the chance. Portland can also afford to pay Matthews without the slightest long or short-term disruption to cash flow and daily operations. We would be stupid to pass on the brightest talents in the world because the fans and cap analysts though it was too expensive. Like it or not the entire business is a revolving door of highly paid but disposable talent without the least notion of parity, wage justice or sanity. Now’s exactly the time to encourage PA to spend as much as possible, as much as needed to land a top level player or two (yes CP3, Parker or Iggy would be just fine). The mood is right and everything and everyone has got a pricetag on their necks so why not go shopping? This is obviously not a question of value as seen through the eyes of a humble consumer but a matter of competing at the highest levels of a cutthroat industry. KP was a nice man and the perfect choice to build a team from the ground up using draft choices but he was clearly out of his league in this league.
In a nut shell, you people that keep saying we can’t do this or we can’t pay that because of the salary cap please remember that the rules were made by the ownership committee’s for their benefit. They are flexible and the punishments for breaking the rules are merely monetary. That’s no pnishment at all for the world’s wealthiest men. The Blazers can and should make every effort to get the brightest players on the team, no matter the cost. What possible concern is it to you if Mathhews costs a few more dollars than the average guy of similar caliber. You should only care that you’ve got an improved version of Shannon Brown to drive the opposition crazy. And finally, if we sacrifice every expiring contract and half the young talent on this team for Chris Paul or Andre Iquodala it will still be a steal for the Blazers. All the opposing arguments because of cost, chemistry or style are cute and pointless because either on of those two guys will put us at the top of the Western Conference for years to come. There you have my harmless rant; go ahead and slash it . Just don’t don’t be a dope and say we can’t afford it or those two guys aren’t worth it. The game is professional basketball.
I'm with you except that the Babbit-Webster swap is a mixed message
Are we interested in $$ savings or not?
Webster ($$) > Matthews ($$$) > Babbitt ($)
by Mad Matt the Road Warrior on Jul 12, 2010 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions
I think the Blazers were interested in getting a player who may be more CONSISTENT
than Webster. I like Webster as a person and wish him well. However, I think his issues with consistency were HUGE. Also, he wanted to start. I think he may have been very happy to go to a team where he will start. He did much better when given more minutes and when he wasn’t competing for the starting position.
He became a LIABILITY as soon as Nic Batum was back in the picture.
So maybe the Blazers traded him for these reasons…and not just because Babbitt is cheaper.
I disagree on several points
Webster was inconsistent, but so was his role this season. He went from simply trying to make a comeback after missing a year to injury, to being one of our primary offensive options, to being Nic Batum’s 12 min/gm back-up. That’s a tough role. While I’m sure he wanted to start, it was clear form what we heard about his exit interviews that he wanted to EARN back his starting spot. It’s not like he was pulling a Rudy about having to come off the bench behind Batum. And at 23 and highly motivated, it seems pretty reasonable that he still has the upside to become more consistent. Shooters like Webster are like fine wines…they get better with age.
Also, there is no way he was a liability once Nic came back. Even though he started making some bonehead decisions and became a non-factor on offense, his defense and hustle made up for it.
The change is gonna be good for Martell
Maybe broaden his horizon after so many years narrowly focused on our team. Minny will love his attitude and hustle.
short answer
Portland desperately needs a 6th man at the 2/3 position who they can consistently rely on night in and night out. They were probably convinced that they don’t have that person on the roster at all – Rudy, Webster, Bayless all show flashes, but all very inconsistently.
The plan could have been to use the MLE to acquire a backup 2/3 who the team feels can be a consistent scoring 6th man type, and if he can defend and hit the 3, even better. Once this decision was reached, it becomes necessary to rid yourselves of 2 of the 3 above mentioned players. Rudy is all but gone already. Trading Martell for Babbitt replaces a player who deserves and expects playing time with one who deserves and expects to sit on the bench while he acclimates to the league and (hopefully) blossoms into a player in year 2.
It’s not about money so much as about not wasting talents and creating an unhappy locker room. We went down that road about 10 years ago.
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
by douglast on Jul 12, 2010 4:25 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Rec.
This is an interesting comment.
"One of the bright spots of the young season has been rookie point guard Jonny Flynn, whose name sounds like he should be the lead character in a Broadway Musical. "What are you doing here, Jonny Flynn?" "Why I'm here to court trouble, and woo a girl, and build the most fantastical contraption the world has ever seen!" -- Dave, Game 7 Blazers versus Timberwolves preview
"It was bad reffing...but not rip apart the fabric of time bad." -- The Arkitect, Game 79 Blazers versus Mavericks Post-Game Thread
by BlazersOrBust on Jul 12, 2010 9:15 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't know what the new regime wants
I don’t believe their motivation is to save money. From all accounts the team’s cash flow is rich and the franchise is increasing in value. My feeling is the PA wants to improve the product for a title run. That’s fine by me.
I don't think Webster for Babbitt was about money.
They really wanted Babbitt. They tried to trade Rudy for that pick first. But according to Rudy’s agent, he stopped that deal by telling Minn that Rudy didn’t want to play there (teams are worried about Rudy’s effort after what happened here last year). When the Rudy deal fell through then they traded Webster to get Babbitt. I think they planned to trade Webster later anyway, and it actually hurts our trade options now because we don’t have Webster to trade anymore.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jul 12, 2010 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions
you have to look at the whole picture and what we need - THIS IS A GOOD SIGNING
A couple things to get out of the way first:
1) We didn’t sign him to an offer sheet to screw with the Jazz. You don’t put $35M on the table to a player that you could potentially be on the hook for just to see if another team will match. The Blazers had targeted him and his skill set as something they wanted and they made him an offer that is pretty much correspondent with the market right now.
2) Dave Compared Matthews deal to Anthony Morrow’s – Matthews is a much more rounded player. Morrow can shoot the lights out, but is a very suspect defender and has been playing in a team culture and system that doesn’t not encourage playing much D. Matthews is a pretty solid shooter in his own right, not on the level of Morrow, but solid. Add to that that he is also a tough and tenacious perimeter defender with size, and to me, that justifies the $3M/year difference between them
I really like this signing and here’s why – Matthews brings a defensive mentality that our backcourt largely lacks. Outside of Nicolas Batum, name a perimeter player of ours that’s a really good defensive player….don’t worry..i’ll wait….
Andre and Bayless are at least decent and do an OK job of staying in front of guys, but both BRoy and Rudy are not known as very good defensive players.
Getting Matthews give us a player that can assume some of the defensive responsibilities that Martell held in the 2nd unit – but from the 2 position. That would allow us to start a 2nd unit of Bayless/Matthews/Babbit/Cunningham/Oden or Camby. That’s a nice mix with a perimeter and inside stopper (Matthews/Oden or Camby), two scorers (Bayless and Babbit), and a versatile guy for everything in between (Cunningham). Matthews can guard the best perimeter scorer on the floor, taking some pressure of Babbit or Bayless and allowing them to focus more on scoring.
Another possibility would be to have him come in and play next to Roy and Batum in some situations. Then you have 2 solid perimeter defenders out there with Roy.
I like the move because it brings us something we lack and something that will help us win in the playoffs. And considering that guys like Darko and Trout are getting big money, I don’t think we are overpaying much to do so
by rip_city_swagger on Jul 12, 2010 9:57 AM PDT reply actions 9 recs
All Defense Unit!
Armon, Wes, Batum, Cunningham, Oden.
THA STOPPAHS!!!
There exists a quality which is nameless.
I agree here
he might be signed as a "heat stopper" consider these defensive rotations.
chalmers\DFish – Miller\Roy
Wade ~ Matthews\Bayless
Lebron ~ Batum\Cunningham
Bosh ~ Camby\LMA
Shaq ~ Oden
Thats probably the only lineup in the league that can defend with that much versatility. As long as we quite switching of course.
Another thing is that this makes Batum… Not expendable… but less untouchable. This could very well be another sign of a consolidation deal, His higher pay helps taking large contracts back as well. Its not inconcievable that Posey could be our starting 3 and Okafor the backup 5. Also with a front loaded contract, its like getting a young 3 and D glue guy, and an EC in one!
Either way, I think we will be in a good position.
Portland could coast along with their superior talent and stay right with us. Now that Portland woke up, the hammer cometh down.
Bayless > Daffy Duck after 3 cans of rockstar
by Batumshakalaka on Jul 12, 2010 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions
*cough*, *sputter*, *cough*
Shaq? Where’d that come from? Did I miss somepin?
There exists a quality which is nameless.
Just seems like a likely move for them
Disclaimer: everything I know about basketball I learned on Blazersedge.
Yeah, if Shaq is willing to take the biggest pay cut in NBA history to win another ring.
Stealth > Wealth
He's going to no matter what
Best case scenario, he get’s the MLE, but I don’t even think that many teams will pay that much for him. At this point, and as much as he’s earned over the years, he’s not playing for the money.
i agree
i like pairing Matthews with Batum and B-Roy because that will allow Batum and Matthews to D up on the opponent’s two biggest scorers on the wings and let B-Roy cover what’s left and focus on his own offense.
by billyrybates on Jul 12, 2010 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions
yup
especially for teams like San Antonio or Houston with quick, scoring PGs that also have a really good wing scorer (Manu/KEvin Martin)
We can put Matthews on the PG, let Batum guard the wing, and then Roy/Miller can guard the worst of the 3 – not too many teams have 3 dangerous perimeter guys (although Miami is getting close if they sign Mike Miller)
by rip_city_swagger on Jul 12, 2010 2:56 PM PDT up reply actions
Keep it Simple
I think the simple answer is usually the right one. The Blazers like what Matthews brings. They offered him the most they are able/willing to pay him, hoping that the Jazz don’t match. If the Jazz match, then so be it. If the Jazz don’t match, then the Blazers will have to sort out what to do with Bayless + Rudy + Matthews — most likely trade Rudy or Bayless for a future draft pick.
I with this meant CP3 was on the way, but that just doesn’t seem likely.
I guess we better get used to this
This is the way it’s gonna be. Big market teams are gonna start getting all the good players while the Portland’s of the league are gonna have to overpay for average players. I’ve seen Matthews play and he doesn’t look bad, but he ain’t worth 7 mil neither. Maybe they overpaid to ensure Utah wouldn’t match. However, if 7 mil is what it takes to get a guy like Matthews to agree to come to Portland then we’re in trouble.
I don't think the Blazers are overpaying at all. It is what the market is dictating this year. Look at what some of the other
players are getting!! And Matthews could easily start should Brandon be injured….which in my mind isn’t that unlikely.
Also, as to the whole small market thing...I'm from Chicago and never felt that Chicago
had it over on the smaller markets. For one thing, their owner is CHEAP. Very Very Very CHEAP.
Also the weather in Chicago just really sucks. Really…way way worse than Portland. And it’s not like Portland is such an awful destination point for players. Look at all of the players who have decided to live here after they retire!!!
So, I think that if Portland got a GM who is able to attract FAs..unlike KP…that was not his strength..Portland could easily build a championship team. And once THAT happens, guess what? Portland then becomes the team that people want to go to so they can win that championship.
It’s not that unrealistic. This is not Fargo North Dakota.
"worth 7 mil" is relative
To get a perimeter defender of his age/quality this summer when guys like Darko, Drew Gooden, Travis Outlaw, etc. are getting big money (hell, Kwame Brown looks like he might cash in) isn’t that bad actually
And we’re not “in trouble” to get “a guy like Matthews” to come to Portland for $7M. The guy shot 38% from 3 last year and is a really good perimeter defender with size – I honestly think he’s worth it, maybe we beefed it up a little to make sure Utah had to really think about matching – but we can afford to play it that way with an owner like Paul Allen
by rip_city_swagger on Jul 12, 2010 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions
King Mar, have you forgot who our owner is. Paul Allen is a market all to himself. Allen has in the past paid for players when the Blazers were trying to contend for titles with Rasheed and Damon Stoudimire and co.......very deep pockets.
Kenneth Lewis Moore
by lightskin350 on Jul 12, 2010 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions
rec
If PA think’s we’re on the verge of triumph, he will do whatever needs to be done.
Like the Whos down in Whoville they did it without boxes or ribbons or bows, they did without centers or posting down low. They won without All-Stars and Spaniards and Frenchmen. They won with old geezers and sub-par defense-men. They won playing rookies from deep off the benches. They won with their grit and their guts in the trenches. And some who observed them have been known to say that their hearts grew three sizes (at least!) on the way. One hopes with their poise and their passion now proven that once they are healthy their game will be groovin'.
by conspirator5 on Jul 12, 2010 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions
we're never going to be a free agent "destination"
we can’t compete with the LAs, Miamis, and Boston/Chicago/New Yorks of the league as far as free agent appeal
So what do we do to counter – we build our team through the draft and develop our own talent and create a winning culture. Then, guys like Camby look at it and say – wow – great city to live in, amazing fans, great ownership willing to spend, a lot of young talent that’s ready to contend – I’ll play here.
Not to mention, you never want to discount the $ side – we have one of the richest owners in the league, and in the end for these guys, they’ll play just about anywhere if the Benjamins are there
by rip_city_swagger on Jul 12, 2010 3:00 PM PDT up reply actions
The picture tells the story: this is a move to match up against LA.
Matthews spending time on Kobe could make a big difference for freeing up B-Roy on offense and Nic on D, who will have his hands full with Artest and assisting LMA in the post on Pau.
Against the cap, you’re paying MLE for a nice backup who can play D at a position you sorely need help in. I think the number against the cap is the key—-the rest is simply the benefits of having an owner who doesn’t mind spending to make his squad better.
Of course…the dude has only played one NBA season so there is definitely some risk assumed here…
I'm just not crazy about player nick names...
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Jul 12, 2010 10:31 AM PDT reply actions
Keeping in mind---B-Roy is our PG in crunch time.
So you would have Matthews to bring in on bigger guards, and Armon to bring in on smaller guards. There…I said it…
I'm just not crazy about player nick names...
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Jul 12, 2010 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions
Armon will be lucky if he makes this team this year.
Who is he gonna beat out for minutes. Armon is not going to take minutes from Bayless or Miller and I think Patty Mills will get that last roster spot. Mr.Johnson is NBDL bound my friend.
Kenneth Lewis Moore
by lightskin350 on Jul 12, 2010 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't think we'll be able to afford Patty
If yesterday’s game is any indicator (it’s not, really), then Patty will get scooped up by another team, or he’ll get offers we won’t want to meet. Besides, we’ve already paid 2 million for Johnson.
Stealth > Wealth
If he accepts the QO
how long till we can trade him? Or can we flip him immediately? We could also use him in a S&T for something, even an exception, the same way GS just did with Morrow. Personally, I like the idea of shipping him out with Rudy to NY for Anthony Randolph, but D’Antoni is supposed to be really high on Anthony, despite their need for guard depth.
I don’t know the rules on how fast you can sign a player that you want to trade, but I would think that if any team wanted him, all they’d have to do is snag him now. You’d have to hope that there was already a deal on the back-burner with a reluctant partner that needed one extra piece to ink the paper.
Stealth > Wealth
If he doesn't commit TO's he'll get PT.
His natural defensive aptitude is miles beyond Patty and J-Bay’s. Watch him use his length while moving his feet. You can’t teach that.
I'm just not crazy about player nick names...
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Jul 12, 2010 2:44 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Very unusual signing
What makes the Matthews signing so hard to guage is that, thanks to the rookie salary scale, we almost never see a situation like this, where a second year player is given a long term deal. By the time most NBA players become free agents, they have played at least 4 years in the league. They may not have reached their ceilings as players, but they are relatively known commodities. Wes Matthews, because he went undrafted and only signed a one year deal, is the very rare exception. It’s really hard to know what kind of a player he’ll be. If he continues to improve, he could end up being a solid starting caliber wing. If so, by the time he nears the end of his deal, he’ll be a pretty good value. Or last season could have been a fluke and he’ll turnout to be a marginal rotation player, in which case this will be one of the worst contracts in the NBA. Or could end up somewhere in between, maybe somewhere like Aaron Afflalo (this seems like the most likely scenario to me).
The problem with this deal is that, as I see, only under the high upside scenario does this deal look at all reasonable. This really is an pretty crazy contract (both in length and amount) for someone so unproven. I think if the Jazz match this offer, it’s probably for the best.
www.ripcitydispatch.com
by Blazer Guy on Jul 12, 2010 10:47 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
it's not that ridiculous, you have to look at the market
Travis Outlaw just signed for $7M a year, and while Trout is a little better on the offensive end, Matthews is a much better defender.
If we had given him any less, Utah would have matched for sure – this at least puts them on the hot seat to make a decision. Paul Allen can afford to play it that way.
Don’t underestimate the defense that this guy will bring to the perimeter for our team, something we definitely need come playoff time (see: Phoenix Suns series last year)
by rip_city_swagger on Jul 12, 2010 11:08 AM PDT up reply actions
but Outlaw is a known commodity
He’s been the league for years now. It’s really hard to know, based on one season’s worth of play in one system, just how good Wes Matthews is. What you don’t want is an untradeable, albatross contract, which there is real risk that this one will becomes. It’s a real gamble.
www.ripcitydispatch.com
have to take risks
the teams that risk nothing end up perennial first round losers
given all the injury risks the blazers keep acquiring, matthews is relatively low on the risk scale
there is uncertainty but it goes both ways. IMO its more likely WM develops into an all-star than regresses into an albatross
by don maxingly on Jul 12, 2010 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions
his skills that are his strengths are very likely to translate wherever he goes
his on-the-ball defense and solid outside shooting should be the same wherever he goes, regardless of the system he is playing in.
We’re not paying/signing him to be a scorer, creator, facilitator…or any of the other things that a system and surrounding personnel would dictate or strongly influence
by rip_city_swagger on Jul 12, 2010 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions
that's why it could turn out to be a great signing as well
but as of right now I will take Matthews over Outlaw for this Blazer team 1000 times out of 1000…and is paying 2 mil per year too much really that outrageous considering Matthews’ potential? I like this signing and agree with rip_city_swagger’s sentiment on the matter wholeheartedly
In a league where even the fat condor contracts players like T-Mac on a broken knee or Hedon't could be easily traded, almost no player is untradable
Especially not one with 5 times the MLE and a signing bonus in year 1.
Well, Eddy Curry is the exception, and maybe even he could have been traded if the Knicks had put some lipstick on the pig in time…
In the world of finance, this is crazy talk and how bubbles happen.
Flastback to 1999:
“Pets.com has to be worth $119 a share because people are willing to pay $119 to get it!”
Normally I would use this flat out as an argument against the size of Wesley’s offer. However, there are two critical exceptions in my mind:
1. Financial investments don’t typically go worthless in 10 years of less because the stock’s knees give out. When we have a championship window based on the age/health of our core players, spending more to have something now can actually make sense.
2. I still think the owners are willing to spend so much this year because they are bound and determined to renegotiate the cap in a way that will permanently and retroactively lower the “max” salary determination… in essence, they do not expect to pay as much for salaries in two years that they are promising today.
Like the Whos down in Whoville they did it without boxes or ribbons or bows, they did without centers or posting down low. They won without All-Stars and Spaniards and Frenchmen. They won with old geezers and sub-par defense-men. They won playing rookies from deep off the benches. They won with their grit and their guts in the trenches. And some who observed them have been known to say that their hearts grew three sizes (at least!) on the way. One hopes with their poise and their passion now proven that once they are healthy their game will be groovin'.
by conspirator5 on Jul 12, 2010 1:01 PM PDT up reply actions
there's a whole new CBA going into effect after next season, and possibly a lockout as a result
they are going to be renegotiating a lot of things – including guaranteed contracts, etc. However, any deal signed now has to be honored even under the new rules – they are always grandfathered in
That’s why Shaq and KG signed those monster deals before the last CBA update – and why players are trying to cash in this summer – as the contracts will likely be (estimate) about 40% less than they are now, and with much less guaranteed money
by rip_city_swagger on Jul 12, 2010 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions
mathews will be a surprisingly good fit with the blazers if jazz don't match
as mentioned earlier, i saw him play 5-6 times this past season. jerry sloan seldom plays, much less starts a rookie. dwill didnt play much more than mathews his rookie season.
mathews plays very hard, and he doesn’t loaf on defense ever, from what i saw. his capacity to finish strong at the hoop will surprise people, as will his tenacity rebounding. he got better all season long, and really had a solid playoffs. his ability as a slasher will be invaluable, as will his willingness to defend anyone. there will be nights that he gets lit up, but that is the nba.
obviously, mathews would be better still, if the blazers played more uptempo. if you look at the blazers roster, there is no reason in the world that they can’t play at a faster clip. except macmillan, of course. there were lots of games last season that it seemed they could really run against teams and dominate, but they didn’t.
Mathews would be better still, if the blazers played more uptempo
From the highlight videos I saw, Wes ran out a lot by himself and received long kick-ahead passes from D-Will to score against the single retreating defender
there’s no reason he couldn’t do that for Portland as well, with Andre being the trigger man
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Look.....I trust are TWO scouts very much
I look at this signing as a way to get a deffender in here who will guard the top guards in the NBA….this means that if we get him we could do a trade that includes Batum to get Chris Paul…as reported by Jason Quick that trade was supposed to be looked at again by both sides when the draft was over. We need a Gm in place to make this happen I believe but in all cases if we could get a Chris paul i think we could let go Batum for him If we get another good deffender
hope not
I think CP3 will play out his contract and make a dash for South Beach in 2012.
The last thing the Blazers need is to trade half their roster for a player who who only help them for a year or two, like what happened with Kiki back in 1985 (Vande hurt his back and was never the same, then he was traded shortly afterwards)
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Jul 12, 2010 7:51 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Finally, some sense. CP3 is a very good player—that’s it. He’s not the only hope the Blazers have to win, he was an option that has become way overvalued.
Stealth > Wealth
wow
CP3 is a very good player—that’s it.
A healthy Chris Paul is either the second or third best player in the league.
Sounds like a very good player to me!
Sorry if you think I’m understating his ability, but there’s been a lot of overstating his abilities lately. Yes, he’s amazing. Yes, he would make the team better. No, I don’t want to give up Nicolas Batum and the entire bench for him (mainly just Nico!).
Stealth > Wealth
It is very difficult to overstate Chris Paul’s ability. His 08-09 was probably the best season ever by a point guard. Nic is good and everything, but if you can get a guy who has the potential to be the best PG of all time, you give up basically whatever it takes.
Make a dash for the MLE?
"One of the bright spots of the young season has been rookie point guard Jonny Flynn, whose name sounds like he should be the lead character in a Broadway Musical. "What are you doing here, Jonny Flynn?" "Why I'm here to court trouble, and woo a girl, and build the most fantastical contraption the world has ever seen!" -- Dave, Game 7 Blazers versus Timberwolves preview
"It was bad reffing...but not rip apart the fabric of time bad." -- The Arkitect, Game 79 Blazers versus Mavericks Post-Game Thread
by BlazersOrBust on Jul 12, 2010 9:17 PM PDT up reply actions
new CBA
the NBA could be playing by a whole new set of rules in 2012
based on what happened with James and Bosh, I wouldn’t touch CP3 with a 10 foot pole right now. Paul Allen could offer him the max and still not get a commitment, and then all Portland would get is a strike shortened year out of CP3 and a big sucking sound of young talent headed Monty Williams’ way
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
This is my concern as well. I'm not one of those who think that all potential will be reached with young players,
but I am concerned with trading lots talent to rent a star for a year or two. Longer term, sure, do it.
We're going to have 10 guards going into training camp aren't we....
I like Matthews but I’m not going to get overly excited about this signing because the Jazz could match……Rudy is as good as gone.
Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company.
I like the signing
I don’t get it, but I have full faith in the organization and where they are headed. I support all their moves from this summer.
they wanted more of a defensive presence in the back court
and with his age AND ability to knock down outside shots Matthews was a solid option
by rip_city_swagger on Jul 12, 2010 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions
hooray!
Elitism - It's lonely at the top. But it's comforting to look down upon everyone at the bottom.
by thankyouforblaze on Jul 12, 2010 1:43 PM PDT up reply actions
Look at TIH being supportive!!
Maybe it’s all the Andre Miller haterade that you drink, but I kinda had you pegged as a negative nancy! I’m glad to hear you support the moves that have been made thus far and I agree that it’s hard to see the forest through the trees at this point…hopefully it will all come together like a big, championship-winning puzzle
Actually, I think Tom is almost a big of homer as I am.
I don’t know anyone else who owns a Michael Ruffin Jersey.
"[S]ince men enjoyed very great leisure, they used it to pursue many kinds of commodities unknown to their fathers, and that was that first yoke they placed upon themselves without thinking about it, and the first source of evils the prepared for their descendants. For, besides continuing thus to soften body and mind, as these commodities had lost almost all their pleasantness through habit, and as they had at the same time degenerated into true needs, being deprived of them became much more cruel than possessing them was sweet; and people were unhappy to lose them without being happy to have them." -Jean-Jacques Rousseau
I wish
I’m 110% hater and I always come to BE with my Hater Face on. I do own an autographed Blazers Shav jersey.
I knew it was one of our previous Human Victory Cigars.
"[S]ince men enjoyed very great leisure, they used it to pursue many kinds of commodities unknown to their fathers, and that was that first yoke they placed upon themselves without thinking about it, and the first source of evils the prepared for their descendants. For, besides continuing thus to soften body and mind, as these commodities had lost almost all their pleasantness through habit, and as they had at the same time degenerated into true needs, being deprived of them became much more cruel than possessing them was sweet; and people were unhappy to lose them without being happy to have them." -Jean-Jacques Rousseau
I don't know if i like the opportunity of Matthews coming to the Blazers or not BUT alot of Jazz fans are really pissed about the Jazz lowballing Matthews and waiting this far into FA to make him a decent offer.
Matthews and Batum and a healthy Oden along with Camby would make this team a very good defensive team. I would love to know what kind of “lift” Andre Miller brings to this team. Miller can’t keep starting PG in front of him anymore, he was never a good shooter plus he needs the ball in his hands to be remotely effective. Andre needs to be on a running team that is where he is dangerous and could really help a team. Portland is a half court team who wants to limit possesions and make the opp team shoot jumpers. The reason Blake was half way decent for Portland was because he could hit open jumpers and shoot 40% from the three……..that is why the Lakers signed him to a multiyear contract, they want him to play off Kobe the way he played off B-roy.
Kenneth Lewis Moore
Miller was brought on as a trade chip
He doesn’t fit the teams need and PG is the one spot keeping this team from being a championship contender when healthy.
You raise a good point about being a half-court team. In that scenario, you have to be efficient and limit turnovers. Matthews is excellent in that regard as well.
by don maxingly on Jul 12, 2010 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions
i think you are vastly underrating Andre Miller
OJ Mayo is the Blazers' PG of the Future
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jul 12, 2010 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions
I think you are vastly underrating how underrated Andre Miller is
He’s a top 10 PG, no doubt. But I think the FO is still viewing him as a piece to get an upgrade. Otherwise, we wouldn’t be linked to rumors for so many PG’s (Parker, Paul, etc.)
I’m not sure that he was brought on solely as a trade chip, but I doubt the thought never crossed someone in the FO’s mind. He could be our championship PG if we make the right moves elsewhere, or he could be traded for an All-Star, but both are pretty good options.
he was a band-aid for sure, a very competent one
He was never the “answer” at the position for us – but he is a very productive and experience stop-gap solution until we do get the long-term guy in there. That’s why he was signed for 2 years with a TO for year 3, we can use the $7M expiring after this year if we want OR keep him on through next year if nothing materializes
the reason he is mentioned in so many trades is because it’s logical to think if we are bringing in a starting PG that we’d send out the guy currently in that role on the EC – not necessarily an indication that we are actively trying to trade him
by rip_city_swagger on Jul 12, 2010 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions
Looks like....
We felt a little left out in all of the free agent hype that has been going down recently and decided to throw starter money at a guy that will be a backup at best. Good thing we got rid of Kevin Pritchard.
Please define starter money
To me it’s usually a matter of draft position, player competency, team need and market forces that determine how much a player is paid more than the consequence of starting or not.
this seems prescient via Ben on twitter
http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1177
When an undrafted free agent plays well as a rookie, it’s often less a sign that he’s truly a great player and more a reminder that talent is out there to find. I can see Utah or some other team giving Matthews too long a contract and regretting it after finding out he’s not substantially better than replacement level.
in the playoffs last year...
13.8ppg, 4rpg, 1.5spg, 35%3PT and 84%FT
I’d say that’s probably better than replacement-level
by rip_city_swagger on Jul 12, 2010 3:07 PM PDT up reply actions
11.8 PER? 38% from the floor? I don’t think his playoffs are the greatest argument for a 35 million dollar deal, although I know some people were very impressed by his defense on Carmelo.
Do you think Sloan felt there was a better option but chose to put WM on Melo for the heck of it?
by 52therim on Jul 12, 2010 9:52 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
the Jazz have bad wing defenders. That’s one of the reasons a lot of people thought thought they would be a good matchup for us. Wes is the best of a really terrible lot.
WHAT?? Who exactly thought the Jazz were a good matchup for us after they swept the season series?
Jerry Sloan’s team’s are known for poor defense?
by 52therim on Jul 12, 2010 11:15 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
OK, so maybe only I thought they would be an OK matchup. Anyway, their wing defense was really bad last year, which explains why people thought Matthews holding Carmelo and Kobe to 30 a night was good defense.
no their interior defense was crap
actually, AK47, Matthews and them are pretty good perimeter defenders, they just had no one inside to protect the rim
My point was – everyone is making a big deal about him being an undrafted free agent with only 1 year experience…well…how many undrafted rookies start and spend a series guarding Kobe in their first season – and playing well while doing it
by rip_city_swagger on Jul 13, 2010 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions
Blazers might have made this offer specifically to mess with the Jazz.
Why is this so unlikely? How probable is it that the Blazers do this, to the same team, a year after they tried to do it with Paul Milsap? A coincidence? Are the jazz the only team in the NBA that have restricted FA? Statistically speaking, it’s kind of hard to believe these 2 moves are not connected in some way…
Geriatric Dunk Squad!
1/4/10 - Juwan Howard dunks on Chris Kaman.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTkOqDgLb6s
3/7/10 - Andre Miller Tomahawk jams on the Denver Nuggets.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-JVgm7F1QA
4/12/10 - Marcus Camby drops 30 and 13 on OKC to cement 50 wins. http://www.nba.com/blazers/media/camby_chant_041310.mp3
by Eat Politicians on Jul 12, 2010 2:23 PM PDT reply actions
It's their fault
for allowing their players to test the waters instead of locking them up early like we did with Camby. If they were thinking that they’d sign these quality players for peanuts, they undervalued their players talent and the front offices of their competition.
You’d have thought Utah would learn their lesson after making the exact same mistake last summer, but I guess not.
Stealth > Wealth
Jazz got a bargain with Millsap. He is an excellent player on a very fair contract. Because this isn’t true of Matthews, they will probably let him walk.
I think a lot of their decision will rest on how many fans they anticipate loosing with Boozer. If it looks like they won’t be able to snag a high profile free agent in the near future, they might consider keeping Mathews around, paying him more than they’re comfortable with, and keeping his fans.
Stealth > Wealth
The Jazz are the only show in SLC
I doubt selling tickets is the biggest concern/focus for if they want to retain Mathews or not. Staying competitive and financially flexible/viable probably trumps fanfare at this point for them.
Gimmicks don't make dynasties
Mathews is a good player.
Plays good man to man defense and shoots the ball relatively well from the outside.
In terms of his value. He means much more to the Jazz than the Blazers so I would think his offer will be matched.
If Paul Allen is willing to spend over the luxury tax, I have no problems with the contract. Mathews fills a need on the roster as a defensive wing player. I think it’s a good direction and the only downside is encroaching the luxury tax threshold.
"I'm at the thingamajig talking the yakety-yak" - Kenny Smith
The Blazers are settling into mediocrity
and the fans will have to be satisfied. The franchise can absorb several more years of this and still probably fill the stands.
unless they can acquire a difference maker that can change the face and hopefully the emotion of this team, they will still have a group of marginal support players for Roy and Nate’s system. How many good mid level players are out there that could contribute in this suffocating slow down of a system? spot up 3 point shooters…haven’t we tried that ? Acquire some high energy team players, that bring some flexibility to the party and you will see the next level a lot sooner than the slow and methodical approach we are currently mired under.
I guess this is considered a rant….but I would like to think of it as losing confidence in this organization’s wisdom….however I do actually think someone does recognize something (needing a floor general) but they are so vested in their current key players that they can’t do a whole lot at the moment…..One more year of patience ? maybe. But we need to understand that the next level might require more than refinement to our current approach.
[Good defense "releases" your offense]
Nate coaches playoff basketball, and it's hard to find a PG
it’s not as much about having energy guys- Nate coaches a slow down, half-court, defensive-focused system. I know a lot of people hate on that, but he reason he uses that system is because that’s what wins in the playoffs. You don’t see the Lakers and Celtics out running the break all the time or being up-and-down, quick-tempo, tons of possessions teams. They utilize half-court sets that take advantage of their mismatches and strengths, and then are tenacious on the defensive end and on the glass. That is what Nate is trying to put in place with our team.
I’d say Nic Batum, LMA, Oden, Bayless are all pretty high-energy guys and are quality players we have surrounded Roy with. Remember, we’ve won more than 50 games the last 2 seasons with our so called “horrible” system despite the injuries and problems the team has had.
On getting a PG – it’s incredibly hard to do. Franchise PGs are at such a premium that you can’t really land them once they are in the league without mortgaging all of your existing talent. And to draft one, you need top have a top-5 pick pretty much. It’s not from a lack of trying – but what good is a PG if we have to send out our prime talent to get them?
by rip_city_swagger on Jul 12, 2010 3:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Jazz using the MLE elsewhere?
http://twitter.com/christomasson/status/18380428642
Jazz could try to get both Ronnie Brewer and Anthony Tolliver with its mid-level exception and let Wesley Matthews go.
by BleedsBlazerRed on Jul 12, 2010 2:38 PM PDT reply actions
They don't have Bird Rights to Matthews, they have to use the MLE.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jul 12, 2010 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions
No, the Utah Jazz don't have Bird rights -- or even Early Bird rights -- for Wes Matthews.
This is similar to what happened with Earl Watson back in 2002 when the Memphis Grizzlies snatched him from the Seattle SuperSonics after his rookie season there.
Everything I've seen says
Utah would have to use their full MLE to match this offer. And the MLE, which is $5.765 million, is the most that Matthew’s contract will count against either the Blazers’ cap or the Jazz’s cap next season.
by BleedsBlazerRed on Jul 12, 2010 3:27 PM PDT up reply actions
wasn't Trenton Hassle the guy several seasons ago that Portland totally over-valued?
"The great charm of cats is their rampant egotism, their devil-may-care attitude toward responsibility, their disinclination to earn an honest dollar." - Robertson Davies
Utah will NOT match IF they can find a cheaper replacement in 6 days.
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
What strikes me
is the difference between last year’s Millsap offer and this year’s Matthew’s offer.
Last year we heard repeatedly how the Blazer were preparing a “toxic offer” to Millsap, days before it happened. Then we heard for days about the “toxic offer”. We were very public, very obnoxious about the whole thing. We essentially told Utah “Go ahead, we dare you to match this.” Even if they might not have wanted to, we pretty much forced them to do so with all of our public bluster. They couldn’t afford to appear like they let us bully them around.
This year, exact same deal was done, but without the bluster and loaded languages and full on media blitz by the team. The meetings were pretty quiet, the offer wasn’t paraded around by team officials, and everything just feels more understated.
Learning something from past mistakes in the post-KP era?
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
Right - no bull this time
But the offer for Millsap wasn’t that onerous. If you have him pegged as a quality NBA starter at the 3/4 then we obviously low balled. We could have have offered 10 million a year and it would look good now. You’d have him banging Ron Artest for years to come.
I think
Matthews could be a nice addition to our team. If he were our rookie last year, we would be stoked to lock him up. His experience makes him a nice backup to the recently-injured Roy & Batum because he could start in a pinch, but entering only his 2nd year, he will happily come off the bench and won’t complain about minutes (see: Rudy).
Assuming Rudy is moved for a draft pick or rides the bench until the trade deadline, this is a rough approximation of how I see the minutes shaking out:
Miller (28m)
Roy (36m)
Batum (36m)
Aldridge (36m)
Oden (28m)
Bayless (24m)
Matthews (20m)
Cunningham (8m)
Camby (24m)
There will be a disappointment that the “big trade” didn’t happen. But when that passes, we’ll realize that we are ready for battle.
Hmmm.
I don’t like that second unit bc my confidence in J-Bay as a playmaker is pretty low.
Also, Miller/Roy…does it really work? Both are nice but don’t seem to bring out the best in each other.
I REALLY hope the team can pull off one more deal to shape that PG spot into something that makes a bit more sense.
I'm just not crazy about player nick names...
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Jul 12, 2010 4:48 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
yes
Also, Miller/Roy…does it really work?
I think we went something like 17 and 6 with them both starting later in the season.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jul 12, 2010 5:17 PM PDT up reply actions
yep
the best stretch was 17-5 from the end of Feb until Roy hurt his knee (following the Camby trade and once Batum returned to the lineup)
There’s nothing wrong with the Roy-Miller backcourt, the only “problem” is that Andre won’t be around for more than another year or two
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Agreed...if Wesley comes over...we are...
Ready For Battle
…It is go time, and it will be interesting to see how this year shapes out.
yeah it is sort of funny
all last season we bemoaned how Utah out physicalled us, we try to swipe one of those physical guys and it is the end of the world around here.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
from slcdunk
Basketball John on Jul 12, 2010 9:12 AM PDT in The Downbeat Comment 188 comments
More on Matthews,
From Coach Nate McMillan,
He’ll be a wing defender," McMillan said. "A guy who can play the two and the three. I looked at some tape of him in the playoffs. He had the assignment of guarding Carmelo and Kobe. You don’t stop those guys, but I think that says a lot about him when Coach Sloan feels … that he’s strong enough to take that challenge… I’m surprised I’m sitting here talking about it because he’s not mine.
Well, it’s nice to see that they at least met with their latest RFA target in person this time.
One of the biggest concerns giving Matthews that money was that he’s just a rookie and while he had a great rookie season, you have to ask if he’s worth that kind of money? If he continues to improve, then yes, he will be worth just about what he’ll be making in a couple of years. If he’s hit his ceiling, then he’s probably not worth the $6M a year he’ll be making.
So the question as to whether or not you match the offer is if you think he’s going to get better. Where can he get better? Ball-handling for one. He could also work on his rebounding. He’ll also learn more of the defensive tricks of the trade with some more time.
So while it’s easy to spend other people’s money, I think the Jazz have to match. One, I don’t think any of the other FAs out there are a better option than Matthews. Others would be cheaper but are they going to get you more wins? Also, are you going to be able to lure those other options to Utah? From the twittersphere it appears that the Jazz have been chasing other players but haven’t been able to land anyone. Matching Mathews guarantees you bring a quality player in.
Next, I talked about players having it and Matthews has that. Those players are hard to come by. This is the type of player that you have on a championship team. I’m no saying that’s happening this year, but if you’re building that type of team, players like Matthews are a must-have.
Finally, I think Matthews improves. Is he going to regress now that he’s not fighting to stay in the league? No. He’s going to get better. While he’s not worth the $9.2M he’s getting this season, he’ll grow into the $6M player after this season.
not enough info
i think a lot of people, the blazers included, are putting a lot of their backup sg eggs in one basket. Matthews had a relatively good rookie season, but there’s no real indication he will be that reliable player as a backup for Brandon. i’m not excited about this move. i also think a lot of people are forgetting Jerryd’s hustle and style of play, especially in the playoffs last year. he is more than a qualified backup at both guard positions. of the 96 minutes at guard, Brandon will get about 36, and Andre 34. that leaves 26 minutes for Jerryd to back up both positions.
~ Kassandra
we have the right to disagree with each other; when you personally attack me with that disagreement is when you cross that line.
I think Bayless and Rudy are going away.
And Mathews and Johnson are going to cover for him.
"I don’t give a ZACH about no trade rumors. As long as somebody ‘CTC’ at the end of the day, I’m with them. For all you that don’t know what CTC means, that’s ‘Cut the Check. I just go out there and play. Again, somebody just ’CTC'." -Sheed
creepy
Kevin Love broke the rim in my high school gym, but he still rocks my dirty socks…..and he is a total fox.
The only person I love more than LeBron James is portlandgiirl91
by Dirty Socks on Jul 13, 2010 10:32 AM PDT up reply actions
baller blocking?
"There was a time when this blog was for intelligent BASKETBALL fans. It has unfortunately become O-Live 2…" ~Ilikeemall
"Did they really expect me to bow down to Jesus?!?" ~Sophia
"At first glance, I saw a fairly unremarkable penis." ~Sophia on Greg Oden
by Philthyanimal on Jul 13, 2010 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions
did you go there?
Jake, did you go or do you go to stanford?
we have the right to disagree with each other; when you personally attack me with that disagreement is when you cross that line.
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.
