# Big Trade Rumor Involving Zach



## rawzzy (Aug 3, 2004)

Just heard a major trade rumor on Sports Radio 950 here in Philly that Milwaukee will send Michael Redd, Desmond Mason, & Marcus Haislip to Portland in exchange for Zach Randolph, Derek Anderson, and Portland's 2005 1st rounder. The radio host said that there had been talks between the 2 teams for a few weeks now, and that Portland was very hard when it came to dealing Randolph, but after Randolphs recent trouble Portland decided to pull the trigger (no pun intended).
Take it for what it's worth :whoknows:


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Bad Bad trade for the Bucks. I think Portland will be quite happy. Michael Redd and Desmond Mason are hell of players and both hustle and seem to have their heads on straight. Nice trade if it gets done.


----------



## Captain Obvious (Jun 15, 2003)

What a horrible trade for Milwaukee.


----------



## CelticPagan (Aug 23, 2004)

I don't see that as a bad trade for the Bucs. Zach is every bit as dangerous inside as Redd is outside. Now, swapping Anderson for Mason tips the balance to Portland..but they are getting a player with loads of potential.


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


----------



## 4-For-Snapper (Jan 1, 2003)

I've never been a big fan of Redd, to be honest. He's a good shooter, but that's about it. I know people say that Zach is a "one trick pony" but I'd prefer to see how he performs this season before trading him. Rumor has it he's looking trimmer and is a bit lighter on his feet (i.e. better defense). However, getting Mason would definitely be an improvement over DA. I love DA, but let's face it...he sucks.:yes:


----------



## SLAM (Jan 1, 2003)

And Zach would flourish even more in the East. I'd rather have Zach than SAR, but it doesn't seem like we're going to get equal value for SAR this off season. Getting Redd really balances out this team. We'd have a great perimeter threat that would make SAR and Miles more effective. 

DS/NVE/ST
Redd/Mason/NVE/Frahm
Miles/Mason/Patterson
SAR/MH
Theo/Vlad/JP

Pretty thin at PF and C, but the PG, SG, SF slots are filled up with talent.

I like it.


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

:no:


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

I could see myself welcoming this trade after some time. I'd hate to give up Zach, though... maybe MIL includes Gadzuric instead of Haislip?


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Portland trades: SG Derek Anderson (13.6 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 4.5 apg in 35.5 minutes) 
PF Zach Randolph (20.1 ppg, 10.5 rpg, 2.0 apg in 37.9 minutes) 
Portland receives: SF Desmond Mason (14.4 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 1.9 apg in 30.9 minutes) 
SG Michael Redd (21.7 ppg, 5.0 rpg, 2.3 apg in 36.8 minutes) 
SF Marcus Haislip (3.0 ppg, 1.7 rpg, 0.1 apg in 8.5 minutes) 
Change in team outlook: +5.4 ppg, -3.0 rpg, and -2.2 apg. 

Milwaukee trades: SF Desmond Mason (14.4 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 1.9 apg in 30.9 minutes) 
SG Michael Redd (21.7 ppg, 5.0 rpg, 2.3 apg in 36.8 minutes) 
SF Marcus Haislip (3.0 ppg, 1.7 rpg, 0.1 apg in 8.5 minutes) 
Milwaukee receives: SG Derek Anderson (13.6 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 4.5 apg in 51 games) 
PF Zach Randolph (20.1 ppg, 10.5 rpg, 2.0 apg in 81 games) 
Change in team outlook: -5.4 ppg, +3.0 rpg, and +2.2 apg. 

TRADE ACCEPTED


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

*Well, it works money wise*



> Milwaukee trades: SF Desmond Mason	(14.4 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 1.9 apg in 30.9 minutes)
> _	SG Michael Redd	(21.7 ppg, 5.0 rpg, 2.3 apg in 36.8 minutes)
> _	SF Marcus Haislip	(3.0 ppg, 1.7 rpg, 0.1 apg in 8.5 minutes)
> Milwaukee receives: SG Derek Anderson	(13.6 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 4.5 apg in 35.5 minutes)
> ...


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

I don't like it, Shareef last season showed nothing that proved he could start. I really don't like this, value wise it is great but Zach has one of the best work ethics in this league. He is 22 years old and puts up 20 and 10, why the hell would u want to mess with that? Because he has a few problems? Ah, Blazer fans make me sick, seriously. Always quick to get rid of someone because of a mistake or two.


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

*Since others are having trouble speaking for themselves..*



> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> I don't like it, Shareef last season showed nothing that proved he could start. I really don't like this, value wise it is great but Zach has one of the best work ethics in this league. He is 22 years old and puts up 20 and 10, why the hell would u want to mess with that? Because he has a few problems? Ah, Blazer fans make me sick, seriously. Always quick to get rid of someone because of a mistake or two.


:yes:


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Well, getting out of DA's contract would be nice, and Mason is a nice guy to have around... but I don't think that it makes sense.

Michael Redd's a pretty good player, but giving up Zach for him is too much.

It wouldn't be the worst deal of all time for the Blazers, but it's not good enough for me to hope it's true.

Ed O.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> I don't like it, Shareef last season showed nothing that proved he could start. I really don't like this, value wise it is great but Zach has one of the best work ethics in this league. He is 22 years old and puts up 20 and 10, why the hell would u want to mess with that? Because he has a few problems? Ah, Blazer fans make me sick, seriously. Always quick to get rid of someone because of a mistake or two.


Not necessarily, I'm thinking of this from a basketball standpoint, not character or 'past incidents'. SAR did so poorly because of his inconsistent minutes and sporatic shifts. I don't think he's the better player, but getting a guy who can shoot like Michael Redd, an athletic swing man with a lot of potential in Mason and a capable back up in Haislip while getting rid of Anderson sounds like a pretty good deal. Though I'm still hesitant to give up on Zach, this trade would balance out the roster and still give us a good future with Telfair, Miles and Redd as he's still a fairly young guy.


----------



## 4-For-Snapper (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Since others are having trouble speaking for themselves..*



> Originally posted by <b>Blaze_Rocks</b>!
> :yes:


Don't take this the wrong way...but do you post anything but smilies?


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

anybody else heard this report? It would be nice to find some other kind of confirmation....


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

*Re: Re: Since others are having trouble speaking for themselves..*



> Originally posted by <b>4-For-Snapper</b>!
> 
> 
> Don't take this the wrong way...but do you post anything but smilies?


Sometimes when I feel like typing. check my other post..You will see that I have opinions too.


blaze:rock:


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

PG Stoudamire, NVE, Telfair
SG Redd, Mason, *Woods
SF Miles, Patterson, *Khryapa
PF Rahim, Haislip, *Outlaw
C Ratliff, Pryzbilla, Stepania

*Reserves
Overseas Ha, Monia, Sinonovic
Cut Frahm


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SheedSoNasty</b>!
> 
> 
> Not necessarily, I'm thinking of this from a basketball standpoint, not character or 'past incidents'. SAR did so poorly because of his inconsistent minutes and sporatic shifts. I don't think he's the better player, but getting a guy who can shoot like Michael Redd, an athletic swing man with a lot of potential in Mason and a capable back up in Haislip while getting rid of Anderson sounds like a pretty good deal. Though I'm still hesitant to give up on Zach, this trade would balance out the roster and still give us a good future with Telfair, Miles and Redd as he's still a fairly young guy.


Shareef started one game when Zach got suspended and he did nothing in that game, furthermore our core group of players are 22 years old and younger. Sure this can make us good immediately but Sebastian Telfair, D Miles, and the rest of our guys are young enough to not have to worry about exchanging our franchise player to make the playoffs. We aren't championship contenders with or without this trade, there is absolutely no reason to trade our franchise guy in Zach Randolph for someone who can shoot and not much more. I think we can get good enough value for Shareef down the line to not have to worry about pulling the trigger on this deal. 

It's entirely premature to trade Zach Randolph at this stage of his career. Zach is about 2 years younger than Redd, he averages roughly 2 points less but averages a lot more rebounds and is an inside presence you can go to. This trade makes Portland a perimeter team, keeping Zach insures you have at least a solid inside game as Zach can score a very good percentage of the time. Right now, this trade makes us pretty good but not great, down the line this will absolutely screw us, our core players are young so this trade makes no sense. You can find similar players in this league to Redd, players like Redd are pretty common and I think we can find a suitable player to fill that role.


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

I'm not a fan of trading Zach by an means... In fact I think it's a STUPID idea.... but if he IS traded, this is a trade I could sign off on...


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> You can find similar players in this league to Redd, players like Redd are pretty common and I think we can find a suitable player to fill that role.




Name 5 guys in this league that obtainable that can shoot like Ray Allen that is that young

go on.. I am waiting??? :wait:

getting players like Redd are not that easy.. if it were we would already have them on the roster


----------



## bencollins (Sep 30, 2002)

*If..*

If the Bucks get either Woods or Outlaw in this deal, then this deal is absolutely perfect for both teams and fills all gaps that both teams have. Even if it's just a rumor, it's very well thought out.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>NateBishop3</b>!
> I'm not a fan of trading Zach by an means... In fact I think it's a STUPID idea.... but if he IS traded, this is a trade I could sign off on...


Agree. Today seems like the wrong day to trade Zach, but if we are going to trade him, it would be better to get Redd/Mason than some broken-down former star (for example, Payton) or assorted trash.

barfo


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Q Rich
Age = 24
Height = 6'-5"
FG% = 41.1% 
3FG% = 35.0%
FT% = 71%
A = 1.4
S = 0.79


Derek Anderson
Age = 30 in July
Height = 6'-5"
FG% = 41.3% 
3FG% = 33.8%
FT% = 85.7%
A = 3.7
S = 1.27


Paul Pierce
Age = 27 in Oct
Height = 6'-6"
FG% = 43.2% 
3FG% = 35.6%
FT% = 78.9%
A = 3.6
S = 1.79


Ray Allen
Age = 29 in July
Height = 6'-5"
FG% = 44.8% 
3FG% = 40.1%
FT% = 88.5%
A = 4.0
S = 1.27


Michael Redd
Age = 25 in August
Height = 6'-6"
*FG% = 45.7% 
3FG% = 40.5%
FT% = 83.8%*
A = 1.7
S = 0.95

Redd
:allhail:


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> Ah, Blazer fans make me sick, seriously. Always quick to get rid of someone because of a mistake or two.


Well, personally, I'd hate to see Zach traded right now. But DAMN that's a nice trade for the Blazers. Redd and D-Mase would REALLY improve this team. And SAR is only a small step down from Zach as a player. I have a feeling he would flourish as the starting PF here as he did in Vancouver and Atlanta.

Please believe me, I'm ignoring Zach's latest incident when I say that deal is VERY attractive for the Blazers. I'd be happy if Nash pulled the trigger on this one (if it's even real). But I'd also be happy if he didn't.

PBF


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Do we have any other sources reporting this rumor?

PBF


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> ......Right now, this trade makes us pretty good but not great, down the line this will absolutely screw us, our core players are young so this trade makes no sense.


What does this mean? I don't understand what is being said, if anything.



> You can find similar players in this league to Redd, players like Redd are pretty common and I think we can find a suitable player to fill that role.


Nonsense! What NBA have you been watching?


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Mason is pretty good too

He seems to be a take it to the rack kind of guy... lots of FT attempts


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

The person who posted this thread, can you give us more info. The way you put it, it sounds like a deal that WILL happen. Or is this just hot air. Funny how this rumor isnt coming out of Portland or Milwalkee.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

What a bad trade for the Bucks! 

BLAZERS
PG: Nick Van Exel...Damon Stoudamire...Sebastian Telfair
SG: Michael Redd...Richie Frahm
SF: Desmond Mason...Ruben Patterson...Qyntel Woods...Travis Outlaw
PF: Shareef Abdur-Rahim...Marcus Haislip
C: Theo Ratliff...Joel Pryzbilla...Vladimir Stepania

BUCKS
PG: T.J. Ford...Mike James...Maurice Williams
SG: Derek Anderson...Erick Strickland
SF: Keith Van Horn...Toni Kukoc
PF: Zach Randolph...Joe Smith...Zaza Pachulia
C: Dan Gadzuric...Daniel Santiago...Zendon Hamilton...Lonnie Jones


----------



## CelticPagan (Aug 23, 2004)

Perhaps Redd for Zach straight up isn't that attractive for Portland, but when you factor in that we are getting RID of DA, getting Mason, and ALSO keeping a pretty fine PF in Rahim(assuming this deal would make him stay). Good deal for Portland!

Mason would sort of make Miles and Patterson more expendable. But we could also feature a very athletic and energetic lineup of Mason, Patterson and Miles!

It would shore up our perimeter defense, and give us a great outside shooter. If we made this deal, I think we'd be a 50 win team.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Actually Redd shot 4% less on 3 pointers than Ray Allen did last season. Also I never said that there were players JUST like Redd that we can get to fill that role, it's a tough role but there are players similar in both terms of needs and wants that Redd has. We need shooting, a lot of players can help us with that. Who would you rather build your team around? Zach Randolph or Michael Redd? You would rather have a big than a small. Now I like Redd but I think trading Zach Randolph for him is completely insane. Wally as crappy as his contract is could fill the role of a shooter, he shoots a better 3 ball than Redd. Here's my list of attainable shooters that can fill the role at the SG position. Some come with bad contracts but it ain't my money, it's only the 4th richest man in the world's money, that is why some of you shouldn't care. 

Wally Szczerbiak
Ricky Davis
Rodney White
Jim Jackson
Shane Battier 
Lucious Harris
Anfernee Hardaway
Joe Johnson
Ronald Murray


Those are some players just off the top of my head that could fill the SG role, let's be realistic, all the players I listed would be much better suited to start at SG than Derek Anderson. If DA plays like he did last season then my statement is true, if he plays like the year before last season then we could get by with him starting. A lot of the players I listed have issues such as contracts, age, injuries, questionable characters, inexperience but they would all be fine starters at SG. They are also all attainable either with a straight across trade or perhaps a three- way deal.


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

*I think the rumor is false*

Uh ...

I'm disappointed in my fellow Blazer fans.

Did anyone even think to confirm the source even exists?

Here's a link to 950 AM in Philadelphia, which according to the rumor originator, is a Sports Radio station.

Great Stars! Great Songs! Philly's Station of the Stars 

Call me a cynic, but I'm not believing a rumor that apparently launched from a station whose web site boasts a photo of Barry Manilow in the upper right corner.

My guess? The original poster made it up.

Kudos to him for making up a rumor that works financially. Shame on those of us who fell for it without doing about 2 minutes of searching on google.

Sheesh. :no: 

-Pop


----------



## 4-For-Snapper (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> What a bad trade for the Bucks!
> 
> BLAZERS
> ...


Miles?


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> I don't like it, Shareef last season showed nothing that proved he could start.


He put up 20 and 10 as a starter for like 7 straight years before last season. Give the guy a break, he's pretty darn good.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>4-For-Snapper</b>!
> 
> 
> Miles?


I suppose, I don't know too much about his situation, though. I just know that he wants to get paid and the Blazers have said they'll match any offer. 

I'm thinking they might include Miles in a sign-and-trade for another big man if this Milwaukee trade went down.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>CelticPagan</b>!
> 
> It would shore up our perimeter defense, and give us a great outside shooter. If we made this deal, I think we'd be a 50 win team.


Well if all you want is a 50 win team then go for it, sure. I don't think that is a valid reason to trade the face of the franchise though. It would make an immediate impact to both teams but in the long run Portland is better off keeping Zach Randolph. The Bucks can't do anything because they have no inside game, Zach would address their need for an inside scorer.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

*Re: I think the rumor is false*



> Originally posted by <b>SodaPopinski</b>!
> Call me a cynic, but I'm not believing a rumor that apparently launched from a station whose web site boasts a photo of Barry Manilow in the upper right corner.


I'm in favor of trading for Manilow, but only if we get a draft pick and two members of ABBA.

barfo


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> BLAZERS
> PG: Nick Van Exel...Damon Stoudamire...Sebastian Telfair
> SG: Michael Redd...Richie Frahm
> ...


You could be right.. but for step one.. I think it would be this. Mason is no sharp shooter but a slasher.. could do pretty well at the 3 I would think

PG Stoudamire, NVE, Telfair
SG Redd, Mason, *Woods
SF Miles, Patterson, *Khryapa
PF Rahim, Haislip, *Outlaw
C Ratliff, Pryzbilla, Stepania

*Reserves
Overseas Ha, Monia, Sinonovic
Cut Frahm


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

*Re: I think the rumor is false*



> Originally posted by <b>SodaPopinski</b>!
> Uh ...
> 
> I'm disappointed in my fellow Blazer fans.
> ...


It's obvious that you havn't been around very long. We're like piranas here, give us just a tiny hint of a hypothetically possible rumor that might come true and we're on it like old people on Denny's.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

this isn't a trade that I'd be entirely against. not entirely for, but not entirely against.


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

*Re: Re: I think the rumor is false*



> Originally posted by <b>barfo</b>!
> 
> I'm in favor of trading for Manilow, but only if we get a draft pick and two members of ABBA.
> 
> barfo


Nah. We should create cap room to sign Tony Bennett, who is a free agent next offseason.

-Pop


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

*Re: I think the rumor is false*



> Originally posted by <b>SodaPopinski</b>!
> Call me a cynic, but I'm not believing a rumor that apparently launched from a station whose web site boasts a photo of Barry Manilow in the upper right corner.


Nicely done. Kind of surprising nobody checked it out since I'm guessing we all use the internet a lot. But it's a lot more entertaining to talk about a rumor than try to look into the source. So I can understand why nobody else did.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Re: I think the rumor is false*

well..


----------



## 4-For-Snapper (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Re: I think the rumor is false*



> Originally posted by <b>barfo</b>!
> 
> I'm in favor of trading for Manilow, but only if we get a draft pick and two members of ABBA.
> 
> barfo


:rofl:

I'm seriously laughing so hard I'm crying. I'm not sure why, it just struck me as funny.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

*Re: I think the rumor is false*



> Originally posted by <b>SodaPopinski</b>!
> Uh ...
> 
> I'm disappointed in my fellow Blazer fans.
> ...


Well, I asked if any other sources were also reporting it (above). Does that count?

PBF


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SodaPopinski</b>!
> Uh ...
> 
> I'm disappointed in my fellow Blazer fans.
> ...



http://www.wpen.com/sports.shtml

Did you bother to click on the SPORTS hyperlink?????

its a sports station as well


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

*Re: Re: I think the rumor is false*



> Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's not a sports station. It's a music station that broadcasts Phillies baseball and St. Joseph's basketball. It's similar to 1190 KEX in Portland - normally a news station, but also broadcasts OSU Beavers football and basketball games. But they don't have sports talk radio.

Nothing on that site leads me to believe they have any type of Sports Talk. At least nothing reputable.

-Pop


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

*Re: Re: I think the rumor is false*



> Originally posted by <b>ebott</b>!
> 
> 
> Nicely done. Kind of surprising nobody checked it out since I'm guessing we all use the internet a lot. But it's a lot more entertaining to talk about a rumor than try to look into the source. So I can understand why nobody else did.


Before assuming this is false, it might make sense to just listen to the station - looks as though there's a talk section, and sports commentators.


----------



## BrooklynBaller (Jun 25, 2003)

I don't know about you guys, but I'd rather have Michael Redd + Joe Smith than Michael Redd + Des Mason + Marcus Haislip. IMO, adding Joe Smith would address the Blazers' needs better (i.e. potential backup 4 & 5) than adding either Mason and/or Haislip. We are already overloaded at the 2 & 3 ... where would Mason play? Do you sit D. Miles ... or do you sit Redd? Both of those guys need at least 35 mpg, IMO, to be effective. And what about developing Outlaw and Woods? Des Mason, just does not address any of our needs.

Bottom line, I would probably veto this trade, unless it included Joe Smith.


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

*Re: Re: Re: I think the rumor is false*



> Originally posted by <b>Public Defender</b>!
> 
> 
> Hold on buying the guy a beer, there, ebott. Looks to me like there is a sports radio station at 950 on Philadelphia's AM dial - assuming this link can be believed. I checked their headlines, and there wasn't any mention of this rumor, but then again, as any good journalist will tell you, rumors aren't news.


What would make you believe that's a Philly station? KJR-AM is Seattle's sports radio station. Besides, the call letters for any radio or television station east of the Mississippi river has to begin with a "W" and any station west of the Mississippi has to begin with a "K."

-Pop


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: I think the rumor is false*



> Originally posted by <b>Public Defender</b>!
> 
> 
> Hold on buying the guy a beer, there, ebott. Looks to me like there is a sports radio station at 950 on Philadelphia's AM dial - assuming this link can be believed. I checked their headlines, and there wasn't any mention of this rumor, but then again, as any good journalist will tell you, rumors aren't news.


I dunno, can you get a cheesesteak in Seattle? KJR's address is up yonder. 

barfo


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: I think the rumor is false*



> Originally posted by <b>SodaPopinski</b>!
> It's not a sports station. It's a music station that broadcasts Phillies baseball and St. Joseph's basketball. It's similar to 1190 KEX in Portland - normally a news station, but also broadcasts OSU Beavers football and basketball games. But they don't have sports talk radio.


http://www.wpen.com/sports.shtml is a valid radio station in Philly

An if KEX had reported it I would give it some respect. If this station is similar to KEX why not? Its been awhile since I listened to KEX but they use to have regular sports reports every hour... I am thinking it was 2x an hour.

So why not this one? Philly is a much larger city than PDX... this station could very well have legitimate sports reports on it despite being a music station. It is a possibility.


But if it has anything to do with Sam Smith... then I agree with you :nonono:


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: I think the rumor is false*



> Originally posted by <b>Public Defender</b>!
> Before assuming this is false, it might make sense to just listen to the station - looks as though there's a talk section, and sports commentators.


I don't know about that. Take a look at the link for their people. Seems to me that they're all music folks. Even the guy that does the show after the Philly's game and days when there isn't a game is a music guy. None of them seem to be sports people. 

But I guess it would only take 1. And there's no guarantee that music folks are only going to talk about music. If it's after a Philly's game and somebody calls in talking about sports and that Kim Martin fellow heard something from a friend of a friend he might very well spew it out.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Does it have to be one of their radio personalities talking about it? maybe not... why not just a sports report on the hour or half hour or such thing...

it may have been just a brief mention of it... not a sports talk show

:whoknows: its just speculation it seems


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

You all know where I stand in reguards to Zach. I love the kid, and wouldn't trade him for anything if I were the GM,but I am not the GM. I am against any trade for Zach, but IF this was a legit trade, it wouldn't be too bad, mainly just because Desmond Mason would boost up our depth at the wing posistion.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>MAS RipCity</b>!
> You all know where I stand in reguards to Zach. I love the kid, and wouldn't trade him for anything if I were the GM,but I am not the GM. I am against any trade for Zach, but IF this was a legit trade, it wouldn't be too bad, mainly just because Desmond Mason would boost up our depth at the wing posistion.


Wow, you really threw me off with that


----------



## Backboard Cam (Apr 29, 2003)

I need to know a little bit about the front office people who work at this radio station before I decide on the trade.


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

Redd is only 2 years older, an all-star SG, and one of the best shooters in the game. But when was the last time we traded a young big for a small? I know we have a different management now, but during the Whitsitt years he never traded big for small. Redd is the perfect player you need WITH Randolph. But obviously we don't have anything to pry him away from the Bucks w/o Zach.

But if we don't hear anything about the rumor today in Hoopshype, Oregonlive, Insider, ect.....This "Rumor" is BS


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

First off I Love Manilow lol 

this deal is bogus no way do the blazers trade Zach because of what his brother did


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> this deal is bogus no way do the blazers trade Zach because of what his brother did


If they trade Zach, it isn't because of his brother, it's because of Zach. In this instance, Zach is accused of lying to the cops, and trying to get his brother away from the crime scene when he knew he was the shooter.

Throw that on top of the other 4, 5, or 6 other stupid decisions he's made and it's reasonable for any GM to start questioning his IQ and probability he'll stay out of jail in the furture or not.

Man, I love ZBO's game, desire, and work ethic, but off the court he isn't learning a damn thing about staying out of trouble.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> I don't like it, Shareef last season showed nothing that proved he could start.


Except putting up a solid 20/10 in Atlanta. Also, I guess we ought to throw out the prior seasons. 

You have to remember, Reef wasn't awesome off the bench, but he didn't play horrid. For his minutes he played fine. He was definitely out of character and out of stride, but what do you expect?

But saying he hasn't shown he could start is asinine.



> I really don't like this, value wise it is great but Zach has one of the best work ethics in this league.


It is amazing how often this is brought up. Yet, EVERY FAN says this about their players. 



> He is 22 years old and puts up 20 and 10, why the hell would u want to mess with that?


Reef was 22 and put up 23 and 9. Go figure.

Play.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

This is the west not the Hawks


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> Shareef started one game when Zach got suspended and he did nothing in that game, furthermore our core group of players are 22 years old and younger.


2 games.

And he did fine ... averaging something like 19/9. 

And last time I checked - one needs a MUCH larger statistical sample size in order to form a valid statement.

Why ignore the past?



> our franchise guy in Zach Randolph


I'm not sure everyone agrees that Zach is "franchise" material.

Play.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> This is the west not the Hawks


Again, look at the past. He's played and flourished in the West.

I know you think that Zach's underwear smells like roses - but he isn't that special.

After Wallace left, his numbers dropped. He didn't average 20/10 after the trade. He averaged 19/9 or something like that. 

Reef has NEVER had the supporting cast or a well-coached team - and this Blazers team is far and above the best team he has been part of. I'd bet if he had the supporting cast and a year here, he'd flourish. 

But, I'd rather him leave because of the organization and the way it treated Reef.

But, as an unbiased observer - you make this trade. It instantly makes Portland a contender for 4-5 years - if it can keep the peices healthy and stable.

Zach will NEVER be a franchise player - just as Reef will NEVER be a franchise player. They are top tier, but just not THE MAN. Which means, they need a supporting cast. This trade gives a supporting cast to Reef.

Play.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> this deal is bogus no way do the blazers trade Zach because of what his brother did


You know cimalee, I really appreciate your contributions to this forum. But sometimes you really frustrate me. I'm not saying this to take a jab at you. It's just that you seem to be completely ignoring the fact that Zach lied to the police on multiple occasions. Here in Oregon we call that "Obstruction of Justice". And here, as in Indiana, that's a crime in and of itself. Are you ignoring this because you just haven't been paying attention, or because you don't want to believe it?

But you're right about one thing (I think): The Blazers should NOT trade Zach as a gut-level reaction to the incident. If they trade him at all, it should be because it improves the team overall. Period.

PBF


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ProudBFan</b>!
> 
> Here in Oregon we call that "Obstruction of Justice". And here, as in Indiana, that's a crime in and of itself.
> 
> PBF


If Onstruction of Justice isn't considered a crime in Washington D.C., then it isn't really a crime!


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Iwatas</b>!
> 
> 
> If Onstruction of Justice isn't considered a crime in Washington D.C., then it isn't really a crime!


Somebody lied in Washington D.C.??? Good luck convincing these guys....

I'll be voting one liar in and one liar out, come Nov.


----------



## Crimson the Cat (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>rawzzy</b>!
> ... will send Michael Redd, Desmond Mason, & Marcus Haislip to Portland in exchange for Zach Randolph, Derek Anderson, and Portland's 2005 1st rounder.


If this is true, I'd be ecstatic.

I've felt for sometime that Randolph's game is limited, due to his size. Rahim, IMO, is better all-around forward (how any of you can discount the incredible season Rahim was having with Atlanta, prior to the trade, is beyond me!). Obviously, Randolph will improve and Rahim has fewer good years ahead of him. But, in Redd, Portland gets a legit stud at off guard. His defense can be picked on just as Randolph's, but I still feel Redd can improve, whereas Randolph's size won't let this happen.

Portland becomes very balanced after this swap. And, the Blazers now have at least 3 seasons to find a young big to replace SAR.

On top of this Portland moves Anderson for Mason. Are you kidding me? Talk about pulling the wool over the Buck's eyes. I like Anderson, but his injuries are annoying, and his contract is further hampering. Mason's quite a good guard/forward in his own right.

Our 2005 draft pick is probably worth it for Haislip.

This is a no brainer in my book.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

This trade makes Portland a better team to start the season.

SOmething that would be different in the offensive scheme though is this. Redd becomes your first scoring Option with Shareef as the second scoring option

Redd and Mason, both, are class acts, and Desmond would be an instant fan favorite. Not a great outside shooter, but he only made 39 attempts from 3 last year and ended up shooting 47% from the field, and he gets to the line.

Haislip...not great but still young could be ok in 10mpg or portland can use Theo and Step or Pryz to fill time.


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Blaze_Rocks</b>!
> 
> I'll be voting one liar in and one liar out, come Nov.


Touché!!!


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> SOmething that would be different in the offensive scheme though is this. Redd becomes your first scoring Option with Shareef as the second scoring option


I'm not sure that I would do this, if I am the head coach. I know I have a Reef bias, but even without - and if we were talking about Randolph, I would say the same thing. 

Working inside out is always smarter than outside in. Reef has always been able to bear the scoring burden, it normally came down to the rest of the team contributing and not sitting around on offense and defense and turning it over. 

I think the team would be smart doing a distribution of:

Reef 17-20 SPG
Redd 14-17 SPG
Miles 10-12 SPG
Theo 5-8 SPG
Damon 9-12 SPG

That is what I would think the most effective team would be. 

As long as the team played defense and didn't turn it over at record pace - then Portland wins well over half the games.

Play.


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

I have several thoughts:

1) If the Blazers are set on trading Randolph, then getting someone like Redd seems to me to be the nearly perfect return. Young SG with a very reasonable contract who is an excellent outside shooter.

2) I don't think the trade as constituted works under the cap because of Desmond Mason. He's on the first year of his extension off of his rookie scale deal, which makes him a BYC player. I'm not sure why Real GM doesn't list him as such.


----------



## Sánchez AF (Aug 10, 2003)

Great trade for the Blazers is you trade Zach you still have SAR and he can do Zach's work plues a great scorer with Redd


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Blaze_Rocks</b>!
> I'll be voting one liar in and one liar out, come Nov.


No.....you can't do that you have to vote for both Kerry and Edwards, they are running together.

Four more years!! : )


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

Seriously,

This is a either a big hoax/rumor. Or it is the bright shining light at the end of the Blazer Tunnel.

This trade would create a very good balanced team that can be together for 4-5 years. 

I wonder if this offer would be acceptable to those in Milwaukie?

I really like it - even better than the Wally/Kandi rumor - because of my perception of the contacts.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Although I highly question the validity of this deal, I think it could benefit POR greatly, and here is why IMO.

I like Zach as a player, and IMO he could and very well might improve into an even better player. But POR is in a very interesting\strong position, b\c we already have another very talented PF in SAR, who is only 27 years old. Zach is 23, so four years difference in age is not that huge of a difference IMO.

Another benefit is that SAR has an expiring contract, giving POR great flexibilty going into 05' FA, although I don't think POR would look to dump ALL of their expiring contracts (NVE, Damon, SAR, Theo AND Miles) in order to capitalize on it. But it does give POR leverage when looking to make moves (FA signings, trades, specifically at this years trade deadline).

SAR can easily replace Zach's numbers at the PF position IMO, particularly in the near term & at age 27, SAR is still well within his prime playing days. The addition of Redd, would open up the lane for both SAR and Miles, provide POR with the shooter that they need & would give POR great balance in scoring, with Redd's shooting, Miles' drives and SAR low post game.

Even better IMO, is that next years draft class is looking to be VERY STRONG at PF. Now, not all of the players I listed will declare, but you can bet a majority of them will (and they always do). So the potential to acquire a young PF to groom as an eventual replacement for SAR is very good IMO. A guy like Splitter, Francis, Aldridge or Turiaf for example.

Also, Haislip who has been dissapointing to date, could serve in the near interim as a b\u to SAR, and if he shows something, could prove to be a starting PF (best case scenario) or a solid b\u PF (likely scenario) for POR down the road. 

Losing DA & gaining Desmond Mason is a win for POR, no matter how you look at it. I would prefer that POR not give the 05' draft pick away, instead offering an 06' pick or placing some sort of restrictions on the pick (like starting it out as a top 20 protect, and then scaling down to lotto & then top 3 protected pick). 

Trading Zach in this type of scenario would be good for POR 

1) Getting an all star level player back at a position (SHOOTING guard) of need in Michael Redd, who is only 2 years older (25) than Zach.

2) We have another PF, in SAR who is more than capable of picking up his production and who at age 27 is still in his prime playing days.

3) We are able to exchange an older DA (30) in return for a
younger and more active, less injury prone, better defending player in Desmond Mason (26), who just happens to have some NW ties.

4) We balance out the roster, defining players roles more clearly. With Damon & NVE handling the PG duties, Redd & Mason at the SG, Miles and Pattersen at SF, SAR and Haslip at the PF and Ratliff and Pryzbilla at the center position.

5) Next years draft is strong in PF (as is next years FA class), offering the opportunity to bring in another young PF type to groom as an eventual replacement for SAR.


FYI

*Draft*

C - Johan Petro, Kosta Perovic, Predrag Samardziski, Channing Frye, Paul Davis

*PF -* Tiago Splitter (euro), Wayne Simien, Lamarcus Aldridge, Lawrence Roberts. Andrew Bogut. Yi Jianlin (china), Ronny Turiaf, Randolph Morris, Fran Vasquez (euro), Andray Blatche (HS), Uros Slokar (euro), Josh Boone, Torin Francis, Ike Diogo, Erazem Lorbek (euro), David Lee, Sean May, Drago Pasalic (euro), Leon Powe, Shelden Williams, Eric Williams, 

Plus Martynas Andriuskevicius (a PF\C) & Chris Taft (PF), both potentially high lottery picks.

Some "swing" type players who could play SF\PF like Nemanja Aleksandrov, Hakim Warrick, Oleksiy Pecherov, Damir Omerhodzic, Charlie Villanueva & Tahirou Sani

*Free Agency*

*PF - * SAR, Tyson Chandler (RFA), Pau Gasol (RFA), Donyell Marshall, Troy Murphy (RFA), Vladimir Radmonovic (RFA), 

C - Kwame Brown (RFA), Jason Collins (RFA), Eddy Curry (RFA), Samuel Dalembert (RFA), DeSagna Diop (RFA), Dan Gadzuric, Brendan Haywood (RFA), Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Zaur Pachulia, Theo Ratliff, C.Trybanski


----------



## blazerboy30 (Apr 30, 2003)

^^^^^^ Good post. 

I agree with all of it. 
I would even add that we improve our defense at the PF spot with SAR over Zach.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> Although I highly question the validity of this deal, I think it could benefit POR greatly, and here is why IMO.
> 
> I like Zach as a player, and IMO he could and very well might improve into an even better player. But POR is in a very interesting\strong position, b\c we already have another very talented PF in SAR, who is only 27 years old. Zach is 23, so four years difference in age is not that huge of a difference IMO.
> ...


I've been thinking lately and I'd have to agree. I am really underestimating SAR, and I guess I'm on of the few too admit it.

Even if Miles walks next year, with this deal we can still start Mason.

DMase's NBA Bio-Bio 

DMile's NBA Bio-Bio 

Pretty much the same player, cept Mase is 4 years older. Anyways, Redd will do wonders for this team. Great post Murph.

BFreak.


----------



## The Pup (Jan 25, 2004)

And if the Blazers draft Al Jefferson, this backup, future starter debate is all a mute point. I miss Warkentein already.....


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Blazer Freak</b>!
> I've been thinking lately and I'd have to agree. I am really underestimating SAR, and I guess I'm on of the few too admit it.


WOW! And who says miracles don't happen!

Heh.

Seriously, if I were a Portland fan, I would think this trade is a trade made in heaven. 

Play.


----------



## el_Diablo (May 15, 2003)

I'd do this trade any day.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ProudBFan</b>!
> 
> 
> You know cimalee, I really appreciate your contributions to this forum. But sometimes you really frustrate me. I'm not saying this to take a jab at you. It's just that you seem to be completely ignoring the fact that Zach lied to the police on multiple occasions. Here in Oregon we call that "Obstruction of Justice". And here, as in Indiana, that's a crime in and of itself. Are you ignoring this because you just haven't been paying attention, or because you don't want to believe it?
> ...





Im not saying he didnt Lie , Lying is wrong but half of you are acting like he pulled the trigger thats what bugs me


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

Another thing to consider is that Zach and his agent feel he is a Max contract kind of player. If Zach is paid between 10-14 million a year for 4-6 years, is he still as valuable? I have mixed feeling about this trade, but I have been worried that we would overpay Zach and he would not improve his defense or passing. 
I really like Mason coming and DA leaving. I like DA, but he is way overpaid and takes too much of our cap space.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

BTW you can vote For Kerry and Cheaney or Bush and Edwards if you want...they are seperate on the ballots, and can in fact be elected that way.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> BTW you can vote For Kerry and Cheaney or Bush and Edwards if you want...they are seperate on the ballots, and can in fact be elected that way.


part of me wishes we could vote for president and vice president seperately. 

But than I realize that'd make the situation even worse.


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

This trade would make the Bucks' backcourt extremely thin:

Pg: Erick Strickland/ Mo Williams (TJ Ford out with Spinal Stinosis)
Sg: Derek Anderson / Mike James ? (They have NO backup SG)

I'm having a tough time believing this is legit, talent wise it's a good trade both ways. But it leaves the Bucks very thin in the backcourt.


----------



## Goldmember (May 24, 2003)

"Balance" Bleh. A balanced pile of crap is still a pile of crap. That new Blazer team may look more balanced, but it still doesn't get out of the west. 

I don't think there's anything that could plummet my enthusiasm for the Blazers more than the team handing the reigns of the front court to a whining career loser who publically took a dump on the team (not to mention playmaker will never leave). At the same time shipping out the first truly special home grown player we've had since Drexler. 

I think we've all been over-saturated with the international game and its onus on outside shooting. The NBA game however is still won in the paint and Zach might as well have "Dutch Boy" tattooed on his asse. 

Michael Redd is a nice player, but all I see is: poor man's Ray Allen. 

How bout them Washington Wizards trading Chris Webber for Mitch Richmond? They too could take the chance of trading one of their young stud PF's because they had another one to take his place. That strategy sure paid off for the Wiz didn't it? Shoot, they did it *twice*, Rasheed Wallace for Rod Strickland anyone? 

Lesson learned. Don't trade big for small. 

...Well, unless that big is named Shareef - who can't fit in and doesn't want to fit in because fitting in might mean you win more than 15 games and that might scare the man silly.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

If Nash trades Zach he should be fired


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Goldmember</b>!
> "Balance" Bleh. A balanced pile of crap is still a pile of crap. That new Blazer team may look more balanced, but it still doesn't get out of the west.


I'm not so sure that they wouldn't.

Although you all hate Stoudamire, he is still an above average PG. 

You'd have a certified stud SG.

Mason/Miles are BOTH energy players that can contribute each night. (although I like Mason more than Miles)

You'd have a PF capable of 20/10 on any night. 

Probably the most dominant defensive center in the West, and probably the number 2 overall center in the west.

The west ain't what it used to be. 



> I don't think there's anything that could plummet my enthusiasm for the Blazers more


Well, since management has publically stated that their number one goal is to meander to Goldmember's enthusiasm, you've probably quashed any trades that even existed.



> handing the reigns of the front court to a whining career loser who publically took a dump on the team


Who's that?



> At the same time shipping out the first truly special home grown player we've had since Drexler.


I'm glad *YOU* have so much loyalty, because I guarantee Zach doesn't. 



> I think we've all been over-saturated with the international game and its onus on outside shooting. The NBA game however is still won in the paint and Zach might as well have "Dutch Boy" tattooed on his asse.


Yes, and Reef is what they refer to as a "perimeter" player. 

Sorry, but you're wrong. The game is won on solid teamwork, the ability to not turn the ball over and a combination of an inside-out game. No one-dimensional team has won the championship lately.



> Michael Redd is a nice player, but all I see is: poor man's Ray Allen.


That's hilarious. What you just said is: "A poor man's 'best shooter in the league'". That's a HARSH comment.

Everyone here talks about Zach's youth this, Zach's youth that ... well, Redd isn't exactly over-the-hill. He's a lot younger than Allen is right now. 



> How bout them Washington Wizards trading Chris Webber for Mitch Richmond? They too could take the chance of trading one of their young stud PF's because they had another one to take his place.


Their backup was never as tested and proven as Reef is. Reef has consistantly shown he can put up 20/10. 



> who can't fit in


How so? I didn't see that there was any attempt to really integrate Reef into the offense. Saying Reef can't fit in - is just silly.



> doesn't want to fit in because fitting in might mean you win more than 15 games and that might scare the man silly.


Wow. You are so right. You're a modern day freaking Edgar Cayce.

Play.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> If Nash trades Zach he should be fired


Any backup to this or just a personal opinion?

If Nash trades Zach and Zach turns into a 30PPG guy and goes to the playoffs year in and out and Portland mires in the bottom of the league ... then I agree.

But, that ISN'T going to happen.

If this trade were real and went through - the team makes the playoffs. 

Play.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> If Nash trades Zach he should be fired


I don't understand why you would think Nash needs to be fired if he pulled off this deal. It seems fair and while Zach is an up and coming player in the league, Reef is really not a drop off. If in fact this deal is on the table it would help the Blazers IMO. Heck, I am even a Randolph fan, but adding Redd and Mason would be a huge step forward for this team, you have to admit that. :yes:


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>HOWIE</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't understand why you would think Nash needs to be fired if he pulled off this deal. It seems fair and while Zach is an up and coming player in the league, Reef is really not a drop off. If in fact this deal is on the table it would help the Blazers IMO. Heck, I am even a Randolph fan, but adding Redd and Mason would be a huge step forward for this team, you have to admit that. :yes:


I agree, and I even admited that in a post earlier in this thread, didn't I PlayMaker?

I mean I am a big ZBo Fan, but SAR isn't a huge dropoff from Zach. We get Redd who is still young at 25, and Mason who can be a great backup to Miles and Redd. Hell, if we wanted to be uber athletic we could go:

Theo/SAR/Mason/Redd/Miles.

Haslip is still young, and since he could get some PT here as the backup, maybe he could flourish?? 

BFreak.

PS:Also, in Kmurph's post, he even said one thing that is very important, if we keep our 05 1st then, this upcoming draft has quite a few PF's.


----------



## Ukrainefan (Aug 1, 2003)

For some reason i'm not that excited about Desmond Mason and i actually like D.A., the team seems to do better when he's out there, he gets a lot of assists for a SG.

It was suggested in another post that Joe Smith would be a good fit for us as a backup C/pf. Here is a possible trade that works on Realgm:

We trade Ruben Patterson, Zach Randolph, Qyntel Woods and Vladamir Stepania.
We receive Joe Smith, michael Redd and Marcus Haislip.


----------



## Terrible (Jan 3, 2003)

Here's something to think about guys,

PG- Van
SG- Redd
SF- Miles
PF- SAR
Center- Theo

There would be no team in the NBA that could afford to let us shoot from the outside, between Van and Redd it would be murder!!!!!!!!!


Once Van and Redd get going SAR and Darius would be allowed to go nuts in the paint.

I love Zach but Redd and Mason already having SAR makes this trade to good to pass up.

Damon we can bench for a taller Van, Redd to shoot the long ball and SAR and Darius to clean up. That's a better team guys than what we have now!


----------



## trifecta (Oct 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> 
> I'm not so sure that they wouldn't.
> 
> ...


I completely agree.


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

*Nash job will be defined by Zach.*

John Nash has a really tough situation. Zach has improved every year for the last 3 years and is putting up Allstar numbers. The problem is that he has been involved with several off and on the court issues that may show he does make smart decisions. Cimalee stated if Nash trades Zach he will get fired, but if the same thing could happen he signs Zach to a max or near max contract and he doesn't play up to his contract and continues to have off the court issues. If he trades him now and Zach gets his act together and is a all star and we don't get a Allstar back, he will be compared to the Zach for DD trade forever and lose his job. What he does this year will define John Nash as Portlands GM IMO.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Lots of good comments in here... and yes, very good KMurph and Play... I agree with most all of your posts

I have been a big Rahim fan before his trade here. And was disappointed at his results here. If this trade did go down, I would be sketical if he can go back to his career levels he has had. I just wonder if bridges are burnt. He in some ways did not get a fair trial. Cheeks never gave him enough mins, but then again they need to be earned.

If Rahim can go back to those levels and stay here after this year. We can probably add a few more significant players and be pretty good in a couple of years. Good inside outside balance is important, just ask the USA Olympic team.

If Rahim harbors bad feelings about the last half of the year and goes to another team next year, we have nothing. Maybe not even a chance to get a solid PF via FA. We will have gone from 2x good PF to none.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Why don't we work a Shareef and D Miles for Redd and fillers deal? I think that would be a great way to go honestly. Giving up Zach is a huge mistake, Shareef we need to get rid of anyways, and D Miles as much as I like him would be easy to replace.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> Why don't we work a Shareef and D Miles for Redd and fillers deal?


Because it isn't realistic.

Reef doesn't have the youth of Redd and isn't exactly at the peak value.

Miles is exactly what you say ... replaceable. So they wouldn't be amped to get him.

Play.


----------



## RG (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> Although you all hate Stoudamire, he is still an above average PG.


What are you basing that on? That's a stretch even if you are just saying as a guard in general, but as a PG it's just crazy. You might make it fly if you say "offensively, as an individual".


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>RG</b>!
> What are you basing that on?


The rest of the league.

The guy rarely turns it over. He has a decent 3+ to 1 TO ratio. 

He makes decent reads, but nothing spectacular. He can make the post entry pass, which a lot of PGs seem unable/unwilling to do. 

Sure, he has dumb moments and shoots too early into the shot clock. On the reverse, he also has the tendency to overplay the clock. 

But, overall - he's above average.



> That's a stretch even if you are just saying as a guard in general, but as a PG it's just crazy.


No, it isn't crazy. People in Portland seem to think All-Star or bust. 

Damon isn't all-star level - but he is certainly manageable. People don't really realize that Damon isn't a terrible PG. He isn't superb, but he is above average. 

Play.


----------



## The Pup (Jan 25, 2004)

> The guy (Damon) rarely turns it over. He has a decent 3+ to 1 TO ratio.


Damon rarely turns it over because he rarely passes. It's like me saying my Grandma is a safe driver because she doesn't get in car wrecks......she never drives! :yes: 

OK, all kidding aside, Damon is not the worst PG in the league. What does bother me is his inability to recognize mismatches. Last year over a long stretch of games, it was documented how many times he shot and his percentage vs. Theo, Zach and Miles and how many attempts they got and their percentage. 

Damon was the second highest volume shooter to Zach (but it was close) while he was by far and away the lowest in terms of shooting percentage. Everytime he jacked it up took a shot away from someone who during that stretch was shooting a minumum of 10% higher. 

Damon is really quite good in an open court came but when it comes to half-court, playoff basketball, his weakness get very exposed.


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

Damon is NOT above average. I think that +/- numbers are very telling...

http://www.82games.com

Damon is one of only a handful of starting point guards with a negative +/- rating (-2.7).

There are only two starters from last season (by my count) with worse ratings - this being Damon's supposed best season:

Jason Williams (-5.5)
Alvin Williams (-4.3)

According to this metric, Damon was the third worst starting point guard in the league in terms of positive team impact.

There are many backups who beat him as well.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Blazer Ringbearer</b>!
> Damon is NOT above average. I think that +/- numbers are very telling...


+/- numbers actually don't tell very much at all. It tells how the overall team scores compared to how the overall team gets scored on. It cannot be used to pinpoint one person, as this person is in multiple lineups. 

So, using that statistic isn't the best choice.

The only true comparison one can make is PG-to-PG on statistics and overall decision making skills. He's average to above average statistically. He's average in decision making skills.

Using the same metric, it would show that Shareef Abdur-Rahim is a +1.3 while Randolph is a -.9. 

Statistics are VERY misleading.

My point is that Damon is capable enough to handle this team as a PG, if they lose Randolph for Redd.

Play.


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

Sure...

According to individual raw averages, Damon is slightly above average:

PPG #13
RPG #6
APG #11
SPG #15

However, he also played a lot of minutes:

MPG #5

To me, that swings him below average in terms of efficiency. For individual percentages, he is almost exactly average:

A/TO #15
FG% #15
3P% #15
FT% #4

So there you go, according to the individual offensive stats, you can make a decent case for Damon being an average starting point guard.

However, if you take into account what he does to the defense and how poorly he actually runs the offense this goes out the window. 

Find me a metric that takes into account his effect on the team that shows him to be average.

+/- stats are hardly perfect, but they lend insight into something that raw individual numbers cannot. Raw #'s say that Damon is an average point guard in terms of individual offensive production - that's it.

The +/- stats suggest that he is at the bottom of the league in terms of positive effect on the team. 

I think this assertion is well backed up by glancing at his obvious faults - very poor defense, shoots early and often at a poor %, dribbles down the clock, etc...


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

BTW, 

I think that Reef/Randolph +/- comparison is telling and not an outlier...

It tells me that Reef is a better team player and defender than Randolph which is something that I am sure that you agree with.


----------



## BealzeeBob (Jan 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> 
> He can make the post entry pass, which a lot of PGs seem unable/unwilling to do.


IMO, Damon is TERRIBLE at making the entry pass into the post. That's a big part of why we needed Pip to initiate the offense.

Go Blazers


----------



## bornaries (Jul 24, 2004)

*Bad trade with Z-Bo*

I can't belive all this hype for this so called trade.

First off you don't trade a big for a small and secondly all this
trade is made of is Z-bo and our first round pick for Redd..
everything else is just filler and since we had a better record
than they did last year do I really want there filler...

Z-bo was one of only 6 NBA players to avg. 20-10
the others are KG,Duncan,Brand and both O'neals would
you trade any of them and a first round pick for Redd...

Also Z-bo only started for one year he will get better.

You also have to think about the end of the year, SAR is a fa
and he doesn't want to be here we would have no PF.
Besides this trade gives us what 5 pts but 3 less rbg and
3 less asst. If DA had been healthy all year he probably would
have avg more then he did which would make this trade even
worse for us


----------



## blazerboy30 (Apr 30, 2003)

so, why did you start a new thread for this???


----------



## bornaries (Jul 24, 2004)

Because it seemed that the other threads were all trying to
out do each other on how great this trade is.. This one is on
why it isn't such a good idea


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

Im wondering the same thing bornaries 


Im just confused


----------



## bornaries (Jul 24, 2004)

confused about the trade or thread


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

about the Trade , Zach has so much upside and wants to win


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

Im tired of seeing opeople say Zach didnt take the blazers to the Playoffs , neither did Lebron James and Im sure the Cavs want to trade him also in his 1st year getting playing time


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

*Re: Bad trade with Z-Bo*



> Originally posted by <b>bornaries</b>!
> I can't belive all this hype for this so called trade.
> 
> First off you don't trade a big for a small and secondly all this
> ...


:clap:


----------



## Captain Obvious (Jun 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> Im tired of seeing opeople say Zach didnt take the blazers to the Playoffs , neither did Lebron James and Im sure the Cavs want to trade him also in his 1st year getting playing time


Don't start comparing Zach to LeBron, that's ridiculous.


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> Im tired of seeing opeople say Zach didnt take the blazers to the Playoffs , neither did Lebron James and Im sure the Cavs want to trade him also in his 1st year getting playing time


that's my favorite post of the day. 

man i love blazers' fans. :yes: :laugh:


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

*Re: Bad trade with Z-Bo*



> Originally posted by <b>bornaries</b>!
> First off you don't trade a big for a small


This is the most overused cliche in forum history. 

What does it mean? When does it apply?

I would gladly trade Stepania for Allen. 

You make the trade if one believes it makes the team better -- regardless of size and reasonable age.



> everything else is just filler and since we had a better record than they did last year do I really want there filler...


What does that mean?

Portland had a better record than Orlando, would we not take McGrady? That's just an absurd comment.



> Z-bo was one of only 6 NBA players to avg. 20-10
> the others are KG,Duncan,Brand and both O'neals would
> you trade any of them and a first round pick for Redd...


Zach isn't even in the same league as KG, Duncan or Shaq (and probably Brand). I might trade Jermaine for a young dead-eye shooter, if I had a solid backup capable of 20/10. 

You forget that Zach's numbers plummeted after the departure of Wallace. He averaged less than 19/10. That's half of a season. 

Zach is good, but he isn't in their league. Not by a long shot.



> Also Z-bo only started for one year he will get better.


That's not necessarily true. I've seen plenty of players decline after one or two seasons. He could go down to injury. He could just sign the next contract and become the spokesperson for McDonalds.

There is ZERO proof he will ever be better than 20/10. Not that there is anything wrong with that.



> You also have to think about the end of the year, SAR is a fa and he doesn't want to be here we would have no PF.


That is a distinct possibility and about the only solid point made so far.



> Besides this trade gives us what 5 pts but 3 less rbg and
> 3 less asst.


You can't look at a trade in numbers like that. Things are never a 1-to-1 tradeoff.



> If DA had been healthy all year he probably would have avg more then he did which would make this trade even
> worse for us


If my aunt had a penis ...

Play.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> Im tired of seeing opeople say Zach didnt take the blazers to the Playoffs , neither did Lebron James and Im sure the Cavs want to trade him also in his 1st year getting playing time


Cim,

There is NO comparison. 

LeBron fills the stands. LeBron sells jerseys. LeBron is a marketing product.

Lebron has far more skill than Zach ... and that's just counting what's he's shown. He has so much more hidden potential that Zach can't even sniff his sock drawer. 

Your point is absurd.

Play.


----------



## RG (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My bad, I thought you'd actually watched this guy play.


----------



## Goldmember (May 24, 2003)

Playmaker, you don't care what's good for the Blazers, you only care what's good for your boy Reef. IMO your opinions regarding Zach, Shareef and the Blazers in general are so tainted by bias that they have zero merit.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Goldmember</b>!
> Playmaker, you don't care what's good for the Blazers


True.



> you only care what's good for your boy Reef.


In the world of basketball, yes.



> IMO your opinions regarding Zach, Shareef and the Blazers in general are so tainted by bias that they have zero merit.


That's untrue. I've prefaced most of my statements with "I'd rather Reef be gone, but if I were a Blazer's fan ..." 

And don't even get into bias. My bias happens to stay with a particular person, but you don't think the vast majority of people here don't have their biases that make their opinions hold "zero merit".

I'd bet if you ask the majority of people here - they'd agree that while I stand by Reef, I also make a lot of basketball sense. So, seriously... get off your high horse.

Play.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>RG</b>!
> My bad, I thought you'd actually watched this guy play.


I did.

Unfortunately, I've watched Reef play a LOT more and thus I've gotten to see REAL terrible PGs by proxy. 

You want to talk about PGs doing nothing or just turning it over - go back and watch the Grizzly games. You want to watch a PG defer and run out the shot clock, go watch JT in Atlanta last year. 

Damon, by comparison, could win a world championship. 

Personally, I think people here undervalue him. I wouldn't want him at his current paycheck. I wouldn't want him over 10 PGs in the league, but he isn't on the bottom 10, that's for sure. 

I think it really all comes down to poor coaching. I think Damon is playing the way coach Cheeks wants. With no solid coaching or gameplan, the PG is basically going to look like the idiot. But, I think the blame lies with the coach in this instance.

Play.


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> 
> 
> Cim,
> ...


:laugh: :no: 

Cavs fan?


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Blaze_Rocks</b>!
> :laugh: :no:
> Cavs fan?


Not even close to a Cavs fan. In fact, I don't even like any of last years "new kids" except for the late round picks. They are too full of themselves.

But - comparing Lebron to Zach? That's just plain silly. 

Lebron sells. Zach doesn't. That's the end of it. 

But, when you look at a purely potential and talent standpoint as well ... it isn't even close.

Play.


----------



## Terrible (Jan 3, 2003)

Our team just like the Olympic team can't make a three. Every team in the NBA knows that and they play zone to show just how bad our shooting really is.

If we can trade Zach for Allen or Redd while still having SAR putting up 20/10 a night it's a no brainer. We need a pure shooter we have two good PF's. 

What's best for the TEAM here guys?

A PF who doesn't pass the ball but gets ya 20/10 a night on a loseing team; or a PF that might be a little older but has similar #'s and knows how to make guys like Darius, Van and Theo better while still looking for a wide open Redd to knock down the easy three?


SAR doesn't have Zach's sniffer for scoreing but he will make the whole team better being on the court.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

Someone posted that with the departure of Wallace, Zach wasn't able to take his team to the playoffs. And because of that we should trade him in favor of keeping Rahim. Couldn't that arguement be flipped as well? Because of the wallace trade that brought Rahim to portland, rahim wasn't able to make the difference to get us into the playoffs? 

I'm not convinced that we would be better off with Rahim. I think Zach is still young, I think he's still maturing in basketball knowledge. I think Z is going to do awesome this year. He's a guy that wants to score. needs to score. Exactly what we wanted from Rasheed and he wouldn't deliver. now we are knocking Z for taking on the traits that we were asking for?

I say fill in around him good players, shooters he can pass the ball to and know it's gonna be a good shot. Work with him on passing out of the double, triple and as seen in an early game against houston last year, quadruple teams....and we will see his assists go up as the shooters drop bombs. 

There has been criticism about his turn overs and forcing up shots near the hoop. A bull in a china shop at times. Surrounded when the defense colapses. All because we don't have the weapons to ease the defense. They don't have to be honest and stay with their men on the outside.

I know this is preaching to the choir, particularly the need for shooters, but I think it directly applies to the Zach situation. I think his numbers will continue to rise as the pressure is removed from him by a properly constructed team.

Keep Zach.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

Mason vs Anderson is a wash. Both didn't play up to expectations. 
Mason is younger but has a longer contract paying him pretty big bucks.

Randolph for Redd is clearly in Milwaukee's favor talent-wise. It's big for small and although Redd was an all-star last season it is still surprising to say the least that he has one of the worst +/- stats in the entire league.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

This trade rumor is being reported on Real GM


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

bump

seems to be gaining momentum


----------



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

All these web pages are quoting the oregonian. which god only knows where quick heard it from. So just because another site comes out and quotes the original, don't get too convinced that it is gaining momentum.

-Mr. Chuck Taylor


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

This is not a good trade. Reef can not hold his own in the west. Ever since he joined our team, he has been lazy in getting back on D, he stops and whines to the officials during game play, drops the ball at least 3 times a game, and was seemingly inconsistent on his mid-range jumpers.


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

BTW, thanks to a discussion on Real GM's forum for CBA/Salary issues, Real GM has now updated their information on Mason and reinstated him as a BYC player.

As such, I still believe that the proposed deal does not work under cap rules. I just can't see any way that Mason could be involved in the deal. That probably means that if the trade happens, it'll be Joe Smith coming to the Blazers.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>So Cal Blazer Fan</b>!
> BTW, thanks to a discussion on Real GM's forum for CBA/Salary issues, Real GM has now updated their information on Mason and reinstated him as a BYC player.
> 
> As such, I still believe that the proposed deal does not work under cap rules. I just can't see any way that Mason could be involved in the deal. That probably means that if the trade happens, it'll be Joe Smith coming to the Blazers.


Especially figuring that Joe would be the odd man out in Milwaukee..and Portland too really.

Milwaukee after deal
PG Ford
SG Mason
SF Van Horne
PF Randolph
C Gadzuric

IMO makes them a much better team than they were with Mase coming off the bench

Portland after trade

PG Stoudamire
SG Redd
SF Miles
PF Abdur Rahim
C Ratliff

IMO better team than with DA at the 2 and Randolph at the 4.



> Originally posted by <b>MAS RipCity</b>!
> This is not a good trade. Reef can not hold his own in the west. Ever since he joined our team, he has been lazy in getting back on D, he stops and whines to the officials during game play, drops the ball at least 3 times a game, and was seemingly inconsistent on his mid-range jumpers.


 Shareef not hold his own in hte west? Your kidding right? Dude has played 5.5 of his 8 years in the west and his career numbers are 20ppg and 8rpg in 37mpg.

As a Blazer he averaged 10ppg and 4.5rpg in 22mpg which is about 15mpg lower than his career average. Do the Math and take his minutes to his career minutes as a starter and he goes for about 17ppg and 7.5 rpg. Granted that is down a bit but we are talking about a guy who was also trying to fit into a new system. I'd say if he starts in Portland he easily comes back to 18-19ppg and 8-9 rebounds.

Also lets look at turnovers...Zach ranks #10 in the NBA for turnovers per game with 3.05 and also settles for the mid range J too often. Shareef averages 1 less TO per game and ranks in the top 13 for Free Throws, Free Throws per 48 minutes and free throw percentage...The # of FT's he takes is indicitive of taking to the rack.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

If the Blazers can turn Zach into Redd and Mason (which I don't know if it works, or if the Bucks would be that stupid), and you have SAR who would be the PF, thats a good trade.

For starters, SAR can hold his own against the west. He's not going to be a top notch PF, but most likely, neither is Zach. Can Zach be one? Sure, but he can also just be the same as what he is now (which isn't bad, on the court). 

What it boils down to is, is the massive upgrade at SG worth the minimal "downgrade" at PF? 

If push comes to shove, I'd say yes it is worth it.


----------

