# Deng getting tough with Bulls



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

Deng might deliver one-and-done edict to Bulls:



> LAS VEGAS – Unless the Chicago Bulls can reach an agreement for a contract extension with restricted free agent Luol Deng before he departs to join the Great Britain national team in two weeks, he will end talks and tell management that he plans to leave the organization as a free agent next summer, a source close to Deng told Yahoo! Sports.
> 
> Deng is determined to come to terms on a long-term contract, but he has set an Aug. 4 deadline to reach an agreement. Once Deng, 23, leaves the country for the European Championship qualifying tournament, he will a sign a one-year qualifying offer for $4.5 million and become an unrestricted free agent in 2009.


Discuss.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Exactly the kind of guy you want to buy next year if you are the blazers. Hopefully this situation only gets worse.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

It seems like there must be an opportunity here somewhere. Assuming Deng isn't being unreasonable and overvaluing himself (a big assumption to me), then you would think there is an opportunity here. There aren't many teams under the cap enough to do much there, so if Chicago doesn't want to pay him long term, but doesn't want to lose him for nothing, it seems like it would be a good time for a sign and trade (with Raef + young cheap talent).

My problem with this is that I'm not convinced Deng is worth the money he is holding out for. His stats are only marginally better than Outlaw, so the only benefit is his supposed defense. It doesn't show up statistically because he is below Outlaw in blocks and steals. I haven't watched him enough to really tell, but he doesn't appear to be a lock down defender.

If he is better than I think then I hope KP is on the phone with them.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

mook said:


> Exactly the kind of guy you want to buy next year if you are the blazers. Hopefully this situation only gets worse.




I actually think it would be better to trade for him if the Blazers could, and still have their cap money for next season. 

Portland has a situation this year that even if no one on the team gripes about playing time, players will lose any value they might have if they don't play enough anyway.

For me I would rather trade a package of something like Webster and Joel along with a pick or whatever to Chicago for a re-signed Deng. Then still have the cap room next season to go after a FA if we want to. We would also get out from Martell's cap hold, and avoid possibly losing him for nothing if we have to waive him to avoid the cap hold. 

It also solves KP's problem of wanting some roster flexability because it's a two for one


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

deng is not a significant enough upgrade over outlaw to be worth a near max deal + luxury tax starting in 2 years, not to mention the assets we'd need to give up in a sign/trade. 

if we are going to overpay for someone who's unhappy with their team we should just go after josh smith.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> For me I would rather trade a package of something like Webster and Joel along with a pick or whatever to Chicago for a re-signed Deng. Then still have the cap room next season to go after a FA if we want to.


How would the team still have its cap room? Deng's contract would then be on the books, eating just as much cap room as if they signed him next off-season.

However, I'd prefer to trade for him also. It would make the team better one season earlier and give the team another season to jell.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

crowTrobot said:


> deng is not a significant enough upgrade over outlaw to be worth a near max deal + luxury tax starting in 2 years, not to mention the assets we'd need to give up in a sign/trade.
> 
> if we are going to overpay for someone who's unhappy with their team we should go after josh smith.




Actually, Deng is better than Outlaw at every aspect of the game except for Blocked shots and 3pt%(and Deng isn't a bad 3pt shooter)


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> Actually, Deng is better than Outlaw at every aspect of the game except for Blocked shots and 3pt%(and Deng isn't a bad 3pt shooter)


I concur.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Minstrel said:


> How would the team still have its cap room? Deng's contract would then be on the books, eating just as much cap room as if they signed him next off-season.
> 
> However, I'd prefer to trade for him also. It would make the team better one season earlier and give the team another season to jell.



Simple. If the Blazers just waited until next season to sign Deng, they woul duse their cap space and be fine. If the team traded existing contracts for him though they would get Deng and still have their cap room next season. 

If hypothetically the Blazers traded Webster and Joel for Deng, Deng would be an upgrade over Webster, and the Blazers could then use their cap room to initiate a trade or sign someone else next year that would probably be an upgrade over our PG, or back up PF/C


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

mediocre man said:


> Actually, Deng is better than Outlaw at every aspect of the game except for Blocked shots and 3pt%(and Deng isn't a bad 3pt shooter)




i know he's a little better, but the difference in most areas isn't that great. deng is not a superstar - he's not that much of an upgrade over what we have, and he's not worth the near-max deal he's looking for. if we are going to throw that kind of money at someone we should be aiming higher than deng.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

crowTrobot said:


> i know he's a little better, but the difference in most areas isn't that great. deng is not a superstar - he's not that much of an upgrade over what we have, and he's not worth the near-max deal he's looking for. if we are going to throw that kind of money at someone we should be aiming higher than deng.





Yes he is a huge upgrade. His basketball IQ alone is light years ahead of where Outlaw will ever hope to be.

And keep in mind, you would be replacing Webster, not Outlaw in my scenerio. Deng is just an overall better player. Better defender, better passer, better skill set.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

mediocre man said:


> Yes he is a huge upgrade. His basketball IQ alone is light years ahead of where Outlaw will ever hope to be.
> 
> And keep in mind, you would be replacing Webster, not Outlaw in my scenerio. Deng
> 
> is just an overall better player. Better defender, better passer, better skill set.



wow, you're massively overrating deng. 

agree to disagree i guess.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> Simple. If the Blazers just waited until next season to sign Deng, they woul duse their cap space and be fine. If the team traded existing contracts for him though they would get Deng and still have their cap room next season.


Yes, that's true, except the reason the team will drop under the cap is expiring deals. I would assume the Bulls would want those in return. But maybe Pritchard could manage to avoid that.


----------



## MrJayremmie (Dec 29, 2007)

I like Deng, a lot. He was someone i thought we should target when we talked about it a while ago. But i feel pretty good about our roster now. I would like to consolidate a bit, but its cool.

After the draft i feel good about our team.

After next year (including QOs and team options) we can have Sergio, Frye, Webster, LaFrentz and Diogu come off our books (along with Francis's contract). So i really think that we can solve our "too much" talent problem after this year.

I believe that if a player has a QO next year, that means the Blazers can choose to not use it making the player an unrestricted Free Agent, correct? or am i way off? That is what diogu has.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> Yes he is a huge upgrade. His basketball IQ alone is light years ahead of where Outlaw will ever hope to be.
> 
> And keep in mind, you would be replacing Webster, not Outlaw in my scenerio. Deng is just an overall better player. Better defender, better passer, better skill set.



I agree. The catch is his demand for a $70 million contract! You don't turn a good player into a great player by throwing money at them. The Blazers tried that with Sheed, and Damon, and Zach. I see no reason to repeat the experiment.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Oldmangrouch said:


> I agree. The catch is his demand for a $70 million contract! You don't turn a good player into a great player by throwing money at them. The Blazers tried that with Sheed, and Damon, and Zach. I see no reason to repeat the experiment.


Do we really need a "great player" at SF though? Normally I'm not a big fan of paying that much money for a non-franchise player, but Deng is such a perfect fit for what we need at SF (defense, perimeter shooting, slashing, youth, intelligence). Deng would be the ultimate role player for this team. 

If we had him sewn up, I could see this team push toward 70 wins in 3-4 years. He'd be the difference between "perennial contender" and "perennial favorite."


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Deng is massively overrated. Please do not waste cap space on him. We need to keep Travis and get a Posey type of backup SF, hell bring back IME!


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

mook said:


> Do we really need a "great player" at SF though? Normally I'm not a big fan of paying that much money for a non-franchise player, but Deng is such a perfect fit for what we need at SF (defense, perimeter shooting, slashing, youth, intelligence). Deng would be the ultimate role player for this team.
> 
> If we had him sewn up, I could see this team push toward 70 wins in 3-4 years. He'd be the difference between "perennial contender" and "perennial favorite."


Agreed. And I think Deng is actually potentially worth a max deal. His much hyped "bad year" was actually pretty good and people are losing track of how young this guy is. He was only 22 last year! Look at his career progression in PER, by age:

Age 19: 14.2
Age 20: 15.8
Age 21: 18.7
Age 22: 17.0

15.0 PER is league average starter, 20.0 PER is the lower bound on star, generally. Until last year, he was improving year by year. He was already on the doorstep of being star-quality at age 21. Last year was a slight step back, but his potential remains huge. This is a player who, had he not had a bad season in 2007-08, would be considered absolutely untouchable, considering production and age. And he plays very good defense, which is largely not reflected by PER.

I think if Chicago lets him go, they'd be making a huge mistake and I'd absolutely love Portland to take advantage. Yes, one doesn't need a star at every position, but if you can get stars who have complementary games and at low cost (low cost, in this case, is not having to give up any of Oden, Aldridge, Roy or Bayless, IMO), you have to do it.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

Deng would be an awesome addition next year, but if the situation gets worse, Chicago should probably look for a S&T. If that is the case, we'd probably be a suitable trading partner. 

That said, I think I'd consider Childress @ 3 years, $20mil instead.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> When faced with these situations in the past, the Bulls would make an offer and tell the player if he thinks he's worth more, go out and collect an offer sheet from another team. The cap room around the NBA is pretty much gone this summer, so no offer sheet is forthcoming. But that doesn't necessarily mean the Bulls have the upper hand in negotiations.
> 
> Deng will have some quality options if he decides to sign the one-year qualifying offer and become an unrestricted free agent next summer. How does joining a Portland starting lineup of Greg Oden, LaMarcus Aldridge, Brandon Roy and Jerryd Bayless sound?
> 
> The Blazers are a dangerous opponent for the Bulls right now, because they have an opening for Deng on the floor and will have cap room next year when Raef LaFrentz and Steve Francis come off the books.


http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=222216


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

The PER arguement may be the best, but people who think Deng is much better statistically, do the work and equalize Deng and Outlaw's minutes. They are actually a lot closer than most people think. Why would you pay 3X salary for Deng over Outlaw for 1.3X production? I would like to have Deng, but do you really want to add a max SF when you will likely have to Max Roy, Oden and Aldridge too? If you are going to add a max player to this roster I wouldn't do it unless I thought they were worth more than one of the big three. If not, I say pass.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Interesting quote from Minstrel's article:



> There figures to be an avid trade market for Deng if it comes to that. Portland would probably be willing to give back Channing Frye and Travis Outlaw, which isn't a great option.


----------



## hoojacks (Aug 12, 2004)

crowTrobot said:


> wow, you're massively overrating deng.
> 
> agree to disagree i guess.


That and he's massively underrating Outlaw, which he tends to do.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

I agree that we don't need a superstar at SF. OTOH, why would we want a nonsuperstar who thinks he deserves superstar treatment?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Reep said:


> Why would you pay 3X salary for Deng over Outlaw for 1.3X production?


Because 1.3X production is better, and the 3X salary doesn't affect the team in any way. It's just more money that Paul Allen has to pay.

Now, if Allen has a salary line he won't cross, and Deng would push Portland near or over that, then sure...it may not be worth it. But if there's no such issue, and Allen will pay four max contracts (or even five, if Bayless turns out to be a star)...why would you be perturbed by Allen paying more money?

Also, you don't appear to be considering defense. Outlaw is a poor defender, Deng is a very good defender. Having a strong team defense is a huge part of winning a championship.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> Because 1.3X production is better, and the 3X salary doesn't affect the team in any way. It's just more money that Paul Allen has to pay.
> 
> Now, if Allen has a salary line he won't cross, and Deng would push Portland near or over that, then sure...it may not be worth it. But if there's no such issue, and Allen will pay four max contracts (or even five, if Bayless turns out to be a star)...why would you be perturbed by Allen paying more money?
> 
> Also, you don't appear to be considering defense. Outlaw is a poor defender, Deng is a very good defender. Having a strong team defense is a huge part of winning a championship.


The real question is which Deng is the future Deng?

The age 22, PER 17.0, Win Shares Above Average of -2.0, Defensive rating (lower is better) of 109 Deng.

Or the age 21, PER 18.7, Win Shares Above Average of +10.5, Defensive rating of 100 Deng?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/denglu01.html

One is a quality defender and efficient scorer. The other is Travis Outlaw (more or less).


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Reep said:


> The PER arguement may be the best, but people who think Deng is much better statistically, do the work and equalize Deng and Outlaw's minutes. They are actually a lot closer than most people think. Why would you pay 3X salary for Deng over Outlaw for 1.3X production? I would like to have Deng, but do you really want to add a max SF when you will likely have to Max Roy, Oden and Aldridge too? If you are going to add a max player to this roster I wouldn't do it unless I thought they were worth more than one of the big three. If not, I say pass.


How do we really know that those three guys will be worthy of max deals? Injuries happen. Guys who look really good in their second year sometimes never get much better. Guys sometimes force trades because they want to be The Man. Sometimes they are run out of town because they did something creepy nobody saw coming. 

It seems pretty likely that those three will be max players, but do we plan everything on it when we don't have to? I don't see why. 

The big problem is having guys paid way more than they're worth, not having too many guys on max deals. At least on the Blazers, thanks to Paul Allen's fat wallet. When you pay too much for inferior talent (see Rashard Lewis, for example) you lose flexibility because you can't easily trade him. 

Say we signed Deng for 6 years at $66 mil. If things go south and we need to trade him, is it pretty likely we can find somebody to give us a good deal for his $11 mil/year contract? Yes, I think so.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> Because 1.3X production is better, and the 3X salary doesn't affect the team in any way. It's just more money that Paul Allen has to pay.
> 
> Now, if Allen has a salary line he won't cross, and Deng would push Portland near or over that, then sure...it may not be worth it. But if there's no such issue, and Allen will pay four max contracts (or even five, if Bayless turns out to be a star)...why would you be perturbed by Allen paying more money?
> 
> Also, you don't appear to be considering defense. Outlaw is a poor defender, Deng is a very good defender. Having a strong team defense is a huge part of winning a championship.



The problem I have with the salary is it makes the player harder to move if they don't work out. What if Deng ends up not fitting with the team chemistry (unlikely, but possible)? What happens if he gets his big contract and then decides to coast (possible).

I keep hearing that he is a great defender, but the times I've seen him he wasn't anything special. 

I just looked up his last ten or so games. James scored 33 and 34 on him. Iggy lit him up. He didn't really hamper Pierce or Caron Butler. Show me where he shut down an opposing teams SF? I'm just not seeing it. He may be a modest improvement over Outlaw defensively, but he didn't lock down any SFs this year, and wasn't able to help his team much.

And Deng is not a three point shooter. His percentage wasn't bad, but he took only 22 shots all season! Travis took over four times that many (and made a higher percentage). 

I think Deng at a max contract would be a big mistake.


----------



## MrJayremmie (Dec 29, 2007)

I agree Reep. He is a good player, but not for this team.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

mook said:


> Say we signed Deng for 6 years at $66 mil. If things go south and we need to trade him, is it pretty likely we can find somebody to give us a good deal for his $11 mil/year contract? Yes, I think so.


Deng turned down $58M/5 years ($11.5M/year). I don't think $66/6 years is going to do it. If he is willing to sign a one year deal and take all that risk, I'm guessing he is looking for $80M or more over six years. Anything less than that wouldn't be worth holding out for. 

I hope the Blazers wait and see how he does this year, rather than try a sign and trade. I just don't think Deng has done enough to earn the big bucks.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

I like the idea of Deng because I get the impression he's a total team player. I don't think he thinks he needs to get his shots or he'll sulk. But at the same time he is a good medium range shooter, and they should be available with our bigs. And he's not famous as a great defender, but defense is mostly about smarts, and he's certainly got those.

Questions if a sign (or rather extend) and trade was available:
* Would Chicago require us to take on a bad contract? I consider Larry Hughes ($12.8M for 2 yrs) and Nocioni ($8M, but for 5yrs!) and Kirk Hinrich ($10M for 4 yrs) to be their worst contracts, but I don't know if they consider them bad.
* What kind of players would they want? I'm guessing frontcourt, because they have a glut of guards, but we don't want to give up Aldridge or Oden (of course) and I'm not sure Przybilla and/or Frye would do the trick.
* If they wanted either Bayless or Rudy, would it be worth it? We have too many guards and he's better than any SF we have, but...


----------



## MrJayremmie (Dec 29, 2007)

Naw, if it was ever a sign and trade we wouldn't give up Roy, Aldridge, Oden, Rudy or Bayless, which doesn't leave them that many assets to choose from unless they want somethin' like Outlaw, Webster, cash, 1st, Koponen and maybe Joel or something similar.

They can have SERGIO!!!!

Don't think it would work out in a sign and trade, as i'm sure they'd only want players the blazers wouldnt give up.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

The columnist said Frye and Outlaw. I can't imagine Bayless would look that good to them, unless they are going to drop Hinrich or Gordon.

I would think they would want interior scoring, but they aren't going to get the from Joel or Frye. I'm not sure we would be good trading partners for them.


----------



## Anonymous Gambler (May 29, 2006)

I think Deng, at the right salary, is worth getting. I would offer Frye, Outlaw, Pryzbilla, a future unprotected number 1 pick, and take back some bad salary. Basically, anyone they wanted except our big 3 and the new two- Rudy and Bayless. Or, they could have either Bayless or Rudy and nothing else of value- but I'd rather do the volume trade.

With Deng, we are set to contend next year- we'd have defense at every position and even more offense than we currently have. I mean there would be no evident holes in the lineup (though something might come up). Deng would be second in actual current playing ability to Roy on the team and eventually Oden and Aldridge would pass him.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

Anonymous Gambler said:


> I think Deng, at the right salary, is worth getting.


if he was willing to sign for "the right" salary he would have signed with bulls long ago - he wants max or close. their dispute is purely monetary.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

You guys are amazing. Deng posted the numbers he did on a bad ACL and achillees tendon.

He "regressed" to 17ppg last year, playing MOST of the season (from december onward) on a VERY bad leg. A leg that has healed.

Now does he deserve MAX money? My opinion is, THAT kind of money is reserved for the Lebron's of the world. So I'd say no.

But I had him rated as the 5th best SF in the league 2 years ago if graded on ability at both ends of the floor. Last year he fell to about 10th, again, due to injury. 

I expect him to climb right back up to the top 6 this year.

Bookmark this. I'll be back to laugh at how much you all underrated deng.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

The Krakken said:


> But I had him rated as the 5th best SF in the league 2 years ago if graded on ability at both ends of the floor.


Wow, you have a lot of confidence.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

The Krakken said:


> Bookmark this. I'll be back to laugh at how much you all underrated deng.


In your rage, you seem to have overlooked that there's a split on Deng and Deng being not much of an upgrade is not a consensus opinion.

Maybe instead of spitting bile at a nebulous entity like a "fanbase" (as though they all have one unified opinion), you should argue with specific individuals you disagree with.


----------



## whatsmyname (Jul 6, 2007)

we might get deng next year :

http://trailblazerscentercourt.blogspot.com/2008/07/cap-space-2009-reporters-already.html


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Depending on salary requirements and the kinds of players that would be needed to get a sign and trade done I think Deng could be a very nice acquisition achieving two goals. Greatly improving the SF position, and possibly clearing some log jams on the roster.

If KP is really interested in Deng and the alternative is to wait until next summer and then possibly have to get in a bidding war with other teams with cap room (not sure if that would happen), while still having to either renounce or trade away players to make room for him, then I think going for the sign and trade now makes a lot of sense.

Whatever happens, I'm cool with this team staying in its present form for a year too.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

The Krakken said:


> You guys are amazing. Deng posted the numbers he did on a bad ACL and achillees tendon.
> 
> He "regressed" to 17ppg last year, playing MOST of the season (from december onward) on a VERY bad leg. A leg that has healed.
> 
> ...


pretty classless post, but dude does bring up the valid point that Deng was injured for all of last year including the pre-season... which is why his stats (and the Bulls record) dipped. When healthy, I think the guy is in the Roy/Aldridge level of border line All-Star who does most everything very well. For a healthy Deng (which is something for the Docs to weigh in on) I'd give up both Joel and Travis in a heartbeat.

Dude is a stud.

STOMP


----------



## wizmentor (Nov 10, 2005)

I like Deng, but many are forgetting one important fact:

In the NBA, players use one ball at a time.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

wizmentor said:


> I like Deng, but many are forgetting one important fact:
> 
> In the NBA, players use one ball at a time.


Good thing Deng is a willing passer, like Roy, Aldridge, Oden and Bayless.

One ball and five players who can pass and score makes for sweet ball movement.


----------



## wizmentor (Nov 10, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Good thing Deng is a willing passer, like Roy, Aldridge, Oden and Bayless.
> 
> One ball and five players who can pass and score makes for sweet ball movement.


Good point overall, but Bayless a willing passer? You do know that when one passes the ball into or close to the basket it's called a "shot", right? :lol:


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

wizmentor said:


> Good point overall, but Bayless a willing passer? You do know that when one passes the ball into or close to the basket it's called a "shot", right? :lol:


I do, yes. And when he passes it to a teammate, it's called a pass. What's your point?


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

I haven't seen Deng play much, but he struck me as a Shareef Abdur-Raheemy type of player. Good stats, productive, but not really that great. I'd rather have a Iggy.


----------



## RW#30 (Jan 1, 2003)

If I were KP, I would certainly look into getting Deng. He is a top SF and would fit perfectly into our system.I would go get him now and work him into the mold. This is an opportunity to get a young proven SF with still upside and if we could get him for Webster or Travis with Fry or Ike and a first round pick next year (it would be low mid 20's) I would do it. If we could have him for around 60 to 70 mil.over five to six years with the starting salary of 8 million it would be a great deal. I would even throw in Sergio.
We could sign Koponen, and add another shooter or have Webster.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

I really like Deng, but I dont know if he is going to be the type of guy who is willing to be 4th or even 5th offensive option on a team. Same goed for Iggy. For this reason I think we need a more 'consumate' role player like Chilldress who I liken to a younger James Posey. And James Posey is exactly the type of skillset we need at SF.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Wow... first of all, this is huge news. If Deng plays for a one-year deal, that is EXCELLENT for Portland.

Secondly, I can't believe that people would let a few million dollars a year stop us from signing Deng, if he were a free agent.

Will it really make a difference if he's making $11m or $13m a year? It will to Deng, probably, but to Allen? Or the Blazers' cap situation? Or to the other players on the team? I seriously doubt that it would.

Deng is big and skilled and young and plays a team game... at a position that we all know (well, except for the Outlaw fanatics) that we need to improve long-term. He is a best-case scenario for the use of our cap space, in my opinion, and if Portland could somehow add him with our cap space, I would admit that the Zach Randolph deal was a successful one, eating all of the crow that I would deserve.

Ed O.


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

If Deng plays the year on the QO and ends up with you guys next year, there'll be no stopping you.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Posey was a non-factor for YEARS in the NBA for a very good reason: he's just not that good of a player. I want a player with MORE tools, not fewer. If we get a very skilled/talented player who has the proper mindset... THAT is the way to make a team good.

Posey looked good because he was playing with three future HoF'ers in their prime. It doesn't mean he actually IS good.

Ed O.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> In your rage, you seem to have overlooked that there's a split on Deng and Deng being not much of an upgrade is not a consensus opinion.
> 
> Maybe instead of spitting bile at a nebulous entity like a "fanbase" (as though they all have one unified opinion), you should argue with specific individuals you disagree with.


Spitting bile at a nebulous entity? Hardly. Unlike a poster or two from this forum who have been trolling the bulls board lately (though there are some VERY good blazers fans on this site), I specifically avoided ANY LABEL OF ANY KIND, including fanbase. I was counting on the contingency here being ADULT enough to know that If I wasn't talking ABOUT them, then I obviously couldn't be talking TO them. Moreover, nothing I said constitutes a personal attack. Just a very strongly stated dissenting opinion. If that makes me classless and "in a rage", well then I don't know what to say about how politically correct we've become.

Rage? Hardly. I was diagnosed with cancer a month ago. The day I found out, THAT was rage. There isn't a single discussion on the web capable of working me up like that.

EDIT: And if there's any questions about me as a poster, all you really have to do is look up my posting history. I don't think I've levyed a personal attack in more than 2 years.


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

Ed O said:


> Wow... first of all, this is huge news. If Deng plays for a one-year deal, that is EXCELLENT for Portland.
> 
> Secondly, I can't believe that people would let a few million dollars a year stop us from signing Deng, if he were a free agent.
> 
> ...



Yeah I'm hoping Josh Smith also takes one year QO. That would give us two more possible SF's to go for next year. I think Deng would be a better fit then Smith but it doesn't hurt to have more options.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Tortimer said:


> Yeah I'm hoping Josh Smith also takes one year QO. That would give us two more possible SF's to go for next year. I think Deng would be a better fit then Smith but it doesn't hurt to have more options.


I agree, I think Deng is the better fit, since he's a "pure" small forward, while Smith is a bit of a 'tweener.

However, Smith is intriguing because it could create one of the most formidable defensive front courts ever. Greg Oden, LaMarcus Aldridge and Josh Smith? That's a hostile paint.


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

I think Deng should be right around the top of our FA list. The news that it could actually be realistic is very exciting!


----------

