# Portland\Houston?



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

I speculated on this awhile back and now according to Draft Express....there may be a lot of talk going on b\t POR and HOU.....

http://www.draftexpress.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1712



> oh, and this is definitely something that is out there. Houston has a lot of offers on the table right now, especially from Portland...


Sura and either Howard or Swift and the #8 to POR for Zach Randolph

book it....

:greatjob:


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*

Randolph isn't coming to Houston. It would be for #4 or one of the backup PG's.


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*

That Paterson is aggressively seeking another pick is a good sign.

I wonder who they have targeted at #8 though, #6 I could see as being a huge pick as one of the big 5 falls if Atl selects Williams, but #8?! 

Based on the position in the draft, I'd say it almost has to be Brewer or O'Bryant we're targeting, both have worked out for Portland (which had people scratching their heads at the time). Furthermore if I had to guess which of the two, I'd say they liked Brewer.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*

Randolph, Blake and 30 to Houston for Salary match and #8 makes a lot of sense for Houston and Portland. It gives the Rockets a huge upgrade at PF and someone that is a follower like Randolph would blossom huge under Yao and T-Mac. It gives Portland another chip in the draft to overhaul their team and continue the rebuilding around Nate's style of team. The possibilty of a Morrison, Sheldon Williams, Patrick O'Bryant, or someone else if they slip, draft would sit well with everyone. I can't see how Houston wouldn't think Zach would be a huge upgrade over anyone they could get at #8 and Portland reduces it's salary a bit sooner than later.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Kmurph said:


> I speculated on this awhile back and now according to Draft Express....there may be a lot of talk going on b\t POR and HOU.....
> 
> http://www.draftexpress.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1712
> 
> ...


"According to Draft Express"? Your link goes to a message board, just like this one. That's not exactly a solid source. No disrespect Kmurph, I hope this ends up being true.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



mediocre man said:


> Randolph, Blake and 30 to Houston for Salary match and #8 makes a lot of sense for Houston and Portland. It gives the Rockets a huge upgrade at PF and someone that is a follower like Randolph would blossom huge under Yao and T-Mac. It gives Portland another chip in the draft to overhaul their team and continue the rebuilding around Nate's style of team. The possibilty of a Morrison, Sheldon Williams, Patrick O'Bryant, or someone else if they slip, draft would sit well with everyone. I can't see how Houston wouldn't think Zach would be a huge upgrade over anyone they could get at #8 and Portland reduces it's salary a bit sooner than later.


I agree. That'd be a good move for Houston. Zach's game would mesh well with T-Mac and Yao. He could go back to being a player that grabs offensive boards and puts them back in, something he was very good at a few years ago when he was putting up 20 pts & 10 rbs.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Verro said:


> That Paterson is aggressively seeking another pick is a good sign.
> 
> I wonder who they have targeted at #8 though, #6 I could see as being a huge pick as one of the big 5 falls if Atl selects Williams, but #8?!
> 
> Based on the position in the draft, I'd say it almost has to be Brewer or O'Bryant we're targeting, both have worked out for Portland (which had people scratching their heads at the time). Furthermore if I had to guess which of the two, I'd say they liked Brewer.


I'd love for us to get Brewer. He could be a really outstanding perimeter defender, which is obviously one of our biggest needs. But I've heard Houston wants to trade UP, not out of the first round. I don't know...


----------



## MightyReds2020 (Jul 19, 2002)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> I agree. That'd be a good move for Houston. Zach's game would mesh well with T-Mac and Yao. He could go back to being a player that grabs offensive boards and puts them back in, something he was very good at a few years ago when he was putting up 20 pts & 10 rbs.


I have a really, really, really hard time believing Zach Randolph will turn himself back into a bit player. For that matter, I can't see how he and Yao can mesh on the offensive end as they are both great post scorers.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*

With T-Mac's back issues, the Rockets have got to be thinking their window of opportunity to win a championship is only the next few seasons. If they want to make a run, they need to get a guy who can score and rebound like Zach now. Blake would be a solid PG for them, he plays smart, doesnt turn the ball over, and is willing to pass first - get the ball to the guys who can score.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Mr. Roger's Cardigan said:


> Randolph isn't coming to Houston. It would be for #4 or one of the backup PG's.


Um... what?

Why would Portland trade down from 4 to 8? I can't think of any reason for Portland to do that other than ridiculous salary-dumping PR- (and competitiveness-) killing moves.

Ed O.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Ed O said:


> Um... what?
> 
> Why would Portland trade down from 4 to 8? I can't think of any reason for Portland to do that other than ridiculous salary-dumping PR- (and competitiveness-) killing moves.
> 
> Ed O.


I meant if there was a trade involving Portland and Houston, it would involve either the #4 pick or one of Portland's backup PG's coming to Houston, not Zach Randolph. But I really doubt these two teams cut a deal.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



MightyReds2020 said:


> I have a really, really, really hard time believing Zach Randolph will turn himself back into a bit player. For that matter, I can't see how he and Yao can mesh on the offensive end as they are both great post scorers.


Then you haven't been watching Zbo the last 2 years as he has floated further and further outside.... :clown:


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Mr. Roger's Cardigan said:


> Randolph isn't coming to Houston. It would be for #4 or one of the backup PG's.


Hey!!! Only Blazers fans are allowed to wear Rose colored glasses!...


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Fork said:


> I'd love for us to get Brewer. He could be a really outstanding perimeter defender, which is obviously one of our biggest needs. But I've heard Houston wants to trade UP, not out of the first round. I don't know...


Yeah based on Roy's comments about a team trading up for him and the rumors swirling around Houston that would make sense. But what can Houston offer to move up that would even interest the Blazers? Jonathan's statement had Houston receiving a lot of offers from the Blazers, what does Houston have that would warrant a lot of offers to move up 4 spots? Assuming Portland wants to stay young, the only talent they have that could be considered young is Head (who we have a similar player to in Jack) and Swift who is 26 but doesn't seem to fit the McMillian mold.

Could it be #8 and a 2007 protected for #4?


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



mediocre man said:


> Randolph, Blake and 30 to Houston for Salary match and #8 makes a lot of sense for Houston and Portland..


Throw in Dixon instead of Blake.... Randolph and Blake and that is it..

leave the #30 and #31 for a NJ swap

Houston throws us back the #8 and Sura and Howard or Swift... still a very good deal. Sura replaces Juan and we get another big man. We need Blake more than we need Juan. Blake can play both guard spots.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Trader Bob said:


> Throw in Dixon instead of Blake.... Randolph and Blake and that is it..
> 
> leave the #30 and #31 for a NJ swap
> 
> Houston throws us back the #8 and Sura and Howard or Swift... still a very good deal. Sura replaces Juan and we get another big man. We need Balke more than we need Juan. Blake can play both guard spots.


Alright I get it. Now you've taken too many pain meds.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Verro said:


> Yeah based on Roy's comments about a team trading up for him and the rumors swirling around Houston that would make sense. But what can Houston offer to move up that would even interest the Blazers? Jonathan's statement had Houston receiving a lot of offers from the Blazers, what does Houston have that would warrant a lot of offers to move up 4 spots? Assuming Portland wants to stay young, the only talent they have that could be considered young is Head (who we have a similar player to in Jack) and Swift who is 26 but doesn't seem to fit the McMillian mold.
> 
> Could it be #8 and a 2007 protected for #4?


Hmmm...maybe. 

Here's another thought. Houston trades the Luther Head and the #8 to Minnesota for the #6. Houston gets Brandon Roy. Minnesota gets...whatever. I have no clue what they want. Foye maybe? 

I believe we'll take Aldridge or Morrison and Atlanta will take Shelden Williams, leaving Roy on the board with the #6 pick. #7 gets the player left over between Aldridge and Morrison. Foye goes 8th. That scenario works out pretty well for everyone involved, in my opinion. 

That makes the top 8 picks:

Tor: Bargnani
Chi: (possibly for Phoenix) Thomas
Cha: Gay
Por: Morrison/Aldridge
Atl: She. Williams
Hou: Brandon Roy
Bos: Aldridge/Morrison
Minn: Foye

That seems fairly realistic to me.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*

remember.. Zach is BYC right now until July 1...

He has an outgoing value of $10.66 and an incoming return trade value of $5.33 mil.. making it difficult to do

and Houston is over the cap.. so they can not absorb salary right now unless another team is involved and under the cap such as Charlotte and Atlanta. After July 1.. its another story though

2005/06 = $62.3 mil
2006/07 = $69.4 mil
According to storytellers web pages http://www.storytellerscontracts.info/resources/05-06salaries.htm


A deal with Houston involving Zach is not likely now... even though he would be a good fit there

Darius anyone??? :gopray:


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*

UGH! I forgot about that little detail. Thanks TB, for crushing all hope.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> UGH! I forgot about that little detail. Thanks TB, for crushing all hope.


Hey, it's only 3 days after the draft. We can wait that long.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Fork said:


> Hmmm...maybe.
> 
> Here's another thought. Houston trades the Luther Head and the #8 to Minnesota for the #6. Houston gets Brandon Roy. Minnesota gets...whatever. I have no clue what they want. Foye maybe?
> 
> ...



Getting a shot at Aldridge and Roy would be sweet...

I am still not convinced Toronto does NOT take Aldridge. I am on the fence with that one.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Fork said:


> Hey, it's only 3 days after the draft. We can wait that long.



It only means they consumate the trade in July not on draft day.... they can still announce it though..


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*

Thanks TB and Fork - there is hope!!!


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*

About 6 mill added to Zach gets past the BYC aspect....

Example.
Zach, Blake and Skinner 

for 

Sura, Wesley and Swift

works


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*

Zach could really excel in HOU as the 3rd option....

and I agree that HOU window is more now than later...

The deal makes a lot of sense for both teams...


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Schilly said:


> About 6 mill added to Zach gets past the BYC aspect....
> 
> Example.
> Zach, Blake and Skinner
> ...



Not for me... we loose both our PF's and get none in return
we also add 2x SGs to go along with Webster and Juan and Lenard?

and Swift is a 3... to go along with Miles, Khryapa, and Outlaw

VERY VERY unbalanced roster

then we take the #6 and draft Roy? in addition to Aldridge????

call me skeptical


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Trader Bob said:


> Not for me... we loose both our PF's and get none in return
> we also add 2x SGs to go along with Webster and Juan and Lenard?
> 
> and Swift is a 3... to go along with Miles, Khryapa, and Outlaw


Swift is a power forward/center tweener, actually.



> VERY VERY unbalanced roster
> 
> then we take the #6 and draft Roy? in addition to Aldridge????
> 
> call me skeptical


Blake and Skinner are irrelevant to the future of our team, except as potential assets to be traded. Wesley and Sura would probably each play for us, unfortunately, but we'd be better off for the future if we just cut them.

Adding the 8th pick wouldn't save this franchise, by any means, but it would help us add another young piece that might blossom.

If we had the #4 and #8, I'd vote for going with something like Aldridge and Foye (or Brewer), but I'd bet the Blazers would go Morrison (or Roy) and O'Bryant. Basically try to get one big and one swing man.

Ed O.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*

I would do a Miles for Juwan trade straight up...


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Ed O said:


> Swift is a power forward/center tweener, actually.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think Aldridge and Brewer would probably be my deam scenario of a draft. 

But I agree, Morrison and O'Bryant or maybe Saer Sene or Cedric Simmons seems more likely.

And the GREAT thing about Stromile Swift, we'd immediately have our newest whipping boy for all the 'casual fans' to hate on.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Ed O said:


> Swift is a power forward/center tweener, actually.


I thought Swift played a lot of 3 in Memphis????? my mistake...

agree on the dumping of players/salries.. it just clutters it all up. A trade were we get players to use would be better IMHO.. not having to the Derek Anderson type of roster fodder where we pay players that do nto exist on the roster

Sura is injury plaqued too....

Wesley is a Damon clone... can score but is short and a liability on D



there are other alternatives available... I have to belive that are better

but the #4 and #8 would be sweet... 

Aldridge and Brewer for me Ed...


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*

I don't see any possible scenario's that give Portland the #8 and #4. It's one or the other.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Mr. Roger's Cardigan said:


> I don't see any possible scenario's that give Portland the #8 and #4. It's one or the other.


Miles, Blake, Outlaw and #30 for Swift, Sura and #8


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Mr. Roger's Cardigan said:


> I don't see any possible scenario's that give Portland the #8 and #4. It's one or the other.


But you haven't given ANY reason that Portland would trade down. Houston has nothing else of value outside of Yao and McGrady that would do us any good, and clearly they're not going anywhere.

The only thing that I can think of is for Portland to trade down and take Houston's first rounder next year... but dropping from 4 to 8 this year is potentially stepping off of a cliff in terms of talent, and I don't see Portland doing it when Morrison, Roy, and/or Aldridge will be available for them at the fourth spot.

Ed O.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Ed O said:


> But you haven't given ANY reason that Portland would trade down. Houston has nothing else of value outside of Yao and McGrady that would do us any good, and clearly they're not going anywhere.
> 
> Ed O.


I wish someone would merge these threads. But, what about

Portland receives #5 (Roy, Gay or Morrison should be here)
Houston receives #4 (Houston takes Roy or Thomas, both worked out for them)
Atlanta receives #8 (a better place to take Sh. Williams if rumors are true)

This could be done with Houston adding value to Portland (Miles for Swift or Howard?) and someone adding value to Atlanta (30th pick, money, point guard). I could actually see this working if the player Portland wants slips to 5.


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*

just my take but i say bargnani,morrison(chicago trade) and gay are off the board. portland is basically on the clock.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



rainman said:


> just my take but i say bargnani,morrison(chicago trade) and gay are off the board. portland is basically on the clock.


I missed your point. Portland would take Aldridge or Roy. I'm not sure how that affects a Houston deal.


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Reep said:


> I missed your point. Portland would take Aldridge or Roy. I'm not sure how that affects a Houston deal.



off topic i guess,i didnt want to start a new thread, i could if you'd like.


----------



## 2k (Dec 30, 2005)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



hasoos said:


> Then you haven't been watching Zbo the last 2 years as he has floated further and further outside.... :clown:


Well if we put some better shooters around him like a more experianced Webster or Bargnani playing the 5 pulling big men out Z-Bo can get back on the block.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

I don't see Portland bringing Howard in just because of his salary situation. It basically goes through 2009 and pretty much equals Darius in terms of money. Not a very appealing trade, IMO.


----------



## Blazed (May 24, 2006)

Howard does nothing for me, especially with a long term contract. The Blazers are building for the future and I don't see how Howard would fit into that.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Blazed said:


> Howard does nothing for me, especially with a long term contract. The Blazers are building for the future and I don't see how Howard would fit into that.


Even teams that are building fo rthe future don't have ALL guys under 23 years of age. A handful of solid vets will do the young guys a lot of good.


----------



## Blazed (May 24, 2006)

Fork said:


> Even teams that are building fo rthe future don't have ALL guys under 23 years of age. A handful of solid vets will do the young guys a lot of good.


 True, but I don't think Howard is that guy.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Blazed said:


> True, but I don't think Howard is that guy.


Well, who would that veteran be then?..

All the good veterans are trying to stay as far away from Portland as they can, and their respective GM's aren't going to give them away for anything we have. We have to be realistic here. If we can get rid of Miles for Howard its something we need to do, especially considering getting the Houston pick.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Ed O said:


> But you haven't given ANY reason that Portland would trade down. Houston has nothing else of value outside of Yao and McGrady that would do us any good, and clearly they're not going anywhere.
> 
> The only thing that I can think of is for Portland to trade down and take Houston's first rounder next year... but dropping from 4 to 8 this year is potentially stepping off of a cliff in terms of talent, and I don't see Portland doing it when Morrison, Roy, and/or Aldridge will be available for them at the fourth spot.
> 
> Ed O.


 And that's why I don't see these two teams cutting a deal. Even if one the big 6 falls to #8, Portland would still want Houston to take on one of their bad contracts. It's doubtful these two teams can work out a deal where they get equal value in return.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

zags, you say "let's be realistic", yet you make the generalization that "All the good veterans are trying to stay as far awar from Portland as they can".

Realistically, I'm sure that at LEAST one player wouldn't mind coming here. Of course, this is all open to personal player opinion, something we'll never get.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*

miles and blake to houston for 8


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Reep said:


> I wish someone would merge these threads. But, what about
> 
> Portland receives #5 (Roy, Gay or Morrison should be here)
> Houston receives #4 (Houston takes Roy or Thomas, both worked out for them)
> ...


I am starting to think there is a 3rd team involved. 
Rockets send a future pick to Blazers, Rockets also send Head to Hawks.

Rockets get Miles, #4.
Blazers get Howard, #5, TE
Hawks get Head and #8.


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

> Rockets send a future pick to Blazers, Rockets also send Head to Hawks.
> 
> Rockets get Miles, #4.
> Blazers get Howard, #5, TE
> Hawks get Head and #8.



Yeah I like that trade if the pick is a lottery protected first, I'd be much more hesitant if it was a future 2nd.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

It really does no good for Portland. We might as well keep the #4.... trade Miles straight across to Houston for Howard

The only thing it really accomplishes is that it helps Houston get who they want at #4. Sure we dump Miles.. but we loose 1 slot in the draft and still pay a lot for an aging Howard for basically the same time frame.

A future pick may be the trick though


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

I really hope that we don't shoot ourselves in the foot and trade down that many spaces. I don't see anything good happening from that.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

SheedSoNasty said:


> I really hope that we don't shoot ourselves in the foot and trade down that many spaces. I don't see anything good happening from that.


It's only one spot down. The assumption is that the guy the Blazers want, may be available there (Roy?). If so, it would be better than just taking him at 4.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

Reep said:


> It's only one spot down. The assumption is that the guy the Blazers want, may be available there (Roy?). If so, it would be better than just taking him at 4.


The original proposal had us going from 4 to 8. That's the one I was commenting on.


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*



Schilly said:


> About 6 mill added to Zach gets past the BYC aspect....
> 
> Example.
> Zach, Blake and Skinner
> ...



Only for the Rockets. Portland ends up with no interior presence and gives up its #1 scorer and a good veteran role player for virtually nothing.

To quote Bill Walton: this trade is Hooooorible.


----------



## tobybennett (Jun 12, 2003)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*

The one im hearing is Howard + 8 for Miles + 4. I don't know about this though. If they are considering it , jsut shows how desperate Portland is to trade Miles. Trading down that far is costly, but I think someone else mentioned that if Houston throws a future #1 in there, that this trade could make more sense for Portland.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

*Re: Portland\Housten?*

man, if we trade down again, i will be pissed off. there is absolutely no one I want who will be there at #8.......i'd rather friggen take roy at 4 then trade down to 8 and miss out on anyone good alltogether.


----------

