# Seattle may trade out of the 1st round



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

They're saying that if Sheldon Williams is gone with the 10th pick, they may look to trade out of the 1st round. The indication is they're looking for a 2007 1st round pick OR an early second round pick plus cash in this year's draft. 

If that's the case, we have to jump all over that deal. 

http://www.draftexpress.com/viewarticle.php?a=1355


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

I agree fork we have to try our best to get their pick.Having 4th 10th 30 31 is really good expecially if we can trade 30 31 for 22 or 23.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Presumably we could move the #30 for a second rounder (and maybe one next year). Send whatever we get for the #30 along with the #31 and a bit of cash to Seattle for #10. That would be good stuff for the Blazers.

Ed O.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

yeah 4th and 10th in the draft would be good

Cedric Simmons 6-9 223 PF/C NCSt. So. would be nice at 10th 
Oleksiy Pecherov 6-10 232 PF Ukr. 1985


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

I hadn't really been thinking in terms of top 10 prospects in the draft... just looking at the top 4, and landing on 6 that I see at about the same level, viz.:

Aldridge
Bargnani
Gay
Morrison
Roy
Thomas

So who would my next four be?

Patrick O'Bryant: young, big and talented

Randy Foye: could end up being the best player in the draft if he can settle handle the 2 guard spot

Shelden Williams: I'm not a huge fan, but he's big and long and ready to play in the front court

Ronnie Brewer: a skilled ballhandler, good athlete and has really good size. Lots of guys with this skill set/size combo seem to be unable to make it because of their inability to shoot straight, but I like him as a second pick in the lottery for the Blazers, especially if we went big (Aldridge or Thomas) with our #4.

Just missed: 
Marcus Williams: chubby and relatively unathletic. He reminds me of Jamaal Tinsley, which isn't the WORST thing in the world, but I like Jack and Telfair more and there are superior prospects at #10 IMO.

Cedric Simmons: reminds me of Stephen Hunter... and I think he's more likely to be Hunter than Ratliff.

Rodney Carney: Measured small at the pre-draft. I just like other swing men better.

JJ Redick: This would actually be an interesting pick at the 10 spot, and (setting aside the recent driving incident) it would be a good move from a PR perspective. And I'd rather have Redick learning to play in the NBA than Dixon showing us his limits on the floor. But, again: I like other guys better.

Others: Sene, SBrown, Pecherov.

Who do you guys have as your current "top 10"?

Ed O.


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

currently my draft is 
adam morrison then 10 is someone big im not really sure,22 if we make a trade is sene.


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

Ronnie Brewer would be the perfect fit at #10. He can play the 1-3 with ease has superb athleticism and length, like Roy he's just solid at everything. The kid reminds be so much of a young Josh Howard. He also has heart and has no qualms about diving on the floor for lose balls, and has the potential to be the best defensive player in the draft.

In my opinion he's the #5 prospect, and if he goes #10 or later will be the steal of the draft.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Any time you can move a combination of 2nd rounders for a late lotto pick the trigger should be pulled.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

My top 10...not how it will go though....

1) Morrison
2) Gay
3) Bargnani
4) Roy
5) Aldridge
6) T.Thomas
7) S.Williams
8) P.O'Bryant
9) R.Brewer
10) R.Foye

others: Shawne Williams, Rodney Carney, Alexnader Johnson, Cedric Simmons


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Ed O said:


> Presumably we could move the #30 for a second rounder (and maybe one next year). Send whatever we get for the #30 along with the #31 and a bit of cash to Seattle for #10. That would be good stuff for the Blazers.
> 
> Ed O.


I don't want the Blazers to bring in 3 rookies into camp, added to what is already an overly young roster, and have been wondering what they could do with the 3 picks.

I don't really like the #30 in this draft. Guaranteed contract in a weak year. Yuk. The #31 is a lot better actually. Non-guaranteed, means we could take a flyer on a high risk/high reward prospect, and not be on the hook if (most likely) they don't make it.

One way to avoid the rookie problem, is to use either or both the #30 and #31 on guys who are overseas. The Blazers can bring them over later.

A better way to deal with all these picks is to get rid of them (for value), either included as sweeteners in larger trades or for picks in future years.

2nd best would be to trade up. If the Blazers could swing the deal you have above, that would be outstanding. With a pick as high as #10, I could live with 2 rookies, in that instance.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

chromekilla said:


> I agree fork we have to try our best to get their pick.Having 4th 10th 30 31 is really good expecially if we can trade 30 31 for 22 or 23.


I disagree. How is having three or four picks in a weak draft a good thing when the Blazers have 12 guaranteed contracts for next season (and hope to re-sign Joel for the 13th spot) and half of the roster already have less than three year's experience? Unless we're intent on building the best college team in the NBA, I'm in favor of taking just one of the top four guys in the draft and using all of our other resources to work in trades for a couple of solid veterans.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

duh one or more of the players stays in europe!


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

1) Bargnani
2) Morrison/Gay
4) Aldridge
5) Roy
6) Foye
7) S. Williams
8) Simmons
9) Brewer
10) Sene
11) O'Bryant (Candy Man II?)

I would guess the real draft would have M. Williams going earlier, so S. Williams, Simmons, or Brewer would likely also be available at 10. If there was a way to get there, it could be worth it.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Ed O said:


> Who do you guys have as your current "top 10"?
> 
> Ed O.


I like the same top 6 as you (and everyone else.)

Aldridge
Bargnani
Gay
Morrison
Roy
Thomas

After that...

Ronnie Brewer
Shelden Williams
Patrick O'Bryant
Shawne Williams/Cedrick Simmons/Rodney Carney


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

This is how I think it will go now

1 TOR = Morrison
2 CHI = Thomas
3 CHA = Gay
4 POR = Aldridge
5 ATL = Shelden Williams
6 MIN = Bargnani
7 POR = Acquired from BOSTON = Brewer
8 HOU = Roy
9 GOLDEN = Foye
10 SEA = O' Bryant


No way Charlotte passes on Ammo


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

Utherhimo said:


> duh one or more of the players stays in europe!


Duh? What is this, fourth grade?

Sure, the Blazers could take a couple of picks and then have them play in Europe for a couple of years. Teams do that when they don't have any immediate needs for players. The Blazers have plenty of immediate needs. I'd like to see the Blazers get competitive sooner rather than later. That means bringing in some guys who actually know how to play in the NBA to help win some games and to help the younger guys develop into better players more quickly.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Trader Bob said:


> No way Charlotte passes on Ammo


Frankly, I hope you are right (that either Toronto or Charlotte picks Morrison). 

That would leave us to choose from Gay and either Aldridge or Bargnani (if Chicago takes Thomas). 

I still can't believe the Blazers would take Roy over any of those three, but if they do I'll pray they know what they are doing.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

1 TOR = Aldridge
2 CHI = Thomas
3 CHA = Morrison
4 POR = Bargnani
5 ATL = Shelden Williams
6 MIN = Gay
7 POR = Acquired from BOSTON = Brewer <=== i like this idea
8 HOU = Roy
9 GOLDEN = Foye
10 SEA = O' Bryant or acquired from seattle = Oleksiy Pecherov 6-10 232 PF Ukr. 1985

use bargani as the sf brewer as sg or pecherov as pf 

trade miles i would like to land morrison if we could with bargnani but brewer or pecherov would be great too


----------



## myELFboy (Jun 28, 2005)

I'll be pissed if the Sonics don't do something to help the current roster (assuming Wilcox resigns), which includes doing something meaningful with this pick. 

The defense & rebounding will still be awful. Chris had some good games...against Houston, Portland, Milwaukee, Sacramento, & Phoenix. Not exactly powerhouse teams last year. 2 barely made the playoffs, one did & had no center or PF, and the 2 others are in the lotto. & Johan & Robert...as long as these two are depended on to make the playoffs, then I'm planning for another playoff miss. These two only played half the season and Robert had ankle injuries and a broken nose. Johan had his nose busted at the end of the season as well. Hill won't play Danny, the reason the Sonics won 52 games 2 seasons ago, and Mikki will get more PT (God forbid). 

The defense was no better under Hill. The biggest difference was taking Luke out of the 4th qtr---they won games with Luke on the bench. 

Ergh, anyway, I'm not optimistic, and giving the pick away for nothing will be just another dumb move this team makes. I find it hard to believe that no one in this draft could break into the rotation...someone at 10 HAS to better than undrafted Damien Wilkins; someone has to be better than Luke Ridnour. There has to exist a deal where a team would like Danny, the 10, and a player not named Ray Allen.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

myELFboy said:


> I'll be pissed if the Sonics don't do something to help the current roster (assuming Wilcox resigns), which includes doing something meaningful with this pick.
> 
> The defense & rebounding will still be awful. Chris had some good games...against Houston, Portland, Milwaukee, Sacramento, & Phoenix. Not exactly powerhouse teams last year. 2 barely made the playoffs, one did & had no center or PF, and the 2 others are in the lotto. & Johan & Robert...as long as these two are depended on to make the playoffs, then I'm planning for another playoff miss. These two only played half the season and Robert had ankle injuries and a broken nose. Johan had his nose busted at the end of the season as well. Hill won't play Danny, the reason the Sonics won 52 games 2 seasons ago, and Mikki will get more PT (God forbid).
> 
> ...


Problem is, I think, that in a draft where the most desired prospects go 6 deep, the #10 pick doesn't have a whole lot of value. Some value, just not premium value. Chances of one of the top 6 dropping to #10 are slim. So unless a team has a player ranked in their top 5, who is currently projected to be on the board at #10, who is going to give Seattle a lot of value for that pick?

The Boston pick looks real interesting, on the other hand. Make a trade for it before the draft, and if you don't give up too much value, spin the wheel and hope one of the top 6 (assuming your scouts agree the top 6 belong) drops to you.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

e_blazer1 said:


> Duh? What is this, fourth grade?
> 
> Sure, the Blazers could take a couple of picks and then have them play in Europe for a couple of years. Teams do that when they don't have any immediate needs for players. The Blazers have plenty of immediate needs. I'd like to see the Blazers get competitive sooner rather than later. That means bringing in some guys who actually know how to play in the NBA to help win some games and to help the younger guys develop into better players more quickly.


yeah i know lol sorry about the duh  

one thing the blazers dont need is 3 players from this years draft, thats why hiddening one overseas isnt wasting a pick, thanks to them getting better in europe and they are saving us time and a roster spot.


----------



## letsmakeadeal (Feb 23, 2006)

i agree trader bob

1 TOR = thomas
2 CHI = morrison
3 CHA = Gay
4 POR = Aldridge
5 ATL = Shelden Williams
6 MIN = Bargnani
7 POR = Acquired from BOSTON = roy
8 HOU = brewer
9 GOLDEN = Foye
10 SEA = O' Bryant trade whith portland for 2nd this year and first next year


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

letsmakeadeal said:


> 10 SEA = O' Bryant trade whith portland for 2nd this year and first next year


You've got to be kidding. No way we trade a first next year for an extra first this year.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Foulzilla said:


> You've got to be kidding. No way we trade a first next year for an extra first this year.



agreed... I willingly gave up the bad bounce of the ping pong ball to the Gods of the NBA this year in selecting #4 for a more than perfect bounce and the #1 pick next year for the Oden sweepstakes.


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

Utherhimo said:


> i would like to land morrison if we could with bargnani


I love AB and I don't hate Morrison, but defensively I'd be very leary of a Morrison/Bargnani frontcourt. I think optimaly like the Mavs you need a Howard like defender to pair with Dirk, we'd need something similar with Bargnani. The same goes for Morrison.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

bargnani is very good on defense


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Utherhimo said:


> bargnani is very good on defense


Where have you read that? Doesn't seem consistent with reports I've seen.

I like Bargnani a LOT--he might be my #1 overall--but I don't think that I've ever read that he was "very good on defense" until your post.

Ed O.


----------



## myELFboy (Jun 28, 2005)

Masbee said:


> Problem is, I think, that in a draft where the most desired prospects go 6 deep, the #10 pick doesn't have a whole lot of value. Some value, just not premium value. Chances of one of the top 6 dropping to #10 are slim. So unless a team has a player ranked in their top 5, who is currently projected to be on the board at #10, who is going to give Seattle a lot of value for that pick?
> 
> The Boston pick looks real interesting, on the other hand. Make a trade for it before the draft, and if you don't give up too much value, spin the wheel and hope one of the top 6 (assuming your scouts agree the top 6 belong) drops to you.


I would like to see some depth added to this team, not a future superstar. From what I've read, it seems the Sonics front office believes that no one in this draft has superstar potential, except Adam Morrison, and Sund has even said he wouldn't beat out Shard. I want a guy that could challenge Damien or Luke; Carney, Brewer, Foye, etc. Or even a scrappy rebounder, maybe Cedric Simmons. I'm not content with the defensively challenged roster the Sonics currently have, and I think they could find SOMEONE with the 10th pick that could challenge *some* of the guys on this roster. 

Maybe they are pulling a smokescreen, who knows...Pendergraft thinks Brewer is the best defensive player in the draft, and some Sonics fans believe they want him, but don't want to make a lot of noise in case Houston or another team is interested in him as well...they did it with Swift, maybe it's another situation like that...8 more days.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

6 blocks in a game during the playoffs dont happen to players with bad defense, i know its just one game but to say he has bad d just isnt true they said his team d needs work.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Utherhimo said:


> 6 blocks in a game during the playoffs dont happen to players with bad defense, i know its just one game but to say he has bad d just isnt true they said his team d needs work.


Pritchard and Nash went to scout him and said that he needs to work especially on his defense. It was in John Nash's blog on blazers.com before he got canned.


----------



## Oil Can (May 25, 2006)

Rumors out of Sonic-ville has them interested in trading Ray Allen and Luke Ridnour for a shot at Adam Morrison.


----------



## myELFboy (Jun 28, 2005)

Oil Can said:


> Rumors out of Sonic-ville has them interested in trading Ray Allen and Luke Ridnour for a shot at Adam Morrison.


Actually, that's a wet dream of a Toronto journalist. I bet the Supes will try to trade the pick, but not with Ray Allen included.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Oil Can said:


> Rumors out of Sonic-ville has them interested in trading Ray Allen and Luke Ridnour for a shot at Adam Morrison.


Link?

WOW, that is way too much IMHO to give up for a player who is not that much better than Rashard Lewis.... if at all

make it a three way.... we get Ray Ray... and they can have Adam... and we send Toronto something...


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

Zagsfan20 said:


> Pritchard and Nash went to scout him and said that he needs to work especially on his defense. It was in John Nash's blog on blazers.com before he got canned.


This was from an article by J.T. Magee on RealGM:



> On defense, it would look like it took him a second to compute what to do. ‘Now that the play is over, I will watch the ball being inbounded, then run down to the other end of the court.’ He’s a very smart player, but it seemed like it would take him a little longer to grasp things on defense then it does on offense.
> 
> As thick as he is for a Euro, he still allows his man to establish great position on him down low. He had success guarding the post, but that won’t always happen in the NBA. If someone like Elton Brand gets within five feet of the goal, like Lorbek and a couple others were able to do in Game 2, then it’s over for him to try and blocks his man’s shot. The play where he pushed Lorbek out was great, but he won’t be able to push a lot of power forward out on the post, with the exception of Zach Randolph.
> 
> It was either his first or second block of the game, but he let his man get by him, waited for him to shoot a lay-up, then blocked it and sent it out of bounds. He read the play perfectly, but in the NBA, if he lets anyone by him like that, it’s a dunk. If not, then the other big man comes over and the ball gets swung around to an open spot on the perimeter for 3. It was great that he was able to recover for the block, but that is a Top 10 dunk in the NBA.


Of course he also said:



> Euros aren’t known for their defense. They are known for anything but that. Bargnani is an exception in one big area: shot blocking


Bargnani is still #1 on my board, but he's very raw defensively. In a few years under Nate though, I think he could become a good defender, he certainly has the tools.


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

Ray Allen will be 31 in a month, that plays a very large role in his value. If he was 25 I agree the Toronto trade would be a joke, but at Ray's age it might not be a horrible deal for Seattle.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

After reading the reasons why Seattle would want Morrison.. due to a somewhat local kid... will sell tickets too

Do you think they have motivation to trade for him?????



Will Seattle trade Rashard Lewis + another player + #10 for Adam Morrison drafted at #4 by us and Darius Miles?


we dump Miles contract and attitude, get a very good SF, and still get a player we want.. maybe Brandon Roy or Ronnie Brewer????


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Trader Bob said:


> After reading the reasons why Seattle would want Morrison.. due to a somewhat local kid... will sell tickets too
> 
> Do you think they have motivation to trade for him?????
> 
> ...



Brandon Roy or Ronnie Brewer shouldn't be the player the Blazers "want" since if that trade happened we would have Lewis at the 3 and Webster at the 2.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Why not?

PG Telfair, Jack
SG Webster, ROY or BREWER (They will become backups to Webster), Dixon
SF Lewis, Khryapa, Outlaw
PF Randolph, Skinner
C Przybilla, Theo, Ha


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Trader Bob said:


> Why not?
> 
> PG Telfair, Jack
> SG Webster, ROY or BREWER (They will become backups to Webster), Dixon
> ...



Because Portland doesn't need backups. Portland needs all-stars. Our roster is full of backups, they are just starting because we are so bad.


----------



## Buck Williams (May 16, 2004)

letsmakeadeal said:


> i agree trader bob
> 
> 1 TOR = thomas
> 2 CHI = morrison
> ...


Thomas will go #2 Andrea will go #1 and Ammo is hard to place no on giveing up our only chance at Oden but a Aldridge and Roy draft would be AWSOME


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

NOW GET THE #10 from Seattle :woot:

Send them Dickau and the #30 and #31


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

30 31 for 10.


----------



## talman (Dec 31, 2002)

Trader Bob said:


> NOW GET THE #10 from Seattle :woot:
> 
> Send them Dickau and the #30 and #31


 :biggrin: 

Our entire team next year will be made up of rookies from the '06 Draft.


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

Until we get into 07 fa then we have free cap space to get all the good fa.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Then make my day complete

#4 = Aldridge
#7 = Gay
#10 = Brewer or Roy


only way to make my day better is to deal off Darius and Dixon


----------



## myELFboy (Jun 28, 2005)

How about we give you guys the 10th pick for next years pick ? The Sonics want to get a pick for next years draft which will be very strong. Personally, I'm hoping they can pick up Foye to add to their guard depth.

Also, trading Ray because he's 31 would be the dumbest thing the Sonics could do. He didn't miss one game last year to injury; only to stomach illness and for fighting, those were the only games he missed. Even at the end of the year when the games meant nothing, he played hard and set a good example...they CANNOT trade him. Particularly if they are trying to spark interest and get an arena deal...trading Ray would be the first step to leaving the PNW.


----------



## talman (Dec 31, 2002)

myELFboy said:


> How about we give you guys the 10th pick for next years pick ? The Sonics want to get a pick for next years draft which will be very strong. Personally, I'm hoping they can pick up Foye to add to their guard depth.


No way in hell that happens. That would be completely Isaiah-esque. Seeing as we will suck hardcore next year a number 1 next year for a 10 this year. No thanks.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Masbee said:


> Problem is, I think, that in a draft where the most desired prospects go 6 deep, the #10 pick doesn't have a whole lot of value. Some value, just not premium value. Chances of one of the top 6 dropping to #10 are slim. So unless a team has a player ranked in their top 5, who is currently projected to be on the board at #10, who is going to give Seattle a lot of value for that pick?
> 
> *The Boston pick looks real interesting, on the other hand*. Make a trade for it before the draft, and if you don't give up too much value, spin the wheel and hope one of the top 6 (assuming your scouts agree the top 6 belong) drops to you.


Looks like the Blazer Brass is reading these boards for good ideas. :wink:


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

I wouldnt be suprised i provided nash.patterson,nate,rice,barret all with the url for good trade scenarios.


----------

