# Paul Pierce Trading



## celtsb34 (Apr 22, 2005)

*paul pierce trading* 

paul pierce is the celtics best shooter and the best passer.why would they think of trading him.

People say that he should be traded to portland  for VAN EXEL and the #3 pick for Pierce


----------



## FatMike58 (May 11, 2005)

DO IT...maybe outlaw too


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

Will never happen. And Outlaw is not going anywhere, that's for damn sure. 

Pierce is overrated.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Okay. So essentially you are saying that you wouldn't trade for a pereniall all-star just because you have to give up a first-round pick, a contract that you wouldn't move otherwises, and a young player that hasn't proven anything?

 Devil's Advocate.


----------



## thekid (Apr 3, 2003)

Why trade Pierce though???


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

QRICH said:


> Will never happen. And Outlaw is not going anywhere, that's for damn sure.
> 
> Pierce is overrated.




and outlaw is untouchable


----------



## LX (Oct 14, 2004)

Outlaw has a whole load of potential. The Blazers would not give up Outlaw and their pick for Pierce. This is one deal I would gladly do on the Celtics side of things however. Pierce for an expiring contract in Van Exel (Doesn't he have a team option in his contract, so we can just waive him anyways?), a very young athletic player who has the potential to be something special, and their 1st round pick. That would be an excellent trade, but only if the Celtics could get Outlaw, NVE, and the 1st rounder. Which is very unlikely.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*One thing is for sure*

When it comes to personnel matters, Portland will blow it. 

When they're not trading young stars like JO for Dale Davis, they're drafting punks like the JUCO "star" who was better at pitbull fighting then playing defense.

Who the hell is Travis Outlaw, anyway?

It would take more than the 3 to get Pierce. For one, Portland is way over the cap, so they have to match salary.

Nice team, Portland. Maybe a playoff team in say, 5 years.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Lanteri said:


> Outlaw has a whole load of potential.




so did kwame brown...howd he turn out?

u dont trade an all star for potential period


----------



## celtsb34 (Apr 22, 2005)

*Re: One thing is for sure*



Truth34 said:


> It would take more than the 3 to get Pierce. For one, Portland is way over the cap, so they have to match salary.


Nick Van Exel


----------



## JFizzleRaider (Nov 1, 2004)

I would consider a trade of Van Exel and #3 for Pierce, but I would have to say no to throwing outlaw in there

Portland right now seems to be putting a lot of there eggs in Telfairs and Outlaws baskets

I would contemplate it if you guys had us throw in Khyrpa instead....then maybe


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

*Re: One thing is for sure*



Truth34 said:


> When it comes to personnel matters, Portland will blow it.
> 
> When they're not trading young stars like JO for Dale Davis, they're drafting punks like the JUCO "star" who was better at pitbull fighting then playing defense.
> 
> ...


Wow. This looks like one of your posts on the Lakers board. 

Is there you don't despise outside of Boston?


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

I don't despise San Antonio or Miami or Detroit or Phoenix or Seattle or Utah and a myriad of others.

I am, however, getting sick of all of these Portland Paul Pierce trade rumors. If we trade our best player, it should be out West, to be sure.

But to say something like, "You can't have Telfair or Outlaw" is absurd. Beggars can't be choosers. Paul Pierce won't be traded for anything less than real prospects or another All-Star. This is not a salary dump situation.

I love the city of Portland, and I think they have some AWESOME fans (thank God you guys got rid of Bonzi Wells), but I think the water has been poisoned a little.

Some of the fans are delusional about their roster, and I don't see the team making the playoffs anytime soon. That about sum it up?


----------



## JFizzleRaider (Nov 1, 2004)

ummm ok, if you think portland would throw in Telfair to "add" to the NVE and #3 pick you sir are delusional.

Portland has put in a lot of stock into Telfair and recently Outlaw, doesnt mean they wont be traded, but EXTREMELY doubtful that they would be a "throw-in" in the deal

The only other logical thing i could possibly think of to "sweeten" it for you guys would be to throw ratliff or darius or something of that nature for Lafrentz so you guys get that contract off your books as well

Im not even a huge Pierce to Portland fanatic, I would rather us not get him....yes hes a great player, but adding him to portland roster doesnt mean they will win the championship, I would rather us get our salary under control and rebuild, not try to tape it up with problems still lingering


----------



## Tersk (Apr 9, 2004)

...to Dallas


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

JFizzleRaider said:


> ummm ok, if you think portland would throw in Telfair to "add" to the NVE and #3 pick you sir are delusional.



he never said that.


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

the whole concept is absurd.
Essentially, you would be trading paul pierce for gerald green and nick van exel.

Exciting as green is, he is not yet a paul pierce, and van exel is not compensation for that difference.

pierce is not the player the celtics need to trade.


----------



## FatMike58 (May 11, 2005)

yea except we wouldnt be drafting green


----------



## 07McCarthy (May 8, 2005)

what about odom and a couple fillers for pierce.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

I don't really like Lamar Odom, but it could work. But Odom is more deferential to Kobe than Pierce would be. There would be a lot of problems between those two.

Wouldn't be good for LA.


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

FatMike58 said:


> yea except we wouldnt be drafting green


who then? I'm not following this too closely but it seems obvious to me...

but please, let me know


----------



## FatMike58 (May 11, 2005)

were done with high school, paul or deron

there are like 5-6 players better than green in the draft, so why pick him


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Why trade Pierce is the more important question? 

Neither Boston _or _Portland would do that deal.


----------



## SamIam (Jun 1, 2004)

The reason trading Paul is ridiculous is that he only has 3 years left on his contract. Since we are stuck with Baker for 3 years, Raef for 4 years and Blount for 6 years.... what do we need cap room for? 

Normally, if you can get a quality player at #3 in the draft and get 4 years of cheap salary you have to consider that. However, we can't use cap space right now anyway. Pierce only counts 12 million next year.

If we want to trade him we should do it when he is expiring because he will have great value to teams looking to get under cap and also to teams that will want to resign him for less than max money. At 29 he will still have a lot left in the tank and will be a valuable player.


----------



## celtsb34 (Apr 22, 2005)

what about this trade?

Travis Outlaw
Nick Van Exel
#3 pick

for

Paul Pierce
Kendrick Perkins
Justin Reed

I switched Marcus Banks for Kendrick Perkins


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

celtsb34 said:


> what about this trade?
> 
> Travis Outlaw
> Nick Van Exel
> ...


I wouldn't do it and I'm sure Portland fans wouldn't do it either. They already have their franchise point guard in Sebastian Telfair. They don't need Marcus Banks and we don't need Travis Outlaw.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

What do we need cap room for? Scenario:

Let's say we do that deal. Paul Pierce for Nick Van Exel's expiring contract and the #3 selection (even though I do not agree with it, I'm using it just for the sake of argument). This eliminate's Pierce's contract and salary cap hit saving us  $13,843,157 (using hoopshype.com's salary page) and $45,304,878 in all (over the next three years assuming Pierce accepts his player option, which he will). [font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Also, with Pierce gone, there is no point in resigning Antoine Walker or Gary Payton. [/font]

The number three selection of this years' draft will likely recieve $3,739,680 next year and $24,570,301 in all over the next five years in which he signs (using Emeka Okafor's first year salary as an example of what a draftee might get this year). So essentially, that deal saves us $10,103,477 *next year* and $20,734,577 total. 

Our first-round pick, #18, will command about $1,270,080 (using Josh Smith's first year salary as an example of what a draftee might get this year).

Now, let's trade Raef LaFrentz. I originally proposed a potential trade ridding ourselves of LaFrentz's contract: trade Raef LaFrentz and Delonte West for David Wesley and Clarence Weatherspoon, both having expiring contracts. 

LaFrentz is due $9,996,250 next year and $45,437,500 in all over the next four years (assuming LaFrentz accepts his player option, which he will). West is due $1,010,040 this year and $5,662,627 in all over the next four years (assuming Delonte doesn't bust and we accept the team option on him).Wesley is expiring at [font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]$4,950,000 and Weatherspoon at $6,353,200.

Our two second-round draft picks will command about $770,554 total next year.

So the combined deal leaves us with the following total salary:

2005-2006: $38,676,033

Rough salaries after next year:

2006-2007: $25,792,283

If you don't think that free agent's will not come to Boston,see ehnumro's post about this topic from last week.
[/font]


----------



## celtsb34 (Apr 22, 2005)

Premier said:


> What do we need cap room for? Scenario:
> 
> Let's say we do that deal. Paul Pierce for Nick Van Exel's expiring contract and the #3 selection (even though I do not agree with it, I'm using it just for the sake of argument). This eliminate's Pierce's contract and salary cap hit saving us  $13,843,157 (using hoopshype.com's salary page) and $45,304,878 in all (over the next three years assuming Pierce accepts his player option, which he will). [font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Also, with Pierce gone, there is no point in resigning Antoine Walker or Gary Payton. [/font]
> 
> ...



Whats up with you and trading for David wesley and Clearence Weatherspoon


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

celtsb34 said:


> Whats up with you and trading for David wesley and Clearence Weatherspoon


They free up a lot of money for us.


----------



## SamIam (Jun 1, 2004)

How about this scenario. We resign Walker for 2 years. We draft a decent player at #18. We keep our team intact next year. Al Jefferson and Perkins along with West and Banks actually improve like we hope. We win 56 games next year and Paul Pierce has a great playoff run (while still isolating and occasionally not running like we want). We then turn around and offer a Paul Pierce with 1 year left and a player option for 2 years and a lot of positive hype on a great playoff run to see what we can get in a draft that might have the next Lew Alcindor drafted at #1 (as opposed to now when the #1 pick has no chance of being a great player.)


----------



## SamIam (Jun 1, 2004)

There has been a lot of chatter about a Nick Van Exel/#3 pick for Pierce and it is funny that Portland fans are so adamant in not wanting Pierce. Apparently they are satisfied with having 3 6-9 210 lb. softies on the roster in Khryapa, Miles and Outlaw. I'll take a 6-7 240 lb. guy who can rebound any day. Paul Pierce is flat out a tough player and even if his head is screwed up a little.... you can't coach size.


----------



## FatMike58 (May 11, 2005)

well you cant coach the blazers either


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

We all want Pierce, it's juist a matter of what we are giving up. The Blazers as they are now won't win with or without Pierce for at least 2 years, so why give up a lot for a guy that will be on the down side of his career then. Outlaw although not proven appears to be the real thing. The #3 pick has the opportunity anyway to net us something way more valuable than Pierce. 
I mean would you guys trade Al Jefferson for an older all star player that could help you immediately, yet couldn't get you over the top to the playoffs? 

And I think all the backlash about the Portland franchise should stop. This team had made the play offs for 22 straight years. They are on a down slide right now, but every team goes through that. I believe it's how you got Pierce in the first place.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

mediocre man said:


> And I think all the backlash about the Portland franchise should stop. This team *had* made the play offs for 22 straight years. They are on a down slide right now, but every team goes through that. I believe it's how you got Pierce in the first place.



keyword...had


----------



## SheriffKilla (Jan 1, 2004)

i dont know if its worth trading pierce for a pick 
at least in this year's draft.. i think there is only one player that has the potential to be a superstar one day ( Johan Petro) but he has a lot of question marks around him
Gerald Green is a nice player he will be a solid 2nd/3rd option one day but he isnt worth trading Pierce
Pierce is a solid 1st option
and if the celtics put the right people around him they will be solid..

Ainge just needs to hurry up and decide to do somethin
he either needs to rebuild around Pierce, try to add as much as he can to what htey already have or just trade Pierce and start ALL OVER....

it seems as if he is doing all 3 instead of concentratin on one objective
i mean over there in Boston you guys have had a tradition of Championships
im sure Ainge knows that, you guys arent lookin at 8th/7th seed playoff teams as success just like the Lakers.. so Ainge needs to make up his mind and turn this team at least into a top 5 contender in the next 1-3 years...
I think they can do it with Pierce, and certainly would be more succesful with Pierce as opposed to Travis Outlaw and Gerald Green


----------



## SamIam (Jun 1, 2004)

mediocre manThe #3 pick has the opportunity anyway to net us something way more valuable than Pierce.
I mean would you guys trade Al Jefferson for an older all star player that could help you immediately said:


> Are you asking would I trade Al Jefferson for Kevin Garnett? In a heartbeat. Al might be great but he might have a weight problem or might not get any better. I'll take a sure winner anyday.
> 
> Would I trade a #3 pick when an Al Jefferson was available for Pierce? NO! Big men in the NBA are like gold. However, you won't have a chance to draft a franchise big man at #3 and you have promising young stars in Telfair and Outlaw. Why wouldn't you want Pierce. You won't get him but I still don't understand why you don't wouldn't him for NVE/#3. I believe the Boston media - who hate Paul Pierce because he doesn't like media attention - has influenced the national image of Paul Pierce far more than the Tinsley incident.


----------



## BackwoodsBum (Jul 2, 2003)

SamIam said:


> I believe the Boston media - who hate Paul Pierce because he doesn't like media attention - has influenced the national image of Paul Pierce far more than the Tinsley incident.


I don't think the media is to blame. Pierce want's the attention, but only when it's positive. It's a known fact that he can't handle any kind of negative attention. The media doesn't make Pierce act the way he does, they simply point the cameras and mics his way and after that he's on his own. If he doesn't like the image then he should change it, it's not the medias job to do that for him. Sure they can ask questions during interviews to slant peoples opinions one way or another, but they do that to everyone, not just Pierce. His actions on the court are another story. There is nothing the media can do to influence what he does on the court, and I've seen plenty of negative things out of Pierce during the games so the only person who can (and should) be held accountable for that is Pierce himself. 

By now everyone here knows that I'd trade Pierce for a warm cup of spit. Despite his talent, I think he is a cancer and that the team would be better off without him. The Portland deal that keeps popping up (NVE, #3, and Outlaw) I would do in a heartbeat. Were this last years draft I'd do it without Outlaw, but this years draft is much weaker so I'd want to try to get Outlaw so hopefully one of the two (Outlaw or the #3 pick) would end up being a star quality player. I proposed a trade earlier where we swap Pierce to LA for Odom and fodder and still think that wouldn't be a bad deal either. There have also been a couple of scenerios with the Clippers that I would jump at. 

Basically I'm all for trading Pierce sooner rather than later because his trade value is dropping and unless he has a change of attitude I don't see that trend changing.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

SamIam said:


> Are you asking would I trade Al Jefferson for Kevin Garnett? In a heartbeat. Al might be great but he might have a weight problem or might not get any better. I'll take a sure winner anyday.
> 
> Would I trade a #3 pick when an Al Jefferson was available for Pierce? NO! Big men in the NBA are like gold. However, you won't have a chance to draft a franchise big man at #3 and you have promising young stars in Telfair and Outlaw. Why wouldn't you want Pierce. You won't get him but I still don't understand why you don't wouldn't him for NVE/#3. I believe the Boston media - who hate Paul Pierce because he doesn't like media attention - has influenced the national image of Paul Pierce far more than the Tinsley incident.



You're really comparing Paul Pierce to KG? I love Pierce, but I don't think he's in the KG area of player. And I think there's a chance that M. Williams might fall to #3. I would consider him a franchise big man. And it's not that I wouldn't want Pierce for NVE and #3,I just don't think that's the best move. Pierce is a great player as I've said, he just wouldn't do anything for this particular team unless they added a few more pieces. 

Telfair
Pierce
Outlaw/Miles
Randolph
Przybilla

Monya
Khryapa
Outlaw/Miles
Ratliff
DA
Ha
FA pg

Although that line up probably gets us a top 4 seed in the east that doesn't get us to the playoffs in the west, so why not go young and see if you can hit a homerun with either Green or M.Williams if he falls for some reason.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Ok I see a lot of petty trodding on Portland, either the team or fans, to why people think it's neccessarry I don't know.

That said let me fill you guys in a bit on why Portland Fans are hesitant to want to trade Travis Outlaw. Travis is an athletic freak, everyone knows that, he can almost touch the top of the backboard, super high flyer, quik runner and a very soilid finisher on the break. But what a lot of People don;t know is that according to all the players in the locker room he also has the best jumpshot on the team. Blazer Fans just got to see him play legit minutes in about 25 games to close out the season. I think the thing we saw is potential know doubt, but not the kind of potential where you question wether he'll be a good player or not, but the potential where we know he will be a very very solid player in the NBA and the question is just how good can he be. I fI were to give you my best description of his game I'd have to say Shawn Marion with a much better shooting stroke, which would lead one to believe he will in fact be a better shooter. He shot well this season, but didn't shoot enough. Portland Assistant Tim Grgrich, who is considerd to be one of the best coaches for developing young talent, claims that Travis improved faster than any player he has ever coached. 

From the Portland perspective we look at Outlaw as a guy who could in fact end up being a better player than Paul Pierce. Will he? WE don't know yet, but as a fan of the Blazers I'd sure like to see one more year of Travis. The JErmaine O'neal trade is still fresh in the mind.

As far as Portland always screwing things up, Zach Randoplph wasn't a botched draft pick, Qyntel is the only JuCo player they have taken (That was exGM Bob Whitsitt). Outlaw is looking better than anyone outside of scouts could have possibly hoped for. 

Last years draft of Telfair, Khyrapa, Monia and Seung Jin Ha is far and away exceeding hopes. WHoeve said Khyrapa is soft obviously has never watched him play. In the last game of the season he guarded Kobe Bryant for much of the 2nd half and for the most part shut him down, even Kobe aknowledged that. No I suppose if you factor that he broke his foot last summer to the extent that there was question as to wether it was career ending or not , then proignoss weas moved to out at least for the season, instead the guy nutted up and played 1/2 the season at about 85% health with 5 temporary screws in his foot, means he is soft, then I guess he's soft.

People tend to forget that Portland was without Zach Randolph for most of the season last year. They were playing at a .500 clip wiht him and played at about .120 without him.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Schilly said:


> But what a lot of People don;t know is that according to all the players in the locker room he also has the best jumpshot on the team.


thats not saying much when ur talking about the blazers...who really HAS a jumpshot on that team lol


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> thats not saying much when ur talking about the blazers...who really HAS a jumpshot on that team lol


Well there is some legitmate truth to that although Damon Stoudamire shot over 40% from 3 pt land this season and that was taking that aspect into consideration.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Schilly said:


> Well there is some legitmate truth to that although Damon Stoudamire shot over 40% from 3 pt land this season and that was taking that aspect into consideration.



tru i forgot about damon...although he shot 36.9% from 3 this season but ill let that one slide :biggrin:


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> tru i forgot about damon...although he shot 36.9% from 3 this season but ill let that one slide :biggrin:


True enough, though at the midway point in hte season he was shooting under 30% so, he did bring it up quite dramatically in the 2nd half.


----------



## Flava_D (Apr 22, 2005)

Wait...did someone say Johan Petro has superstar potential?? Wait did they say he's the ONLY player in this draft to have it?? As they said back in the 80s, you gotta check yo-self before you riggidy wreck yo-self - Marvin Williams has superstar potential - Chris Paul has superstar Potential - heck even Webster and Green have it - but Johan Petro - he'll never be anything more than a Sam Dalumbert at best - regardless all this Pierce NVE/Outlaw/#3 talk seems a bit far fetched - as someone said before, you'd be trading Pierce for an unproven high schooler and Chris Paul - then we'd have 3 inexperienced pgs who need development, a retiring unhappy pg who would probably never show up and an untapped potential kid to sit on the bench (if he hasn't cracked Portland's rotation, he won't crack ours anytime soon) - thats bout all for now...


----------



## Al Jefferson (Nov 20, 2003)

There is no way Id give up Paul for NVE and #3 .. Notta chance.

AJ


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

Wow all this Outlaw talk has me bothered, I don't even want the kid. Portland fans may be impressed, I am not. I'd much rather have Sergei Monia than Outlaw but I really don't like this deal. You trade an all-star, unless you are gutting the roster then you get an all-star back. A top 3 pick in this draft is nothing to get excited about.


----------



## celtsb34 (Apr 22, 2005)

whiterhino said:


> A top 3 pick in this draft is nothing to get excited about.



It cold be the next Larry Bird


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

celtsb34 said:


> It cold be the next Larry Bird



Or the next Len Bias


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> Or the next Len Bias


Or the next Darko Milicic


(I do like him though)


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

aquaitious said:


> Or the next Darko Milicic
> 
> 
> (I do like him though)



based on....


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> based on....


Top 3 pick. :/


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Just keep in mind that if Al Jefferson & Josh Smith had gone to college for a year, the number three pick would be either Marvin Williams or Bogut. The talent in this draft isn't in the top five, it's in the sheer depth of future NBA players. Gerald Green could seriously be the best player drafted this year, and he's not likely to be as good as Josh Smith. Take it for what it's worth. Unless that number three pick is accompanied by either Outlaw or Monya, or Portland is taking on Boston's worst contracts (i.e. Raef's & Blount's) in the deal, I'm not interested.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

aquaitious said:


> Top 3 pick. :/



i meant why in the world would u like darko?


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> i meant why in the world would u like darko?


I think he has a bright future. The guy only turned 18 on draft day, he's an oversees high schooler who's stuck behind Ben and Rasheed. Well I can't say "stuck" but he's going to be overshadowed and will not develop on a stacked team. The kid has got potential, a ton of it.


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

> Nice team, Portland. Maybe a playoff team in say, 5 years.




Or we could move to the weak *** Atlantic Division and beat out the Celtics next year...weak East is junk and I am sure you all know it.


Masking edited. -aqua


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

The Atlantic Division produced three playoff teams.

The Eastern Conference produced the championship winner last year.

The Boston Celtics are better than the Portland Trailblazers.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

Premier said:


> The Atlantic Division produced three playoff teams.
> 
> The Eastern Conference produced the championship winner last year.
> 
> The Boston Celtics are better than the Portland Trailblazers.


All facts. 
Premier I think this is the first time I agree with you :raised_ey


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Second.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Premier said:


> The Atlantic Division produced three playoff teams.
> 
> The Eastern Conference produced the championship winner last year.
> 
> The Boston Celtics are better than the Portland Trailblazers.



i agree as well...the jailblazers are just a bunch of players thrown together that nobody else wants...ie van exel, stoudamire, darius miles, rueben patterson etc...


----------



## Al Jefferson (Nov 20, 2003)

Premier said:


> The Atlantic Division produced three playoff teams.
> 
> The Eastern Conference produced the championship winner last year.
> 
> The Boston Celtics are better than the Portland Trailblazers.


Good Point Premier.

AJ


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Apples and Oranges really. Record wise Boston was a lot better than Portland. No doubt about it. But I'm not sure it's fair to say they are better. Maybe if you chcked (games lost due to injury) stats or something it might be different. Portland wasn't going ot win a thing this year....Just like Boston,but I think the Blazers would have been a lot better if Randolph (46 games played), Abdur Rahim(54 games played), Ratliff(63 games played), Darius Miles (63 games played)Viktor Khryapa(32 games played) NVE(53 games played) and others hadn't been lost for so many games. I'm not saying those guys are wonderful or anything, but I think the team would have won more games if they had all been healthy for the year. I think I read somewhere that the Blazers were right at .500 with Randolph, and .200 something with him out.


----------

