# Chad Ford: ZBO for Nocioni & #9 (idea)



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

> It's obvious he's going to move Zach Randolph here ... maybe Martell Webster and see if he can get a more experienced small forward back. Dallas and Chicago seem like the best candidates. Portland will want Josh Howard, though I find it hard to believe Dallas would let him go. Chicago might be willing to do Andres Nocioni and P.J. Brown in a sign and trade type of deal. That could make some sense for Portland though in the latter case, I may try to push for Chicago's No. 9 pick as part of the deal.


So Chad Ford is spitballing in his latest chat wrap. Zach and maybe Martell for Nocioni and the #9. Would you guys do that deal? I don't know. 

I think I would just assume hold onto Ime and Outlaw, and trade Zach for a starting point guard. That #9 might be useful though.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Would you do Korver + Miller for Randolph?

I'm not completely sold on trading Zach to open things up unless it's a fair trade. I understand that either way, we'll get better next year, I just want to squeeze some value out of Zach instead of dumping him for spare parts.

I think SF is a more pressing upgrade issue, esp. with Outlaw emerging as a 4 rather than a 3.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

I agree with you Nate. 

I wouldn't do the deal personally....the Philly deal sounds intriguing for me.....I'd hope Webster would be that 3-point shooter here though...


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

I read this, too, and can't make up my mind, either. I am in favor of keeping Zach and bringing LA off the bench for another year unless we can get good value for Zach... and I can't decide if this is it or not.

The deal would have to look something like this:

Zach (and 2nd rounders, maybe)

to Chicago for

Nocioni
PJ Brown
9th pick.

Let's look at each of the pieces we'd be getting back...

Nocioni. I'm not a huge fan. He's going to be 28 this year, so he's no spring chicken and he'll be out of his prime by the time our core matures. On the other hand, he could step right into our starting lineup at our weakest spot and he spreads the floor well (36.4% from 3s in his career). He will probably want a lot of money, but as a starting 3 he might be worth it.

Brown. Cap filler. Would take a pay cut from last year and could still fill a role as a backup 4 on the team. Along with Nocioni, he would help us push for a playoff spot in the next year, but it depends on how long the contract would be... we don't want to pay for him too long, given he's going to be 38 in October.

9th pick. This could turn out pretty sweet. Spitballing my personal top 9:

1. Oden
2. Durant
3. Yi
4. Brandan Wright
5. Mike Conley
6. Al Horford
7. Corey Brewer
8. Julian Wright
9. Jeff Green

I actually like Hawes more than Green, but given we'd draft Oden, and in SPITE of being a believer in BPA, I think diversifying our draft picks a bit would make sense.

Would Green + Nocioni for Zach be enough? I don't know...

Ed O.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

Kevin Garnett
Josh Howard
Gerald Wallace
Korver and Miller
Richard Jefferson
R Lewis
Nocioni and #9

That is probably the order I'd take a randolph trade in. Korver and Miller is an interesting idea I hadn't thought of that before. We'd get a great shooting SF and a solid veteran point.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

In a heartbeat in this draft.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

I absolutley love this deal. Nocoini is exactly what I want in a SF. He doesnt demand the ball. He can hit the 3. He can play in the post. He plays good defense. He is tough as nails. He is a veteran and a leader. Then we have the 9th pick to work with also. I would try and deal #9 and a lotto protected 2008 1st rounder(Or Martell) for Corey Brewer. Coming out of this draft with Oden and Brewer would make the Blazers 2007 draft better than their 2006 draft.


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

I actually like Nocioni a lot, and given how deep this draft is I probably go for it personally. I thought PJ was talking retirement though so it'd likely have to be some other filler which could alter my opinion.


----------



## number1pick (May 24, 2007)

If Oden is drafted and somehow is able to somehow trade back into the lottery they are drafting Conley Jr. Oden, Conley Jr., and Conley Sr, their agent, have been saying that they want the team that drafts Oden to try and draft Conley Jr. also.


----------



## blakeback (Jun 29, 2006)

make it Deng, and we'll talk.


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

ThatBlazerGuy said:


> I absolutley love this deal. Nocoini is exactly what I want in a SF. He doesnt demand the ball. He can hit the 3. He can play in the post. He plays good defense. He is tough as nails. He is a veteran and a leader. Then we have the 9th pick to work with also. I would try and deal #9 and a lotto protected 2008 1st rounder(Or Martell) for Corey Brewer. Coming out of this draft with Oden and Brewer would make the Blazers 2007 draft better than their 2006 draft.



I agree. I like Nocoini too. I have to admit, this trade look good both ways (most don't) The Bulls are pretty darn close to being a Finals team - they need interior scoring. Can you imagine what Zach would do against the East everynight? A Front Line of Wallace/ZBo/Deng would be dynaminte. Now, do the Bulls give us that pick? Or do they think taking on ZBo's $$$ is enough?


----------



## #10 (Jul 23, 2004)

I think it all depends on the terms of Nocioni's contract. As Ed mentioned, he is fairly old, so if it's for more than 4 years, I'd have to hesitate. Add some 2nd rounders from Portland going to Chicago and Sefolosha to Portland and I'd do it.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Ed O said:


> I read this, too, and can't make up my mind, either. I am in favor of keeping Zach and bringing LA off the bench for another year unless we can get good value for Zach... and I can't decide if this is it or not.


Agreed. 

Generally I think Roy and Aldridge and Oden and Co. could make up for Zach's scoring.
Then I think again. Would they really? Roy would turn into less of a playmaker/passer and more of a scorer, and I'm not certain Aldridge is ready to match up against the 4's of the western conference. Sure we saw a lot from him after the all-star break, but I'd like to be *sure*, and there's nothing wrong with taking the long path with talented bigs like LMA. 

Plus, keeping Zach would really give our second unit some punch.

Sergio (Jack)
Jones (Roy)
Webster (Udoka)
Outlaw (Randolph)
Aldridge (Oden)

That's a second unit that could really get up and down.



> I actually like Hawes more than Green, but given we'd draft Oden, and in SPITE of being a believer in BPA, I think diversifying our draft picks a bit would make sense.
> 
> Would Green + Nocioni for Zach be enough? I don't know...


A couple points in favor of a Hawes pick at #9:

- Can you imagine the potential battles in practice between Hawes, Aldridge and Oden? They'd all benefit from that competition. 

- LaFrentz expires in 2 years and Hawes would plug that hole on a rookie scale contract (cheap compared to the price of FA bigs). If he was productive as a rotation player, he'd allow us to spend that money normally reserved for your big on someone at another position.

- Hawes would offer something different from Oden and Aldridge. He's comfortable with the ball in his hands, can shoot well out to 20, and is apparently a terrific passer. 

- If you think about the pick as an investment that doesn't really need to bear fruit immediately but could grow value in a trade down the road, Hawes might be a good match. He might not play much with the guys in front of him, but in 3-4 years if Portland decides to go in a different direction, many teams would love to net a guy like him in a trade. On the other hand if a guy like Jeff Green never broke into the rotation after a few years, his value would have decreased a lot more than Hawes'.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

A case against this deal:

KP mentioned that he would have been looking to trade the pick had they landed at #6 yesterday. I'm not sure he's targeting more picks at this point, especially in return for Randolph (a valuable piece).


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

Isn't Noc an RFA? If so, any sign-and-trade involving him couldn't occur until July 12 (or whenever the FA signing moratorium is lifted this year). If that's so, this can't happen before the draft - which is OK by me. Because if it really is Noc + 9 + filler, I'd want to wait and see who's still on the board at 9. If Brewer is, I'd do it in a heartbeat. Noc as our SF for the short term and eventually 6th/7th man when Brewer is ready to be our starting SF long term. So, say two years of Noc as starter, backed-up by Brewer and then they switch roles for the next two - three years. That makes us better at the 3 not only this year and next, but pretty much covers the starting SF position for the next decade plus - and gives us a solid starter/back-up combo at the 3 for the next four - five years.

BNM


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

Boob-No-More said:


> Isn't Noc an RFA? If so, any sign-and-trade involving him couldn't occur until July 12 (or whenever the FA signing moratorium is lifted this year). If that's so, this can't happen before the draft - which is OK by me. Because if it really is Noc + 9 + filler, I'd want to wait and see who's still on the board at 9. If Brewer is, I'd do it in a heartbeat. Noc as our SF for the short term and eventually 6th/7th man when Brewer is ready to be our starting SF long term. So, say two years of Noc as starter, backed-up by Brewer and then they switch roles for the next two - three years. That makes us better at the 3 not only this year and next, but pretty much covers the starting SF position for the next decade plus - and gives us a solid starter/back-up combo at the 3 for the next four - five years.
> 
> BNM


I don't see any chance that Brewer falls to the #9 spot. I don't think he will slide past the #5 spot. Unless Yi and Conley become sure fire top 5 picks, I don't see Brewer being available for us unless we deal with Boston or Milwaukee.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Why should we make the Bulls better than they already are in exchange for spare parts? I don't do this deal, I might look at it if I knew Brewer was available with the 9th but he likely won't be and I don't feel like making our east counterpart a better team.


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

Were I the GM I would do it only if Yi or Brewer are available at #9.


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

If we can trade Zach and end up with a good role player and draft Brewer, I would deal Zach. The only teams I believe we could deal with and get Brewer is Atlanta for #3 and Boston #5. If we want to deal with Chicago, then we would be targeting J Wright, Conley or maybe Jeff Green, but unless Brewer totally sucks in workouts and interviews, he will not be there at #9.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Samuel said:


> Would you do Korver + Miller for Randolph?
> 
> I'm not completely sold on trading Zach to open things up unless it's a fair trade. I understand that either way, we'll get better next year, I just want to squeeze some value out of Zach instead of dumping him for spare parts.
> 
> I think SF is a more pressing upgrade issue, esp. with Outlaw emerging as a 4 rather than a 3.


Nocioni is better than spare parts. And the #9 pick in this years draft could be a very high quality player. 

That said, I'm not sure I want us getting too much younger. How many picks do we need? 

And somebody called him 'fairly old' jesus...he's 27 people. We don't need to be the youngest team in the history of the NBA. A few 'old guys' actually might do us some good. 

Still, I'd rather hold out for a better SF if possible.


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

Honestly, I'm tired of adding younger players as well. I'm totally ok with our core if it's Oden, Roy, Aldridge, and Sergio, with other guys like Webster and Outlaw who could still turn into quality starters for us. 

I know that a lot of people are saying we need a small forward, but right now I think a veteran point guard could do wonders for this team, especially if we're going to have two stars in the post. I mentioned Mike Bibby before, I think he would fit in nicely. He has a ton of experience with All-Star big men, and he used to be very effective running the pick and roll. What would it take to get him though?


----------



## BuckW4GM (Nov 2, 2005)

if we can't get lewis or jefferson for zach, i'd be in favor of this trade if brewer is still available at #9. as it is, it's a maybe for me. i like young a lot, so getting the #9 would pretty much ensure us being able to draft young. i would trade down to draft young though.


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

NateBishop3 said:


> Honestly, I'm tired of adding younger players as well. I'm totally ok with our core if it's Oden, Roy, Aldridge, and Sergio, with other guys like Webster and Outlaw who could still turn into quality starters for us.
> 
> I know that a lot of people are saying we need a small forward, but right now I think a veteran point guard could do wonders for this team, especially if we're going to have two stars in the post. I mentioned Mike Bibby before, I think he would fit in nicely. He has a ton of experience with All-Star big men, and he used to be very effective running the pick and roll. What would it take to get him though?


I have a question with your post. Why do you and so many people say our young core of Roy, aldridge and Sergio is our future. Why does everyone leave off Jack? Honestly, it's like he is terrible. I'm not critical of your post, but Jack isn't great, but he isn't bad either and still young. Sergio really only passes well, but he is more flashy and gets way more pub.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

NateBishop3 said:


> I mentioned Mike Bibby before, I think he would fit in nicely. He has a ton of experience with All-Star big men, and he used to be very effective running the pick and roll. What would it take to get him though?


Maybe a few years ago, but I think Mike Bibby is expensive and a shadow of his former self. Maybe you could make the case that he needs to play in a different system and whatnot, but just look at the numbers for PGs:

Adjusted field goal percentage:

Jarrett Jack, 50%, #6
Mike Bibby, 48%, #14

Field Goal Percentage:

Jack, 45%, #6
Bibby, 40.4%, #20

Points per shot:

Jack 1.34, #5
Bibby 1.20, #12

Assists:
Jack 5.3, #23
Bibby 4.7 #31

I like the notion of grabbing a veteran PG, but I'd rather get one on the cheap and put him in Dickau's spot so that if Sergio or Jack screw up, we know we have someone who can close out and keep things moving effectively.

I wish we could grab Greg Anthony again. Someone inexpensive who won't make a fuss about lesser minutes, distribute, and knock down the outside jumper occasionally.


----------



## BuckW4GM (Nov 2, 2005)

Peaceman said:


> Why do you and so many people say our young core of Roy, aldridge and Sergio is our future. Why does everyone leave off Jack?


i view it like this based on potential and current play:

superstar (mvp type) = Oden

star = aldridge, roy

potential to be star or will be average/above average = sergio
average starter = jack

bench (6th, 7th, 8th man) = outlaw
bench (6th, 7th, 8th man) = webster


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Nocioni and the #9 pick = 2 guys who will never start for this team, so Zach's name doesn't even get brought up in this scenario.


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

BuckW4GM said:


> i view it like this based on potential and current play:
> 
> superstar (mvp type) = Oden
> 
> ...


You don't think that Jack even has the potential to be above average anymore after only two seasons of running the point (and only one full season)? Wow...


----------



## BuckW4GM (Nov 2, 2005)

yakbladder said:


> You don't think that Jack even has the potential to be above average anymore after only two seasons of running the point (and only one full season)? Wow...


actually i do. i take that back.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

Ed O said:


> I read this, too, and can't make up my mind, either. I am in favor of keeping Zach and bringing LA off the bench for another year unless we can get good value for Zach... and I can't decide if this is it or not.
> 
> The deal would have to look something like this:
> 
> ...


My feeling is "no".

You are getting 2 guys who won't be part of our future, so it really comes down to Zach for the #9 pick. I must confess that I am not a big fan of Hawes, Green, or Noah - who are likely to be the BPAs at that spot.

I would rather swing a deal that included a decent young player, and a lower pick. Then chase a talented but lesser "name" guy. (EG Fernandez, Splitter, Law)


----------



## PetroToZoran (Jul 2, 2003)

NateBishop3 said:


> I know that a lot of people are saying we need a small forward, but right now I think a veteran point guard could do wonders for this team, especially if we're going to have two stars in the post. I mentioned Mike Bibby before, I think he would fit in nicely. He has a ton of experience with All-Star big men, and he used to be very effective running the pick and roll. What would it take to get him though?


I don't know if this would work, but this may get Bibby and Nocioni.

Portland:
Out- 23.6mil
Zach Randolph (to Chicago)
Jarett Jack (to Sacramento)
Martell Webster (to Chicago)
Fred Jones (to Sacramento)
Dan Dickau (to Sacramento)
Any combination of the 4 2nd round picks (Sacramento)
2008 or 2009 1st round pick (to Sacramento)
In- 22.6mil (if Noc gets signed at 7.5mil)
Adrian Griffin (from Chicago)
Mike Bibby (from Sacramento)
Andres Nocioni (from Chicago)

Reasons why Portland does this trade. They get a solid SF in Nocioni that is a good defender and a solid 3pt shooter. They also get a good and experienced PG in Bibby with a nice shooting touch. They give up lots of picks (futures, and 2nd rounders) but this team is stacked as is.

Chicago 
Out- 11mil
Andres Nocioni (to Portland)
Adrian Griffin (to Portland)
Viktor Khryapa (to Sacramento)
#9 Pick 2007 draft (to Sacramento)
In- 16.3 mil
Zach Randolph (from Portland)
Martell Webster (from Portland)

Reasons why Chicago does this trade. They get a skilled post player in ZBo and I don't know anything about Webster but this is just the original trade that started this thread so no need to change it up. I'm counting on Chicago being under the cap to make this trade happen. I don't really understand how it can though if S&T is only after July 12. If salary is an issue, throw in spare parts out of Chicago like Griffin or something.

Sacramento
Out- 13.5mil
Bibby (to Portland)
In- 9.2mil
Jarett Jack (from Portland)
Dan Dickau (from Portland)
Fred Jones (from Portland)
Viktor Khryapa (from Chicago)
#9 Pick 2007 Draft (from Chicago)
2008/2009 First round pick of Portland's (from Portland)
Some of Portland's 2007 2nd round picks (from Portland)

Reasons why Sacramento does this trade. They get a lot of picks, can start rebuilding, get a possible PG of the future. Dickau, Jones, and Khryapa are expiring contracts. It's a stretch, but maybe.



The numbers are based on the salaries from Hoopshype for 2007/2008 season. Oh I get confused about when players contracts change from 2006/2007 season to 2007/2008. Well, I think either way, something like this can be mad for each season.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

For those of you who think we have too much youth already, time for a reality check.

First, we have just been given a tremendous gift - but that gift is 19 friggin' years old! Bringing in veteran journeyman and spare parts won't turn the team into a contender any faster. Try to be a little patient.

Second, unless you are on the cusp of a title, talent trumps experience. A talented player can gain experience - the reverse isn't very likely! We have some vets who are pretty much useless (Raef, Dickau) and some young players who are useful, but replaceable. (JJ, Jones, Travis, Webster) Every personel move the team makes should be based on what's best for the team in 3 years......not 1 year.


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

Peaceman said:


> I have a question with your post. Why do you and so many people say our young core of Roy, aldridge and Sergio is our future. Why does everyone leave off Jack? Honestly, it's like he is terrible. I'm not critical of your post, but Jack isn't great, but he isn't bad either and still young. Sergio really only passes well, but he is more flashy and gets way more pub.


Because Jarrett Jack isn't a point guard. He's a scoring guard, without any confidence. He has size, but he doesn't use it. He hasn't displayed any form of court vision. He is not a floor general. Brandon Roy is a better point guard than Jack, and Roy isn't a point guard. 

People mention Sergio when they're talking about our "core" because he has shown real flashes of promise. When given playing time, Sergio has produced very impressive numbers. Jack has been the starter for a full season now, but he showed very little. He had a handful of very nice games last year, but the vast majority of his outings were unimpressive. 

He's not a very good defender. He's not a very good rebounder. He's not a very good distributor. So, in short, no he's not part of our future. I think he will be replaced, either by Sergio or by someone else. He just doesn't have "it".


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

I'd hope for something more for Zach. Maybe more is the wrong word. Cause what I'd hope to get for Zach is the pipe dream small forward to complete the puzzle. Lewis, Jefferson, etc. But if Draft day rolls around and we don't have anything else on the burner I'd do Ed O's deal.

I want Zach to be traded. I want next year's starting lineup to be Oden, Aldridge, ?, Roy and Jack. I'd be happy to have Nocioni fill in the small forward spot. Brown would be a good backup for 3 years. 

I don't know who we'd pick at 9. But in this draft there would be somebody useful. Conley used to be lower than the 10th spot but seems to have shot up the mock drafts for no reason. Maybe he'd be available. We were supposedly willing to take Noah with the top pick in last year's draft. He wouldn't be a bad guy to take at 9. Julian Wright has as much super-star potential as anybody else that's not Oden or Durant.

Let's say we get Julian Wright.

c- Oden, Przybilla
pf- Aldridge, Outlaw, LaFrentz
sf- Nocioni, Julian Wright
sg- Roy, Webster(if he's not part of the deal), Freddie Jones
pg- Jack, Sergio

Not bad.


----------



## WhoDaBest23 (Apr 16, 2003)

Nocioni is the type of SF a lot of teams would love to have. He is a tough veteran that knows how to play, can come in and start, plus will leave everything out on the court. I'd do Zach for say Noc, PJ & #9 if I was Portland. I don't know if the Bulls would though because Zach doesn't seem like a guy that Skiles would be too fond of. Anyways, #9 could net Portland a guy like Wright, Green, Brewer, or possibly even Oden's own person PG, Conley. It's a very intriguing idea to say the least, but I have a feeling Portland's going to possibly try out Zach and Oden together for a year.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

If you inflate Nocioni's stats to starters minutes (36 per game) he average 18ppg and 7 rebounds...he'd be a big upgrade at SF and has a good all-around game. He may actually be a better fit for us than Lewis or Jefferson.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> KP mentioned that he would have been looking to trade the pick had they landed at #6 yesterday. I'm not sure he's targeting more picks at this point, especially in return for Randolph (a valuable piece).


He also mentioned that he wasn't going to sit still after the 1st pick and be happy to watch the draft play out...and that he still prefers to be aggresive.


----------



## Bwatcher (Dec 31, 2002)

My guess is that KP thinks that players currently rated in the 6-10 range aren't really that much better than players 11-? I believe he thought that he could use the #6 in a trade for a veteran or in a trade with another team that would get multiple picks in the first round this year and/or next year. My gut feeling is that players this year 6-2x? are pretty similar in impact for the Blazers.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

ebott said:


> c- Oden, Przybilla,,*?*
> pf- Aldridge, Outlaw, LaFrentz
> sf- Nocioni, Julian Wright *or Corey Brewer or Jeff Greene, Miles?*
> sg- Roy, Webster(if he's not part of the deal), Freddie Jones
> ...



I have liked Nocioni'a numbers for quite a while.. good shooter, hear he is aggressive and tough, and good age and a vet

I am not in favor of getting rid of JJ unless its a HUGE upgrade at SF

Even with Dickau at 3rd string PG... This is a nice lineup to take into the season

I would take Brewer over Julian... and maybe take a very hard look at Jeff Greene too.. but any of those 3 would be sweet for a SF prospect in the future

You let Martell roam around the outside on the 2nd unit and let him fire away too...

Nice team to start the season off with....


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

Peaceman said:


> I don't see any chance that Brewer falls to the #9 spot. I don't think he will slide past the #5 spot. Unless Yi and Conley become sure fire top 5 picks, I don't see Brewer being available for us unless we deal with Boston or Milwaukee.


Most mock drafts have Brewer going 7 or 8 (one has him as high as 4th another as low as 14th - yeah right). So, it's not impossible that he might fall to 9th - especially if Atlanta reaches for Conley at 3. Last year they reached for Shelden Williams at 5 and passed over Roy, Gay and Foye benefiting every one who picked after them. They are desperate for a PG. So, they might reach again.

Of course, the deal can't be consummated until after the FA signing moratorium. So, you make any deal contingent upon the player you want being available at 9. If the player you want is Brewer and he gets snapped up earlier, no deal. Simple as that.

Or, you just take the ninth pick and combine it with something else (player, future pick, whatever - like we did with Viktor last year to get Aldridge) to move up a couple spots and grab the player (Brewer, in this example) you want.

If Chicago is willing to offer the 9th pick as a sweetener in a Zach for Noc + filler deal, I'd definitely consider it, but make the deal contingent on being able to get the exact player you want (either by him falling to 9, or pre-arranging another deal to move up from 9 to get him).

BNM


----------

