# Reef to Minnesota



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

Insider is mentioning a Reef for Wally and Kandi.

They aren't saying it is in the works, but just as a potential deal.

Play.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

this would suck for portland kandi and wally world both have bad contracts


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> Insider is mentioning a Reef for Wally and Kandi.
> 
> They aren't saying it is in the works, but just as a potential deal.
> ...


I think Minny could get more.  (j/k)


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

If the Wolves match and keep Hassell, this wouldn't be bad for the Blazers from a "meeting needs" perspective. However, I could see DA and Wally butting heads something fierce. DA would probably have to go in that scenario as well.

PBF


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

a SG/SF again? + a center 

good pieces of the puzzle... but not those 2...

then what do you do with Miles and Patterson?



I use to like the Kandi man but he has been very unreliable at best

Note: the htread title is misleading... is should say idea or Insider speculation, etc...


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

I said it in the past - KG can and does play a SF role. Something tells me that Reef wouldn't be on the bench.

That team would also be CRAZY!

KG from the midrange into Reef ... who do you double and you can't leave either of them in single coverage.

That's nasty. If Minnesota could do that deal ... they had best be all over it.

Play.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

but Portland would not IMHO


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
> a SG/SF again? + a center
> 
> good pieces of the puzzle... but not those 2...
> ...


Miles takes the one year contract. Patterson is fodder.

I think Kandi is something that Portland could use. Theo is going out soon.

Insider mentioned maybe DA, Miles and Step for Kandi and Wally as well.

Play.


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

Maybe this was the type of 1 for 2 deal Nash alluded to...

I'm not sure if I'd do it... Wally and Kandi are both questionable in attitude and durability. 

Nevertheless, we'd look something like this...

NVE/Damon/Telfair
Wally/NVE/DA
Miles/Patterson/Woods
Randolph/Ratliff
Kandi/Ratliff

Solid 3-man rotation up front if all parties can stay healthy. Ratliff and Kandi would look nice in the game together - Kandi can score inside and both are solid interior defenders. Wally provides more outside shooting...

There are definitely good things about the deal, but kiss capspace goodbye. If they do this deal, they could look near the deadline to deal Damon, NVE, or both for another piece...


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> 
> That's nasty. If Minnesota could do that deal ... they had best be all over it.


Nash DID say that if the Wolves match and keep Hassell, there might be a 2-for-1 deal happening in the near future. Anyone here think this (Shareef for Wally + Kandi) is what he was alluding to?

PBF


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Can someone please tell me how R-free agents and their contracts work. 

This was my thought. 

Minnesota matches Hassell then trades him along with Wally and Kandi to Portland for DA, SAR and filler or whatever. 

I have no idea if this works financially or is Hassell can even be traded like that. It was just a thought I had. Maybe that's why Portland had the press conference?


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Wally's contract is terrible. I really don't see this as a deal that Nash and co would do aftr all the patience they've shown. If we could somehom offload Patterson or Anderson's contract, then I could see us considering a deal like this, but as it is, we'd be hamstrung for the next 5 years by Wally's bloated contract.


----------



## 4-For-Snapper (Jan 1, 2003)

Please God don't let us pick up Wally World! Kandi man I can deal with, but we could do better for SAR, IMHO. I'm not saying we can get a superstar for him or anything, but we sure could do better than this deal. 

No to this trade all the way!


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>mediocre man</b>!
> Can someone please tell me how R-free agents and their contracts work.
> 
> This was my thought.
> ...


If Minny matches and keeps Hassell, I don't believe they can trade him. Nor would I expect them to.

PBF


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I know it may be a unpopular idea to bring Wally in, but he does kinda fit the bill of What Portland needs. A sweet shooting SG. Now I know the Deefense issue,but let's get real if a guy can shoot the 3 and play D then you have an all NBA type talent, and that would be unattainable for Portland in all likelyhood.

Kandi's contract ain't so bad in fact it's pretty good, he's signed for this season and next season is all. Last year is only 5.9 mil. For a backup to Theo that isn't bad, and lets face it there really aren't many decent centers out there anyway.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ProudBFan</b>!
> 
> 
> If Minny matches and keeps Hassell, I don't believe they can trade him. Nor would I expect them to.
> ...


they could if it were a S&T agreed upon in advance.


----------



## O2K (Nov 19, 2002)

judging from what nash is doing, i doubt this would happen because of the contract situation, they both have long expensive contracts, and judging from what nash wants to do i doubt this is gonna happen


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

I think I would do it, but only if we had a Damon/Woods/1st rounder for Kidd deal set up too. 

Think...

PG- Kidd/NVE
SG- Wally/DA
SF- Miles/Patterson
PF- Zach/Kandi
C- Theo/Kandi

That is a SICK roster.


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> I know it may be a unpopular idea to bring Wally in, but he does kinda fit the bill of What Portland needs.


Portland needs an offensive-minded SF who has had major problems defending SG's in the past?

Portland needs a player who is the only Timberwolf in 9 years to have a major problem with Kevin Garnett?

Portland needs a player who has only played 80 games over the last two years?

Portland needs a player who would make $63 million over the next 5 years after being traded?

I respectfully disagree. There are better options than Szczerbiak.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>O2K</b>!
> judging from what nash is doing, i doubt this would happen because of the contract situation, they both have long expensive contracts, and judging from what nash wants to do i doubt this is gonna happen


Umm Kandi is only under contract this year and next year and at 5.4 and 5.9 that really is an average sized contract....Wally on the other hand....

Let's remember though that Wally this year was out a lot of the season and kind was lost on the team once he came back.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> 
> they could if it were a S&T agreed upon in advance.


Even though the Blazers already signed Hassell to an offer sheet?

That would mean that the Blazers would be giving up players to Minny to get a player they already signed to an offer sheet - for the same amount (since Minny can only match - not increase - the offer) as they offered him.

Giving away players for free? Where's the sense in that?

PBF


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ProudBFan</b>!
> 
> 
> Even though the Blazers already signed Hassell to an offer sheet?
> ...


See the Kenyon Martin deal with Denver


----------



## Sánchez AF (Aug 10, 2003)

Nice pick for Minny bad for the Trail Balzers.


----------



## Backboard Cam (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> Insider is mentioning a Reef for Wally and Kandi.
> 
> They aren't saying it is in the works, but just as a potential deal.
> ...


So what does your friend think of that?

My guess is that the trade is unlikely because (as mentioned) the Blazers don't want a big contract like Wally's unless it's a marquee player.

Backboard


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> 
> See the Kenyon Martin deal with Denver


Martin never signed an offer sheet. The sign-and-trade was worked out BEFORE the offer sheet was signed.

Hassell has already signed an offer sheet, so he can't be traded.

Further, if the Wolves match, they can't send him to Portland in trade for 12 months.

Ed O.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

Wait a minute? Hold everything! Time out!!!

Isn't Shareef going to be our starting small forward this year? Isn't he in the process of losing 25 pounds to get ready? Isn't that what we were told?

Or was that just a smokescreen to make other teams cough up better offers for Shareef?

(I hate it when that happens!)

By the way, this is a very nice offer for Shareef. Let's face it, this is the best deal we've heard about yet. If you ignore the contract situations for both of the Minnesota players, this instantly fills a couple of needs for Portland.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Excluding the contracts and money owed to them, I don't think this is necessarily a bad deal for POR at all. Say what you will about Sczerbiak, but he is a VERY good shooter IMO. Yeah, he will hurt on defense, but I don't think he is as bad as many say he is.

Wally is a career 50% FG shooter and a career 41% 3pt FG shooter. He definitely fills the need for a shooter. I actually think with a guy like Miles at SF, that POR could easily switch up their defensive assignments b\t the SG\SF spots, so that Miles would take the tougher defensive assignment and Wally the easier one. His contract isn't pretty, but I think many have come to the conclusion that having any MEANINGFUL cap space in 05' is a real longshot, unless we opt to gut the team, and IMO that just isn't a viable option. 

Olowokandi is unimpressive as a center, but he IS a capable starting center, not a great one mind you, but a capable one. He reminds me a lot of Dampier, a guy who consistently underperforms, but is adequete. The question is, does he have a "breakout" year in him? I think he could. I wouldn't mind having Olowokandi as a b\u center at all. He would even be acceptable as a starting center IMO. Like Schilly said, his contract is very palatable IMO.

This isn't a great deal out there, but it is far from the worst. I twould be a good deal for POR IMO.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Also remember that Wally was Minnesota's second best player in their series against LA. 

It seems that he is exactly what we want in a SG. If we got Hassell too, that would be great. It would make for a great SG rotation. Shooting and defense. 

Remember, this guy is one of the few guards that shoots 50% from the field. Only Matt Harping acomplished that last year if I remember correctly.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

I have been fed some mighty big turds in my Blazer fan life. I mean JR Riders-sized steaming ones. 

Olowakandi couldn't keep the starting CENTER job over guys like Ervin Johnson, Gary Trent and Mark FREAKIN Madsen. When Mark Madsen takes your job, it is officially time to end all discussion about "breakout season." 

And most matadors would be flattered to be compared to Wallyworld. The only thing that doesn't breeze by him is every percieved insult from his teammates. You put Wally and Damon in the same back court, you might as well set up the trampoline too, because at some point Theo is going to bust a hip trying to clean up all the mistakes and we are going to be left with Zach Randolph as our frontcourt defensive stopper. 

This steamer steams just a little too much for even me.


----------



## Pan Mengtu (Jun 18, 2004)

How about Hassell in a sign and trade instead of Wally? That way you don't have to take on the monster Wally contract, and instead get the player you want for what you were willing to pay him anyways.


----------



## Blazerfan024 (Aug 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pan Mengtu</b>!
> How about Hassell in a sign and trade instead of Wally? That way you don't have to take on the monster Wally contract, and instead get the player you want for what you were willing to pay him anyways.


Cant do that since Hassell signed offer sheet cant be traded for 12 months like ED.O Said.


----------



## keebs3 (Feb 19, 2004)

*Wally and Michael Olowokandi*

Sorry if this has been mentioned...

But the insider article on ESPN says a possible deal with SAR for Wally and Olowokandi (a center right?)

I know we don't need more guys, but I think these two would be good enough to make the roster and help out next year.

But who would it kick off the roster that we could use??

JMK


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Blazerfan024</b>!
> 
> Cant do that since Hassell signed offer sheet cant be traded for 12 months like ED.O Said.


I was going to post that earlier, but then I thought there MIGHT be a chance that a sign-and-trade could still happen.

Why didn't I post it? Because I think I was wrong about being wrong.

According to the Salary Cap FAQ, 


> A signed offer sheet can be rescinded within the 15 day waiting period if all three parties (the player and the two teams) agree. However, they could not do this in order to engineer a better deal (such as a sign-and-trade arrangement) between the teams.


I remembered the ability to rescind the signed offer sheet, but the second sentence kinda nixes the idea that a sign-and-trade could be worked out after a guy signs an offer sheet.

Ed O.


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

What if it weren't a better deal? As long as the monetary reward isn't greater to Hassell, that still leaves plenty of grey area.

Dan


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

I like this deal!

I think Wally is underrated by all you guys. While he isnt quite worth his contract, I'd say he is a much better value then Foyle, Fisher, Camby and some of the other FA's.

Wally's contract is better then Hassel's. Wally is a legit All Star who can help carry a team. Hassel is a decent backup but a below average starter. For their respective level of production Walley just gives you more bang for the buck.

It would be nice to ship DA of to minnesota in this deal and I think they'd accept that. 

Olowakandi is an adequate backup which the blazers do need at the center position. His deal is reasonable too.

This defentely would pave the way for a Kidd deal


----------



## sheefo13 (Jul 13, 2002)

first off, the wolves wouldnt do the trade. shareef has a bad contract himself. wally=sar. kandi is a 7 footer that can get off the ground. wolves dont need a cry baby on the team. They have a good vibe going right now with wally and spree and cassell. Unless we get something GOOD and we need it at that position, like a real SF, then we arent do this trade....


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>sheefo13</b>!
> first off, the wolves wouldnt do the trade. shareef has a bad contract himself.


You forgot to think before you posted.

Reef's contract runs out after this year.

Wally's contract is a boat anchor. 

To compare the two contracts is laughable at best.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

Even hoopshype says Kandi has developed into one of the best centers in the game. :laugh: Kandi is a bust that no one seems to give up on!

He shoots under 43%, which is not good for a center. Hey, he's a decent backup center though, just not worth 6 million a year.

I still like Wally Sczerbiak, he's proven to be a great consistant sh ooter.

I wouldn't be too upset with this trade, but I think if we're going to take on Wally's long term contract, we may as well go after Jason Kidd. This Minnesota deal would be sweetened if they'd trade Sprewell for Anderson.


----------



## Terrible (Jan 3, 2003)

We do not need Wally, he wont help us on defense and we have Van to take all our last second shots. Pass!!!!!!!!!!

At this point outside of moving SAR just to shut him up from all this whinning I'm happy with our team.

Resign Miles and we have a decent rotation.

PG- Damon, Telfair
SG- Nick, DA
SF- Miles, Patterson
PF- Zach, Outlaw
Center- Theo



Van will give us an inside outside game, no one in their right mind would let Van sit out there and shoot like they do with DA.

Get rid of SAR and maybe Q for another back up PF for Zach and call it good.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

We need a freakin shooter. Hassle will play good perimieter defense, and as long as Wally doesn't let his man blow by him by playing to tight, he'll be ok, because there are VERY few slashers in the league today who are also an outside threat.


----------



## Terrible (Jan 3, 2003)

Yega? Who in the NBA would ya rather have shooting clutch big shots than Van? Wally and Van is to much of a defensive liablity on one team.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> I was going to post that earlier, but then I thought there MIGHT be a chance that a sign-and-trade could still happen.
> ...


Why are all these crazy rules in place? The only answer I can think of is that they provide more stabilily. That piece works for me regarding a player who's been recently traded -- not much fun for a player to be on six different rosters over as many weeks. In a case like this, though, why *not* let the sign-and-trade happen?


----------

