# Joel for Cassell?



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

Rick Bucher just reported that the Blazers have been talking to the Clippers about Cassell for Przybilla. I don't know how much truth there is to that. Tim Legler said we'd be idiots to mess with this roster right now and I agree with him. I know most of you agree as well.


----------



## Miksaid (Mar 21, 2005)

Miksaid says no.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

Sounds like nonsense. What would we want with Cassell? And what would we do without Joel?

barfo


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

Talk about us getting a lot more softer in the middle if we were to do that. Cassell's old and slow at this point in his career, and has about 1 to 2 years left in this league.
I've always liked his game, though, but that would just be horrific if we did that.


----------



## MrJayremmie (Dec 29, 2007)

i heard that also, and was comin' here. WTF would they be thinking? we are already thin up there... they want to freakin' play Frye (one of the softest big men of all time) and LaFrentz at Center? Give me a freakin' break. The fact that this is being considered pisses me off. Joel is a HUGE part of this team now and in the future. He will be an amazing backup for Oden when oden is injured, tired, or in foul trouble, you can't just throw his name out there in trade rumors... that can mess up chemistry right there.

Major Bull **** on KP's side if this has any truth near it. Lets add Cassell to be our 4th (5th counting Roy) PG on this team right? we need a veteran PG? Blake!!!!!?!?!!?! Christ if they pull the trigger on this i will snap, why mes with the chemistry.

And finally, i don't wanna have to look at Sam Cassell's ugly mug everytime i try and watch my team. for the love of God KP what the hell are you thinking? Even if we want to trade someone like Jack and Green, McRoberts, Freeland, Miles, LaFrentz, Kaponen ok.... but to trade our only real Center we have right now is rediculous. 

Andre Iguodala is a player i'd like to be considered for a SF role on the team for maybe a Jack, Webster, pick, Freeland, and Green/McRoberts and another 1 or 2 picks on top... but come on. That seriously might be the STUPIDEST trade possibility i have EVER heard. I pray to god there is no truth to this, or KP will have to answer to a hell of a lot of Angry fans.

ZachAddy, if you see KP in New Orleans ask him WTF is he thinking. This is crazy talk, Joel is one of our 5 most important players on this team.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

the only thing possibly of interest for the Blazers regarding Sammy is that his contract is expiring. Obviously there are lots of other reasons why Portland wouldn't want to do this deal. Maybe the Clips approached KP regarding Joel and this was their offer, but I have a hard time seeing why that would warrent any sort of discussion. 28 year old starting centers are worth more then any 38 year old PG...

STOMP


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

MrJayremmie said:


> And finally, i don't wanna have to look at Sam Cassell's ugly mug everytime i try and watch my team. for the love of God KP what the hell are you thinking? Even if we want to trade someone like Jack and Green, McRoberts, Freeland, Miles, LaFrentz, Kaponen ok.... but to trade our only real Center we have right now is rediculous.


You mean you don't want to see this?


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

barfo said:


> Sounds like nonsense. What would we want with Cassell? And what would we do without Joel?
> 
> barfo


I'm not for this and doubt it is really being considered, bu when you ask the questions I thought

What would we want with Cassell: his expiring contract (is it expiring)

What would we do without Joel: not pay him on his contract so we can resign Webster, Outlaw, Roy, Aldridge, Sergio and company


----------



## MrJayremmie (Dec 29, 2007)

> You mean you don't want to see this?
> 
> http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...assellljpg.jpg


christ...


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

I wouldn't worry about it. I trust KP completely. I have a lot of crow to eat after the Zach trade because I was especially hard on Pritchard about that move. Looking back, Zach for Rudy, James Jones, and Frye was a very good move. I don't believe that KP would steer us wrong. I don't think this deal would happen.


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

Well for one the Blazers would be interested becouse Sam Cassell has a 6.5 million dollar expireing contract. The Blazers would be a bit softer in the middle though. I do like Roy and Cassell in the backcourt though that would be vary nice.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Would be a horrible trade. Mediocre PG is the LAST position of need.


----------



## blue32 (Jan 13, 2006)

alext42083 said:


> You mean you don't want to see this?


not many forum posts make me laugh, except perhaps talk-hards (political/racially charged stuff), and now this!
LOL


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

I think this is why going for cap space is such a dangerous plan. You have to sacrifice talent in deals before the FA period, might just end up being fools gold.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

That makes no sense. It leaves us without a starting center and even deeper in a position that doesn't need a lot of depth right now. Won't happen.

Besides, the Clippers already have a pretty good center in Chris Kaman.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

I actually suggested we trade for Cassell after we got Oden and before he went down, because Cassell is supposed to be a great locker room guy (he's very popular among players) and teams that acquire him almost always have a bounce after they get him (see Bucks, Wolves and Clippers), and I thought we needed a vet PG. But I forgot about it after we got Blake back. And now I think it's obvious that Joel is too valuable to us.

(Sidenote: why would the Clips want Joel? Practically the one place they DON'T have a hole is at C.)


----------



## Baracuda (Jan 10, 2007)

Nonsense.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Not that I agree with this trade, but if you add Oden into the mix next year, and continue to chalk Outlaw up as a PF rather than a SF, there are little to no minutes available for him.

Blake / Sergio
Roy / Jack
Webster / Jones
Aldridge / Outlaw
Oden / Frye-Przybilla?

+ 1st round pick

Someone is going to get left out in the cold.

Again, though, I think there are other ways of going about this. If Portland were to pull the trigger on such a deal, I would expect that another would be coming as well.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Also, Portland couldn't use the savings from Cassell's expiring deal to sign another player next year. Take away Joel's contract, and Portland would still be several million over the cap next season. So that option doesn't make sense.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

maybe it's joel freeland for Cassell.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Hap said:


> maybe it's joel freeland for Cassell.


That certainly makes more sense. But I still don't want Cassell. We don't need him. Our chemistry experiment is going along just fine.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Oden is not going to play 48 minutes a game. Portland needs a banger for the second unit, when one is needed. Joel can do that. There is no way we move Joel without replacing him with some backup muscle.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

no way to the deal but i would take sam as old and gimpy as he is , he still ca score no way trading joel tho


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

There's no way this happens. Joel has too big of a role for something like this to happen this year. Not only that, he'll be a great compliment to Oden next year while Cassell does next to nothing.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

Draco said:


> I think this is why going for cap space is such a dangerous plan. You have to sacrifice talent in deals before the FA period, might just end up being fools gold.



Bingo.

If the team is actually committed to the "cap space in 09" master plan, this is the type of crappy deal they will have to make......repeatedly.

It's one thing to dump a guy like Miles or Raef for cap space - they don't play anyway. Joel, OTOH, may be mediocre, but he still has SOME value on the floor. 

Why risk the good things that are happening this season over a "if-but-maybe" future pipedream?? :rant:


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

How do you guys know that KP dosen't have something else up his sleeve if this trade went down? If the Blazers had another center or traded for another center to depend on this trade might make some sence for the Blazers.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

if there's a better backup in the league to Oden, I can't think of it. well, maybe Shaq at this point, but who wants to pay $20 mil/year for a backup center? 

I don't see us trading Przybilla for several years to come. there just aren't a lot of better 7-1 defender/rebounder/shot blocker role-playing centers who probably wouldn't mind coming off the bench. 

the one exception I could see is if Przybilla has made it clear he will revolt if benched in favor of Oden. but that just seems so out of his character.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

It might be more complicated than simply Trading Joel for an expiring deal...HEar me out here, I am playing devils advocate. We know that the main focus for this team is the future, THis season is a pleasant surprise, but realistically the future is key. 

Joel right now starts and plays 21 mpg. Next year he won't start and he will be splitting time with Frye, who will be splitting time with Outlaw at the reserve 4 as well. SO Joel moves to our 2nd unit...How will he fit there?

I think Portland will move Jarrett Jack over the summer. He becomes redundant and a downgrade IMO from Rudy F. Rudy F and Sergio then become the primary reserve backcourt. Both are uptempo good passers and Rudy a good jump shooter who also is a good finisher at the rim. Sergio excels at penetrating the lane and kicking it out. A spread offense would be best which means players who help spread the floor.

Which lineup for a 2nd unit looks better?
A: Sergio, Rudy, Travis, Channing, Joel
B: Sergio, Rudy, James Jones, Travis, Channing
Which lineup compliments each other best? Which is closer to the successful 2nd unit we have now?

By Trading Joel for Cassell it opens a roster spot for Rudy to come over, it also knocks 6.8mil of our salary for summer 2009. YEs we will suffer a bit this year, not a ton though. Nate already isn't using Joel in pressure situations.


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

Schilly said:


> It might be more complicated than simply Trading Joel for an expiring deal...HEar me out here, I am playing devils advocate. We know that the main focus for this team is the future, THis season is a pleasant surprise, but realistically the future is key.
> 
> Joel right now starts and plays 21 mpg. Next year he won't start and he will be splitting time with Frye, who will be splitting time with Outlaw at the reserve 4 as well. SO Joel moves to our 2nd unit...How will he fit there?
> 
> ...


I agree 100% it also seems as of late that Nate likes channings game more than Joel's. I think it's hard for some people to look towered the future being that the Blazers are doing so well.:cheers:


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

If you go to 82games.com, Frye at center with the other 4 starters has a significant +/_ number of +44 in 200 minutes. The regular starters with Joel has a -14 in 286 minutes.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

This is real confusing... and I think Nate undervalues Joel a little bit.
He's a great defensive player and it's not like he's completely worthless offensively. He's not a Chris Dudley or something. Involve Joel in pick and rolls and he's really effective. He can get the offensive boards, and he's adequate at the line.

This would be a lot more questionable than when we traded ZBo at the time of the draft IMO.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

If cutting Joel's salary was the goal, they could do that this summer or next year just as easily. We don't need an expiring contract this year.

The only reason to do this trade is to get back into the lottery. 

It would indeed make us a little softer in the middle, like a marshmallow is a little softer than a walnut. 

I am still having a hard time believing Bucher didn't just make this up while drunk. 

barfo


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Of course what would the final deal be? Would we be getting more in return? Sending more in addition?


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

Schilly said:


> Of course what would the final deal be? Would we be getting more in return? Sending more in addition?


Well, sure. If Chris Kamen is coming back with Sam, then it might be a good trade after all. Somehow I'm guessing not.

barfo


----------



## TLo (Dec 27, 2006)

I think the story is BS. It makes no sense whatsoever.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

Has Ric Bucher predicted anything right other than his "bold" prediction that the Blazers were selecting Oden No. 1 in the summer?

Cap space is overrated. You already have a player that can play.


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

I'm just curious how KP thinks he's going to get someone major in 2009? Chris Paul? Yeah... the Hornets are going to let HIM walk away /sarcasm

We can pretty much forget about Paul or Williams because you can guarantee that the Jazz and Hornets will max them out. And unless Tom Penn has figured out a way around bird rights and restricted free agency, we're screwed in that regard.

Who else is on the market in 2009?

I just think it's a pipe dream and we should worry about keeping this nucleus together. Really, what else does this team need?


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

Total nonsense, indeed.

Pryz is a perfect Blazer (character, work ethic, commitment to the team), and his interior defense next year will allow the team to extend its dominance when playing the White Unit. Solid centers are very thin in this league - I can't believe we'd give him up.

He will wear out a lot less quickly as Oden's backup - he could play in Portland for another 5-7 years. Unless a *good* deal came along, I'd like to think we'll be keeping him.

iWatas


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

The only way I'd be somewhat in favor of trading Joel for Cassell would be if we get Corey Maggette back in the deal. He would be the prefect starter at SF for this team and probably be the solution for the cold offensive starts as of late.


----------



## Resume (Jul 17, 2007)

LMFAO oh man... that picture of cassell is a gem!!!


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

barfo said:


> If cutting Joel's salary was the goal, they could do that this summer or next year just as easily. We don't need an expiring contract this year.


true dat... unless he sustains a severe injury, Joel should be a very easy guy to move at any time in the next few seasons. He's playing well and just entering his prime, his contract is reasonable, and of course there is always a scarcity of decent Bigs around the league.


> The only reason to do this trade is to get back into the lottery.


so... Joel for Sammy plus the Clips 2008 #1?

that makes more sense from Portland's perspective (though not for this season), but I fail to see what the Clips gain... unless they are looking to make another move with Kaman. With Brand down clearing the low block, CK's numbers have gone way up and it could be that they've been fielding enticing trade offers for him... Maybe they're looking for a better compliment at the 5 to run with EB?

STOMP


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

barfo said:


> If cutting Joel's salary was the goal, they could do that this summer or next year just as easily. We don't need an expiring contract this year.
> 
> The only reason to do this trade is to get back into the lottery.
> 
> ...


Correct. It makes no financial sense to trade Joel now for the magical summer of 09, instead of just trading him after next season.

You know, the season (much like this one) where we need him.

As for making a roster spot for Rudy (as was implied elsewhere), thats where cutting Green or McRoberts or trading Jack for a future pick comes into play.

Trading Joel just sounds like someone coming up with any idea to trade Joel because they just want to get rid of him and think that because Fryes -+ is better, he's better.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

No way we make this trade, not a chance. It just doesnt make any sense.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

I think the notion that Frye can be the back up C is a faulty one. For starters, he's mostly an outside player on offense. He rebounds well, but worse than Joel.

He provides no interior defense (as a C). .3 blocks a game (thats Zach Randolph territory). He scores more than Joel, but he also has close to 40% more total shots (140 vs 228). 

Here are the per 48's, 40's and 32's for each.

48
Channing. 
18 points, 12.27 boards and .81 blocks
Joel.
11.2 points, 16.45 boards and 2.51 blocks

40
C
15, 10.2 and .68
J
9.3, 13.71, 2.1

32
C
12, 8.1, .54 
J
7.4, 10.97, 1.7

I think Joels defense, rebounding and blocked shots (alone) are worth keeping him as the backup instead of trying to come up with the magical 09 cap room. That's not to say that they should play Joel in favor of Channing (or vice versa) but that trading one because the other can provide enough, especially if we get a stiff like Rasho in return, is a poor long term solution.


----------



## BIG Q (Jul 8, 2005)

I do not like this deal as stated. There would have to be more to it. The only thinking I can come up with is that KP knows that James Jones is opting out of his deal. He may not have expected that. Hence, with Jones opting out and KP committed to re-signing him it will cost us some of our "2009 cap space plan." By moving Joel for an expiring and re-signing JJ around MLE money we come out with a bit more 2009 cap space money to spend.

It is just a thought. I do not like it though because Joel could be moved in the off season for an expiring. He could also be part of a major deal with Raef's expiring deal this off season or next season. Portland gains nothing that I can see by moving Joel this season. He should be our starter in the playoffs this season.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

This deal makes a lot of sense if it's a 3 way trade though. Maybe a team like Toronto who really needs a PG could get involved?


----------



## MrJayremmie (Dec 29, 2007)

adding the clippers #1 pick makes this trade look much different, eh?


----------



## MrJayremmie (Dec 29, 2007)

I also wonder if it will be Blazers, Clips, and maybe Memphis.. Gasol goin' to the clips or somethin' we can get a #1 pick and Connely... i think that could work, and i wouldn't be against that.



> This deal makes a lot of sense if it's a 3 way trade though. Maybe a team like Toronto who really needs a PG could get involved?


Calderon is doin' very well for them. I'm not sure If ford is ever comin' back, but if he does, they have one of the best Pg combo in the nba.


----------



## drexlersdad (Jun 3, 2006)

Why the Clipps would trade for pryz is beyond me. They have one of the top 5 centers in the league this year. Kaman.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

draft nathan jawai!  thats my 42 like answer!


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

NateBishop3 said:


> I'm just curious how KP thinks he's going to get someone major in 2009? Chris Paul? Yeah... the Hornets are going to let HIM walk away /sarcasm
> 
> We can pretty much forget about Paul or Williams because you can guarantee that the Jazz and Hornets will max them out. And unless Tom Penn has figured out a way around bird rights and restricted free agency, we're screwed in that regard.
> 
> ...


They Hornets wont be able to afford to max Chris Paul out.:cheers:


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

I like Joel.

This is retarded.


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

I think this "rumor" got to Bucher by way of a team that's not involved and wants to mess with Portland's chemistry by blowing a bunch of trade smoke. If there's even a glimmer of reality to this even being a discussion, it's from Pritchard saying 'yeah, we'll get back to you...' just to be polite.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

drexlersdad said:


> Why the Clipps would trade for pryz is beyond me. They have one of the top 5 centers in the league this year. Kaman.


I speculated earlier in the thread about this... maybe they'd rather have a defensive 5 (Joel) alongside Brand and feel that the time is right to trade Kaman. As you allude, his numbers are way up this year from having the low block to himself and they may be fielding some tempting offers for him. 

If they don't feel that Kaman and Brand are a complimentry match, then they probably should break them up. CK's contract dwarfs Joel's, and he's not been very productive playing 2nd fiddle low block scorer to EB. 

STOMP


----------



## drexlersdad (Jun 3, 2006)

STOMP said:


> I speculated earlier in the thread about this... maybe they'd rather have a defensive 5 (Joel) alongside Brand and feel that the time is right to trade Kaman. As you allude, his numbers are way up this year from having the low block to himself and they may be fielding some tempting offers for him.
> 
> If they don't feel that Kaman and Brand are a complimentry match, then they probably should break them up. CK's contract dwarfs Joel's, and he's not been very productive playing 2nd fiddle low block scorer to EB.
> 
> STOMP



you could very well be on to something. Although a cassell for Joel deal is a rip-off for us. Joel could get minutes on basically ANY NBA team.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

drexlersdad said:


> you could very well be on to something. Although a cassell for Joel deal is a rip-off for us. Joel could get minutes on basically ANY NBA team.


seems most of us are in agreement that a 28 year old Joel playing as well as he is with years left on a reasonable contract is worth a lot more then a 38 year old Cassell with an expiring deal... and it makes even less sense since Portland really doesn't need cap relief for the 2008/9 season. Thats why the speculation that they might be throwing in their lotto choice as well. At least that gives Portland a reason to do this supposed deal.

STOMP


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

There is no way we are trading Pryz unless we get back a big in return...our front line would be woefully thin without Pryz. McBob hasn't shown that he can step in and fill a role off the bench.


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

I don't think the deal makes a lick of sense for the Clippers if they lose a lottery pick in the process. Przybilla is decent, but by no means worth the value the Clips could get with a top five pick (or are we theorizing the pick would be top-five protected, or something...?).


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

BlazerFan22 said:


> How do you guys know that KP dosen't have something else up his sleeve if this trade went down? If the Blazers had another center or traded for another center to depend on this trade might make some sence for the Blazers.



How do I know KP doesnt have something else up his sleeve if this trade went down? I'll tell you how I know. 

KP isnt an idiot. 

We are not going to start tinkering around with the chemistry of this team in mid-season with moves that can be put off till the off-season.

Let's learn from the mistakes Bob Whitsitt and the Chicago Bulls have made. Stability and continuity isnt a bad thing for a young, winning team.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Maybe the Blazers are looking to trade Joel so they can offer Jones a multi-year contract (when he opts this summer) and still have cap flexibility in 2009 . . .


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Maybe the Blazers are looking to trade Joel so they can offer Jones a multi-year contract (when he opts this summer) and still have cap flexibility in 2009 . . .



But cant they do that after the season?


----------

