# Official: Francis bought out (Merged)



## OneSport3 (Nov 10, 2004)

*Francis Free?*

I haven't heard anything from Blazers sources about Steve Francis being bought out. I guess the Washington Post has some info on it.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/wizardsinsider/2007/07/francis_is_free.html


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

*Re: Francis Free?*

Pardon me for my ignorance, but what benefit is it to trade one of our most productive players for a potentially good player and to buy out the other ($30 mil wasted)? Am I the only one with this thought? Is this the addition by subtraction idea? Looking at history, that idea doesn't work. Look at John Nash's recent history.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

*Re: Francis Free?*



Loyalty4Life said:


> Pardon me for my ignorance, but what benefit is it to trade one of our most productive players for a potentially good player and to buy out the other ($30 mil wasted)? Am I the only one with this thought? Is this the addition by subtraction idea? Looking at history, that idea doesn't work. Look at John Nash's recent history.


Did you miss one of the other threads where this topic has been kicked around ad nauseum?


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

*Re: Francis Free?*

I think it is a great thing and was getting worried they might not buy out Francis contract. We don't need him and saved over 30million from Zach's salary. I would have given Zach away free if some team would just take Miles and his contract. We get a young guy in Frye which I think will make a good 3 man rotation with Oden and LMA. We don't need a cancer like Francis. Why do you think the Knick fans were so happy about the Zach trade. It was partially getting Zach but I think half of their joy was getting rid of Francis.


----------



## drexlersdad (Jun 3, 2006)

*Re: Francis Free?*

I think we are counting on LMA to go for 20/10, which I think he can do.

also...

I think Frye will get major minutes this year, I see him getting 13/5, which makes up for LMA's #'s last year, give or take.


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*

Yeah, it's not my money, but this seems like a pretty crazy way to run a basketball team. Couldn't the Blazers have weaseled some kind of a draft pick out of the deal with NY, at least? I mean Channing Frye is a promising player and all, but I don't know that he alone is worth trading the team's most prolific scorer (and I'm an Aldridge fan)!


----------



## BrewBlazer (Jun 24, 2007)

*Re: Francis Free?*

$30M!? Wow, maybe now Little Stevie Franchise can buy some character.



Loyalty4Life said:


> Pardon me for my ignorance, but what benefit is it to trade one of our most productive players for a potentially good player and to buy out the other ($30 mil wasted)? Am I the only one with this thought? Is this the addition by subtraction idea? Looking at history, that idea doesn't work. Look at John Nash's recent history.


I'm pretty much with you on this.


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic (Jul 2, 2005)

*Re: Francis Free?*



Loyalty4Life said:


> Pardon me for my ignorance, but what benefit is it to trade one of our most productive players for a potentially good player and to buy out the other ($30 mil wasted)? Am I the only one with this thought? Is this the addition by subtraction idea? Looking at history, that idea doesn't work. Look at John Nash's recent history.


Everybody keeps saying addition by subtraction, but man I think we will miss him!


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Francis Free?*



BrewBlazer said:


> I'm pretty much with you on this.


Check back during the summer of 2009.


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

*Re: Francis Free?*



e_blazer1 said:


> Did you miss one of the other threads where this topic has been kicked around ad nauseum?


M'memory isn't as good as it used to be, I reckon. :boohoo:


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

*Re: Francis Free?*



HispanicCausinPanic said:


> Everybody keeps saying addition by subtraction, but man I think we will miss him!


Why would the Blazers miss Francis? He is a shoot first PG with a bad attitude and no game. He was decent earlier in his career but not now. I would even rather just go with Sergio then Francis and he isn't ready to be a NBA starting PG yet. I hope we just keep Jack unless we get a good SF or PG in trade.


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*



e_blazer1 said:


> Did you miss one of the other threads where this topic has been kicked around ad nauseum?


Ya beat me to it. And I've had a really good sarcastic remark waiting for someone to say something just like that.

But my basic feeling is that short, black hole, no defense power forwards are fools gold. Karl Malone was fools gold. As was Charles Barkley. As is Zach.

Oden + Aldridge + Frye >>>>>> Oden + Zach + Aldridge


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

*Re: Francis Free?*



Tortimer said:


> Why would the Blazers miss Francis? He is a shoot first PG with a bad attitude and no game. He was decent earlier in his career but not now. I would even rather just go with Sergio then Francis and he isn't ready to be a NBA starting PG yet. I hope we just keep Jack unless we get a good SF or PG in trade.


I think his comment was in reference to Zach.


----------



## BrewBlazer (Jun 24, 2007)

*Re: Francis Free?*




ABM said:


> Check back during the summer of 2009.


Well without a doubt I am pleased li'l stevie will never wear a Blazer uni. I do understand the reasoning behind the whole trade and buyout. For me it just seems a rather spendy ($30M) buyout.


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

*Re: Francis Free?*



Loyalty4Life said:


> I think his comment was in reference to Zach.


Sorry, I misunderstood him. Your probably right. I never have like Zach but I do think we will miss his offense but I'm really happy he is gone. Now if we can just get rid of Miles contract I will be really happy.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Francis Free?*



ebott said:


> But my basic feeling is that short, black hole, no defense power forwards are fools gold. Karl Malone was fools gold. As was Charles Barkley. As is Zach.


Um. Crazy talk. On two fronts:

1. Zach isn't nowhere near the level of Malone or Barkley.

2. How on EARTH are two of the best 10 or 12 players in NBA history "fools gold"? Because they didn't lead their teams to championships?

Man, ebott. I have no idea what's happened to your ability to use logic with regards to the NBA, but it's left you. Hope it's only temporary. 



> Oden + Aldridge + Frye >>>>>> Oden + Zach + Aldridge


No way.

Ed O.


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

*Re: Francis Free?*



Ed O said:


> No way.


I concur.



> Ed O.


I doubly concur.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Francis Free?*

It depends on the length of the buy-out. Remember, Kemps was like 15 years or something. Maybe Steve is getting 30 million over 30 years.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*



ABM said:


> Check back during the summer of 2009.



Phooey.

Chasing cap space is like trying to get rich by spending all your income on lotto tickets. Just enough people win to keep pulling in the suckers.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*



ebott said:


> Ya beat me to it. And I've had a really good sarcastic remark waiting for someone to say something just like that.
> 
> But my basic feeling is that short, black hole, no defense power forwards are fools gold. Karl Malone was fools gold. As was Charles Barkley. As is Zach.
> 
> Oden + Aldridge + Frye >>>>>> Oden + Zach + Aldridge


If you think Frye is better than Zach, you have never seen him play. He has the same weaknesses as Zach (passing, defense) and is inferior at what Zach did well (scoring, rebounding). Even that assumes he straightens out, and gets off the Theo Ratliff career path. (IE, don't ask me to play hard, the team is losing!)


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*

Time will prove it to be the *Worst trade *in the history of the Blazers.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*



MARIS61 said:


> Time will prove it to be the *Worst trade *in the history of the Blazers.


Nah, the 3 players and 2 #1 picks for Kiki still takes that prize! The Moses Malone deal is a close second.


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

*Re: Francis Free?*



MARIS61 said:


> Time will prove it to be the *Worst trade *in the history of the Blazers.



I don't think so but we shall see. I think Frye will be pretty good over the next few years for us. I would be really surpised if Zach stays out of trouble in NY. I don't even think he will do all that good for the Knicks. Maybe for the first couple months if they are lucky. I might be wrong but I really doubt it. Like I have said many times I would give Zach away for free if someone would have just taken Miles contract.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

*Re: Francis Free?*

The only way I could see this as being a good deal is if NY is taking Miles off of our hands. Then we are paying off one less year.


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*



ebott said:


> But my basic feeling is that short, black hole, no defense power forwards are fools gold. Karl Malone was fools gold. As was Charles Barkley. As is Zach.





Ed O said:


> Um. Crazy talk. On two fronts:
> 
> 1. Zach isn't nowhere near the level of Malone or Barkley.


a) you can't use Crazy talk against me. It's my thing.
b) I completely agree. 



> 2. How on EARTH are two of the best 10 or 12 players in NBA history "fools gold"? Because they didn't lead their teams to championships?


Yes. 

That's the whole point of being a professional basketball team. To try and win championships. Malone and Barkley didn't do it as the main cog. And later on in their careers when they tried to latch on with those that had (Malone with the Lakers and Barkley with the Rockets) they showed that their style of play was disruptive and ultimately their addition to their existing teams was not helpful.



> Man, ebott. I have no idea what's happened to your ability to use logic with regards to the NBA, but it's left you. Hope it's only temporary.
> 
> No way.
> 
> Ed O.


With regards to Zach I stick by all of my previous statements.

1) Record with Zach: 24-43 36% Record without Zach: 7-8 46% 
2) Zach diminishes the play of Aldridge and Roy. 
With Zach you end up with a starting lineup of oden,ZACH,ime,roy and jack with aldridge off the bench. But after trading Zach you end up with Oden, ALDRIDGE, ime, ROY and Jack with Frye off the bench.


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

*Re: Francis Free?*



ebott said:


> a)
> With regards to Zach I stick by all of my previous statements.
> 
> 1) Record with Zach: 24-43 36% Record without Zach: 7-8 46%
> ...



I know a lot of people on this forum don't agree but your right on IMO. We are better off now then with Zach.


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*



MARIS61 said:


> Time will prove it to be the *Worst trade *in the history of the Blazers.


Nah. As others have said, there are some ancient trades that will remain worse. And lest we forget the Trader Bob double-shot of Brian Grant for an overweight, drug-addicted Shawn Kemp, or the Jermaine O'Neil for career-nearly-over Dale Davis? Both trades sucked eggs.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Francis Free?*



MARIS61 said:


> Time will prove it to be the *Worst trade *in the history of the Blazers.


worse than Kiki for Byron Irvin?

worse than 5 players for Kiki?

worse than Jermaine for Stale Davis?

worse than Moses Malone for a draft pick?

worse then Clyde for Otis Thorpe?

worse than Drazen for a player we basically waived for a player that was undrafted?

worse than Jim Paxson for Jerry freaking Schisting?

puh-lease. take off the blinders.


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic (Jul 2, 2005)

*Re: Francis Free?*



HispanicCausinPanic said:


> Everybody keeps saying addition by subtraction, but man I think we will miss him!


My boy just emailed and said to get my head out of my ***! We are way better off with out him! When you put the off court crap into the picture, he had to go! My mind is now changed! There..............You Happy?!?!?!?!?!???


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

*Re: Francis Free?*

yeah i think we will be better without zbo sad to say but tis be da trooth!


----------



## wizmentor (Nov 10, 2005)

*Re: Francis Free?*

Francis Free? Could be, but he may also get a year long treatment of gastritis :lol:


----------



## Rip City Reign (Jul 1, 2007)

*Re: Francis Free?*



MARIS61 said:


> Time will prove it to be the *Worst trade *in the history of the Blazers.


I think Drazen Petrovic for Walter Davis is far worse than the Zach trade.

Zach needs a defensive center behind him. Curry is not that player. He would have fit well with Oden, but Aldridge/Oden wins more games than Zach/Oden, IMO.


----------



## sanfranduck (Jan 31, 2005)

*Re: Francis Free?*



Loyalty4Life said:


> Pardon me for my ignorance, but what benefit is it to trade one of our most productive players for a potentially good player and to buy out the other ($30 mil wasted)? Am I the only one with this thought? Is this the addition by subtraction idea? Looking at history, that idea doesn't work. Look at John Nash's recent history.


L4L, I agree with you. 

My problem isn't so much what Portland did -- get rid of Zbo's deal, remove a bad off-court influence, add Channing Frye, etc -- that's all fine. My problem is what Portland missed out on. It's the opportunity cost of that trade. Zbo was our biggest bargaining chip and our best shot at getting a prime-time, starting-caliber small forward, and we gave him away. No first round picks, no starting small forward, we got some potential cap room and a backup PF. I trust KP as much as anyone here, but I just can't help but think we could have done better.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*

since we bought him out, he shouldn't count against our cap them right?


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

*Re: Francis Free?*

so....Pro-Zach trade salary cap afficiandos.....what does this all mean now?

Is our flexibility that was supposedly going to come from this trade gone now or what?


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

*Re: Francis Free?*

Not surprisingly, this seems to be breaking down the same way as the Sheed, Bonzi, Ruben discussions always went. Those who think that talent trumps character are upset at the Blazers dumping a gifted offensive player. Those who think character, ultimately, is essential to building a championship team feel the opposite. What's really sad is that the Blazers have had so many of these poor character guys that have become so known for their transgressions that no team in the league will give fair value in terms of trades. What I'd like to see is a little less anger expressed towards management decisions to dump them and a little more directed at the boneheads who have cost our Blazers so much through their stupid actions.


----------



## sanfranduck (Jan 31, 2005)

*Re: Francis Free?*



MAS RipCity said:


> since we bought him out, he shouldn't count against our cap them right?


That's incorrect. He counts full against our cap this year, and I believe he counts the full amount minus whatever we saved next year.

So, if portland paid $30 of the $34 million, as is rumored, he'd count the full amount this year - roughly $17million - and about $13 million next year. We only save the difference between the buyout and the full amount and only for the final year.

We still save about $30 million compard to Zach's deal, because Francis' deal expires two years before Zach's does.


----------



## sanfranduck (Jan 31, 2005)

*Re: Francis Free?*



e_blazer1 said:


> Not surprisingly, this seems to be breaking down the same way as the Sheed, Bonzi, Ruben discussions always went. Those who think that talent trumps character are upset at the Blazers dumping a gifted offensive player. Those who think character, ultimately, is essential to building a championship team feel the opposite.


e_blazer, to re-state my post: My problem isn't getting rid of Zach; that's fine. My problem is that they did it without getting a starting-caliber small forward in return. I just feel they could have gotten more. That has nothing to do with your character debate.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*

that's kinda lame then..I would threaten to put him in the D league or just sit him unless the buyout was lower...we saved a whole 4 mill...woot...i guess? If you buy out someone, I don't think it should count against the cap after the 1st year.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

*Re: Francis Free?*



sanfranduck said:


> We still save about $30 million compard to Zach's deal, because Francis' deal expires two years before Zach's does.


Its really not a savings because we get zero production out of it. At least if Zach stayed, we payed 30 million dollars more but get 4 years of a very skilled offensive PF...one of the tops in the game.


----------



## sanfranduck (Jan 31, 2005)

*Re: Francis Free?*



Xericx said:


> Its really not a savings because we get zero production out of it. At least if Zach stayed, we payed 30 million dollars more but get 4 years of a very skilled offensive PF...one of the tops in the game.


Well, it opens up a ton of cap room during the same offseason that Roy and Aldrdige will be eligible for huge extensions...


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

*Re: Francis Free?*



sanfranduck said:


> e_blazer, to re-state my post: My problem isn't getting rid of Zach; that's fine. My problem is that they did it without getting a starting-caliber small forward in return. I just feel they could have gotten more. That has nothing to do with your character debate.


I wasn't refering to anything you wrote, SF. Just a general comment about some of the posts in the thread. 

As far as getting more for Zach, KP has said that he got several offers for Zach and this was the best, "by far", of the bunch. I believe him. Zach fouled his nest so many times that nobody was willing to give equal value in return. You don't give an equal star player in return for a guy like Zach who not only has off-court issues, but has significant deficiencies in his game and a bad contract to boot. Most often teams will try to pass off their bad contracts in exchange. The best you can hope for is a young guy with upside and a salary dump that will give you flexibility in the future. The Blazers got that and were able to finesse the deal so they got James Jones thrown in for nothing.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*



e_blazer1 said:


> Not surprisingly, this seems to be breaking down the same way as the Sheed, Bonzi, Ruben discussions always went. Those who think that talent trumps character are upset at the Blazers dumping a gifted offensive player. Those who think character, ultimately, is essential to building a championship team feel the opposite.


That is, indeed, not surprising.



> What's really sad is that the Blazers have had so many of these poor character guys that have become so known for their transgressions that no team in the league will give fair value in terms of trades.


That doesn't make sense to me. Are you saying that other GMs won't give us fair value for any player because of the Jail Blazer stigma? I don't see how that can be true unless the other GMs don't have any way to evaluate talent and character other than what they read in the newspaper. Or are you saying that players from Portland are so unwelcome in other cities that the GMs fear fan (owner? media?) backlash if they should trade for someone from Portland? I find that a little hard to believe - for instance, when we traded Khryapa to the Bulls, I don't think there was an outcry in Chicago that he was a punk since he previously played in Portland. 



> What I'd like to see is a little less anger expressed towards management decisions to dump them and a little more directed at the boneheads who have cost our Blazers so much through their stupid actions.


Agreed, but there are several other threads right now about Quick and Canzano.

barfo


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

*Re: Francis Free?*



sanfranduck said:


> Well, it opens up a ton of cap room during the same offseason that Roy and Aldrdige will be eligible for huge extensions...


don't you mean the offseason BEFORE they are eligible?

http://hoopshype.com/salaries/portland.htm

I thought they are eligible the summer before their final year.....not two summers before their final year?


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

*Re: Francis Free?*



barfo said:


> That doesn't make sense to me. Are you saying that other GMs won't give us fair value for any player because of the Jail Blazer stigma? I don't see how that can be true unless the other GMs don't have any way to evaluate talent and character other than what they read in the newspaper. Or are you saying that players from Portland are so unwelcome in other cities that the GMs fear fan (owner? media?) backlash if they should trade for someone from Portland? I find that a little hard to believe - for instance, when we traded Khryapa to the Bulls, I don't think there was an outcry in Chicago that he was a punk since he previously played in Portland.


No. I'm saying that you can't expect to trade a guy like Zach (and before him, Bonzi, Sheed, or Ruben) for equal talent that doesn't have the same baggage as those guys did. For example, Sheed's talent puts him in the same general discussion level as some of the top stars in the game. But, if you're a GM, do you trade one of those guys who doesn't have character issues for a guy you know has a history of being a general pain in the tush? History says no. You get an over-the-hill Theo Ratliff and an overrated SAR in exchange. And then the receiving team is happy just to dump him for cap space.



> Agreed, but there are several other threads right now about Quick and Canzano.


Ah, you're a clever one, barfo. Now just recognize that the reason we got squat for so many of our players is because they were first class jerks. Character does matter.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*



e_blazer1 said:


> Ah, you're a clever one, barfo. Now just recognize that the reason we got squat for so many of our players is because they were first class jerks. Character does matter.


That's what I always suspected about Abdur-Rahim, but everyone kept claiming he was a good character guy. Glad to have it confirmed.

barfo


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

*Re: Francis Free?*

From Larry ****'s cap FAQ:



> 60. How do buy-outs affect a team's salary cap?
> 
> The agreed-upon buy-out amount is included in the team salary instead of the salary called for in the contract. If the player had more than one season left on his contract, then the buy-out money is distributed among those seasons in proportion to the original salary. For example, say a player had three seasons remaining on his contract, with salaries of $10 million, $11 million and $12 million. The player and team agree to a buyout of $15 million. The $15 million is therefore charged to the team salary over the three seasons.



SO...correct me if I'm wrong....the buyout saves us approximately 2 million dollars this year and next year...but if we paid that 2 million per season we would have Francis as a backup guard or even starter on our roster? I hate Steve Francis...but seriously, for 2 million dollars....it might not have been THAT bad.....bleh


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

Steve, it was nice to know ya

http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/47033/20070711/blazers_buy_out_francis/


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

*Re: Official: Francis bought out*

Ah, the end of the Steve Francis era in Portland. 

Well, if they were willing to pay $30 million to get rid of Zach, I wonder what they have planned for Miles, and, for that matter, for me? 

I will accept a buyout for $30 million. Really, no hard feelings. I know the team is building around youth and I'm middle-aged. It makes sense for all parties. 

barfo


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

*Re: Official: Francis bought out*

Well its 55 minutes until the 11th hour... errr 11th of July. We will see the back end of this NY deal very soon.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

well i sure hope so..because we didn't see the "pre-arranged" rumored buyout!!!! The buyout was nil..just to get Francis off the roster....under 2 million in savings this year and next!


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

*Re: Francis Free?*



Xericx said:
 

> From Larry ****'s cap FAQ:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I disagree. While I feel that Steve can still play at a decent level, he's not in our long-term plans. I'd much rather spend that playing time on players that we are looking to see if they will be pieces in our future (Jack, Sergio, etc.) than have Francis just take up some of their minutes.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

I prefer to have young players overtake veterans by playing better than them in limited minutes rather than the deer in headlights approach..that's just me though

although I still hate francis and am glad he's not gonna be here....although for 2 million a year in savings that we're likely gonig to spend on a 12th man.....dunno how smart that is...short or long run


----------



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

Good riddance Steve Francis.

I loved the times i got to see you play in that trailblazer uniform.

Zero Times!

now that was a special era.


Enjoy your 14 million you lousy SOB!


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*



barfo said:


> That's what I always suspected about Abdur-Rahim, but everyone kept claiming he was a good character guy. Glad to have it confirmed.
> 
> barfo


Barfo: you are my hero! :clap2: 

The Blazers keep getting screwed in trades, because they let the whole world know they "have" to trade certain players to pacify the media. If teams would have believed that KP was willing to keep Zach for another year, the offers would have gone waaay up.


----------



## ChadWick (Jun 26, 2006)

*now We Can Trade Him For C-maggs!!!!*


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

ChadWick said:


> *now We Can Trade Him For C-maggs!!!!*


No, we can't. 

He's now in the sense, an unrestricted free agent. We pay him, but don't hold his rights. 

Basically, we're paying him money not to show up near the team. If this was the best KP could do with Zach, why trade him?


----------



## ChadWick (Jun 26, 2006)

yuyuza1 said:


> No, we can't.
> 
> He's now in the sense, an unrestricted free agent. We pay him, but don't hold his rights.
> 
> Basically, we're paying him money not to show up near the team. If this was the best KP could do with Zach, why trade him?



IDK but we got Channing who IMO will fit in well and be good off the bench for L-Train


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Francis Free?*



MAS RipCity said:


> that's kinda lame then..I would threaten to put him in the D league or just sit him unless the buyout was lower...we saved a whole 4 mill...woot...i guess? If you buy out someone, I don't think it should count against the cap after the 1st year.


You can't put anyone on your roster with more than two years' NBA experience in the D-League.

And if you sat him out, he'd collect his paycheck in full. And since it's Steve Francis, he'd probably be ok with that.

And yes, buyouts SHOULD count against the cap after the first year. If not, then any team could just buy out whatever scrub with a ridiculous salary and have him off the books next year. Take Brian Cardinal just for instance. Memphis could just give him $25 million this year, tell him to get lost, and then be completely rid of his contract? *I* would love that, but it gets teams with those awful anchor-contracts off the hook way too easily.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*

Pritchard gave in way too easily to Francis and his agent. He should have made them sweat it out for a few more weeks or hell a month or two. I bet Francis would have accepted 20-25mil, knowing that the clips might give him a 2 year MLE deal for $10mil. Instead Pritchard saved $2 mil a year?


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Francis Free?*



e_blazer1 said:


> Ah, you're a clever one, barfo. Now just recognize that the reason we got squat for so many of our players is because they were first class jerks. Character does matter.


You say that... but every time we make a trade like that our team gets worse and the other team gets better.

It's like if you say it enough it'll make up for the fact that we've given away so much talent and haven't sniffed the playoffs since we started doing so.

Ed O.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> "This was the definition of a win-win situation with Isiah and the Knicks getting Zach Randolph and Steve being the ultimate beneficiary in being bought out," Fried said.


Luckily Portland was able to make New York and Francis happy. I love it when we subsidize other teams in the NBA.

Ridiculous.

Ed O.


----------



## HAAK72 (Jun 18, 2007)

I understand all of the frustrations, but let me try and simplify the reasoning behind this...

Francis has talent...YES! Francis is actually a good guy...YES! Francis could play a major positive role on the Blazers roster...YES! Francis' contract still counts against the cap...YES! Francis will play for a Western conf. foe...YES! 

BUT, the major difference between Francis and LaFrentz/Miles is that he will be hindering the development of our "championship" squad/core because he CAN still play valuable minutes...simply put, he is not in the Blazer's future plans regardless of his abilities, contract, etc, etc...

...it is virtually the same reasoning behind the zBO trade...thank god LMA can shine now!!! 

FOCUS ON THE FUTURE...BLAZIN' BLAZERS...2010 RIP CITY DYNASTY!!!


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*



Oldmangrouch said:


> The Blazers keep getting screwed in trades, because they let the whole world know they "have" to trade certain players to pacify the media.


Wrong. The Blazers keep getting rid of bad apples because it's the best way to build a team of character that can win a championship.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Pritchard seems to be a pretty good talent evaluator. Tom Penn is known as a cap genius. Maybe they know what's best for the long term goal of the franchise...The Blazers franchise, not Stevie Franchise. 

What this deal did is 

1. Save the team 2 million each of the next two seasons
2. Save 30 million in salary after 2008
3. Got us the best Eupoean player in the draft in Fernandez
4. Got us a better SF than we currently have on our roster in Jones
5. Opened up a roster spot
6. Got us a player in Frye that was deamed untouchable by the Knicks last season. A player Pritchard...(a great talent evaluator) loves.



WE AREN'T DONE DEALING!!!!!!


----------



## Rip City Reign (Jul 1, 2007)

mediocre man said:


> Pritchard seems to be a pretty good talent evaluator. Tom Penn is known as a cap genius. Maybe they know what's best for the long term goal of the franchise...The Blazers franchise, not Stevie Franchise.
> 
> What this deal did is
> 
> ...


I agree on all counts and KP is not done dealing.

Plus, the PF spot is cleared, the Jailblazer era is officially in the past and the new era has truly begun.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Francis Free?*



Oldmangrouch said:


> Phooey.
> 
> Chasing cap space is like trying to get rich by spending all your income on lotto tickets. Just enough people win to keep pulling in the suckers.


I don't know if this was addressed already, but here goes.

I do agree that the chance to get a decent free agent in 2009 is slim, but the main reason we want to have cap space in 2009 is to re-sign our own guys and STILL have space to sign someone if we want.


----------



## gatorpops (Dec 17, 2004)

mediocre man said:


> Pritchard seems to be a pretty good talent evaluator. Tom Penn is known as a cap genius. Maybe they know what's best for the long term goal of the franchise...The Blazers franchise, not Stevie Franchise.
> 
> What this deal did is
> 
> ...


Amen! I totally agree. 

If we don't get any other benifits from this trade of Zack, we have all of the above. The biggest of which, is Rudy F. He alone may replace over half of Zacks production of points. He will anchor the second unit and be dinamite with roy in the fourth quarter when the game is on the line. Watch him in the Worlds. 

And yes, we get Jones for nothing and he is better than Freddie Jones and Dichau put together. He has playoff experience. Who else has on our team? 

This is going to go down as maybe the best trade we have made in putting this "current team" together IMO. 

When do we get to get some info MM? Thought you said that we would get info near the "time". Anything at all? I am getting up there in age you know.:biggrin: 

gatorpops


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

gatorpops said:


> Amen! I totally agree.
> 
> If we don't get any other benifits from this trade of Zack, we have all of the above. The biggest of which, is Rudy F. He alone may replace over half of Zacks production of points. He will anchor the second unit and be dinamite with roy in the fourth quarter when the game is on the line. Watch him in the Worlds.
> 
> gatorpops



Did we ever hear for sure if he's staying in Europe for this year or not? Thought that was official, but can't remember.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

*Re: Francis Free?*



Ed O said:


> You say that... but every time we make a trade like that our team gets worse and the other team gets better.
> 
> It's like if you say it enough it'll make up for the fact that we've given away so much talent and haven't sniffed the playoffs since we started doing so.
> 
> Ed O.


Ed, there are a lot of things about the Blazers' dealings over the past five years that you and I agree upon. The Blazers wasted assets that they could have used to obtain quality players (ending contracts for Damon, NVE, etc.). They also wasted draft picks on the wrong players and they have made financial committments to other players that were in excess of what they should have paid. The one area that I suppose we'll never agree upon is whether the team should have kept its talented, but tainted, players (Sheed, Bonzi, and Ruben). We've talked about the reasons for dumping these guys for years on this board and the two camps are just plain never going to agree about it. We can dream about better trades that the team could have made, but in the end, we simply are where we are. The road may not have been the one that either one of us would have chosen as an ideal path for a rebuild, but it has resulted in the Blazers, through a combination of luck and smart moves by KP, getting the best core of young talent in the league and a strong hope for the future of the franchise. I think that it's time that we simply agree to let the past be the past and get on with the future.


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

LameR said:


> Did we ever hear for sure if he's staying in Europe for this year or not? Thought that was official, but can't remember.


I don't think it is official but it sounds like he is staying one more year two max in Europe and then coming to the NBA.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*



Public Defender said:


> Nah. As others have said, there are some ancient trades that will remain worse. And lest we forget the Trader Bob double-shot of Brian Grant for an overweight, drug-addicted Shawn Kemp, or the Jermaine O'Neil for career-nearly-over Dale Davis? Both trades sucked eggs.


I remember how stoked I was about those trades at the time. At the time it felt like we were trading Travis Outlaw and Jamaal Magloire for Ben Wallace and Jermaine O'Neal. 

Most of us thought Kemp was just coming off of a bad year, the year before, he averaged a career high in points.


On the Francis issue. I think Francis could have had some success here, so I don't like it that Paul Allen just flushed 30 million down the toilet. Why not at least utilize Francis' scoring off the bench?? I'm afraid Francis is going to pull a Baron Davis and resurrect his career somewhere else.


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

*Re: Francis Free?*



Yega1979 said:


> I'm afraid Francis is going to pull a Baron Davis and resurrect his career somewhere else.


I think that's a decent possibility. Look at his career stats. He only really started being hindered in New York. I'm fine with that though.


----------



## Rip City Reign (Jul 1, 2007)

*Re: Francis Free?*



Yega1979 said:


> On the Francis issue. I think Francis could have had some success here, so I don't like it that Paul Allen just flushed 30 million down the toilet. Why not at least utilize Francis' scoring off the bench?? I'm afraid Francis is going to pull a Baron Davis and resurrect his career somewhere else.


Francis does not have the athleticism or desire to resurrect his career. His shooting % continues to decrease, he can't defend and he needs the ball in his hands to be effective.

So long, Stevie Franchise...


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*



Hap said:


> worse than Kiki for Byron Irvin?
> 
> worse than 5 players for Kiki?
> 
> ...



Zach + $30,000,000 for zip, nil, nada, nuttin'?

The worst.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*



Draco said:


> Pritchard gave in way too easily to Francis and his agent. He should have made them sweat it out for a few more weeks or hell a month or two. I bet Francis would have accepted 20-25mil, knowing that the clips might give him a 2 year MLE deal for $10mil. Instead Pritchard saved $2 mil a year?


He didn't save anything because he will have to pay for Zach's/Francis's replacement + what he paid them + what we spent to develop Zach into the offensive beast he is.

(Have fun with the offensive beast remark.)


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Thinking that Steve Francis was willing to come here and not be a douche bag, is like people thinking that Kemp coming here was going to be anything but an experiment in a fat klump.


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

*Re: Francis Free?*



MARIS61 said:


> Zach + $30,000,000 for zip, nil, nada, nuttin'?
> 
> The worst.



I don't agree with you. Frye is going to be really good for us the next few years. I think Oden/LMA/Frye 3 man rotation is going work good. It also help us get Rudy who I also think is going to be great for us in a couple years. It got rid of 30+million from our cap. Also I predict Zach will be in trouble before the all star game and we will be really happy we traded him.


----------



## ASDQWE (May 31, 2007)

Zach isn't anywhere near the player Drexler was, and he was traded for Otis Thorpe who only played a half-season with the Blazers.

Btw Thorpe of 1995= Channing Frye


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Francis Free?*



MARIS61 said:


> Zach + $30,000,000 for zip, nil, nada, nuttin'?
> 
> The worst.


 Moses Malone, (moses freaking malone!) was traded for a draft pick.

Frye, while he isn't blowing up the league, is a better backup than Zach would be, because Zach wouldn't be a backup. And LaMarcus will be better than Zach shortly (maybe not this year, but in the long run he will be). 

It's better for the team both short term and long term.

While the overall talent trade wasn't "even", but it's not the worst trade in Blazer history. 

So take off the Zach blinders man.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Keep on *****in about Statbo being gone if you want, maybe go get a support group or something. The team is better off with him gone. 

I can hardly wait for the first game when Portland plays NY, Lamarcus swats Zbo at one end and is down on the other end dunking while Statbo walks down the court and *****es at the refs over a phantom call. Then you will realize why we made the trade.


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

hasoos said:


> Keep on *****in about Statbo being gone if you want, maybe go get a support group or something. The team is better off with him gone.
> 
> I can hardly wait for the first game when Portland plays NY, Lamarcus swats Zbo at one end and is down on the other end dunking while Statbo walks down the court and *****es at the refs over a phantom call. Then you will realize why we made the trade.



I agree. Last game I went to a Blazer game Zach argued at least 3 or 4 plays in a row while the rest of the Blazers were playing 4 on 5 defense. I can see once maybe if it was a terrible call but 3 or 4 times in a row on phantom calls is just crazy. Get over the Zach trade. Thank God we got rid of him.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

> While the overall talent trade wasn't "even", but it's not the worst trade in Blazer history.


I agree that it's not historically bad. I hate it, but it's not even on the Rasheed Wallace level of badness. in that deal we eventually wound up with absolutely nothing to show for it. at least we got Frye and the Spanish dude. 

this deal was somebody spitting in your face. the Rasheed deal was urinating. I'll take spit over urine every time.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Hap said:


> Thinking that Steve Francis was willing to come here and not be a douche bag, is like people thinking that Kemp coming here was going to be anything but an experiment in a fat klump.


Do you think that Francis would have been more willing to be bought out after we put his *** on the suspended list for being a douche a couple of times?

Was Kemp more willing to take LESS money after we buried him behind other players in the rotation?

Francis had NO reason to give any significant money from his contract back in a buyout, and he ended up giving almost none back. If Portland hadn't been so transparent in its willingness to pay him almost every single cent he was owed to NOT play for them, maybe his representation would have been more willing to negotiate that amount down.

Ed O.


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

Ed O said:


> Do you think that Francis would have been more willing to be bought out after we put his *** on the suspended list for being a douche a couple of times?
> 
> Was Kemp more willing to take LESS money after we buried him behind other players in the rotation?
> 
> ...


I agree that sounds right but I think the Blazers and Knicks already had the Francis buyout in the works before the trade was finalized.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Tortimer said:


> I agree that sounds right but I think the Blazers and Knicks already had the Francis buyout in the works before the trade was finalized.


Why?

Francis had no veto authority. He doesn't want to go back to NY.

Why would Portland and New York prenegotiate that, and why would the Blazers stick to it, since they seemingly have no incentive to help out Francis?

Ed O.


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

Ed O said:


> Why?
> 
> Francis had no veto authority. He doesn't want to go back to NY.
> 
> ...



I thought I heard the Knicks were talking about buyout of Francis before we even traded for him. Maybe I was wrong.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

Ultimately, the Francis buy-out is probably just about the money. He's not a guy that KP wants on the roster or we wouldn't have done the buy-out. By doing the buy-out, the Blazers save a few million and, most likely, got Francis to agree to spread the money out over more years. Instead of paying him his current salary of around $17 mil per year for two years, the team probably cuts the cash out-go down to around $6 mil per year over 5.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

*Re: Francis Free?*



Hap said:


> Moses Malone, (moses freaking malone!) was traded for a draft pick.
> 
> Frye, while he isn't blowing up the league, is a better backup than Zach would be, because Zach wouldn't be a backup. And LaMarcus will be better than Zach shortly (maybe not this year, but in the long run he will be).
> 
> ...



I think we could have probably attempted to trade Zach for another mediocre, soft backup PF + 2 years of bad salary (of which we get ZERO production out of since we bought him out). 

Take off the Zach hating blinders man. What happened here was another disappointment because the buyout amount will count much more than most of us anticipated.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

e_blazer1 said:


> Ultimately, the Francis buy-out is probably just about the money. He's not a guy that KP wants on the roster or we wouldn't have done the buy-out. By doing the buy-out, the Blazers save a few million and, most likely, got Francis to agree to spread the money out over more years. Instead of paying him his current salary of around $17 mil per year for two years, the team probably cuts the cash out-go down to around $6 mil per year over 5.



Where did you make this up from? Did you see Larry ****'s salary FAQ? We're going to be paying 15 million per year over the next two instead of 17 million per year.


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

Xericx said:


> Where did you make this up from? Did you see Larry ****'s salary FAQ? We're going to be paying 15 million per year over the next two instead of 17 million per year.



We don't know that for sure. I would guess we structured the buyout to pay Francis over more then 2 years but we will never know for sure.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

Tortimer said:


> I thought I heard the Knicks were talking about buyout of Francis before we even traded for him. Maybe I was wrong.


Of course you heard it....it was some over-optimistic blazer fans trying to justify this trade by saying that there was a good pre-arranged buyout in place and we were essentially trading for that as well....there were also rumors of us trading Miles for Malik Rose too.....is that still happeneing?


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

Tortimer said:


> We don't know that for sure. I would guess we structured the buyout to pay Francis over more then 2 years but we will never know for sure.


of course we're going to know for sure. His salary WILL count against our cap....better to have the salary hit happen over the next two years versus the next 5 also. Just to get it over with.


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

Xericx said:


> Of course you heard it....it was some over-optimistic blazer fans trying to justify this trade by saying that there was a good pre-arranged buyout in place and we were essentially trading for that as well....there were also rumors of us trading Miles for Malik Rose too.....is that still happeneing?



No, but I would have loved to trade Miles for Rose. There were so many people thinking there is some magical back-end to the Knicks/Pho deal but I never really believed them. The best we can hope for is getting Rudy and J.Jones and we haven't even heard for sure if we got them.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

Xericx said:


> Where did you make this up from? Did you see Larry ****'s salary FAQ? We're going to be paying 15 million per year over the next two instead of 17 million per year.


Some particular reason for the hostility?

If you actually take the time to read the CBA FAQ on the topic, you'll see that teams are allowed to spread the payment of the money out over more years. It still counts against the cap for the buy-out amount spread over the number of years remaining on the contract. If, as reported, the buy-out is for $30 mil, then the Blazers have a charge against their cap of $15 mil per season for two years. I'm not in the know on the terms of the buy-out, but it's perfectly reasonable to assume that the actual payout of the money has been extended as allowed in the CBA. The Blazers have to have some incentive to do the deal or else they may as well let Stevie ride the pines.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

e_blazer1 said:


> Some particular reason for the hostility?
> 
> If you actually take the time to read the CBA FAQ on the topic, you'll see that teams are allowed to spread the payment of the money out over more years. It still counts against the cap for the buy-out amount spread over the number of years remaining on the contract. If, as reported, the buy-out is for $30 mil, then the Blazers have a charge against their cap of $15 mil per season for two years. I'm not in the know on the terms of the buy-out, but it's perfectly reasonable to assume that the actual payout of the money has been extended as allowed in the CBA. The Blazers have to have some incentive to do the deal or else they may as well let Stevie ride the pines.


Or so you would think. The 2 million in savings...i'd almost rather have stevie ride the pine.

but if the goal is cap flexibility in 2 years, then the best move is to not spread out the buy out since its still going to count against our cap right?


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

Xericx said:


> Or so you would think. The 2 million in savings...i'd almost rather have stevie ride the pine.
> 
> but if the goal is cap flexibility in 2 years, then the best move is to not spread out the buy out since its still going to count against our cap right?



We can spread it out but it still only counts against the cap for the next two years.


----------



## PDXshelbyGT (May 24, 2007)

Read nba.com

"portland waives Steve Francis" interesting use of words.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

Tortimer said:


> We can spread it out but it still only counts against the cap for the next two years.


So then the 15 million per year will still count against our cap for the next two years, right? but they payout is spread out over 5 years?????? 

this sounds a bit off again......if this is true, more teams would be buying out bad contracts.....it just doesn't sound right


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

Xericx said:


> So then the 15 million per year will still count against our cap for the next two years, right? but they payout is spread out over 5 years??????
> 
> this sounds a bit off again......if this is true, more teams would be buying out bad contracts.....it just doesn't sound right



I think that is right from reading the Cap info someone posted earlier.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

I do think the Rudy Fernandez aspect of this deal is being ignored by some people here....

I read an article about Housten wanting to trade up for Rudy...and yet it fell through and POR ends up acquiring him instead....and at first hearing about the deal it sounded like a standard $3mil for pick....but then it comes out that it is tied into this NY deal...where POR gained a TE by dealing a 3rd player to NY....that POR was able to include with $3mil to PHX to net Fernandez and take James Jones' 2yr deal off their books as well...netting them $6mil to their bottom line this year, plus the next year of Jones' deal as well and not having to pay a #24 pick...

I wonder if this offer trumped whatever HOU (or another team was offering) as PHX is looking to stay underneath the luxury tax....

Overall I am not excited about it...I would have thought POR could have done better...however a lot will depend on how Channing Frye develops, and what the impacts of Rudy Fernandez (n particular) and James Jones are....

I don't think that the deal for Fernandez or Jones would have been possible without the NY deal occurring....


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

Kmurph said:


> I do think the Rudy Fernandez aspect of this deal is being ignored by some people here....
> 
> I read an article about Housten wanting to trade up for Rudy...and yet it fell through and POR ends up acquiring him instead....and at first hearing about the deal it sounded like a standard $3mil for pick....but then it comes out that it is tied into this NY deal...where POR gained a TE by dealing a 3rd player to NY....that POR was able to include with $3mil to PHX to net Fernandez and take James Jones' 2yr deal off their books as well...netting them $6mil to their bottom line this year, plus the next year of Jones' deal as well and not having to pay a #24 pick...
> 
> ...


The justification for Rudy doesn't do much in regards to Francis' buyout, which MANY blazer fans thought was going to be better and clear out a little more cap room this year and next.....which apparantly it is not going to do. Its just supplicating on the part of blazer fans to make more excuses again and make up more "what ifs" or hypothetical players or trades that will appear out of smoke....but the deal is what it is.....we never got the good buyout of francis that was rumored.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

another potential plus for keeping franchise that we missed on is that him riding pine meant that we could have used him in a trade next summer since he would be on the last year on a bad contract...teams with players making a good salary rebuilding would trade for expiring contracts......mehhh...just a though


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

Xericx said:


> So then the 15 million per year will still count against our cap for the next two years, right? but they payout is spread out over 5 years??????
> 
> this sounds a bit off again......if this is true, more teams would be buying out bad contracts.....it just doesn't sound right


The payment schedule for the buyout amount is negotiable, the CBA allows basically any arrangement that the team and the player agree to. It could be 100% upfront, or it could be spread over 100 years, or anything in between.

barfo


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

Ed O said:


> Do you think that Francis would have been more willing to be bought out after we put his *** on the suspended list for being a douche a couple of times?
> 
> Was Kemp more willing to take LESS money after we buried him behind other players in the rotation?
> 
> ...


I agree, we could've sat on him for awhile to see if he'd lower his price. He could go on the emergency squad and pout all he wanted. I don't see how we would've had to pay more than the $30 mil unless he wanted to sit at home for two full seasons which I don't see him doing.

I think if there was ever justice in the universe the Vancouver franchise would've come back and we would've traded him there.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> The justification for Rudy doesn't do much in regards to Francis' buyout, which MANY blazer fans thought was going to be better and clear out a little more cap room this year and next.....which apparantly it is not going to do. Its just supplicating on the part of blazer fans to make more excuses again and make up more "what ifs" or hypothetical players or trades that will appear out of smoke....but the deal is what it is.....we never got the good buyout of francis that was rumored.


I don't agree with this....

Like I said, I don't think POR would have got Rudy Fernandez if they didn't have the TE to take James Jones' contract from PHX...

and I never thought the buyout was going to benefit POR this year or next....the whole point of the deal was 2 years from now when Francis's deal and LaFrentz's deal will both be off the books....That is when POR will potentially have a lot of money to go after a key FA or two....

Of course if they start using it up before then...well then this "cap space in 09'" mantra that they have stated will have been a joke...and then some criticism of this deal will be justified....

My whole point was that, IMO, I think you have to look this deal as more than just Zach for Frye...

What will POR do with their capspace in 09'? Who will they sign and what impact will they have?

What will the impact of Channing Frye be?

What will the impact of Rudy Fernandez be?

What will the impact of James Jones be?

I just disagree with the opinion that you have to judge a deal on how it stands the day it was made....That just doesn't fly in today's NBA...where deals are often made with an eye to the future...Like I beleive this one was...

I am not trying to say this was a great deal, at first hearing about it I was surprised, I too would have thought POR could have done better for Zach....

however...I am willing to wait and see how Frye performs & how James performs this year...and I will be very interested to see what Fernandez's impact is next year and what POR ultimately can get done in the summer of 09'...before I start lambasting it as the worst (or one of) trades in POR history... (a bit of a hyperbole perhaps?)

I think calling this a horrible deal at this point in time is very premature....


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

As i just speculated on....

http://mikebarrettsblog.blogspot.com/2007/07/francis-gone-ny-trade-finalized.html



> Look at it this way. Zach and Dan Dickau were traded for Channing Frye and Steve Francis. The reason the Blazers were able to then pull the second part of the deal was where Fred Jones entered the equation. By adding Jones to the deal, the Blazers were able to then approach Phoenix and take a player off their hands (James Jones) and give them nothing but a cash in return. The Suns, who are trying to cut payroll, were so excited about this opportunity, they threw the 24th draft pick into the deal. That, of course, turned out to be Rudy Fernandez, who was considered by many the "steal of the draft" even though he won't play for the Blazers next season. Several execs said that if not for the buyout in his European contract, Fernandez would have most certainly been a lottery pick.





> This then can be actually viewed as two different trades, even though it came across as one big trade. It's basically, Zach and Dickau for Francis and Frye. Freddie for James Jones and Rudy Fernandez. When you add the second piece, and consider what's coming in the future, as far as cap room in two seasons, and the potential of Fernandez, the deal really gets attractive for Portland.





> Then you have to consider your future at the power forward spot, LaMarcus Aldridge, now will be a starter, and any question marks about Zach are gone. The two extra years he had, and all the additional money on his deal, are gone. You had to buy out Francis to make it happen, but it was well worth it. Also consider that Francis gave up 4 million bucks, on draft night, to make the deal happen. And, the Blazers will get a portion of what ever Francis signs for next season, and then will continue to get a portion of any new contract he signs after that. So, the buyout isn't as bad as it seems after that


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

I love Barrett's spin. He's paid by the team to do it, so I don't blame him. But it's hilarious.

Ed O.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

*Re: Francis Free?*



Hap said:


> Moses Malone, (moses freaking malone!) was traded for a draft pick.
> 
> Frye, while he isn't blowing up the league, is a better backup than Zach would be, because Zach wouldn't be a backup. And LaMarcus will be better than Zach shortly (maybe not this year, but in the long run he will be).
> 
> ...


Since you brought up Moses Malone

PG- Terry Porter
SG- Michael Jordan
C- Arvydas Sabonis
PF- Moses Malone
SF- Clyde Drexler
:boohoo:


----------



## BlazeTop (Jan 22, 2004)

I don't know if anyone noticed this wrinkle from Quick about the buyout



> From Oregon Live
> 
> The Blazers negotiated a buyout of guard Steve Francis' contract, believed to be around $30 million of the $33 million he was owed. Francis was acquired from New York in the draft-night trade that included the Blazers sending Zach Randolph to the Knicks. Pritchard said the Blazers reached an agreement to buy out Francis before the trade was finalized. *Pritchard said part of the negotiation included the Blazers getting a 50 percent "offset," meaning the team will receive a 50 percent kickback for the next two seasons from any free agent contract Francis signs this summer. . . *.


----------

