# ESPN Insider..Chris Sheridan..Dixon 4 Fred Jones



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

Chris Sheridan mentions in his Insider article "10 players most likely to be traded" that the Blazers may send Dixon to TOR for Fred Jones.



> Yes, we know the most popular Portland trade chip to be run through the rumor mill this season has been Jamaal Magloire, but Insider is hearing that Portland is now "begging" teams to take the former All-Star off their hands. Magloire's $8.3 million contract expires at the end of this season, but big expiring contracts clearly aren't nearly the valuable commodities they were in recent years.
> 
> That's why we're listing Dixon as the likeliest member of the Blazers to be shipped out. Don't be surprised if he goes to Toronto for Fred Jones.


Works on ESPN tradechecker 
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/traderesult?players=1707~1718&teams=28~22

Not a bad deal IMO..should clear more PT for Sergio and Roy.


----------



## drexlersdad (Jun 3, 2006)

Fred Jones is good, he won the High school slam dunk contest while at Sam Barlow. And he won it in the NBA too. But is that all he can do? He is basically a dunking Dixon, with a conscience in his shot selection. He can't be worse on Defense.


----------



## sabas4mvp (Sep 23, 2002)

I like this trade


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

This year:
Jones FG%: 38% Three point%: 31%
Dixon FG%: 43% Three point%: 36%

Jones hasn't played meaningful minutes since December. 

They have the same contract length. 

I can't stand Dixon, but at least you have to guard him. I suppose if there are problems behind the scenes with Dixon's attitude (I haven't heard any such thing), Jones is the kind of guy you'd get for him. 

I'm hoping the point is moot anyway. When Rodriguez gets back, I'd like to see Sergio, Jack and Roy eat up all the minutes at PG/SG, so it's irrelevant who is on the bench.


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

I'd take this deal.

You lose the "leadership" that Dixon provides, but gain a good defender and finisher in Jones. 

This trade goes down in the ho-hum category, but I see Jones becoming a Nate guy and Nate liking a Roy/Jones backcourt down the stretch in close games.

Then all we need for the "knockout" would be a trade for Mike Dunleavy to add the "Jr." to the Roy/Jones combo.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Make it so.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

"Yes, we know the most popular Portland trade chip to be run through the rumor mill this season has been Jamaal Magloire, but Insider is hearing that Portland is now "begging" teams to take the former All-Star off their hands. Magloire's $8.3 million contract expires at the end of this season, but big expiring contracts clearly aren't nearly the valuable commodities they were in recent years."

I'm curious as to what has changed in that big expiring contracts aren't the valuable commodities they were in recent years.

There is still a salary cap, still a luxuary tax . . . yet owners don't seem as obsessed with the idea of cutting salary. Maybe the luxuary tax hit hard at the begining, but now owners have gotten somewhat used to the idea????


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

Sounds made up to me. And stuff that reporters make up rarely happens.


----------



## stockfire (Jul 17, 2004)

ebott said:


> Sounds made up to me. And stuff that reporters make up rarely happens.



Nonsense. Iavaroni is the best Blazer coach yet -- he never lost a game!


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

IMO:

1. Not looking at the stats, my impression is that Jones is at least as good a perimeter shooter (%-wise) as Dixon.

2. Jones is physically bigger and stronger than Dixon. Opposing SG's won't post him up on the perimeter nearly as much as they do Dixon.

3. Again, impression: Jones is much better finishing at the rim than Dixon (a result of #2, above).

4. Jones is a home-town hero.

If the salaries line up, and reports are that they do, I do this trade in a heartbeat.

But the big question is: Why would Toronto do this???

PBF


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

mook said:


> This year:
> Jones FG%: 38% Three point%: 31%
> Dixon FG%: 43% Three point%: 36%
> 
> ...



Why can't you stand Dixon? 

I have read he has asked to be traded, so maybe he is a problem in the locker room. Otherwise I don't do the trade because I think the Blazers need a scoring punch of the bench more than a hustle guy (this last part was my own opinion about the rumor, not addressing anything you said mook)


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

This is a useless trade. This doesn't help us on the court or in the books. So, I ask, why even do it?

-Pop


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

ProudBFan said:


> But the big question is: Why would Toronto do this???


Dixon is less expensive this year, and his contract is shorter by a year. Given the production of Anthony Parker, and the emergence of Garbajosa at the 3, Graham moves to the 2 and Jones becomes an extra player outside of the rotation. When you determine that who you play works better than who you don't, you might as well save a few million dollars on the contract. Dixon likely wouldn't play much.


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> I have read he has asked to be traded, so maybe he is a problem in the locker room. Otherwise I don't do the trade because I think the Blazers need a scoring punch of the bench more than a hustle guy (this last part was my own opinion about the rumor, not addressing anything you said mook)


That's news to me. If he has actually asked to be traded, I fully endorse this deal. I'm not convinced Jones is any better then Dixon, and I also don't care too much about the hometown hero stuff. However, as they are pretty comparable, I would definitely rather have someone who wanted to be here (of course, that's assuming Fred would want to be here).


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Speaking of Toronto . . . Barnani had a good game last night. Overall his production has increased steadily and if it continues, he could challenge Roy for ROY.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Foulzilla said:


> That's news to me. If he has actually asked to be traded, I fully endorse this deal. I'm not convinced Jones is any better then Dixon, and I also don't care too much about the hometown hero stuff. However, as they are pretty comparable, I would definitely rather have someone who wanted to be here (of course, that's assuming Fred would want to be here).



Can someone else confirm this. My main source of Blazer info is the "O" (no comments please) which I read almost daily or KXL. I could swear I either read or heard he has requested a trade (there was no mention that he is a problem in the locker room.)


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

I wouldn't do this deal - except if Dixon is unhappy being here. He's doing what we need him to do - that is - shoot and score when he's on the court. He's never going to become a taller SG - so he is what he is - an explosive (when his shot is falling) shooter with no conscience. He's also a bargain!!! Save trading him for a later date when we actually get something in return that helps us.

Fred Jones?? Please, all you Duck homers!! He's a worse player than Dixon - see the stats. They don't lie.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

SodaPopinski said:


> This is a useless trade. This doesn't help us on the court or in the books. So, I ask, why even do it?
> 
> -Pop


Maybe it helps in the locker room.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Samuel said:


> Dixon is less expensive this year, and his contract is shorter by a year. Given the production of Anthony Parker, and the emergence of Garbajosa at the 3, Graham moves to the 2 and Jones becomes an extra player outside of the rotation. When you determine that who you play works better than who you don't, you might as well save a few million dollars on the contract. Dixon likely wouldn't play much.


Garbajosa is listed on NBA.com as a Center, did you maybe mean Bargnani?


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Speaking of Toronto . . . Barnani had a good game last night. Overall his production has increased steadily and if it continues, he could challenge Roy for ROY.


if roy stays 1/2 way healthy bargnani won't come anywhere close. roy has much too big of a lead at this point to make up in 1/3 season. nothing to worry about except injury.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

mook said:


> This year:
> Jones FG%: 38% Three point%: 31%
> Dixon FG%: 43% Three point%: 36%


If you look at career avg, they are closer

Fred = 34.4% 3FG%, 41.1% 2FG%, 81.9% FT%, 2.1 Assists, and 2.2 rebounds
Juan = 33.5% 3FG%, 41.4% 2FG%, 82.3% FT%, 1.7 Assists, and 2 rebounds

Fred is at $3.1 mil, $3.3 mil and $3.5 mil
Juan is $2.55 mil and $2.55 mil


----------



## sjla2kology101 (Apr 23, 2006)

IMO I would rather have a home town boy like jones then someone who isn't anymore the a 12 point a night(on a great night) pure scorer.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Schilly said:


> Garbajosa is listed on NBA.com as a Center, did you maybe mean Bargnani?


Not sure why they have him listed at C. All the games I've watched he's player the 3/4.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

crowTrobot said:


> if roy stays 1/2 way healthy bargnani won't come anywhere close. roy has much too big of a lead at this point to make up in 1/3 season. nothing to worry about except injury.



With the lack of respect the Blazers get from the league, I don't think it should be assumed Roy has it locked up.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Trader Bob said:


> If you look at career avg, they are closer
> 
> Fred = 34.4% 3FG%, 41.1% 2FG%, 81.9% FT%, 2.1 Assists, and 2.2 rebounds
> Juan = 33.5% 3FG%, 41.4% 2FG%, 82.3% FT%, 1.7 Assists, and 2 rebounds
> ...



Yes, but Fred's FG%, 3PT FG %, points and mins continue to drop each year.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Sergio to Freddie!!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh man, that would be so sweet.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Why can't you stand Dixon?


of our four true guards (Sergio, Jack, Roy, Dixon), he's the shortest, the worst passer, the worst scorer and the worst defender. he's ok as a third string shooting guard, but I hate seeing him get minutes over Sergio. 

"but Sergio and Dixon don't even play the same position" I can hear you argue. no, they don't, but Jack and Roy are both combo guards and playing time is fungible. Jack is going to get his 30 minutes. Roy is going to get his 36 minutes. 

the scraps left over will be used up largely by Sergio or Dixon. for obvious reasons, I prefer Sergio.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Schilly said:


> Maybe it helps in the locker room.


that's the one reason I might do this deal.

Jones' ego might be more beaten down after having been on three different teams in two years. even that reason doesn't exactly thrill me, though. we want a player basically because he knows he sucks?


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

mook said:


> of our four true guards (Sergio, Jack, Roy, Dixon), he's the shortest, the worst passer, the worst scorer and the worst defender. he's ok as a third string shooting guard, but I hate seeing him get minutes over Sergio.
> 
> "but Sergio and Dixon don't even play the same position" I can hear you argue. no, they don't, but Jack and Roy are both combo guards and playing time is fungible. Jack is going to get his 30 minutes. Roy is going to get his 36 minutes.
> 
> the scraps left over will be used up by Sergio or Dixon. for obvious reasons, I prefer Sergio.



With that logic, wouldn't you hate any guard the Blazers pick up? 

Not trying to give you a hard time, I just know there is a lot of hate for Dixon on this board and surprised to hear you hate Dixon as well.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

I don't really *hate *Dixon. I probably should've phrased what I wrote better. 

I realize there's a role on this team for a third string shooting guard, and I accept that he's a decent fit for that role. for example, Sergio is injured right now and we need a guy like him to fill in. 

I do hate using him in any other capacity. when Nate puts Dixon in for 25 minutes in a game while giving 7 minutes to a healthy Sergio, I go nuts. 



> With that logic, wouldn't you hate any guard the Blazers pick up?


nope. if we get a guard who is better than Roy, Sergio or Jack, I'd be happy to see them get more minutes than one of those three. if we get a guard who is worse than Roy, Sergio or Jack, I might be convinced that they fit in somewhere behind them.

Fred Jones would definitely be the latter. I don't get too excited one way or the other about third string veteran guards, so I'm not terribly passionate either way about this trade idea.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

It seems to me that while they each have their strengths, for now at least, Dixon is a better fit for this team. Jones is listed as an inch shorter and in general plays more like a PG than Dixon does. The team has two decent PGs in Jack and Rodriguez, a third PG in a pinch in Dickau, and a rookie SG they're trying to find minutes for at PG. Meanwhile at SG there's the aforementioned rookie and.... Jack? Webster? Udoka?


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

Dixon and Jones have similar roles in the NBA, even if they are physically different. They are both streaky bench scoring guys who do pretty much nothing else. Dixon has been more consistent than Jones over his career (yes, that's a scary thought), so generally could be considered better, but the difference isn't much. If we made this trade, we'd be trading down in production in exchange for alleviating the rumored discord that Dixon may or may not be bringing, and paying the price of the extra contract year Jones brings to do it, although we might end up a spot higher in the draft. So ... meh.

*BUT,*

What swapping Dixon for Jones does do is give us a tiny bit extra salary flexibility to swap more players with Toronto. Lots of people have mentioned a possible Magloire for Mo Pete swap, but the salaries don't match. If you include all the pieces together, and add either Derrick Martin or Kris Humphies, then the salaries match.

Recap: *Portland sends Juan Dixon and Jamaal Magloire to Toronto for Mo Pete, Fred Jones and either Derrick Martin or Kris Humphries*. 

Any takers on that? I would do it. Even though Pete is expiring, he's a decent player. Jones 3.3 isn't too much to swallow (hopefully he plays up to is). Martin or Humphries can try out for us and maybe stick or maybe get waived. Basically, the reward isn't high, but we're giving up little, so the risk is minimal.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

I do that deal yesterday. Not a bad trade for Portland at all. Gives the Blazers more shooting and more minutes for Aldridge and Joel. It also doesn't kill them salary wise. The other nice thing it does is gives you an little bit of an inside track of signing Peterson this summer if the team decides it needs a veteran SF who can shoot. Should out us in great play off possition next year.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Yes, but Fred's FG%, 3PT FG %, points and mins continue to drop each year.


true.. but does it correspond to the move from Indy to Toronto

would he in a Blazer uniform get better looks at the basket when others are concetrating on Zach

is Dixon's percentage higher than he was at Wasahington? maybe because he gets better looks now


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

dudleysghost said:


> Recap: *Portland sends Juan Dixon and Jamaal Magloire to Toronto for Mo Pete, Fred Jones and either Derrick Martin or Kris Humphries*.


That's a very interesting idea. Further, the addition of Peterson makes Jones more interesting to me. Again, I think Dixon fits the Blazers needs at SG better but if Jones could simply be another option at PG (with Roy and Peterson getting most of the SG minutes) he's more valuable, I think. For example, he might well become the best defensive PG on the team and with Roy able to create from the SG spot, they might work well together. Likewise, Jones and Rodriguez could be paired (perhaps with Roy, Outlaw/Webster, and Aldridge) for a few minutes a game to try just racing the other team into the ground.

This really is a very interesting idea, Dudley. Nice work.


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

I like the idea of including Dixon as part of a bigger deal. Maybe we can get a little more out of a Magloire deal 

But trading him by himself seems like wasted effort for no real gain. Especially if we're simply going to trade him for another mediocre player like Fred Jones. If we could trade him for an expiring contract and a future first rounder I'd be all for it. But Fred Jones? Does nothing for me.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> With the lack of respect the Blazers get from the league, I don't think it should be assumed Roy has it locked up.



fortunately roy already has enough ROY buzz out there where bias won't be an issue. it's his to lose at this point, not bargnani's to win.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

I would like this deal to be expanded. But, if it was just Dixon for Jones I would still do it. Jones is not the scorer that Dixon is, but he is a much better defender. I also think he can be our 3rd string PG if he is playing alongside Roy. He played some point at Oregon. 

Also, Fred would be a nice boost to fan morale. I am not saying he would be a huge factor in getting people in the seats, or that fan morale is not already on the rise. But, he certainly would not hurt. 

This move could also focre Nate to give Webster or Outlaw more minutes and more freedom to shoot. 

Good deal.


----------



## M3M (Jun 19, 2006)

I would do this trade in a second.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Chris Sheridan has no imagination whatsoever.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

I watched Indiana play last year and Jones was the best player on the floor. And he was burning it up for the Raptors at the beginning of the year, too. Of course, they were losing all the time then, and now Anthony Parker has all the minutes, they're at the top of their division, so...

The major benefit I see in this trade is that Jones is only useful in a running game, so either he doesn't get used, or we run. Whereas Dixon by his very presence slows down the game.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

I'm not a Juan fan but I have to disagree with that assessment.

Juan has been a solid piece to Sergio's running game, and looks like a different player in that style.

Jack seems to be a bad match for Juan, Martell, Travis and LaMarcus.


----------



## A.W.#8 (Sep 8, 2003)

I think I've seen Fred Jones dunk like 3 times all year. And I've seen every game. And he's not that great of a shooter either. I would rather have Juan Dixon.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

No way I do this trade.

Dixon has Jones beat in points per game, assists per game, steals per game, FG%, FT% and 3-point %.

Jones has a slight edge in blocks per game (.32 vs .13) and rebounds per game (2.2 vs. 1.5).

You're not making the team better by doing this trade, so I can't say I'm a fan of it.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

MARIS61 said:


> Chris Sheridan has no imagination whatsoever.


No kidding. Haven't several posters dropped this idea before?

Where are you now, Chris!?!?!


----------



## sportsnut1975 (Jul 6, 2006)

I like this trade because I like Fred Jones and I am a DUCKS fan. I have no problem with Juan so if he stays no problem either.


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

Samuel said:


> Make it so.


Sweet.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

From the O: 


> Magloire wants to play more than the 19 minutes he is averaging, and Dixon has wondered aloud if Portland is the best fit for him with the emergence of rookies Brandon Roy and Sergio Rodriguez, and the commitment to develop Martell Webster.





> Magloire, who has an expiring contract of $8.3 million, has been the Blazer mentioned the most in trade rumors, but he admitted he doesn't know what his future holds.
> 
> "I can't get a read on it," Magloire said. "But I have never said I wanted to be traded. Never said that. I've just said I want an opportunity to play and help this team win games. I just feel like I can do more.
> 
> ...


http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/sports/1171522545138230.xml&coll=7

It does sound like Dixon's been whining to management a lot more than we've heard about. Seems like this Jones trade (or something like it) is pretty likely.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

yeah just when?


----------



## dwood615 (Jul 20, 2004)

if this happened we lose some outside shooting but gain some fan base because he is a local player...1 time slam dunk champ too...hes an exciting plyer bigger then juan too...an inch shoter but like 30 lbs heavier


i like it


----------



## ehizzy3 (Jun 12, 2006)

jones has a good shot also, id take him over dixon any day


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

The value of expiring contracts have always been long over-valued by Blazer fans who think some GM out there is willing to give up quality players for a 'waste of space' player. 

Expiring contracts are only valuable in the right situations. Such as when you pair one with a good young player who doesn't make that much, in exchange for a vet who is on a big contract. They are also useful if you want to try to land a disappointing player whose on a huge contract. But you have to be targeting a player that another team would basically like to give away.


----------

