# NY/POR trade getting closer?



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Just looking around the webs and reading various blogs message boards etc...etc... I have to think that Portland and New York are in fact talking...

Joh Hollinger of ESPN Insider says the framework of the deal being discussed is 

Portland Trades
Darius Miles
Theo Ratlif

Portland Receives
Penny Hardaway

Now supposedly Portland won't do this deal as it stands as tehy want more than just cap relief. I'd have to assume they are wanting either Channing Frye or David Lee in addition on this one.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

I'm not sure I like that one. 

The Good: gets rid of two high, long term salaries. Only Zach's anchor remains. And he has been earning it lately. This would give enough room to resign Joel (even if Ruben doesn't opt out). We instantly drop to the clearly youngest team in the league (built-in excuse).

The Neutral: Theo has been a monster on defense and is such a nice guy to have on the team. Miles was key early in the season--would fit with the current team? How would Miles do with Blake/Dixon? A big unknown.

The Bad: Trading two starters for an expiring contract and a rookie sounds like a recipe for slipping out of our winning ways.



If this is what it takes to sign Joel long term, then I guess it is worth it. As helpful as Miles was early in the year, I'm not sure he is going to benefit from the new offense. I don't see him being a big ball movement kind of guy. Given the talent we'd be surrendering, Frye or Lee would have to be included.


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

I have been saying for at least 3 years that there is no one on the Knicks whom I want on the Blazers, and nothing has changed my mind. I've also been hearing this type of rumor for at least 3 years and fortunately they have all been bs.

Portland gives up a serviceable center and a young guy with a lot of talent for ... nothing.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Does trading Ratliff & Miles do anything for our ability to re-sign Joel over the summer? Is Penny an expiring contract?

PBF


----------



## SLAM (Jan 1, 2003)

Don't worry. If a deal with NY does indeed go down, we're certain to get the better end of it. Isiah Thomas just doesn't get good deals.

I'd like to see a Theo/Ruben for Penny (and one (1) young unproven talent) as much as anyone. We'd be awful thin at center, but we're young and inexperienced at every other position, so why sweat it (time for Ha!)?

Miles and VK would have to cover the extra PF minutes hen Zach sits, which may free a few SF minutes for Monia and Webster.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

crandc said:


> I have been saying for at least 3 years that there is no one on the Knicks whom I want on the Blazers, and nothing has changed my mind. I've also been hearing this type of rumor for at least 3 years and fortunately they have all been bs.
> 
> Portland gives up a serviceable center and a young guy with a lot of talent for ... nothing.


But, if it meant keeping Joel, rather than losing him, would that change your mind? Without the Joel issue, I would agree with you (although Lee [5 + 5 in 18 min] and Frye [14 + 6 in 26 min] do have value). BTW, does Lee remind anyone else of Mark "Mad Dog" Madsen (tough active player, good rebounder, lousy FT shooter)?

On the up side, what some consider to be two of Nash's biggest mistakes (signing Miles and Theo to such big contracts) could end up netting us a decent rookie.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

ProudBFan said:


> Does trading Ratliff & Miles do anything for our ability to re-sign Joel over the summer? Is Penny an expiring contract?
> 
> PBF


Trading Theo and Miles for Penny puts us about 10 mil under the cap next summer.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I do want to point out that apparently the hang up is Portland isn't willing to do Miles and Theo for Penny straight up. they want the Knicks to sweeten the pot.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Understood Schilly...

That is down right funny to read. We send out Theo and Darius, both whom are capable of starting and are very good defensively and only get back a has been player who has not had any significant minutes played in ages.....

We need to get back a big man for sure or its no way jose....

Frye and Penny or Lee and Penny or nothing...

Or a three way with Denver to get Nene and Penny... My personal preference...

cap relief and something I wanted all summer long, a backup PF....


----------



## GrandpaBlaze (Jul 11, 2004)

My hesitation in the Theo/Miles trade is that although we have a lot of SF's, Miles is, without a doubt, by far the best of the bunch.

Granted, Miles hasn't played with the team since the team started "gell'in" (Dr. Schools commercial anyone?) and there is a question as to if he will fit with the team as it has gelled but that same question will apply to anyone new we obtain.

Obtaining more youth with "potential" while dealing away our best proven players is not a recipe for success. Sure such a deal enables us to sign Joel but as much as I like Joel, is he worth Miles & Theo? No way in my book.

If we were to get Frye, we then have two relatively young guys at PF both of whom have shown they can perform. It definitely gives us a very good backup to Zach - someone who will put serious pressure on him to continually perform.

Lee would replace Theo at a fraction of the cost with a player on the upside rather than the downside. 

Still, I have been looking forward to having Miles return and have a very solid SF position. Trading him leaves us with Ruben & Victor both of whom, in my opinion, are very good backup SF's but neither of whom I'd pick as a starter.

So, my summary:

Miles/Theo -> Penny/Lee:
* Leaves Blazers weaker at SF
* Leaves Blazers probably slightly weaker at C
* Enables us to resign Joel

Miles/Theo -> Penny/Frye:
* Leaves Blazers weaker at SF
* Leaves Blazers weaker at C
* Strengthen's Blazers at PF (where we are already strong)
* Enables us to resign Joel

If it happens, it happens. I'm just don't see much reason for the Blazers to do such a deal.

Gramps...


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

Unless it's Frye/Penny/Pick for Miles/Ratliff I don't like it. The cap room we'd get would be gone with the resigning of Joel. I'm not big on giving Joel 8-10 million/per since he's still an offensive liability.


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

I'd do it for Penny/Frye.. Anything less, and I'd say no.


----------



## The Sebastian Express (Mar 3, 2005)

I will post something I posted on another board, outlining the salary. I used Ruben in this scenario, so just add and subtract 900k where necessary.


(this is in a Theo/Ruben for Penny/Lee scenario. It also really works for any expiring salary contract around 16 million.) 

We would be sending out 18,019,866 million in salary. 

We would be taking back 16,661,360 in salary, 15,750,000 of that is in expiring deal. 

After Penny's deal expired, and we add all the salaries together for next year (including Sergei Monia's 1 million, which isn't counted on hoopshype, plus the 30th pick in the draft, and David's Lee salary) we would have 45,218,485 million in salary. 

About 4.8 million insalary, right? Wrong. 

Without Theo and Ruben's defensive presence, and leadership (Theo), we would be assured a top five pick. That can add anywhere from 3.6-2.3 million. 

If we got the first pick, we would have a salary of 48,835,585 million. 

If we got the fifth pick, we would have a salary of 47,591,285 million. 

Which is 3.8 to 2.5 less than we could offer with the MLE. 

So we would have to offer Joel the MLE anyways, and if he left we would have Ha, the rookie, or some third rate center starting for us.


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

Scout226 said:


> I'd do it for Penny/Frye.. Anything less, and I'd say no.


Agreed and I would try to get a 2nd rounder as well.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

I'd be happy if the trade was as follows:

Theo, miles and Detroits pick

for
Penny, Frye and a future pick

I realize that Knick fans will claim they're being taken to the cleaners, but they're giving up basically Frye for 2 potential starters. Frye is good, but Im not sure if he's so great that getting 2 starters isn't worth it.

IF the Knicks are hell bent on getting Theo and Miles, to the point where they are willing to maybe include Frye, they must think that Theo and Miles are difference makers.

I think it's all fluff at this point.


----------



## RipCity9 (Jan 30, 2004)

Reep said:


> BTW, does Lee remind anyone else of Mark "Mad Dog" Madsen (tough active player, good rebounder, lousy FT shooter)?


Why? Is he a talentless hack?


----------



## JFizzleRaider (Nov 1, 2004)

I'm not sure I wanna give up or get rid of Miles yet, hes still only 24 and IMO our best player. Although it would keep giving Khyrapa and Outlaw minutes, Im not to happy with it. If needed I would rather throw Outlaw in a deal to entice them as long as they take Patterson as well.

Something along the lines of PAtterson/Ratliff/Outlaw for Penny/Lee or Frye/Ariza

And even if Joel doesnt resign with us, oh well, we would have HA as our backup and we could hope to get Lamarcus Aldridge to be our starting center, or we could get a journeyman to fill in

I'm just tired of having Patterson on our team, and Ratliff isnt near worth the money he is getting paid, and hes only going to get worse


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

The Sebastian Express said:


> I will post something I posted on another board, outlining the salary. I used Ruben in this scenario, so just add and subtract 900k where necessary.
> 
> 
> (this is in a Theo/Ruben for Penny/Lee scenario. It also really works for any expiring salary contract around 16 million.)
> ...


Actually, Yes we would have that much, it is just a matter of order of operations. I believe as the rules are written, if we sign Joel first, the Rookie players salary isn't added on for salary cap purposes until the rookie contract is signed. You are always allowed to sign your rookie draft pick even if you are over the cap. So the Blazers would merely have to sign Joel before signing the rookie draft pick. I could be wrong, but thats the way it used to work a few collective bargaining agreements ago.


----------



## riehldeal (May 11, 2003)

if they threw in their first rounder unprotected for next yr's draft i would maybe consider this

miles/ratliff for penny/lee/2007 1st rounder


2007 draft will be crazy good, with this yr's seniors in high school getting a beneficial year of seasoning in college ball

if we could get under the cap and finally be able to maybe lure away a young budding superstar i am all for it....of course this is assuming that as someone said before, that we would be under the cap next offseason by $10 million.....i have not looked at the figures and assume that we would lose most if we resign joel

however, i think the blazers should be very careful about overvalueing our players, joel in this case, and resigning him for too much .... why not trade some of our backcourt and SF depth and maybe our later 1st rounders and second rounder in this year's draft for a big man that is atleast equal to joel......i mean i love joel but i bet we could get the same else where.....and if we could use the money else where by signing a young about to break out superstar, then maybe we should strongly consider that


what do you guys think??? sorry i rambled, just thinkin out loud at this point, schooll is killin me, haha


----------



## The Sebastian Express (Mar 3, 2005)

While that may have been that way sometime, allow me to present the new CBA, and the way it had been since 99.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#43



> *Unsigned first round picks are included in team salary immediately upon their selection in the draft. They count as 100% of the scale salary for that pick, unless there is a verbal agreement for a higher salary. * An incident occurred prior to the 1997-98 season when Vancouver's first round pick, Antonio Daniels, revealed in an interview that he and the team had verbally agreed to a contract starting at the maximum salary (120% of the scale amount). Since verbal agreements apply to the salary cap, the league then changed the team's cap figure from the scale amount to 120% of scale.



Edit: Fixed a typo.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

The only way I could fatham the loss of DMiles AND Theo to the Knicks would be to get Frye in return. Frye is big enough to play either post position and we clear so mch cap room. I am one of the bigest Miles fans there is, but we do need to get rid of some SF's...prolly 2 of them with Ruben being the other. I just don't know if I could give up Darius, I think he is gonna flourish when he comes back. Everyone seems to be buying into Nate's system.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Yep sure enough. The only other option would be to trade somebody other then Ruben, and then know that Ruben is going to opt out of his contract, so they would get the additional salary cap relief, and hope that the cap for this year goes up.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

The Sebastian Express said:


> I will post something I posted on another board, outlining the salary. I used Ruben in this scenario, so just add and subtract 900k where necessary.
> 
> 
> (this is in a Theo/Ruben for Penny/Lee scenario. It also really works for any expiring salary contract around 16 million.)
> ...



I think you need to re-check your math...

Next Season with Theo and Miles (and Monia factored)
$57,986,631

Subtract $19,416,666 (Theo and Miles)

$38,569,955

Now add in Lee and we are just under 40mil so 8mill under the cap.
add in and assumed #5 pick or lower max of $2.4mil and the #30 pick max of $744K

That puts Portland at about $42,639,995 or about $6.5mil under the cap.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

RipCity9 said:


> Why? Is he a talentless hack?


Yeah, no kidding.

Aside from relative lack of pigment, I see no comparison between Lee and Madsen. Lee is much more athletic. Much, much more skilled. Madsen's been in the NBA for 6 years. His career highs for points and rebounds are 15 and 10. Lee has already gone for 23 and 15. 

Actually, David Lee reminds me a little of Brian Grant, which would be nice to have on our team again.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

I agree that the deal of Ratliff and Miles for Hardaway and Frye is the ONLY one worth taking. We must keep a big of somesort on our roster. There is no guarantee that Joel re-signs with us. Frye can play the C if needed, Lee cannot (IMO).

Do the deal.


----------



## The Sebastian Express (Mar 3, 2005)

Incorrect. Go add the salaries. Ruben's player option is not included on salary sites because he has not picked up his option yet. For instance, on hoopshype's salary, our total salary next year not including Ruben comes out to 55 something. Why they have it at 56.9, I don't know. However, we actually have 61 or 62, when you factor in Ruben's.. I believe, 6.8 player option.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

i prefer the theo/ruben trade much better if we trade miles it must include frye or nene 

or we will draft gay or morrison


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> I do want to point out that apparently the hang up is Portland isn't willing to do Miles and Theo for Penny straight up.


Good Lord, I would hope not. That's a ridiculously one-sided deal, and a complete steal for the Knicks. Nash is not this stupid, believe me.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

The Sebastian Express said:


> Incorrect. Go add the salaries. Ruben's player option is not included on salary sites because he has not picked up his option yet. For instance, on hoopshype's salary, our total salary next year not including Ruben comes out to 55 something. Why they have it at 56.9, I don't know. However, we actually have 61 or 62, when you factor in Ruben's.. I believe, 6.8 player option.


Excellent, I hadn't caught that.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

outlaw has been pretty impressive at times over the last 10-12 games. up and down certainly, but showing strong improvement with more playing time. it wouldn't surprise me if we were able to pull the trigger on a miles deal simply because outlaw is again being slated for starting SF next year. 

frye has been really dogging it lately, but that may just be the result of team turmoil.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Well...You have to give Isaiah credit, he has the balls to propse ridiculous offers...

Theo AND Miles? for Hardaway and Ariza is a joke from POR perspective, and it doesn't even guarantee POR can resign Pryzbilla...and Ariza? Yeah like POR needs ANOTHER SF....I don't think so.....

One good point about having Theo is that if Pryzbilla does walk (and that is not a given)...POR has a center other than Ha.....

Miles is only 24, he was having a very good year before the injury, and IMO his contract is not horrible...to throw him into a deal that won't even get POR major capsapce is just plain stupid....

The question shouldn't be IF NY needs to add Lee or Frye to the deal, but if adding one of them is enough compensation for POR to part with both Miles and Theo....I am not conviced that it is...even moreso regarding Lee.....


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Ok New Math based on Hoopshype

2006/2007
$61,904,751
- $19,416,666 (Miles &Ratliff)
*$42,488,085*
+ $926,040 (Lee)
*$43,414,125(/b)
+ $3,500,000 (draft picks)
$46,914,125

$53,000,000 (projected cap '06/'07)
-$46,914,125
=$6,085,875 (Cap Space)*


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Fork said:


> Yeah, no kidding.
> 
> Aside from relative lack of pigment, I see no comparison between Lee and Madsen. Lee is much more athletic. Much, much more skilled. Madsen's been in the NBA for 6 years. His career highs for points and rebounds are 15 and 10. Lee has already gone for 23 and 15.
> 
> Actually, David Lee reminds me a little of Brian Grant, which would be nice to have on our team again.


I'm not saying that Lee isn't a better player with more potential, but:

Height: both 6'9"
Weight: both 245 lbs.
Scoring per 48 min: Madsen 11, Lee 13
Rebounds per 48: Madsen 11, Lee 13
FT%: Madsen 55%, Lee 59%

You have to admit that some of that does look similar. And to Madsen's credit, he played on better teams (Lakers and T-wolves) than Lee is on, which I think helps Lee's stats. I would welcome Lee on this team, but would rather have Frye.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

I agree with Kmurph, times 10. The trade (as originally posted) of Theo AND Miles for an expiring contract gives up two starting quality players and only benefits Paul Allen's wallet (well, it also saves the Knicks franchise, but who cares). Just a ridiculous fleece job. If Paul Allen (no way Nash could do this without approval) does this deal it shows he now cares only about money (like most of us mortals).

Miles does not have a bad contract. I think a lot of people here seriously underestimate Darius. He was playing hurt at the beginning of the season, he was buying into what Nate wanted as well as anyone on the team, and he was our best player. I don't see any reason why he can't come back and acclimate and excel at Nate ball (if he wants to). 

I also think a lot of people underestimate what Theo brings -- but I recognize that he is overpaid, is on the downhill side of his career, and is injury prone.

I wouldn't do Theo and Miles for Frye (and the expiring contract) either, even if it did let us offer Joel a little more $$. I don't think we'll need to.

Theo and Ruben for Frye (and ending contract) -- sure, we are rebuilding. Theo and Miles for Frye (and ending contract) and an unprotected pick in 2007...I'm interested.

I will concede this though -- I've been wondering why Darius is still sitting out. It does seem a little suspicious.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

I didn't see this referenced earlier, but the foxsports Daily Dime says Peter V. (I know, I know . . .) says:



> Peter Vecsey of the New York Post reported that a four-way trade between Orlando, Denver, Seattle and New York could go down in the next day or so. The rumored deal has Steve Francis going to the Nuggets, and guys like Nene, Earl Watson, Flip Murray, Reggie Evans, Vitaly Potapenko, Penny Hardaway, Theo Ratliff and Ruben Patterson changing addresses.


So, does that mean that Nene and Penny end up in Portland? I'm not sure I see what Orlando gets out of this unless Nene goes to Orlando and Portland gets Reggie Evans? And who wants the Ukraine Train?


----------



## The Sebastian Express (Mar 3, 2005)

Wouldn't that be a five team trade?


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

The Sebastian Express said:


> Wouldn't that be a five team trade?


Yeah, I just noticed that. I guess it kind of kills the credibility.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I just stumbled across a funny little loophole.

If a team is under the cap but by less than the MLE they still get the MLE. An expired contract player counts on the cap unless they have been renounced. So in essence if Portland were to get to say about 8mil under the cap, Joel would count as cap space to them, for his bird rights value of 5mil. this puts the team at less than the MLE under the cap and the team qualifies for the MLE _and_ can re-sign Joel starting at 8mil.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Don't trade Miles!


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

does the cap go up every year? 


aaaarrrggghhhhh wish it would just happen whatever is to happen even if it dont include us.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Wow. And you guys are even discussing this deal? 

I don't think Darius is nearly as bad as he's being made out to be. Even if he is, if you move the guy now you're basically dealing a guy at his lowest point. 

Here's my deal: Miles and Ratliff for Frye, Penny, and a future non-lottery protected. Why only that? Because you're dealing a freaking 24 year old who was a 3rd pick in the draft. 

I still want to see Miles with a full season under McMillan. There is still hope, and Miles is still a freak athlete.

My guess is, Nash is initiating this one, Thomas counteroffered, and Nash won't budge without Allen's approval.

No deal.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Blazer Bert said:


> I've been wondering why Darius is still sitting out. It does seem a little suspicious.


Why is that? 

Portland is in a youth movement so fully that they benched Darius last year to play Outlaw. He gets hurt, and they can be more conservative with his return because they want to give the young guys playing time.

This is where even having Ruben on the roster doesn't make sense. I bet Nash offered him a buyout and Ruben's agent told him no. They have Portland and their 25 points of light between a rock and a hard place.


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

I don't get the Frye hype. He's a bigman with decent offensive skills, average rebounder and not that good of a defender.

Frye = young Juwan Howard.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

The Sebastian Express said:


> Incorrect. Go add the salaries. Ruben's player option is not included on salary sites because he has not picked up his option yet. For instance, on hoopshype's salary, our total salary next year not including Ruben comes out to 55 something. Why they have it at 56.9, I don't know. However, we actually have 61 or 62, when you factor in Ruben's.. I believe, 6.8 player option.


I like the ease of going to HoopsHype, but for accuracy I would recommend that you use StoryTeller's site Check it out or under the NBA links on the forum main page

Next years team salary concurs to your estimate of around $62 mil

Regardless of the team total if Ruben is traded right now, we have to include his salary for this year and next year and includ a trade kicker of 15% of the remaining balance.

His salary is $6.3 mil now and will be $6.8 mil next year if he excercises his player option. For ease of calculation I am going to say he is at the exact mid season point in terms of pay.... or $3.15 mil left this year.

Trader kicker = ($3.15 mil + $6.8 mil = $9.95 mil *0.15 = $1.49 mil in trade kicker
add that to his salary of $6.3 mil + $1.49 mil = $7.79 mil or so... lets say $7.8 mil in terms of value for trading


I still think if Ruben survives the trade deadline he will bolt at the end of the season to play for the team of his choice... me thinks the Cavs


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

Trader Bob said:


> Trader kicker = ($3.15 mil + $6.8 mil = $9.95 mil *0.15 = $1.49 mil in trade kicker
> add that to his salary of $6.3 mil + $1.49 mil = $7.79 mil or so... lets say $7.8 mil in terms of value for trading


Good point, TB, but I think the $7.8 mil value only is used for the receiving team. For the Blazers' end of the deal, they would have to count him at his current year salary.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

After listening to Courtside tonight I am more convinced that a deal will happen. In setting the table for the Nate interview Rice said he was going to ask Nate as to how he felt about winning this season or making moves to secure the future. Rice then said that Nate may in fact feel that since he is there for 5 years, that making a move to reinforce teh future might be more important than trying to sneak into the playoffs now or come up short...When Nate was asked he confirmed that a trade that would help for the future was more important right now than trying to compete right now, especially since they do have a lot of work to make that happen.

AKA...Nate is on board with making a trade similar to the deal to move Theo and also open to moving Ruben.

BTW CSMN was reporting the rumored deal as
THeo and Darius

for

Penny, and Ariza....But Nash will only pull the trigger if Lee is included as well.


----------



## Ruff Draft (Nov 21, 2004)

Schilly said:


> After listening to Courtside tonight I am more convinced that a deal will happen. In setting the table for the Nate interview Rice said he was going to ask Nate as to how he felt about winning this season or making moves to secure the future. Rice then said that Nate may in fact feel that since he is there for 5 years, that making a move to reinforce teh future might be more important than trying to sneak into the playoffs now or come up short...When Nate was asked he confirmed that a trade that would help for the future was more important right now than trying to compete right now, especially since they do have a lot of work to make that happen.
> 
> AKA...Nate is on board with making a trade similar to the deal to move Theo and also open to moving Ruben.
> 
> ...


I would love to see D-Miles and Q-Rich together once again, and I would love Lee/Ariza grow on the Blazers. Wouldn't that cause the Blazers a logjam at the 3 though?


----------



## JFizzleRaider (Nov 1, 2004)

If Its going to be Miles and Theo for Penny/Ariza and Lee I'm going to be very upset. I DO NOT want us to trade Darius. Hes our best player and in return we would be getting basically a backup PF, and a SF about as good as what we already have. 

Make the switch of Patterson and Miles....Please MR Nash find a way to get that done


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

Someone else said it earlier today, and I'll repeat it since I liked it so much:

The Blazers and Knicks have been rumored to be in trade talks for the past 15 years, and pretty much nothing has happened.

I'll believe this deal (or any deal) when I see it.

By the way - the CSMN guys don't have a clue. Never have when it comes to trades.

-Pop


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

SodaPopinski said:


> Someone else said it earlier today, and I'll repeat it since I liked it so much:
> 
> The Blazers and Knicks have been rumored to be in trade talks for the past 15 years, and pretty much nothing has happened.
> 
> ...


h8r.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

There are 3 guys at Olive reporting that they are hearing essentially the same thing...2 of the 3 I know are reliable as is their info. 1 O don't know one way or the other on. All 3 are saying this is teh current deal.

Portland trades
Theo
Ruben
Smith 
a pick

Portland receives
Penny
Frye
Lee

Supposedly the hangup right now is that NY wants multiple picks. No one knows what pick currently has been offered.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Schilly said:


> BTW CSMN was reporting the rumored deal as
> THeo and Darius
> for
> Penny, and Ariza....But Nash will only pull the trigger if Lee is included as well.


And the Courtside guys didn't think this would be a horrible deal? Sure we have a glut at SF, but the solution is trading our best SF, and half of TheoBilla, for nothing more than a 43rd and a 30th pick? Two starters for two bench players on one of the worst teams in the league? And we'd still be stuck with Ruben, and be down to only one center. Unless they really think Travis can be as good as Miles, and soon, or unless Miles has asked to be traded, I'm just not seeing it and I'm trying. Maybe it's just me. Or maybe Nash thinks Lee is as much of sure thing as he apparantly thought Telfair, Webster and Jack were? :whoknows:


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Schilly said:


> There are 3 guys at Olive reporting that they are hearing essentially the same thing...2 of the 3 I know are reliable as is their info. 1 O don't know one way or the other on. All 3 are saying this is teh current deal.
> 
> Portland trades
> Theo
> ...


Now, that's more like it! :biggrin: :clap:

Throw in the extra pick. What do we need it for?


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

If we deal Miles, I want Frye. Anything short of Frye and its a terrible deal for us. Its amazing how Blazer fans underate Miles. Lee is nowhere near the talent Miles is. Ariza is just another underdeveloped SF. IMO, he would be the least talented SF on this team. He cant shoot and has overrated D. 

The Theo, Ruben, Smith and pick for Penny, Frye and Lee deal is amazing. I definatley dont think that will ever happen. Even if we switched Patterson to Miles, I would jump on that deal.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Schilly said:


> There are 3 guys at Olive reporting that they are hearing essentially the same thing...2 of the 3 I know are reliable as is their info. 1 O don't know one way or the other on. All 3 are saying this is teh current deal.
> 
> Portland trades
> Theo
> ...


If the pick is Detroit's next year, I'd do it. We get a backup PF and C for the future, both with reasonable ready-know skills. We lose Theo and the pick. The pick (if Detroit's) then it would be worth less than Lee or Frye.

If the pick is one of Portland's first rounders, then I say no. Mainly because I'm not convinced that Frye or Lee is ever going to be a starter on a very good team. But, they would be good backups, and you never know.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

crandc said:


> I have been saying for at least 3 years that there is no one on the Knicks whom I want on the Blazers, and nothing has changed my mind. I've also been hearing this type of rumor for at least 3 years and fortunately they have all been bs.
> 
> Portland gives up a serviceable center and a young guy with a lot of talent for ... nothing.


Exactly.

But come to think of it, that's usually what Pash Natterson gets for talented players. :curse:


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Here are the deals I support(Which means nothing)

1) Penny, Butler & Lee for Patterson and Theo

2) Penny, Frye & Lee for Miles, Theo and Det's pick

Thats about it.


----------



## JFizzleRaider (Nov 1, 2004)

Theo, Ruben, Smith and a pick for Frye, Lee, and Penny?

Where in the heck can I sign up for that baby? Of course the pick better not be Portlands 1st round pick, I would do it if its Detroits 1st round pick and if they haggled us for our 2nd round pick too....but If its our pick? To hell with that. I would rather switch Patterson with Miles in this deal if it meant us getting to keep our 1st round pick


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

MARIS61 said:


> Exactly.
> 
> But come to think of it, that's usually what Pash Natterson gets for talented players. :curse:


realistically, the only trade we've gotten nothing in return for our "talented" players was the bonzi trade and in retrospect, BOnzi's dumb *** got what bonzi's dumb *** deserved.

the sheed trade was fair value, just we should've dealt him to Detoit (cept that, iirc, it wasn't possible under the cap).

We weren't going to get **** for NVE, DA or Damon (let's be real here) and Shareef only lost out because the Nets tried to screw Shareef out of money.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

I was excited for the trade deadline to come and go, hoping that all this silly trade talk would die down, but then I realized that it would only intensify with the end of the season looming in two-three months.

There won't be any trades before the deadline. This is the team that will finish the season.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Schilly said:


> There are 3 guys at Olive reporting that they are hearing essentially the same thing...2 of the 3 I know are reliable as is their info. 1 O don't know one way or the other on. All 3 are saying this is teh current deal.
> 
> Portland trades
> Theo
> ...



So basically Christmas would come early in Portland this year? That would be a huge deal if it were to come true. I don't think that we would see Frye unless Miles was in that deal, but if it were for the above mentioned players......sign me up. Trade a pick for Frye, atleast you know what he is going to do at the NBA level unlike many of the untested HS and college players in the draft.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Schilly said:


> There are 3 guys at Olive reporting that they are hearing essentially the same thing...2 of the 3 I know are reliable as is their info. 1 O don't know one way or the other on. All 3 are saying this is teh current deal.
> 
> Portland trades
> Theo
> ...



I like the thought of that trade, but think it might be Darius instead of Ruben (Agreeing with Howie as well). I think they may be able to convince Ruben to leave at the end of the year. Clearing more money yet.

Roster
PG Blake, Jack, Telfair
SG Dixon, Webster, Monia, Hardaway (Expiring)
SF Khryapa, Ruben (Leaving at player option at end of year), Outlaw
PF Randolph, Frye
C Przybilla, Lee, Ha

Possible NY pick



Maybe explains why Webster and Monia will be back soon. Depth at the SG spot. Penny will not probably play for us.


----------



## hoojacks (Aug 12, 2004)

There is NO WAY we trade Miles now. We've been doing very well while weak at the SF. Imagine when he comes back (if and only if he buys into the system.) Whooo boy.

Man, if it's Theo + Ruben + Smith and a pick for Penny, Frye and Lee, I am a happy camper.
I hate to lose Theo, but it's gonna happen sooner or later. Personally, I think they've been showcasing Theo by playing him more than Joel lately.

We lose a bit of defense, but gain for the future without doubt.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Reep said:


> I'm not saying that Lee isn't a better player (then Mad Dog Madson) with more potential, but:
> 
> Height: both 6'9"
> Weight: both 245 lbs.


This past summer at the pre-draft he measured 6'7.75, 229.5 lbs with a 7'0 wingspan. 

Personally I don't see all that much upside in Lee and I'm not that enamored with the idea of getting Frye either... I think Channing has some potencial but the prize that I'd really value from them is their 2007 unprotected. As opposed to 2006, the 2007 draft is projected to be a great one with many jewels. Then again, a roster of Robinson, Marbury, Crawford, Rose, Woods ( :wink: ), Miles, Lee, Frye, Curry, and Ratliff, coached by Larry Brown just might start to win some games and make that pick less alluring then I'd hope.

I think I'm sufficiently on record about how I feel about the importance of retaining Joel. I'd rather have his services as part of the Blazer future then Theo and Miles. Theo is probably close to his finish line and certainly so before Portland has a shot at contending again... so it really boils down to (for me) Joel vs Miles for the future of the club. I'm much more comfortable with Khryapa, Outlaw, and Monia inheriting bigger roles then Ha and Nedzad. 

btw... I'm very hopeful that Big Ned will be on board next year.

STOMP


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

While I really doubt that we will trade Darius before the deadline.....

I wouldn't mind seeing it happen, we have shown that we can win without him and I'm excited at the possibility of Kryapa and Outlaw more minutes to finish out the season...Then trade one of them in the offseason and draft Morrison for the small forward spot...


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

I like the proposed deal. Miles, although our best player right now, does NOT have the mental capacity to lead a team long term. He also cannot shoot well consistently.

For those that say, he needs more time with Nate, I say in return; Leopards don't change their spots. He will have another blow up with his coach one day and he will always play with less than full effort on the court. That's who he is.

Go ahead, Blazers, pull that trigger and bring in Frye, Lee and Penny.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Im really starting to want that Frye and Lee package. They are both the perfect backups at PF and C. Lee is the hard nosed backup PF we need. He is a rbounding machine and a real hustle guy. Also, I would probably rate his athlecism higher than Zach. Frye is the scoring C we need to compliment Joel. He has a nice J, and a knack at just getting the ball in the hoop. I love Miles, but VK and Outlaw are going to be great. And honestly, VK's BBall IQ is already probably higher than Miles. I just hope if we trade Miles to NY he doesnt explode for 20+ ppg, which I feel he will.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

Theo, Patterson, Smith and a pick for Lee, Frye and Hardaway would be friggin' awesome. I'm crossing my fingers.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

STOMP said:


> btw... I'm very hopeful that Big Ned will be on board next year.
> 
> STOMP


I haven't heard anything about Ned recently. Any news? He had some flashes of good play this summer, but then a lot of nothing too.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

It looks to me that the Knicks are looking in other directions, possibly trading with Denver instead. Either that or Isiah at least figured he better take a look around for what other deals might be made before pulling the trigger.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

nedzad looks to be a career euro guy i am sure they already know HA is better than nedzad i saw he stats for the euro league season garbage. 

I would like for the frye penny and lee trade then we can draft a sf or a pf actually the best aviable player, the trade does make the draft interesting. we could draft a sf this year! if ithe trade goes threw.


----------



## RipCity9 (Jan 30, 2004)

I can't believe we'd be entertaining the idea of trading Darius, whose contract is reasonable and was looking very good before going under the knife.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Here is the reason I think they would consider trading Darius. By trading Patterson, you lose his salary off the cap. By trading Darius, and waiting for Patterson to opt out, you get both of their salaries off the books. Please note, I am not saying it makes sense from a basketball standpoint, only a salary cap clearing room standpoint.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

hasoos said:


> It looks to me that the Knicks are looking in other directions, possibly trading with Denver instead. Either that or Isiah at least figured he better take a look around for what other deals might be made before pulling the trigger.


Not necessarily. We all know Denver has been hot to trot to get a SG....If the Denver deal (KMart rumored) is a deal like. 

NY Trades
Jamaal Crawford
Malik Rose 

Denver Trades 
Kenyon Martin

If Denver doesn't receive either Malik or Maurice Taylor they have no inside presence left, unless they think Fye could fill Martins shoes. Denver is very much in the playoff hunt.

Then if New York has Kmart and Eddy Curry I'm not sure who they think would be better to them, Theo Ratliff or Channing Frye off the bench as the hard nosed defender.

Just some thoughts, they may be too rose colored.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

hasoos said:


> Here is the reason I think they would consider trading Darius. By trading Patterson, you lose his salary off the cap. By trading Darius, and waiting for Patterson to opt out, you get both of their salaries off the books. Please note, I am not saying it makes sense from a basketball standpoint, only a salary cap clearing room standpoint.



I agree

We clear even more room doing it that way. And we still have Viktor and Travis at the SF spots


----------



## cpt.napalm (Feb 23, 2005)

Not only does darius clear more cap space, and gets rid of patterson, it also clears the SF log jam. Allowing us to draft at any position but PG. (see Adam Morrison)

For the draft instead of following BPA (Best Player Available) we can follow, BPATIAPGUTATSCOCP (Best Player Available That Isn't A Point Guard Unless They Are The Second Coming Of Chris Paul)


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

Man, you guys are fully convinced this deal is going to happen. That's hilarious.

No way this deal goes down - guaranteed.

You've obviously learned nothing from the Nash/Patterson era.

-Pop


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Trader Bob said:


> I think they may be able to convince Ruben to leave at the end of the year.


What does that conversation sound like? What do you propose John Nash open with?



> "Hey... yeah we were thinking, maybe you could opt out of your contract... Yeah, I know it's almost 7 million, but look at it this way: you might be able to make 10 million a year and start for another team in the process! ...no, I'm not saying that will happen... Who's interested in you? Plenty of teams! What? Oh, no one specifically..."


You get my drift. As I've said before, the market will not bear 7 million for Ruben. He may talk all day about playing time, but the 7 million is a lot more important... I assure you. A buyout or waiving him outright are the only scenarios I see Ruben leaving in, trades nonwithstanding.

Additionally, pretty much every team in the league has either a temporary or a future solution at SF. Ironically, NY is the only city where I could see Ruben winning the starting job. Qyntel is a hopeful, tenative idea.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

SodaPopinski said:


> Man, you guys are fully convinced this deal is going to happen. That's hilarious.
> 
> No way this deal goes down - guaranteed.
> 
> ...


What's the Gurantee?


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Kitty on the Knicks Board posted this snippet from Insider



ESPN Insider said:


> A league official who has had recent conversations with Isiah Thomas said the Knicks are considering trading any player on their roster except Eddy Curry, reports the Newark Star-Ledger.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

I guess time will tell, but it would be sweet for a deal like this to go down for Portland. I think that even if you have to give up Daruis it makes sense. Frye would be a nice addition to the front line and so would Lee. Frye would be your insurance policy incase Joel does bolt, but this move would help in resiging him wouldn't it with Hardaway coming off the books at seasons end?

Long term this deal helps Portland more than hangin onto Ratliff and Miles......doesn't it?


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

HOWIE said:


> I guess time will tell, but it would be sweet for a deal like this to go down for Portland. I think that even if you have to give up Daruis it makes sense. Frye would be a nice addition to the front line and so would Lee. Frye would be your insurance policy incase Joel does bolt, but this move would help in resiging him wouldn't it with Hardaway coming off the books at seasons end?
> 
> Long term this deal helps Portland more than hangin onto Ratliff and Miles......doesn't it?


I firmly believe that in order to make a deal like this work, Miles will need to be included.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Samuel said:


> You get my drift. As I've said before, the market will not bear 7 million for Ruben. He may talk all day about playing time, but the 7 million is a lot more important... I assure you. A buyout or waiving him outright are the only scenarios I see Ruben leaving in, trades nonwithstanding.
> 
> Additionally, pretty much every team in the league has either a temporary or a future solution at SF. Ironically, NY is the only city where I could see Ruben winning the starting job. Qyntel is a hopeful, tenative idea.



I am not disagreeing with you Samuel. But, I think we also underestimate the importance of a players ego. We have all heard Ruben yap for years now. But he has a very competitive fire in him and he wants to win and win on a contending team, just like every player does. IF Ruben leaves he IMHO will most certainly not get that kind of money, for the reasons you state. But I think its well within the grasp of reality that Ruben may leave and go to a team that pays him less but can offer him a role on the team more prominent than our team can. Playing time, contributing and winning, and on a winning team are big deals to most players.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

HOWIE said:


> ......Long term this deal helps Portland more than hangin onto Ratliff and Miles......doesn't it?


Yes.

Frye is the prize. He's not Yao or Shaq, but he's a really good basketball player who can be the b/u at both post positions. We don't need both a b/u center and b/u PF if one guy is athletic, skilled and has the necessary height to play both spots.

Miles is eye candy. He'll never develop into the stud we need. Ratliff, great guy, but on the downside of the career.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

HOWIE said:


> Long term this deal helps Portland more than hangin onto Ratliff and Miles......doesn't it?


I don't know if it helps more than hanging onto Miles. 

Personally, I believe Miles has a better chance to develop into a star than anyone on our roster or the Knicks roster. Lee will be solid, but never a star. Frye is decent, but a finesse center doesn't make the kind of impact that Darius Miles can have.

But with the salary relief this provides...maybe its worth it. I'm torn.


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

OK, after reading through 6 pages of posts, I wanted to chime in with a few things (haven't logged on in a few days):

1) Trading Ratliff and Miles for expiring contracts will not get the Blazers under the cap enough to make a larger-than-MLE offer to Joel. Neither will trading Ratliff and Patterson. Hoopshype? A joke. They can't even get their equation at the bottom of the page to equal the numbers that they provide for individual players. To say nothing of the holes that they have. To say nothing about how they've butchered Outlaw's contract. And I could go on.....As for the salary cap, the best estimates I have read predict it will stay pretty much the same in 2006-07 and might even drop a bit.

2) The idea that Patterson will not exercise his player option for 2006-07 is laughable to me. Right....he's going to give up $6.8 million in order to take $1 million from another team. Yeah, sure he will....

3) Just a few weeks ago, Frye was considered an untouchable commodity. Now he's available for this deal?


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Storyteller said:


> 3) Just a few weeks ago, Frye was considered an untouchable commodity. Now he's available for this deal?


Well let's think about something that makes no sense, but complete logic.

New York hasn't made the Playoffs in a few years. There is intense pressure on Zeke to do so now. On top of that Larry Brown has never been known to really look at the talent on paper thing logically, instead he prizes players like Ruben and Theo.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Trader Bob said:


> Playing and go to a team that pays him less but can offer him a role on the team more prominent than our team cantime, contributing and winning, and on a winning team are big deals to most players.


How many competitive teams can afford to give Ruben Patterson more than 23 minutes a game on paper?

Sure, he can win playing time by being that spark plug, but that's all theory. Most NBA teams are stacked at LEAST 2 deep at the SF position, sometimes 3 & 4 on more competitive teams (the teams Ruben would want to go to.

Can you give me a few examples of competitive teams that might take on Ruben for significant minutes? SF logjams are typical; in cities like portland they're just called that because of the age similarities.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Storyteller said:


> 3) Just a few weeks ago, Frye was considered an untouchable commodity. Now he's available for this deal?


We're not making that up. 

If Stephon Marbury has to sit out until after the break, it would further reduce the possibility of his being traded before the Feb. 23 deadline. But a league official who has had recent conversations with *Isiah Thomas said the Knicks are considering trading any player on their roster except Eddy Curry.* -- Newark Star-Ledger

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/scorecard/02/07/truth.rumors.nba/


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Utherhimo said:


> nedzad looks to be a career euro guy i am sure they already know HA is better than nedzad i saw he stats for the euro league season garbage.


You're sure about what they know?  Well, he pretty clearly showed more then Ha did this last offseason, reportedly outplaying him in practice and in games, which was why I was sort of surprised to see him sign a new 4 year deal back in Europe. But then again, if he was here with Joel and Theo this year, he'd be seated next to Ha with his cheap rookie deal on the clock. It makes sense for him to be over there developing with regular PT and delaying the start of that cheap contract. I emailed Nash after NS signed the new deal and asked if it contained an out for the Blazers to exercise... he said indeed it did. 

If Theo is dealt and/or Joel leaves via free agency, there may be a lot of minutes available. I guess we'll see...

STOMP


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Storyteller said:


> OK, after reading through 6 pages of posts, I wanted to chime in with a few things (haven't logged on in a few days):
> 
> 1) Trading Ratliff and Miles for expiring contracts will not get the Blazers under the cap enough to make a larger-than-MLE offer to Joel. Neither will trading Ratliff and Patterson. Hoopshype? A joke. They can't even get their equation at the bottom of the page to equal the numbers that they provide for individual players. To say nothing of the holes that they have. To say nothing about how they've butchered Outlaw's contract. And I could go on.....As for the salary cap, the best estimates I have read predict it will stay pretty much the same in 2006-07 and might even drop a bit.
> 
> ...


1. Your assuming Patterson would only get the veteran minimum. I think that is a mistake.
2. You assuming Patterson is smart. I think that is also a mistake. :biggrin: :clown:


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

for all we know, Ruben might actually opt out. He might not want to spend another year on a losing team, even if it meant not making 7 million.

If you ask me, I'd rather make 10 million over 3 years (not an unreasonable contract for him) on a decent team, than 1 year and 7 million on a team that's going nowhere next year. Plus, it's not like Ruben is guaranteed $$ after next season anyways, so if he can get 3 years of guaranteed money, thats better than playing next year for 7 and then potentially playing himself out of a job (see: sprewell).

The more he whines, and complains, the less likely he'll get a decent offer. if he's on his best behavior this year, he could get a multi-year contract offer this summer from a team who thinks they just need a decent backup SF. 

He of course runs the risk of getting a DA type contract but that was mostly done because D'Brick was already getting paid 9 million more than he's worth, so why would he hold out for more?


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

I'm gonna say that nothing gets done simply because of past history with John Nash, but I'm difinitely hoping to get back one or two of the Knicks' youngsters and an expiring contract.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Hap said:


> for all we know, Ruben might actually opt out. He might not want to spend another year on a losing team, even if it meant not making 7 million.
> 
> If you ask me, I'd rather make 10 million over 3 years (not an unreasonable contract for him) on a decent team, than 1 year and 7 million on a team that's going nowhere next year. Plus, it's not like Ruben is guaranteed $$ after next season anyways, so if he can get 3 years of guaranteed money, thats better than playing next year for 7 and then potentially playing himself out of a job (see: sprewell).



The only way I see Ruben opting out is if Nash tells him he'll be the 4th option next year.




> The more he whines, and complains, the less likely he'll get a decent offer. if he's on his best behavior this year, he could get a multi-year contract offer this summer from a team who thinks they just need a decent backup SF.



I agree with that, but Ruben has showed us over and over again that he's not capable of that logic. He's a sparkplug guy with a sparkplug personality.

I think if people were willing to give Ruben the '10 million over 3 years' deal like you say, Nash would have been able to send him somewhere a while ago.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

SheedSoNasty said:


> I'm gonna say that nothing gets done simply because of past history with John Nash, but I'm difinitely hoping to get back one or two of the Knicks' youngsters and an expiring contract.


what exactly is his "past history" that shows 'nothing gets done'?

it's not like the team has been offered insane offers left and right and he's turned them down.

The biggest "blunder" you could argue that he made was the Carter one. But one could counter argue that it isn't actually any history. Why? Well the fact that Rod Thorn basically backed up what Nash (and several posters here) said actually did happen (the offer was agree'd upon by Toronto, they just just got a 'better' offer from the Nets) kind of makes it sound like he didn't back out, but got the rug taken out from under him.

Was he supposed to take Jalen Rose too? Pfft..no thanks, especially considering the Nets didn't take Rose.

Maybe, and I know this is hard for fans to accept, Nash doesn't want to trade as much as NY wants the Blazers to trade, if Frye is included. How do we know it's not NY who's saying "Ok, we want Theo, Miles, AND your lotto pick (unprotected) for Penny and Frye"?

Nash (and any GM with sense) would just laugh and say "no thanks. come back when you're serious". 

I know some of us are acting like Frye is gonna be a big super star, but basically the team is giving up 2 starters AND a potential top 6 pick for Channing ****ing Frye? I know we get out of Theo and Darius's contract, but the amount that the team gets out of their contract (and how much it helps re-signing joel) isn't worth trading away a lotto pick in the process.

But I know, it's just "John Nash's history" that proves it wouldn't happen.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Samuel said:


> I think if people were willing to give Ruben the '10 million over 3 years' deal like you say, Nash would have been able to send him somewhere a while ago.


how do you figure? They'd be getting Ruben for only a contract, vs having to trade someone decent for him. That doesn't prove anything.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

SheedSoNasty said:


> I'm gonna say that nothing gets done simply because of past history with John Nash, but I'm difinitely hoping to get back one or two of the Knicks' youngsters and an expiring contract.


I know somebody else already posted something like this, but here's my two cents.

What? John Nash has pulled off several trades. Wells for Person and a draft pick. McInnis for Miles. Wallace and Person for Shareef, Theo and Dan Dickau. Eddie Gill for the #23 pick in the 2004 draft. The #3 pick for the #6 and #27 in last year's draft and the Detroit pick in this year's draft. Then, the #27 and our second round pick for the #22. He also had a deal worked out with NJ to get rid of SAR, but they backed out after he didn't pass his physical. 

That's six trades (really 7) and I may have missed one in there somewhere. So...why does this past history of 6 or 7 trades in 3 years tell you nothing is going to happen?


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

hasoos said:


> 1. Your assuming Patterson would only get the veteran minimum. I think that is a mistake.


You're absolutely correct. The reality is that he could experience what another talented player with a troubled past experienced this season - Latrell Sprewell. He also could turn down guaranteed millions to get absolutely nothing.



> 2. You assuming Patterson is smart. I think that is also a mistake. :biggrin: :clown:


Nice. But we both know that he's smart enough, at least, to realize that $6.8 million guaranteed is bigger than whatever another team can/will pay him. 

Sorry, I just don't see any reason why Patterson would opt out. IMO, it's far more likely that he exercises his option then says, "now trade me". Seems to fit more with his past behavior.


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

Hap said:


> If you ask me, I'd rather make 10 million over 3 years (not an unreasonable contract for him) on a decent team, than 1 year and 7 million on a team that's going nowhere next year.


Show me the team that's going to offer him $10 million for 3 years and I'll consider this. Until then, you might as well speculate that the Bulls will use their cap room to give him the $7 million that he'd make with the Blazers.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Storyteller said:


> Show me the team that's going to offer him $10 million for 3 years and I'll consider this. Until then, you might as well speculate that the Bulls will use their cap room to give him the $7 million that he'd make with the Blazers.


I bet if someone knew Sprewell would play for 3 million a year, they'd sign him. He's out of the league because he's a putz and wanted too much $$. Im not saying that there IS an offer for him, but that he might be able to get one. Ruben, for all his trouble, isn't that bad at 3 bills a year. if we had him for 3 million next year, I doubt he'd be on the trade block.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Hap said:


> Ruben, for all his trouble, isn't that bad at 3 bills a year. if we had him for 3 million next year, I doubt he'd be on the trade block.


If he wasn't such a head-case at times (and so disruptive to team harmony during those times), I doubt he'd be on the trade block regardless of his salary.

PBF


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

I could see Houston offering Patterson half of the MLE.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Storyteller said:


> Show me the team that's going to offer him $10 million for 3 years and I'll consider this. Until then, you might as well speculate that the Bulls will use their cap room to give him the $7 million that he'd make with the Blazers.



The theory is the same for Ruben as it was for Karl Malone and Gary Payton. They took a significant cut in pay to play for a contender. Yes, Ruben is no HOF'er, but that does not mean he will not sign for a contender for lets say $3-5 mil. defensive stoppers are valuable to contending teams. Yes, many tams have lots of SF's. But Ruben is considered to be a good defensive presence and energizer despite his lack of all around HOF skill set. He can be valuable to the right team.

Most of the contending teams will have a MLE slot available to sign Ruben if they want to.

Will Ruben go to a contender for half value to a loss of about $2 mil....... maybe so. Gary and Karl did!


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Storyteller said:


> Nice. But we both know that he's smart enough, at least, to realize that $6.8 million guaranteed is bigger than whatever another team can/will pay him.
> 
> Sorry, I just don't see any reason why Patterson would opt out. IMO, it's far more likely that he exercises his option then says, "now trade me". Seems to fit more with his past behavior.


I'm with you... no way he'll turn down the biggest checks of his life. Suggesting this is a possibility seems almost as crazy as him actually doing it. Dude's agent will be in his ear reminding him whats what with the market, and Captain Chaos will be back for another year of the same ol' in Portland.

STOMP


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Trader Bob said:


> The theory is the same for Ruben as it was for Karl Malone and Gary Payton. They took a significant cut in pay to play for a contender. Yes, Ruben is no HOF'er, but that does not mean he will not sign for a contender for lets say $3- mil. defensive stoppers are valuable to contending teams. Yes, many tams have lots of SF's. But Ruben is considered to be a good defensive presence and energizer despite his lack of all around HOF skill set. He can be valuable to the right team.


How many years would you gander that GP or Karl made more then 6.8 mil? I don't know, but I'd guess that it was quite a few... I'd guess that both enjoyed a season or two making double that. 

Apples and oranges.

STOMP


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

Trader Bob said:


> Will Ruben go to a contender for half value to a loss of about $2 mil....... maybe so. Gary and Karl did!


Ruben is no Gary nor Karl. I could see him as a Chester, but definitely not a Gary or Karl.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

STOMP said:


> How many years would you gander that GP or Karl made more then 6.8 mil? I don't know, but I'd guess that it was quite a few... I'd guess that both enjoyed a season or two making double that.
> 
> Apples and oranges.
> 
> STOMP


yep, Karl gave up literally millions because he wasn't happy in utah.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

I say Nash goes up to Patterson and tells him that he can either opt out or be the 5th SF behind Miles, Outlaw, Viktor and Monia. Hell even throw in Martell and make him the 6th SF. That will get him out. Maby. Hopefully.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

Perhaps Portland should consider trading Randolph instead of Miles. Frye is a PF, and Randolph is the same calibur PF as Dixon is at SG. He's simply a gifted low post scorer, but doesn't add much else.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

nope zbo wont be traded Yega you havent been watch zbo play have you? 

The kninks lost agian they will trade


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Yega1979 said:


> Perhaps Portland should consider trading Randolph instead of Miles. Frye is a PF, and Randolph is the same calibur PF as Dixon is at SG. He's simply a gifted low post scorer, but doesn't add much else.


Except rebounding (ranks #12 in offensive rebounds and #17 in total rebounds per game). And he's easily one of the best and most consistent mid-range shooters on the team. 

I respectfully disagree with your comparison of Zach to Dixon, for their positions.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

ESPN says Marbury might be available, but wouldn't he put us over the tattoo cap?


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

Double post.


----------



## BIG Q (Jul 8, 2005)

STOMP said:


> You're sure about what they know?  Well, he pretty clearly showed more then Ha did this last offseason, reportedly outplaying him in practice and in games, which was why I was sort of surprised to see him sign a new 4 year deal back in Europe. But then again, if he was here with Joel and Theo this year, he'd be seated next to Ha with his cheap rookie deal on the clock. It makes sense for him to be over there developing with regular PT and delaying the start of that cheap contract. I emailed Nash after NS signed the new deal and asked if it contained an out for the Blazers to exercise... he said indeed it did.
> 
> If Theo is dealt and/or Joel leaves via free agency, there may be a lot of minutes available. I guess we'll see...
> 
> STOMP


I was at the Vegas summer league and Ned looked horrible. He was not even close to Ha. Ned could not even win a jump ball against a 6'8 center. He is years away, trust me. Ha is two years out, if he ever makes it, Ned is the full 4years out. Not even close.


----------



## PhilK (Jul 7, 2005)

Talkhard said:


> ESPN says Marbury might be available, but wouldn't he put us over the tattoo cap?


Not only that.. He'll probably put us over the Relatives cap..


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

But then we could brag about having the "Coney Island duo" in the back court... :biggrin:


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

"The Blazers aren't anxious about dealing Ratliff now that they've won 7-of-11 games"

http://hoopshype.com/rumors.htm


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

that means they will have to sweeten the pot


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

after this loss we could use a trade ugly


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Utherhimo said:


> after this loss we could use a trade ugly


We needed a trade before this loss. We still need a trade. One bad loss (or even 10 bad losses) doesn't change anything.


----------



## SolidGuy3 (Apr 23, 2005)

Thomas would be willing to take on Patterson. Ruben Patterson would thrive in the city of New York. If Thomas was willing to get Eddy Curry and Dog Woods, then he will take Patterson, Nash just needs to pull the trigger.


----------

