# I was at the Press Conference with Mcmillan and Pritchard



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

I hung around with some friends to listen in on the Press Conference. I actually sat 10 feet from KP and Mcmillan. Heres what i picked up.

There is more to this trade scenario than what we are being told. Pritchard knows there is another deal going down for a SF. He incidentally released this information and tried to cover it up immediately, however reporters were nagging him with questions about his statement.

Essentially, the blazers have a deal in the works described as, "blockbuster". The contents of the trade cannot be disclosed as this time, however Pritchard said this deal would be finalized within 7-10 days.

After he released this information he said, "I am going to get fined for saying this" and, "oops, i shouldnt have said that".

Implying that there is a second half to the randolph deal coming. Pritchard also said that the NY deal was necessary to complete this deal for a SF.

NOTE: There was no indication that James Jones was a blazer. This was news to me when i signed on to BBB 10 mins ago.

Now onto other things...

Jack, Roy are not going to be on the summer league team.

Fernandez isnt going to play next year. HE will be in europe because of contract conflicts and imroving his game altogether.

Nichols was dealt to NY 2nd rd pick next year.

The Zach deal IS official.

The decision to draft oden was made last night at a team meeting with all the coaches, managers.

Pritchard dodged questions about certain players: Przybilla, Webster, Jack, Udoka

KP wants to resign Outlaw.

Nothing about Udoka.

Again it was apparent KP was holding something back from the media about a deal for a SF. IT IS COMING.

Webster, Koponen, Green, Mcroberts, Oden, Fernandez, Rodriguez are likely summer league players.

KP wunsure if Francis will play a minute as a blazer, but wants to talk to him and meet him to see what he is all about.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

not sure what type of blockbuster we could make without dealing our big 3?


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

The other shoe has already dropped. Jones is the SF, obtained with the trade exception from NY. 

There is no "blockbuster", and no reason to conceal the deal for 7-10 days. KP's behavior in this matter is just bizzare.


----------



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

MAS RipCity said:


> not sure what type of blockbuster we could make without dealing our big 3?


With 5 Point Guards now i think we have room to trade Jack, along with PRzbilla and or Webster.

I thought about trading Przybilla and Jack to Minny for Brewer and a CAP filler.

Przybilla with his local ties to Minnesota might be attractive. Plus, Minny has no PG if i recall. They dumped James to Houston last time i checked.


----------



## BlazerCaravan (Aug 12, 2004)

Oldmangrouch said:


> The other shoe has already dropped. Jones is the SF, obtained with the trade exception from NY.
> 
> There is no "blockbuster", and no reason to conceal the deal for 7-10 days. KP's behavior in this matter is just bizzare.


So either KP is a pathological liar acting delusionally, or you're wrong.

To be honest, I'd say the weight is just about 50/50... but I think you being wrong is maybe 51% possible rather than 49%.


----------



## c_note (Jan 30, 2007)

This doesn't make sense to me. Why would they not mention Jones being a part of the Randolph deal (the trade exception). Or, how can they do both these deals simultaneously, one hinging on the other? I'm confused.


----------



## c_note (Jan 30, 2007)

Does anyone have a legitimate link for the James Jones thing? I haven't seen one yet.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Oldmangrouch said:


> The other shoe has already dropped. Jones is the SF, obtained with the trade exception from NY.
> 
> There is no "blockbuster", and no reason to conceal the deal for 7-10 days. KP's behavior in this matter is just bizzare.


Umm are you so sure? According to Quick "Late in the evening, the Blazers closed a deal to acquire forward James Jones from Phoenix without giving up a player." That doesn't say it has to wait a few days...Now waitig a few days could indicate waiting for BYC status for a player to expire or somehting like that. If a Player is BYC that expires July 1, which is Monday. then it really can't be official untol the moratorium is over.


----------



## ROYisR.O.Y. (Apr 1, 2007)

there is no way the blazers are done


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

The only reason to delay a trade, and the only reasoning behind a "fine", would be a trade involving a S&T. Since he's not supposed to be in contact with potential free agents before (July 1?).


----------



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

BlazerCaravan said:


> So either KP is a pathological liar acting delusionally, or you're wrong.
> 
> To be honest, I'd say the weight is just about 50/50... but I think you being wrong is maybe 51% possible rather than 49%.


He was honest about keeping the #1 pick secret until the bitter end.

I'd be willing to bet he has something in the works here. I see no reason why he would keep the information about James Jones secret. If he was included in the Fernandez deal, it makes no sense to not tell the media we landed another SF.

The way KP and Mcmillan reacted to the question sparked a buzz across the room that something larger than a bench player from PHX would be a starter for Portland.

The James Jones trade deal was part of the Fernandez situation too. The jones announcement came BEFORE the press conference.

If it was announced, why would KP not tell the media?


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Verro said:


> The only reason to delay a trade, and the only reasoning behind a "fine", would be a trade involving a S&T. Since he's not supposed to be in contact with potential free agents before (July 1?).


BYC


----------



## handclap problematic (Nov 6, 2003)

Schilly said:


> BYC



Ok, so who is out there that is soon to be releived of BYC status?

Any ideas?


prunetang


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

Schilly said:


> BYC


That would explain a delay, but how would it relate to a fine?(I guess it could have just been a flippant comment by KP though)


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

handclap problematic said:


> Ok, so who is out there that is soon to be releived of BYC status?
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> ...


Well we did just land a new starting center (Oden), a reserve pf/c (Frye) and drafted another PF (McRoberts).


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

BlazerCaravan said:


> So either KP is a pathological liar acting delusionally, or you're wrong.
> 
> To be honest, I'd say the weight is just about 50/50... but I think you being wrong is maybe 51% possible rather than 49%.



:whoknows: I had no big problem with his gamesmanship over the #1 pick. This is just over-the-top. At this point, I wonder if he is doing this stuff just to keep the fans riled up, and therefore talking about the team. If they had been able to keep the deal under wraps for a few days, it would have worked. As is, the trade leaked, and everybody knows the press conference was just hyperbole.

As for him being a liar......if he is going to get into the PR end of things, that is kind of a prerequsite! :biggrin:


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Verro said:


> That would explain a delay, but how would it relate to a fine?


Talknig about a deal before it's complete.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Can Frye be packaged with other players or not? If not, this scares me to think that Aldridge may be involved in the second deal if we indeed have another deal lined up for a SF.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Sambonius said:


> Can Frye be packaged with other players or not? If not, this scares me to think that Aldridge may be involved in the second deal if we indeed have another deal lined up for a SF.


Not for 60 days. I htink they brought in Frye as a backup at the 4/5.


----------



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

Sambonius said:


> Can Frye be packaged with other players or not? If not, this scares me to think that Aldridge may be involved in the second deal if we indeed have another deal lined up for a SF.


TBH, if we are trading up for a better SF, i think Channing Frye has more trade value than Zach Randolph.

Pair Channing frye with Jarrett Jack and Joel Przybilla, or picks like Green could land us a far better SF than Zach ever could.

Frye has a much better contract to deal with and is younger and more appealing to teams.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Schilly said:


> Not for 60 days. I htink they brought in Frye as a backup at the 4/5.


Then how could Pritchard say we HAD to do this deal in order to do the second? I hope this doesn't mean we are trading Aldridge and using Frye as the starting 4.


----------



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

Sambonius said:


> Then how could Pritchard say we HAD to do this deal in order to do the second? I hope this doesn't mean we are trading Aldridge and using Frye as the starting 4.


Better chance it involves Jack, Webster, Przybilla, Green

Francis could be insurance at PG if we trade Jack away.


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

I would love to think that there is a deal in the works for Yi.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Sambonius said:


> Then how could Pritchard say we HAD to do this deal in order to do the second? I hope this doesn't mean we are trading Aldridge and using Frye as the starting 4.


I think it was a we need to get this guy beofore we can trade that guy situation. A precautionary thing to make sure you don't pull the trigger on teh 2nd then have the 1st bail out leaving you with an even larger gaping hole. For example what if we are looking to move Joel, but KP didn't want to get stuck without a backup C? So he in his mind has to complete the deal to get Frye (an upgrade from Joel BTW) before he finalizes a deal sending Joel out.


----------



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

Spoolie Gee said:


> I would love to think that there is a deal in the works for Yi.


I'd rather trade for Brewer.

Jack, Przybilla, Green for Brewer, Hassell, filler


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

Sambonius said:


> Then how could Pritchard say we HAD to do this deal in order to do the second? I hope this doesn't mean we are trading Aldridge and using Frye as the starting 4.



I admit, that thought crossed my mind as well. As angry as I am at KP, I don't want to believe he is capable of something that Psychotic.

Of course, if he did do it, some folks here would rush to claim it was really a good deal.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Schilly said:


> I think it was a we need to get this guy beofore we can trade that guy situation. A precautionary thing to make sure you don't pull the trigger on teh 2nd then have the 1st bail out leaving you with an even larger gaping hole. For example what if we are looking to move Joel, but KP didn't want to get stuck without a backup C? So he in his mind has to complete the deal to get Frye (an upgrade from Joel BTW) before he finalizes a deal sending Joel out.


I feel you. I hope that is the senario we're looking at.


----------



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

I just thought i would reiterate what i saw at the press conference.

I saw KP and McMillan with my own eyes. They know something is going down, and by their body language and tone of voice, I highly doubt their actions were directed towards acquiring James Jones.

I dont see KP reacting to James Jones that way.

This leads me to think there is a bigger, better SF that they have all but nailed down, and we will hear about it in a week or so.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Five5even said:


> Better chance it involves Jack, Webster, Przybilla, Green
> 
> Francis could be insurance at PG if we trade Jack away.


Pritchard said he thinks they have the 3 spot pretty solid and they made a trade through the draft for it. It sounds like it could be Green or another small forward in this draft, I'd say either Green, Brewer, or Thornton.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Just to spell it out a little better , Joel is a BYC player and his BYC status expires on Monday.


----------



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

Schilly said:


> Just to spell it out a little better , Joel is a BYC player and his BYC status expires on Monday.


could you explain BYC?

is this good or bad for trading Joel?

If it is indicating a przybilla trade, i bet we get Brewer.


----------



## c_note (Jan 30, 2007)

There's no way they would trade LMA for a SF, no matter who it was. You don't trade big for small(er) generally. You guys are crazy for even thinking about this.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

BYC is when a player gets a new contract that the 1st year is more than 20% higher than the prior season. What BYC does makes trades very difficult. Say Joel makes 5 mil. His incoming Value to the other team is 5mil...but due to his BYC status the most portland can take back for him is 50% of that or 2.5 mill. That doesn't work for salary matching in a trade. BYC is only in affect for one season, so as of Monday the BYC is lifted and his value is 100% in both directions.


----------



## handclap problematic (Nov 6, 2003)

Schilly said:


> Just to spell it out a little better , Joel is a BYC player and his BYC status expires on Monday.



Hence the reply you gave my BYC question, (which didn't really answer my question). Instead you said that we just acquired a new Center a new PF/C and another PF. I see where you are going with this. 

Interesting to note though, that management has said that they want to bring in guys who want to play in Portland. And, if Joel goes, that means that in the last year, we would have dealt Steve Blake, Fred Jones, Dan Dickau (who cares) and Joel Pryzbilla, who all really wanted to be here......

Not that that really bothers me much. I am not a huge fan of any of those guys....


prunetang


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

AS a note...Joel took the highest contract offered to him last summer.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

After tonight, Clippers still need a point guard. Could be Thornton, Jack, and Joel involved.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Sambonius said:


> After tonight, Clippers still need a point guard. Could be Thornton, Jack, and Joel involved.


Joel and Jack would match $$$ wise much better with a differnt SF on the Clippers.


----------



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

Schilly said:


> BYC is when a player gets a new contract that the 1st year is more than 20% higher than the prior season. What BYC does makes trades very difficult. Say Joel makes 5 mil. His incoming Value to the other team is 5mil...but due to his BYC status the most portland can take back for him is 50% of that or 2.5 mill. That doesn't work for salary matching in a trade. BYC is only in affect for one season, so as of Monday the BYC is lifted and his value is 100% in both directions.


This fits the timeframe of what KP was talking about.

Personally, i cant see KP and Nate being satisfied at SF with James Jones after all the dealing they have done in the last 2 years.

Thats why i dont think James Jones is the SF trade that they alluded to in the press conference.

Heck, ill throw James Jones into the trade mix for a diff SF now.

ill offer Przybilla, Jack, Webster, James Jones, picks FOR a quality SF. Now im sure they could land someone decent with that.


----------



## handclap problematic (Nov 6, 2003)

Schilly said:


> AS a note...Joel took the highest contract offered to him last summer.



I know. I just find it a bit funny that wanting to play for Portland is becoming a bit of a kiss of death. And, I am not saying this in a bad sarcastic way. None of it is obviously personal, tis a business afterall, but it is just a tad bit.....um......absurd.


but then again, I like absurdity, afterall, my favorite author is John Paul Sartre.......


prunetang


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Is Agent Zero a guard or a forward?

PBF


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

We had to take players that wanted to be in Portland...Cause we sucked!, LOL!


----------



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

Schilly said:


> Joel and Jack would match $$$ wise much better with a differnt SF on the Clippers.


i like it.



Seriously, if you saw KP and Nate's reaction when they leaked that they had something lined up, You have to know they werent psyched about James Jones. Its just not possible.

To me, they were psyched because they are close to getting a lotto pick that they couldnt get into earlier.

AKA: Thornton, Brewer, Young

That to me seems much more likely.

Jack is still very tradeable. The clips, Minny still need a PG, so i wouldnt doubt a scenario to get Brewer or Thornton.


----------



## handclap problematic (Nov 6, 2003)

Schilly said:


> We had to take players that wanted to be in Portland...Cause we sucked!, LOL!



I have to admit, I have had that thought before........

As a sidenote, I am not certain if we are going to keep James Jones or not, but I will go on record as really liking the guy. No, he is not a world beater.....but he is a fine and scrappy role player. He struggled with his shot a lot last year after going through some injuries. I would expect him to come back from that, as the rest of his career, although a bit short, has shown what he can do. He can hit the 3, scrap hard on defense and boards and block an occasional shot as well (which is really a reflection of his scrappiness). 

And about the "possible future SF trade"........I am out of the loop as I have no inside sources or whatever, so I do not know if something more will happen. But, I really don't think KP would let us down like this. I am guessing he knew he would take some lumps tonight with the Zach trade, but he probably also knew that the second part would more than justify it. I am thinking something like Jack and Joel for Corey Maggette, who the Clippers have been shopping forever. 

Jack and Joel went up the hill to fetch a glass of water............



prunetang


----------



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

handclap problematic said:


> I have to admit, I have had that thought before........
> 
> As a sidenote, I am not certain if we are going to keep James Jones or not, but I will go on record as really liking the guy. No, he is not a world beater.....but he is a fine and scrappy role player. He struggled with his shot a lot last year after going through some injuries. I would expect him to come back from that, as the rest of his career, although a bit short, has shown what he can do. He can hit the 3, scrap hard on defense and boards and block an occasional shot as well (which is really a reflection of his scrappiness).
> 
> ...



I think its also worthy to note that KP is on record many times saying they wanted another top 10/lotto pick.

they didnt get it during the draft, but...

the press conference indicates that nate and KP are satisfied with their situation at SF.

I think they have a deal lined up for a lotto SF (Brewer, Thornton, T.Young) that was unavailable earlier in the night.

THAT IS WHY THEY ARE SATISFIED.

I dont believe they would be satisfied with James Jones. he's just trade bait.


----------



## HAAK72 (Jun 18, 2007)

My guess is that if the word "blockbuster" was used to described the "7-10 day away trade", then the SF would be a proven player and not one of this year's lottery SFs

zBO must GO...oh wait, FINALLY!!!

The suspense is killing...more to come from the Blazers...In KP we trust!!!


----------



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

HAAK72 said:


> My guess is that if the word "blockbuster" was used to described the "7-10 day away trade", then the SF would be a proven player and not one of this year's lottery SFs
> 
> zBO must GO...oh wait, FINALLY!!!
> 
> The suspense is killing...more to come from the Blazers...In KP we trust!!!


If it involves Przybilla his Trading Salary changes on monday. So, the CAP might not match until Przybilla's BYC expires on monday.

Meaning, the trade is invalid until Przybillas contract jumps up 2.5 million so the salary caps match for the teams involved.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

From Barretts Blog:

"Now, there was one other move you didn't hear about, and *it won't be made official for about a week*. The Blazers, in conjunction with the trade to New York, used a trade exception to purchase the Fernandez pick (which you did hear about) and will also acquire Phoenix's James Jones. Jones is a good outside shooter and was very solid with the Suns the past couple of seasons. "

Sure looks like to me the SF trade is James Jones, and that is it.


----------



## ilPadrino (May 23, 2003)

Draco said:


> Sure looks like to me the SF trade is James Jones, and that is it.


Exactly. I have not read or heard a single thing that would indicate anything other than this.


----------



## PhilK (Jul 7, 2005)

Draco said:


> From Barretts Blog:
> 
> "Now, there was one other move you didn't hear about, and *it won't be made official for about a week*. The Blazers, in conjunction with the trade to New York, used a trade exception to purchase the Fernandez pick (which you did hear about) and will also acquire Phoenix's James Jones. Jones is a good outside shooter and was very solid with the Suns the past couple of seasons. "
> 
> Sure looks like to me the SF trade is James Jones, and that is it.


Let me please break it to you. 

James Jones- announced in the media. 

The trade which is in the works, for the other SF - Won't be official, and Pritchard won't talk about it - For a week.

tbpup, and MM, has informed us that there's a done deal that made them Happy. This deal hasn't been announced yet. Is it so hard to understand? 

KP is a smart guy. Really. Much more than us. You think he'd do the NY trade, Just to acquire James Jones? C'mon.


----------



## jwhoops11 (Nov 26, 2003)

Schilly said:


> Joel and Jack would match $$$ wise much better with a differnt SF on the Clippers.



I'm not taking the time to play with numbers this morning, but if Joel and Jack become Corey Maggette...Then I'm pretty darn happy with the team on the floor next year, not too mention we become relevant in the upper tear of the playoff picture immediately.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Maybe they have had discussions about another deal, but I don't think it's the one they were referring to at the press conference. That was James Jones.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

Didn't they also mention that Rudy was involved in the trade for this unknown SF? If that is the case, it must be James Jones...unless we've already agreed with Phoenix to send them some stuff for Shawn Marion. Perhaps a resigned Outlaw, Francis, Webster, and Joel?


----------



## ehizzy3 (Jun 12, 2006)

i hope the info leaks early by like tommorow or something! i cant wait for a week


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

James Jones is it. *They never used the word blockbuster.* They were not "giddy" about it, but rather robotic and they were joking around about getting fined. 

They needed the NY deal to go through because they aquired a trade exception, which was required to get James Jones. He also said that Rudy was involved in the trade.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

rose garden pimp said:


> i hope the info leaks early by like tommorow or something! i cant wait for a week


It already leaked. The player is James freaking Jones.


----------



## ehizzy3 (Jun 12, 2006)

james jones is not blockbuster worthy

theres a different trade


----------



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

Yega1979 said:


> Didn't they also mention that Rudy was involved in the trade for this unknown SF? If that is the case, it must be James Jones...unless we've already agreed with Phoenix to send them some stuff for Shawn Marion. Perhaps a resigned Outlaw, Francis, Webster, and Joel?


Amare wasn't traded yet, so maybe Marion still wants out of PHX...

I just dont see KP and McMillan saying that They "feel good" or whatever about their SF position being 'solid' with James Jones/Outlaw. The impression i got when i was at that press conference was that there was a much better SF deal that they were unable to talk about, or see the effects of for 7-10 days.

If this is the case, why would the James Jones trade be announced at the same time? We already knew that PHX was giving us fernandez, so when PHX included Jones, shouldn't they have been able to talk about it?

After this much trading in the last 2 years, Nate and KP i'm sure aren't satisfied with James Jones and Outlaw at SF!


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

I dont we'll trade Frye. I get the impression that KP and Nate like him.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

B_&_B said:


> I dont we'll trade Frye. I get the impression that KP and Nate like him.


Yeah, and they'll probably need him with all the foul trouble that Oden and Aldridge will probably get into this year. 

While I'm a little concerned that he had such a poor year, I would have been estatic if Portland got him only a season ago. Let's see how he bounces back.


----------



## Zybot (Jul 22, 2004)

PhilK said:


> Let me please break it to you.
> 
> James Jones- announced in the media.
> 
> ...


I seem to recall MM or Hap saying that the deal is good because of who is leaving and who is coming back. Could it be that KP has finally found a suitor for Miles? Wow. That would be huge.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

rose garden pimp said:


> james jones is not blockbuster worthy
> 
> theres a different trade


Listen to the actual press conference, segment to on OLive, it's only 8 minutes and the word block buster is never mentioned, nor is it hyped up as any kind of incredible trade. In fact everything they say makes it obvious that it's the James Jones trade.


----------



## Stepping Razor (Apr 24, 2004)

Also, Maggette's contract (unlike Joel's, which is longer) ends at the same time as Francis's and LaFrentz's. Which means that we really might be getting close to having usable cap space in two summers. The only fly in that ointment remains Darius Miles. If they can somehow get him off the books, we really will be big players in FA.

Stepping Razor


----------



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

KP said he will match offers for Outlaw and, with the pending trade, feels the small forward position is now "solid, but that doesn't mean we won't explore free agency". 

If a blockbuster trade for a star SF was going down, why would we also re-sign Outlaw AND trade for James Jones AND explore free agency?


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> If a blockbuster trade for a star SF was going down, why would we also re-sign Outlaw AND trade for James Jones AND explore free agency?


I'm not sure that James Jones wasn't ballast that we HAD to take to get the rights to Rudy... sending Phoenix $3m is nice and all for the Suns, but allowing them to get rid of $6m over the next two years for a guy who isn't that important?

It looks like a mini salary dump to me, perhaps as a condition for giving up their #24 pick.

As for the free agency comment: it might just be the truth... irrespective of who we traded for, we'd LOOK at free agents.

I dunno. It's simpler to take it as there's no trade for a small forward. But less fun. Haha.

Ed O.


----------



## jwhoops11 (Nov 26, 2003)

I honestly don't think the Blazers view Travis as a small forward anymore. With Travis at the 4 we have a 4 player rotation of Oden , Frye, Aldridge and Outlaw. Maggette could start at the 3 but slide over to play the two, while Roy could play some back-up minutes at the 1. Outlaw could swing back and forth between the 4 and the 3, while James Jones and Webster fill in as needed. Very very versatile, and very dangerous I think. Think about trying to match up against Oden, Aldridge, Maggette, and Roy, with Sergio running the point...Or Steve Blake I suppose. Then the Blazers throw a fresh Outlaw in the game. That front court is tall, athletic, and pretty darn scary!


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Stepping Razor said:


> Also, Maggette's contract (unlike Joel's, which is longer) ends at the same time as Francis's and LaFrentz's. Which means that we really might be getting close to having usable cap space in two summers. The only fly in that ointment remains Darius Miles. If they can somehow get him off the books, we really will be big players in FA.
> 
> Stepping Razor



So does Garnett's. 

You want blockbuster. :biggrin:


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

Did anyone else notice that in the video of the press conference, Kevin was asked about Sergio and Rudy...and he balked and said that that was part of the thing that he couldn't talk about? Everyone keeps skipping over that fact. We know that there is a conditional trade that was made that was dependant on the NY trade. We know that Kevin and Co. cannot talk about the details or anything else about it. From the comment above, they cannot talk about Sergio or Rudy... What part do they have to play in all this?


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

I listed to the press conference, and as much as I would like to believe there is another big SF coming, it isn't what KP was talking about. He was clearly talking about JJ. He couldn't complete it because the NY trade wasn't complete yet. This is all there is for Zach. 

I do believe another trade may be in the wings--maybe for a SF--but it is a completely seperate deal. I know many of you are down on MM, but the trade he heard about could still happen, which to me indicates some combination of Jack, Webster, Outlaw, and Joel.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

rx2web said:


> Did anyone else notice that in the video of the press conference, Kevin was asked about Sergio and Rudy...and he balked and said that that was part of the thing that he couldn't talk about? Everyone keeps skipping over that fact. We know that there is a conditional trade that was made that was dependant on the NY trade. We know that Kevin and Co. cannot talk about the details or anything else about it. From the comment above, they cannot talk about Sergio or Rudy... What part do they have to play in all this?


I think he just meant Rudy. As the Rudy deal is unofficial, they cannot officially comment on it.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

jwhoops11 said:


> I honestly don't think the Blazers view Travis as a small forward anymore. With Travis at the 4 we have a 4 player rotation of Oden , Frye, Aldridge and Outlaw. Maggette could start at the 3 but slide over to play the two, while Roy could play some back-up minutes at the 1. Outlaw could swing back and forth between the 4 and the 3, while James Jones and Webster fill in as needed. Very very versatile, and very dangerous I think. Think about trying to match up against Oden, Aldridge, Maggette, and Roy, with Sergio running the point...Or Steve Blake I suppose. Then the Blazers throw a fresh Outlaw in the game. That front court is tall, athletic, and pretty darn scary!


Agreed.

Outlaw is taking the form of a Kevin Garnett type of power forward. Of course, I'm not saying that he's anywhere close to his skill level, but the kind of body and athleticism he has may translate better as a power forward than as a small forward.

Not to mention, Frye is a capable center. If indeed Joel is traded and Magloire leaves for nothing, Outlaw is a clear cut backup at the 4 position.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

rx2web said:


> Did anyone else notice that in the video of the press conference, Kevin was asked about Sergio and Rudy...and he balked and said that that was part of the thing that he couldn't talk about? Everyone keeps skipping over that fact. We know that there is a conditional trade that was made that was dependant on the NY trade. We know that Kevin and Co. cannot talk about the details or anything else about it. From the comment above, they cannot talk about Sergio or Rudy... What part do they have to play in all this?


I think this is because the Phoenix trade included Rudy, but also Jones, which means it can't be discussed until the NY trade is finalized by the league. IOW, the Phoenix trade was one large trade, not cash for the pick followed by the trade exception for Jones.


----------



## Crimson the Cat (Dec 30, 2002)

Geez. The 7 to 10 day trade is with PHX. That's the trade that was mentioned in the press conference.

The player I believe MM is referring to leaving is Pryz in a deal with Jarrett. He hinted at Bob Seger (Hollywood Nights). That gives you two teams to consider. He also cryptically reference to a player with two T's in his name. We need a starting small forward that can shoot and play defense. While Jones fits the bill there is a certain player that also played in the same system that Jones thrived in and who happens to have been sent to "Hollywood". Connect the dots people!


----------



## Crimson the Cat (Dec 30, 2002)

The question is "Is Pritchard still considering doing this second deal"?

Hell yes. What a great turn around this team is making in two seasons. To have Jones as a reserve to this other forward will be an excellent move.


----------



## Scipio (Feb 18, 2004)

Don't know if this tossed somewhere already but could the SF KP is going after be Gerald Wallace? Bobcats just let Knight go so maybe they're already opened up a backup PG spot for one of your Guards? It would have to be a S&T of cource and Gerald being FA together with those KP's "I'm going to get fined" talks this could be a possibility, more than Lewis IMO. And Wallace would fit nicely to you guys.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Scipio said:


> Don't know if this tossed somewhere already but could the SF KP is going after be Gerald Wallace? Bobcats just let Knight go so maybe they're already opened up a backup PG spot for one of your Guards? It would have to be a S&T of cource and Gerald being FA together with those KP's "I'm going to get fined" talks this could be a possibility, more than Lewis IMO. And Wallace would fit nicely to you guys.


Wallace as a Blazer would be sweet, indeed.

I think there are going to be BYC issues with him, though, which would make it hard to trade him. The Bobcats might still have space under the cap to re-sign him to a larger deal without giving him BYC status, but with the Richardson deal yesterday I don't know where they're sitting in that regard.

Ed O.


----------



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

Heres something i just realized after listening to this post draft conference again for probably the 10th time.

KP dodges Sergio Rodriguez and Fernandez several times.

When asked about Summer league teams, he forgets Sergio Completely and has to be reminded.

Is sergio being traded potentially instead of Jarrett jack?

When i was at the conference KP started to try to cover his tracks, at least thats what it looked like. My guess is that he named off all of the players that would be in summer league, knowing that a few of them might not be there in a blazer uniform.

Also...

He does say that we will sign Outlaw again, but he doesnt say that we wont deal him right after we sign him.

With James Jones, we could theoretically trade away Outlaw (S&T) with Sergio or Jack with Przybilla, webster or a few prospects.


There is no way the blazers dont make another splash this offseason. We all knew going into the offseason that SF was our biggest weakness, and we still haven't improved at that position!!!

There has to be a deal in the works.

KP said the "deal" cant be processed for another week to 10 days, so IT CANT BE JAMES JONES!

It has to involve the Free Agent market, whether its S&T for Lewis, Wallace in exchange for Przybilla when his BYC expires along with Outlaw (S&T).

We have enough pieces to trade in order to land a good SF.


----------



## graybeard (May 10, 2003)

Five5even said:


> Heres something i just realized after listening to this post draft conference again for probably the 10th time.
> 
> KP dodges Sergio Rodriguez and Fernandez several times.
> 
> ...



Now you're scaring me. I love Sergio and think he is going to be a superstar akin to Nash. I'm sure that Seattle would jump at a trade for Sergio, Martel and S. Francis for Shard.


----------



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

graybeard said:


> Now you're scaring me. I love Sergio and think he is going to be a superstar akin to Nash. I'm sure that Seattle would jump at a trade for Sergio, Martel and S. Francis for Shard.


I bet they would want a big man like a S&T'ed magloire or przybilla.


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

Five5even said:


> He does say that we will sign Outlaw again, but he doesnt say that we wont deal him right after we sign him.
> 
> With James Jones, we could theoretically trade away Outlaw (S&T) with Sergio or Jack with Przybilla, webster or a few prospects.



Didn't he also respond, "No" when asked if a sign and trade was involved in this mystery trade?


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Sergio isn't being traded. He's been described as part of the core ever since he was drafted, more or less. It's going to take A LOT to pry him away from PDX, I would think.


----------



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

wastro said:


> Sergio isn't being traded. He's been described as part of the core ever since he was drafted, more or less. It's going to take A LOT to pry him away from PDX, I would think.


If PHX demanded Sergio in a trade scenario for Marion would you pull the trigger?


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

LameR said:


> Didn't he also respond, "No" when asked if a sign and trade was involved in this mystery trade?


I believe you are correct.


----------



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

Here's one thing I don't get: why is KP ok with talking about Rudy but not ok with talking about James Jones when they are part of the same trade? And, isnt the knicks trade official? Why would it take 7-10 days to get this done if it is just for James Jones?


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> Here's one thing I don't get: why is KP ok with talking about Rudy but not ok with talking about James Jones when they are part of the same trade? And, isnt the knicks trade official? Why would it take 7-10 days to get this done if it is just for James Jones?


I don't think he was supposed to talk about Rudy, that being the reason behind him mentioning he'll probably get fined. Could easily be wrong though.


----------



## graybeard (May 10, 2003)

LameR said:


> I don't think he was supposed to talk about Rudy, that being the reason behind him mentioning he'll probably get fined. Could easily be wrong though.


 Probably because he's under contract to another team?


----------



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

They didn't have a problem talking about the New York trade. Or the Rudy Fernandez part of the Phoenix trade. It just doesnt make sense to keep quiet about James Jones.


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> They didn't have a problem talking about the New York trade. Or the Rudy Fernandez part of the Phoenix trade. It just doesnt make sense to keep quiet about James Jones.


He said specifically later in the conference that he's not supposed to answer a question along the lines of, "Did having Sergio play any role into you selecting Rudy?" Then said that was something he shouldn't have talked about earlier. That's where I got that conclusion from. He did talk about Rudy, but apparently wasn't supposed to.


----------



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

LameR said:


> He said specifically later in the conference that he's not supposed to answer a question along the lines of, "Did having Sergio play any role into you selecting Rudy?" Then said that was something he shouldn't have talked about earlier. That's where I got that conclusion from. He did talk about Rudy, but apparently wasn't supposed to.


I heard that too...I interpreted it the same as you, although its possible that Sergio is involved in a deal he can't talk about, although unlikely. Another thing is that if KP can't talk about the Rudy deal, its interesting that blazers.com has it up as a story.


----------



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

KP is on 1080 right now and he just said he cant answer questions about Rudy - so that answers that question. Which really leads me to believe that James Jones is the guy he was talking about at the press conference.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

Five5even said:


> If PHX demanded Sergio in a trade scenario for Marion would you pull the trigger?



not for marion. for lewis i would have to think about it.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

Just FYI,

Henry Abbott at ESPN.com, an avowed Blazer fan, is saying that Jones IS the small forward KP was refering to at the press conference. IE there is no other deal, blockbuster or otherwise.


----------

