# Portland and New Jersey talking trade....caution...it sucks!!!



## mixum (Mar 19, 2003)

SAR for Kittles and Aaron Williams? maybe also Patterson for Rodgers and Lucious Harris....yah and maybe we can give them Zach too? TERRIBLE DEAL....these are the deals that made NAsh fail everywhere the man has been.....if we do this deal I would seriously consider boycotting the season!

http://www.oregonlive.com/weblogs/blazersblog/


----------



## KIDBLAZE (Jul 8, 2003)

what the ****!!!!!   :curse: :curse: :curse: :curse: :banghead: :soapbox: :soapbox: :soapbox:


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Kittles sucks..hell no, he could get WAY more for Rahim.


----------



## mixum (Mar 19, 2003)

ESPN is reporting its close......WTF


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

Where on ESPN does it say that the deal's close?


----------



## mixum (Mar 19, 2003)

*Espn news had it on*

well i guess we will be a lotto team again next season!!!


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

Come on, this trade isn't *that* bad. 

Kerry Kittles averages 44% on field goals over his career (pretty good for a jump-shooter playing without a teammate commanding a double-team), he gets almost 38% from behind the arc, and manages better than 1.5 steals per game (some of those in recent years are surely thanks to Jason Kidd's quick hands, but Kittles' numbers before Kidd came along are basically the same). He doesn't score a ton, though mid-teens is about all we need from an SG, assuming we're going to get about the same out of Stoudamire, we'll get 20 from Zach, mid-teens from Miles, and some mop-up duty from the likes of Patterson, Derek Anderson (off the bench), etc. The most important thing is to have a consistent outside shot - and Kittles is certainly more consistent than DA (compare - 41% and 33% from 3-point). 

Sure the former Villanova standout is slight, so he's not that good a defender against strong opponents, but with Theo guarding the middle, he'd get some help. Kittles' long arms make up for some of his weakness, in my book. 

I have to admit, I've been a bit of a Kerry Kittles fan since his college days, even so, I think he's an underrated SG. 

This isn't an ideal trade, and I'd rather get Jason Collins than Aaron Williams, but if the Blazers can't get Ray Allen or Paul Pierce, Kittles is an upgrade at SG over Derek Anderson, and that's a step in the right direction. (Among SG's we could reasonably acquire, I'd put Kittles as within the top 8-10 that I'd be willing to consider for SAR, personally - behind T-Mac, Allen, Pierce, Finley...). 

I give this trade a C+. If we could get a draft pick or one of the Nets' better young players, it might make it to B-.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

Good post, Public Defender.

Some other points to consider.

1) Kittles is one of the quickest open-court players in the league. 

2) He plays great on-ball defense and a lot of his steals come that way.

3) Nash was the Nets GM who drafted Kittles.

I think this trade is better than a no-trade for Portland. It is an exaggeration to say you'd be a lottery team because of this trade.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

I just don't see Kittles as being that much of an improvement over DA. They play similar games and the averages aren't all that different. I think many would be disapointed with his production as a Blazer, just my gut feeling.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

If we do this trade, it is obvious that we are still trying to get alot of cap room next year, as both Kittles and Williams have expiring contracts. 

I really dont like it. Maby it would numb the pain if they included Zoran and the 22nd pick. Even then I dont really like it. 



I would mutch rather trade SAR for the 3rd or 5th pick in this years draft.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

Two thoughts:

1. That kinda puts all that Ray Allen talk into perspective, huh?
2. Maybe Nash is trying to drive his fave player K-Mart out of New Jersey

Actually, 3:

3. The code words "while nothing is imminent" actually translate as "we made this **** up"


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

This appears to be another case of the NY media saying, "There's an available player... how will the Knicks/Nets get him?"

That Portland would trade SAR for a guy who's not even expected to be protected in the expansion draft is silly to me. Portland would be much better served keeping SAR, because the backup 4 is a more important spot than the backup 2. Aaron Williams isn't really a factor, IMO, because while he could play the backup 4/5 I don't think he'd be a factor at age 32 and 6'9".

Looking at Kittles: he's just not an improvement over DA. We've already got DA, so I don't think we need to add another player of his caliber... especially if it costs us SAR.

Ed O.


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SheedSoNasty</b>!
> I just don't see Kittles as being that much of an improvement over DA.


A few years ago, I might've agreed with you, but over the two seasons Anderson has spent with the Blazers, he's gone through long stretches of poor shooting and mediocre play overall. Kittles, on the other hand, has continued to be a solid, even clutch, shooter for the Nets, and part of the reason the Nets are one of the best defensive teams in the East (and the NBA, overall). 

Kittles is not a "leaps and bounds" better player than DA (like Pierce and Allen), but he is better. Should the Blazers make this deal, I'm hoping there's another deal to get rid of DA, possibly Dale Davis (though I like DD) and get some decent bench players - 

- a young backup SG (is there a young Bonzi Wells I recall hearing about in the draft?) 

- a reliable backup PG who might be getting up in years and would prefer fewer minutes (someone in the mold of a somewhat younger Robert Pack or Rod Strickland)

- and a defensive-minded power forward to D up when Z-Bo's getting worked (along the lines of Scot Pollard or Corliss Williamson, perhaps) 

I'm not saying we're going to get all that from trading DA, but I hope those are the priorities in how we use our exceptions, tradeable players, and draft picks.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

You know the only part of this rumor that is true is this

NY Daily News 



> The Nets have their eyes on a Blazers All-Star big man for the second straight offseason.


I am sure that Nash and Thorn or Stefanski have had disscussions, and probably this piece of junk trade was thrown out from the NJ side, but I SERIOUSLY doubt Nash is consdiering it. At least not as proposed. Now if other "factors" were added to the principles in this deal (Kittles & SAR) then it might get closer to the realm of reality. Things like NJ taking Ruben and his 3yr deal back with SAR, NJ adding the #22 or adding Plannic (Whom POR inquired about at the trade deadline BTW) or Kristic. 

Ruben was mentioned, as was POR #13 pick (which I find hard to beleive). But IF they are heavily discussing a deal (and I am not sure they would be before the Chicago Pre Draft Camp), I could see how some of the periphirary (sp?) players could have been left out of mention in this article. Especially if these are ongoing and preliminary discussions (which I am confident they would be...if they are even ongong).

I could see POR asking NJ to take Ruben with SAR, and asking for their pick and either Plannic or Kristic, and maybe NJ countering with POR throwing back their #13, or something like that.

The bottom line is IMO, POR can do better. Kittles is ok, is he better than DA? That is debatable IMO, Rogers or Williams offer very little to the deal, and SAR for Kittles is in NO WAY a fair exchange. So NJ throwing back the #22 makes a little sense and a young prospect perhaps, with POR (I would hope) asking for Kristic and NJ more willing to part with Plannic, or if it was Kristic (and I am not sure they would part with him anyway) they would ask for the #13. Then there is the whole Ruben aspect, NJ takes Ruben POR gets less back, ah who the hell knows :grinning: 

Kittles, Rogers, Plannic and #22
for 
SAR

OR

Kittles, Rogers, Kristic and #22
for
SAR and #13

I don't know how bad POR wants to rid themselves of Ruben, but I would think that deal would look like

SAR & Ruben
for
Kittles, Rogers, Harris & Williams

But IMO this makes little sense for POR, unless they really do intend to be a player in 05 FA.


----------



## Leroy131 (Mar 11, 2004)

Kittles' value is probably closer to Dale Davis than Shareef Abdur-Rahim. Not to say that Kittles isn't a productive player and a solid defender, but I think Kidd makes everyone on that Nets team better. He's not head and shoulders better than DA. If that was our best trade option for Shareef, I think I'd punt, keep Shareef for next season, and put the full court press on bringing in Steven Jackson or Marquis Daniels to go along with one of the Snyder/Jackson/Telfair/Monya crowd (or if we can trade up, Livingston/Harris or to a lesser extent Gordon) as the focal point of our offseason backcourt reconstruction...


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Kittles stats 

Kittles has a better 3FG% than both DA and Paul Pierce, yet is still a bit shy of Ray Allen and Michael Redd

Kittles has played in a lot of games in his 7 year career. 3 years he was in 82 games nad one year in 77. He also played in 65, 62 and 46 games the other three. Teh year of 46 games was in the shortened season.

With all that said, his $9.8 mil expiring contract is fairly high


Career stats
*Derek Anderson*
Age: 30 on July 18
Height: 6'-5" tall
2FG%: 41.3
3FG%: 33.8
FT%: 84.7
Steals: 1.27
Rebounds: 3.5
Assists: 3.7
PPG: 13.5

*Kerry Kittles*
Age: 30 on June 12
Height: 6'-5" tall
2FG%: 43.9
3FG%: 37.8
FT%: 78.1
Steals: 1.62
Rebounds: 3.9
Assists: 2.6
PPG: 14.3

Hopefully something else will pop up. Obtaining Kittles for a diferent trade combination would be preferred. A trade of Dale + filler (Woods?) + #23 for Kittles would be much better, but its not going to happen. :nonono:

A roster of:
PG Stoudamire, FA Barry, 2004 draft pick
SG Kittles, DA, Woods
SF Miles, Patterson
PF Randolph, Davis, Outlaw
C Ratliff, (Davis), 2004 draft pick

With Dickau taken in the exp draft
Stepanio opting out to go to Miami
Gil and Cook let go

Adding Kittles is a good thing


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
> Kittles has played in a lot of games in his 7 year career. 3 years he was in 82 games nad one year in 77. He also played in 65, 62 and 46 games the other three. Teh year of 46 games was in the shortened season.


He also missed an entire year (2000-01) with a knee injury, remember. He seems to be over it, but I wonder as he ages if it'll ever be an issue.

My biggest issue with him is that he almost never gets to the free throw line. Damon is already dragging us down by never penetrating and getting to the line, and a back court of Kittles and Damon would mean we'd get fewer freebies per game.

Kittles is definitely a good shooter, but I don't think that he's a clear enough upgrade over DA that it's worth getting him.

Ed O.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Portland should do this deal, Kittles is a very good perimeter defender, a great shooter that Portland lacks, and is very good in the transition game. He's definitely an upgrade over Derek Anderson, and Aaron Williams has a good arsenal of offensive moves, and could be an asset off the bench, don't underrate him. For a backup PF, who can't play another position effectively, with Randolph in place at PF, this is a good move for Portland, even if Abdur-Rahim is better than Kittles. SAR doesn't have all that much value, probably a little more than in this deal, but it's still a good deal for Portland. SAR is a proven loser, not many teams are crazy about getting him. Pull the trigger Portland. As for New Jersey, why do they do this, making room for Snyder/JR Smith/Luke Jackson and waving good bye to K-Mart?


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> Kittles is definitely a good shooter, but I don't think that he's a clear enough upgrade over DA that it's worth getting him.
> 
> Ed O.


You've hit on the crux of this trade, Ed. How much better than DA is Kittles? I think he's enough better that it's worth shaking up the roster to make room - assuming the other moves leave no gaping holes on the bench. 

Considering the fact that the Blazers lost several games late in the season due to the difficulty of the backcourt to make shots, I think acquiring someone that's at least as good a shooter as Kittles is an imperative. Would I rather get Ray Allen or Paul Pierce? Certainly. But I'm not sure that Abdur-Rahim is enough to make that happen - and the players we're willing to deal (anyone except Miles, Randolph and Ratliff) aren't going to close the gap. 

I don't know if this is the exact deal I want, but it's a place to start.


----------



## BlayZa (Dec 31, 2002)

Gareth "you ever had a go at speedway?"
Simon "have you?"
Gareth"yup"
Simon "alright , i was doing it once... and um i was bombing it round and some idiot had left like a ramp thing out....
Tim "litterbugs"
Simon "...and i could see the people were going 'Oh my god if that guy hits that ramp going at that speed he's definately dead!' - I hit the ramp , I took off in the air , I turned over in the air and they were going 'Well he's definately dead now!' I landed on my wheels , pulled over and said 'What were you worried about?'

one for Ed O

on the trade , its so so - its an upgrade over DA but im pretty sure something better will come along


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

*Shareef to the Nets?*

Sounds like Shareef Abdur-Rahim is going to be traded to everybody under the sun. First Seattle, the for draft picks, and now to the New Jersey Nets?

_The Nets already have another All Star at the power forward position in Kenyon Martin, but with Martin a restricted free agent this offseason who is expecting to demand big dollars Abdur-Rahim would be insurance in case negotiations break down with Martin and he leaves. *Should Martin stay Abdur Rahim can play the small forward position, having done so in Vancouver before transferring to the Hawks,* allowing rising star Richard Jefferson to slide across to shooting guard. _ 

Now was it me or did Portland not just try this last year. Was it that Miles was that much better at the three than Shareef or was it that Shareef just couldn't guard other threes? Where is the logic in this trade for New Jersey?

_Besides a potential trade, the Nets also will try to use their $5 million and $1.4million exceptions to attract free agents like *Brent Barry,* Anthony Peeler, Damon Jones, Gordan Giricek, DeShawn Stevenson, Travis Best or Kenny Anderson._ 

Now why would they want to go and spoil my summer like that?

New York Daily News


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

do disrespect towards kittles , hes not a upgrade over da Id take da anyday who im not sold on


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

this deal would suck for portland big time


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> do disrespect towards kittles , hes not a upgrade over da Id take da anyday who im not sold on


While Kittles isn't a "stud" sg, he is an upgrade over DA.

career FG% Kittles is higher. Including the last 3 years he'd had (what is now considered) solid #'s.

Even if you take out DA's attrocious #'s this year, it's not like it's that much worse than his normal %.

DA's best year (43.8%) is Kittles *career* average, and considering the last 3 seasons for Kittles have been in the stratosphere in comparison to DA's CAREER, he IS an upgrade.

They're the same age, and Kittles has a better 3 point % too. You throw in Kittles shorter contract, and it's not even close.

If it was a trade for DA and Kittles, I'd do it easily. Since it's not, (and who it's for, and realizing the team already has a player they think is a SG) it's not a good trade. But it's unquestionally an upgrade.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

getting kittles does not help us


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

I would rather have gives like qyntel and travis grow , I wonder why Nash always is linked up with these teams he use to be the Gm for . I remember him saying he didnt want kittles in teh draft he wanted kobe but the owner told him to pick kittles


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> getting kittles does not help us



never said it did, which is why it's not a good trade. But it would be an upgrade at the shooting guard. But it would create another problem on the Blazers. 

Two players who are worthy of starting, and only 48 minutes between the two of them.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

I agree that SAR's value is higher than Kittles'. But the trade would not be "aweful" as Kittles is probably a middle of the pack SG, while Anderson is the dead-worst SG in the league.

But this trade would suck, because Brent Barry would be just as good as Kittles, and we could pick him up with the exception.

Perhaps a good player to nab with SAR would be Wally Szerbiak. Assuming we could work out an agreement before hand where Wally isn't going to be paid the max.


----------



## Hawks4ever (Jun 6, 2002)

Hah you all laughed when all we could get for SAR was Bobby Sura and a 1st round draft pick. NEWSFLASH, SAR has no trade value. WHATSOEVER!:no:


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Hawks4ever</b>!
> Hah you all laughed when all we could get for SAR was Bobby Sura and a 1st round draft pick. NEWSFLASH, SAR has no trade value. WHATSOEVER!:no:


so...are you suggesting that Rasheed is only worth bob sura and a 1st round pick?


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

I would rather trade Shareef to the bulls for the 3rd pick


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> I would rather trade Shareef to the bulls for the 3rd pick


who wouldn't? But because you and I would rather do that, doesn't mean it's even remotely realistic, and possible.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

NJ fans...NY fans...All of these trolls they all make me laugh :laugh: 

These are the same types of things we heard regarding Rasheed Wallace. Remember the NY Knicks rumours for Kieth Van Horn & Kurt Thomas, or was it Kurt Thomas and Shandon Anderson (That was one of my favorites :grinning: ) and how NY fans came in here talking smack saying how we overate our players and this would be the best we could ever hope to get, then there was DAL fans offering Jamison & Najera saying the same thing, or GS fans with Dampier and NVE, the list goes on and on. But the FACT is POR did A LOT BETTER than those idiots said we would, now didn't we?

Theo Ratliff?
SAR?

Not a bad exchange for Sheed and Wes Person IMO.

The same thing is going to happen with SAR, mark my words. POR will get good value for him, and look around the net. See how many teams are interested in him? How often his name comes up in trade speculation? I would say the market for SAR is larger than it was for Rasheed, and that can only be good for POR. Nash will wait, there is no hurry, and will deal SAR when he feels he recieves a fair offer.

I bet things start to heat up at the Chicago Pre-Draft camp, and draft day might be very active as well, or he may wait until the FA period. Who knows?


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> NJ fans...NY fans...All of these trolls they all make me laugh :laugh:
> 
> These are the same types of things we heard regarding Rasheed Wallace. Remember the NY Knicks rumours for Kieth Van Horn & Kurt Thomas, or was it Kurt Thomas and Shandon Anderson (That was one of my favorites :grinning: ) and how NY fans came in here talking smack saying how we overate our players and this would be the best we could ever hope to get, then there was DAL fans offering Jamison & Najera saying the same thing, or GS fans with Dampier and NVE, the list goes on and on. But the FACT is POR did A LOT BETTER than those idiots said we would, now didn't we?
> ...


Agreed again.

It's never one of the first 5 crappy deals you hear about that ends up being the one that goes down. Did we even hear about Sheed for SAR and Theo before it actually happened? I don't think so. Same with Bonzi for Wes + the draft pick.

I'm not putting too much stock in this one as it seems (and is) too bad to be true.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> NJ fans...NY fans...All of these trolls they all make me laugh :laugh:
> 
> These are the same types of things we heard regarding Rasheed Wallace. Remember the NY Knicks rumours for Kieth Van Horn & Kurt Thomas, or was it Kurt Thomas and Shandon Anderson (That was one of my favorites :grinning: ) and how NY fans came in here talking smack saying how we overate our players and this would be the best we could ever hope to get, then there was DAL fans offering Jamison & Najera saying the same thing, or GS fans with Dampier and NVE, the list goes on and on. But the FACT is POR did A LOT BETTER than those idiots said we would, now didn't we?
> ...





when sheed was traded everybody knows sheed is my boy I just couldnt believe how much they got for him


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

I trust Nash as our Gm . It was probably Thorn who called to see what they could get for Reef


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

The only way this trade should go down is if the Nets take crappy DA off our hands and also throw in another decent player or expiring contract.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

*Re: Shareef to the Nets?*



> Originally posted by <b>HOWIE</b>!
> Now was it me or did Portland not just try this last year. Was it that Miles was that much better at the three than Shareef or was it that Shareef just couldn't guard other threes? Where is the logic in this trade for New Jersey?


If this happened, and the Nets keep K-Mart, K-Mart would guard small fowards, while Shareef would guard power fowards. They would then swap offensively, much like how the Nets played K-Mart and KVH.

-Petey


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Yega1979</b>!
> The only way this trade should go down is if the Nets take crappy DA off our hands and also throw in another decent player or expiring contract.


Well if the deal is expanded to:

Shareef, Ruben Patterson for Kittles, Rogers, Harris and Williams; ALL those contracts expire except for Williams, who is under the MLE anyway.

-Petey


----------



## Nightfly (Sep 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> I would rather trade Shareef to the bulls for the 3rd pick


Why would the Bulls do this?


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>HearToTemptYou</b>!
> 
> 
> Why would the Bulls do this?




because the bulls want to win right now


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>HearToTemptYou</b>!
> 
> 
> Why would the Bulls do this?


I bet the Bulls would make that trade because Okeafor is the only top-rated player in this draft.

Petey, I think Portland would rather play Patterson at backup PF than take on guys like Williams and Rogers. Patterson is a great energy player and good inside scorer. And Kittles would be a sub-standard return for a player as talented as SAR.


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

Look you guys need a good defender and he is a decent shooter and him and Ruben on the floor would be crazy. Its about roles and you need a guy on your team who know what that means...SAR obviously doesn't so go with it.

I hope we don't because we would be doing the same thing you guys did last year, but you would be lucky to get Kittles. out.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Yega1979</b>!
> 
> 
> I bet the Bulls would make that trade because Okeafor is the only top-rated player in this draft.
> ...




I want the 3rd pick so we could go after Howard or livingston


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Yega1979</b>!
> 
> 
> I bet the Bulls would make that trade because Okeafor is the only top-rated player in this draft.
> ...


No doubt, I'd love to have Patterson on the Nets just for the reasons you said. But from what I remember they pushed or tried to push him out of town last year right? While as I said all players from those deals are expiring, except for Williams whom has a player option.

-Petey


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

bump..........

with todays insider posting.. this is relevant again


----------

