# Portland/Seattle trade



## prasutagus (Jan 22, 2003)

The answer to all our problems:

Portland trades:

Shareef Abdur-Rahim = 14.63 mill.
Derek Anderson = 8.44mill.
Travis Outlaw = .84 mill
total out = 23.91 mill.

Seattle trades:

Ray Allen = 14.63 mill.
Sign and trade Brent Barry for 6.5 mill
total out = 21.13 mill.

Portland roster:

PG - Barry, Stoudamire
SG - Allen, Barry, Woods
SF - Miles, Patterson, Woods
PF - Randolf, Davis
C - Ratliff, Davis, Stepania

Seatle starting roster:

PG - Murray
SG - Anderson
SF - Radmonovic
PF - Abdur-Rahim
C - James or Potapenko

:yes:


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

No no and no thank you.

And where did Rashard disappear to on our lineup?


----------



## prasutagus (Jan 22, 2003)

oops, you are right. Just overlooked him. Simply put Rashard into the small forward slot, move Radmonovic into the PF slot, and put Rahim at center.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>prasutagus</b>!
> The answer to all our problems:
> 
> Portland trades:
> ...


excellent idea!


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

A few things pop into my mind to maybe glean it a bit better.

I am all for getting Barry and Allen, but...

1) I think it remains to be seen, but if the negotiations do not go well with Barry and then Allen. We can possibly get Barry for nothing. So why send them anything for him. The last I had read Barry wanted a 4 year deal but Wally was only going to offer a 2 year deal. But I think that may be media fodder, since he can not deal with a FA right now anyways.

2) Seattle will have Collison at PF. So why send Outlaw who may show some promise? Perhaps send Dickau or Woods instead.

3) Bad blood... Seattle and Portland trades may never happen

4) Allen for Rahim + filler has intrigued me... but I sometimes wish it were Damon and Zach. I have always wanted Rahim and Allen on our team. Oh well.. :whoknows: getting Ray would be solid for us.


I just think we might be able to get Allen and barry and still be able to either keep DA as a backup or deal him in another trade


----------



## prasutagus (Jan 22, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
> A few things pop into my mind to maybe glean it a bit better.
> 
> I am all for getting Barry and Allen, but...
> ...


Thanks for the helpful response. A couple comments about what you said:

1. Looking at Seattle's roster, if they lose Barry to free agency and Allen to a trade, and don't get a good guard in return, then they will be atrocious at the guards spot, so I didn't think they would go for that. That's why I felt if they did a sign and trade with Barry, who they will lose anyway, we throw in Anderson to help fill their vacany at 2 guard, and we give them Outlaw as a promising 19 year old to help sweeten the deal, then it would be more realistic from Seattle's point of view. It would be great to get Barry for nothing and still get Allen, but looking at from Seattle's point of view it didn't look realistic. 

2. I'm not sure Outlaw is a power forward. And even if he is, Collison has proven to be an injury bust and may not pan out. Plus, Outlaw will never get any PT on Portland, but he may in Seattle.

3. I don't believe that the Portland-Seattle "bad blood" issue extends off the basketball court. When it comes to business, it doesn't make any sense why two franchises would eliminate potential business deals and increased success simply due to geographical proximity. The "bad blood" is just a fan and on-court competition that the front offices like to play up in order to keep the rivalry fun and profitable.

4. I would love to throw Damon in on the deal as well, but look at Seattle's roster, the only high priced player they have is Allen. There is just no way to put him in and give Seattle a fair shake. And I wouldn't trade Randolf for anybody (except maybe Duncan).


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

keep outlaw! and sorry sonics fans this could go down or something like that....


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>prasutagus</b>!
> 
> 3. I don't believe that the Portland-Seattle "bad blood" issue extends off the basketball court. When it comes to business, it doesn't make any sense why two franchises would eliminate potential business deals and increased success simply due to geographical proximity. The "bad blood" is just a fan and on-court competition that the front offices like to play up in order to keep the rivalry fun and profitable.


Unfortunately, I am pretty sure you're wrong.

Portland and Seattle haven't made a trade for as long as I can remember, and they have a pretty significant history of organizational conflict going back to Whitsitt's move from Seattle to Portland and including Portland scooping up the discarded Ruben Patterson.

I think there's a chance Portland could get Ray Allen, with SAR as the key piece, but I think that lingering issues between the two organizations might be the biggest single hurdle.

Ed O.


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, I am pretty sure you're wrong.
> ...


If this package is the best one Portland is offering, then Seattle's sanity will be the single biggest hurdle.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Marcus13</b>!
> No no and no thank you.
> 
> And where did Rashard disappear to on our lineup?


that team would be better than this years team, but go ahead... continue to overvalue Jesu.


----------



## Scinos (Jun 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ArtestFan</b>!
> If this package is the best one Portland is offering, then Seattle's sanity will be the single biggest hurdle.


:yes:

I wouldn't mind getting SAR, but I wouldn't give up Ray. I don't see any reason for us to take on DA's bad contract either. The Lewis + fillers for SAR is the only deal i'd consider.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ArtestFan</b>!
> 
> If this package is the best one Portland is offering, then Seattle's sanity will be the single biggest hurdle.


I think I might tend to agree... Seattle simply wouldn't be interested in taking back DA as part of the deal. I think that SAR, though, can for a solid foundation for a trade.

People who think that Seattle won't part with Ray except for a MVP-level player are wrong, IMO. (I don't think that's what you're saying, ArtestFan... just riffing a bit.)

They got Ray on the cheap (an expiring contract in Gary Payton and a bench player in Desmond Mason) and the team hasn't won with Ray Allen any more than they did before they had him. Assuming the Sonics think that Murray can handle the 2 spot, pluggin SAR in at the 4 makes them a significantly better, more balanced team.

Not so much better, though, that they'd be willing to take on the rest of DA's salary, I don't think...

Ed O.


----------



## Scinos (Jun 10, 2003)

You make some fair points Ed...



> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> I think I might tend to agree... Seattle simply wouldn't be interested in taking back DA as part of the deal. I think that SAR, though, can for a solid foundation for a trade.


I agree...Sund & Co. are reluctant to give Barry an extension at the MLE for 3 or 4 years. That tells me they wouldn't want anything to do with the remaining ~$27 Mill over 3 years left on DA's contract.



> People who think that Seattle won't part with Ray except for a MVP-level player are wrong, IMO. (I don't think that's what you're saying, ArtestFan... just riffing a bit.)
> 
> They got Ray on the cheap (an expiring contract in Gary Payton and a bench player in Desmond Mason) and the team hasn't won with Ray Allen any more than they did before they had him. Assuming the Sonics think that Murray can handle the 2 spot, pluggin SAR in at the 4 makes them a significantly better, more balanced team.
> 
> Ed O.


I can see the Sonics trading Ray, perhaps if the contract extension talks don't work out. But, I don't think we would improve with a SAR for Ray deal. It's more like a lateral move at best for us. You're right that the Sonics haven't won much with Ray...but SAR has never been a winner.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Whats wrong with #13 and #23 + Rahim for Ray Allen? That seems MORE then fair to me.


----------



## Greg Ostertag! (May 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ArtestFan</b>!
> 
> 
> If this package is the best one Portland is offering, then Seattle's sanity will be the single biggest hurdle.


Much werd.

Why would we trade Ray Allen (not to mention Brent Barry) for SAR, when it is entirely feasible that Rashard Lewis be traded for him. Sure, you've got Darius Miles at the 3-spot... but you'll just have to live with that, because Lewis is all you'll be getting for SAR.



> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> People who think that Seattle won't part with Ray except for a MVP-level player are wrong, IMO. (I don't think that's what you're saying, ArtestFan... just riffing a bit.)


Shareef Abdur-Rahim is hardly in the ballpark of MVP level-player. Your only other candidate there would be Zach Randolph, and he's hardly at that level yet. Just because we won't get an "MVP-level" player for Ray doesn't mean we have to accept your second-tier players.

I wouldn't entirely rule out a deal involve Ray and SAR, but you'd have to have some extremely attractive filler attached...


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

So what is Seattle offers for trading us Allen? The salaries are almost identical..

so you need to exchange other players/salaries with us or draft picks


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> I think I might tend to agree... Seattle simply wouldn't be interested in taking back DA as part of the deal. I think that SAR, though, can for a solid foundation for a trade.
> ...


Whitsett doesn't work here anymore, and when is the last time we made a deal with ALOT of teams in the NBA. The Jazz, the Spurs, the Nuggets, the T-Wolves etc..the fact is we haven't made a trade with the majority of the teams in the NBA in a very long time.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Yega1979</b>!
> 
> Whitsett doesn't work here anymore, and when is the last time we made a deal with ALOT of teams in the NBA. The Jazz, the Spurs, the Nuggets, the T-Wolves etc..the fact is we haven't made a trade with the majority of the teams in the NBA in a very long time.


So what? (a) Those teams aren't in our division, and (b) We didn't steal (or seemingly steal) their GMs. Both of those conditions apply to Seattle.

You can pretend like Seattle and Portland don't compete for a similar fanbase and that there's not nasty history between the franchises, but ignoring it doesn't make it go away.

Ed O.


----------



## BlazerMania (Apr 5, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>MAS RipCity</b>!
> Whats wrong with #13 and #23 + Rahim for Ray Allen? That seems MORE then fair to me.



AGREED. I might even keep one or both of those picks.... :|


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> So what? (a) Those teams aren't in our division, and (b) We didn't steal (or seemingly steal) their GMs. Both of those conditions apply to Seattle.
> ...


I don't think believing it makes it real either. Portland and Seattle will swing a deal if it's in the interest of both teams. But inter-division trades too seem to be more rare porportionally to non inter division twadezies.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Yega1979</b>!
> 
> I don't think believing it makes it real either. Portland and Seattle will swing a deal if it's in the interest of both teams. But inter-division trades too seem to be more rare porportionally to non inter division twadezies.


I'm not relying on my belief to make it so... it's been widely reported here in Seattle for some time that the odds of the Sonics and Blazers making any kind of deal was reduced because of the recent past between the two franchises. It came up quite a bit with Gary Payton before he was traded to the Bucks.

I guess we're not really disagreeing, though, since it's almost all pure speculation... I just think there IS some "special sauce" between the two teams that make a deal even _less_ likely than a deal between Portland and other intradivisional rivals.

With that said, I've been maintaining that a SAR-for-Ray Allen deal is possible for some time, and if it does go down it would be in _spite_ of any lingering antipathy.

Ed O.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Guys, i really think Seattle will not trade Ray. This Seattle team COMPLETLEY rely's on Allen. Everything revolves around him. He is their go-to guy, their leader and their teams heart and soul. 

They would be horrible without him. Completley horrible. They would have two timid second options to lead their team, Rashard Lewis and SAR. 

Also, dont think the 1st rounders would help entice them. They had 2 lotto picks last year and another one this year. I doubt they will make a trade involving their best player simply to get a 4th lotto pick in the past 2 years.


----------



## PTB_loyalist (Apr 3, 2004)

I dont know if money maches but how about

Portland Trades:
Shareef Abdur-rahim
Qntel Woods 
Dale Davis

Seattle Trades:
Ray Allen
Luke Ridnour
Jarome James 


we get the consitant shooting in Allen, a soild up and comeing PG in Ridnour(also would be a fan favorite), and some cap room when James' contract runs out. I like it, what does everybody else think?


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

I would be interesting to get Ray Allen, Luke Ridnour and draft Luke Jackson... reuniting Luke and Luke


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PTB_loyalist</b>!
> I dont know if money maches but how about
> 
> Portland Trades:
> ...


Not to say that SAR, Davis, and even Woods don't have value but, you're basically trying to trade three guys we're not too keen on for three that are in a position to play big roles next year and in years to come for whatever team they're on. I'm all for the theory that one person's junk might be another person's treasure but, if you really want to get those three from the Sonics, I think Zach would almost certainly need to be involved.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ThatBlazerGuy</b>!
> Guys, i really think Seattle will not trade Ray. This Seattle team COMPLETLEY rely's on Allen. Everything revolves around him. He is their go-to guy, their leader and their teams heart and soul.
> 
> They would be horrible without him. Completley horrible. They would have two timid second options to lead their team, Rashard Lewis and SAR.


There's no evidence that this is true. They were 12-13 without Ray Allen to start the season, and they ended up 37-45, which means they were worse WITH Ray (25-32) than they were without him.

Rashard was much better before Ray came back, and if the Sonics want to make him more assertive, they might not want to have a guy they feel rushes perimeter shots to avoid double teams (like Ray is thought to have done this past season).

I've never seen much that indicates he's the team's leader, and even if he IS the leader: so what? Where has he led the Sonics in the season he's been there? Nowhere.

People act like Allen is some sort of Seattle institution. He's not. He's played 85 games (just about a full season) with the Sonics and he's been the best player on back-to-back lottery teams. Neither the city nor the organization (and _especially_ not the coaching staff) is as attached to him as some might think.

Ed O.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

why do people keep talking about the fact that Portland and Seattle are interdivision teams? We play them 4 times just like everyone else, and besides the winner of each division getting either the 1 seed or the 2 seed in the conference, there's nothing else that distinguishes them as being closer than being interconference rivals.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Samuel</b>!
> why do people keep talking about the fact that Portland and Seattle are interdivision teams? We play them 4 times just like everyone else, and besides the winner of each division getting either the 1 seed or the 2 seed in the conference, there's nothing else that distinguishes them as being closer than being interconference rivals.


Can you name a big intradivisional (not interdivisional, which the vast majority of trades are) trade in the past several years in in the entire NBA? There might be a couple that I'm blanking on, but being in the same division DOES make a difference to where and when a player is traded.

Ed O.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> Can you name a big intradivisional (not interdivisional, which the vast majority of trades are) trade in the past several years in in the entire NBA? There might be a couple that I'm blanking on, but being in the same division DOES make a difference to where and when a player is traded.
> ...


perhaps, but that's not what I'm arguing against.


----------



## PoorPoorSonics (Mar 20, 2004)

LOL ArtestFan and others, I couldnt agree more.

Just because there may be trouble signing Allen to an extension doesnt mean Seattle is going to give him to Portland for ****ty contracts and your second tier forward in SAR. Im sure they arent banking on getting an MVP type player but they wont just hand him away. Im all for Allen being traded, and have no faith in Collison...but Allen for SAR NO.

Also the 3 mid-late draft picks I would say no thanks, they dont entice me in the least.

And Ridnour...keep dreaming hes going to be a superstar PG.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PoorPoorSonics</b>!
> LOL ArtestFan and others, I couldnt agree more.
> 
> Just because there may be trouble signing Allen to an extension doesnt mean Seattle is going to give him to Portland for ****ty contracts and your second tier forward in SAR. Im sure they arent banking on getting an MVP type player but they wont just hand him away. Im all for Allen being traded, and have no faith in Collison...but Allen for SAR NO.
> ...


they won't get any offers better than SAR, so i guess he stays?


----------



## PoorPoorSonics (Mar 20, 2004)

As far as if thats the best theyll get maybe, we'll see and if it is than yes hopefully he does stay.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Portland will not get Ray Allen unless they part with Zach Randolph, and don't expect to give Seattle a bunch of ****ty contracts to equal up the salaries and then expect a pick or Ridnour also. We're talking about Ray Allen here, and SAR, the guy who's never been to the playoffs, and who couldn't crack the starting lineup on a team that didn't even make the playoffs this season. That's making SAR sound worse than he is, I know, but those are the cold hard facts, and you're talking about Ray Allen here, a top 15 player in the league.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>rukahS capuT</b>!
> 
> We're talking about Ray Allen here, and SAR, the guy who's never been to the playoffs, and who couldn't crack the starting lineup on a team that didn't even make the playoffs this season.


That tends to happen when you play behind one of the only 3 20/10 guys in the league.



> That's making SAR sound worse than he is, I know, but those are the cold hard facts, and you're talking about Ray Allen here, a top 15 player in the league.


If Ray Allen is a top 15 player in the league, then SAR is too.


----------



## PoorPoorSonics (Mar 20, 2004)

Yes 20/10 is very impressive and not many players can average those numbers... but there a quite a few more than 3 who do. And I would consider Allen top 15 too, but saying that SAR is...thats laughable. I understand people having wishful thinking for their team, but Allen is a superstar, SAR is second tier. Allen and a future great PG in Ridnour just wont happen. If you are wanting Allen than Randolphs name better be included in the talks. Stacking 3 picks in a draft that isnt so great on top of a mediocore PF wouldnt cut it either.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PoorPoorSonics</b>!
> I understand people having wishful thinking for their team, but Allen is a superstar, SAR is second tier.


What has Ray Allen done that makes him a superstar? I would say they are both second tier, Ray Allen hasn't done anything that makes me think 'superstar.'


----------



## PoorPoorSonics (Mar 20, 2004)

Hes actually been in the playoffs, multiple all-star appearances, has actually played for a team and had a winning record, olympic appearances, considered one of the best if not THE best shooter in the league. On top of all this has at least some marketability...jerseys(how many people you seen wearing rahim jerseys?), video games, commercials, etc., this all generates ticket sales and income.

Allen>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>rahim


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Samuel</b>!
> 
> 
> That tends to happen when you play behind one of the only 3 20/10 guys in the league.


Randolph+Jermaine O'Neal+Shaquille O'Neal+Tim Duncan+Elton Brand+Kevin Garnett=3 20/10 guys?




> If Ray Allen is a top 15 player in the league, then SAR is too.


Name 15 players better than Ray Allen. I can surely name 15 better than SAR, easily.

Randolph(obviously since he's starting)
T-Mac
Kobe
Shaq
Duncan
Garnett
Peja
Dirk
LeBron
Carmelo
Ray Allen
Iverson
Marbury
Kidd
Vince Carter

There are plenty more, SAR isn't a Top 25 player in the league. Prove to me that Ray isn't top 15.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PoorPoorSonics</b>
> 
> Also the 3 mid-late draft picks I would say no thanks, they dont entice me in the least.
> 
> And Ridnour...keep dreaming hes going to be a superstar PG.


So let me get this strait... mid first picks like the Blazer's #13 don't entice you in the least, but the point guard the Sonics selected with last years #14 pick is going to be a superstar? Lots of great players have slipped beyond the #12 pick over the years, so I happen to think the Blazers pick holds some decent value. 

Personally (slipping on GM hat) if Rick Sund called inquiring about SAR, I'd be interested who the filer combos would be with Luke involved as the prime guy. I like his game too.

STOMP


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Ray Allen Superstar? ...LOL....Yeah he sure lead SEA to the promised land this year :uhoh: I'd say he is definitely a SECOND tier guy, not a first. He has never lead his team anywhere. Leading your team to the playoffs in the EC is hardly anything to justify greatness.



> Randolph+Jermaine O'Neal+Shaquille O'Neal+Tim Duncan+Elton Brand+Kevin Garnett=3 20/10 guys?


ROFL  Are you serious? maybe you need to take ANOTHER look at the players you just listed there. 3? 5? Does it matter? Look at the company SAR AND Zach are in. So YEAH, it is pretty damm impressive, crappy team or not. 

The TRUTH is...some uninformed FANS may argue SAR trade value has diminished, but GM's know better. Add that to the fact his LARGE contract expires next year as well, and you have yourself a HIGHLY valuable commodity. It's not that SAR trade value has diminished, its just that he is playing behind a player (Zach) who's worth and trade value is FAR greater.

I like Ray Allen a lot, & I would love to have him on POR, I don't think SEA will trade him though. Unless Allen FLAT OUT demands a trade (and I don't think he will), SEA will at least hold onto him this offseason. In fact I think they will be active and try to acquire pieces to place around him instead of trading him. I do think that they would LOVE to get their hands on SAR. I think POR could get a fairly decent package for SAR from them too, just not including Allen. It isn't b\c "trade value" wise they aren't equal, b\c they are, it is b\c SEA WANTS to keep Allen. Anyone else is fair game IMO though. 

I am just not sure SEA can offer what POR is looking for. R.Lewis is a nice player, but saddled with a long term (5yrs) deal at a position (SF) we already have an abundance of players at (Miles, Ruben, Outlaw, Qyntel (for the time being) ). I think POR might (should IMO) have interest in Ridnour, SEA #12, maybe Collison? I know they like B.Barry, but why deal for him when you could possibly sign him as a FA? Other than that though, slim pickings up there.


----------



## PoorPoorSonics (Mar 20, 2004)

Ya leading your team to the playoffs in the EC is nothing? Why couldnt SAR do it than? Hmm? Yes Ridnour slipped, but many would argue this draft is weaker than last years, a lot weaker. 

Guess McGrady isnt a superstar Magic didnt make the playoffs, guess Carter isnt either, guess Brand isnt either, guess KG isnt cause they get bounced in the first round every year, guess Iverson isnt. Iverson, McGrady, Carter all SGs...pretty hard to lead your team to the playoffs as a SG when you are the key player isnt it, even in the east, Allen still managed though.

Yes Allen hasnt done anything special you are right, playoffs, olympic team, multiple all star appearances...NONE of which SAR have done. 
If you think you are going to get Ridnour or Collison you are crazy. These are two guys set up to play major roles for Seattle. If you talk about slim pickings look at Portland...who do you have Seattle would want in a trade for Allen other than Randolph? No one. Maybe Ratliff but doubt Portland would part with him at this point. DA the crappy SG with the terrible contract? Stoudemire? LOL. Miles? No thanks we have a better SF in Lewis. 

I really dont like having a SG as the franchise player and prefer big men...but not second tier big men that prove they cant win...not even in the EC...not even to the playoffs!


----------



## BrooklynBaller (Jun 25, 2003)

*What about this possible deal? ... 3-way*

Chicago trades: SG Jamal Crawford (17.3 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 5.1 apg in 35.1 minutes) 
PF Tyson Chandler (6.1 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 0.7 apg in 22.4 minutes) 
SF Eddie Robinson (6.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 1.1 apg in 20.1 minutes) 
Chicago receives: PF Shareef Abdur-Rahim (16.3 ppg, 7.5 rpg, 2.0 apg in 31.6 minutes) 
SF Qyntel Woods (3.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 0.7 apg in 10.8 minutes) 
Change in team outlook: -10.2 ppg, -3.5 rpg, and -4.2 apg. 

Portland trades: PF Shareef Abdur-Rahim (16.3 ppg, 7.5 rpg, 2.0 apg in 31.6 minutes) 
SF Qyntel Woods (3.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 0.7 apg in 10.8 minutes) 
Portland receives: SG Ray Allen (23.0 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 4.8 apg in 56 games) 
Change in team outlook: +3.1 ppg, -4.6 rpg, and +2.1 apg. 

Seattle trades: SG Ray Allen (23.0 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 4.8 apg in 38.4 minutes) 
Seattle receives: SG Jamal Crawford (17.3 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 5.1 apg in 80 games) 
PF Tyson Chandler (6.1 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 0.7 apg in 35 games) 
SF Eddie Robinson (6.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 1.1 apg in 51 games) 
Change in team outlook: +7.1 ppg, +8.1 rpg, and +2.1 apg. 

TRADE ACCEPTED

You could also do this in two separate trades. Seattle could trade Ray Allen to Chicago for Tyson Chandler, Jamal Crawford, and Eddie Robinson. Portland could then swap SAR for Ray Allen. This would achieve the same thing as above but would allow Seattle and Portland from trading directly with each other.

I think this particular trade looks good all the way around. Seattle gets Jamal Crawford -- a Washington kid who played HS ball at Rainier Beach in Renton, Washington. They also get an excellent prospect in Tyson Chandler to play PF/C. They replace Ray Allen with a pretty decent player in Crawford and get a young PF prospect as well. Seattle is happy.

Portland trades SAR (and possibly Qyntel Woods and/or a draft pick) and receives Ray Allen. I think we all know what this team is capable of with a decent shooter (let alone one of the league's best). Portland is happy.

Chicago gets a legit 20/10 guy to play the post alongside Eddy Curry. They also get an excellent prospect in Qyntel Woods and a top 15 pick. Chicago is happy.

Thoughts?


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Samuel</b>!
> 
> perhaps, but that's not what I'm arguing against.


It's not? Can you explain what you meant when you posted this, then?



> why do people keep talking about the fact that Portland and Seattle are interdivision teams? We play them 4 times just like everyone else, and besides the winner of each division getting either the 1 seed or the 2 seed in the conference, there's nothing else that distinguishes them as being closer than being interconference rivals.


Assuming you meant intradivisional, and not interdivisional (because Portland and Seattle are in the same division, so they're intradivision) it sounds like you're minimizing the fact that they're in the same division.

My point was that intradivisional trades are uncommon, at least, but I'm confused whether you agree or disagree with that.

Ed O.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PoorPoorSonics</b>!
> Yes Ridnour slipped, but many would argue this draft is weaker than last years, a lot weaker.


many would argue that warm beer is better, a lot better... I'll hold off judging the talent in the upcoming draft at least until I've had a chance to see most of it play. Too many times I've heard the stuff like... "Yao Ming is a stringbean who'll be snapped in half in the NBA"... to take early reports as gospel. 

Since most of the players that are projected to go in the 1st are from high school and away from the states, this draft will probably not have the early returns that the last one has, but I think there will be some real talent coming in. Lots of young bigs. Personally I think both of the Blazers firsts have real value, but then again... since the Portland scouting department has had better success selecting nuggets from the later half of the first round then the Sonics have had up at the top, perhaps it's only natural that I'm more optimistic about those picks then you.

STOMP


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> ROFL  Are you serious? maybe you need to take ANOTHER look at the players you just listed there. 3? 5? Does it matter? Look at the company SAR AND Zach are in. So YEAH, it is pretty damm impressive, crappy team or not.


SAR a 20/10 guy? Zach was this year, but Shareef isn't in that company. Abdur-Rahim has been a 20-10 guy just once in his career, back in 99-00 on the Grizzlies. 




> The TRUTH is...some uninformed FANS may argue SAR trade value has diminished, but GM's know better. Add that to the fact his LARGE contract expires next year as well, and you have yourself a HIGHLY valuable commodity. It's not that SAR trade value has diminished, its just that he is playing behind a player (Zach) who's worth and trade value is FAR greater.


Once again, an absolutely invalid arguement. Why would the Sonics trade Ray Allen, a better player, for SAR just because Shareef's big contract expires? Uh, so does Ray's! :laugh:




> I like Ray Allen a lot, & I would love to have him on POR, I don't think SEA will trade him though. Unless Allen FLAT OUT demands a trade (and I don't think he will), SEA will at least hold onto him this offseason. In fact I think they will be active and try to acquire pieces to place around him instead of trading him. I do think that they would LOVE to get their hands on SAR. I think POR could get a fairly decent package for SAR from them too, just not including Allen. It isn't b\c "trade value" wise they aren't equal, b\c they are, it is b\c SEA WANTS to keep Allen. Anyone else is fair game IMO though.


No, SAR and Ray Allen do not have equal trade values. If SAR is sent to Seattle, it would be not be for Ray Allen or any package including Ray Allen. Ray doesn't go to Portland without Zach coming to Seattle.




> I am just not sure SEA can offer what POR is looking for. R.Lewis is a nice player, but saddled with a long term (5yrs) deal at a position (SF) we already have an abundance of players at (Miles, Ruben, Outlaw, Qyntel (for the time being) ). I think POR might (should IMO) have interest in Ridnour, SEA #12, maybe Collison? I know they like B.Barry, but why deal for him when you could possibly sign him as a FA? Other than that though, slim pickings up there.


I don't think Seattle is all that crazy about trying to get SAR, I don't see them really wanting to make a deal with Portland for him. Do you honestly think Seattle would be better off with SAR instead of Ray Allen next year? Contracts aren't really even an issue here, it's strictly about the player because both have large expiring contracts. I just don't see the logic in Seattle trading Ray for SAR.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> It's not? Can you explain what you meant when you posted this, then?
> ...


Yes they are uncommon. My point is that there seems to be little basis for this uncommon history, for there is a small difference between the properties that make up a division and a conference. Portland should not approach this potential Seattle trade with scepticism because intradivisional trades are uncommon.


----------



## SeattleBlazerfan (Nov 28, 2003)

> reuniting Luke and Luke


    :sour:


----------



## PoorPoorSonics (Mar 20, 2004)

Thats because there is no logic in it Tupac


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

IMO, the only offer that might overcome the "trading within the division" wall that exists between Seattle and Portland would have to involve Randolph if the target was Allen.

Zach's potential might be the inducement necessary for the Seattle brass to deal Allen to Portland. SAR + a couple of draft picks for Allen might be a "fair" deal, but it wouldn't be enough (IMO) to cross that wall.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>rukahS capuT</b>!I just don't see the logic in Seattle trading Ray for SAR.


I've always been a big fan of Rays game, and conversely never that into SAR's (because of the mediocre D), but I try to remind myself that there is a whole lot of stuff that goes on that us mere fans don't see. For all I know Ray Allen is a royal pain and his teammates hate his guts. The Sonics could be looking to move him for someone useful they want to keep rather then just letting Ray walk. 

This trade chatter is probably mostly the result of local medias looking at the green grasses in their neighbors yard, and that the expiring contracts happening to match up. SAR does play a position that Seattle is in need of filling with someone competent, and he's more then that... I'd figure he'd start and play 30+ minutes for them if he was somehow added next year. Certainly the team would benefit if they could team up long range bombers like Allen and Lewis with an inside threat of Rahim's caliber. 

howzabout... SAR for Rid, Calvin Booth, and a resigned Brent Barry? If anything thats a bit light on whats being returned to Portland IMO, but it would address the Blazers weakness at guard now and into the future. Just curious what Sonics fans think...

STOMP


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> howzabout... SAR for Rid, Calvin Booth, and a resigned Brent Barry? If anything thats a bit light on whats being returned to Portland IMO, but it would address the Blazers weakness at guard now and into the future. Just curious what Sonics fans think...
> 
> STOMP


Sounds like Portland gets jobbed in that deal. We trade an all star for: 

Brent Barry, a guy we could likely sign for the MLE if we really wanted him. 

Ridnour, an okay prospect, but a guy who probably wouldn't be able to contribute much by next year and might never be better than a back up PG. I'm not sure he's really that much better than Dickau or Eddie Gill at this point. Sure, he's a hometown guy, but not worth it in my opinion. 

and Calvin Booth, who sucks and has a contract as bad as anybody in the league. 4.9 ppg and a salary of ~6 million, signed through 2007. Over 1 million per point he averages per game. No thanks. 

Portland needs at least a top flight prospect for Shareef. Reef was dealt for the #3 pick a couple years back. I think in the right deal, he could be worth at least close to that much again.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

one thing for sure... we know Nash does not believe in Fire sales... (e.g. this years trades)

Rahim will not be dealt unless we get a good value in return


----------



## PoorPoorSonics (Mar 20, 2004)

I dont like that deal for Seattle for a few reasons. One I think Ridnour is going to be one hell of a PG in a couple years. Two SAR has one year left on his contract and has proven he cant win. Also Brent Barry is awesome, he can play the one and two, and he is a great leader...assuming Seattle can resign him. If they cant than doesnt hurt to throw him in.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PoorPoorSonics</b>!
> I dont like that deal for Seattle for a few reasons. One I think Ridnour is going to be one hell of a PG in a couple years. Two SAR has one year left on his contract and has proven he cant win. Also Brent Barry is awesome, he can play the one and two, and he is a great leader...assuming Seattle can resign him. If they cant than doesnt hurt to throw him in.


you are prolly one of only 7 sonics fans on Earth who wouldn't trade Rid,Barry(leavin you anyways) and Booth for Rahim...:yes:


----------



## prasutagus (Jan 22, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> howzabout... SAR for Rid, Calvin Booth, and a resigned Brent Barry? If anything thats a bit light on whats being returned to Portland IMO, but it would address the Blazers weakness at guard now and into the future. Just curious what Sonics fans think...


I do like this trade idea, also. I'd rather have Allen, of course, but Ridnour will be a good NBA point guard, and we get better outside shooting with Barry. Booth would simply be a backup for Randolf for 10 minutes a game. The trade doesn't give us any superstars, but it fills the holes that we have very nicely and makes us a better team for next year and that's what is truly important.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

We can do better than that for Rahim :yes: I woud call up Chicago, Boston, Orlando before I woudl ever do that trade.

Lots of teams need scoring big men. Seattle is not the only one. They need to up the ante. We are stocked up on big men. The hardest spots to fill. Let them begin the bidding.


Seattle has to come to the conclusion that we faced when it was said Sheed would walk at the end of the year for nothing.

Are they really prepared to let Barry walk for nothing at all on June 30???? And if they do not, what will they pay for him in a sign and trade?

Are they willing to let Ray Allen go next year for nothing in return? Will McMillan and Allen mend fences or will McMillan get axed? Or Allen traded? What will fester next?

Sound familiar to us Blazer fans????


Like it or not Sonics fans... your going to have to deal with it...


----------



## prasutagus (Jan 22, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
> We can do better than that for Rahim


Sorry Trader Bob, we're not going get Tracy McGrady or Paul Pierce for Rahim, and I don't know what the heck you want to get from Chi-town, they have nothing. Allen for Rahim would be a bit of a steal, which is why we would have to throw in filler, and the Rid, Booth, Barry deal for Rahim is just fair. Rahim is a decent ball player, but he just isn't THAT good.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Rid, Barry and Booth for SAR is a joke of a trade IMO.

The Hawks weren't willing to take on the Sonics' folderol and neither should the Blazers. The Sonics are going to lose Barry to free agency, they barely played Ridnour last year (a low lottery pick, equivalent to the pick Portland has this year) and they'd LOVE to be rid of Booth.

Portland would have to be insane to take that little value for SAR, IMO.

Ed O.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

This is so typical...

BEFORE we traded Rasheed, I remeber all these fans of other teams offering us garbage for Sheed, and telling us that we wouldn't get ANYTHING of value for him...


um...I think not.... :uhoh: 

This is the same case with SAR, now all of the sudden his trade value is diminished...which is flippin ridiculous. Watch again as POR gets something pretty significant for SAR, what will all the doubters say then?




> SAR a 20/10 guy? Zach was this year, but Shareef isn't in that company. Abdur-Rahim has been a 20-10 guy just once in his career, back in 99-00 on the Grizzlies.


Oh...excuse me....his CAREER average is 20 & 8, I can see the BIG difference there...:uhoh:


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> Rid, Barry and Booth for SAR is a joke of a trade IMO.


Bingo! Rid, BB, Booth for SAR wasn't proposed in seriousness, but rather to see the lengths that some of the Sonics fans here would go backing their current players. Not for a moment should Nash consider this deal IMO. Calvin Booth for 3 more years at over 6 mil a year? Yikes! Getting rid of that cap killer alone would make Sund's summer. Acquiring him would earn Nash one trip to the tar and feathers machine.

Rid is nice and might be worthy of rotation minutes next year, but SAR is a proven inside scorer entering his prime years. BB is a UFA on the wrong side of 30 coming off of an injury plagued season, who will almost undoubtably be leaving Seattle to whoever offers him a MLE deal and a role. With Ray entrenched at his natural 2 guard slot and all the other guards they have under contract, I really doubt he goes back. With his Oregon/West Coast ties, he's likely a Blazer if Nash wants him. Portland has the role and the MLE to extend. 

Substitute Potapenko (expiring deal after 2004-5) for Booth and add a future Seattle first and we're getting closer to a reasonable exchange IMO.

STOMP


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> Bingo! Rid, BB, Booth for SAR wasn't proposed in seriousness, but rather to see the lengths that some of the Sonics fans here would go backing their current players.
> 
> STOMP


Well, you got the response you were looking for then. Check this thread:

where a Sonics fans claims they wouldn't trade Brent Barry for Dwight Howard. 



> Rashard+Barry? I wouldnt give them one of them......


Don't worry dude. I don't think that's very likely to happen.


----------

