# The Nets Need Your Point Guards!



## ghoti (Jan 30, 2005)

Please help the Nets by forking over any of your four PGs.

Anyone want to suggest something equitable?

Thinking of any of those guys on the Nets makes me extremely happy.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

4?

you can have steve blake for a song.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

Steve Blake for Jason Collins?


----------



## ghoti (Jan 30, 2005)

SheedSoNasty said:


> Steve Blake for Jason Collins?



I like the song idea better.


----------



## ghoti (Jan 30, 2005)

SMiLE said:


> 4?
> 
> you can have steve blake for a song.


Believe me, Steve Blake would be a godsend for the Nets.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

ghoti said:


> Believe me, Steve Blake would be a godsend for the Nets.


I believe you, he's a good player if you want someone who's consistently consistent, and nothing spectacular.

A great backup, no doubt. He could thrive on certain teams as a spark-plug type player, imho.

part of me wishes it was here, but the other part of me realizes that jack and telfair are enough better than him (overall, meaning taking the long term into account) that the cards aren't in his favor. Doesnt mean, of course, that he won't be here for 2-5 years...but his contract makes that a little hard.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

ghoti said:


> I like the song idea better.


I don't see anything attractive/feasible from the Nets. You'd have to include a third team. Oh, and my mentioned trade couldn't happen anyway. We'd need to include Brian Skinner to make the salaries work.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ghoti said:


> I like the song idea better.


I thought he was offering Blake to you for less than a song.


----------



## ghoti (Jan 30, 2005)

SheedSoNasty said:


> I don't see anything attractive/feasible from the Nets. You'd have to include a third team. Oh, and my mentioned trade couldn't happen anyway. We'd need to include Brian Skinner to make the salaries work.


The Nets have Mile Ilic, Christian Drejer, two 1st round picks, and a $3M TE in addition to the players on the roster.

You have four PGs and the Nets desperately need any of them. 

As soon as Nash got axed, suddenly there was hope...


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

I could see Blake and #30 for #22 and #23.


Or possibly even Blake, #30 and #31 for #22 and #23.


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

Ehh, Outside the big 3 (or should I say 2, Kidd is over the hill) there isn't much to chose from, just spare parts. 

Collins is painful to watch play basketball. I would hate to see him in a Blazer uni. Poor mans Ervin Johnson. I guess Ilic would be the only prospect from that team I would be somewhat consider (for Blake, you really dn't have a shot at Jack or Telfair)


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Verro said:


> I could see Blake and #30 for #22 and #23.
> 
> 
> Or possibly even Blake, #30 and #31 for #22 and #23.



not bad verro....get it done! ooh...we have no gm. 

who's the 4th PG? Dixon?


----------



## ghoti (Jan 30, 2005)

QRICH said:


> Ehh, Outside the big 3 (or should I say 2, Kidd is over the hill) there isn't much to chose from, just spare parts.
> 
> Collins is painful to watch play basketball. I would hate to see him in a Blazer uni. Poor mans Ervin Johnson. I guess Ilic would be the only prospect from that team I would be somewhat consider (for Blake, you really dn't have a shot at Jack or Telfair)


If the price for Blake were Ilic, the Nets would just draft a PG.

Trading a 7'2" center for a backup PG isn't generally a good idea.


----------



## ghoti (Jan 30, 2005)

SMiLE said:


> not bad verro....get it done! ooh...we have no gm.
> 
> who's the 4th PG? Dixon?


Yeah.

I know he's an undersized SG, but no one on the Nets can shoot.

I'd rather have him than be forced to draft a role player.


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

And? Just because he's tall doesn't mean he's a surefire prospect. Ha is 7'4.5", does that mean we wouldn't trade him for a decent prospect? ..no

A 7'2" center in the 2nd round isn't generally a good sign.


----------



## southnc (Dec 15, 2005)

Blake was not only the best PG on the Blazers this past season, he was also the most improved player. He shot over 400 overall, and over 400 for 3's as well. His defense has also improved.

Of course, a lot of Blazer fans are concerned Blake will take away minutes from Telfair and Jack, when he out-plays them again. Well, it's a lamo but valid excuse, I guess. :biggrin: 

There is no indication that he is at his ceiling either, when considering his steady improvement over his young career.

In terms of his intangibles (team player, high bball IQ, behavied, etc) and effort, he would be a great fit for the Nets. And, I like the idea of Blake being mentored by Kidd, since their game play is very similar.


----------



## ghoti (Jan 30, 2005)

QRICH said:


> And? Just because he's tall doesn't mean he's a surefire prospect. Ha is 7'4.5", does that mean we wouldn't trade him for a decent prospect? ..no
> 
> A 7'2" center in the 2nd round isn't generally a good sign.


Sometimes that is true. (Somaila Samake, anyone?)

This is different, though.

We have been following his progress pretty closely and he is developing well against very good competition.

If he were in this year's draft, he would be taken in the middle of the first round and very possibly higher.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

southnc said:


> Blake was not only the best PG on the Blazers this past season, he was also the most improved player. He shot over 400 overall, and over 400 for 3's as well. His defense has also improved.
> 
> Of course, a lot of Blazer fans are concerned Blake will take away minutes from Telfair and Jack, when he out-plays them again. Well, it's a lamo but valid excuse, I guess. :biggrin:
> 
> ...


if similar you mean they both play basketball...than yes, they are.

plus, kidd wishes he shot 3's as good as blake did.


----------



## CanJohno (Feb 11, 2005)

ghoti said:


> Please help the Nets by forking over any of your four PGs.


No offense, but it's not our responsibility to "help the Nets." Also, we only have *three* PG's--Dixon, most definitely, is NOT a PG.



ghoti said:


> Anyone want to suggest something equitable?


So far, the only suggestion that makes any sense for _us_ is Ilic (which, of course, you shot down quickly).


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Well, I would do Blake, 30 for Ilic and 22. 

Or, Blake and 30 for 22 and 23


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

no no no blake for nets 07 first rounder!


----------



## Infinet (Mar 14, 2005)

You guys might as well trade us Telfair now. Once that rookie contract is up... he's heading back home and you guys know it. Might as well get something for him :biggrin:


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

what to the knicks? lol dont think so


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Infinet said:


> You guys might as well trade us Telfair now. Once that rookie contract is up... he's heading back home and you guys know it. Might as well get something for him :biggrin:


yep, it's a given. because god knows all NY'ers always end up in NY.


----------



## CanJohno (Feb 11, 2005)

Infinet said:


> You guys might as well trade us Telfair now. Once that rookie contract is up... he's heading back home and you guys know it. Might as well get something for him :biggrin:


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

SMiLE said:


> yep, it's a given. because god knows all NY'ers always end up in NY.


I know you are joking about his, but when I lived in The City a few years back, I swear that 25% of Manhattenites were from Texas.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Reep said:


> I know you are joking about his, but when I lived in The City a few years back, I swear that 25% of Manhattenites were from Texas.


heck, it doesn't take much to be able to claim you're from Texas. Our President acts like he's a texan, when he grew up with a silver spoon up his nose in Connecticut


----------



## Anonymous Gambler (May 29, 2006)

Telfair for Ilic, straight up! I'd do that in a second. New Jersey gets a home town favorite. Portland gets a center with potential.

Or Dixon and the 30th for the 22nd and spare change.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

How about Zoran Planinic, Scott Padgett, #22, and #23 for Steve and Juan.


----------



## CanJohno (Feb 11, 2005)

Anonymous Gambler said:


> Telfair for Ilic, straight up! I'd do that in a second. New Jersey gets a home town favorite. Portland gets a center with potential.


:laugh:


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

Telfair for Ilic? Seriously? How 'bout Telfair for Kristic.


----------



## CanJohno (Feb 11, 2005)

Dark Knight said:


> How about Zoran Planinic, Scott Padgett, #22, and #23 for Steve and Juan.


That's not a bad deal, but it'd leave us with 5 picks... and I'm not sure that management feels that they need _that_ many picks. They would, however, make for good trade fodder in other deals, I suppose.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Dark Knight said:


> How about Zoran Planinic, Scott Padgett, #22, and #23 for Steve and Juan.


dude..you can't be serious...

to quote kramer...giddyup!


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

SMiLE said:


> dude..you can't be serious...
> 
> to quote kramer...giddyup!


I'm assuming that's a positive reaction. I'd really just like to trade #22 and #23 for Blake and Juan, but salaries don't work, obviously, so I included Zoran and Padgett because they're both pretty worthless. Whereas Steve and Juan don't really seem to fit on the Blazers, they are two players who would be perfect on the Nets. They're the exact type of players that we need at the backup 1 and 2.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Dark Knight said:


> I'm assuming that's a positive reaction. I'd really just like to trade #22 and #23 for Blake and Juan, but salaries don't work, obviously, so I included Zoran and Padgett because they're both pretty worthless. Whereas Steve and Juan don't really seem to fit on the Blazers, they are two players who would be perfect on the Nets. They're the exact type of players that we need at the backup 1 and 2.



thats a positive "I'll even include the 30 and 31st picks" reaction.


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

Hmm I thought that Jordan Farmar was a lock to be picked by New Jersey??


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

SMiLE said:


> thats a positive "I'll even include the 30 and 31st picks" reaction.


Alrite, throw em' in. We've got a deal.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

deanwoof said:


> Hmm I thought that Jordan Farmar was a lock to be picked by New Jersey??


Farmar may not even stay in the draft.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

SMiLE said:


> thats a positive "I'll even include the 30 and 31st picks" reaction.


Thats a great deal


----------



## ghoti (Jan 30, 2005)

Hbwoy said:


> Thats a great deal


Wow. Yeah it is.


----------



## soonerterp (Nov 13, 2005)

southnc said:


> Blake was not only the best PG on the Blazers this past season, he was also the most improved player. He shot over 400 overall, and over 400 for 3's as well. His defense has also improved.
> 
> Of course, a lot of Blazer fans are concerned Blake will take away minutes from Telfair and Jack, when he out-plays them again. Well, it's a lamo but valid excuse, I guess. :biggrin:
> 
> ...


Having three very good point guards isn't really fair to all three of them if they want appreciable playing time. I will grudgingly accept Blake being traded IF it gets rid of Miles or some other dolt, but not to get rid of him for the sake of getting rid of him because he's "inferior" to Telfair and Jack. Not only is he NOT inferior to Telfair and Jack, Blake actually *pushed* those youngsters to be BETTER and their improvement can in part be attributed to Blake.

The thought of Blake being Kidd's successor one day is intriguing.

And bonus ... he'd be back on the East Coast.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

soonerterp said:


> Having three very good point guards isn't really fair to all three of them if they want appreciable playing time. I will grudgingly accept Blake being traded IF it gets rid of Miles or some other dolt, but not to get rid of him for the sake of getting rid of him because he's "inferior" to Telfair and Jack. Not only is he NOT inferior to Telfair and Jack, Blake actually *pushed* those youngsters to be BETTER and their improvement can in part be attributed to Blake.
> 
> The thought of Blake being Kidd's successor one day is intriguing.
> 
> And bonus ... he'd be back on the East Coast.


Is that you on TerpTown?


----------



## soonerterp (Nov 13, 2005)

Dark Knight said:


> Is that you on TerpTown?


Yeah I post there too ... do I know you?


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

soonerterp said:


> Yeah I post there too ... do I know you?


I post there scarcley under jmk888 (used to be jmk here). I recognized your name.


----------



## soonerterp (Nov 13, 2005)

Dark Knight said:


> I post there scarcley under jmk888 (used to be jmk here). I recognized your name.


Crap. Busted.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

serious i doubt that portland the 3 they have right now let alone 5 picks I dont think they want to draft more than 2 rookies, we just dont have the roster space


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Portland should seriously be trying to trade Blake this summer anyway. I can't imagine why he'd want to sign in Portland once his contract is up at the end of the coming season, so odds are he'll wind up just walking (see: Sabonis, Stoudamire, Rahim, Van Exel, Pryziblla (pending)). 

without his Bird rights, any team that trades for him is basically just renting him for a season, and hoping Blake wants to come back to the team he is traded to out of his own free will (it does happen a lot, but there are no guarantees).


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

The Blazers have 3 young, solid point guards, each with a lot of potential. Overall, I think Blake was the best starting PG of the three this season... but it's really, REALLY hard to say which of the three has the highest long-term "ceiling" at this point. Remember, Jack himself said he was playing most of the season at 60% due to his tweaked ankle (recently sugically repaired).

I think the Blazers should put a lot of effort into exploring trades for each of them, then execute the one trade that gets them the most back. No matter which of the three they trade, they'll still have 2 solid young point guards with great potential - a situation they haven't been in since... well... as long as I can remember. Closest they've been to that IMO was 1999-2000 with Damon and Greg Anthony... but Anthony was nowhere near young at the time, and both of those guys were both pretty much at their peak at the time.

The Blazers are going to have to trade one of 'em, and since it seems to be a rock/paper/scissors scenario, I think they should trade the one that gets them the most back. But I don't see that the Nets have anything attractive to offer in return - would need to be a 3-way if the Nets wanted to land one of 'em.

PBF


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

Blake for a 1st round pick. Nothing less after you guys screwed us in the SAR deal.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

tlong said:


> Blake for a 1st round pick. Nothing less after you guys screwed us in the SAR deal.


I think Blake for a single 1st round pick would be another case of the Nets screwing the Blazers. Blake is worth more than that, IMO.

PBF


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

ProudBFan said:


> I think Blake for a single 1st round pick would be another case of the Nets screwing the Blazers. Blake is worth more than that, IMO.
> 
> PBF


You could be right. However if his contract expires after next season and we don't have his Bird rights then I would be happy with a 1st round pick.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

tlong said:


> Blake for a 1st round pick. Nothing less after you guys screwed us in the SAR deal.


LOL - :clap: :clap: :clap:


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

ProudBFan said:


> I think Blake for a single 1st round pick would be another case of the Nets screwing the Blazers. Blake is worth more than that, IMO.
> 
> PBF


Is he really? We signed him for practically nothing, he's a backup pg on the worst team in the league, and we don't have his Bird rights. 

New Jersey would most likely just be renting him for one season. If he's good enough to be worth more than a late draft pick, odds are a more attractive team (Phoenix, San Antonio) will offer him the same dough as a free agent and steal him, because decent backup PG's are hard to find. 

A great example is Earl Boykins. He played some really nice minutes in Golden State, proved his value and then went on to a better opportunity in Denver, and Golden State got nothing for him. Odds are the same thing will happen to either New Jersey or Portland after this season with Blake. He's got decent size, good character, a nice jumper and is pretty smart. Sounds like a good backup for Tony Parker or Steve Nash to me.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

theWanker said:


> Is he really? We signed him for practically nothing, he's a backup pg on the worst team in the league, and we don't have his Bird rights.
> 
> New Jersey would most likely just be renting him for one season. If he's good enough to be worth more than a late draft pick, odds are a more attractive team (Phoenix, San Antonio) will offer him the same dough as a free agent and steal him, because decent backup PG's are hard to find.
> 
> A great example is Earl Boykins. He played some really nice minutes in Golden State, proved his value and then went on to a better opportunity in Denver, and Golden State got nothing for him. Odds are the same thing will happen to either New Jersey or Portland after this season with Blake. He's got decent size, good character, a nice jumper and is pretty smart. Sounds like a good backup for Tony Parker or Steve Nash to me.


And why wouldn't he be a good backup to Jason Kidd? I don't get it.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

I agree with theWanker on the Blake question. 

If Blake is worth anything, it seems to me that it is extremely unlikely he will resign with the Blazers (even if we wanted him back by then). If we were to trade one of our other two PGs (Telfair or Jack), then lose Blake for nothing (very likely), we'd be hurtin' for certain. 

Blake is worth more than a 1st round pick? Did I read that right? The only reason we got him last year is that no one else wanted him. Even though he's been able to showcase his improvement here, I doubt very much that Blake will have a better NBA career than Telfair, and I doubt he'll have a better NBA career than Jack. 

We should try to trade Blake while we can, and clear up playing time for our two superior prospects.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

yeah blake for a future first round pick


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Infinet said:


> You guys might as well trade us Telfair now. Once that rookie contract is up... he's heading back home and you guys know it. Might as well get something for him :biggrin:


Ok. No problem.

Telfair for Krstic.


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

Blazer Bert said:


> The only reason we got him last year is that no one else wanted him.


While most of your post is true, this part is not. Blake did not want the Wizards, and I believe Cleveland was looking at him as well.


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

Dark Knight said:


> And why wouldn't he be a good backup to Jason Kidd? I don't get it.


He would. Just that you wouldn't be any more likely to get him to resign then some other team I think is his point (due to no bird rights), and it could be argued that there are more attractive teams to go to if all he's getting is the MLE anyways. Personally I think he would be a great pick up for your team, and would happily trade him straight across for a 1st round pick.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

yakbladder said:


> While most of your post is true, this part is not. Blake did not want the Wizards, and I believe Cleveland was looking at him as well.


I hadn't heard that about Cleveland. wow, that would have been a much, much better place for him than here. heck, they pushed Detroit to the limit while basically getting nothing from the point guard position. (well, Snow did play some decent defense on Chauncey, I guess). Blake would've spread the floor so much better than Snow did--he might've even started for them. 

instead he comes here and spends half the season behind a second year high schooler? yeesh. talk about bad career move, if you are right.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Dark Knight said:


> And why wouldn't he be a good backup to Jason Kidd? I don't get it.


I can't imagine any free agent pg seriously consider New Jersey above a proven winner like the Spurs or Suns. if you are going to be a backup anyway and get paid the same amount anyway, why not go to a team that has a more winning track record? 

(although for me, personally, I'd much rather live in NYC and work in New Jersey than roast in San Antonio or Phoenix.)


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

theWanker said:


> I can't imagine any free agent pg seriously consider New Jersey above a proven winner like the Spurs or Suns. if you are going to be a backup anyway and get paid the same amount anyway, why not go to a team that has a more winning track record?
> 
> (although for me, personally, I'd much rather live in NYC and work in New Jersey than roast in San Antonio or Phoenix.)


Nets are more of a proven winner than the Suns are (I'm using the whole Kidd era). It's not as if this is the Atlanta Hawks and we're in the lottery every year. This is a winning team. A team that NEEDS a backup PG. Blake would be greatly accepted here, and would basically be in a no-lose situation. He gets to learn under the tutelage of Jason Kidd, which no one should discredit, and help be a part of a winning team, instead of tagging along for the ride, which is what you're proposing.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

theWanker said:


> I can't imagine any free agent pg seriously consider New Jersey above a proven winner like the Spurs or Suns. if you are going to be a backup anyway and get paid the same amount anyway, why not go to a team that has a more winning track record?
> 
> (although for me, personally, I'd much rather live in NYC and work in New Jersey than roast in San Antonio or Phoenix.)


You are going to "roast" in Phoenix in January?

NBA doesn't play during the hottest summer months. "Hot" NBA cities is a non-issue.

Bizarrely, many NBA players make their offseason home in places like Houston, Atlanta and Florida. Why? The best summer weather in the U.S is found in the Pacific states, California (at the beach), Oregon and Washington.


----------



## BlayZa (Dec 31, 2002)

Blake was still our best and most stable PG last season, i dunno why some of you guys are making out like he isnt worth zip. 

he and jack are still our best pg combo , hate it or love it.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Dark Knight said:


> Nets are more of a proven winner than the Suns are (I'm using the whole Kidd era).


Bwahahahahahahaha!

Number of 50 win seasons in the last 10 years:

New Jersey: 1
Phoenix: 5

Number of times missed the playoffs since 1989: 

New Jersey: 9
Phoenix: 2


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

Fork said:


> Bwahahahahahahaha!
> 
> Number of 50 win seasons in the last 10 years:
> 
> ...


----------



## southnc (Dec 15, 2005)

theWanker said:


> I hadn't heard that about Cleveland. wow, that would have been a much, much better place for him than here. heck, they pushed Detroit to the limit while basically getting nothing from the point guard position. (well, Snow did play some decent defense on Chauncey, I guess). Blake would've spread the floor so much better than Snow did--he might've even started for them.
> 
> instead he comes here and spends half the season behind a second year high schooler? yeesh. talk about bad career move, if you are right.


 Blake did want to go to Cleveland, but the Cavs panicked and decided to go with a more "experienced" guard. Also, there was thought that the Zards would match any offer from an East Coast Team (Blake was an RFA).

But, your point is well taken - if Blake did go there, perhaps (re-read previous word) they might still be in it.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Dark Knight said:


> How about Zoran Planinic, Scott Padgett, #22, and #23 for Steve and Juan.


Where do I sign? I think Planinic will be a decent point guard and would except his role, if not he's younger than Blake and we could ship him off in another trade. Plus we'd be getting the #22 and #23, but we'd definitely have to find a taker for our picks #30 and #31...


----------

