# Allen Confirms - Trade Looming..



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

From: The Big O



> .....The trade talks involving the Trail Blazers are no longer speculation. Owner Paul Allen on Thursday acknowledged rumors that the team is considering a trade are true and current, as evidenced by his 30-minute meeting with team president Steve Patterson and general manager John Nash during the third quarter of the Blazers' 105-96 loss to the Phoenix Suns at the Rose Garden.
> 
> After the game, Allen said he is contemplating whether he should pull the trigger on a proposed trade.
> 
> "Trade. Not to trade. I don't know," Allen said before walking out of the arena........


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

at least there was a reason for Allen to be there, because I sure felt like a world class chump for wasting two hours of my life on that game. 

a big fear for me right now is that whatever happens in this trade, we wind up trading away our only decent PG in McInnis.


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>theWanker</b>!
> 
> ...a big fear for me right now is that whatever happens in this trade, we wind up trading away our only decent PG in McInnis.


What if, say, Steve Nash came in return? (not that that would happen, though....)


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

I guess the closer to the dead line the better the options. I think that if something does happen it has to be Dallas. Orlando isn't crazy enough to trade McGrady and I really don't like the New York deal. Maybe both Dallas and Portland are waiting for today so that Rasheed can fly home with the Mavericks tomorrow?

Something has to give, because Portland is in a nose dive and things don't look so rosey right now.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ABM</b>!
> What if, say, Steve Nash came in return? (not that that would happen, though....)


then McInnis wouldn't be our only decent point guard....


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

If we trade Sheed away for crap and send McInnis out without getting a decent point guard, talk about screwed...

I like it though that Allen has the final say, I suppose all owners do, but you know Paul loves the franchise and wants to see it get back to being a contender.


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>theWanker</b>!
> 
> 
> then McInnis wouldn't be our only decent point guard....


You had mentioned being fearful of trading McInnis. What if, in doing that, though, we got Nash? Wouldn't that be enough of an upgrade to make trading Jeff a little more palatable?

If Nash were to be included in _any_ deal, Dallas would want a PG included in return. Jeff is the only reasonable solution, IMO.


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

New Orleans is really struggling right now. I wonder if Nash & C. could convince them to part with B. Davis in a trade involving Sheed?

Mashburn sounds pretty good right about now, too!  He's on the verge of returning.


----------



## DariusMiles23 (Aug 29, 2003)

Sheed for Jamison and Tariq-Abdul Whahad. tariq has 28 mill over 4 more years on his contract, and he is injured. So in other words, cap for cap hell. Smart move.:uhoh:


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

Sheed for Jamison and Wahad is a TERRIBLE trade. If we do that they better toss in Josh Howard as well. Otherwise we're taking it up the tail pipe. If Nash makes this move I will have lost a lot of confidence in him.


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

Chad Ford doesn't think the Mavs will pull the trigger on a trade for Wallace:



> .........(If Sheed didn't re-sign with the Mavs is) one of the reasons the Mavs are reluctant to pull the trigger. If Sheed leaves, they essentially gave up Antawn Jamison (or whoever they'd send to Portland) for nothing. Even if they could get some sort of guarantee by Sheed, I don't see how it makes the Mavs any better. To me, they need a blue collar banger to do some dirty work in the paint. Sheed isn't that guy.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Most any Dallas trade would stink unless we got Nash back

New Orleans is not going to trade Baron Davis IMHO. He IS their team. Damon and Zach for Baron and Jamaal?

Whatever is on the table with Mr. Allen sure seems to be quiet this time. That is more of an indication to me than anything

16 - 21 stinks.....


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

I'm against these headcase for headcase trades. I think a trade like Phoenix got for Marbury would be best. But who would do that for us?


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

I think we're as much on the New York side of that deal as the Phoenix side since we're offering mucho cap room...

I definitely think that we could have picked up Marbury for Sheed if we wanted to - but hey, who needs a point guard? We have Damon!


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

One thing's FOR SURE:

If Nash felt the need to bring Allen into the loop, it must be something he (Nash) likes.

RADAR UP, people!

PBF


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>NateBishop3</b>!
> Sheed for Jamison and Wahad is a TERRIBLE trade. If we do that they better toss in Josh Howard as well. Otherwise we're taking it up the tail pipe. If Nash makes this move I will have lost a lot of confidence in him.


I agree, Nate. Two things though:

1. That might not be all there is to it. Remember, Nash's claim to fame is large, multi-team deals.

2. If Rasheed really did stage a one-man strike for an extension, Allen/Nash might want him gone bad enough to do this.

PBF


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

I just hope they don't make the trade for Jamison and Abdul-Wahad. That would be a joke.


----------



## bfan1 (Mar 5, 2003)

Um-all that was confirmed is that there is a trade on the table and they are trying to decide whether to do it or not.

This has happened before.


----------



## DariusMiles23 (Aug 29, 2003)

I know i will get flamed for this but here i go.

I think gettin Tariq is the worst part of the trade. Jamison I think would be a pretty good addition, plus how old is he? 25-26? I think adding him would be good because. He comes to play a lot more than Sheed so, teams will have to watch out for him. IF they throw in Howard or a pick i say we do it.

Davis/Stepania/RBB
Zach/Davis/Patterson
Jamison/Patterson/Woods
Anderson/Woods/Person
Mcinnis/Damon

See, if they double team Zach and leave Tawn open, he will go off. IF they double team Twan they we can give it to Zach. Plus Jamison brings more every night then SHeed. I still wouldnt mind keepin Sheed but I g2g.

Peace,
Shorty


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NateBishop3</b>!
> Sheed for Jamison and Wahad is a TERRIBLE trade. If we do that they better toss in Josh Howard as well. Otherwise we're taking it up the tail pipe. If Nash makes this move I will have lost a lot of confidence in him.


Even getting Howard, the deal would stink. It puts the Blazers right back out of the FA running for 2005 and the Blazers still would be a lottery team for the foreseeable future... unless they were able to move Damon and Dale (as expiring contracts) next year for good players, and if the luxury tax is gone as anticipated teams will be less willing to give up quality for expiring deals.

Ed O.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

BTW as of this morning Najera is on the IL

he can not be traded while on it


----------



## Blazerfan024 (Aug 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
> BTW as of this morning Najera is on the IL
> 
> he can not be traded while on it


So is Delk he injured ankle and will be out 2-3 weeks.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bfan1</b>!
> Um-all that was confirmed is that there is a trade on the table and they are trying to decide whether to do it or not. This has happened before.


Paul Allen walks by some foaming at the mouth press after another frustrating loss..."Mr Allen, Mr Allen! Trade? Trade? Trade?" 

"Trade. Not to trade. I don't know," PA responds as he brushes bye.

"Trade: Not if, but when? Owner Paul Allen confirms that the Blazers are considering a deal" headline from the O.

" ," STOMP


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

opps...


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Well something at least has passed the Nash test to give it to Mr. Allen at least....

Jamison played at NC under dean Smith. Are we underating his defensive abilities due to him being on offensive minded teams in Dallas and GS?

Assuminghe plays at SF, can he really do it at SF? Didn't GS move him back to PF?

What woudl we do with Wahad? 3-4 SG's ...
DA, Person, Wahad and Woods (Q being a 2/3)


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BlazerShorty990</b>!
> 
> I think gettin Tariq is the worst part of the trade.


Yep. Kinda like the initial explosion of an atomic bomb. Of course, the fallout's pretty bad, too.



> Jamison I think would be a pretty good addition, plus how old is he? 25-26? I think adding him would be good because. He comes to play a lot more than Sheed so, teams will have to watch out for him.


Jamison is 27. He's less than 2 years younger than Rasheed.

IF Jamison had a reasonable contract or IF he were 24 or 25 (so he'd have significant additional room to improve) I think that I'd be willing to take him back as a centerpiece to a Rasheed deal. In spite of his defensive liabilities and his inability (or unwillingness) to pass the ball.

As it is, though, his contract would singlehandedly keep us from being a player in the summer of 2005 (he makes $13.8m in 2005-06).



> IF they throw in Howard or a pick i say we do it.


Howard or a pick would just be makeup on a pig. It's still a pig of a deal.

Ed O.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Is anyone else here, disheartened by the prospect that Nash may actually MAKE a boneheaded trade with DAL? I mean a trade for Jamison & Wahad, would put this franchise in a hole, that I am not sure we could get out of for the next FOUR years. I mean Jamison is a nice player, but IMO his style of play and lack of defenses mirrors that of Zach, so why acquire him? As if the fact that he makes $11mil, $12mil, $13mil & $15mil over the last four years of his deal isn't enough? And then to add insult, throw in Wahad's NASTY 4yr deal. I mean it makes ABSOLUTELY no sense. 

This is absolutley the time NOT to panic and pull the trigger, just b\c things have fallen apart at the seams. What Nash SHOULD (and I hope he did) tell Cuban is to take his ridiculous offer and shove it. IF Nash makes this trade, either trade mentioned , with DAL he needs to have his head examined.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Since Delk was placed on the IL yesterday, it will have to wait 5 Dallas games at a minimum to include him.

translation.. Dallas deal is not going tohappen with Delk in it in the forseeable future


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

We are better off trading with Atlanta. SAR, and Ratliff have better contracts than anyone except Nash on Dallas. If we got a 1 round pick and Howard, it would make it better, but I don't like the current trade. If we can get a deal soon, we should offer Sheed a lowball deal around 5 million with club options and trade him this summer. Lotto here we come.


----------



## Stallion (Apr 23, 2003)

> See, if they double team Zach and leave Tawn open, he will go off. IF they double team Twan they we can give it to Zach.


If they double team Zach, he will still shoot... I don't know about the rest of you but I can't wait to have the foundation of our team be two tweeners!


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Has there ever been this much discussion about one trade over the course of a few weeks...and then that very same trade actually did go down?

People are getting so worked up over Wallace for Jamison and (Delk + Najera) or (Howard + Wahad) when it's not really all that likely to happen. 

There are 28 teams to trade with. I doubt there's only one possible (bad) deal out there.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

and Dallas has 2 of those 3 on the IL.. not going to happen today anyway.. they need to be brought off the IL list to be traded. Delk has to wait 5 games now



I agree with Peaceman....

SAR and Ralitff are better than any offer Dalals has

I think SAR has a similar game to Jamison, and I woudl pick him over him

SAR > Jamison > Keith Van Horn ..... better of the three speculations

Ratliff > Wahad or Najera > NY junk


If we had done what I wanted last summer we would not have had to go through all of this and probably have a better record .  Plus you would not have had to listen to me for 6 months now... :rofl:

Sheed and ? for SAR and Ratliff


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Wahad...Curious Delk is going to be down for 2-3 weeks, if he goes on IR who is activated? Najera is there already.

So either Jon Steffansson or Tariq would be activated as I believe Najera is till hurt.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

> Yep. Kinda like the initial explosion of an atomic bomb. Of course, the fallout's pretty bad, too.


great line, Ed O. 

taking on Tariq is an official brainburger move.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

How about Walker + Jamison for Sheed and filler

just tossing out scenarios since Wahad and Najera and now Delk are on the IL


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
> How about Walker + Jamison for Sheed and filler
> 
> just tossing out scenarios since Wahad and Najera and now Delk are on the IL


So Dallas activated Jon Stefansson?


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

> How about Walker + Jamison for Sheed and filler


if by "filler" you mean Damon Stoudamire, then DING DING DING we have a winner. 

unfortunately, Cuban would be insane to make that move.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Would he?

A few factors. 

What is Steve Nash's priorities this summer?
-Rumor has him opting out and returning to Phoenix as a high possibility.
How does Dallas look Financially?
-They could kick about $32mill out in 2 years, or resigfn those 2 for less.

Another thing, I am not quite sure the rest of the league has quite as negative of a perception of Damon as we do, as a player. His contract is ugly, but Dallas could deal with it for 2 years.


----------



## blazerfan4life (Dec 31, 2002)

*SIGH*

Personally..the "rumored: trade with NY..i hated..and if this deal goes down with Dallas..if that is the team..i don't like it either..What happened to Nash's trading Wallace for players of his status..I mean Wallace was an All-star for GOD's sake..not saying Wallace has been playing like an All-star now..but these 2 "deals" are not for us...:no: :no: :no:


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: SIGH*



> Originally posted by <b>blazerfan4life</b>!
> Personally..the "rumored: trade with NY..i hated..and if this deal goes down with Dallas..if that is the team..i don't like it either..What happened to Nash's trading Wallace for players of his status..I mean Wallace was an All-star for GOD's sake..not saying Wallace has been playing like an All-star now..but these 2 "deals" are not for us...:no: :no: :no:


Dikembe Mutumbo was an All star, so was Shawn Kemp and Vin Baker. Heck Damon was Rookie of the Year.

What they have done is irrelevant to what they do.


----------



## Blazerfan024 (Aug 15, 2003)

*Re: Re: SIGH*



> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> 
> Dikembe Mutumbo was an All star, so was Shawn Kemp and Vin Baker. Heck Damon was Rookie of the Year.
> 
> What they have done is irrelevant to what they do.



So trading for crap is what we should do ??


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Not necessarily, but talent is not either a star or crap. 

I do believe that our expectations as fans may be a little over inflated but that is to be expected. I doubt anyone here will jump for joy if and when Sheed is dealt, much the way we reacted to the Bonzi deal.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> Not necessarily, but talent is not either a star or crap.
> 
> I do believe that our expectations as fans may be a little over inflated but that is to be expected. I doubt anyone here will jump for joy if and when Sheed is dealt, much the way we reacted to the Bonzi deal.


I fear you might be right. The thing is that the Rasheed Wallace trade could prove to be MUCH more painful than the Bonzi Wells deal. For at least two reasons:

-- Rasheed is our best player. Bonzi was probably our third-best. Losing Rasheed is going to hurt more on the floor than losing Bonzi did.

-- A bad deal for Rasheed could negate any and all value for Bonzi. If Portland traded Memphis's first along with Rasheed and got back Antawn and TAW, for example, Portland would not have any more cap flexibility than they had before trading Wells and no 1st rounder from the deal.

There's also still the HOPE that Nash can find value for Rasheed. The Bonzi deal is dead and buried (by most of us  ) and hope springs eternal for many on this board... if Portland makes a deal that most of us consider "bad" then it'll be a crushing thing in many respects.

Ed O.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

It seems the buzz at the bash about a trade may have been correct.. but it was he Darius Miles trade

looking back at it, the subtle hints may have been there all along. Mo's sudden doghouse for McInnis, no playing time... I wonder if other subtle hints are looming and we have not noticed them as well


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> I wonder if other subtle hints are looming and we have not noticed them as well


Bonzi got benched ... Bonzi got traded.

Jeff got benched ... Jeff got traded.

Nothing subtle there. Who's next, Dale?

Dan


----------

