# Hoopshype: Magloire to Memphis?



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Hoopshype says there is talk of Magloire going to Memphis for Stromile Swift and Dante Jones. I don't think that is too bad of a deal.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

I can't stand Stromile Swift, and Dahntay is a decent SG.

Dahntay has a QO after this year (assuming it's not signed yet) and I'd bet he'd not get it here. And Swift could be a so-so backup PF. I think.

Overall, it's an "eh" move.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Yea I know what your saying. I don't know what kind of a guy Swift is, but he might be a little bit better sitting on the bench then Magloire, not whining at least. 

Jones is a pretty good shooter. I think he could be a good value.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

Do it. We don't have to witness Magaworthless any longer, and hopefully Joel will get his minutes and the Blazers can actually start winning some games.


Don't know much about Swift other than he's a typical running, jumping, idiot without a jumpshot type player that this generation has turned out in droves. He's more suited to play backup PF than anyone else on our team though, and we could put a mean running unit out there!

Rodriguez
Webster
Outlaw
Swift
Aldridge


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Count me out. I'd rather let Magloire expire than add any more mediocre talent. If we can't get a solid young player or pick, or use Magoire to dump some other big salary, then I would rather let him walk. Swift and Jones don't do it for me.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Yega1979 said:


> Do it. We don't have to witness Magaworthless any longer, and hopefully Joel will get his minutes and the Blazers can actually start winning some games.
> 
> 
> Don't know much about Swift other than he's a typical running, jumping, idiot without a jumpshot type player that this generation has turned out in droves. He's more suited to play backup PF than anyone else on our team though, and we could put a mean running unit out there!
> ...


Did you forget the Rookie of the Year?


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Reep said:


> Count me out. I'd rather let Magloire expire than add any more mediocre talent. If we can't get a solid young player or pick, or use Magoire to dump some other big salary, then I would rather let him walk. Swift and Jones don't do it for me.


Swift and Jones are fine IMO, a big question though is if this would be a deal designed to facilitate another deal. Swift is an improvement over Mags, and Jones is probably an improvement over Dixon.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

if we dont get a draft pick or package him with dixon, jsut let him walk and cut our losses.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

I'm really intrigued by this deal. Swift can do well given consistent playing time. Besides, I'd rather have a guy who can catch the ball and dunk, rather than one can't. Dahntay can be the solution to our backup 2-guard spot if Dixon leaves. The guy was solid in Duke.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

doule post ...again sorry.


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

Reep said:


> Count me out. I'd rather let Magloire expire than add any more mediocre talent. If we can't get a solid young player or pick, or use Magoire to dump some other big salary, then I would rather let him walk. Swift and Jones don't do it for me.


I agree. There is no way this trade happens. What would they do with Stromile? Let him clog up LA would-be minutes? Burry him on the bench? (He's whine like he always does) B/U Joel at Center? He's 230 lbs!! He's only averaged more than 6 boards once in his career. And I don't know why you would want D. Jones either. This is a stinker of a deal. I don't care if Mags is a bum, let him walk before you do something like this.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

MAS RipCity said:


> if we dont get a draft pick or package him with dixon, jsut let him walk and cut our losses.


Jones is better than any Draft pick we could get for Mags. If you tink we'd get better than a 2nd rounder for Mags ask yourself if you would trade a 1st rounder for him.


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

Schilly said:


> Jones is better than any Draft pick we could get for Mags. If you tink we'd get better than a 2nd rounder for Mags ask yourself if you would trade a 1st rounder for him.


Then let Mags (and his salary) walk. What do you think Dahntay Jones could do for this team? Don't we have enough SG/SF's? Jones is so vanilla - I'd rather keep Ime.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Schilly said:


> Jones is better than any Draft pick we could get for Mags. If you tink we'd get better than a 2nd rounder for Mags ask yourself if you would trade a 1st rounder for him.


Well in the ai 3 team deal, I believe we were offered joe smith who is expiring and a late 1st..shoulda taken that.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

dont know depends on what else they are planning to do zbo for PP?


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

No way would I do this deal. What we need to do is package Magloire with another player or two for a promising young player or a first round pick. Anything else is just treading water.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

I would rather find a way to get Mike Miller.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Jones best attribute is that he's a lock down defender. But I can't stand Swift. I think we could net more for Magloire.


----------



## c_note (Jan 30, 2007)

Schilly said:


> Did you forget the Rookie of the Year?


pretty sure hes talking about the 2nd unit...


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

oh plus if we heard it in a newspaper the deal must have already been turned down.


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> Jones best attribute is that he's a lock down defender. But I can't stand Swift. I think we could net more for Magloire.


I'm with you on Swift. And Jones is a good defender, but so is Ime . . . and Ime can shoot. I don't see Jones or Swift giving us something we need. A friend of mine (who has coached high school basketball and whose opinion I respect) was at the Denver/Portland game - the home game that wasn't televised. He said Ime played one of the best defensive games he'd seen in a long time. I asked him how good it could have been with Melo getting 33. He said that many of those weren't against Udoka. I watched the next game (at Denver), and was impressed by that as well. Melo was the benefit of some very questionable calls that night that put Ime in foul trouble, in particular a couple of should-have-been charges on Anthony. I'm convinced that Ime is a very good defender, plus I like his shooting range, FT shooting, and the "intangibles" he brings. So I ask again, why do we need Dahntay Jones?


----------



## M3M (Jun 19, 2006)

personally i would do it in a heartbeat.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

I'd definitely do this deal. Jones is a good defender, and IIRC is a decent shooter. Swift is a decent big man making decent money at the MLE.

Aldridge/Joel/Swift/Zach frontcourt is pretty good.

Joel/Aldridge
Zach/Swift
Udoka/Webster
Roy/Jones
Jack/Sergio

and we trade dixon as well in a deal, nice 10 man roation.


----------



## blzr610 (May 24, 2006)

The only things Memphis has that we would want to trade an expiring contract in a package for are Mike Miller or their pick. Otherwise, tell Jerry West to stop lowballing us. 
How about Magloire and Outlaw for Miller and Tsakalidis? It works under the CBA.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

I don't like it. Jones can't shoot or do anything other then play decent defense. Last year he shot 14% from 3pt line. Swift I don't think is any better then Outlaw at PF and Outlaw is already behind Aldridge who is behind Zach. Swift can't really play much center, or at least play it well. I would reather let Mags walk at the end of the year or more likely sign and trade him. These are two players who just aren't worth it to have on our roster no matter how cheap they are.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

RealGM is reporting it, too:

http://www.commercialappeal.com/mca/grizzlies/article/0,1426,MCA_475_5327872,00.html



> Word circulating in the locker room is that the Grizzlies want to pry away Portland center Jamaal Magloire and his expiring $8.3 million contract for Swift ($5.4) and Dahntay Jones ($1.9). The NBA trade deadline is Feb. 22. ...Memphis entered the game ranked second in the NBA in three-point field goal percentage (38.6 percent). ...Lost in the hubbub surrounding a potential Paul Gasol trade is that he became the franchise's all-time free throw attempts leader last week. Gasol passed former Vancouver Grizzly Shareef Abdur-Rahim. Earlier this season, Gasol passed former Griz Shane Battier for the most games played.


PBF


----------



## c_note (Jan 30, 2007)

blzr610 said:


> The only things Memphis has that we would want to trade an expiring contract in a package for are Mike Miller or their pick. Otherwise, tell Jerry West to stop lowballing us.
> How about Magloire and Outlaw for Miller and Tsakalidis? It works under the CBA.


I don't think this trade makes any sense for the Blazers. Trade a promising young talent in Outlaw who still hasn't reached his potential, and we receive Mike Miller in return? That would give us two players with almost identical styles (Miller and Webster). Plus Miller is a CRAP defensive player compared to Outlaw. The Blazers are pretty high on Outlaw, as is the rest of the NBA. I wouldn't even trade Outlaw for Miller straight-up, and I'm sure the Blazers wouldn't either. He's got the potential to be as good as Darius WITHOUT being a huge headache. In fact, hes an extremely nice guy. Any trade speculation involving Travis is purely that, speculation. Many of you obviously have no idea how valuable Travis is....


----------



## c_note (Jan 30, 2007)

I say just let Magloire walk and ink Outlaw to a nice contract. We don't need any more big men. The only feasible move I can see the Blazers making is Randolph for somone like Gasol somehow. Which won't happen. Let's just stick with this team for another year and see where it takes us. We have sooooo much young talent....


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Reaaly crappy deal for the Blazers IMO.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Scrubs.


----------



## darkhelmit54 (Jan 23, 2005)

why are there so many people sipping the Mike MILLER (WHOOPS) cool-aid on these boards? Does anyone other than half of the Portland fans even really think this guy's good? The jazz sure didn't hesitate to let him go.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

darkhelmit54 said:


> why are there so many people sipping the Mike Magloire cool-aid on these boards? Does anyone other than half of the Portland fans even really think this guy's good? The jazz sure didn't hesitate to let him go.


What? Who's Mike Magloire? And if you mean Mike Miller or Jamaal Magloire, neither played for Utah.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

If Portland isn't getting any primo pieces, I'd trade Magloire for an expiring and a pick. Everything else doesn't offer Portland the flexibility they need with their roster.


----------



## PhilK (Jul 7, 2005)

We should add some 2nd round picks and grab ourselves Mike Miller. 

One way or another they've got Rudy Gay as a project 3.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

darkhelmit54 said:


> why are there so many people sipping the Mike Magloire cool-aid on these boards? Does anyone other than half of the Portland fans even really think this guy's good? The jazz sure didn't hesitate to let him go.


I would be very interested to know what kind of cool-aid _you_ are sipping there, darkhelmit54...

So many things disturbingly wrong with that statement, I'm not sure where to begin.

PBF


----------



## stupendous (Feb 17, 2003)

darkhelmit54 said:


> why are there so many people sipping the Mike Magloire cool-aid on these boards? Does anyone other than half of the Portland fans even really think this guy's good? The jazz sure didn't hesitate to let him go.



:lol: 

Watch as darkhelmit54 loses all validity right in front of your eyes!


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

This deal seems pretty pointless.

If you're not making the team better in a Magloire deal, don't make a Magloire deal... 

That's how I feel anyway.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

How long is stro-shows contract for? He seems like Miles without the tude. He was another projectp layer in that vaunted 01 draft I believe, or maybe he was the year before. Anyways he would be a great player to use in there with Sergio, but we already have Outlaw who gets our spot up 4 minutes...


----------



## PhilK (Jul 7, 2005)

Why does everybody think badly of Stro? Does he have bad attitude? I know he had some injuries- But everybody has had some.. 

He has great hands, Great hops, He can easily be a 10 ppg off the bench, and 15 ppg on a Sergio team. 

Sergio/Martell/T-Law/Stro/LA and we don't lose one 2nd quarter this year.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

PhilK said:


> Why does everybody think badly of Stro? Does he have bad attitude? I know he had some injuries- But everybody has had some..
> 
> He has great hands, Great hops, He can easily be a 10 ppg off the bench, and 15 ppg on a Sergio team.
> 
> Sergio/Martell/T-Law/Stro/LA and we don't lose one 2nd quarter this year.


In a vacuum, I agree. But where is he going to get those minutes? Stro is an undersized PF. He would be behind Zach and Aldridge. You could argue that if you start Zach and Aldridge, give Joel some limited minutes, then there is some backup PF available. But, it would be very limited and I'm pretty sure Stro doesn't work well in that environment. 

We do not need more middle tier players. Just let Magloire walk unless you can get someone (or a pick) with potential.


----------



## darkhelmit54 (Jan 23, 2005)

stupendous said:


> :lol:
> 
> Watch as darkhelmit54 loses all validity right in front of your eyes!


Stupendous, you lost all validity when you uploaded that picture of yourself for your avitar. One spelling mistype does not equate to a lifetime of ugliness.


----------



## darkhelmit54 (Jan 23, 2005)

Stro isn't an undersized PF, he's an undersized C who's more than capable of playing PF due to his long arms and quickness. Think of a less awkward, and less effort version of Outlaw.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

darkhelmit54 said:


> Stupendous, you lost all validity when you uploaded that picture of yourself for your avitar. One spelling mistype does not equate to a lifetime of ugliness.


He still never played for the Jazz.


----------



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

darkhelmit54 said:


> Stro isn't an undersized PF, he's an undersized C who's more than capable of playing PF due to his long arms and quickness. Think of a less awkward, and less effort version of Outlaw.


No, actually think of him as a less athletic, 5 year older, more injury prone version of Outlaw with a worse contract situation and no upside.

I have no idea why Portland would do this trade. Swift is completely redundant talent wise and would be buried behind Zach, Aldridge, and Outlaw. Do we really need an overpaid, injury prone 4th string power forward with absolutely zero upside?

If this is all they are being offered, I say let Magloire walk and save Paul Allen the 24 million in salary/luxury tax it would cost to take on Swift's contract. He can put the money toward buying back the Rose Garden. That's a much better use of his money that thowing it away on Stromile Swift. 

BNM


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

darkhelmit54 said:


> Stro isn't an undersized PF, he's an undersized C who's more than capable of playing PF due to his long arms and quickness. Think of a less awkward, and less effort version of Outlaw.


Somehow that doesn't make me feel very good. I don't want any version of Travis playing center. Bill Russell was a great center--in his time. Back then you could play center at 6'9" 220lbs. Those days are gone. Swift is a tweener. Too small to play PF, not skilled enough to play SF. A man without a position. If he could pass and shoot, he could be our version of Diaw--but he can't do either.

He can't even hold down the PF spot on a team without a real PF.


----------



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

darkhelmit54 said:


> why are there so many people sipping the Mike MILLER (WHOOPS) cool-aid on these boards? Does anyone other than half of the Portland fans even really think this guy's good? The jazz sure didn't hesitate to let him go.


Let's see... He's 26 years old and currently average 18.1 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 4.3 APG and is shoooting 43.3% from three point range. He would instantly become our best 3-point shooter and give the Blazers a legitimate outside threat when teams double team Zach (which is pretty much everytime Zach gets the ball). He may not be a superstar, but he's a solid NBA player who fits a need in Portland. He's a much better fit than Stromile Swift and with Rudy Gay the SF of the future in Memphis, he's expendable to the Grizzlies. His contract is longer than Swift's, but at least he would get some PT and contribute in Portland.

Oh, and he was drafted by Orlando and has played his entire NBA career in Orlando and Memphis and his college ball at Florida. He has never played for the Jazz, nor have they ever held his draft rights.

BNM

P.S. Do you even know who Mike Magloire/Miller is, or are you confusing him with someone who actually played for the Jazz at one time?


----------



## darkhelmit54 (Jan 23, 2005)

sorry my mistake about Utah, not sure why I thought that. I knew he was originally out of Orlando though, why'd they let him go? I'm surprised he's only 26, it feels like I've heard his name in passing for quite a while, just never with a whole lot of acclaim, just a guy who shot threes, was unathletic, and played no D.


----------



## ryanjend22 (Jan 23, 2004)

swiftt would fill in for miles, would make us a bit more rounded...

more time for aldridge to get comfortable and adjusted....

and of course, no more watching magloire. i guess, at this point i just want him off the team. no hard feelings but he needs go. im not excited by this, ibut if this is truly is value, it will do.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)




----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

If we are in fact going to a running style, I couldn't think of a better player to play in that system then Swift. Him and Rodriguez would be doing alley-oops all game long. But as of right now, knowing how many injuries Swift has had, I don't think he's a good fit.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> If we are in fact going to a running style, I couldn't think of a better player to play in that system then Swift. Him and Rodriguez would be doing alley-oops all game long. But as of right now, knowing how many injuries Swift has had, I don't think he's a good fit.


I don't get the connection with Stro being good on an up tempo team. Isn't Memphis trying to run that offense right now? Isn't Stro the only power forward on the team with more than one year of experience (Cardinal doesn't count). They have a running team and he is getting 20 min/game and looking very marginal. How is it that he would all of the sudden blossom in Portland, when he can't do it in Memphis? And do you really want to play him ahead of Aldridge? What does he do better than Aldridge? I just don't see it.

Miller has his flaws, but I think he would be very interesting fit if there was a way to get him. I would do Magloire + Outlaw if they would take it.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

i would love to get Mike Miller on the team


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Boob-No-More said:


> Let's see... He's 26 years old and currently average 18.1 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 4.3 APG and is shoooting 43.3% from three point range. He would instantly become our best 3-point shooter and give the Blazers a legitimate outside threat when teams double team Zach (which is pretty much everytime Zach gets the ball). He may not be a superstar, but he's a solid NBA player who fits a need in Portland. He's a much better fit than Stromile Swift and with Rudy Gay the SF of the future in Memphis, he's expendable to the Grizzlies. His contract is longer than Swift's, but at least he would get some PT and contribute in Portland.



Well, I have liked the idea of getting Miller. I just do not know what it would take to get him. West seemingly is interested in Magloire. Memphis is supposedly interested in cutting costs for the new owners. So an expiring Magloire would fill that need. They would need a shooter

I would probably over pay to get them to give us Miller....

Magloire + Dixon + Outlaw + $3 mil cash.... for Miller and filler... maybe Dahntey Jones... but it does not quite work. (within $800K). Do nto know if Memphis would do it though

Miller would be nice to have


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

This deal comes down to who is better to fill the backup PF role, Swift or Outlaw?

While Outlaw still has a lot of upside, he has not yet developed the inside game to be an effective PF. He needs to put on the 10-20 lbs and develop some post moves and a hook shot so he can take full advantage of his length and athleticism.

As a RFA at the end of the season, Outlaw is worth another 2-3 year shot at $4M/season to see what he can do. If someone offers him more, the Blazers should just let him go.

Swift is an average backup, but he his fast and athletic and would fit in great as the 4 in a fast breaking bench unit for Portland.

Swift + Jones may be the best the Blazers can get for Magloire.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Trader Bob said:


> I would probably over pay to get them to give us Miller....
> 
> Magloire + Dixon + Outlaw + $3 mil cash.... for Miller and filler... maybe Dahntey Jones... but it does not quite work. (within $800K). Do nto know if Memphis would do it though
> 
> Miller would be nice to have


Magloire + Outlaw for Miller + Jones works, also

Magloire + Outlaw + Dixon for Miller + [Swift or Cardinal] works

I would think if they are really interested in dumping salary, one of those would work. Throw in the money if needed, or even one of our second rounders.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Blazer Maven said:


> Swift + Jones may be the best the Blazers can get for Magloire.


I would rather have an empty seat that add two third stringers. You would adding salary for no real benefit.

PF: Zach, Aldridge, Swift?
SG: Roy, Webster, Dixon, Jones?


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

darkhelmit54 said:


> sorry my mistake about Utah, not sure why I thought that. I knew he was originally out of Orlando though, why'd they let him go? I'm surprised he's only 26, it feels like I've heard his name in passing for quite a while, just never with a whole lot of acclaim, just a guy who shot threes, was unathletic, and played no D.


I'm going on memory here, so someone correct me if I am remembering wrong. I believe he was traded for Drew Gooden. I presume this is because at the time Orlando had McGrady and needed some interior help for him more then another shooter to play alongside him. I don't think they did it because they didn't like Miller, but because they liked what they could get for him (though since they didn't keep Gooden, I would say it was a bad trade for them).


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

How about Mike Miller + Jake Tsakalidas for Magloire + Webster. 

Memphis cuts Jake's longer contract. They replace Miller with a guy who is younger and has more upside. They get their big man. 

Portland gets the best player, a great perimeter scorer, and a nice compliment to Jack and Roy. 

I'll admit we come out way ahead on this one, so maybe we add the two second rounder picks or Freeland too.


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

Reep said:


> I would rather have an empty seat that add two third stringers. You would adding salary for no real benefit.
> 
> PF: Zach, Aldridge, Swift?
> SG: Roy, Webster, Dixon, Jones?


Aldridge is getting his minutes at the 5, almost exclusively.

Webster is playing the 2 and 3, and Dixon is as good as gone.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

mook said:


> How about Mike Miller + Jake Tsakalidas for Magloire + Webster.
> 
> Memphis cuts Jake's longer contract. They replace Miller with a guy who is younger and has more upside. They get their big man.
> 
> ...


This is a scary trade. Magloire is better than Jake, but is expiring so who cares. Miller is better _now_ at shooting and passing than Webster. Webster is probably a better rebounder now, will likely never be as good a passer, and will likely be as good a shooter and a better defender. I don't know. If Martell gets his confidence I think he could easily be a better player than Miller. I wouldn't add any extra value given the extra contract of Miller. This is a tough call, which probably makes it a fair trade.

Maybe if Miller got a hair cut I would do it. ;-) Every time I see him I see that picture of him with his shirt up high (looking like big breasts). Ewwww there it is again.


----------



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

darkhelmit54 said:


> sorry my mistake about Utah, not sure why I thought that. I knew he was originally out of Orlando though, why'd they let him go? I'm surprised he's only 26, it feels like I've heard his name in passing for quite a while, just never with a whole lot of acclaim, just a guy who shot threes, was unathletic, and played no D.


Yes, he is 26, but I just checked and he turns 27 this month. As he only went to college one year, he was only 19 when he came into the league. So, at 26 (soon to be 27) he's in his 7th season and having his best year yet. And he seems to still be getting better. His PER has increased every year he's been in the league. A very nice trend.

No acclaim? He was Rookie of the Year. Just shoots threes? Yes, it's true he does shoot (and make) a lot of threes, but he's also shooting 50% on two point field goal attemps. His averages of 5.8 RPG and 4.3 APG are excellent for a small forward. In fact, he would be second on the Blazers in both RPG (trailing only Zach) and APG (trailing only Jarrett). He has recorded 14 assists in a game twice this year and 13 rebounds twice. His EFF of 18.88 would put him second on the team behind Zach and over 3.5 points ahead of Brandon Roy. I'm not suggesting he's a better player than Brandon Roy, but I think people are selling him short when they say all he does is shoot threes. He does that very well - far, far better than anybody on the team, but he also rebounds and passes the ball. 

He's not the kind of player you build around, but he's a great second or third option on offense that can spread the defefense. He's a willing and capable passer and a decent rebounder. He's a good role player whose game compliments other players without getting in their way. He would either be a decent starting 3, or an outstanding 6th man for the Blazers. Heck, Sergio makes guys like Jamaal Magloire and Juan Dixon look like decent offensive players. Imagine what he could do playing alongside a guy who can actually catch and shoot the ball. In short, he's an older, better, more experienced, more dependable version of what we hope Martell Webster will eventually be. And yes, Martell is "only 20" and has more "upside", but Miller is twice as productive today and at 19/20 he was ROY and averaged 11.9 PPG, 4.0 RPG and 1.7 APG - numbers Martell can only dream about at this time.

He'll never make the NBA all-defense team, but again he's at least as good as Martell at playing defense, and his offense, rebounding and passing are far superior. Unathletic, sure. But he does have more dunks this year than Brandon Roy. The fact of the matter is (other than on Sports Center) there are no style points in basketball. Miller can put the ball in the basket. He's a better shooter than anyone on the Blazers and fills a glaring need. If all we have to give up to get him is Jamaal Magloire, I'd do it in a heart beat. Beacause of Miller's contract, and the tightening of the purse strings in Memphis, they might be willing to let him go for below market value in exchange for an expiring contract. Heck even if we have to throw in another bench player or two (like Dixon and/or Dickau - both short, reasonable contracts) and a second round pick or two, and take out some of their overpaid trash (Brian Cardinal) in return, I'd still do it.

BNM


----------



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

Foulzilla said:


> I'm going on memory here, so someone correct me if I am remembering wrong. I believe he was traded for Drew Gooden. I presume this is because at the time Orlando had McGrady and needed some interior help for him more then another shooter to play alongside him. I don't think they did it because they didn't like Miller, but because they liked what they could get for him (though since they didn't keep Gooden, I would say it was a bad trade for them).


Yep, that's the one. At the time, Orlando had pleny of perimeter players, but their BEST big man was Shawn Kemp (version 2.0 - the 335 lb. crack addict). Memphis was well stocked with talented young bigs (including reigning ROY Paul Gasol) and needed outside shooting. So, it was a trade that made sense for both teams. The rookie Gooden immeditaely took Kemp's starting job (and doubled Kemp's production) and other than occasional drug busts and rumored comebacks, Kemp was never heard from again. Orlando did keep Gooden one more year before trading him to Cleveland.

BNM


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Miller has an aggressiveness that Webster lacks. I would like to have both on the team and deal someone like Travis. Miller seems to have a killer instinct and wants to shoot the ball (in a good way). And even though he is "not athletic", I've seen him take the ball strong to the rack several times with great results. Given his offensive savvy and ability to shoot and pass, it seems like he would be a solid fit. This is even more true if they keep Zach. Sergio-Roy-Miller-Aldridge would cause a lot of problems for teams that want to double Zach.


----------



## c_note (Jan 30, 2007)

WOW, I cannot believe you guys are all so trade-happy. Why do we need Mike Miller? We have a player with the exact same style in Martell, except HES YOUNGER AND HAS MORE POTENTIAL. 7 years younger to be exact. Trading Martell or Travis would be complete insanity, especially for a mediocre player like Mike Miller. Let's just trade the whole team away because they are all unproven. This board has absolutely no loyalty whatsoever.....


----------



## gatorpops (Dec 17, 2004)

Boob-No-More said:


> Yes, he is 26, but I just checked and he turns 27 this month. As he only went to college one year, he was only 19 when he came into the league. So, at 26 (soon to be 27) he's in his 7th season and having his best year yet. And he seems to still be getting better. His PER has increased every year he's been in the league. A very nice trend.
> 
> No acclaim? He was Rookie of the Year. Just shoots threes? Yes, it's true he does shoot (and make) a lot of threes, but he's also shooting 50% on two point field goal attemps. His averages of 5.8 RPG and 4.3 APG are excellent for a small forward. In fact, he would be second on the Blazers in both RPG (trailing only Zach) and APG (trailing only Jarrett). He has recorded 14 assists in a game twice this year and 13 rebounds twice. His EFF of 18.88 would put him second on the team behind Zach and over 3.5 points ahead of Brandon Roy. I'm not suggesting he's a better player than Brandon Roy, but I think people are selling him short when they say all he does is shoot threes. He does that very well - far, far better than anybody on the team, but he also rebounds and passes the ball.
> 
> ...


Completly agree!!:clap2: 

GATORPOPS


----------



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

c_note said:


> WOW, I cannot believe you guys are all so trade-happy. Why do we need Mike Miller? We have a player with the exact same style in Martell, except HES YOUNGER AND HAS MORE POTENTIAL. 7 years younger to be exact. Trading Martell or Travis would be complete insanity, especially for a mediocre player like Mike Miller. Let's just trade the whole team away because they are all unproven. This board has absolutely no loyalty whatsoever.....


Umm... if you read what I wrote, I never suggested trading Martell Webster. Mike Miller is twice the player Martell is today, was a better player at the same age and has improved every year in the league. So, I'm not so sure Martell's "upside" will ever reach, or exceed Mike Miller's present productivity. So, adding Miller now makes the team better and gives Martell a good role model to pattern his game after. The players I suggested trading were Jamaal Magloire, Juan Dixon and/or Dan Dickau - none of whom are part of the Blazers future plans and none are "unproven". Calm down and actually read the posts before you go and get all upset.

BNM

P.S. And the whole reason I even mentioned Mike Miller is he's a better player and addresses a need much more than Stromile Swift and Dahntay Jones.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Boob-No-More said:


> Umm... if you read what I wrote, I never suggested trading Martell Webster. Mike Miller is twice the player Martell is today, was a better player at the same age and has improved every year in the league. So, I'm not so sure Martell's "upside" will ever reach, or exceed Mike Miller's present productivity. So, adding Miller now makes the team better and gives Martell a good role model to pattern his game after. The players I suggested trading were Jamaal Magloire, Juan Dixon and/or Dan Dickau - none of whom are part of the Blazers future plans and none are "unproven". Calm down and actually read the posts before you go and get all upset.
> 
> BNM
> 
> P.S. And the whole reason I even mentioned Mike Miller is he's a better player and addresses a need much more than Stromile Swift and Dahntay Jones.


i think he was responding to my post. I was suggesting a Magloire/Webster for Miller/Jake trade. 

I agree with Reep. my idea is a scary trade. whenever you trade away a 20 year old, you have the possibility of looking very, very foolish. 

but you also face the possibility of looking very, very greedy if you don't do that deal. we could've gotten far more for Travis Outlaw if we'd dealt him at the age of 19. 

as Marsellus Wallace once said, "You see, this profession is filled to the brim with unrealistic mother****ers. Mother****ers who thought their *** would age like wine. If you mean it turns to vinegar, it does. If you mean it gets better with age, it don't." 

Outlaw has "vinegared" on us somewhat. he still has some value, but nothing like he did a few years ago. Webster hasn't vinegared yet, and a trade like this hedges against that possibility. 

the thing is, nobody ever remembers the trades that never happened and the youngsters who consequently vinegared. we only discuss the fine wines (Jermaine O'Neal) we let get away. although GM reputations are often built by those wines, the lost opportunity costs of the hidden vinegars can be just as damaging.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

Boob-No-More said:


> Yes, he is 26, but I just checked and he turns 27 this month. As he only went to college one year, he was only 19 when he came into the league. So, at 26 (soon to be 27) he's in his 7th season and having his best year yet. And he seems to still be getting better. His PER has increased every year he's been in the league. A very nice trend.
> 
> No acclaim? He was Rookie of the Year. Just shoots threes? Yes, it's true he does shoot (and make) a lot of threes, but he's also shooting 50% on two point field goal attemps. His averages of 5.8 RPG and 4.3 APG are excellent for a small forward. In fact, he would be second on the Blazers in both RPG (trailing only Zach) and APG (trailing only Jarrett). He has recorded 14 assists in a game twice this year and 13 rebounds twice. His EFF of 18.88 would put him second on the team behind Zach and over 3.5 points ahead of Brandon Roy. I'm not suggesting he's a better player than Brandon Roy, but I think people are selling him short when they say all he does is shoot threes. He does that very well - far, far better than anybody on the team, but he also rebounds and passes the ball.
> 
> ...


You didn't need to go to all this effort to convince us that DarkHelmet didn't know what he/she was talking about. He/she proved that earlier....much earlier.

Thanks for the extra info.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

I would do this deal...

Jamaal+Outlaw+1st Round Pick(lotto protected in 07', top 3 protected in 08') for Mike Miller and Lawrence Roberts or Alexander Johnson or Dahntay Jones.


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

c_note said:


> WOW, I cannot believe you guys are all so trade-happy. Why do we need Mike Miller? We have a player with the exact same style in Martell, except HES YOUNGER AND HAS MORE POTENTIAL. 7 years younger to be exact. Trading Martell or Travis would be complete insanity, especially for a mediocre player like Mike Miller. Let's just trade the whole team away because they are all unproven. This board has absolutely no loyalty whatsoever.....


Miller is 5 times the player Webster is. You would be incredibly biased if you chose Webster over Miller.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Loyalty4Life said:


> Miller is 5 times the player Webster is. You would be incredibly biased if you chose Webster over Miller.



The only way someone could choose Webster over Miller would be because of potential. IF Webster can meet Miller's playing ability we should all be very happy.


----------



## c_note (Jan 30, 2007)

Loyalty4Life said:


> Miller is 5 times the player Webster is. You would be incredibly biased if you chose Webster over Miller.


I am biased. Sorry if I believe in my team and its players. Yes, Miller is better right now. But I would be willing to wager that Webster WILL eventually be better than Miller. You don't trade potential for a proven player unless you are a contender, and at the least a playoff team, which the Blazers are not. This team is building for the future, why trade a 20 year old for a 27 year old? Makes absolutely no sense. If I was Memphis, I'd trade Miller for Webster straight-up in a heartbeat. No doubt Webster is more athletic, and will be a much better defender/rebounder than Mike Miller. If you disagree with any of this, you are a fool in my book. But whatever, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. 

PS. Loyalty4Life? LOL, nice name...:lol: :lol:


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

Reep said:


> I would rather have an empty seat that add two third stringers. You would adding salary for no real benefit.
> 
> PF: Zach, Aldridge, Swift?
> SG: Roy, Webster, Dixon, Jones?


I agree with this. Swift and Jones are probably legit second stringers, but the Blazers really don't need that. If we are going to trade, it should be to consolidate talent or add something with potential, and this trade does neither. It's not horrible value wise, since Magloire has low value, but we've got enough mediocre guys and young guys wanting minutes. We have now Sergio-Jack-Roy-Ime-Webster-Outlaw at the 1-2-3 spots, and Zach-Outlaw-LMA-Raef-Joel at the 4-5, and that's not even including Dixon and Mags. We have no need for guys to just fill up the roster.

If we can't get anything really good for Mags, and I doubt we can, I think we should just let him walk. It gives us more roster flexibility and room under the lux tax to work this summer. Given how well Patterson and Pritchard did last summer, I think they can use the MLE and second rounders (with those extra roster spots) to get something at least as good as Swift/Jones, and possibly much better. This trade just locks us into blah.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

c_note said:


> WOW, I cannot believe you guys are all so trade-happy. Why do we need Mike Miller? We have a player with the exact same style in Martell, except HES YOUNGER AND HAS MORE POTENTIAL. 7 years younger to be exact. Trading Martell or Travis would be complete insanity, especially for a mediocre player like Mike Miller. Let's just trade the whole team away because they are all unproven. This board has absolutely no loyalty whatsoever.....


I understand what you are saying and I like to be loyal to our team members through thick and thin also.

However, at some point (and I think it starts - now) we must improve our team and especially the top 8-9 players. We're 13 deep and most every body is in the middle of the pack except Zach and Roy. Everyone else needs to be evaluated and every opportunity to improve that rotation needs to be explored. Just because Webster was selected #6 overall, doesn't mean that he is guaranteed to make it. There are plenty of examples where someone is drafted on potential and never gets past that development point.

Miller would be a guy who would immediately be a top 8-9 type player for this team. He also has skills (shooting from deep) that are league tested and fairly consistent for many seasons. The guy has talent. Is he going to get much better, probably not. He is a good solid player now though, and seemingly a good balance to a low-post player like Zach. Go ahead, double team Zach!

Anyway - its a point of discussion. You have your take - I have mine.


----------



## c_note (Jan 30, 2007)

RedHot&Rolling said:


> I understand what you are saying and I like to be loyal to our team members through thick and thin also.
> 
> However, at some point (and I think it starts - now) we must improve our team and especially the top 8-9 players. We're 13 deep and most every body is in the middle of the pack except Zach and Roy. Everyone else needs to be evaluated and every opportunity to improve that rotation needs to be explored. Just because Webster was selected #6 overall, doesn't mean that he is guaranteed to make it. There are plenty of examples where someone is drafted on potential and never gets past that development point.
> 
> ...


I see what you're saying, and I agree there comes a time when you must cut your losses. But c'mon, lets give them AT LEAST another year. Martell has been on the team a year and a half now, straight outta high school, and people are already screaming to trade. I'm not saying you are, that's just the general feed I get from these boards. At least 1 more year for Martell. Outlaw, in my eyes, has already proven himself and theres no way in hell we should trade him. Plus I bought his jersey :yay:


----------

