# Quick reporting a trade rumor. (merged)



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

On the Fan they're talking about the Blazers offering Dixon for Mickael Pietrus. He's supposed to be on later in the show to talk about it.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

I REALLY like that idea! :clap2:


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

Yeah, that would be a great trade on our part and I think it makes sense for them to get rid of one of their slew of SF's. Jackson, Harrington, Pietrus, Barnes...one of them I think needs to go.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

Pietrus would be a good starting SF for us. He was putting up good #'s early in the season when he was getting a solid # of minutes. He is injured right now, and has missed the last 3 games due to a sprained ankle.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

If that trade goes down like that then patterson should get exec of the year. His...(pritchards) draft was incredible, and although magloire has been less that wonderful his trade for him was very good as well. Trading Dixon for Pietrus would be a great move.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

Hmmm...

I've heard he has a highly-inflated notion of his self worth, so I'm not sure he'd perform well in limited minutes.


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

Chris Mullin would have to be one of the worst GMs in the league to make this move ... so I guess it could be possible. Sounds way too good to be true to me though. Pietrus can play SG better than Dixon and is still on his rookie contract, with only the qualifying offer for next year remaining, so I see no possible benefit for the Warriors in this deal, unless there are some more important pieces that also go on the move in the deal.


----------



## BIG Q (Jul 8, 2005)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

There has to be more to it because there is just such a huge talent disparity. I could see Dixon and our 2008 first rounder, not 2007. Golden State does not want to pay Pietrus the huge extension he is looking for, plus as noted they have like 14 swing players.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



Samuel said:


> Hmmm...
> 
> I've heard he has a highly-inflated notion of his self worth, so I'm not sure he'd perform well in limited minutes.


He's performed in GS with limited minutes. I think he'd get more minutes with us. He's better now than Outlaw and Ime.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

I think we'd probably have to include a 2nd rounder for this one to fly.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



BIG Q said:


> There has to be more to it because there is just such a huge talent disparity. I could see Dixon and our 2008 first rounder, not 2007. Golden State does not want to pay Pietrus the huge extension he is looking for, plus as noted they have like 14 swing players.



Nope not much more to it . . . they just want us to throw in a trade filler like Sergio or Aldridge, and it's a done deal.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

Done...

That would be a good trade for POR...Pietrus has talent...on offense and defense and is still young...

The risk for POR is that he will be a FA this season...and could walk for nothing...but then again, if POR lost Dixon for nothing...I wouldn't complain...


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



Schilly said:


> I think we'd probably have to include a 2nd rounder for this one to fly.


Thats what I was thinking.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

Pietrus is a good talent, with potential to become a big contributor to the team. He's been injured for some periods of the season this year, but when he played, he performed.


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

I can believe we'd offer it. Golden State wouldn't do that in a million years.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



ebott said:


> I can believe we'd offer it. Golden State wouldn't do that in a million years.


Unless Pietris is a redundancy on their current lineup, or simply doesn't work with the current lineup.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



ebott said:


> I can believe we'd offer it. Golden State wouldn't do that in a million years.


Option A: Pietrus expires at the end of the year, Pietrus asks for big money, Golden State says no, doesn't offer him anything. He walks.

Option B: Golden State determines that they're not going to offer him big money at the trading deadline, and deals away Pietrus (a SF) to one of the few teams without an entrenched starting SF for a SG.

I don't think it's dreaming on Portland's part. And it's a good way for Golden State to get something out of Pietrus before he doesn't re-sign.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

Exactly what is there to lose by offering the deal? Or any deal that you think would upgrade the team for that matter. The worst thing that happens is they say no and you keep in the same situation you are in. Best situation they say yes and you upgrade your team. Nothing to lose.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

http://blog.oregonlive.com/blazers/2007/02/the_french_are_coming.html


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

Magloire and Dixon for Pietrus and Foyle?

I'd still do it.

Foyle brings solid defense, won't complain about minutes and is truly one of biggest class acts in the game.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

BTW, Quick is going to be on around 6.


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



Schilly said:


> I think we'd probably have to include a 2nd rounder for this one to fly.


I'd be willing to give two 2nd round picks to get Pietrus. He would fit right in with this group.


----------



## Huey Lewis (Jan 2, 2007)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



zagsfan20 said:


> Magloire and Dixon for Pietrus and Foyle?
> 
> I'd still do it.
> 
> Foyle brings solid defense, won't complain about minutes and is truly one of biggest class acts in the game.


I totally agree with you. I still make the trade. Foyle is a pretty good backup (great shot blocker), even though he is overpaid, and Peitrus is an exciting young sg/sf. Before the draft they talked about peitrus being the Jordan of France. Now he is no Jordan, but he is young and hasn't really been given an opportunity. And Ime is like thirty. We need a younger sf for the future.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



Huey Lewis said:


> *I totally agree with you*. I still make the trade. Foyle is a pretty good backup (great shot blocker), even though he is overpaid, and Peitrus is an exciting young sg/sf. Before the draft they talked about peitrus being the Jordan of France. Now he is no Jordan, but he is young and hasn't really been given an opportunity. And Ime is like thirty. We need a younger sf for the future.


I think I might need to reconsider my opinion then.


----------



## BIG Q (Jul 8, 2005)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



zagsfan20 said:


> Magloire and Dixon for Pietrus and Foyle?
> 
> I'd still do it.
> 
> Foyle brings solid defense, won't complain about minutes and is truly one of biggest class acts in the game.


I forgot about them wanting to dump Foyle. He has two years left with a team option for a third as reported on HoopsHype, but Storyteller shows the third year as partially guaranteed for $1,000,000. He is scheduled to make $18,687,500 over the next two years. Who here thinks Pietrus is worth that extra salary plus what we would have to sign him to? Foyle would come off the books at the same time as Raef, with Miles coming off the next year.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

How about this one for yous all..

Dixon and Miles for Pietris and Foyle.

What!? Miles...Well why not. We're talking about swallowing a horrendous contract, at least the bad contract we are sending back can be paid for with insurance instead of out of pocket. On top of that if Miles makes a comeback he's a much better player than Foyle. If he is done, then he retires, and Golden State is mega money ahead.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



Schilly said:


> How about this one for yous all..
> 
> Dixon and Miles for Pietris and Foyle.
> 
> What!? Miles...Well why not. We're talking about swallowing a horrendous contract, at least the bad contract we are sending back can be paid for with insurance instead of out of pocket. On top of that if Miles makes a comeback he's a much better player than Foyle. If he is done, then he retires, and Golden State is mega money ahead.


:allhail:

Your my hero Schilly

GS has always liked Miles for some reason


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

X = Pietrus
Y = Dixon
Z = Foyle's contract

X > Y

X - Y =/= Having to take on Z

No deal.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

If we take Foyle's contract we'll be the laughing stock of the league.

I'm also less than enthralled about Pietrus. There's no way he'll ever be a starter for us and I doubt he'd be happy as a backup. He's basically identical to Dixon with more rebounds but less assists, except he has never been able to buy a FT despite all his money.

I suspect we made the offer simply to dump Dixon, with the intent of letting Pietrus walk at the end of the year.

That would make sense and I would applaud the move.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

smoke screen

bring on Deng


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

Dixon for Deng?

I give that one my thumbs up.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

Ya, I think we all would... but I doubt Chicago would.


----------



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

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

The offer was "rebuked with extreme prejudice", according to Quick. So lets not get too excited...doesn't sound like theres much of a chance.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



Trader Bob said:


> smoke screen
> 
> bring on Deng


That's exactly what I thought when I saw that Chicago was going after Shareef.


----------



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

dixon for pietrus....dont make me laugh

if don nelson did that deal then he`d get taken away by men in white coats

if blazers actually managed to pull it off i`d stop thinking macmillan was a complete **** for for a couple of weeks


----------



## sportsnut1975 (Jul 6, 2006)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

I would love to see this. I got to talk to him at the first game Golden State was here. He actually walked up a couple rows and shook my hand. so I am a little biased. Get it done.


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



Samuel said:


> Option A: Pietrus expires at the end of the year, Pietrus asks for big money, Golden State says no, doesn't offer him anything. He walks.
> 
> Option B: Golden State determines that they're not going to offer him big money at the trading deadline, and deals away Pietrus (a SF) to one of the few teams without an entrenched starting SF for a SG.
> 
> I don't think it's dreaming on Portland's part. And it's a good way for Golden State to get something out of Pietrus before he doesn't re-sign.


It's more like this:

Option A: GS knows they won't re-sign Peitrus, but keeps him and either lets him walk for nothing or gets an asset in return for a sign and trade deal this summer.

Option B: GS trades Pietrus for Dixon, and takes on a guy who will contribute nothing for their team while making $3 mil next season.

Is there any conceivable reason for the Warriors to choose option B? I don't see it.


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



zagsfan20 said:


> Magloire and Dixon for Pietrus and Foyle?
> 
> I'd still do it.
> 
> Foyle brings solid defense, won't complain about minutes and is truly one of biggest class acts in the game.


Now that sounds realistic, and I think I've heard this one before. I don't think Foyle is as bas as his reputation either, and he could be a contributor, but he is making $19 mil over the next two seasons. That's probably just too much for Paul Allen to want to shell out, especially since we wouldn't even be guaranteed of re-signing Pietrus at a reasonable price. If Pietrus did re-sign, this trade would put us well over the lux tax threshold.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

Magloire+Dixon for Foyle+Pietrus is a absolute steal for us. 


Mickael Pietrus is a starting quality SF. He is an athletic, young player who has quality defensive skills and can hit an open 3 pointer. 13 points off .48% shooting for a SF is tremendous. A combo of Pietrus and Webster could hold down the SF spot for the next decade. 

Foyle would not get many minutes. But, his deal expires the same year as LaFrentz. Until that year, we will not even be able to think about cap space. He is also a great character guy who gives alot back to his community. Certainly a better backup than Raef. 

Blazer managment has shown they are willing to take on $ to get superior talent(Roy deal). I think this would be a great move. 


PG- J.Jack/S.Rodriguez/D.Dickau 
SG- B.Roy/I.Udoka 
SF- M.Pietrus/M.Webster 
PF- Z.Randolph/T.Outlaw 
C- L.Aldridge/J.Pryzbilla/A.Foyle

If we did this deal, and Pietrus fit in well, it just might help us get into the 8th spot.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



ThatBlazerGuy said:


> Magloire+Dixon for Foyle+Pietrus is a absolute steal for us.


Blech.

I wouldn't touch Foyle's contract with a 10-foot pole.

And I don't think Pietrus is that great either, just better than Dixon.


----------



## ehizzy3 (Jun 12, 2006)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*




www.starbury.com said:


> dixon for pietrus....dont make me laugh
> 
> if don nelson did that deal then he`d get taken away by men in white coats
> 
> if blazers actually managed to pull it off i`d stop thinking macmillan was a complete **** for for a couple of weeks


and then you could learn to spell his name correctly :clap:


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



> I wouldn't touch Foyle's contract with a 10-foot pole.


Ya, I am starting to agree with you. But, I think we should do anythin within reason to get Pietrus. 



> And I don't think Pietrus is that great either, just better than Dixon.


I disagree. I dont think Pietrus is a star. But, he could develop into that 3rd scorer we are looking for. Simply put, he is a solid all around player. He has been a victim of a crowded backcourt this season, but has still managed to put up stellar numbers. 

13ppg, 5rpg, 1apg, .8spg, .8bpg, 48% from the field. His 3 point shot has been erattic(36%), and his FT% is terrible for a SF(64%). But, throw into account his athlecism, above average defense and age(25) and he appears to be a perfect fit for our SF gap. He is definatley the best SF we can get without giving up and of our core players(Zach, Roy, Jack, LaMarcus, Sergio, Webster). If managment does not think it is worth it to take on Foyle in order to get Pietrus, than I would offer these two deals in order of preference...

1) Juan Dixon, Portland's 2007 2nd round pick, Chicago's 2007 2nd round pick and Indiana's 2008 2nd round pick for Mickael Pietrus.

2) Travis Outlaw and Juan Dixon for Mickael Pietrus, Zarko Cabarkapa and Golden State's 2007 2nd round pick.


----------



## Huey Lewis (Jan 2, 2007)

*Quick on 1080*

On Trades:
Golden State turned down Dixon for Peitrus offer, but still has interest in Dixon. Quick says Blazer are active, but its an awfully quiet trading period. Bibby most likely big name to be traded, possibly to Cavs. If something is done with Blazers it will involve Magloire, Dixon, or Outlaw. If trade is not done it's because Blazers overvalue thier players. 

Tonights Game:
ZBo banged up his finger last night. It's really hurting him but he will play. ZBo says he is getting beat up like shaq. He said he is going to start dishing out some of the blows himself. Quick doesn't know if Sergio will play tonight. Thats it, not much.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

Foyle??????

No way.

Deal killer.

Some in this thread are WAAAAAAAAY overvaluing Pietrus.

He has yet to play a complete season.

He has yet to "break out".

What exactly is there to be excited about beyond "potential".

What reason is there to think he will stay in Portland as an impending free agent? He has no history here. We would have to overpay him to keep him like all the other teams.

We already have Travis and Webster. Not like we are desperate for those kinds of young players.

The dude is 24. He is not 21 or 22. Normally, players his age have done something exciting by now if they are ever going to be anything more than average.

Dixon and a couple of 2nds, fine.

Foyle for an ending contract. Get outta town. Horrible, horrible trade proposal.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



ThatBlazerGuy said:


> But, he could develop into that 3rd scorer we are looking for. Simply put, he is a solid all around player. He has been a victim of a crowded backcourt this season, but has still managed to put up stellar numbers.


I have loads of friends from the Bay Area that aren't big on Pietrus. He's a whiner who thinks he's going to be a great player someday, but it's more the typical NBA feeling that he'll get there without actually working on his game.

So I think Pietrus is a good 'plug-in and see if he works here' type guy, but I wouldn't have any aspirations for him beyond that.

He's just an average player with good athleticism and enough minutes for stats. He'd be a bench player on a playoff team (don't tell him that!).


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Quick on 1080*

I hope Mullin gets it out of his poorly groomed head that anyone will be willing to take on Foyle for anything less than Ellis.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



www.starbury.com said:


> dixon for pietrus....dont make me laugh
> 
> if don nelson did that deal then he`d get taken away by men in white coats
> 
> if blazers actually managed to pull it off i`d stop thinking macmillan was a complete **** for for a couple of weeks


Coaches don't make trades.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: Quick on 1080*

Did we need another Quick thread on the same topic?


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



Masbee said:


> Foyle??????
> 
> No way.
> 
> ...


Great post. Thanks for bringing us back down to earth...


----------



## Stepping Razor (Apr 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

Dixon didn't get into the first half of the Lakers game.

Does this have significance?

Stepping Razor


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

If indeed we have to take on Foyle, I'd rather see us go after Fred Jones instead.


----------



## ryanjend22 (Jan 23, 2004)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

*EDIT: put my response in the wrong thread. i too like the pietrus trade. hope it happens!*

im not positive, but isnt the trade deadline tommorow...?

zach is playing tonight, w/ bruised ribs. if he was in a trade tommorow he would NOT be playing. so there cant be any truth to this.

regardless, i want to keep zach. i changed my mind. i like this guy too much. also, magloire is playing as well so there goes any hope of getting him out of town. damn. i dont see us making ANY moves.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



ryanjend22 said:


> *
> 
> im not positive, but isnt the trade deadline tommorow...?
> 
> ...


*

The only way they pull Zach from a game is if the trade is final. If there is a deal, which I doubt, then it probably wouldn't be final until the last minute. There still could be a trade.*


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*

If this trade goes down, I'll be underwhelmed:

"The Los Angeles Lakers and Portland Trail Blazers are discussing a trade that would bring disgruntled Blazers center Jamaal Magloire to Los Angeles for Chris Mihm and Aaron McKie, a league source close to the negotiations said Wednesday night."

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_y...F?slug=aw-tradenews022107&prov=yhoo&type=lgns


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



Stepping Razor said:


> Dixon didn't get into the first half of the Lakers game.
> 
> Does this have significance?
> 
> Stepping Razor


I don't believe he played at all tonight, did he? If so, Dixon must be gone, because he always gets into the game at some point.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



Talkhard said:


> I don't believe he played at all tonight, did he? If so, Dixon must be gone, because he always gets into the game at some point.


Dixon did not play AT ALL tonight. He's been in Nate's doghouse lately, but with him being fresh on the second game of a back-to-back tonight, it's awfully curious.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

I saw we use Outlaw as trade bait while his stock is high. The dude is 24 years old and still doesn't know how to play the game well.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Yega1979 said:


> I saw we use Outlaw as trade bait while his stock is high. The dude is 24 years old and still doesn't know how to play the game well.


Just like your inability to spell words (like people's names) correctly, your ability to use math is crappy too.

Travis is 22.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Nope not much more to it . . . they just want us to throw in a trade filler like Sergio or Aldridge, and it's a done deal.


:lol:

Well, there goes that one.

Hear that? Thats the sound of my heart bleeding.

:lol:

PBF


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



wastro said:


> Dixon did not play AT ALL tonight. He's been in Nate's doghouse lately, but with him being fresh on the second game of a back-to-back tonight, it's awfully curious.


Was Dixon even THERE? I seriously dont remember seeing him sitting on the bench.

Then again, I seriously dont remember seeing much of anything other than LaMarcus sweet jumpers.

PBF


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



ProudBFan said:


> Was Dixon even THERE? I seriously dont remember seeing him sitting on the bench.
> 
> Then again, I seriously dont remember seeing much of anything other than LaMarcus sweet jumpers.
> 
> PBF



I saw Dixon. He was suited . . . I saw him with a big smile while they were carrying Joel past him. I'm sure he wasn't smiling at the fact Joel was injuried, but it made a wierd scene because he was smiling at that time.

I figured someone joked about having Juan carry Joel or something like that. Did anyone else catch that?


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



Kiss_My_Darius said:


> I saw Dixon. He was suited . . . I saw him with a big smile while they were carrying Joel past him. I'm sure he wasn't smiling at the fact Joel was injuried, but it made a wierd scene because he was smiling at that time.
> 
> I figured someone joked about having Juan carry Joel or something like that. Did anyone else catch that?


I was thinking the same thing.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Re: Quick reporting a trade rumor.*



ryanjend22 said:


> *EDIT: put my response in the wrong thread. i too like the pietrus trade. hope it happens!*
> 
> im not positive, but isnt the trade deadline tommorow...?


noon PST today


----------

