# Lewis officially opts out of Seattle [merged]



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2883178


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

*Re: Lewis officially opts out of Seattle*

Do you think he might take a mid level exception to win a championship??


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

*Re: Lewis officially opts out of Seattle*



mgb said:


> Do you think he might take a mid level exception to win a championship??


Hah.


----------



## BenDavis503 (Apr 11, 2007)

*Re: Lewis officially opts out of Seattle*

This has got to mean we are taking Oden and getting Lewis  (crosses fingers)


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: Lewis officially opts out of Seattle*

I personally see a sign and trade with the Knicks in his future. Charlotte is not going to give him the max and neither will Orlando, but New York probably will pony up the dough.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

*Re: Lewis officially opts out of Seattle*



HKF said:


> I personally see a sign and trade with the Knicks in his future. Charlotte is not going to give him the max and neither will Orlando, but New York probably will pony up the dough.


Didn't he say he wants to win?


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

*semi-OT: Rashard ops-out!*

thats right he opts out of his contact...hhhhmmmmmm ready to move to portland is he?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: Lewis officially opts out of Seattle*



zagsfan20 said:


> Didn't he say he wants to win?


He is leaving 10 million on the table and his team is going to draft a difference maker in Kevin Durant (or Greg Oden). If Lewis were on the Knicks they would make the playoffs, but the truth is, Lewis wants to be paid 15+ million for the next 5-6 years and even if a team like the Hawks were offering and he'd take it. He wants that $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

I think that this might just be significant. I don't hear about any other players opting out at this time to become unrestricted free agents. Today isn't a deadline or anything? It seems to me that this plays well for Portland.

Postulating Pros:
1. Portland has Nate McMillan, I've been looking back over seattle PI articles trying to find ones with friction between the two. So far at the end of McMillans run in Seattle it doesn't seem like it. SO perhaps they ended on good terms and perhaps Rashard might want to play for Nate again...even seek his team out.
2. Portlands fortunes are dramatically changing. They are a young up and coming team who is going to make some noise really fast. If your a young vet who's wanting in on the action...this is the place to be.
3. His opt out comes rather soon on the heels of the draft. Might it be said that in seeing that Seattle might in all likely hood get Durant (his position) and Portland picking up Oden that he declared himself available to give portland as much time as possible to work out the sign & trade?
4. Portland is close to seattle so it's not a dramatic change.
5. SF is the position that Portland is perhaps weakest in? A Perfect fit?
6. Could play along with Seattle native, ROY!

Cons:
1. Getting a deal done will be difficult because we are over the cap.
2. Perhaps his relationship isn't as close to Nates.
3. Is he Me first or Team first?
4. Perhaps he has his heart/mind set on somewhere else further away.
5. CTC baby.

All that aside, If we could swing a sign and trade, or a three way deal that passed Zach on to someone else. I am plenty pleased with a lineup of 

Oden
Aldridge
Lewis
Roy
Jack

Though, I'm not entirely certain that Sergio won't possibly beat out Jack for the starters spot. Pick up the tempo of the game even a little, with Aldridge and Oden defending the middle with their blocking ability and you have a team that is itching to fast break. Lewis is a finisher, Roy is a finisher, Sergio is a deliverer. Oden blocks the shot, tips to Sergio who is already at half court who passes ahead to the streaking Lewis for the easy layup!

Oden and Aldridge would really bring up our defense dramatically. From what I've read Lewis isn't the greatest defender. But then neither is Z-bo so that aspect is sorta a wash.

I think that Portland is going to make a big push to try and get Lewis. I think todays news is the tip of the hat from Lewis saying....go ahead and try to make it happen.


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Well, it does sound like Paul Allen is willing to spend again. I would hate to get stuck in another bad contract though and Lewis isnt worth that much dough.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

If Lewis is willing to take less money than guys like Antwan Jamison, Michael Redd and Shawn Marion (who are all being paid almost 16 million per), it's a good deal. However if he wants to be signed and traded so he can make 6 years/96 million dollars, I think there is only two teams that would do it for what he can bring to the table (Dallas and New York). While Paul Allen doesn't mind paying the luxury tax, I just don't see him ponying up that kind of bread for a guy who has always been a #2 option and doesn't really play any D.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Spoolie Gee said:


> Well, it does sound like Paul Allen is willing to spend again. I would hate to get stuck in another bad contract though and Lewis isnt worth that much dough.


I don't understand this attitude.

for the 1,000,000th time: IT'S NOT YOUR MONEY!

If Paul Allen wants to overpay to get talent to Portland, who the **** cares? We're over the cap anyway, we'll be over the cap for the next 10 years as it is...

If Paul Allen wants to get talent...welcome it. Why would you be concerned about what he's worth?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

The only problem with thinking that it's not someone else's money, is that when you give out albatross contracts they become incredibly difficult to move once those players become injured or problem childs (case in point Darius Miles). Reasonable deals are still more ideal because they are better assets should things change.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

HKF said:


> The only problem with thinking that it's not someone else's money, is that when you give out albatross contracts they become incredibly difficult to move once those players become injured or problem childs (case in point Darius Miles). Reasonable deals are still more ideal because they are better assets should things change.


Again...who cares? Cut him. Waive him. Trade him for an even worse contract. Whatever. Still not our $$$.

And BTW, we're not talking about Darius Miles (million dollar body, 10 cent head, 10-12 pp), we're talking about Rashard Lewis (sounds like a great guy, good lockerroom influence, 20-22 ppg)

Obviously, there's a big difference. So, you lock Rashard up to a max contract. At WORST, that's overpaying by a couple mill per year. Not a big deal to get an all star caliber player. Even better when it's still not your cash.


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Fork said:


> I don't understand this attitude.
> 
> for the 1,000,000th time: IT'S NOT YOUR MONEY!
> 
> ...



I know its not my money!!! That has nothing to do with it! I hate getting stuck with players like Damon, Miles and Ratliff with their bloated contracts that handcuff the organazation for years.


----------



## UOSean (Jul 7, 2005)

HKF said:


> The only problem with thinking that it's not someone else's money, is that when you give out albatross contracts they become incredibly difficult to move once those players become injured or problem childs (case in point Darius Miles). Reasonable deals are still more ideal because they are better assets should things change.



EXACTLY!! It's better down the road if for some unforseen reason we want to trade and need the pieces. Look at Zach. Dude is talented but he's overpaid (along with the offcourt issues) which makes him less attractive for potential trade partners. If zach were making 8 mil instead of 13 mil. He'd be gone in a second.

The thing that baffles me about lewis opting out now is Seattle is in the middle of a management crisis. The don't even have a GM, or a coach for that matter!! During times like these teams don't want to add big $$ contracts like the one Lewis is asking for, even for a sign and trade. The only teams that could sign him without a trade would be Orlando which is probably gonna use their $ for Darko and Charlotte who already have G wallace and AMMO.

If we can get Lewis on the cheap. I say do it. Otherwise we don't need someone who demands $15 mill, doesn't play D and needs the ball in his hands to contribute.


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Fork said:


> Again...who cares? Cut him. Waive him. Trade him for an even worse contract. Whatever. Still not our $$$.


It still eats up cap room. I dont give a %^&* how much Allen spends, I just dont want us to get painted into a corner with bloated contracts that cant be moved.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

In an ideal situation, the size of the contract only impacts trade value, NOT what a player is worth to his own team. Portland is not an ideal situation. 

Once the media and the sheeple "fans" figure out that the team is paying max $$$ for a guy who is basically a SF version of Zach, all hell is gonna break loose.

This is the problem with dealing with people who can't grasp the difference between an overpaid/productive player (Zach) and a truly worthless player (Miles). I doubt there is another city in the NBA where the media is so universally uninformed and unsophisticated. 

:soapbox: (I know....I'm ranting again!)


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

If you can get Lewis for a relatively decent price, go for it. But let's not pull a New York and overpay the majority of our players. Pay them what they're worth.


----------



## blzr610 (May 24, 2006)

I just don't see us being able to get a sign and trade done in this situation. Seattle has to agree to accept the traded players, and they could demand Roy or Aldridge to kill the deal instantly. Don't sign and trades also have to be 1 for 1 trades? Who besides Zach could equal Rashard money by himself?


----------



## blazers2285 (May 2, 2005)

*Is it possible now for us to sign lewis as a free agent and trade zach for a pick*

say since lewis has opted out of a contract we sign him for a deal starting not above 15 million and then we oviosuly caint keep zach becasue of salary cap so we trade him for a mid to late first round pick and nap a good back up pf or a combo guard + filler. this is a deep draft and if we cain't get rj through a trade could this be a possible solution. We don't want to undervalue zach but this could be a major move that would make us stronger becasue of the second pick. We need a team that could sign zachs hugh contract however. Maybe new york will take him?


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

*Re: Is it possible now for us to sign lewis as a free agent and trade zach for a pick*

Getting rid of Zach wouldn't get us below the salary cap. The most we could offer Rashard Lewis would be the mid level exception, which usually around 4.5 million per year. We would have to convince Lewis to sign for significantly less than he made last year, which would be very hard to do.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

HKF said:


> The only problem with thinking that it's not someone else's money, is that when you give out albatross contracts they become incredibly difficult to move once those players become injured or problem childs (case in point Darius Miles). Reasonable deals are still more ideal because they are better assets should things change.


I think KP and the Blazers are pretty much aware of whether Rashard will be a problem child or would be injury-prone if they were able to get him.
This isn't John Nash handling things anymore, and I trust Pritchard to the fullest that he absolutely knows what he's doing.
And with Nate having coached Rashard, I'm sure Nate knows exactly what he's about.

I can't see how much more perfect Lewis would fit in here, right into the SF spot. A pretty good 3-point shooter, can post up, can flat out score and I love the fact that he's 6-10 and he's only 27, soon to be 28.

Our front line would be 7-0, 6-11 (Aldridge) and 6-10... you kidding me? I'm just getting giddy thinking about it. And to me, this really seems realistic that it could happen unlike most trades/rumors that get posted on here. Lewis opting out makes it even closer to becoming a reality...


----------



## drexlersdad (Jun 3, 2006)

*Re: Is it possible now for us to sign lewis as a free agent and trade zach for a pick*

It IS possible to trade for lewis with a package NOT including ZBO. Something like a resigned Magliore + Martell + Pick might get it done if he is leaving anyway


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

I don't know, it sounds like there will be many a SF to be had one way or the other this year.

I think Lewis may be an answer at a reasonable cost, but I'd like to see what the BEST answer is and try and obtain that.

Any chance for Wallace (Gerald) or perhaps Denver would be persuaded to dump Carmelo? I know it's an extreme long shot, but you've got to at least explore the possibilities.


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> I think Lewis may be an answer at a reasonable cost, but I'd like to see what the BEST answer is and try and obtain that.


Honestly, I don't think there's a better fit in the league, assuming we draft Oden. Lewis is as good of an outside shooter as anyone at the position, is a very good slasher and has a pretty solid inside game, and has the length and athleticism to be effectively disruptive on the defensive end (i.e. not a liability with two 7'ers behind him).

I'm very intrigued by the timing of his opting out... Being so long before the signing period and Seattle having no management team in place to negotiate with, that seems to indicate he doesn't plan on returning. He's making it be known very early that he's available... Conventional wisdom says he will want a large contract, but you would hope that common sense (and his agent) has told him that few teams can offer him that, so working closely with Seattle (i.e. waiting for a management team to come together) on a S&T is his best bet at getting it. I can't help but wonder if he is considering a smaller contract to play for a winner?

Dan


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Why wouldn't Shard just sign a 1 year MLE, then get paid big time with us the next season? I really never understood why players didn't do that more often. If he is really that hung up about the money instead of being hung up on winning, then I don't want him. JUST WIN BABY!


----------



## Webster's Dictionary (Feb 26, 2004)

I think I would actually rather have Gerald Wallace. Can you imagine a defense of Jack (maybe slightly below average) Roy (average and getting better) Wallace (Great defender) Aldridge (Good, could be great) and Oden (by all reports a great defender already). I think that we would completely lock teams down with that lineup, never mind the fact that I think that every one of them can score a lot of buckets too. Add on top of that that Wallace will probably be cheaper and we need to find a way to get him in a Blazer uni next year.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

MAS RipCity said:


> Why wouldn't Shard just sign a 1 year MLE, then get paid big time with us the next season? I really never understood why players didn't do that more often. If he is really that hung up about the money instead of being hung up on winning, then I don't want him. JUST WIN BABY!


Because that kind of deal is against NBA rules. IIRC, he would have to be with the Blazers for 3 years before his Bird rights kick in. In the meantime, the team has to be careful what kind of promises they make him. The T'Wolves had something like *4* first round picks taken away from them for violating that rule! :eek8:


----------



## RW#30 (Jan 1, 2003)

yakbladder said:


> Any chance for Wallace (Gerald) or perhaps Denver would be persuaded to dump Carmelo? I know it's an extreme long shot, but you've got to at least explore the possibilities.


There are no possibilities with Melo. Let's not go crazy here and think all NBA teams will bow to the Blazers now and give up their best players for 2nd rounders.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

Webster's Dictionary said:


> I think I would actually rather have Gerald Wallace. Can you imagine a defense of Jack (maybe slightly below average) Roy (average and getting better) Wallace (Great defender) Aldridge (Good, could be great) and Oden (by all reports a great defender already). I think that we would completely lock teams down with that lineup, never mind the fact that I think that every one of them can score a lot of buckets too. Add on top of that that Wallace will probably be cheaper and we need to find a way to get him in a Blazer uni next year.


The one thing about Gerald Wallace is he can't shoot the 3-ball. He's a great athlete and all, but I think the Blazers are looking for a SF who can stroke the ball, which is why I'd like to see Lewis here.

Jack is a little inconsistent from the outside, and while Roy said he's going to work on his outside shot, which will just add to how good he will be, I'd rather him be the creator/slasher/scorer on this team.
It's what made Udoka so effective offensively. When he was making his corner threes, the offense was rolling.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

dkap said:


> I can't help but wonder if he is considering a smaller contract to play for a winner?


He's opting out so he can get max money from Seattle. This is his payday moment... he's not too old, his production has been consistently good for the last few seasons, and there are actually a few teams under the cap that might be able to sign him.

I think the 'accepting smaller contracts' period will come after this deal runs out.


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

Wallace is an interesting option. Honestly, I'd be happy with either Lewis or Wallace at the 3. I actually have a tough time deciding between the two. It all comes down to the number 3.

Wallace is 3 years younger. He'd likely be around longer when our young guys are in their primes.

Lewis is 3" taller. While I admit, the thought of a 7', 6'11, 6'10 front lin sounds appealing, Wallace is actually a better defnder and better rebounder and Lewis doesn't really use his size to post up smaller forwards very much, he's more of a shooter/slasher.

3-point shooting - this is the BIG one in Lewis' favor. Wallace hardly ever even attempts any 3s and when he does he makes them at an awful percentage. Quite simply he isn't a 3-point threat and will not spread the defense like Lewis would. Lewis shoots the 3 at both high volume and a good percentage. Offensively, he's not just a better scorer than Wallace, his outside shooting would really open things up inside or Oden and Aldridge.

So, the question then becomes what do you want from the 3 spot - offense or defense? Also, do you want your 3 to help you win more now, or do you want him to still be around (and still very productive) 4 - 5 years down the road.

Personally, I'm leaning toward Lewis. I think his outside shooting would really spread the court and open things up for Oden and Aldridge. Without that aspect, teams would just pack the lane and dare us to beat them from the outside - which negates much of the advantage we'd get from Oden and Aldridge ofensively. Also, I think Lewis helps us win more games now, and possibly get deeper in the play-offs sooner. With a line-up of Oden, Aldridge, Lewis, Roy and Jack, I think we win ~52-54 games next year (yeah, I know that sounds optimistic, but you'd be adding Oden at center, Lewis at the 3 and Roy, Alridge and Jack would all be a year more experienced, and hopefully healthy). That may be enough to get homecourt and make it to the second round - if not in 2008, than surely in 2009. Why is that important? Success in May/June helps attract free agents - which may make it easier to replace Lewis 4 - 5 years from now when he's on his last legs and we are pushing for a title every year.

So, I'd prefer Lewis, but would also be happy with Wallace.

BNM


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

Samuel said:


> He's opting out so he can get max money from Seattle. This is his payday moment... he's not too old, his production has been consistently good for the last few seasons, and there are actually a few teams under the cap that might be able to sign him.


Which is why it makes even more sense to take Oden and "force" Seattle to take Durant. With Durant, Lewis becomes redundant and there's no way they would want to give him a max. deal when he's about to be replaced with future 10-time all-star and likely multiple time scoring champion. It would be insane to give Lewis a max. deal for 5 or 6 years when you just drafted Durant.

So, unless they want to let Lewis walk and get abolutely nothing, a sign and trade is their only other option. For us, ideally that means Zach, but even if we don't land Lewis, having him on the market means more quality small forwards available and increases our odds of landing one.

BNM


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

For Lewis (or rather his agent), the problem is finding a team that either has enough cap room to make a big offer or one that is willing to pay top dollar who _also_ is able to give Seattle something they want, and match salaries in the process.

Seattle is going to offer him some amount (I'd guess $11 mil or so first year with max incrementals), and that will be the baseline offer. Charlotte can pay both Wallace and Walter Hermann and still have enough left to give Lewis max or very near max if they choose. I sort of doubt that they will go from being so super-cheap to spending that much all of a sudden, but if their owner wants to do it he can make it happen. If that's the course he chooses, then their offer could be the new baseline.

NYK might be willing to pay max, but they have nothing to entice Seattle into a sign and trade, so it's a no go. Would Seattle rather take back the matching contracts of Steve Francis, or some combo of Jamal Crawford and Malik Rose, or just let Lewis walk? I think they would choose thin air over the overpaid players NY could send them.

Orlando is an interesting possibility IMO. They don't have the free space to offer Lewis max or near max, but if they S&T Darko to Seattle simultaneously, it would leave them with enough space and potentially give Seattle an asset they want in return. Salaries wouldn't have match since Orlando does have enough cap space to squeeze this deal out.

Portland has Zach Randolph to offer and to match salaries with. I think Seattle would balk at taking him straight across, even if the alternative was nothing, but if a third team could be found that wanted Zach and would give Seattle an asset they want, it could get done. I don't really know what Seattle's priorities are right now, other than drafting Durant, but it's imaginable that a deal could be found.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

What if they wanted to sign and trade Lewis for Roy and Lafrentz and say we don't want Zach Randolph? Would it be advantageous then?


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

HKF said:


> What if they wanted to sign and trade Lewis for Roy and Lafrentz and say we don't want Zach Randolph? Would it be advantageous then?


I don't know if I understood all of the questions you posed, but I wouldn't give up Roy for Lewis. Not saying Roy's better than Lewis at this point (although I think he will be), but Roy fits more with the youth movement of the team, and is the only really proven player in our backcourt.


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

*Re: Is it possible now for us to sign lewis as a free agent and trade zach for a pick*



NateBishop3 said:


> Getting rid of Zach wouldn't get us below the salary cap. The most we could offer Rashard Lewis would be the mid level exception, which usually around 4.5 million per year. We would have to convince Lewis to sign for significantly less than he made last year, which would be very hard to do.


I know he doesn't want to sign for that little, but he might have the same problem Joel had last offseason. Only a few teams have the cap space to sign him, several of them already have a decent SF and the teams that don't might go after Vince Carter or one of the other free agents instead. It is possbile that a sign and trade could be worked out with another team, but I don't know how many other teams would be interested in doing that. I wouldn't bet on it, but it isn't impossible either.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

There is one more issue I have not heard mentioned. If the Blazers can swing a Randolph + picks type of deal that would be ok, but we have to remember that in 3 more years, Roy, Aldridge and Sergio will all be up for contracts, and I can see Roy and Aldridge getting max deals. Sergio not far behind. And then the year after Oden will almost certainly get a Max contract. So if we are unable to trade Zach and still sign Lewis to say a 5 year 15 mil start contract, then the Blazers might not be able to keep sign the real prizes down the line. It is true that this issue is far off and a lot can change between now and then, but the Blazers have to at least be keeping this in mind. Otherwise in 4 years the Blazers would be paying around $75 million for just those 5 players.

I think that if Zach can be traded, perhaps with Webster and the 2008 first round pick, that might be a good deal. But we simply can't expect PA to fund another mega-payroll.


----------



## graybeard (May 10, 2003)

Nate McVillain said:


> There is one more issue I have not heard mentioned. If the Blazers can swing a Randolph + picks type of deal that would be ok, but we have to remember that in 3 more years, Roy, Aldridge and Sergio will all be up for contracts, and I can see Roy and Aldridge getting max deals. Sergio not far behind. And then the year after Oden will almost certainly get a Max contract. So if we are unable to trade Zach and still sign Lewis to say a 5 year 15 mil start contract, then the Blazers might not be able to keep sign the real prizes down the line. It is true that this issue is far off and a lot can change between now and then, but the Blazers have to at least be keeping this in mind. Otherwise in 4 years the Blazers would be paying around $75 million for just those 5 players.
> 
> I think that if Zach can be traded, perhaps with Webster and the 2008 first round pick, that might be a good deal. *But we simply can't expect PA to fund another mega-payroll.*


*
*

Wrong. Don't worry about Paul Allen's pocketbook, it's the biggest in the business. He's done it before with lesser blazer teams. Now he owns everything blazers. There will be a bigger fanbase for these kids than we have seen since the championship season in 77.
The $15 million that Shard will cost us will be pocket change compared to the revenue the blazers will get when they win the championship... it'll blow the roof right off the Rose Garden.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

LameR said:


> I don't know if I understood all of the questions you posed, but I wouldn't give up Roy for Lewis. Not saying Roy's better than Lewis at this point (although I think he will be), but Roy fits more with the youth movement of the team, and is the only really proven player in our backcourt.


I mean what if Portland said we'll trade you Zach Randolph, but Seattle feels they are comfortable with their platoon of Collison and Wilcox and said we'd prefer Brandon Roy and Lafrentz for a traded Lewis? I have the feeling that Seattle doesn't want Zach, so if they can't do it for Zach, they'd have to trade some other assets. 

Maybe Jack, 2008 pick and Lafrentz, would get it done, I'm not sure.


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

dudleysghost said:


> For Lewis (or rather his agent), the problem is finding a team that either has enough cap room to make a big offer or one that is willing to pay top dollar who _also_ is able to give Seattle something they want, and match salaries in the process.


I was thinking the same thing. Here are my thoughts.



dudleysghost said:


> Seattle is going to offer him some amount (I'd guess $11 mil or so first year with max incrementals), and that will be the baseline offer.


I suspect that is about the most he will be offered, but he supposedly part of the reason he was willing to opt out was because he was unhappy with Seattle, the management and the losing. The team won't lose as much next season with Durant, but that is because they will have a new upcoming star who plays the same position as Rashard. Which would win out, his greed or his competitive spirit?



dudleysghost said:


> Charlotte can pay both Wallace and Walter Hermann and still have enough left to give Lewis max or very near max if they choose. I sort of doubt that they will go from being so super-cheap to spending that much all of a sudden, but if their owner wants to do it he can make it happen. If that's the course he chooses, then their offer could be the new baseline.


Even if they can give him a large contract after signing those players, as UOSean said, they will already have Adam Morrison and Gerald Wallace. Would they have room for him?



dudleysghost said:


> NYK might be willing to pay max, but they have nothing to entice Seattle into a sign and trade, so it's a no go. Would Seattle rather take back the matching contracts of Steve Francis, or some combo of Jamal Crawford and Malik Rose, or just let Lewis walk? I think they would choose thin air over the overpaid players NY could send them.


I agree.



dudleysghost said:


> Orlando is an interesting possibility IMO. They don't have the free space to offer Lewis max or near max, but if they S&T Darko to Seattle simultaneously, it would leave them with enough space and potentially give Seattle an asset they want in return. Salaries wouldn't have match since Orlando does have enough cap space to squeeze this deal out.


Would they rather sign and trade Darko for Rashard or just keep Darko for themselves? I think they'd rather have Darko myself.



dudleysghost said:


> Portland has Zach Randolph to offer and to match salaries with. I think Seattle would balk at taking him straight across, even if the alternative was nothing, but if a third team could be found that wanted Zach and would give Seattle an asset they want, it could get done. I don't really know what Seattle's priorities are right now, other than drafting Durant, but it's imaginable that a deal could be found.


We could offer a sign and trade for Zach, and they might or might not take it, or we could offer a lesser trade and wait them out. I don't think we should offer much more than Zach though, we have all the leverage with them, we could even try to demand that they give us more. If Rashard and his agent can't make one of the other deals work, he will have to choose between Seattle's money and possibly the MLE with a team he likes better. Our team might be on the top of a free agent's list for once. Which one would he choose?


----------



## Mateo (Sep 23, 2006)

*Re: Lewis officially opts out of Seattle*



HKF said:


> I personally see a sign and trade with the Knicks in his future. Charlotte is not going to give him the max and neither will Orlando, but New York probably will pony up the dough.


I think New York is also the likely destination. I think he would like to go to Houston but I'm not sure that they have the pieces. They seem to (mistakenly) think Battier is fine in the SF spot.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

HKF said:


> I mean what if Portland said we'll trade you Zach Randolph, but Seattle feels they are comfortable with their platoon of Collison and Wilcox and said we'd prefer Brandon Roy and Lafrentz for a traded Lewis? I have the feeling that Seattle doesn't want Zach, so if they can't do it for Zach, they'd have to trade some other assets.
> 
> Maybe Jack, 2008 pick and Lafrentz, would get it done, I'm not sure.


I don't think that moving Roy for Lewis makes sense. I'm sure that Seatle would LOVE Roy... they could pair him with Ray, and have a pretty darn good starting 5:

PG: Roy
SG: Allen
SF: Durant
PF: Wilcox
C: Swift

In another thread I wondered if Seattle would take Antawn Jamison and Martell Webster for Lewis...

Ed O.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Ed O said:


> I don't think that moving Roy for Lewis makes sense. I'm sure that Seatle would LOVE Roy... they could pair him with Ray, and have a pretty darn good starting 5:
> 
> PG: Roy
> SG: Allen
> ...


This is under the guise of a Jamison for Zach swap, then turn around swap Jamison/Martell for a re-signed Lewis (and Damien Wilkins?). 

It could work if they felt they could bring along Durant a little slower, not to mention they could go small at times with Jamison at the 4 (but he'd also be expiring). See when it comes to Seattle, with that ownership stuff up in the air, plus not having a GM or Coach yet, it's hard to see them taking back a long term max deal but Jamison would only have a year on his contract and be very ideal. Portland definitely has options, but to me, I feel Lewis is looking to get paid as much as he can (for six years), so his priority is in finding a team who will pay him that first.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

As far as the money goes, if the Blazers are trading Zach for Shard, even if they pay the maximum or near the maximum, losing Zach's contract would largely mitigate it. Essentially it boils down to: That money is spent...would you rather spend it on Randolph or Lewis?

With Oden and Aldridge on the team, I'd much rather spend that money on Lewis, even if it's more than he's worth.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

good point minstrel i would rather have Rashard.


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

RW#30 said:


> There are no possibilities with Melo. Let's not go crazy here and think all NBA teams will bow to the Blazers now and give up their best players for 2nd rounders.


Uh, not sure whose post you are reading, but it wasn't mine. I didn't say anything about 2nd rounders nor did I say anything about other teams "bowing to the Blazers". I said let's explore all possibilities. Why not call Denver and ask what they'd want for Melo? It's well known that Denver doesn't want to be far above the cap and that they might move one or more major piece this year. Let's see what they'll do. Maybe they'll be stupid and trade for some crazy combination of picks and players.


----------



## Mateo (Sep 23, 2006)

yakbladder said:


> Uh, not sure whose post you are reading, but it wasn't mine. I didn't say anything about 2nd rounders nor did I say anything about other teams "bowing to the Blazers". I said let's explore all possibilities. Why not call Denver and ask what they'd want for Melo? It's well known that Denver doesn't want to be far above the cap and that they might move one or more major piece this year. Let's see what they'll do. Maybe they'll be stupid and trade for some crazy combination of picks and players.


... they aren't trading Carmelo Anthony.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

http://www.boston.com/sports/basket...007/06/12/celtics_get_rundown_on_trio/?page=2


Boston.com said:


> If Phoenix doesn't work out as a trading partner, there is speculation around the league about a possible deal with Seattle that would bring forward Rashard Lewis to Boston. Lewis reportedly is good friends with Gerald Green and would consent to the deal if Green is not a part of the package. Robert Swift also could be in the mix. Ainge has coveted Swift in the past . . .


I was under the impression that a deal couldn't be made until after July 15, meaning picks couldn't be involved. Maybe I'm wrong.

Also, I hate it when NBA rumors surround one player being 'friends' with another.

I still think he'll end up in Orlando next to Dwight Howard.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

*Re: semi-OT: Rashard ops-out!*



Utherhimo said:


> thats right he opts out of his contact...hhhhmmmmmm ready to move to portland is he?


Nope. He stands to make about $8M / year more elsewhere than we can offer him here, if I understand the situation correctly.

PBF


----------



## graybeard (May 10, 2003)

Hmmm, so Quick says that Shard is headed to Orlando because they have the cap room to sign him. I'm looking at Orlando's roster here, http://www.hoopshype.com/depth_charts_southeast.htm So what happened to Turkoglu? It appears to me that Orlando needs a shooting guard, not a small forward. What am I missing here?


----------



## wizmentor (Nov 10, 2005)

*Re: semi-OT: Rashard ops-out!*



ProudBFan said:


> Nope. He stands to make about $8M / year more elsewhere than we can offer him here, if I understand the situation correctly.
> 
> PBF


quick question: what's the shortest time you can sign an MLE for?
I remember the league being mad at the Blazers during the Chris Dudley
signing, so I assumed they fixed short term signings, but I don't know.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

graybeard said:


> Hmmm, so Quick says that Shard is headed to Orlando because they have the cap room to sign him. I'm looking at Orlando's roster here, http://www.hoopshype.com/depth_charts_southeast.htm So what happened to Turkoglu? It appears to me that Orlando needs a shooting guard, not a small forward. What am I missing here?


Nothing. I think Orlando is rightfully going with a slow growth model: Don't try to address every issue at once or you'll overpay. There are quite a few guys that could be had for the MLE (Pavlovic, Kopono, Barnes, Stack, Carroll, MoPete, Finley, Flip, even Grant Hill).


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

graybeard said:


> Hmmm, so Quick says that Shard is headed to Orlando because they have the cap room to sign him. I'm looking at Orlando's roster here, http://www.hoopshype.com/depth_charts_southeast.htm So what happened to Turkoglu? It appears to me that Orlando needs a shooting guard, not a small forward. What am I missing here?


The obvious answer is that Lewis is just a better basketball player than Turkoglu.


----------



## graybeard (May 10, 2003)

I'm going to call BS on Quick's rumor that Shard is going to Orlando. I think he's planning on coming to the Blazers and he's number one on the Blazers list this summer.
The Sonics would be fools just to let Shard walk and I don't see that the Magic have the pieces that Seattle wants.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

graybeard said:


> The Sonics would be fools just to let Shard walk and I don't see that the Magic have the pieces that Seattle wants.


You're assuming (rightly, probably) that Rashard wouldn't take slightly less money to sign with Orlando.


----------



## graybeard (May 10, 2003)

Samuel said:


> You're assuming (rightly, probably) that Rashard wouldn't take slightly less money to sign with Orlando.


 I think he's a valuable asset to the sonics and they're not just going to let him walk. He'll force their hand to a sign & trade to a team that he chooses (blazers). I think Orlando will be his fall back option if all else fails.(pay cut)

(edit): I doubt a pay cut, but less money than the blazers will offer.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

graybeard said:


> I think he's a valuable asset to the sonics and they're not just going to let him walk. He'll force their hand to a sign & trade to a team that he chooses (blazers). I think Orlando will be his fall back option if all else fails.(pay cut)
> 
> (edit): I doubt a pay cut, but less money than the blazers will offer.


I still think a 3rd team will need to be involved if the Blazers are the team he demands to go to. Unfortunately, once a 3rd team gets involved things get more complicated. Portland will probably end up sending out a bit more than they have in mind (Martell, Outlaw, Jack, or even two of the 3) because team #3 will have leverage against Portland.

I'm not enough of a business guy to figure out how the leveraging would likely work out. It's complicated.

Also, a lot of parties looking to trade are using picks as part of their packages. That muddies up the predictive waters considerably as an outsider to the situation. There is still no consensus on whether S&Ts + picks are possible under the CBA.

Finally, we're in their division. The lottery brought back a rivalry. Sam Presti seems like a sharp guy. A deal will be expensive and complicated. Is that worth it to KP?


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

Samuel said:


> You're assuming (rightly, probably) that Rashard wouldn't take slightly less money to sign with Orlando.


Orlando has to renounce their rights, or trade or let someone else sign Grant Hill and Darko Milicic to have even close to enough cap space to sign Rashard Lewis without a sign and trade deal, which makes it seem unlikely to me. But if the Magic do do that, they have enough space to offer Lewis up to the max. He wouldn't necessarily have to take any less money.

One alternate possibility is that Orlando uses Darko or some other players to work a sign and trade deal. Can we offer anything better for Seattle than Darko? IMO, it depends on how much Darko would agree to sign with Seattle for, but probably not.


----------



## graybeard (May 10, 2003)

The Sonics leverage goes right out the window, Lewis gets to go to the team he wants, or he walks. The Sonics get Zach or nothing. Which would you do?


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

graybeard said:


> The Sonics leverage goes right out the window, Lewis gets to go to the team he wants, or he walks. The Sonics get Zach or nothing. Which would you do?


This scenario assumes both that Lewis has a team under the cap offering him near max, because otherwise the Sonics do have the leverage, and also that no other team in the league is willing to pay Lewis a comparable amount and offer Seattle something they want more than Zach. It's possible that will all happen, but IMO it's not likely.


----------



## graybeard (May 10, 2003)

How much money did Lewis leave on the table to opt out, $22 million wasn't it? I don't think he leaves that much money without having a good idea of what the outcome will be.


----------

