# Blazers are discussing Rasheed for K. Martin



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

910 has Jason Quick on right now and he said the blazers are in serious discussions with NJ for Martin. They said it would be Sheed and Patterson or Sheed and Sabonis for Martin and Mutumbo.


----------



## baler (Jul 16, 2003)

All that time for "discussions". Just another reason to hate J Quick. I like the Wallace for Martin but not sure about Mt. Mutumbos contract.


----------



## yangsta (May 14, 2003)

that would be so horrible....... maybe kenyon, jefferson for sheed... but no way we trade sheed and someone for kenyon and uselesss mutumbo.. sheed is our best shooter, why try from someone who can't shoot?


----------



## bfan1 (Mar 5, 2003)

*...*

one bad attitude for another?

no thanks-keep Sheed.


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

Has jason quick ever been right on anything?


----------



## baler (Jul 16, 2003)

*Re: ...*



> Originally posted by <b>bfan1</b>!
> one bad attitude for another?
> 
> no thanks-keep Sheed.


At least the one bad attitude plays hard EVERY night not just when he feels like it.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

if we did do sheed for martin I think it would be worse for Z-Bo, cause martin can't play the 3 or play on the peremitter like Sheed can.


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

Sheed is a four and needs to plant his lazy butt on the block...so the perimeter argument is bull. Get a shooter. I meant that in the nicest way.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Draco</b>!
> if we did do sheed for martin I think it would be worse for Z-Bo, cause martin can't play the 3 or play on the peremitter like Sheed can.


I think that this is a key point (since some people are going to be willing to move Rasheed for anything, regardless of the drop in talent). I think that Martin CAN defend many 3's (interestingly, the Nets used him to guard McGrady in stretches last year), but Martin's perimeter game is worse than a player like SAR's and about on par with Pau Gasol... and ZR. Not a good match.

Additionally, Martin wants a big-time contract and he's not as young as many might think (he's less than 3.5 years younger than Rasheed).

Martin's a pretty good player, but if the Blazers move Rasheed and RP for him and filler, it's going to be a major mistake.

Ed O.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Tom</b>!
> Sheed is a four and needs to plant his lazy butt on the block...so the perimeter argument is bull. Get a shooter. I meant that in the nicest way.


Your opinions about where he should play and what type of player the Blazers ought to acquire doesn't change the fact that he's our best perimeter shooter, and swapping Martin in for him would result in one of the worst perimeter shooting teams in the league in quite some time.

Meaning the Blazers would have even worse spacing offensively and ZR and Martin and Bonzi, all of whom probably operate best on the blocks, wouldn't have any room to operate.

Ed O.


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

i'm not arguing with you, but sheed is lazy, that is why he shoots the 3 well. Randolph is your Kenyon. a trade like this makes no sense.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

This trade makes no kind of sense , I dont think portland is willing to take Mutumbos contract for 2 more years


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

not trying to be a jerk, but what has Jason Quick ever been right about....he is a rumor mill at best.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Tom</b>!
> i'm not arguing with you, but sheed is lazy, that is why he shoots the 3 well.


You might not be arguing with me, but I'm arguing with you when you make statements like this... 

Lazy people shoot the three well? Or people who shoot the three well are lazy?

How is the fact that Rasheed shoots the 3 well evidence that he's lazy? If he were to shoot like Antoine Walker (poorly) would it mean he's lazier, less lazy, or the same?

It doesn't make sense.

If it were a matter of Rasheed being lazy, how do you explain the effort he gives (which is quite good) at the defensive end?

Ed O.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Tom</b>!
> not trying to be a jerk, but what has Jason Quick ever been right about....he is a rumor mill at best.


He stated last year in a webcast that a Blazers move was imminent, and Jeff McInnis signed the same day.

He definitely has info that most of us do not. Of course, he's got some sort of crush on Damon Stoudamire... and, because he reports things that are less-than-certain, he's often wrong (because that's the nature of reporting about trades: most stuff falls through).

Ed O.


----------



## blazerbraindamage (May 5, 2003)

K-Mart would be bad for Zach and I also have to question Mutombo vs. DD...this smacks of going back to the old Whitsitt logjams.Playing conflicts = more of the same.Will things ever change?


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

ok..of you think Rasheed isn't lazy and soft you need to watch a few more games. the guy has more talent than 99% of the league and stands out behine the 3 point line...chew on that and try and deny it. geez!


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

this deal makes no sense , just like Tom said kenyon is just like zach


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

Don't you guys get it?

Portland gets rid of Rasheed, the technical-foul machine, and in return gets....a player who had more technicals, more flagrant fouls and more disqualifications than Sheed this past season.

Never mind.....


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

Thanks...it just think he throws out a few too many rumors without looking into them first.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

No way to Mutumbos Contract


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>So Cal Blazer Fan</b>!
> Don't you guys get it?
> 
> Portland gets rid of Rasheed, the technical-foul machine, and in return gets....a player who had more technicals, more flagrant fouls and more disqualifications than Sheed this past season.


...you forget that Portland would also get a PF who is a full 2 inches shorter for the inside battles in the bigger badder West. Sign me down too. BTW, how is it Wallace plus Sabas's expiring deal for Kenyon and Diek? That doesn't balance out in contracts exchanged at all.

STOMP


----------



## Scinos (Jun 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> BTW, how is it Wallace plus Sabas's expiring deal for Kenyon and Diek? That doesn't balance out in contracts exchanged at all.
> 
> STOMP


Yeah, it works out STOMP...

New Jersey trades: PF Kenyon Martin (16.7 ppg, 8.3 rpg, 2.4 apg in 34.1 minutes) 
C Dikembe Mutombo (5.8 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 0.8 apg in 21.4 minutes) 
New Jersey receives: PF Rasheed Wallace (18.1 ppg, 7.4 rpg, 2.1 apg in 36.3 minutes) 
C Arvydas Sabonis (6.1 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 1.8 apg in 15.5 minutes) 
Change in team outlook: +1.7 ppg, -3.0 rpg, and +0.7 apg. 

Portland trades: PF Rasheed Wallace (18.1 ppg, 7.4 rpg, 2.1 apg in 36.3 minutes) 
C Arvydas Sabonis (6.1 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 1.8 apg in 15.5 minutes) 
Portland receives: PF Kenyon Martin (16.7 ppg, 8.3 rpg, 2.4 apg in 77 games) 
C Dikembe Mutombo (5.8 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 0.8 apg in 24 games) 
Change in team outlook: -1.7 ppg, +3.0 rpg, and -0.7 apg. 

TRADE ACCEPTED


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

It does??? What does Diek make a year 22 mil? I have no clue about his contract, but I know it's Wallace 17, Sabas 7, and Kenyon is on the last of his rookie slot (somewhere around 2 I believe).

STOMP


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Tom</b>!
> ok..of you think Rasheed isn't lazy and soft you need to watch a few more games. the guy has more talent than 99% of the league and stands out behine the 3 point line...chew on that and try and deny it. geez!


I almost literally cannot watch more Blazers games than I do. I've missed like 2 televised games in the last 3 years. I watch many of the games multiple times. Don't try to tell me I need to watch more Blazers games.

It's possible that I could watch more NBA games in general. I'm limited to about 2 (full games) a night in the regular season because I have a job and don't have time to record other channels and watch them during the day. I seriously doubt that there are many people who are not employed in the NBA who watch more NBA games than I do, though.

Rasheed shot about 70% of his FG attempts inside the 3 point line... and he got to the line 272 times, which was mainly the result of being fouled while attempting 2 point field goals. To claim that he merely "stands out behind the 3 point line" is ignorant.

While I've got actual games watched, statistical evidence and logic on my side, you've got the tired old Blazers-bashing media line. I wonder which one is more accurate?

Ed O.


----------



## Bwatcher (Dec 31, 2002)

My strong hope is that this "leak" is a public announcement for the rest of the league to make your best offers for Sheed, Reuben, and Sabas. While it wouldn't be a terrible, terrible trade, I really don't see that it accomplishes that much towards the team's long term goals, unless you think that Zach is a flash in the pan. I don't think that way, so I say keep Sheed at this point. I agree that Zach and Kmart overlap, and I'm sure Kmart doesn't want to play less than full starter minutes. Deke could be valuable for 20 minutes a game on the defensive end, but he would hurt the offense. Bringing back Sabas for the same thing gets you better offense and saves some millions next year.

From the NJ standpoint, I think this looks great short term. Wallace is on a par with Martin, and you get to dump Mt. M's huge salary. This is like a ($70 deke - 25 difference wallace and martin) $40-45 million gift. Even for them though, I wonder if Sheed would resign next year. Playing in the East and being that close to Philly, I kind of wonder if he wouldn't end up in Philly the following year.

All in all, I would rather stand pat, than take this deal.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

I think you made some good points bwatcher. I agree that this isn't a really bad deal in terms of talent, but the 2 and the 4 our the positions we are stacked in so if we do any trades it should really be for a different type of player. I'd rather have Sabas than Dekembe too.


----------



## Swoosh (May 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> I almost literally cannot watch more Blazers games than I do. I've missed like 2 televised games in the last 3 years. I watch many of the games multiple times. Don't try to tell me I need to watch more Blazers games.
> ...


Put him in his place, Ed.  He obviously hasn't seen as many Blazer games as the rest of us and is going by the "national" media's view of Sheed's game.


----------



## hitokiri (May 22, 2003)

Kenyon aint goin nowhere. He is one of the reasons Kidd stayed and Kidd will not let him get traded. End of story.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

I hope so Id rather keep Rasheed


----------



## Scinos (Jun 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> Rasheed shot about 70% of his FG attempts inside the 3 point line... and he got to the line 272 times, which was mainly the result of being fouled while attempting 2 point field goals. To claim that he merely "stands out behind the 3 point line" is ignorant.
> 
> Ed O.


lol...70% of his 2pt shots ? 

He was 405 / 787 last season from inside the arc...or 51.5% and is a career 50.5% from 2pt range, I don't know where you got 70% from...:uhoh:


----------



## KIDBLAZE (Jul 8, 2003)

Somebody tell me this, Why would you trade for a player you already have. I mean, if you look at Z-BO and K-MART style of play it is very similar. I hope and :gopray: all the talk of "serious discussions" is a lie.


----------



## Scinos (Jun 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KIDBLAZE</b>!
> Somebody tell me this, Why would you trade for a player you already have. I mean, if you look at Z-BO and K-MART style of play it is very similar. I hope and :gopray: all the talk of "serious discussions" is a lie.


I don't really know, but it happens. e.g Knicks traded for KVH when they drafted Lampe...they are similar (tall shooters). Knicks also drafted an undersized PF Sweetney, and they have other undersized PF's... 

It happens...:whoknows:


----------



## Anima (Jun 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Scinos</b>!
> 
> 
> lol...70% of his 2pt shots ?
> ...


LOL Ed meant that 70% of Wallace total shots are inside the arc.


----------



## trifecta (Oct 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Scinos</b>!
> 
> 
> lol...70% of his 2pt shots ?
> ...


Just for clarification - 

Ed didn't say he MADE 70%. He said that of all the shots Sheed TOOK, 7 out of 10 were inside the three point line.

I don't know if that's accurate or not but it seems reasonable and it is what he wrote.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Scinos</b>!
> 
> lol...70% of his 2pt shots ?
> 
> He was 405 / 787 last season from inside the arc...or 51.5% and is a career 50.5% from 2pt range, I don't know where you got 70% from...:uhoh:


We all get confused sometimes. That's OK. Let me break it down for you. (I see others already have posted what I actually said and meant, but I had this typed up so for clarity and posterity, the full explanation is as follows...  .)

He shot 1094 times from the field last year. 307 of them were 3 point attempts, leaving 787 of the 1094 from 2 point range. Therefore, Rasheed shot 71.9% (about 70%) of his FG attempts inside the 3 point line.

"Of" is key to the sentence structure and therefore the meaning. I did not say he shot about 70% *on* his FG attempts inside the 3 point line.

Ed O.


----------



## trifecta (Oct 10, 2002)

As far as this trade was concerned, at first I liked it. Why should I care about Deke's contract?

Whoever pointed out the duplication of position had a good point though. If we have made Randolf 'untouchable' (per article quoting Nash), why in the world would we get another starter who plays the same spot?

While I admit that I would vote for Sheed being gone (although part of me is eager to see how they fit Sheed into their 25 point marketing plan) it still needs to make sense for this roster. Kmart doesn't.


----------



## FeloniusThunk (Jan 1, 2003)

One difference between KMart and Zach is defense. KMart and asheed isn't a terrible trade talent-wise, and if you turned around and got a top notch, young sf (Carmelo?) for Zach to go with KMart, it would look pretty good.

As is, though, eh.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

Perhaps the new thought is that Zach might be able to play SF. His mid range is pretty good and he does have a pure looking stroke. If he could chase the SF's of the league on Defense then this trade might make sense. Most likely, the trade is a bad Idea because we are doubling up on PF's.


----------



## Scinos (Jun 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> We all get confused sometimes. That's OK. Let me break it down for you. (I see others already have posted what I actually said and meant, but I had this typed up so for clarity and posterity, the full explanation is as follows...  .)
> 
> He shot 1094 times from the field last year. 307 of them were 3 point attempts, leaving 787 of the 1094 from 2 point range. Therefore, Rasheed shot 71.9% (about 70%) of his FG attempts inside the 3 point line.
> ...



Oh, yeah...I see what you mean now. I just skimmed over your reply and saw "Rasheed shot about 70%...FG inside the 3 point line"...my bad 

That really only means that he takes shots from there...he could spend some deal of time out on the arc, yet not shoot the ball...However that's impossible to prove, so I'll stick with your method.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thylo</b>!
> Perhaps the new thought is that Zach might be able to play SF. His mid range is pretty good and he does have a pure looking stroke. If he could chase the SF's of the league on Defense then this trade might make sense. Most likely, the trade is a bad Idea because we are doubling up on PF's.


Martin would chase the SF, like he does with T-Mac.

-Petey


----------



## bfan1 (Mar 5, 2003)

*...*

Just paid a visit the Net's board...they don't seem to be going for this...they don't want "Raweed"....


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

I think that coaches and owners will understand the value of Sheed much better then most fans outside of portland. All they ever really see, (especially on the east coast) is sheed problems with refs, getting T's, and being busted with Damon for weed. Sheed is a quiet player and does not tell his side to the media, so around the league, fans see three negative things about sheed for each time they see a positive ( Which is when the blazers play them and sheed crushes their pf) They can look at the occational positive that they see of sheed and think that it is a rare occation.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thylo</b>!
> I think that coaches and owners will understand the value of Sheed much better then most fans outside of portland. All they ever really see, (especially on the east coast) is sheed problems with refs, getting T's, and being busted with Damon for weed. Sheed is a quiet player and does not tell his side to the media, so around the league, fans see three negative things about sheed for each time they see a positive ( Which is when the blazers play them and sheed crushes their pf) They can look at the occational positive that they see of sheed and think that it is a rare occation.


Interesting point, he doesn't seem very vocal or interested in correcting his image like others, but he hasn't really been in as gravy danger as others.

-Petey


----------



## bfan1 (Mar 5, 2003)

*I sure hope not!*

My mom just let me know they are talking about this in the news in Portland. (KATU). She said they said it would be in the paper tomorrow. They weren't clear about how much fact there is or if it was just rumor....

Man I hate this stuff!

Would they REALLY do this?????


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

Wallace for K-mart reminds me of the Drexler Otis Thorpe trade in that I could see it working out well for Wallace and I could see it working out well enough somewhere down the line for the Blazers but the outside shooting with both K-mart and Z-bo logging big minutes....

:uhoh:


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Petey</b>!
> 
> Interesting point, he doesn't seem very vocal or interested in correcting his image like others, but he hasn't really been in as gravy danger as others.
> 
> -Petey


Such as Shawn Kemp, who was always in gravy danger.

barfo


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

I would hope POR got a little more from NJ for taking back Mutumbo, like a 1st rounder or better yet, Kristic. 

Can't say this trade idea really enthuses me. Kenyon doesn't heve the cleanest rep either, and his game does seem to mirror that of Zach's. IF as someone previously mentioned, there was another deal in place (involving Zach?) to bring in a SF then I could see more logic behind it. Zach's trade value does seem to be at an all time high at present. Who knows? Interesting though....

Zebo and K-Mart on the frontline together? hmm.... Lord will we need some outside shooting.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>barfo</b>!
> 
> 
> Such as Shawn Kemp, who was always in gravy danger.
> ...


Meant like grave danger, sorry. And I meant like as in the example of Kobe.

Wallace would have not had time in jail, like the situation Kobe is in. Why would he need to defend himself to anyone?

-Petey


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>baler</b>!
> All that time for "discussions". Just another reason to hate J Quick. I like the Wallace for Martin but not sure about Mt. Mutumbos contract.


"Wallace for Martin" is $13,000,000 off from working under the salary cap. Mutombo would have to be included.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>yangsta</b>!
> that would be so horrible....... maybe kenyon, jefferson for sheed


:laugh: Do you honestly think Rasheed Wallace is worth that much?!!:laugh: 

Wallace is a cancer on and off the court, the Blazers would by far get the better end of the deal if they traded away Patterson/Sabonis and Wallace for Martin and Mutombo.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

Sounds like a really dumb trade. Martin is like Sheed-talent.

I'd much rather trade Rasheed for SAR!


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

How many times do we have to hear that Rasheed is a cancer on and off the court. That Damon is a cancer on and off the court. That Ruben Patterson is a cancer on and off the court. That Bonzi Wells is a cancer on and off the court. That Jeff McInnis is a cancer on and off the court. That Derek Anderson is too injury-prone and paid too much. That Dale Davis has no offensive game, is aging, and is overpaid. 

I'm sure there's a lot of other gibberish that fans of other teams have been spoon-fed by the media that I'm just currently blanking on (maybe something about ZR's weight?).

I don't understand how such a cancer-ridden body of players can win ~50 games consistently. They're not winning championships, but they're one of the top 8 or 10 teams in the NBA every year.

Such as this season, when they finished a game better than the Nets in spite of playing the majority of their games in a far superior conference. Trading Rasheed, the best player on the Blazers, for Kenyon Martin and Richard Jefferson might not be fair to the Nets, but it's just as fair as a Wallace + cap relief (Sabas) for Martin and cap albatross (Mutombo) deal is to the Blazers.

Ed O.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> Trading Rasheed, the best player on the Blazers, for Kenyon Martin and Richard Jefferson might not be fair to the Nets, but it's just as fair as a Wallace + cap relief (Sabas) for Martin and cap albatross (Mutombo) deal is to the Blazers.


Yes excellent point, but it has been reported in the Media that it was a Wallace for Patterson or Sabonis for Martin and Mutombo deal, because I think no matter how much the Blazers might claim to want to dump salary, I don't think they mean it. If you were going to trade Sabonis for Camby, which I read a few times on this board, and I think on ESPN before the draft, how is that dumping salary? He is basically just being traded for another player in this case.

-Petey


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Interestingly, Martin has broken off contract talks with the Nets and has asked for a trade, reports ESPN.com's David Aldridge.

This makes me wonder if Martin's agent isn't spreading info that the Blazers are interested...

I think the Nets would be crazy to give Martin a six-year, $87 million deal. But that's just me.

Ed O.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> Interestingly, Martin has broken off contract talks with the Nets and has asked for a trade, reports ESPN.com's David Aldridge.
> 
> This makes me wonder if Martin's agent isn't spreading info that the Blazers are interested...
> ...


No that is not just you, I think the whole Nets forum feels that way, and also alot of the educated members of the board would too.

-Petey


----------



## Scinos (Jun 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> This makes me wonder if Martin's agent isn't spreading info that the Blazers are interested...
> 
> Ed O.


Yeah, probably. His agent will probably leak/invent rumours to boost Martin's value and to probably squeeze more out of NJ.


----------



## Bwatcher (Dec 31, 2002)

I agree EdO. Martin is trying to strike while he thinks he has some leverage. I think that he is right, that his value now may be at a high. His main edge is aggression, and as he ages that edge will lessen. Also, it seems clear that the Nets will not beat the Western champ. So, next year at this time, everyone will know that paying Kmart the max won't buy a championship.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

I sure wouldn't want to pay him that much. Yikes.... 

I am not a fan of Martin's game at all, and at $87 million I am REALLY not a fan of his game. I would hope POR, if they did do this deal, got something a little extra included, be it a draft pick or another player. I doubt it would be Jefferson, but NJ should throw som other player of value our way IMO. As a thanks for taking Mutumbo off your hands. 

IF that trade happens, I don't even want to imagine the contract talks b\t POR and Martin. U G L Y !!!!! is all I can say.


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> I almost literally cannot watch more Blazers games than I do. I've missed like 2 televised games in the last 3 years. I watch many of the games multiple times. Don't try to tell me I need to watch more Blazers games.
> ...


I think even your fellow Blazer fans will agree Sheed isn't living up to his ability...seems pretty simple to me. The guys one of my favorite players and a big letdown from what i expected.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

I live in New Jersey, and I just heard WFAN report that the Nets and Blazers are discussing Wallace and Patterson for Martin and Mutombo. So apparently this is a real deal, and not just rumors. Personally, I think this trade works out much better for NJ than it does for Portland. Martin has a limited game that is built around aggresive play and ferocious dunks. Mutombo is old. I think that Wallace and Patterson, despite their off-court problems, are a more talented pair of players. This trade, along with the aquisition of Alonzo Mourning, could win NJ a title.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

I'm not crazy about the Sheed/Patterson for Martin/Mutumbo. But, if Martin can guard SFs and NJ sweetened the deal, it might be okay. How about NJ adding PG Planinic (sp) and/or Jason Collins? If we could swing a PG prospect or a living center out of this maybe it wouldn't be so bad. I think this could work

How about adding Miginnis and Planinic and/or Collins


Portland trades: PF Rasheed Wallace	(18.1 ppg, 7.4 rpg, 2.1 apg in 36.3 minutes)
SF Ruben Patterson	(8.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg, 1.3 apg in 21.2 minutes)
PG Jeff McInnis	(5.8 ppg, 1.3 rpg, 2.3 apg in 17.5 minutes)
Portland receives: C Dikembe Mutombo	(5.8 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 0.8 apg in 21.4 minutes)
PF Kenyon Martin	(16.7 ppg, 8.3 rpg, 2.4 apg in 34.1 minutes)
C Jason Collins	(5.7 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 1.1 apg in 23.5 minutes)
PG Zoran Planinic	(5.7 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 1.1 apg in 23.5 minutes)
Change in team outlook: -4.0 ppg, +7.1 rpg, and -1.4 apg.

New Jersey trades: C Dikembe Mutombo	(5.8 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 0.8 apg in 21.4 minutes)
PF Kenyon Martin	(16.7 ppg, 8.3 rpg, 2.4 apg in 34.1 minutes)
C Jason Collins	(5.7 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 1.1 apg in 23.5 minutes)
PG Zoran Planinic	(5.7 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 1.1 apg in 23.5 minutes)
New Jersey receives: PF Rasheed Wallace	(18.1 ppg, 7.4 rpg, 2.1 apg in 74 games)
SF Ruben Patterson	(8.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg, 1.3 apg in 78 games)
PG Jeff McInnis	(5.8 ppg, 1.3 rpg, 2.3 apg in 75 games)
Change in team outlook: +4.0 ppg, -7.1 rpg, and +1.4 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED, but have to wait until December 15 for Planinics contract. You could probably swap Planinic for Krstic or Collins and it would still work


PG: Damon, Planinic (until Planinic can start)
SG: Bonzi, DA
SF: Kmart, Qyntel
PF: Zach, Kmart, Davis
C: Davis, Collins, Mutumbo

Do you think that combinations of Damon/Bonzi and DA/Qyntel would provide good enough shooting? Maybe, maybe not.


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

Either way, both teams are in for a shake up w/ new guys coming in who are key parts of their oLd team.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

link to oregon live article about this deal 


http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/sports/1060430800320070.xml


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

i chose my current signature exactly because of the urgency some fans feel to remove Sheed from Portland. 

Guy Fawkes felt that the desperate remedies that were necessary was to blow up the British house of Parliament with dynamite, and he nearly succeeded. 

(Side note: He was caught and burned at the stake. Interestingly enough every year now on the day he was caught they hold town gatherings across the country, light fireworks and burn him in effigy. Last year in my wife's home town they actually had a military tank blast a cannon through the effigy. The English are quirkier folk than you suspect. [/CultureLesson])

anyway, my point is that we are desperate for changes, but you can't lose your sense of proportion about it.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Reep</b>!
> I'm not crazy about the Sheed/Patterson for Martin/Mutumbo. But, if Martin can guard SFs and NJ sweetened the deal, it might be okay. How about NJ adding PG Planinic (sp) and/or Jason Collins? If we could swing a PG prospect or a living center out of this maybe it wouldn't be so bad. I think this could work
> 
> How about adding Miginnis and Planinic and/or Collins
> ...


The Nets didn't go after a PG, because they expect Zoran to play, he had a big summer in the Boston Summer League, and with so many players whom who would fill his role, doubt they would trade him and Collins. If it was Martin and Mutombo for Patterson and Wallace as now suggested, that is even money (no dropping of a retired Sabonis), that much better?

-Petey


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Add Kristic at least. POR will have to pay a LOT of tax, next year, in absorbing Mutumbo's deal. I am sure that is why NAsh is balking at his inclusion in this deal.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

I do not like this trade for many of the reasons you all said. Wallace is worth way more to me than Martin, and Mutumbo's has that horrible contract. I enjoy watching Martin play but not for us full time. There is nothing worth taking on Mutumbo's contract.

*Now.. I might bite on Jefferson, Martin and Mutumbo for Sheed and Patterson.*


ATTENTION JOHN NASH 
If you look down at Bob Whitsitt's old phone. Down on the left... is ATLANTA... a speed dial button... push it.

For Sheed and Patterson = $23.445 mill OUT 
add in McInnis = $26.445 mill
I would rather have...
Atlanta sends Jason Terry S&T (BYC), SAR, Ratliff
Atlanta gets $25 mill in expiring contracts




NOTE: as for this rumored deal (by the way IMHO... NEVER trust a FAN station as a source... meaning WFAN... it would be like trusting Mark Amazom here)


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

The salaires dont match thats why this deal is not happening . Portland will not take Mutumbos deal


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

yes it does

Sheed $18 mill + Patterson $5.445 mill = $23.445 mill OUT

Martin $5.12 mill + Mutumbo $17.125 mill = $22.25 mill IN



Works very well... in fact we save $1.2 mill and $2.4 mill with luxury tax issues



Throw in Richard Jefferson at $1.58 mill and it makes me feel better. Mutumbo's contract is only until 2004/05

Sheed and Patterson for Martin, Jefferson and Mutumbo is better... but I still would not do it.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*IMHO, No way is Martin worth it...*

from RealGM headlines...

_A Nets source told The News that Martin is offended by the Nets' offer of an estimated $65 million to $70 million over six years, which is well short of the *$85 million to $90 million the 2000 No.1 overall pick is seeking.* According to the source, Martin's agent, Brian ****, asked Nets president Rod Thorn for a trade earlier this week. _


I do nto think we want to pay him that much either.... and he is a possible FA next year.. so why not keep Sheed then. He is motivated by a contract year.


----------



## s a b a s 11 (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Tom</b>!
> I think even your fellow Blazer fans will agree Sheed isn't living up to his ability...seems pretty simple to me. The guys one of my favorite players and a big letdown from what i expected.


And you'll find that he mostly doesn't agree with those Blazer fans either. Peer pressure and/or capital/bold fonts doesn't work on Eddie O.

Stuart


----------



## s a b a s 11 (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>hitokiri</b>!
> Kenyon aint goin nowhere. He is one of the reasons Kidd stayed and Kidd will not let him get traded. End of story.


YIKES!

Stuart


----------



## FeloniusThunk (Jan 1, 2003)

If the goals are to improve character and bring down salary, these trades don't help. Wallace's contract for Mutombo's loses money for the Blazers for an extra year, and Martin seems to want a whole lot for his next contract, too. Trading Sheed's "character problems" for Martin's is also a wash, at best. If it's RP instead of Sabonis, then at least that's a character upgrade, though a bit of a loss in productivity.

It only makes sense if it's part of a bigger plan to then trade Zach or Martin, or if the management is really feeling pr boost for the "trade Wallace or else" sentiment is more important than winning.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>s a b a s 11</b>!
> 
> And you'll find that he mostly doesn't agree with those Blazer fans either. Peer pressure and/or capital/bold fonts doesn't work on Eddie O.


True dat, Stuart.

Getting back to the point:



> Originally posted by <b>Tom</b>!
> I think even your fellow Blazer fans will agree Sheed isn't living up to his ability...seems pretty simple to me. The guys one of my favorite players and a big letdown from what i expected.


I don't really disagree that he's not getting everything out of his game that he could (and maybe should). I do NOT equate that with being lazy and/or hanging around the 3 point line. He just seems not to have the hunger that so many great players do.

Do I wish that he had it? Absolutely. But I won't call him lazy because he doesn't.

Ed O.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Here are deals I would find relatively acceptable (as a Blazers fan) involving the Nets and Blazers:

NJ gets Rasheed, Patterson
Portland gets Martin, Deke, Jefferson

or

NJ gets Rasheed, Sabonis
Portland gets Martin, Deke, Krstic

Add in picks and cash either way if you need wiggle room.

I'm not the hugest Martin fan in the world, but he IS a good defender and he might be able to pair up with ZR in the front court since he can guard 3's.

I think from the Blazers' perspective they have to get some additional value for Rasheed, though. Jefferson could slide right into either the starting 3 spot (the question then would be what happens with ZR and Martin at the 4) or be the 6th man backing up the 2 and 3 spots.

Krstic hasn't even played in the NBA, but he's an excellent prospect and one that the Nets might not need any time soon if 'Zo stays healthy. Portland would get to keep Patterson as a key bench player while adding a potential center of the future in Krstic.

I'm not sure NJ would go for either of these, and I gotta say that I hope there would be better deals out there than this if Rasheed is going to be moved... although I think I like it better than any deal except the Gasol + Battier idea we've kicked around before.

Ed O.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Scinos</b>!
> 
> 
> Yeah, it works out STOMP...
> ...


WOW! Wild rumors. I am a little late but will throw in my two cents right now.

If the above is the proposed trade New Jersey wouldn't hesitate to pull the trigger, and Portland would be making a HUGE mistake.

Good God, don't do it.

Kenyon's agent has just demanded a MAX extension for him, and after being rebuffed, has demanded a trade. New Jersey would be paying the Lux tax bill every year it is assessed if they re-sign Kenyon to a max deal. It is kinda hard for a franchise to deal with that when they can't even fill their arena. They have a problem.

Why is Portland so willing to solve the Nets woes? I have no clue.

Let's see how the above trade would match with the publicly stated goals of the Blazers:

Emphasize character over talent:

Rasheed has talent w/ character problems. Kenyon has talent and has character problems. He was punished for his on court behavior far more than Rasheed last season. Techs, flagrants, ejections. Sabas and Mutumbo are a wash here. So character is not emphasized in this trade.

Reduce excessive salaries:

Portland is sending two expiring contracts for a player with 2 years left and another demanding a MAX contract even though they are not a franchise caliber player deserving of such a deal. So money is not emphasized in this trade. Strike out so far.

Maybe the roster needs are motivating this deal. Does swapping Kenyon for Sheed make the Blazer coaches drool at what a great fit he would be and how it solves the needs of the team? No way. The spacing on offense would be a disaster. And who gets to operate in the paint: Bonzi, Zach or Kenyon? There isn't room for all of them.

If the Nets want Deke off their hands, they better take Damon. If they want Sheed, they better take Patterson or send Jefferson back too. The above deal is a disaster for the Blazers, and hopefully Nash laughed it off as the insult it is.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Masbee</b>!
> Why is Portland so willing to solve the Nets woes? I have no clue.


We have no indication that Portland is willing to do this, but the NY area media seems to put out rumors like this several times every offseason. For some reason Portland's talent always seems to be available on the cheap in their various wild senerios that never happen. Why should they care about Portland's interests when they are just stirring the pot to sell some papers.

STOMP


----------



## Anima (Jun 3, 2003)

Fanball's View:



> First off, that deal makes no sense for the Blazers, and we'd be shocked if they agreed to it. Secondly, unless Martin somehow forces their hand, the Nets can wait until after the season to pay him. New Jersey can match any offer given to Martin by another team in the summer of 2004, so why pay him now! ?


http://www.fanball.com/

BTW has anyone else noticed how arrogant the New York media is about trades? If any trade doesn't go though they write that either the Knicks or Nets turned it down no matter how bad the trade was for the other team.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

*I am getting sick of players trying to ride Paul Allens Moneybags*

The one thing that I think about this is that, I am getting real sick of players trying to get traded to Portland just so they can ride Paul Allen's moneybags to big fat contract. Kenyon Martin isn't worth the contract he is asking for in NJ, Portland, or anywhere else in the league. This reminds me of one of those things like with DA, where since SA won't pay him, he goes to Portland. I think those days are over, and I think that this deal stinks. Improve the team in the areas where it needs to be improved (PG) or don't bother. All this trade does is saddle us with another fat contract of another player who will never reach upper eschelon play, and make us too deep at PF still. How does this help the team in any fashion? Read my lips..."POINT GUARD"...understand?


----------



## -33- (Aug 6, 2002)

kMart isnt as good as sheed...he cant shoot like sheed but can defend better....even trade really


----------



## The Enigma (May 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Caron_Butler</b>!
> kMart isnt as good as sheed...he cant shoot like sheed but can defend better....even trade really


On the perimeter... Yes
Against SF's... Yes
In the paint...No way

Kenyon could not even begin to dream of defending Duncan, Webber and Garnett the way Rasheed does.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> Here are deals I would find relatively acceptable (as a Blazers fan) involving the Nets and Blazers:
> 
> NJ gets Rasheed, Patterson
> ...


Personally I don't like either trades.

-Petey


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> 
> We have no indication that Portland is willing to do this, but the NY area media seems to put out rumors like this several times every offseason. For some reason Portland's talent always seems to be available on the cheap in their various wild senerios that never happen. Why should they care about Portland's interests when they are just stirring the pot to sell some papers.
> ...


If you read the first post this rumor first hit out via Portland's media outlets.

-Petey


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Epadfield</b>!
> Fanball's View:
> 
> 
> ...


If you read today's papers, you will notice how they are saying the Blazers are not so willing to take on Mutombo's contract.

-Petey


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

There was an article in today's Oregonian about the trade, I haven't seen it posted here yet so here it is.

http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/sports/1060430800320070.xml

This is the part that caught my eye.



> As general manager of the Nets, Nash picked Martin with the No. 1 selection in the 2000 draft.


Do GMs have a blind spot for players they have a history with? If I'm not mistaken, the last time our GM decided he had to trade for a player he had a history with, it was Kemp.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

I am pretty sure that Thorn picked Martin, not Nash, Nash was not there then. I remember Thorn picked NJ knowing we had the 1st overall pick and it would allow him to mold the team in a manner he saw more fit.

-Petey


----------



## RipCityJB (Jan 7, 2003)

> Yes excellent point, but it has been reported in the Media that it was a Wallace for Patterson or Sabonis for Martin and Mutombo deal, because I think no matter how much the Blazers might claim to want to dump salary, I don't think they mean it. If you were going to trade Sabonis for Camby, which I read a few times on this board, and I think on ESPN before the draft, how is that dumping salary? He is basically just being traded for another player in this case.


As I have seen several posters (such as the above) claim to know what the Blazers intentions are (i.e. dump salary, improve image, etc)......lets clarify. From the mouth of John Nash, the Blazers have three co-existing priorities:

**Reduce payroll
**Improve image
**Maintain status as a play-off team

The Blazers aren't out looking to "dump salary". If that was the case, half the team would be gone already. Same if the only priority was to get rid of players that have damaged the image. (you want image problems, try selling a 25 win team to Portland). 

Anyway, the Blazers are looking for deals that in some way accomplish all three of the above objectives. Of course that's a tall order...and that's why no deals have happened yet and may not happen.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RipCityJB</b>!
> As I have seen several posters (such as the above) claim to know what the Blazers intentions are (i.e. dump salary, improve image, etc)......lets clarify. From the mouth of John Nash, the Blazers have three co-existing priorities:
> 
> **Reduce payroll
> ...


I didn't claim to know their intentions. I am just making my point by referring to posts in this forum by Blazer loyals. I am also making my point by making reference to a reported or suggested ESPN trade of Camby for Sabonis, and that doesn't reduce salary does it, if Sabonis' contract comes off in a few days, if he is released?

You also really think if the Blazers wanted to dump salary they just could? I thought salarys in the NBA had to match up unless teams were under the cap.

-Petey


----------



## Anima (Jun 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Petey</b>!
> 
> 
> If you read today's papers, you will notice how they are saying the Blazers are not so willing to take on Mutombo's contract.
> ...


Petey- Well it seems to be that when ever I read about a trade in a NY paper (especially the Post) is says the NY team turned the trade down if it doesn't go though. Now I maybe wrong about that but I am just going by what I have seen in the past.

AP Article- Power forward Kenyon Martin is putting pressure on the New Jersey Nets for a maximum contract extension *despite failing the team with the NBA championship on the line just months ago.*

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ap-nets-martin&prov=ap&type=lgns

OUCH


----------



## RipCityJB (Jan 7, 2003)

Petey.....by quoting you I meant no disrespect....your posts are well thought out and intelligent....you are a welcome guest here in Rip City! I just wanted it to be clear that the stated intention of the Blazers is that any deal that be made make sense from a competitive standpoint in addition to the other priorities (image/payroll).


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RipCityJB</b>!
> Petey.....by quoting you I meant no disrespect....your posts are well thought out and intelligent....you are a welcome guest here in Rip City! I just wanted it to be clear that the stated intention of the Blazers is that any deal that be made make sense from a competitive standpoint in addition to the other priorities (image/payroll).


Thanks, I enjoy Rip City, you guys are a fun bunch to post with. If you guys rip the Nets off I swear I will show up at your party, pay the fare and beat you all down. At the moment, I am not joking.

-Petey


----------



## PetroToZoran (Jul 2, 2003)

I honestly don't see how this trade will help Portland other than getting rid of Wallace and possibly Patterson.

As a Nets fan, I love the Arvydas/Wallace for Martin/Mutombo trade, but as for Portland, it makes no sense. For us, we get an excellent offensive player who can hit the 3. With the addition of Wallace and Mourning, we could change our style from run and gun to a conventional half court offense. Wallace has also cooled down quite a bit. His technical foul numbers were way down. I don't know why Nash would want to trade him.


----------



## Paxil (Jan 1, 2003)

Johnycash, no doubt Sheed would be amazing in the East. His T's are way down, didn't get tossed from a single game last year. Martin would help Portland in the rebound dept... and he is one mean dog... 

I don't think Portland can expect to get equal value for Sheed. Some team is going to be verrrrrry happy.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

*KENYON MARTIN PLEASE DO IT*

I would sign the papers in a heartbeat.
Not that he doesn't come with baggage,but not quite as 
large of a matching set..as Sheed.

Actually I confess..
I love this guy !
I was so sorry for him the night he broke his leg in school.
I wondered if he would bounce back from that.

Yes,I remember how he called out other players in the playoffs,
then folded the next year.
But darn it,I love his passion.
And he is a gentleman at the podium.
Plus he is one mean guy under the basket..


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

This is like some bad nightmare. Every day it's:

Wallace for [inferior player]!

Why can't we ever get a horrible trade rumour in *our* favour?

John Nash Thinking About Dealing Wallace for Duncan!

Wallace out, Marbury and Amare in!

Wallace To Be Dealt For McGrady, Gooden!


I'm getting mightily tired of all sorts of trade rumours where Portland gets considerably worse. I'm sure *even* trades are out of the question, so how about some unfair trades that favour Portland for a change? Can we do that? Just once? For Minstrel?

Won't someone please think of Minstrel? :sigh:


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

Does this make you happy?

Portland trades: 

PG Damon Stoudamire
(6.9 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 3.5 apg in 22.3 minutes) 

Portland receives: 

SF Tracy McGrady
(32.1 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 5.5 apg in 39.4 minutes) 

Change in team outlook: +25.2 ppg, +3.9 rpg, and +2.0 apg.


Orlando trades: 

SF Tracy McGrady
(32.1 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 5.5 apg in 39.4 minutes) 

Orlando receives: 

PG Damon Stoudamire
(6.9 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 3.5 apg in 59 games) 

Change in team outlook: -25.2 ppg, -3.9 rpg, and -2.0 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

*Because I think he is comparable to this*

I will give you a really good deal on my new WRX..
because it has some dents on the side.
I mean the car is perfect,but those dents are gonna cost alot to
be repaired.

So,I have to drop my price I am asking.
This car is a little rocket,but...
it's damaged goods.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>gambitnut</b>!
> Does this make you happy?
> 
> Portland trades:
> ...


Thanks, man. It's a start. Now let's make a seven page thread out of it, where we discuss how fair it is and Magic fans can come and decry it.

This would make my soul happy.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

*Re: Because I think he is comparable to this*



> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> I will give you a really good deal on my new WRX..
> because it has some dents on the side.
> I mean the car is perfect,but those dents are gonna cost alot to
> ...


I don't really think he's "damaged goods." Even when you take his positives, subtract out his negatives, he still comes out ahead of players like Martin or Bosh or whoever.

I thought Martin would give Duncan a battle...he was like a mosquito buzzing an elephant. Wallace really *does* give Duncan a tough time, *and* Wallace is a threat that Duncan has to defend hard. Martin, half the time, defended himself nicely by missing wide open shots.

The other key point here is that Portland *doesn't have to deal Wallace*. If those "dents" reduce his price to other people, but he's still totally servicable, then he has more value as a keeper then in trade. Hold onto him, use him and forget about the dents. I'd rather have a dented high performance car then a pristine Dodge Rabbit.


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> 
> Thanks, man. It's a start. Now let's make a seven page thread out of it, where we discuss how fair it is and Magic fans can come and decry it.
> ...


What does Orlando do if Gaines isn't as good as they think? They need a good veteran PG. I know McGrady might seem like a steep price to pay, but when you have an urgent need, you do whatever it takes to fill it!


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

*Re: Re: Because I think he is comparable to this*



> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> I'd rather have a dented high performance car then a pristine Dodge Rabbit.


I dunno, a Dodge Rabbit sounds like a collectors item to me. I could park it next to my VW Dart.

barfo


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>gambitnut</b>!
> 
> 
> What does Orlando do if Gaines isn't as good as they think? They need a good veteran PG. I know McGrady might seem like a steep price to pay, but when you have an urgent need, you do whatever it takes to fill it!


It's easier to find a high-level shooting guard than it is to find a high-level point guard.

Besides, what has T-Mac ever won? He's never made it past the second round (he got there once with the Raptors). Stoudamire has gone all the way to the Western Conference Finals.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

*Boy,Wallace high performance??*

You mean he has the talent to be high performance,don't you?
Heck you could pick a player off any team and tell about another
player they really abuse..
But it's those other 84 games..he has to show up for. More than Duncan. And I would say Tim usually comes out the winner.

Give Kenyon his due here..
he is young and fearless.
Rasheed's act is getting abit old.
Or are you happy with flame out after flame out with him
disappearing?
It's weird..he is not a playoff type.
you would think he would be,but most of my memories of him
are not good ones in the playoffs.

Besides,please name a playoff game that was dominated by
Sheed. Ever.
You have to admit that Kenyon does prety darn well for a young
player to the league.
Hell,I am not saying he is the missing link.
But we need an aggresive player..and he sure is that.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

*Re: Boy,Wallace high performance??*



> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> 
> It's weird..he is not a playoff type.
> you would think he would be,but most of my memories of him
> are not good ones in the playoffs.


Err, then I think you're letting your hatred of him get in the way. In the 2000 Western Conference Finals against the Lakers, he *averaged* over 30 points per game. That's *very* dominant.

In the 2002 playoffs, when they lost in the first round, Wallace had enormous statistics against Shaq and the Lakers. The 2001 playoffs I don't remember clearly what Wallace did, but I do remember that he was one of only a couple players to actually play well.

You don't make a good case against Wallace when you *only* mention the negatives and *never* mention any positives. A strong case would be to mention both, so you have credibility of a balanced opinion, and then explain why the negatives are more important than the positives.

Instead, every post of yours about Wallace is: Wallace is a choker, punk, and a jerk. He always sucks, he never plays well. Maybe he did well in one game, other than that, never. He'll never be good, he never was good, etc.

I have no problem, really, with people who want to deal Wallace. But I don't think changing the facts, like saying he's never done well in the playoffs (when, in fact, most of his best performances have been in the playoffs) adds to your case.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

*but you know what?*

when Portland really needed him in that last 10 minutes...
he did what?
zip.
his 30 points were a mute point.

If you don't get the rebound that will get you the game,if you don't get that layup that wins the game..
who cares if you got 50 points???

PLEASE !!!!!!!
STOP SAYING I HATE HIM !!
I DO NOT HATE HIM !!!!
you are rude to say that.
for gods sake pick up any periodical,newspaper,talk show,radio,
it's always the same topic about Rasheed.
You act like this is JUST ME..


He is not a dominant player. Tim Duncan is.
I maintain he is not even close to winning THE BIG GAMES like
Tim.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

*Re: but you know what?*



> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> when Portland really needed him in that last 10 minutes...
> he did what?
> zip.
> his 30 points were a mute point.


Ah, I see. So your contention is, unless he was scoring every minute of the game, he wasn't really all that dominant.

Fine then. Wallace has never had a good playoff performance in his life.



> PLEASE !!!!!!!
> STOP SAYING I HATE HIM !!
> I DO NOT HATE HIM !!!!
> you are rude to say that.


Rude? Saying you hate Wallace is hardly a personal attack. And the fact that you insult him in mostly every post you make about him certainly suggests you either hate or really, really, really dislike him.



> for gods sake pick up any periodical,newspaper,talk show,radio,
> it's always the same topic about Rasheed.
> You act like this is JUST ME..


I never said it was JUST YOU. I said YOU leave out rather key facts, or make things up, like saying he's never good in the playoffs. I fully agree other people do that, too.



> He is not a dominant player. Tim Duncan is.


Lots of players commit the sin of not being as good as Tim Duncan. Like every player in the league except Shaquille O'Neal and Tim Duncan.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

*do me a favor*

drop dead

i am so sick of you arguing every post..

JJ, With all due respect, take 10 deep breaths and re.....lax. It'll do your heart some good. I think it's been well documented regarding how many of us feel about some of the Blazers' (and other) players. Keeping all that in mind, we've all just continued to learn how to get along - as hard as that may seem - despite our sometimes passionate differences. This is one of those Kodak moments. Cool? Cool.~ABM


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Then maybe discussion forums aren't your thing, if you get sick of disagreement.

I didn't insult you a single time. And you tell me to drop dead. But *I'm* rude. Gotcha.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> Then maybe discussion forums aren't your thing, if you get sick of disagreement.


Reminds of the argument clinic...

B: WHAT DO YOU WANT? 

M: Well, I was told outside that... 

B: Don't give me that, you snotty-faced heap of parrot droppings! 

M: What? 

B: Shut your festering gob, you tit! Your type really makes me puke, you vacuous, coffee-nosed, maloderous, pervert!!! 

M: Look, I CAME HERE FOR AN ARGUMENT, I'm not going to just stand...!! 

B: OH! Oh, I'm sorry, but this is abuse. 

M: Oh, I see, well, that explains it. 

B: Ah, yes, you want room 12A. Just along the corridor. 

M: Oh. Thank you very much. Sorry. 

B: Not at all. 

M: Thank you. (Under his breath) Stupid git!!


----------



## Terrible (Jan 3, 2003)

Sheed for Kmart is a crappy trade!!!!! Kmart best and only quality is that he's fearless, cause without it he would be a bench player. He has no outside shot, he's smaller than Dirk,Tim,CWebb and Sheed. All of the guys above school him and show just how raw he is. If Sheed is to be traded, try finding someone who wont be just as hot tempered, and worse of a basketball player. 

Kmart is a dirty player and I don't think he'd make Portland one bit better. 

This trade only makes the Nets better.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Terrible</b>!
> Sheed for Kmart is a crappy trade!!!!! Kmart best and only quality is that he's fearless, cause without it he would be a bench player. He has no outside shot, he's smaller than Dirk,Tim,CWebb and Sheed. All of the guys above school him and show just how raw he is. If Sheed is to be traded, try finding someone who wont be just as hot tempered, and worse of a basketball player.
> 
> Kmart is a dirty player and I don't think he'd make Portland one bit better.
> ...


I recalled what you said in the playoffs, and I brought it up just a few hours ago. It's admirable you still feel the same way, while some Blazer fans do seem to think highly of the trade (as also others don't).

-Petey


----------



## Terrible (Jan 3, 2003)

Okay!


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Terrible</b>!
> Okay!


I meant it as a compliment... some people change their minds easily, you still on the same thinking from before, that is all.

-Petey


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>barfo</b>!
> 
> 
> Reminds of the argument clinic...
> ...


Barfo, you consistently sum things up oh so very well. If no one's said it recently, thanks for being the poster that you are.

:ghug:

:grinning:


----------



## Terrible (Jan 3, 2003)

Oh I guess I missed what you where saying Petey! No worries! 

But I'm still not trading my thug for yours! NO! NEVER! NOT!


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Terrible</b>!
> Oh I guess I missed what you where saying Petey! No worries!
> 
> But I'm still not trading my thug for yours! NO! NEVER! NOT!


I want our thug too! So no worries, stink we aren't the GMs though then.

-Petey


----------



## brom (Aug 1, 2003)

:upset: 
So I strolled into work this afternoon, and to my dissmay I am informed of the potentail Sheed/K-Mart trade. And to say the least I was furious and couldn't wait to get on here and rant and rave about how bad of a move this would be. After reading through the other posts, however, I am not quite so upset.
It brings a smile to my face to see that I am far from alone in this.
Sheed is, without a doubt, a far better all round player than Martin. In fact I'd say the only things he (Martin) has over Wallace is slightly (and only slightly) better D, and his agressiveness. And all that agression isn't allways a benifit, after all this is the "Flagrant Flyer" we're talking about here.


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

This trade is simply a bad trade. Martin just straight up doesn't fit on a team where Zach Randolph is untouchable. If it were Rodney Rodgers and Richard Jefferson instead of Martin I'd do it in a second. Jefferson, OTOH, would be a pretty good fit at the 3. He doesn't have very good outside shooting percentages but he rarely shoots from outside the arc (24 in 80 games) so maybe he's a better shooter than his numbers indicate. Jefferson also doesn't have the character issues that come along with Martin. 

c- Davis, Mutombo
pf- Zach, Rodgers
sf- Jefferson, Woods
sg- Bonzi, Woods
pg- DA, Damon, McInnis

I'm done with my pipe dream for the day.


----------



## Bwatcher (Dec 31, 2002)

*Apparently (as usual) the rumor appears after deal is dead*

New York and New Jersey papers are writing some Sunday on the Kmart situation. Nothing new except the following tidbit from the Ledger:

"Portland GM John Nash, the former Nets boss, suggested yesterday that it is no longer viable: "When rumors get out," Nash said, in his only substantive comment, "it's well after the discussion has taken place." 

http://www.nj.com/nets/ledger/index.ssf?/base/sports-1/106048987242550.xml


So, it would appear that those against the trade can breath easy for awhile.

Also, perhaps interesting, is that the Nets are talking about plotting to get KG a year from now.


----------



## KIDBLAZE (Jul 8, 2003)

> Portland GM John Nash, the former Nets boss, suggested yesterday that it is no longer viable: "When rumors get out," Nash said, in his only substantive comment, "it's well after the discussion has taken place."





IT'S NOT TRUE, THANK THE ALMIGHTY GOD ITS NOT TRUE:worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>barfo</b>!
> 
> M: Look, I CAME HERE FOR AN ARGUMENT, I'm not going to just stand...!!
> 
> ...


Ah, classic Monty Python. Good stuff.


----------



## Anima (Jun 3, 2003)

I don't think these have been posted yet but they have been then I am sorry.

http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/john_canzano/index.ssf?/base/sports/106051651986922.xml

http://www.nypost.com/sports/nets/2459.htm


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Epadfield</b>!
> I don't think this has been post yet but if it has then I am sorry.
> 
> http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/john_canzano/index.ssf?/base/sports/106051651986922.xml


Yeah... I was just about to post this link, too, [sarcasm]expressing my confusion over Canzano's stance. Normally he's so supportive of Blazers players and the organizational direction.[/sarcasm]

That he would suddenly put "team leadership" as more important than the three goals of the team (winning, financial responsibility, character) shows either (a) he's out of step with the goals of the organization, (b) he doesn't understand basketball, and/or (c) he just wants to see Rasheed Wallace gone.

To go a slightly different direction here, let's look at the basic rumored deal from the perspective of the three rules (which seem to be a pretty good set of things to accomplish; we might quibble over their relative importance but they all have their value):

*Winning Games*: Does trading Rasheed + Player (either Sabas or RP) for Martin + Dikembe help the team win games?

_Short Term_: I would argue no. As several people have stated, Martin plays pretty much the same position as Zach Randolph. Deke would be an upgrade at the backup 5 (if Sabonis decided not to come back), but the backup 5 simply doesn't win that many games in the NBA. Losing Patterson would mean losing one of our best defenders and hurt.

_Long Term_: Some might argue that Martin's younger than Rasheed, so in the long run this deal would look better. I would argue differently. Martin is not a kid. He's going to be 25 in December, and he's about 3 years, 3 months younger than Rasheed... which makes him older than people probably think he is. Deke is obviously not a factor long-term. I just don't see the Blazers winning more games in the long term because of this deal.

*Financial Sense*: Does trading Rasheed + Player (either Sabas or RP) for Martin + Dikembe make sense financially?

_If Patterson were traded_: Deke has a disgusting contract in that it's worth more than $37m over two years. Kenyon Martin's agent is seriously talking about a maximum extension. Wallace makes entirely too much money next year, but he has but one year left on the deal. Patterson's overpaid and on a long-term deal, so moving him would make good financial sense but doesn't do NEARLY enough to ameliorate the money commitments coming back to Portland.

_If Sabonis were traded_: Financially, giving up Sabas would make the deal even worse. Portland would still have the long-term committment to RP and no immediate relief in the form of Sabonis's non-guaranteed deal.

*Character*: Does trading Rasheed + Player (either Sabas or RP) for Martin + Dikembe help rebuild the perception of strong character on th Blazers?

Martin has on-court issues, just like Wallace. He has publically chastised a teammate (KVH) for not showing up in the Finals. I don't see him being any sort of improvement over Rasheed here.

It could be argued that moving Patterson in the deal might tip the scales here in favor of "yes, it does help rebuild the character perception".

Getting back to Canzano's column, he says point-blank that finances aren't a factor ("if you're the Blazers, payroll isn't the key factor in this trade"... I should hope not, considering the Blazers get hosed in that area), and that the team will be less effective on the court ("If there is an objection to trading Wallace, it should only come from Blazers coach Maurice Cheeks, who doesn't yet have the safety net of a fair contract extension").

He seems to be saying that Martin's "leadership" would be of value to Portland (is a 8th seed with leadership better than a 6th seed without it), and that it would give the new regime credibility to trade its best player.

It would give it credibility to the fans/media who think that change for its own sake is good or who have a huge chip on their shoulder about Rasheed, but to everyone else it would make Patterson and Nash look foolish.

Ed O.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> Yeah... I was just about to post this link, too, [sarcasm]expressing my confusion over Canzano's stance. Normally he's so supportive of Blazers players and the organizational direction.[/sarcasm]
> ...


Although it's been said, many times, many ways,
John Canzano is a freaking idiot
I hope he's gone by Christmas, or so.

barfo


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> To go a slightly different direction here, let's look at the basic rumored deal from the perspective of the three rules (which seem to be a pretty good set of things to accomplish; we might quibble over their relative importance but they all have their value):
> 
> *Winning Games*: Does trading Rasheed + Player (either Sabas or RP) for Martin + Dikembe help the team win games?
> ...


I agree with most of your points here ED O. I don't see financial relief if we sign KMART to a large max deal. I do see some gain on the leadership part of MArtin though. You brought up the KVH incident, which I have mixed feeling on. Portland might have gained some benefit from having a player call players out for not working hard and screwing around. No one would know for sure, but Bonzi who i think is a follower, not a leader might have been more consistant, rather than follow Sheed who doesn't need to work as hard, because he has more natural talent. 
I think Nash is trying to do all three, but in the end he will have a near impossible task ahead of him. If he improves the character, keeps us competitive (even if not next year, but two years out), and puts a product that is fun to watch, I'll be happy.


----------



## blazerfan4life (Dec 31, 2002)

I like Deke..he got a bad deal in NJ..he can play when he is healthy and it really is a Martin for Wallace deal anyway..i would do it..then off with Damon


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

My god. 

How can we blazer fans overrate rasheed sooooo much. 

At least K-Mart plays his butt off every game. He is only 25 also. 

He is a better rebounder, passer, and shoots a better FG% than Wallace. Also, he is a better defender. He DOES NOT dissapear in the playoffs, He averaged 18 points and 9 rebounds along with 3 assists. 


Sheed is 29, his peak year was 2002 and is only going to get worse. 

It amazes me how much yall overvalue his butt.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

If it was just Martin for Wallace, then maybe we would make the deal. And maybe everybody on these boards would want to make the deal. But they want us to take on a terrible contract as well. About 40 million over 2 years. That's a deal breaker. Why can't some people understand *that*

Oh yeah, and we'd have to re-sign Martin next year. How about 12 million per year for 6 years? Next season, we'd have Martin and Mutombo signed for 30 million between the two of them. Not exactly my idea of cost cutting.


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ThatBlazerGuy</b>!
> My god.
> 
> How can we blazer fans overrate rasheed sooooo much.
> ...



I think he is overated also, but I'm just concerned the KMART isn't worth and max contract. I love his hustle, and he did play Duncan as good any any other PF. Since he is pressuring NJ, maybe we can get a better deal. I could care less about all the complaining about Dekes contract. It will expire when most of are other huge contacts. I don't have a problem being patient with trading Sheed, but I will be interested to see what Sheed fans say if we let Sheed walk for nothing next summer. Someone will probably pay him and our trade options with him might dry up, or he might pull a BGrant and say S & T me or I'll sign for the MLE.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

I agree we may be able to get a little bit more from NJ. 

Maby we could pry Rogers and Zoran and add Patterson...

Patterson, Wallace, Sabas for K-Mart, Deke, Zoran, Rogers

That would be a awesome trade. NJ would maby add even more, because Wallace+Sabas gives them enough cap room to sign KG next year.


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ThatBlazerGuy</b>!
> I agree we may be able to get a little bit more from NJ.
> 
> Maby we could pry Rogers and Zoran and add Patterson...
> ...


Mark Cuban should be all over getting KMART. He would add a lot to that team. Reboulding, leadership, defense and more hustle. I think we can do better, but this deal is better than others listed. I would have liked to get Bosh, but Salary wise we would have had to pick up a lot of garbage. Kmart, Deke, the rights to Nenad Krstic, and 2005 first round pick.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Ya, i forgot about Nenad. 

If they included him i would definatley do that trade. 

They have to add a pick and Nenad or Zoran. Not because the Sheed/Sabas for Deke/Martin trade is not fair already, but because they REALLY want the cap room, so we should try and get as much as we can.


----------



## MercyKersey (Jul 22, 2003)

I only read the past few posts so this might have been brought up but..
Trading Sheed for martin is seriously one of the stupidest trades ive heard. Zach randolph and martin both play the same style of game, they pound it inside and play low post. Rasheed can play outside in which makes it possible for Sheed and Zach to coexist at the same time on the court and make on of the most powerful frontcourts in the nba!
If you put Zach and Kmart on the floor they cancel eachother out cuz there both just clogging up the lane and neither of them can shoot from the outside. Sheed can not only shoot from the outside, he can shoot from 5 feet behind the 3pt line..
Making this trade makes us much worse as a team, and i would argue that kenyon martin character is worse then sheeds.. You never see sheed cheap shot guys and try to break there necks or put guys out of the league, kenyon martin gets suspended for trying to hurt people. Whats worse assualting someone or not talking to the media? I thought so...


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ThatBlazerGuy</b>!
> I agree we may be able to get a little bit more from NJ.
> 
> Maby we could pry Rogers and Zoran and add Patterson...
> ...


The Nets would still be over the cap, so they couldn't afford KG.

The Nets didn't sign a backup PG, spent all their MLE on Mutombo... Johnson is a cav (I think), and they planned to play Zoran as their backup pg... if they trade him, there would be a whole there next season. 

For those interested, Zoran played vs. Parker today, he was schooled by 11 to 2, and Zoran's team lost by 30. Disappointing.

-Petey


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ThatBlazerGuy</b>!
> Ya, i forgot about Nenad.
> 
> If they included him i would definatley do that trade.
> ...


Like I said, we are actually over the cap without the 2 still.

We have alot of money locked up, and we have spent our MLE the last 2 years, that is 10 million dollars right there, plus Jason Kidd, and Kittles old contract.

I hope they don't part with Krstic or Zoran. Although I won't mind to see 2 picks being exchanged.

-Petey


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

*How about a K-Mart deal that doesn't involve Sheed?*

The Blazers don't really need K-Mart... and the Nets don't really need Wallace, so let's move on. 

How about another deal that could get rid of the Nets' tough guy without giving them our best player?

Dallas has recently been making noises about wanting to get tougher. Let them have Martin... 

Portland sends:
Damon Stoudamire (to Dallas)
Ruben Patterson (to New Jersey)

Dallas trades:
Nick Van Exel (to Portland)
Raef LaFrentz (to New Jersey)

New Jersey trades:
Dikembe Mutombo (to Portland)
Kenyon Martin (to Dallas)

Why Portland does it: Patterson and Stoudamire are at the top of the Blazers' list of players to jettison. Getting a better PG is a great move - suffering a salary loadstone sucks, but at least it's only for two years, and he's at a position we're short in. 

Why Dallas does it: toughness. Kenyon Martin is a godsend for a frontcourt desperately in need of some bone-shattering attitude. Stoudamire's an excellent backup, and can play off the ball, for when the Mavs want to keep Nash in, and keep the good shooting on the floor. 

Why New Jersey does it: they get a shot-blocker in LaFrentz and a player with every bit of K-Mart's ferocity in Ruben Patterson. Offensively, LaFrentz has better versatility than does Martin, and Patterson has that nose for the goal that they'd give up by losing Martin.

salary-wise, this is close, but Portland might need to throw in Jeff McInnis, or someone, to make it all work out.


----------



## PetroToZoran (Jul 2, 2003)

K-Mart/Mutombo for LaFrentz and Patterson? 

No way and here are the reasons why.

1. Nets want to save cap room! Getting Lafrentz forever will not help them get under the luxury tax anytime soon.
2. K-Mart is our second best player. There is no way we take other team's left overs for him.
3. We don't have room for ANOTHER center.
4. We won't have a power forward in our lineup.
5. The only reason we would trade Martin is to not pay him the max. So what do we do in return? Trade for a player considerably worse than Martin with a contract near the Max. Makes sense? No.

Next trade.


----------



## Blaze (Jan 25, 2003)

A variation on the Dal/NJ/Port idea:
Port sends Wallace and Patterson to NJ
NJ sends Mutombo and Martin to Port
Port then sends Damon and Davis to Dallas for NVE and LaFrentz. 


I think that even though some of these contracts are ugly, the Blazers will still reduce payroll next year with Kemp's contract coming off the books. If they decide to waive Sabas, then they save additional money this year. 

I understand to most people in this forum, making this trade with NJ sounds terrible, but to the fans who are not as passionate as the ones here, they (the ones I talk to) would love to Sheed go. 

I wouldn't be surprised to hear this trade resurface later this week once Sabas has his physical. We'll see.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Maby we can pull off a 3 way trade where we send Wallace to NJ, NJ sends Martin to another team and that team sends us a good young SF or C.


----------

