# Breaking News?



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

(on ESPN) Theo for Penny? Anyone hearing that?


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

Olive forum has a mention of it...dunno


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

At the same time ESPN is reporting Penny for Steve Francis...


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

Wonderful.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Theo isn't going anywhere.


----------



## bballchik (Oct 22, 2005)

mark my words, THERE WILL BE *NO* TRADES THIS YEAR BY PORTLAND!! seriously, none. none. none. i'd bet massive amounts of money on it, any takers by the way?


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

All I'm seeing is Franchise maybe going to NY.


----------



## BlazerFan (May 26, 2005)

Blazer Freak said:


> All I'm seeing is Franchise maybe going to NY.


Same here


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

if the knicks do franics + someone else for Penny's contract, Isiah Thomas must seriously check into drug re-hab.

what exactly has Francis done to show he's an improvement over what crap they have?


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

It'd be Francis + Cato for Penny, Crawford (BOO!) and Ariza or Lee.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I think it's pretty silly to say will or won't when none of us have a window into the Franchises mind...Or do we?


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

deanwoof said:


> It'd be Francis + Cato for Penny, Crawford (BOO!) and Ariza or Lee.


Crawford = BIG BOO!

Hopefully that would mean Crawford would be headed to Denver or somewhere. I can't stand his game.


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

Can any of you open this? If so, what does it say about any Knicks/Blazers trade potential?

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/columns/story?columnist=sheridan_chris&id=2330954


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

The insider article only has one sentence on the Blazers. They say that NY and POR have had talks regarding Penny for Theo.


----------



## BealzeeBob (Jan 6, 2003)

So Thomas now wants two shoot first point guards? If they plan to play those guys at once, they better find a way to have more than one ball in play at a time.

Go Blazers


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

You would think Isiah Thomas - as a former point guard - would have more sense than to want to pair Stephon Marbury with Steve Francis. Those two are both ball-dominating point guards who aren't as well suited to playing shooting guard. Also, since both of them are only a few inches over 6', they're going to be exposed on the defensive end. Sure, it'll grab some attention that Francis is coming - a big splash that'll grab some headlines and put some people in the stands - but I seriously doubt that such a move will do anything to improve the Knicks. 

The Magic, though, are really making moves. Also trying to get in position for Darko? Or is Orlando the only front office that returns Marc Stein's phone calls?


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

bballchik said:


> mark my words, THERE WILL BE *NO* TRADES THIS YEAR BY PORTLAND!! seriously, none. none. none. i'd bet massive amounts of money on it, any takers by the way?



Sure. $20.00?


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

call me crazy, but maybe that deal for New York ain't so bad. they add a 19 ppg, 6 assist, 6 rbg player while giving up basically Crawford? 

on the other hand, with just those two you are basically committed to nearly $40 mil in contracts a year for the next three years. ouch. and when I think "Larry Brown player," the name Steve Francis does not exactly leap out there.


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

Could it be the 2 for 1 that Nash was talking about last week?

Portland sends:

Theo and Ruben

Portland receives:

Penny and Q Rich

Q Rich would plug the hole at the SG spot until Martell is ready and would provde some rebounding from the 2 spot that we have missed for years.

Do the deal!!!!!


----------



## gatorpops (Dec 17, 2004)

What dooes Q-Rich contract look like? How many years?

gatorpops


----------



## gatorpops (Dec 17, 2004)

What do you all think of his defense? Can he?

gatorpops


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Blazer Maven said:


> Could it be the 2 for 1 that Nash was talking about last week?
> 
> Portland sends:
> 
> ...


Richardson is a very expensive "plug", and not a very good one at that. His stats are grossly overrated (and seemingly ingnored by his fans) and his contract doesn't equal his production. Even last year on the Suns, while he made 224 three's, he also shot 36% from three. I'm not sure if his poor shooting is enough of an improvement over what we already get at the SG spot, especially taking into account his health and contract.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

gatorpops said:


> What dooes Q-Rich contract look like? How many years?
> 
> gatorpops


till 2010 $6,858,500 $7,482,000 $8,105,500 $8,825,750 $9,352,500 (player option)


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> till 2010 $6,858,500 $7,482,000 $8,105,500 $8,825,750 $9,352,500 (player option)


Ouch...Those are some nasty numbers....

and he may have some back problems?

UH...no thanks.


How Thomas has not been fired yet is a miracle....James' signing alone is worthy of an escort out the door.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Hap said:


> till 2010 $6,858,500 $7,482,000 $8,105,500 $8,825,750 $9,352,500 (player option)


damn. that's a ton of cheddar for a one-dimensional guard who isn't really that spectacular at his one dimension (three point shooting). 

even if money were no issue, I'm not sure that Q is really all that much of an upgrade over Juan Dixon.


----------



## J_Bird (Mar 18, 2005)

Kmurph said:


> and he may have some back problems?
> 
> UH...no thanks.


On top of that, his contract is not insured, due to said back problems.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

theWanker said:


> damn. that's a ton of cheddar for a one-dimensional guard who isn't really that spectacular at his one dimension (three point shooting).
> 
> even if money were no issue, I'm not sure that Q is really all that much of an upgrade over Juan Dixon.


Q-Rich used to be a Power Guard, somewhat similar to the young Bonzi. What the heck happened to him?


----------



## Stevenson (Aug 23, 2003)

Quentin Richardson is uncessary as he is not much different than a much less expensive Juan Dixon, who is doing just fine, thank you very much.


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

Stevenson said:


> Quentin Richardson is uncessary as he is not much different than a much less expensive Juan Dixon, who is doing just fine, thank you very much.


Are you kidding me? Q Rich can defend the perimeter, can hit the glass and can hit the three. The Blazers are the worst rebounding team in the NBA. Do you think having the slightest (160 and 170 lbs, respectively) just might have something to do with that?

Q will get you 16/6/3 a night and can breakout and hit 30+ on occasion. Starter material.

Juan will get you 16/1/4 a night and will get posted up at will by anyone with a beefy 2 guard. I like Juan, but he is back up material.

Also, Q reunited with Miles will act to motivate both of them.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Blazer Maven said:


> Are you kidding me? Q Rich can defend the perimeter, can hit the glass and can hit the three. The Blazers are the worst rebounding team in the NBA. Do you think having the slightest (160 and 170 lbs, respectively) just might have something to do with that?
> 
> Q will get you 16/6/3 a night and can breakout and hit 30+ on occasion. Starter material.
> 
> ...


lets put somethings to bed here. Richardson is NOT a good 3 point shooter. Last year, on the Suns (the SAME suns team that made Joe Freaking Johnson a 50% 3 point shooter) he shot 36% from 3.

well woop-de-****ing doo.

Richardson isn't the thing this team needs ( a GOOD outside shooter..not a volume outside shooter). Even if he's a good defender, his contract, horrendous shooting ability, and his contract, are 3 reasons why Portland should run away from this.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

So, if I'm reading this right, Q's contract is a wee-bit overly large for his production?

Dixon seems to be the STEAL of the year production wise. I say NO to players with back problems. We don't need such preventable acquisitions, unless they include expiring contracts.

Go ahead and pull the Theo/Ruben deal for Penny and a youngin. Sounds right way to go. We want the highest pick again next year in addition to this year. That's the way we'll be better in the future. Not by making trades for superstars that cannot get it done now.


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

Hap said:


> lets put somethings to bed here. Richardson is NOT a good 3 point shooter. Last year, on the Suns (the SAME suns team that made Joe Freaking Johnson a 50% 3 point shooter) he shot 36% from 3.
> 
> well woop-de-****ing doo.
> 
> Richardson isn't the thing this team needs ( a GOOD outside shooter..not a volume outside shooter). Even if he's a good defender, his contract, horrendous shooting ability, and his contract, are 3 reasons why Portland should run away from this.


Richardson, IIRC, won the 3 point shootout last year, so I think it can be argued that he can shoot the 3. The threat of the 3 can spread the defense, giving more room for Miles, Zach, etc to operate.

IIRC, he hit 8 threes against the Blazers in the Rose Garden last year, blowing open a close game. As a young vet, QRich, along with Zach and Darius, can lead the franchise until Bassy/Jack/Webster take over.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Masbee said:


> Q-Rich used to be a Power Guard, somewhat similar to the young Bonzi. What the heck happened to him?


I think the recent rule changes have hurt that style of play. It's a lot easier now for a center or forward to slide over and help out on a guard posting up, negating the size advantage. It's just too crowded. 

With the hand checking rule, there's more of a premium on quick guards who can penetrate off the dribble rather than beat you posting up in the middle. Hence Iverson is shooting a career high 45%, and Bryant is off the charts.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

theWanker said:


> I think the recent rule changes have hurt that style of play. It's a lot easier now for a center or forward to slide over and help out on a guard posting up, negating the size advantage. It's just too crowded.


I think that's true, and when coupled with physical ailments players like QRich can see their numbers drop precipitously.

I would be happy to get Richardson in a trade. I think that he's a significant upgrade--injury risk and all--over what we have currently at the 2 position, and Miles/Q would be fun to watch. I'm not going to argue that he should necessarily be a target of the team, though, because he's not good enough to turn this franchise around and _assuming_ the team still has a plan to do that getting closer to mediocrity might actually be detrimental to it at this point.

Ed O.


----------

