# Sheed to Toronto??



## Swoosh (May 2, 2003)

From the Toronto Star today:



> It's no secret the Raptors have long coveted Rasheed Wallace and why not? The guy would be a perennial all-star in the East and is precisely what Toronto needs.
> 
> The No.4 pick and a couple of players (Jerome Williams, Antonio Davis) should be the first offer and Grunwald just might pursue this one seriously, even if he has to take back another contract in return.


I'm not exactly sure of the contract status of AD and JYD (too lazy to look), but I like the idea on a personell level...two tough hard working big men and a top pick. We could select Bosh with the fourth pick, or even trade down a few places if we could find a taker who REALLY wanted the #4 (since there really isn't that much difference in the top twenty once you get past the third pick). Denver is also considering their options with the #3, so (if this deal went down) we could package the #4 along with a player to get the #3 from them and select Melo.

If this deal were to go down, I like the possibilities.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Exactly what I was thinking, but who?

This would be a dream scenario:

POR trades R.Wallace & .McInnis to TOR

TOR trades A.Davis, L.Murray, L.Hunter #4 to POR

THEN

POR trades #4 & ???____________ to DEN

DEN trades #3 to POR

The question is what player? would they take Derek Andersen?
or a re-signed Antonio Daniels (would he resign knowing he is going to DEN?), the #23?

POR takes C.Anthony at #3

PG - Damon, AD, Hunter
SG - Wells, Q.Woods
SF - Anthony, Murray
PF - Zach, A.Davis
C - Davis, Boumjte x2

I would assume as well that Pattersen would be gone.

I'd like to hold on to the #23, but if we had to use it to obtain Anthony I'd do it.

As for DEN they get a good player Andersen OR another 1st rounder (@ #23) or gulp... both for moving down 1 spot!!!! Plus with DA they get a veteran presence at a position (SG) sorely lacking.


----------



## yangsta (May 14, 2003)

is chris bosh really that bad? How come no one is mentioning the potential #4 pick? If he can play at least at the level of Drew Gooden, I would take him in a heartbeat. Or if we want to draft a guarunteed fan favorite... we could go for Luke Ridnour


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Chris Bosh is a much bigger question mark than Drew Gooden was last year. Gooden came out after his junior season at Kansas and was a year and a half older than Bosh is going to be during the draft. Gooden was a much stronger (physically) player who'd played pretty well in big games and was coming out of an excellent program with a very good coach.

Gooden was a much more solid pick than Bosh, IMO, because of these reasons... Bosh still has a lot of potential, but I'm a little dubious that he'll be as good as Drew.

As far as Ridnour at #4: WAY too high to take him, IMO.

Ed O.


----------



## LionOfJudah (May 27, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>yangsta</b>!
> is chris bosh really that bad? How come no one is mentioning the potential #4 pick? If he can play at least at the level of Drew Gooden, I would take him in a heartbeat. Or if we want to draft a guarunteed fan favorite... we could go for Luke Ridnour


Its not like he's bad, just unproven in the NBA. Its a risk, and if you can trade for a player that is proven in the NBA for one who isn't its a safer bet.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Swoosh</b>!
> From the Toronto Star today:
> 
> 
> ...


Very interesting thought of moving Wallace to Toronto. Davis would be a nice workhorse to have in the post cleaning boards with Dale. You could also start Zach and have more muscle coming in behind him. 

I just want to make sure that Portland gets some shooters from somewhere. Having Davis and the 4th pick would be a good deal for the Blazers. That would signal the rebuilding era, without hurting to bad.

Of course if something like this happens there are going to be many more moves! My God, it isn't even June yet!


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Sheed for #4 Antonio Davis and the REAL Junk Yark Dog......uh where can I sign? Although the Davis boys are old,they can stil lrebound with the best of them. JYD is a Ruben clone without hte issues so it would be much easier to deal Ruben away. Do we just trade #4 to Denver for #3 striaght up,maybe give htme our 2nd rounder and cash or do we just draft Chris Bosh? I would really be enthusiastic with Carmelo though.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Or we could just trade them #4 and #23 for #3,that is pretty fair considering that they don't want Melo. Going with Pippen and Sabonis retiring here is what we would have.

PG-Damon Stoudamire,Jeff McInnis,Antonio Daniels
SG-Bonzi Wells,Derek Anderson,Qyntel Woods
SF-Carmelo Anthony,Jerome Williams,Ruben Patterson
PF-Zach Randolph,Antonio Davis
C-Dale Davis,Ruben Boumtje-Boumtje

We would then need to get rid of 1 or both back up Point Guards, either Bonzi or DA,and Ruben. If we could sign Payton that would be a very sweet start. I would try to trade some of those palyers for a come off the bench sharp-shooter.Trade the rest for a big body. I really like the team we could have if we got Carmelo. Melo,Z,and Q-Diddy is such a very posistive future.


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Swoosh</b>!
> 
> I'm not exactly sure of the contract status of AD and JYD


AD has a really bad deal - 3 more years for $37 million. Williams' is not as bad - 4 more years for $23.5 million (similar to what Patterson has left).

I've said it before, I don't like the idea of getting AD. He'll be 35 when the season starts. His stats last year - playing inside in the East:

35.7 MPG, *40.7 FG%*, 13.9 PPG, *8.2 RPG*

A lot of people complain that Rasheed doesn't rebound enough at PF. Well, Davis averaged less than a rebound more than Sheed - and he played center and doesn't hang around the perimeter on offense. And shooting 40% from the field doesn't sit well with me. His HIGHEST FG % in 4 years in Toronto was 44% - his first year with the Raptors. Davis, IMO, is wearing down. The Blazers are already paying their backup PG $13 million - do they want to pay their backup PF/C that amount, too?


Williams' stats last year:

33.0 MPG, 49.9 FG%, 9.7 PPG, 9.2 RPG

He's 30 himself, but I could easily see him backing up Zach for 3-4 years. His contract might be a little big for a backup, but like I said, the Blazers are paying a similar deal to Patterson to be the backup at SF.


Here's another issue for Portland - looking ahead to the team salary figure. This year, it will be somewhere in the $90's (that's millions). If the Blazers stand pat and re-sign Rasheed, it will probably be in the high $60's in 2004-05. But if they do this deal, it will be in the high $70's. That's close to $20 million extra coming out of Allen's pockets when all is said and done.

All this just to take a chance on Bosh? I'm not that high on Chris to begin with, so this deal just isn't worth it to me. If this is the only deal that Portland can make to trade Rasheed, then I'd vote to keep him around for another year.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

I know Chicago is open to trading thier #7 pick, would they take a future 1st,re-signed Antonio Daniels,Ruben Patterson for #7? If we get rid of Sheed,we HAVE to keep Bonzi for his scoring even if he is inconsistent. Draft Luke Ridnour with the #7 pick.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

*Re: Re: Sheed to Toronto??*



> Originally posted by <b>So Cal Blazer Fan</b>!
> 
> 
> AD has a really bad deal - 3 more years for $37 million. Williams' is not as bad - 4 more years for $23.5 million (similar to what Patterson has left).
> ...


We have Paul Allen, he'll take AD. I really would welcome A Davis to PDX with open arms. Do you know how good we would be on the boards with the Davis boys and Zach?A Davis is our Brian Grant.


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>MAS RipCity</b>!
> I know Chicago is open to trading thier #7 pick, would they take a future 1st,re-signed Antonio Daniels,Ruben Patterson for #7?


Not only wouldn't they do that, they couldn't (salary cap issues).


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Sheed to Toronto??*



> Originally posted by <b>MAS RipCity</b>!
> A Davis is our Brian Grant.


This is the only part of your post that I agree with. Good guy, deteriorating performance, horrendously overpaid for several years to come, not a player that the Blazers should trade for this summer. That describes both of them.


----------



## yangsta (May 14, 2003)

Sheed is our most consistent shooter... kinda sad that our 7 footer is our best shooter.. and we know that portland has enough inside prescence as of right now.... I don't think this is the right trade for us.... on top of that.. we are brining in TWO more players that expect 25+ minutes a game... 

The only way I'd trade sheed is if we get a top 3 pick, KG, Duncan, Kidd, or Jermaine in return.. of course it wouldn't be a 1:1 trade...


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

maybe we could swing a 3 way deal with Denver. Sending JYD, Davis and #4 to Denver, Sheed to Toronto and Camby and #3 to Portland.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Well if we get the #4 for Wallace, I'd feel a LOT more comfortable with Anthony than Bosh. If DEN is wiling to pass on Melo (not a given by any means), a trade for #4 and a player and\or pick, is a sweet deal for them IMO. This way POR gets Anthony. 

Yes SoCal, AD's contract is awful, 3yrs left, but in the strange world of the NBA today, there are GM's who his contract would be valuable to in another 2yrs. 2yrs w A Davis? That is not so bad IMO, by the end of 2yrs both Dale & Antonio will most likely be gone, and we will have bridged the gap with Z, Q and (holding out hope) Melo or whomever we drafted at #4.
Bonzi would most likely be dealt sometime down the road as well,
as well as DA (if he is still there) and Damon. Not al at once mind you, but piece by piece as good deals came about for good young players, picks. That is how I envision it happening, starting this year, I guess we will see what happens.

I think the whole goal for POR should be, try to rebuild, WITHOUT TANKING IT, while remaining competitive (ie competing for, hopefully maintaining, a playoff spot). If we fell out of the playoffs for a year or 2, so be it, as long as we are building on something positive.

Bottom Line for me is what is more important? Maintianing the playoff streak? or winning an NBA championship?. I'll take the latter.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

OK here's a 3 way deal works in real GM

Toronto trades: 
PF Antonio Davis (13.9 ppg, 8.3 rpg, 2.5 apg in 35.7 minutes) 
PF Jerome Williams (9.7 ppg, 9.2 rpg, 1.3 apg in 33.0 minutes) 
#4 pick

Toronto receives: 
PF Rasheed Wallace (18.1 ppg, 7.4 rpg, 2.1 apg in 36.3 minutes) 
Change in team outlook: -5.5 ppg, -10.1 rpg, and -1.7 apg. 

Denver trades: 
C Marcus Camby (7.6 ppg, 7.2 rpg, 1.6 apg in 21.2 minutes) 
SF Rodney White (9.0 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 1.7 apg in 21.7 minutes) 

Denver receives: 
PF Jerome Williams (9.7 ppg, 9.2 rpg, 1.3 apg in 71 games) 
PG Jeff McInnis (5.8 ppg, 1.3 rpg, 2.3 apg in 75 games) 
#4 pick
#23 pick
Change in team outlook: -1.1 ppg, +0.3 rpg, and +0.3 apg. 

Portland trades: 
PG Jeff McInnis (5.8 ppg, 1.3 rpg, 2.3 apg in 17.5 minutes) 
PF Rasheed Wallace (18.1 ppg, 7.4 rpg, 2.1 apg in 36.3 minutes)
#23 pick 

Portland receives: 
PF Antonio Davis (13.9 ppg, 8.3 rpg, 2.5 apg in 53 games) 
C Marcus Camby (7.6 ppg, 7.2 rpg, 1.6 apg in 29 games) 
SF Rodney White (9.0 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 1.7 apg in 72 games) 
#3 pick
Change in team outlook: +6.6 ppg, +9.8 rpg, and +1.4 apg. 

TRADE ACCEPTED


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

I was the first to propose a Blazers and Toronto deal involving Sheed and the 4th, if we do this deal, perhaps we can shift it for the 3rd but if not, I would gladly take Chis Bosh. The dude has the potential to be another KG. Either Mello or Bosh would sit well with me, Bosh may come out the better prospect, ya never know. Mello however will have immediate impact on any team he goes to.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Mybe Portland could get Denvers 2nd rounder too.


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> POR trades #4 & ???____________ to DEN
> 
> DEN trades #3 to POR
> ...


What a joke, fellas, WHAT A JOKE. Yeah, Kiki is going to quickly swap picks with you when you tell him that you'll throw in either Derek Anderson or Antonio Daniels! Good one!


> Originally posted by <b>MAS RipCity</b>!
> Or we could just trade them #4 and #23 for #3,that is pretty fair considering that they don't want Melo.


What are you people talking about? Denver doesn't want Carmelo? Just because they are willing to listen to offers DOES NOT MEAN that they are going to make this garbage deal with Portland. Kiki understands what Carmelo is worth, c'mon, guys, be realistic, stop being such homers, jesus!


> Originally posted by <b>MAS RipCity</b>!
> I know Chicago is open to trading thier #7 pick, would they take a future 1st,re-signed Antonio Daniels,Ruben Patterson for #7?


Good god, of course they wouldn't!


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

*The latest ramblings from The Hated Mr. Anti-Blazer!*

Pippen gone, now Arvydas gone... and you guys STILL don't think the writing is most DEFINITELY on the wall for a rebuilding job this summer? Seriously?

Arvydas was scheduled to make, what, $7.5 mil next year? His departure saves Paul Allen $15 mil in one season alone--$7.5 mil in salary, another $7.5 mil in luxury tax--so this is actually good news from a financial standpoint. Pippen was going to cost the team another, say, $4 mil next year, so there's another $8 mil in savings, $23 mil off the payroll already, fellas, and it's not even June!

Portland's ridiculous 2002-03 payroll of $105 mil (or thereabouts) is actually going to go down by a TON. Pippen made $20 mil last year (right?), and Arvydas made nearly $7 mil. I'm not sure how exactly the Shawn Kemp thing was handled, I don't know how much he gets from the team next year, I don't know how his contract is handled from a luxury tax-salary cap standpoint, but surely the tax-cap number for Kemp goes down next year, as well, but maybe not, who knows.

And, oh yeah, Antonio Daniels made just over $3 mil, if he comes back, it will be for less than that, closer to $1.5 mil, he's not the hottest commodity in the world.

So are Portland fans still interested in trading Rasheed somehow for that #4 overall pick to Toronto? Toronto is going to have an awfully tough time keeping their payroll under the luxury tax threshold if they don't get creative. They could trim a few million off the 2003-04 payroll somehow in a Rasheed trade, and, the following summer, they could re-sign Rasheed to a contract that pays him several million less than he is making right now (as we all know, he's in line for a pretty big paycut next summer). Of course, Portland would have to take on Antonio Davis and one of the Williams Brothers (probably Jerome), and I continue to believe that the #4 overall pick (Chris Bosh, presumably) is not worth it.

Of course, what happens if Toronto agrees to take on... RUBEN PATTERSON? Talk about an unwanted contract and an unwanted player! If Toronto would take on Patterson, I think the deal actually would make some sense. Here's an idea:

Rasheed Wallace (expiring contract) and Ruben Patterson (four years remaining on his contract, that's an eternity) to Toronto;

#4 overall pick, Antonio Davis (three years remaining), Jerome Williams (five years remaining), and Eric Montross (filler, two years remaining) to Portland.

Portland would, of course, take Chris Bosh at #4 overall, he seems to be the consensus #4 overall pick right now. The team could figure out a way longterm for he and Zach Randolph to co-exist. I am really starting to think that Randolph can play center in this league--he'd get dominated by Shaq and Duncan and Yao, but then again, who DOESN'T get dominated by these guys? It's not like there have not been undersized centers in this league in the past. Hakeem Olajuwon was 6'9" or 6'10" (although he was listed at 7'0", I think). Bill Russell was about 6'9". Bosh isn't ready to contribute as a rookie, anyway, so it's a problem you can deal with in a year or two.

Here's next year's Portland team after this deal:

Starting lineup

PG Damon Stoudamire
SG Derek Anderson
SF Bonzi Wells
PF Zach Randolph
C Antonio Davis

Key reserves: Antonio Daniels (re-signed to totally reasonable extension), Jerome Williams, Dale Davis, Qyntel Woods

End of the bench (no PT): Jeff McInnis, Chris Bosh, Pavel Podkolzin (#23 overall pick?)

Stashed on the IR: Eric Montross

How successful the Blazers are next year obviously has a lot to do with Antonio Davis. I wouldn't count on the guy ever doing much in this league ever again--I think his age has finally caught up to him, I think he's only going to miss more and more games due to injury from here on out, but you never know. This really isn't a very good team, merely making the playoffs would be a SIGNIFICANT achievement for this group. Assuming the Blazers get very little out of Antonio Davis, I'd pencil this team in for about 30-35 wins, competing with Seattle for 11th place in the Western Conference. But Bosh is a pretty interesting prospect, so maybe the offseason moves will pan out in the long run, who knows.

What the Blazers COULD do is to turn this deal with Toronto in a three-way by trading away all salaries that extend beyond the summer of 2005 (i.e., contracts with 3 or more years remaining) in exchange for dudes whose contracts expire ASAP (i.e., within two years, prior to the summer of 2005). Again, the contract of Dikembe Mutombo is an attractive target here--it's enormous, and it's done in two years. New Jersey has other non-essentials whose contracts expire within two years, as well. Here's a deal that Toronto could turn around and do with New Jersey:

Antonio Davis, Derek Anderson, and Jerome Williams to New Jersey;

Dikembe Mutombo (two years remaining) and Kerry Kittles (two years remaining) to Portland.

New Jersey would replace Kittles' minutes with a re-signed Lucious Harris and Derek Anderson. Kittles is an awfully streaky and erratic player, he's not really an essential member of New Jersey, in my opinion.

Here's what Portland looks like after THIS move:

Starting lineup

PG Damon Stoudamire
SG Kerry Kittles
SF Bonzi Wells
PF Zach Randolph
C Dale Davis

Key reserves: Antonio Daniels (re-signed to totally reasonable extension), Qyntel Woods, Chris Bosh (suddenly forced into the lineup as a rookie), Dikembe Mutombo

End of the bench (no PT): Jeff McInnis, Pavel Podkolzin (#23 overall pick?), Mystery Minimum Salary 12th Man

Stashed on the IR: Eric Montross

A 30-35 win team that at least had a little personality due to some decent veteran role players (D.A. and Junk Yard Dog) suddenly gets worse, we're talking about a 25-30 win team now, competing with the Clips for 12th place all of a sudden. [NOTE: This is NOT a good team. If you think this is a good team, take a look at Memphis' 2002-03 12th place roster, explain to me why the 2003-04 Portland team that I'm proposing here is better. I don't think you can do it.] HOWEVER, in the summer of 2005, you guys will have AN ENORMOUS amount of cap room to play around with, since the salaries of Stoudamire, Kittles, Davis, Mutombo, McInnis, and Montross all expire at that time, here's your nucleus heading into that summer:

1 Zach Randolph
2 Bonzi Wells
3 Chris Bosh
4 Qyntel Woods
5 Antonio Daniels
6 Pavel Podkolzin
7 2004 high lottery pick (they'll SUCK in 2003-04)
8 2005 high lottery pick (and they'll SUCK in 2004-05, too)

Team needs: a legit center (unless the team wants to go ahead and play Zach there longterm, or unless Podkolzin pans out), a legit point guard, maybe an off-the-bench perimeter SG/SF sharpshooter. Maybe you guys could get either Emeka Okafor or Kosta Perovic with your high 2004 lottery pick, there's your center solution. And maybe you could get your PG problem solved with your 2005 high lottery pick. More likely, you solve your PG problem via free agency in the summer of 2005. In other words, all of your team needs could be met, you guys could have an extremely interesting team starting in 2005-06.

For the upteenth time, this is actually a pretty quick rebuilding job here, you have a really promising nucleus that you can add some significant parts to if you let all those contracts expire. OR, you could TRADE those expiring contracts prior to the 2004-05 deadline for a team that is worried about losing a top player (a disgruntled player, obviously) to free agency with no compensation, a team that has decided to rebuild and move longterm contracts for contracts that expire ASAP. Nobody would be able to put together a better package for a, say, ALLEN IVERSON (who is NOT going to be happy with what he sees happening in Philly over the next year, trust me) than Portland IF Portland makes deals for contracts that expire ASAP. Portland could bail Philly out on some unwanted longterm deals (particularly Keith Van Horn, although Aaron McKie's deal sucks, too) and give Philly a ton of expiring contracts and one or two members of the young nucleus above.

These are the sorts of moves a team can make if it actually shoots for financial sanity (as opposed to the financial INsanity we've seen in Portland over the past several years). If you continue to overpay for talent and take on unwanted longterm salaries, you just keep digging yourself into a deeper and deeper hole.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Roby you are yet to be right, but it could happen. We'll just have to wait and see.


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

*Re: The latest ramblings from The Hated Mr. Anti-Blazer!*

Good post Roby. Can Chris Bosh play SF? 

Core :

Sg : Qyntel Woods
Sf : Chris Bosh
Pf : Zach Randolph
C : Parvel P. / Kendrick Perkins ?


----------



## yangsta (May 14, 2003)

anyone have any more info on "baby shaq"?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nbadraft/d03/story?id=1560314

Perkins led Ozen to a 96-3 record in his final three high school seasons. He averaged 27.5 points, 16.4 rebounds and 7.8 blocks per game last season, when Ozen lost in the state championship game to Fort Worth Dunbar.

on nbadraft.net he's expected to go 2nd round... I dunno.. I say we take him at #23.. could turn out to be a lottery pick next year


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

I started reading this thread and was going to make a long post reply until I read SoCal's nice response which I agree with, and the other replys that followed. To recap what I feel regarding AD:

He is similar to Brian Grant.

He is coming off his worst season in a long time, and at 35 might not recover his former productivity.

He has one of the worst contracts/performance left in the NBA. Most of the bad contracts (Kemp, Pippen, Zo, Juwan Howard, etc.) are gone or only have one or two years left. At 3 years, Davis contract is a bitter pill to swallow even if he were playing at his career best. Coming off his worst season, at age 35, Davis is near as close to untradeable as any player in the NBA.

*Antonio Davis has a negative trade value.* The Raptors will have to "pay" a team to take him off their hands. JYD has just enough value that he could be that lure.

JYD is overpaid for a backup, but his production is far more proportional to his salary, and has some value. But he has little value to Portland, unless they can also get rid of Patterson, who fills the same energy role off the bench.

So this trade boils down to Portland trading Rasheed Wallace for the #4 pick in a 3 player draft.

It would be the worst trade in Blazer history.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

BTW I'd be surprised to see DA and Bonzi in the starting lineup together this season. Personally IMO they need to move one of them for a SF or backup PF/C. I believ Qyntel given the vote of confidence and the opportunity can equal the output of DA this season coming up. Yes, I am being optomistic, but Q also showed the flashes. Bonzi at SG would be better, but I think Bonzi is the more tradeable comodity. We'll just have to see how this plays out.

I've also heard rumors that Bosh has the physical ability and skills to play the SF position as well as PF. I'd just do the Toronto deal and keep the 23 for Podkolzin or whatever the best Center prospect is on the board.

Potential future lineup
Pg ?
SG Woods
SF Bosh
PF Randolf
C Pokolzin (Perkins?)


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Why wouldn't DEN look at that deal anyway? IF they don't want Melo, see Roby, you have to read the ENTIRE post before you berate people, I said IF DEN didn't want to take Melo, IF, get it? You know, like it IS possible. They DO have 2 SF already. So IF that was the case and IF POR made that deal with TOR and was sitting at #4, how hard would it be to move up to #3?? Certainly, not as hard as it would be from #5,6,7 etc... We are talking about flip flopping spots here, gaining another 1st rounder is worthless? or a pick and a player is worthless? I disagree, the whole point for DEN passing on Melo is to get a pick and a player from someone else. They NEED veteran players BADLY, now AS I SAID in my post maybe they look at DA and do not find his salary palatable, but certainly IF DEN wasn't sold on Melo and POR WAS at #4 and wanting Melo a deal could be struck. Your golden boy "Kiki" will have his butt in the ringer if he doesn't sign some significant FA this year BTW, and despite your assurances they will, it is most certainly not a given. No one likes to play for a crappy team Roby.

[strike]Lastly, I am sick and tired of your attitude, if you disagree with posts, fine, state your disagreement, but to berate other posters is ridiculous. YOU are not a GM Roby, YOU do not have any more insight into matters than I do, nor do I have more insight than you, so stop pretending that you do. You are just throwing out ideas like the rest of us. I disagree with your ideas, you disagree with mine. That is understandable, but to berate others ideas is unacceptable. If your gonna continue to do it, do it somewhere else.[/strike]

Come on man we can't be callin people out like this


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

*Chris Bosh from www.nbadraft.net*



> NBA Comparison: Tim Duncan/Kevin Garnett
> 
> Strengths: Great inside outside player. Few are blessed with his athletic prowess. Plays with a good amount of aggresiveness, but doesn't get out of control or lose his composure easily. Appears "Garnett-esque" because of his long frame and amazing fluidity. Runs the floor exceptionally well. Doesn't have the perimeter skills of Garnett, namely shooting, but appears to like playing in the post more so than Garnett and could end up filling out into more of a dominating post player. Has great ball handling skills and really can pass the ball. Has some developed post moves and an advanced offensive game for a 19 year old. Can even step out to three point land and hit a few long range shots. Understands the game well, doesn't make unnecessary moves, uses the drop step and jump hook effectively. Because of his long arms, timing, and explosiveness, he is an excellent shot blocker. The team even goes to him to bring the ball up the court at times as a point forward.
> 
> Weknesses: Still weak physically. Needs time to develop into his body. Must bulk up and add strength to handle the power of NBA players. Still has problems with consistency but that can be expected from a young player. Needs better stamina, mental toughness. He can lose focus towards the end of games.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

*Another review from nbadraft.net*

Chris Bosh


> Strengths: Very quick off the floor and can really rise…6'11 lefty who may still be growing and can step out and hit deep ball…Quicker than most college big men, especially those his size…Solid handle for his size, that looks as if it will only get better…Good face up game and turn around jumper on the block…Soft touch on shot and hits high percentage of 3's…Takes good shots (almost to a fault) …Is comfortable with ball on the perimeter…Works hard for good position in the post and has good footwork down low…Can dribble with either hand…Gives big target for passer when posting up…Can block shots…Good at boxing out, solid rebounder, who should only get better as he adds weight/strength…Sound passer…Decent FT shooter…Active without the ball…Solid defender…Intelligent player and supposedly very coachable.
> 
> Weaknesses: Needs to add a lot (a whole lot) of strength to bang in the post in the NBA…Would like more moves in his post up game…Very poor at pick and roll, weak setting screens… Wonder whether smaller, quicker NBA players expose him on the perimeter…Gets pushed around rebounding and in getting position in the post. needs to improve hands catching passes…Lacks constant focus and intensity…Does not go after shots he could easily swat…Needs to improve mid range game…Has a lot of work to do before realizing his potential.
> 
> Notes: *Member of the National Honor Society, the National Society of Black Engineers and the Dallas Association of Minority Engineers* ... McDonald's All-American… Long and lanky… Very athletic…thin, but has frame to add more weight…Look and to still be getting accustomed /growing into his body…Young and very immature physically, turns 19 this March...Decent player now, but looks to have 25 and 10 potential…Nowhere near fully developed


Check the bold part. This indicates that he is an intelligant person.


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

> Named Tech's 10th ACC Rookie of the Year by the Atlantic Coast Sports Media ... Also named to the All-Atlantic Coast Conference second team and to the ACC All-Defensive Team ... Was the only freshman to make either first or second team ... Named first-team all-District 5 by the National Association of Basketball Coaches and All-South by the U.S. Basketball Writers Association ... Made the USBWA's national all-freshman team ... Named ACC Rookie of the Week four times during season ... Consistent scorer with smooth offensive skills and shooting touch, and a very effective rebounder and shot-blocker ... Declared his intention to enter the NBA draft on May 9, 2003.





> Scouts use Garnett and even Tim Duncan as comparisons when discussing Bosh. That is, with one major exception. Bosh's 49 percent shooting from beyond the 3-point line has everyone giddy. He's a very smooth player. Seems equally comfortable facing the basket or playing on the block. Has above-average athleticism. He's a quick leaper and runs the floor extremely well. Has some nice moves in the paint, including a sweet turn-around jumper right around the block. Has a soft touch on shots. Has great shot selection. He's not afraid to fight for position down low and seems to have a knack for rebounding. He plays with aggressiveness on the defensive end. He's very intelligent, *gets along well with his teammates and is a model citizen off the court*. He needs to get stronger. He'd be a much better rebounder and defender if he added 20 pounds of muscle. He's a bit of project, but he's probably a lock for the top five.


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

Not only that Schilly, but he is a someone with a good personality and head on his shoulders........someone with out the off-court distractions from what I heard. This is just what the Blazers need. They need to rebuild up their PR.............Bosh is a good start.

Positive PR is important.........

-------------

But back to the talent issue, which is always a constant argument over here......

Why would Denver trade down from the highly coveted 3rd pick to the 4th? What Denver needs, among other things, is better G's. At 4, there isn't worth a G worth taking(besides Ford- get back to that later). Bosh seems to be the consensus #4 pick, like Robyg said. He's a PF IMO......but I think he could play some 3. But he isnt a G. 

Now, while in "theory" trading Anderson plus the 4th pick(assuming there was a prior trade) for the 3rd fills Denver's need of a G, it doesn't make sense for Toronto. Anderson is a solid player, when healthy........ But Anthony is part of the Big 3 Cant Miss prospects. Not only that, but Carmelo probably could play SG(although he is best suited for SF IMO). Don't forget either, that Rodney White did pretty well at SG towards the end of the year......perhaps Denver wants to go with a taller lineup with White at SG.........but I think they'll look to add more talent. 

Denver wont do that trade. They are rebuilding. Why add a Derek Anderson and move down a spot, losing out on a great prospect like Anthony, when they can
A. Sign Maggette. Maggette is better than Anderson. Then they could still draft Carmelo.
B. Sign the defensive minded Stephen Jackson. Jackson can hit the 3 and is a good defender. Plus, they'd still be able to land Carmelo.

Denver has cap room, and plenty of it. Arenas seems to be there #1 pursuit. Expect him in Denver........I am :yes: After signing him, that fills their need for a PG. Look for them to go after a Maggette type, or Jackson type of SG. 

Draft Carmelo and have him play the 3. Skita at the 4. Nene at the 5. Skita still needs plenty of development, so maybe they bring back Juwon Howard....I dunno.

Point is, that with the FA class out there, and with the money they have, they can probably get someone better than Anderson, or Patterson to play SG(Maggette), or someone who would be a good player in Stephen Jackson(whom Id rather have than Patterson anyway.......and should come cheaper than Anderson, making Jackson more desirable).

The point is the Nuggets dont need to trade their pick for a G, and move down. They can address it in FA. Yes, Denver is listening to offers.......and yes, they could trade it. But in the end, barring a good/great offer, I believe Denver will take Carmelo.


----------



## ballocks (May 15, 2003)

as i said before on this board, the proposed portland-toronto trade seems terrible from both sides. 

i don't understand what these franchises are building- they're sort of sitting on the fence and remaining indecisive. i don't think wallace is worth that much for toronto, and i don't think antonio davis + jyd+ #4 are worth that much for portland.

this is one of those deals that baffles me.

peace


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

Denver, IMO, even if they decide to trade the #3 pick, will not trade it for a big contract. They want to keep their cap room to go after FA's. (BTW, Sonny Vaccaro was on local radio yesterday and his opinion was that the Nuggets #1 target is now Olowokandi, and that Arenas is #2) But if they want to get both of them, they have to save their salary space. For that reason, I don't see them trading the #3 for something like #4 & Anderson or #4 & McInnis or #4 & ?????. In fact, I'm still not convinced that they will trade the pick. But if they do, look for something more like a cheap, young SG under his rookie deal (who makes less than Melo would) and future draft picks. Something like Richardson and a future #1 from Golden State. And Portland just isn't in a position to make that kind of deal.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

I am sure that many of you have read this from Oregonlive.com, but I thought that I woudl throw this out there.

_Trade Winds
Toronto Sun reporter Doug Smith says the Raptors have coveted Rasheed Wallace for years and might be willing to part with Jerome Williams, Antonio Davis and the No. 4 pick in the draft in exchange for the two-time all star. Names that should be available at the No. 4 spot in the draft include All-American point guard T.J. Ford, ACC Rookie of the Year Chris Bosh and Conference USA's player of the year Dwayne Wade. 

There are three obvious standouts in this year's draft (LeBron James, Carmello Anthony and Darko Milicic). Denver is rumored to be disinterested in Carmello Anthony, who will most likely be left for them at No. 3. *If the Blazers could pull off the above deal, they might be able to send the Nuggets the No. 4 pick and a player like Qyntel Woods for the 3rd pick.*_

If Portland is serious about cleaning up this Summer then this is a smart move. Qyntel is a confessed drug user that has said he just can't stop. He is the classic Stupid Jock. He has shown that he isn't to smart in his traffic stop and there is a reason he fell to Portland in the Draft. If Portland can get Carmello Anthony for Woods then it would be a smart basketball move and PR move. :yes: 

Losing Rasheed just to get you to the forth pick, Jerome Williams, and Antonio Davis makes sense too. You would be getting players that want to play in the paint. But getting Anthony would be the prize for moving Wallace!


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>HOWIE</b>!
> 
> If Portland is serious about cleaning up this Summer then this is a smart move. Qyntel is a confessed drug user that has said he just can't stop. He is the classic Stupid Jock. He has shown that he isn't to smart in his traffic stop and there is a reason he fell to Portland in the Draft. If Portland can get Carmello Anthony for Woods then it would be a smart basketball move and PR move. :yes:
> 
> Losing Rasheed just to get you to the forth pick, Jerome Williams, and Antonio Davis makes sense too. You would be getting players that want to play in the paint. But getting Anthony would be the prize for moving Wallace!



Well, if Woods is that much of a problem, why would Denver want him then? Especially after he said he can't stop.........

But looking at pure talent, its a deal Denver would probably take. Woods looks like he will be a very good player, and they could land Bosh at the same time.........


----------



## Swoosh (May 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>HOWIE</b>!
> I am sure that many of you have read this from Oregonlive.com, but I thought that I woudl throw this out there.
> 
> _Trade Winds
> ...


Giving up the fourth pick (assuming a deal went through to acquire it) and Woods for the third pick is too much to give up. Woods alone may have as much potential as Anthony. I would rather stick with Woods and use the #4 pick.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

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


I guess that my thought would be that alone in Denver, Woods might turn into something. Being in Portland and surrounded by the bad press and teammates that tend to get into trouble a lot just doesn't seem like the kind of place that Woods needs to be in. The deal sounds like it would work for both teams. Portland to sheed the image that they have had over the past few years. This deal get rid of two of their problem children! :yes:


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

I agree. Wallace/Woods for Anthony? That's a little too much.. I'm all for keeping Woods, I feel he's going to be a great player.. Maybe the 4th pick and future picks?


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I agree with Swoosh on this one. Bosh is compared to KG and Duncan. While it is a stretch to say that I would say that he would be worth taking the risk on, rather than dealing WOods and Bosh for Anthony.


----------



## yangsta (May 14, 2003)

agree.. I'm sure that this won't be the last time we hear of qyntel getting in some off court trouble.. but I do think that we should keep him another year...hopefully he will become a star, and get enough attention so that he'll actually be concerned about his image... 
if he works out this offseason, does well in summer leagues, he could become a pippen type player (with less defense, more offense)...or maybe a poor man's tmac. They say he's a really good shooter, and we all know that he has madd hops (It seems like 75% of his points this year were off alley-oops) I would rather get Bosh and keep Qyntel, than get a glenn robinson type player out of Melo.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Boy that could be a double dip stinger if Bosh and Q lived up to their NBA comparisons. TMac and Garnett.


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

What were Bosh's numbers last year? What makes him so good? I'm not too familiar with him.


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

I wouldnt give up the 4th AND Woods for it......but then again, if I was Denver, I would demand that.

Its a double edge sword. If Portland lands the 4th, my guess is that they'll just keep it. Theyd have to part with either Woods or Randolph to move up to 3, which in that case, would be bad for Portland.


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Loyalty4Life</b>!
> What were Bosh's numbers last year? What makes him so good? I'm not too familiar with him.



Its not all about numbers. Gasol had nothing great as far as statistics go, but he ended up as the ROY.

I dont remember his stats. But Bosh is athletic. Read the profile on him at nbadraft.net. I havent watched him play more than twice, so I wont comment on my opinions about his game too much. I just think he will end up as a good pro, from what I saw.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Someone on the draft board had a great point.

Bosh is a freshman. If he were to stay another year or 2 it is likely that he could be the #1 overall.


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

*Different trade*

How about this trade? 


Portland trades: PF Rasheed Wallace (18.1 ppg, 7.4 rpg, 2.1 apg in 36.3 minutes) 
SG Derek Anderson (13.9 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 4.3 apg in 33.6 minutes) 
SF Ruben Patterson (8.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg, 1.3 apg in 21.2 minutes) 
Portland receives: PF Antonio Davis (13.9 ppg, 8.3 rpg, 2.5 apg in 35.7 minutes) 
PF Jerome Williams (9.7 ppg, 9.2 rpg, 1.3 apg in 33.0 minutes) 
PG Lindsey Hunter (9.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 2.5 apg in 23.2 minutes) 
C Marcus Camby (7.6 ppg, 7.2 rpg, 1.6 apg in 21.2 minutes) 
Plus #3 from Denver
Change in team outlook: +0.6 ppg, +12.4 rpg, and +0.2 apg. 

Toronto trades: PF Antonio Davis (13.9 ppg, 8.3 rpg, 2.5 apg in 35.7 minutes) 
PF Jerome Williams (9.7 ppg, 9.2 rpg, 1.3 apg in 33.0 minutes) 
PG Lindsey Hunter (9.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 2.5 apg in 23.2 minutes) 
Toronto receives: PF Rasheed Wallace (18.1 ppg, 7.4 rpg, 2.1 apg in 74 games) 
SF Ruben Patterson (8.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg, 1.3 apg in 78 games) 
Change in team outlook: -6.9 ppg, -8.7 rpg, and -2.9 apg. 

Denver trades: C Marcus Camby (7.6 ppg, 7.2 rpg, 1.6 apg in 21.2 minutes) 
Denver receives: SG Derek Anderson (13.9 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 4.3 apg in 76 games) 
Plus #4 from toronto
Change in team outlook: +6.3 ppg, -3.7 rpg, and +2.7 apg. 

TRADE ACCEPTED

This trade gives Denver a new SG without sacrificing much cap room. They still would have close to $20 million in cap room. They lose Camby, but they were looking to move him at the trade deadline earlier this year. Camby even though injury prone, would be a nice tall lengthy defender for Portland. Toronto gets Sheed, but has to take back a longer contract for us taking two long contracts. We get Hunter in addition who has one year left.
New line up

AD, Camby,Ruben BB
Zach, DD
Carmelo, JWilliams
Bonzi, Qwoods
McInnis, Damon, Hunter 

Plus the #23.

We would still have all summer to tweek the lineup.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

While Vintage is right (it's not all about the numbers), Bosh DOES have good numbers in the one year at Georgia Tech. Specifically, he shot 56% from the floor (which is very good, but not unheard of, in college) including *46.8%* from three point range. Even considering the close three point line, that's some excellent shooting for a young guy.

My biggest fear is that he's just a younger Jon Bender, rather than a younger KG... I haven't seen him play enough to feel confident one way or the other.

Ed O.


----------



## DrFunk03 (May 13, 2003)

:naughty: 

If you'd like to show us your proposal just post it here rather than directing people to another site.

Thanks, Schilly


----------



## Qyntel's Shadow (Dec 31, 2002)

Dr. Funk, that site has hit their bandwidth limit anyway. Would ya mind cutting and pasting it here? From all of the trade ideas I've seen, and tried, I can't escape AD coming to Portland as a key ingredient. That doesn't work for me. Draft picks are at their highest value right now, trading for them seems logical, but trading away a large expiring contract, embodied in a producing player (in the harder conference) just doesn't flow for me. Keep Rasheed until late Summer if he's gonna get moved. His value will rise as the Free Agents sign, and teams realize they aren't going to land the player they originally desired. Then, Rasheed's stock goes up, and Portland can get more than bad contracts and a high pick.


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

You're being homers again, fellas. Qyntel Woods is a somewhat interesting prospect, but keep in mind that this guy fell all the way to, what, #21 overall last year? Denver is NOT going to trade the highly coveted Carmelo Anthony for the #4 pick and Qyntel Woods, they can get so much more than this for Carmelo. Qyntel is hardly a can't miss prospect! How is Qyntel Woods a better prospect than, say, Rodney White, a guy Denver doesn't really know what to do with?

Having said all that, I suppose it's possible that Kiki could totally fall for this Chris Bosh kid and want to trade down, but again, he could get a lot more for Carmelo than many of you guys think. I don't think there's an offer that Toronto (the team that has the #4 pick at the moment, remember) can make that will really interest Kiki at all. It's amazing that a team can have basically NO assets, but it's true, all Toronto has that anybody wants is Vince Carter and this #4 pick, and Vinsanity has so many doubters at this point that I cannot imagine that they could possibly get equal value for the guy. [Incidentally, how about Vinsanity for the #3 pick straight up? Shouldn't Toronto make Kiki this offer? Is Vinsanity worth the gamble?]

Miami at #5 doesn't make a whole lot of sense, either, because the team already has Caron Butler to man the SF position. And, since Miami, like Toronto, only has two assets that anybody wants (Caron Butler and the #5 pick), well, there's another team that it makes no sense for the Nuggets to trade with.

How about the Clips? Now THERE'S a team that makes sense as a trading partner for Denver. Lamar Odom is a restricted free agent. If Kiki wants this guy, he can make him an offer, and Odom can accept that offer, but the Clips can match that offer. Same deal with Corey Maggette, who Kiki is supposedly interested in (I'm not so sure, but it could be true). Same deal with Andre Miller, but I don't get the feeling that Kiki is interested in this guy, nor do I get the feeling that the Clips plan on matching an offer for Miller this summer, anyway. Michael Olowokandi is an UNrestricted free agent, so if Denver wants this guy, they can sign him themselves, they don't need to mess with this whole sign-and-trade business.

A trade that, to me, makes a ton of sense here, IF Kiki is truly interested in Odom AND Maggette, is this one:

Odom (sign-and-trade), Maggette (sign-and-trade), and the #6 pick TO DENVER FOR the #3 pick and Rodney White.

Another trade that makes sense:

Maggette (sign-and-trade), Chris Wilcox (still a top prospect), and the #6 pick TO DENVER FOR the #3 pick.

Now THAT is what Carmelo Anthony is worth, fellas.


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

There you go again, actin' like your Kiki's right hand man


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Roby, good rationale, but you are not thinking salary matching for trades.

Odom + Maggette resigned will be way way over what Rodney White makes.

IMO Portland should sit tight on getting Bosh and the Filler for Sheed, that is a good deal for Portland.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Wrong Roby. You conveniently overate some players and undervalue others, based upon your warped "salary based" value system you got going there. Everyone likes to play GM, most people just don't take it so seriously.

BTW the Baylor should be FIRED on the spot if he did either of those deals, Talk about bad trades... Odom, Maggette AND the #6 to move up 3 spots. How can you suggest this and then shred other suggestions? That is a horrible trade for the clips, HORRIBLE. Let me see E.Brand was traded for the #2 pick, but Melo is worth THAT much more. Come on.... You OVERVALUE draft picks, who have proven nothing in the NBA yet, you UNDERVALUE any player who has a contract that YOU deem overinflated, thus making that player worthless, of course. You eem to be so sure that POR will just BLOW the team up, not likely, and seem to know exactly what Kiki and other GM's are thinking, ah...I don't think so. You don't have all the answers dude... sorry but its the truth.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>robyg1974</b>!
> Maggette (sign-and-trade), Chris Wilcox (still a top prospect), and the #6 pick TO DENVER FOR the #3 pick.
> 
> Now THAT is what Carmelo Anthony is worth, fellas.


I disagree that Maggette, Wilcox and the #6 is a better package than Woods/Randolph (one of the two, not both) and the #4. Especially if the other team really wanted Bosh.

Personally, if I were Portland, and I had the #4 pick, I wouldn't deal it with Woods for Maggette, Wilcox and the #6.

I do agree that Odom, Maggette and the #6 is a better package, assuming you hae faith that Odom will be more motivated to play to his talent level.


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

Hey Peaceman..............please read this.




> Originally posted by <b>Vintage</b>!
> Not only that Schilly, but he is a someone with a good personality and head on his shoulders........someone with out the off-court distractions from what I heard. This is just what the Blazers need. They need to rebuild up their PR.............Bosh is a good start.
> 
> Positive PR is important.........
> ...


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> 
> I disagree that Maggette, Wilcox and the #6 is a better package than Woods/Randolph (one of the two, not both) and the #4. Especially if the other team really wanted Bosh.
> ...



I dunno. This is hard to tell. Maggette is the best of the Woods/Wilcox/Randolph group as of now. Randolph has the best chance(between him and Wilcox) as being a an All Star. It sort off balances it out. 

But back on topic......

Roby- I do have to agree with the Blazer fans a little. I dont see them trading Maggette and Odom, plus their pick, for the 3rd pick UNLESS Sterling has decided to let them all walk this summer. 

Thats the only way I see that happening. Carmelo does have a ton of trade value........but not Odom, Maggette, 6 trade value. I think you might be a tad bit over zealous with that one. But I agree with most of what you said. Denver, under no circumstance, will trade the #3 pick for the #4 and Derek Anderson. They can get better than Anderson in FA. And I know you don't like Maggette a lot, but I feel he is a good player and will continue to get better.

The question Denver will ask is "Are we better off keeping Carmelo, and adding Arenas and somone like Stephen Jackson to play SG than we would if he traded our pick for the 4th and Derek Anderson?"

With the 4th, they'd most likely add Bosh, and then go for Arenas. A Anthony/Arenas/Jackson tandem is better than a Bosh/Arenas/Anderson tandem...........

Denver will pass on that offer should it be offered.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Vintage - 

The real question for DEN will be WHO will sign with them, that is crucial for Kiki IMO, and there is no guarantee that S.Jackson, G.Arenas, M.Olowokandi and whoever else will sign with them. I think that is the underlying issue with blowing a team up, its not a given, by any means that a FA will want to play for you. DEN was a horrible team last year, and will be for a while longer. Most players just do not want to play for a lousy team, especially if they have been on a losing team for awhile, and other teams are VERY creative at getting these guys to sign with them instead. 

Now I agree it is very possible that DEN decides they don't want DA's contract (@ 4 more yrs too), and they may score big in Free Agency, but they could also strike out ala CHI, hopefully Kiki doesn't panic if things do not go as planned. But moving from 3 to 4, and remember this is all based on IF DEN isn't sold on Melo for their team, and they see more value (which I believe for them there is) in essentially trading him. They could, IF POR had the #4, make a deal with POR pick up a player \and picks and drop a spot & then pick whomever they like OR then make another deal with a team that has targeted Bosh, Lampe, TJ, etc..., and get ANOTHER player and picks. I just see the possibilities for DEN to really help themselves by dangling the #3. Maybe POR would have to give something else to move up one spot (Q, #23 and future 1st?, who knows?), and maybe POR would say forget it, stay at #4 and draft Bosh OR dangle #4 for players\picks. But if DEN makes a deal to move several spots down (like to #6 for example), I'm not convinced that it would be better than flip-flopping the #4 AND then trading again. DEN will be interesting to watch during the draft, and BTW I see teams licking their chops if Skita is at the PF spot.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Denvers fishing...Plain and simple...They are throwing out the bait to see what they can get.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Honestly, their is little to no chance we can get Melo. He is near impossible to obtain...

but i like this Bosh kid. He has size, skills and quickness. He is much different than Jon Bender. He is physical. He got 9 boards a game last year. To go along with 2 blocks. 

Bosh would need to lean to play SF, but i think it can be done. He has quickness and size, and a nice jumper. At SF i would compare him to a less athletic Miles with MUCH more fundamentals. 


I would try to get more out of Toronto though. Mo Pete is appealing. 

Also, if we got Bosh, moved Wells to SG..then we must trade DA.....

Here are a few scenarios....

DA for #10 Pick, Hughes, Lue(S&T)

DA for Wes Person, #13, #27

DA for Jay Williams, Eddie Robinson


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ThatBlazerGuy</b>!
> but i like this Bosh kid. He has size, skills and quickness. He is much different than Jon Bender. He is physical. He got 9 boards a game last year. To go along with 2 blocks.
> 
> Bosh would need to lean to play SF, but i think it can be done. He has quickness and size, and a nice jumper. At SF i would compare him to a less athletic Miles with MUCH more fundamentals.


So he's a small forward that's less athletic than Miles with more fundamentals. Sounds like a less athletic Jon Bender to me.

It's hard to compare stats because Bender skipped college, but pulling down 9 boards a game when you're 6'11, even in the ACC, isn't that hard, so I don't think that it proves he's physical as you claim he is. (Bender averaged like 15 boards a game his senior year in HS, while Bosh got 9, for whatever that's worth...)

I don't mean the slam the guy; I guess we'll wait and see.

Ed O.


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> Vintage -
> 
> The real question for DEN will be WHO will sign with them, that is crucial for Kiki IMO, and there is no guarantee that S.Jackson, G.Arenas, M.Olowokandi and whoever else will sign with them. I think that is the underlying issue with blowing a team up, its not a given, by any means that a FA will want to play for you. DEN was a horrible team last year, and will be for a while longer. Most players just do not want to play for a lousy team, especially if they have been on a losing team for awhile, and other teams are VERY creative at getting these guys to sign with them instead.


Yes, it is a gamble. A huge one. But with as many good FAs that are expected, it should cause players to jump teams. Clippers wont sign everyone. So Denver should be able to get a FA. Arenas/Kandi seem to be the leading candidates. And I was just using Stephen Jackson as an example. Personally, Id love to seem him in Chi. Maggette might leave LaC as well. Denver can offer money, and that might be enough for them.


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ThatBlazerGuy</b>!
> Honestly, their is little to no chance we can get Melo. He is near impossible to obtain...
> 
> but i like this Bosh kid. He has size, skills and quickness. He is much different than Jon Bender. He is physical. He got 9 boards a game last year. To go along with 2 blocks.
> ...


Not one of those deals will happen. First, Washington brought Hughes in as a PG and liked him bec. he played good defense. Hughes could very well be their PG next season. You just about left them non existent at PG now. And I doubt Washington will trade the #10 pick for DA. He's not what they need IMO.

DA for Wes, 13, and 17? You will have Memphis fans laughing their butts off if you posted that. First, West is trying to dump cap. Why in God's green earth would they take on DA's contract. Plus, with one of those picks, mainly 13, they stand a good chance of getting someone real good, a legit C, if one should fall. Thats what they need. 

DA for Jay Williams and Eddie Robinson? Eddie's contract balances out with DA. DA is a better shooter, but Eddie is the better defender. And no way would we "throw in" Jay. If Jay is going to get traded, it will be for a defensive 3. DA isn't worth giving up Jay for. Jay had a bad rookie year, but no one has "given up" on him. That trade is not going to happen.


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> Roby, good rationale, but you are not thinking salary matching for trades.
> 
> Odom + Maggette resigned will be way way over what Rodney White makes.


Denver has a ton of cap room, so they can absorb these large salaries, not a problem.


> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> BTW the Baylor should be FIRED on the spot if he did either of those deals, Talk about bad trades... Odom, Maggette AND the #6 to move up 3 spots. How can you suggest this and then shred other suggestions? That is a horrible trade for the clips, HORRIBLE.


Dude, I don't even know why I even ATTEMPT to reason with you. Maggette will probably not get re-signed by the Clips, anyway. He's going to get an offer for way more than he's worth, the Clips won't match that offer. That makes the deal Odom and the #6 for the #3 and White. Donald Sterling ultimately doesn't really want to give Odom $7-$8 mil in the first year of a longterm deal. Also, in case you were living on the moon last year, the Clippers SUCKED, the only gamer was Elton Brand. How many Clippers fans are sitting around thinking that NEXT year is going to be different? Not many. How many are going to start thinking that NEXT year will be different IF they go get Carmelo? A lot!

You make a common mistake, Kmurph. You think quantity is better than quality. You think 3-4 good players is better than one great player. You're wrong. Great wins in this league, not good. If Carmelo turns out to be as good as people think, or even CLOSE to as good as people think, this trade will ultimately be seen as a lopsided deal in L.A.'s favor.


> Let me see E.Brand was traded for the #2 pick, but Melo is worth THAT much more.


Carmelo puts people in the seats, he's widely seen as "the real deal," and he will be on a rookie contract until the summer of 2007. Talk about bang for your buck! How many more fans will pay to go see Carmelo over the next four years than will pay to go see Bosh during that same time period? People used to pay money to go see Lamar Odom play... not anymore. I can't imagine that very many kids told their dads last year, "Daddy, daddy, can we PLEEEEEEEEASE go see Corey Maggette play sometime?" But Carmelo Anthony, now there's another story! The guy is getting hype, a LOT of hype, he has charisma, he has showmanship, he has skills. He probably will not be as good as people think he's going to be, but it'll be a few years before we all realize it. In the meantime, somebody is going to make a TON of money off this guy, and the Clippers know this. The Clippers pay less money in salary to Carmelo than they would to Lamar Odom, Corey Maggette, and T.J. Ford, yet they sell more tickets with Carmelo, WAY more tickets, than they would with Odom, Maggette, and Ford. Will they win more games with Carmelo? Actually, yeah, they probably will, but that's not really the point. This financial stuff matters, it matters a lot. Hardcore hoops fans, they might get kind of excited to watch a Corey Maggette, but the casual fan is only interested in hyped-up guys like Jordan, Kobe, etc.

Also, when Brand was traded, he was two years away from restricted free agency (not four), and the Bulls did not view him as a true franchise player, based on the fact that they were BY FAR the worst team in the league despite his productivity.


> Come on.... You OVERVALUE draft picks, who have proven nothing in the NBA yet, you UNDERVALUE any player who has a contract that YOU deem overinflated, thus making that player worthless, of course. You eem to be so sure that POR will just BLOW the team up, not likely, and seem to know exactly what Kiki and other GM's are thinking, ah...I don't think so. You don't have all the answers dude... sorry but its the truth.


You know what, dude, I definitely have a better idea of what GMs are thinking than somebody who proposes the #4 pick and Derek Anderson for the #3 pick. Honestly, that's one of the worst ideas I've heard in a while.

As for Portland blowing the team up, well, Pippen is gone, Arvydas is gone... that's a pretty good start!


> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> I disagree that Maggette, Wilcox and the #6 is a better package than Woods/Randolph (one of the two, not both) and the #4. Especially if the other team really wanted Bosh.


Randolph and the #4, nobody mentioned that, did they? Randolph is worth quite a bit more than Woods, obviously. Also, if the Nuggets decide that T.J. Ford is their guy--and I really don't know what Kiki is thinking, which is why he's so smart, he doesn't let people know what he's thinking, he understands that it's just a big old poker game, most GMs don't get it--and if he can get Ford at #6, then #4 vs. #6, doesn't really matter, it really comes down to the other players involved. Chris Wilcox is still a major project. I don't understand it when a guy comes out after his first or second year of college, he's still really raw, everybody acknowledges that "it's going to take a while, just be patient, in about three years, he's going to start being really, really good," and, 25 games into his rookie year, when he is doing nothing, JUST AS EVERYBODY PREDICTED, everybody starts labelling him a bust. Wilcox is a very nice commodity in this league, look at the dude, look at that size and athleticism and tenacity, guys like that don't grow on trees. A dude like Qyntel Woods, he's really nothing all that special, maybe he turns out to be something else, but from a physical standpoint, he's not the first lanky slasher/jumper without an outside jumper and with very little understanding of how to play team basketball I've seen and he definitely won't be the last.


> I do agree that Odom, Maggette and the #6 is a better package, assuming you hae faith that Odom will be more motivated to play to his talent level.


I'm not much of an Odom fan, but he still has some believers in this league, and, he's only about 23-24 years old, he's younger than you think he is.


> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> Denvers fishing...Plain and simple...They are throwing out the bait to see what they can get.


Yep, I totally agree, I ultimately don't see Carmelo getting traded anywhere. You always want to know what your assets are worth. Kiki is just gauging what Carmelo is worth. If he creates a bidding war for Carmelo, then who knows, he may end up totally ripping somebody off here, he's a shrewd guy.


> Originally posted by <b>Vintage</b>!
> Roby- I do have to agree with the Blazer fans a little. I dont see them trading Maggette and Odom, plus their pick, for the 3rd pick UNLESS Sterling has decided to let them all walk this summer.


I don't know, I gotta think that Sterling plans on letting Maggette walk if somebody offers him MLE+, and somebody will. I think he'll bring back Brand, hell, I even think he'll max him out. Olowokandi is pretty much a goner. I think Andre Miller is, too. The guy that I can't figure out is Lamar Odom. Surely Sterling has cold feet about matching a large ($8 mil+) offer sheet for the guy, he hasn't been the most productive and efficient player in the world over the past couple of years. But I also gotta think that he doesn't want to just let Odom walk if he can get something good for the guy, and he can, there is a huge difference between #3 and #6 this year, hell, there's a huge difference between #3 and #4 this year!


> The question Denver will ask is "Are we better off keeping Carmelo, and adding Arenas and somone like Stephen Jackson to play SG than we would if he traded our pick for the 4th and Derek Anderson?"
> 
> With the 4th, they'd most likely add Bosh, and then go for Arenas. A Anthony/Arenas/Jackson tandem is better than a Bosh/Arenas/Anderson tandem...........
> 
> Denver will pass on that offer should it be offered.


I don't really see San Antonio letting Stephen Jackson go this summer. I think the SG that Denver will get, IF they get a SG (and I gotta think that PG and C are their top two priorities), will be Maggette, and I think they can get him for JUST OVER the MLE. He will get several full MLE offers, but my guess is that Denver will be the only team willing to give him a bit more than that, around $5.5 mil will be the best offer he can get, and he'll take it).

And it's pretty obvious that a younger and cheaper Maggette is a more valuable commodity in this league than Anderson, I agree completely, Vintage. Anthony > Bosh; Maggette > Anderson.


> Originally posted by <b>ThatBlazerGuy</b>!
> Also, if we got Bosh, moved Wells to SG..then we must trade DA.....
> 
> Here are a few scenarios....
> ...


Dear god, fellas... DEAR GOD. I give up.


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

Yes roby, that last one is a doozy. I cant tell which is the better of the "proposed" trades...........but I almost died laughing, then I realized he was serious.

I tried to explain it in this thread, and in another.....but that one is a whopper. I thought you'd like to try to explain it......:laugh:


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

The whole argument for Denver not trading down to the #4 is based purely on them signing players via FA. They can get the players they think they can by signing them outright. As was mentioned it is a roll of the dice. KMurph spells it out very well. Denver has been horrible for years. They could very well get the Chicago Bulls affects, and not be able to attract FA's. Perhaps the only FA interest is just in to barter with teams they really want to go to and having Denver's interest a bit raises their salary with other teams. Its been done and will continue to do so. Its part of the sale.

I woud love our team to be in Denvers under the cap postion right now with the load of FA's that will be available this summer. It would be nice to sign almost anyone you think you desire. But it may just be a pipe dream.

It was also pointed out players do not want to wait years to be competitive again. They want to win now, just as much as the other teams.

If Denver did trade down with Portland at the number 4.... and they got either (name your Portland player)... work it out CBA wise though or you will catch heck from someone 

and they got the Portland player plus the #4 and got Ford (admitting they might not get Arenas) or Kaman or Bosch (big men and saying Hilario may not be so good after all)...

(please dont discount the value of any pro player, they do fill a need)

Going from Anthony to a Portland player and a draft pick... is not all that bad.. it might even be better for the team depending on what happens in FA. They may need that PG or SG or SF or ? after all.

Thinking Areans is a lock in Denver is not giving Golden State enough credit. They haev a young talented team as well. Witht he #11 pick. Eric Mussleman said he has brought in Ridnour to look at. Great pick for them if they can get him. The whole Arenas talk in Denver borders on FA tampering. Why has he been talked about so much? Does he have connections to Colorado? family, regional desires, etc...

It is NOT A GIVEN that Denver will score BIG in FA just because they have lots of money to spend.

Just because Damon was 15-5-5 in the playoffs this year does not mean he will be highly coveted in the off season.... same thing for Denver.. just because they are so far under the cap, does not mean every FA player imaginable in the league will flock to Denver....

do not bet every dollar you have on this concept. There are 28 other teams out there with off season plans as well. The planets haev no tyet aligned over the rocky mountains.

I would love to have Carmelo as our SF of the future... but if Toronto happens to make a trade with us... Kaman or Bosh would do wonders to. With Sabas apparently not coming back, and Pippen maybe not either. Big men are suddenly a need, with a goof SF as well.

The draft is full of busts over the years. High draft picks as well. Carmelo has been impressive in the NCAA tourney, but is he the real deal? We do not know. Anyone who tells you he is is just plain full of it. They do not know either, its just their opinion and nothing more than that. More than likely its something they read on another site and they are bringing it in here.

Look for Denver to draft Carmelo but trade him in August... after they realize they will not get the players they originally wanted.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>robyg1974</b>!
> Dude, I don't even know why I even ATTEMPT to reason with you.


:allhail:

Can you make a logical response without being so rude to posters?


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

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



He tries time and time again to explain everything........ Yet, some still feel Bonzi could net the #3 pick, or that Anderson + 4 could, or whatever...........


And just for fun, I decided to throw that DA for ERob and Jay idea that somone here came up with........and put it on our forum to see the response.

http://basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32832 

Feel free to check in on it from time to time.


----------



## Ballishere (May 24, 2003)

I case you portland fans have forget Toronto has not traded the fourth pick to Toronto!!!!!


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Ballishere</b>!
> I case you portland fans have forget Toronto has not traded the fourth pick to Toronto!!!!!



They seem to think its almost a done deal. I haven't read anything about it, and I just kind of assumed they knew what they were talking about on that issue....that it will most likely happen.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>robyg1974</b>!
> 
> Randolph and the #4, nobody mentioned that, did they? Randolph is worth quite a bit more than Woods, obviously.


I saw someone put "Randolph/Woods" with the #4 as their trade proposal. And, yes, Randolph is worth considerably more at the moment, but I wouldn't deal Woods and the #4 for Maggette, Wilcox and #6.



> Wilcox is a very nice commodity in this league
> ...
> A dude like Qyntel Woods, he's really nothing all that special, maybe he turns out to be something else, but from a physical standpoint, he's not the first lanky slasher/jumper without an outside jumper and with very little understanding of how to play team basketball I've seen and he definitely won't be the last.


This is why you lose a ton of credibility in all your rants. If it's an unproven player on another team, they're *gold*. I can't count the number of done-nothing prospects on other teams that you've absolutely lionized as "great potential, real commodity, could be special, super talented project"...and any unproven prospect on Portland is just some clown who's never done anything.

As long as you continue to randomly overvalue and undervalue people with no rational basis, you really make no strong case. You just sound incredibly biased: "Portland prospects are worth nothing, everyone else's prospects are worth their weight in gold."

I've read NBA scouts who noted that Qyntel Woods played 'Melo and James in high school and held his own in direct competition against them, and that he wasn't very far off them in terms of talent. He slid in the draft due to allegations of pot-smoking. While that's a character flaw, it says nothing negative about his talent.

So, yes, feel free to claim Woods is "nothing special, just another lanky slasher"....with absolutely no rational basis for who you call a brilliant asset and who you call a nothing, you don't have the credibility to slam everyone you disagree with. You're just as much a homer as the people you blast, it just goes the other way with you...if it's in Portland, it's worth nothing, if it's on Denver, or some team with a lot of prospects, it's worth a huge amount.

Put it this way...if Portland had Wilcox, and Portland fans claimed he had great value and was a real commodity in this league, you'd be busy telling them what idiots they are.

If you want others to stop homering *for* the Blazers, stop homering *against* the Blazers. You're *just as* unrealistic as everyone else, except in the opposite direction. You're simply being hypocritical, when you bash others for the same behaviour you exhibit.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

There's at least two different threads (including this one; read the first post in the thread) dedicated to the rumor that Toronto has targeted Rasheed as their top priority and it's clear that other than Vince Carter their top trading piece is the 4th pick. I don't think that it means the trade is likely (like greater than 50% of likelihood) but it seems to be close enough to be discussion-worthy.

Ed O.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

If the Blazers get one of the early picks for Sheed and use it on Kaman, I will murder everyone in the Blazers organization. Kaman is just another white stiff, if he was coming from overseas than Id give him a chance but no. Bosh may come out better than ANthony, I wouldnt be pissed if we picked Bosh and kept him, he's gonna be very very good. He can play SF too, it would be nice to Mello but I wouldn't dwell on it, Bosh has just as much if not more of an opportunity to become better than Mello. Bosh would even out the defensive liability to which Randolph is, Anthony wouldnt and that would cause Zack to guard the Duncans, KGs, and C Webbs.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

similar discussions

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32815&forumid=14


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

*A couple things:*

The trades listed above, while some have some merit, I think that a lot of the trades listed in the above threads are the ever so common over valued Blazer player for a player worth a damn trade. What ROby G is trying to point out to many of you is that you are placing too high of value's on Blazer players in trades, that is his opinion. That is mine as well. I tend to think that if Portland currently has a deep roster of above average players with one talented player who doesn't want to play hard. Some of them were great once, but not anymore. Those that were great got old, and probably won't be back this season. Some of them are young and unproven. In a trade, they need the same value. Randolph has value. Qyntel does not, he is unproven. DA is a journeyman guard. It is insane to think you could trade him for a top 4 draft pick player who is barely one year into his career, let alone get another player thrown in on the deal for Portland to receive. Think about it. Would you do the deal from their side of things? I think not. 

A lot of people think that Carmello is a SF because of his height. If you watch him play, the more you realize he is a guard. Watch some film. I think you will agree. He is a 6'8" guard.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Also I would use both of our late picks to pickup a center, such as Perkins. If Blazers couldn't pickup a solid PG in the off season then I would say put DA at PG and move Bonzi to SG.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

<<Notes: Member of the National Honor Society, the National Society of Black Engineers and the Dallas Association of Minority Engineers ... >>

Or maybe he couldn't get on with the national society of white engineers?


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Ah hate to burst your egotistical little bubble there Roby, but you don't know more, you don't know more than anyone else here... I don't see any GM's here do you? I love it everyone here is a seer, and Roby is the oracle, you spew out garbage like its a given, when it is SO far from that. LOL...delusional... purely delusional. I am throwing out possibilities that I believe could happen, but they could just as likely NOT happen, that is the point of these boards, is it not? Someone pointed out the fact that POR doesn't even have the #4 pick from TOR yet, yep they absolutely don't and they very well MAY not get it, or even WANT to get it. What was reported on the radio today shows there is likely interest, but will it come to fruition, who knows? certainly NO ONE ON THIS BOARD (are you listening Roby?) knows what POR, TOR, DEN, ANY TEAM will do, we all just play GM, like I said before, SOME people just take it more seriously than others.

BTW, you don't read posts very well either, I said IF DEN was not interested in drafting Melo for themselves. Maybe they are, and they are just floating rumours out to gauge interest, that is very possible. But it also possible that they see MORE value in trading the pick. Yes ROBY quality DOES mean more than quantity in the NBA. But that makes a HELL of a lot more sense, when you KNOW IT IS QUALITY. We all ASSUME Melo is, Darko is, LeBron is, but there is a good chance at least one of them WILL NOT BE the SUPERSTAR everyone on these boards label them to be. Maybe Melo will be, maybe he won't, if your so certain about it, go wager your life savings in Vegas on it (or better yet on POR blowing their team up this year). I surely wouldn't, its great to talk all full of [email protected]#*T on these boards, but put having to put some meaning behind those words, is entirely another story. And BTW DEN DOES need quantity as well, I would agree that the most important piece is "acquiring" that superstar, but DEN needs a whole lot of help, and maybe they don't see Melo as that player. Not that they do not see him as a good player, but maybe they don't see him as a SUPERSTAR player, OR maybe they think they already HAVE one. Not all GM's in the league hold Melo in the exact same regard, as to his potential.

And BTW DA is not a scrub player, he is certainly better than anyone on DEN, I mean come on Nene showed some promise, but outside of him? give me a break. And I threw out DA as merely a potential option, the point being that if POR WAS at #4 (far from a given) and DEN wasn't sold on Melo at #3 (Far from a given), that POR COULD find a way to make a deal, the question would be could it be palatable for them.

You talk about attempting to reason but you don't. You think that your opinions and YOUR opinions alone are correct. That doesn't make you smart DUUUUUUUUUUUUDE... it makes you the exact opposite.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> Exactly what I was thinking, but who?
> 
> This would be a dream scenario:
> ...


The Blazers won't be trading Anthony. If they did trade him to Portland for the number 4 pick (if they got it)...the deal would probably include Woods and the #23 pick.

Denver would then take T.J. Ford with the 4, and Outlaw (?) at 23.


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
> :allhail:
> 
> Can you make a logical response without being so rude to posters?


Well, I don't know, I'd say that the only time I'm rude is if a guy is rude to me. Although I will never hesitate to point out that a dumb trade idea is, well, a dumb trade idea. I don't think telling somebody that their idea is dumb is rude, I just think that some of you fellas are a little sensitive, that's all. I expect anybody who thinks my ideas are dumb to do the same, so I honestly don't think I'm being hypocritical here. The difference is that when somebody tells me my ideas are dumb, I try to take the criticism like a man, nothing wrong with constructive criticism. When some of you guys' ideas get criticized, you freak out, you immediately resort to name-calling, it's ridiculous.

If I were a Portland fan, and I'm in a chatroom that pretty much exclusively contains other Portland fans, I'd like to get a non-homerish opinion every once in a while, although, apparently, a lot of you guys disagree! Why do some people want to only hang out and interact with people who are exactly like them? How boring is that?


> Originally posted by <b>robyg1974</b>!
> ...Chris Wilcox is still a major project. I don't understand it when a guy comes out after his first or second year of college, he's still really raw, everybody acknowledges that "it's going to take a while, just be patient, in about three years, he's going to start being really, really good," and, 25 games into his rookie year, when he is doing nothing, JUST AS EVERYBODY PREDICTED, everybody starts labelling him a bust. Wilcox is a very nice commodity in this league, look at the dude, look at that size and athleticism and tenacity, guys like that don't grow on trees. A dude like Qyntel Woods, he's really nothing all that special, maybe he turns out to be something else, but from a physical standpoint, he's not the first lanky slasher/jumper without an outside jumper and with very little understanding of how to play team basketball I've seen and he definitely won't be the last.





> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> This is why you lose a ton of credibility in all your rants. If it's an unproven player on another team, they're *gold*. I can't count the number of done-nothing prospects on other teams that you've absolutely lionized as "great potential, real commodity, could be special, super talented project"...and any unproven prospect on Portland is just some clown who's never done anything.


I don't really know what you're talking about here, Minstrel. Zach Randolph, really nice young player, wow, to think he lasted until, what, #22 overall a couple of years ago? Really nice player, any team would like to have that guy. But what other prospects do you have? Antonio Daniels, that dude was drafted five years ago, he's a journeyman already, solid off-the-bench hustle guy, but nothing special, he's as good as he's ever going to get, probably. Daniels is not a "prospect." So the only prospects you guys have are Randolph and Woods.

My point is that huge, athletic, and skilled PFs and Cs such as Wilcox and Randolph are significantly and I mean <b>significantly</b> more valuable in this league than guys like Qyntel Woods. When I come up with a Portland trade, I very rarely include Qyntel, because I think he's definitely worth holding onto, he could turn out to be pretty good, you never know. But the fact of the matter is that he was passed up by, what, 20 teams in last year's draft? He's obviously not an enormous prospect in this league right now, at least from the typical NBA GM's perspective. Tskitishvili, that dude went #5 overall. He's a seven-footer with SF skills, he's a kid, I think he's still a teenager. Big guys like Tskitishvili and Wilcox are always going to be more valuable commodities in this league than SFs like Woods, that's just all there is to it. I'm not trashing Woods here, I'm just saying that you guys are NUTS if you think he's as valuable in this league as a Wilcox or a Tskitishvili or, to be fair, just so you don't think I'm all "anti-Blazer," a Randolph!


> As long as you continue to randomly overvalue and undervalue people with no rational basis, you really make no strong case. You just sound incredibly biased: "Portland prospects are worth nothing, everyone else's prospects are worth their weight in gold."


Surely to god I've defended myself pretty well here. Like I said, Portland ONLY HAS TWO PROSPECTS! How can you guys say that I trash Portland's prospects? I am obviously impressed by Randolph, I don't think I've EVER proposed a deal that includes this guy, you don't trade this guy unless you are overwhelmed (which won't happen), so you're apparently talking about Qyntel Woods? He's a fairly interesting prospect, I was surprised he slipped down to #21 last year (as was everybody), but c'mon, guys, like I said, big guys are always going to be more valuable commodities in this league than SFs. SF is the easiest position to fill on the basketball court.


> I've read NBA scouts who noted that Qyntel Woods played 'Melo and James in high school and held his own in direct competition against them, and that he wasn't very far off them in terms of talent. He slid in the draft due to allegations of pot-smoking. While that's a character flaw, it says nothing negative about his talent.


I would argue that smoking pot is hardly a "character flaw," I would only argue that it's illegal, but that's not the issue here. I think he probably slipped for other reasons, I don't think that smoking some doobage is going to cause teams to pass on a dude, not when around 1/3 of the league's players smoke doobage on a fairly regular basis, not when 2/3 of all GMs used to smoke the doobage when they were Qyntel's age. Hell, the greatest player in Portland history--The Great Bill Russell--that dude used to go to Grateful Dead shows AND DROP ACID! Pot vs. acid, dear god, talk about night and day!

I think there was something else going on that we didn't hear about. I have a feeling that, in his individual workouts, maybe he didn't interview well, maybe he didn't show very many skills (athleticism, yes; skills, maybe not), maybe they did a background check on the guy, maybe some of his old coaches and teachers told scouts that he has a big problem with authority, I don't know. If this guy deserved to go lotto last year, smoking some doobage would not have caused him to drop all the way down to #21, surely to god. I think the guy is worth holding onto, I really do, but I will be surprised if he ever turns into, say, an above average starter in this league. He's also worth holding onto simply because his trade value is not exactly out the roof right now. Buy low, sell high.


> So, yes, feel free to claim Woods is "nothing special, just another lanky slasher"....with absolutely no rational basis for who you call a brilliant asset and who you call a nothing, you don't have the credibility to slam everyone you disagree with. You're just as much a homer as the people you blast, it just goes the other way with you...if it's in Portland, it's worth nothing, if it's on Denver, or some team with a lot of prospects, it's worth a huge amount.


Yeah, maybe I'm a bit of a homer for Denver. It's not so much Denver's players that I am impressed with, it's the fact that Kiki totally gets it. Like I've said several times and I mean SEVERAL TIMES, I LIVE IN PORTLAND, I'd love to see Portland reconstruct their roster the RIGHT way, I'd LOVE to see them get Kiki in here, let him work his magic, he wouldn't even necessarily replicate what he did in Denver, he might not have to! It's not Denver I like, it's Kiki, and like I said, I'd love to see him come up here, that would be fantastic! How is that anti-Blazer? Again, is Paul Allen, THE OWNER OF THE TEAM, "anti-Blazer" for letting Scottie Pippen and Arvydas Sabonis leave? Well, is he?


> Put it this way...if Portland had Wilcox, and Portland fans claimed he had great value and was a real commodity in this league, you'd be busy telling them what idiots they are.


Well, that's just paranoid, now, isn't it?


> If you want others to stop homering *for* the Blazers, stop homering *against* the Blazers. You're *just as* unrealistic as everyone else, except in the opposite direction. You're simply being hypocritical, when you bash others for the same behaviour you exhibit.


Again, Minstrel, pretty paranoid there, dude. I honestly have no idea where you guys come up with this "anti-Blazer" stuff. Just because I don't VASTLY overrate every single player on the Portland roster doesn't mean that I think they all suck, obviously. Well, I guess I shouldn't use the term "obviously," it's obvious to me, it's obvious to Vintage and some people around here, but it's apparently not obvious to everybody.

The problem stems from the fact that you guys vastly overrate your own players, and anybody who offers a sensible evaluation of your players' value instantly becomes a laughingstock because they are in a tiny minority. If I were to go hang out with a bunch of army dudes, and present a case against American imperialism, I would be similarly dismissed as a crackpot, but if I were to hang out with some reasonable, educated people and present the same case, plenty of people would totally agree with me. Same deal here. Most NBA fans realize that Carmelo Anthony WILL NEVER NEVER NEVER get traded for the #4 pick and DEREK ANDERSON or ANTONIO DANIELS. Yet somebody in here posts an idea like that, and not only does nobody point out to you that it's ridiculous, but many of you will say things like, "I don't think we should do that deal, we can't afford to lose Derek Anderson blahblahblah"! Hilarious! You have to see it to believe it!


> Originally posted by <b>hasoos</b>!
> I tend to think that if Portland currently has a deep roster of above average players with one talented player who doesn't want to play hard. Some of them were great once, but not anymore. Those that were great got old, and probably won't be back this season. Some of them are young and unproven. In a trade, they need the same value. Randolph has value. Qyntel does not, he is unproven. DA is a journeyman guard. It is insane to think you could trade him for a top 4 draft pick player who is barely one year into his career, let alone get another player thrown in on the deal for Portland to receive. Think about it. Would you do the deal from their side of things? I think not.


Well said, Hasoos, and not just because you agree with me!

I think that a lot of Portland fans take Mo Cheeks' brilliant coaching jobs from the past couple of seasons for granted. You guys have awfully high expectations. Many coaches would've been unable to get this team into the playoffs, but Mo had them occasionally playing as well as any team in the league. It seems weird to think that Portland is actually an OVERachieving team, because of their payroll and because of all the negative publicity, but I really do believe that the Blazers are one of THE most overachieving teams in the league over the past couple of years, ESPECIALLY this year. This team finished with about the same record as a team with Kevin Garnett and a team with Shaq and Kobe. That is an UNBELIEVABLE achievement for a team whose top three players were Rasheed Wallace, Bonzi Wells, and, who, Scottie Pippen?

This year's Portland team, classic example of "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts." These guys really bought into what Mo and Pippen's leadership. They will really miss Pippen. These guys are not worth as much as individual pieces as you guys think. They're not the first team in sports history that you can say this about--last year's Anaheim Angels are a good example of this phenomenon, the previous year's New England Patriots are perhaps the best example--and it's certainly not an insult! So stop taking it as an insult, fellas!


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>robyg1974</b>!
> 
> The problem stems from the fact that you guys vastly overrate your own players, and anybody who offers a sensible evaluation of your players' value instantly becomes a laughingstock because they are in a tiny minority.


No, the problem stems from the fact that you are (as you admit) as much a homer as the people you deride. So, since you are also a homer (for Denver) you have little room to *blast* people as rudely you tend to do.

To wit, why do you take a tone of objectivity when you are also a homer?

I try to avoid the whole "homer" issue by avoiding proposing my own trades...I know I'll probably be biased to some extent, and then I'll overcompensate for it by undervaluing Portland players. The whole thing smacks of uselessness, especially since nothing said here has any effect on reality. So I don't do it.

Not only do you not avoid the issue, you're a full-on homer who blasts other people for being homers. Don't you see how that's a problem?


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> Ah hate to burst your egotistical little bubble there Roby, but you don't know more, you don't know more than anyone else here... I don't see any GM's here do you?


Like I said, I know it sounds condescending, but I totally know more about this stuff than somebody who thinks that Carmelo for the #4 and D.A. has a chance of happening, or somebody who thinks that D.A. for JAY WILLIAMS ARE YOU KIDDING ME has a chance of happening. No reason to take it personally, dude, surely to god you know plenty of things that I don't know, there are obviously many different kinds of knowledge, we all have our strengths!


> I love it everyone here is a seer, and Roby is the oracle, you spew out garbage like its a given, when it is SO far from that. LOL...delusional... purely delusional. I am throwing out possibilities that I believe could happen, but they could just as likely NOT happen, that is the point of these boards, is it not?


Well, I'm here to tell you that Carmelo Anthony for Chris Bosh and Derek Anderson WILL NEVER HAPPEN, this is not my opinion, this is a fact, some people understand the difference between facts and opinions. I am not an oracle for knowing this, it seems pretty obvious to me, I'm always and I mean ALWAYS shocked when I see some of these ridiculous ideas around here. Some ideas are better than other ideas, that's just all there is to it.


> Someone pointed out the fact that POR doesn't even have the #4 pick from TOR yet, yep they absolutely don't and they very well MAY not get it, or even WANT to get it. What was reported on the radio today shows there is likely interest, but will it come to fruition, who knows? certainly NO ONE ON THIS BOARD (are you listening Roby?) knows what POR, TOR, DEN, ANY TEAM will do, we all just play GM, like I said before, SOME people just take it more seriously than others.


What did you say? I wasn't listening, can you repeat yourself?


> BTW, you don't read posts very well either, I said IF DEN was not interested in drafting Melo for themselves.


Who doesn't read posts well, now? Like I said before, just because Kiki may or may not be all that sold on Carmelo Anthony does not mean that he is unaware of the guy's trade value. Kiki may actually prefer Bosh to Carmelo. If Portland somehow gets the #4 pick, and if they offer it to Portland for the #3, he may think to himself, "Damn, Zach Randolph sure would be nice!" But just because he thinks that he's coming out ahead in such a deal DOES NOT MEAN that he cannot come out even FURTHER ahead in a DIFFERENT deal!

If somebody makes the guy a whopper offer for Carmelo, and he thinks that the team is offering too much, what do you think he's going to do, decline the offer because it's too much? He knows that Carmelo is worth quite a bit, he understands that Carmelo, more than his available cap room, is the key to this team's future. Either he drafts Carmelo and this is his go-to guy for the next several years, or he trades Carmelo for somebody who WILL be his go-to guy for the next several years. If you want to think that I don't know what Kiki is thinking, well, jesus, no kidding, but that is not going to stop me from presenting an argument, is it?


> And BTW DEN DOES need quantity as well, I would agree that the most important piece is "acquiring" that superstar, but DEN needs a whole lot of help, and maybe they don't see Melo as that player.


Good god, seriously, dude, what's so hard to understand here? D.A. is signed to a bloated contract. There are a ton of free agents out there this summer. Kiki can easily fill out his roster with reasonably priced veterans. An Erick Strickland, there's a solid player, you can get him for around $1.5 mil, he may not receive a better offer than that. Why would you trade for D.A.'s enormous salary when you can go get an el-cheap-o Erick Strickland? Why would you want D.A. at $8 mil when you can get 3-4 solid vets for a COMBINED $8 mil? HELLO! Kiki will be able to fill out his roster, he'll get his quantity, it won't be as tough as you guys think.

By the way, if D.A. were a free agent this summer, I hope you guys realize that he would be looking at a 50% paycut, he'd drop down from around $8 mil to around $4 mil. Teams know this, they know they can get a comparable player for half the price.


> Not that they do not see Melo as a good player, but maybe they don't see him as a SUPERSTAR player, OR maybe they think they already HAVE one. Not all GM's in the league hold Melo in the exact same regard, as to his potential.


But some GMs love the guy, that's the point. If Kiki does not think the guy is going to be great--I don't think he's going to be great, either, by the way--it doesn't matter, he knows that there are teams out there who DO think he will be great, he knows that there are teams out there who realize Carmelo's marketing potential. If Kiki is not in love with Carmelo, then he will identify which teams ARE in love with Carmelo and squeeze everything he can out of them. Why would he do anything different?


> And BTW DA is not a scrub player, he is certainly better than anyone on DEN, I mean come on Nene showed some promise, but outside of him? give me a break.


Dear god, did I call D.A. a scrub, obviously not. I just said the dude is not a valuable commodity in this league because of his contract, and he isn't.

And dude, I want to hear it, I want to hear you say, "Derek Anderson is a more valuable commodity in this league than Nikoloz Tskitishvili." Go ahead, say it, let's hear it!


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

*Roby*

You always seem to rip on the Blazers...I'm just curious, who is your team?


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> No, the problem stems from the fact that you are (as you admit) as much a homer as the people you deride. So, since you are also a homer (for Denver) you have little room to *blast* people as rudely you tend to do.
> 
> To wit, why do you take a tone of objectivity when you are also a homer?
> ...


Well, I'd say that I'm about the biggest non-homer I've ever met, I actually get criticized by sports fans for not having a team that I am loyal to. I explained in my post why I'm not a homer, but you apparently didn't read it. I said that it's not really Denver that I care about, it's the job that Kiki is doing down there. I'd be super-impressed with Kiki if he was doing what he is doing on the moon. And, like I said, I'd love to see Kiki come to Portland, because I'd like to see what he could do with this team. I repeat, I'd love to see Kiki come to Portland, because I'd like to see what he could do with this team. One more time: I'd love to see Kiki come to Portland, because I'd like to see what he could do with this team. Dude, I'm not a homer for Denver basketball, TRUST ME, I just admire visionaries. Kiki understood the ramifications of the CBA at least a couple of years before the rest of the league caught up with him, he's ahead of the curve. Any number of teams could've done what he has done, and they didn't, and look where some of these teams are now, jesus, look at Toronto, what a mess!

Anyway, I realize that your whole argument rests on the premise that I am just as big of a homer as you guys, but that's a bunk argument, whether you realize it or not, Minstrel. I like following teams that do things the right way. I root for teams that know how to handle the salary cap and the luxury tax. I have no sympathy for teams that have no idea what they are doing. That's why I root for San Antonio, Detroit, Denver, and Utah these days, those organizations really get do get it. I'd like to see the entire league get it. The NBA would be so much better if its teams would behave in a financially sane manner. The CBA is designed to force teams to do this, and it is working, slowly but surely.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

LOL Roby!

Alright enough is enough, you and I do not see eye to eye. I find it amusing that you steadfastedly hold onto the belief that you know more than anyone else here. But this bickering and slandering on BOTH sides is getting to the point of ridiculousness. Believe it or not I DO think that SOME of your points have merit, I just do NOT agree with all of your opinions. 

Some of your points I disagree with.

First - I never proposed DA for Jwill & Erob, But I do think Bonzi for Jwill & Erob could be a possibility.

2nd - Who says DEN would take Bosh @ #4? maybe they have someone else higher on ther board, maybe they make ANOTHER deal to a team DESPERATE & WILLING to overpay for Bosh, TJ, or Lampe. And who said DA as the ONLY option? I mentioned it as one of several options. You could be correct, Kiki could come back and say Zach and #4, POR then decides NO, and counters again, there are several varaibles involved here. What are other teams offering? What is Kiki trying to accomplish? What is POR willing to offer? What value do both GM's ultimately place on Melo? etc...

3rd - You heard what i said, your just choosing not to listen. 
:no: 

4th - b\c Erick Stricklanmd isn't 1/2 the player DA is. And I will say it again, Money is not everything Roby, Let's see if DEN can get all the FA they target, I am betting not, and CERTAINLY not for below market value like you have proposed, they MOST likely will have to PAY more for a player (let me clarify a highly regarded FA). If you were Arenas, honestly, would you go to DEN? Or better yet if you were Olowokandi? I mean they both have played on LOSING teams, why go to another? There is NO guarantee that DEN will be a great team, that Nene, Skita, or even Melo will be Stars, let alone superstars. Players like MONEY and they like WINNERS. All DEN has is money, and that ain't enough in most cases. And most savvy GM's can find ways to make the money work. Who would you choose SA or DEN? I say DEN will get used as a leveraging point a LOT this offseason, but maybe Kiki will do what other GM's could not, we BOTH will have to wait and see.

5th - Hear ya go  DA is a more valuable commodity than Skita to SOME GM's... LOL I couldn't resist. I think beauty is in the eye of the beholder. You would admit that Skita's value was higher last year than this year, correct? Each year that he does little to nothing his value erodes more, I mean Eddie Griffin was a fairly high Lotto pick if I remember correctly and what did DEN trade for him? I think Charles Barkely said it best "Every team loves the player they drafted, until they see them in fall camp" something to that effect. And how true it is! DA is a WAY better player than Skita now, it isn't even close Roby. Skita COULD end up being the next Nowitzki, or whatever they are comparing him to, but he also could be a washout. I agree with you that Kiki may look at DA's salary and want no part of it, BUT he may also see the value that Derek could bring to the team. A veteran player, a leader, etc... Trading for a guy is not always about salary and contracts.

Lastly, I have no interest in trading insults back and forth, which I am just as guilty of doing. We disagree, and that is fine. Your points have merit, and mine do as well, and we should leave it at that. Like I said before, some of your points are good ones, others I feel are not. If we WERE opposing GM's obviously no deals would be happening  and that's the way it goes, not everyone agrees. I think you are way out there with some of your ideas and vice-versa so be it. No biggie, its all for fun :yes:


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>robyg1974</b>!
> 
> Well, I'd say that I'm about the biggest non-homer I've ever met


Yes. And your trades, in your opinion, are the most realistic ever devised (you've noted that before). You *are* a great admirer of yourself, I have to admit that. 



> I explained in my post why I'm not a homer, but you apparently didn't read it.


Actually you said this:

"_Yeah, maybe I'm a bit of a homer for Denver._"



> I said that it's not really Denver that I care about, it's the job that Kiki is doing down there. I'd be super-impressed with Kiki if he was doing what he is doing on the moon.


So? Home town isn't the only reason for fandom. So you're a Denver fan due to Vendeweghe. That doesn't make Denver somehow not your favourite team or you not a homer. In fact, being such a fan of Kiki would make you *likelier* to homer for Denver's players. After all, if Denver's players and prospects are better, that reflects better on your favourite GM.

So you have *clear* reason for bias. Rodney White is such a brilliant prospect to you because if he wasn't, that would make Vandeweghe's roster a little less impressive.

You've actually explained how you *are* a homer, not how you *aren't*. A homer for a GM is going to homer all his players and acquisitions. It makes the GM look better.



> Anyway, I realize that your whole argument rests on the premise that I am just as big of a homer as you guys, but that's a bunk argument, whether you realize it or not, Minstrel.


As "you guys"? So we're *all* big homers? The fact that you freely characterize *everyone* in a single comment shows what a tenuous grasp on reality you possess. Especially after proudly explaining how you're not a homer, when every bit of your explanation laid out your homerism in clear detail, as I noted above.

I don't think you're "as much a homer as _us_" because that would suggest you are averagely biased, like the average of an entire fan segment. I think you're as biased as the few posters you consider the *worst* offenders in terms of pro-Portland bias. You are a heavy homer *for* Denver's roster (because Vandeweghe put it together, not because they exist in the city of Denver) and heavily biased *against* Portland's roster (probably due to philosophical differences with Portland's style, not because they exist in Portland).

To sum, I don't think you're a homer or biased against teams due to *region*. You're a homer for teams who's management you like, and for those teams you are *as much a homer* as the most optimistic Portland fans.

I'm sorry to have to point that out to you, since it seems a large part of your self-image seems wrapped up in being the most objective fan in the world. However, it's quite untrue. Better to accept that sooner than later.

Now, as a Denver homer, what are your trade proposals?


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

I'm not sure if I should say this publicly or not, but Minstrel, you are a great debater. I wish I had half the skills you possess at debating. 

I agree whole-heartedly with your posts here. Very well said.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Thanks, L4L. That's nice of you to say.


----------



## ballocks (May 15, 2003)

are the people here trying to determine whether roby's ideas are plausible by arguing whether he's a "homer"? in other words, are they trying to deny his suggestions by invalidating his "objective" point-of-view?

or is it just personal now? has it just become an argument that has little to do with nba basketball and more to do with the appeal of the poster's personality (or lack thereof)? or is it somewhere in between? 

anyway, i've read several of roby's posts and find that he has some really fascinating opinions. of course, you have to separate the emotional tone and the personal attacks from the basic thoughts in order to derive what he's trying to state objectively, but the point remains that he has some interesting things to say.

he may not be going about it in the right manner but the fact is that some people appear to be citing his quirks as a person (both explicitly and implicitly) as a reason why his opinions don't/can't hold water. those properties are mutually exclusive. roby can be "crazy" and "right" at the same time. that shouldn't be forgotten.

anyway, what matters to me is that the suggestions for derek anderson were absolutely shocking (imo... i guess). i've also seen it for some other players on this very bulletin board. it seems that some portland fans think their counterparts can "throw in" valuable assets while the blazers don't return the favour: it's the "get something for nothing" mentality. for example, i've seen possible trades that are, in my opinion, already lobsided in portland's favour- yet it somehow doesn't seem to be enough for some fans. the respective posters go on to claim that the blazers' trading partner should throw in a #6 draft pick...while they'd "prefer the blazers kept #23" for themselves. as if the 6th draft pick is not important/valuable but the 23rd pick is. you can see why. 

what's more, it seems that they (i.e. some portland fans...sometimes) point out a trail blazer's potential value yet want to still move him out of town ASAP. i don't understand that. i think it may be the most obvious proof of wishful thinking. it's just a study in fundamental human psychology- if he's REALLY worth that much, you wouldn't want to move him so fast. i suppose the derek anderson example is representative: people cite his value as a player but conveniently leave out (or understate) his considerable price tag and the (more attractive) alternative set for potential trade partners around the league. 

i've seen the same thing about rasheed wallace but that's been beaten to death. you can't have your cake and eat it too. let's try to point out ALL the pros and ALL the cons and THEN form an opinion. for one, it's easier. for another, the opinions that result from that process are, for the most part, comprehensive and based on the facts. otherwise, we're just fooling ourselves. (i give myself the same advice.)

maybe i shouldn't have posted this but oh well.

peace


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

Minstrel, dude, your sentences are well-constructed, they have periods, they have commas, etc., but they make no sense!

A homer is somebody who cannot think of his own team and its players objectively. That's what a homer is. A homer has no awareness of how ridiculous he is. A homer thinks people are nuts when you suggest that his players are worth less, way less, than he thinks they are.

I'm an admirer of Joe Dumars and Kiki Vandeweghe because I look at the way that each dude is constructing his team and I am amazed at how shrewd each dude is. Each GM is positioning his team for longterm viability in today's salary cap-luxury tax-obsessed CBA environment. I look around at NBA teams, and I decide that these two guys are among the best at their profession. It's a rational decision. Being a homer, that's totally irrational.

Somebody who admires an individual for making smart business moves is not a homer. Your entire argument is getting increasingly desperate, it relies on a VERY liberal usage of the term "homer." How am I being unreasonable? When do I ever propose ideas as ridiculous as Derek Anderson for Jay Williams? Of COURSE you guys think my ideas are ridiculous! Why? Because you're homers, DUH!

Being a fan of Kiki makes me more likely to be a homer for Denver's players? Well, no, not true. Kiki is accumulating the sorts of commodities that teams want, he is refusing to accumulate undesirable commodities, he has been refusing to overpay for talent, I hope that it continues for the sake of Denver fans. He has made mistakes. Trading for Rodney White, gutsy move, but it was a mistake. If he signs Olowokandi this summer, even at a market value contract, another mistake. Same deal with Maggette. But these dudes are VALUABLE COMMODITIES in this league, that's the point. He's not going to give Olowokandi a max deal. Portland, back in the Trader Bob days, they would've given Olowokandi a max deal. Portland would have overpaid for talent, Kiki will not. Olowokandi at $6-$7 mil vs. Olowokandi at $12 mil, who is the more valuable commodity?

Again (I keep repeating myself here on this one): Derek Anderson at $8 mil is a completely different commodity than Derek Anderson at $4 mil. Why is this so hard to understand? Kiki would have never given D.A. $8 mil, because he's a smart GM, he understands that if you overpay for talent, you end up paying for it later on down the road. Portland overpaid for talent, and look at them, they are paying for it now, their owner has had enough, he will order his new GM to CLEAN HOUSE. Why do you think nobody wants this job? Why do you think nobody has taken this job? This is not going to be a fun job over the next year!

Finally, preferring something because it's empirically better is different than preferring something because of irrational loyalties such as homerism or nationalism. Preferring San Antonio, Detroit, Denver, and Utah because their teams are properly managed is a rational decision. Preferring Portland because you are from Portland, you live in Portland, you grew up rooting for Portland, all you think about is Portland, you are so obsessed with Portland that you cannot possibly think rationally about Portland... this is not a rational decision, this is homerism.

You're saying I'm a homer because I like Kiki. You can like somebody for rational reasons. Liking Kiki because he's a visionary and because he makes smart personnel moves relative to his peers is VERY DIFFERENT from liking Derek Anderson SO MUCH JUST BECAUSE HE PLAYS FOR YOUR TEAM that you honestly believe that he is as valuable an asset in this league as Jay Williams, the #2 pick in last year's draft. I mean, when you don't even understand WHY somebody is laughing at you for making such an outrageous proposal as D.A. for Jay Williams, when you think they are being "anti-Blazer" for laughing at such a ridiculous idea, YOU ARE MOST DEFINITELY A HOMER! And trying to turn the tables on that person by bizarrely accusing them of being some kind of homer with an asterisk, sorry, not effective!


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>robyg1974</b>!
> Minstrel, dude, your sentences are well-constructed, they have periods, they have commas, etc., but they make no sense!


Just because Minstrel has proper grammar is not the reason I am applauding his posts. His views on this subject are accurate and to the point. His proper grammar is just an added bonus to me, making his posts easy and enjoyable to read. I'll admit, I don't read long posts usually, but I do read Minstrel's posts (including the long ones). Perhaps if you took a few pointers instead of border-line mocking people and their opinions, more of us would respect what you have to say and consider your opinions credible.


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

A totally fair critique, Ballocks.


> Originally posted by <b>ballocks</b>!
> are the people here trying to determine whether roby's ideas are plausible by arguing whether he's a "homer"? in other words, are they trying to deny his suggestions by invalidating his "objective" point-of-view?
> 
> or is it just personal now? has it just become an argument that has little to do with nba basketball and more to do with the appeal of the poster's personality (or lack thereof)? or is it somewhere in between?


I certainly have not presented myself in a very sympathetic manner to some of these homers in here, that's for sure, obviously not the best strategy in the world, you're right. I've obviously played a major role in allowing this to deteriorate into something personal, no question.


> anyway, i've read several of roby's posts and find that he has some really fascinating opinions. of course, you have to separate the emotional tone and the personal attacks from the basic thoughts in order to derive what he's trying to state objectively, but the point remains that he has some interesting things to say.


I wish I could be as diplomatic as you are, dude, I need to work on my diplomatic skills, I know.


> he may not be going about it in the right manner but the fact is that some people appear to be citing his quirks as a person (both explicitly and implicitly) as a reason why his opinions don't/can't hold water. those properties are mutually exclusive. roby can be "crazy" and "right" at the same time. that shouldn't be forgotten.


Totally fair assessment. I realize that I'm more than a little crazy.


> anyway, what matters to me is that the suggestions for derek anderson were absolutely shocking (imo... i guess). i've also seen it for some other players on this very bulletin board. it seems that some portland fans think their counterparts can "throw in" valuable assets while the blazers don't return the favour: it's the "get something for nothing" mentality. for example, i've seen possible trades that are, in my opinion, already lobsided in portland's favour- yet it somehow doesn't seem to be enough for some fans. the respective posters go on to claim that the blazers' trading partner should throw in a #6 draft pick...while they'd "prefer the blazers kept #23" for themselves. as if the 6th draft pick is not important/valuable but the 23rd pick is. you can see why.
> 
> what's more, it seems that they (i.e. some portland fans...sometimes) point out a trail blazer's potential value yet want to still move him out of town ASAP. i don't understand that. i think it may be the most obvious proof of wishful thinking. it's just a study in fundamental human psychology- if he's REALLY worth that much, you wouldn't want to move him so fast. i suppose the derek anderson example is representative: people cite his value as a player but conveniently leave out (or understate) his considerable price tag and the (more attractive) alternative set for potential trade partners around the league.


See, you have said everything I've been trying to say repeatedly, you condensed it into two paragraphs, you pointed out to the homers around here how ridiculous they are, and you didn't even piss them off! How do you DO that? Seriously? Impressive!


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Ballocks - 

I dont find the prospect of trading Derek Anderson and the #4 pick for essentially Melo to be shocking. Derek is a proven commodity in this league, we could go into detail about how having to split time in a overcrowded POR roster SEEMS to diminish his value, but i would argue most GM's see him for what he is. A talented player, when healthy, signed to a lengthy (@ 4yrs) and semi-inflated contract. He is better than most players available at his position, certainly not the best, but FAR from the worst. Like I told Roby, ther are NUMEROUS factors involved in any deal. And Derek was one of several options for POR moving from #4 to #3, and based upon a lot of "What IF's" (POR\TOR trade being the the first). DEN could very likely say NO, anmd then counteroffer and so on. But on its face value, it hardly is a ridiculous offer.

No one is saying that the #23 is MORE valuable than the #4 (let's use that as an example). I think what I am saying is - You are getting R.Wallace, a proven Big Man in his prime. The best player on POR, and an All-Star. What is the #4 pick now other than potential? I am getting essentially the #4 pick and bad contracts (AD, and whoever else), I am sure POR would try to minimize this as much as possible. Sure I'd like POR to keep the #23 in such a deal, but if I had to give it up, would I? Yes. I don't think that is unrealistic, to want to give away as little as possible. You certainly don't want to offer the #23 as a throw in, but know that if you had too, you'd include it in the deal. That is what I meant ny saying I'd prefer (I assume you were referencing me) to keep the pick.

I am not diminishing Wallace's value by wanting him traded. I just feel he's had his time in POR and its time to start with someone else. Is Larry Brown a bad coach? Just b\c he is leaving Philly, doesn't diminish his value to another team. He is what he is. You know what you are getting when you hire him (including the fact that he WILL leave your orginization eventually). It was just time to move on, same with Wallace, it is time to move on. POR needs a fresh start and so does Wallace IMO. Do you not think that L.Brown will havbe a profound efect on whatever team he decides to caoah? b\c his track record indicates he most assuredly will have a positive effect. So, it has NOTHING to do with dimished value IMO. You do not think Wallace could have a profound effect in the EC, where he doesn't have to face Duncan, Webber, Nowitzki and Garnett? I think his value to an EC team is in fact GREATER than it is to a WC team. I found it interesting that a TOR beat writer on the radio last afternoon felt the same.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>robyg1974</b>!
> A homer is somebody who cannot think of his own team and its players objectively. That's what a homer is. A homer has no awareness of how ridiculous he is. A homer thinks people are nuts when you suggest that his players are worth less, way less, than he thinks they are.


Yes, that all describes you with Denver, I agree.



> Of COURSE you guys think my ideas are ridiculous! Why? Because you're homers, DUH!


First, to prevent yourself from looking clueless, quit using terms like "you guys." Calling *everyone* on the forum a "homer" just because you're throwing a temper-tantrum is childish.

Okay. Got that immaturity out of you?

Fine. Your rhetoric above is incredibly circular. I can use the same in reference to you. I wouldn't phrase it as crudely as you do, but to echo it and simply switch parties:

"Of COURSE you, roby, think some Portland fans' ideas are ridiculous! Why? Because you're a homer, DUH!"

Now, shall I explain why this is flawed? Because you're explaining away perceptions about your ideas by an opinion about everyone else that is completely unsupported. Your reasoning is circular:

You guys are homers.
Why are you homers?
Because you disagree with me on the values of players.
Why do you disagree with me on the values of players?
Because you're homers.

Congratulations. You're supporting your claim that certain people are homers with the claim that certain people are homers. Circular and worthless. One could easily use the same about you:

Roby is a homer.
Why is he a homer?
Because he disagrees with a bunch of fans on the values of players.
Why does he disagree with a bunch of fans on the values of players?
Because he's a homer.



> [Vandeweghe]'s not going to give Olowokandi a max deal. Portland, back in the Trader Bob days, they would've given Olowokandi a max deal.


Ah, making a guess about what Whitsitt "would have" done and using that as an argument for Vandeweghe. Do I need to mention, again, how flawed your logic is? How about if I just guess what Vandeweghe would have done with Brian Grant and then use that guess as an argument for or against Vandeweghe? Let's see...I'm going to randomly guess that Vandeweghe trades Brian Grant for Shawn Kemp and then immediately extends Kemp's contract five extra years at $20 million per year. Gosh, that was pretty stupid of Kiki. I guess Kiki isn't such a smart GM, eh? Shame that Trader Bob and Vandeweghe are subject to our guesses about what they "would" do.

What's that? You're furious because there's no way in heck Vandeweghe would that? Hmm, that's odd, because I was also thinking there's no way Whitsitt would have given Olowakandi a max contract, even assuming he could have.

Further, you seem to be oblivious to different circumstances. Vandeweghe is under the cap, which means overspending wastes valuable cap room. Therefore, it is to his advantage not to overpay at all. Whitsitt, however, was always over the cap, which meant that overspending didn't affect the team's talent level, only Allen's costs. If Allen was willing to foot the costs, then overspending, if it meant getting a player who they otherwise could not have gotten, was to Portland's advantage.



> Why do you think nobody wants this job?


Because you made that up out of your own biases.



> Why do you think nobody has taken this job?


Because so far, Portland has checked about guys who are *already under contract*. None of those people have been made available to "take the job."



> Finally, preferring something because it's empirically better is different than preferring something because of irrational loyalties such as homerism or nationalism.


I hate to burst your bubble, but nothing makes Vandeweghe's Denver team "empirically" better than Portland. As you've been made well-aware by now, the plan he's undertaking has yet to succeed anywhere in basketball. So, in fact, he's going against the odds and the numbers. That's "empirically" inferior. You, with absolutely no evidence to support it, have determined Vandeweghe's plan to be the height of logic, so you're *calling* it an empirical marvel. It makes me wonder whether you even know the defintion of the word "empirical."

Here, I'll help you along:



> em·pir·i·cal
> 1. a. Relying on or derived from observation or experiment: empirical results that supported the hypothesis.
> b. Verifiable or provable by means of observation or experiment: empirical laws.
> 
> 2. Guided by practical experience and not theory, especially in medicine.


Let me highlight that for you..."relying on or derived from observation or experiment"..."Verifiable or provable by means of observation or experiment"..."Guided by practical experience and not theory"

This means, the fact is that the "Kiki Plan," as you bizarrely dub it, is very *non-empirical*. All "experiments" with this plan (attempts to use it) have failed. As you agree. You like the *theory*...but cast your eyes back to the definition: "Guided by practical experience and *not theory*."

I admire your zeal, but the fact that you don't even know the meaning of the words you use to claim your favourite GM is the best weakens your credibility further. I'm sorry, that's simply reality.



> this is not a rational decision, this is homerism.


Working from irrational decision (like believing Vandeweghe's plan is "empirical" when it's actually the opposite) is homerism? Got it. 



> Liking Kiki because he's a visionary ... is VERY DIFFERENT from liking Derek Anderson SO MUCH JUST BECAUSE HE PLAYS FOR YOUR TEAM


Claiming Vandeweghe is "visionary" when he *A.* hasn't *even built a playoff team* and *B.* is using an old, old plan, *not one he invented*, is *just as* irrational as believing Derek Anderson is as valuable as Jay Williams. Both are untrue.

Further, liking Rodney White or Tskitsivlli simply because they play for Vandeweghe is just as irrational as liking Derek Anderson simply because he plays for Portland.



> And trying to turn the tables on that person by bizarrely accusing them of being some kind of homer with an asterisk, sorry, not effective!


Oh, no asterisk at all. You are a fully legitimate homer, based on the *irrational* belief that Vandeweghe is *A.* visionary, when he's done nothing original (the blow-it-up plan, as you've agreed, is eons old) and *B.* that his plan is "empirical" when we've seen quite clearly that it isn't.


----------



## Swoosh (May 2, 2003)

Roby = Melo ???

The way he touts Melo, you would think that Anthony was the second coming. He is still an unproven commodity. He just reminds me too much of Glen Robinson to take him seriously as a franchise player. He could turn out to be a good player, but he could be a bust, just as the fourth pick could end up being the best player in the draft class a fews years down the line.

Seriously, though...He seems to "overvalue" draft picks as much, if not more than he states that us Blazer fans "overvalue" our players. I wonder what he believes Shawn Bradley is worth? I mean, he was the second pick in the draft a few years back.


----------



## Qyntel's Shadow (Dec 31, 2002)

> I think there was something else going on that we didn't hear about. I have a feeling that, in his individual workouts, maybe he didn't interview well, maybe he didn't show very many skills (athleticism, yes; skills, maybe not), maybe they did a background check on the guy, maybe some of his old coaches and teachers told scouts that he has a big problem with authority, I don't know. If this guy deserved to go lotto last year, smoking some doobage would not have caused him to drop all the way down to #21, surely to god. I think the guy is worth holding onto, I really do, but I will be surprised if he ever turns into, say, an above average starter in this league. He's also worth holding onto simply because his trade value is not exactly out the roof right now.


Roby G,
The book on Qyntel was that he had (an, honestly, still has) a low basketball IQ. His exposure to the game was limited to a couple of years in high school and then Junior College. He had the JuCo stigma that JuCo players don't adjust to the NBA very well, and often fail at the professional level. He blew out a knee in high school playing football, so there was a lingering question about how well it was treated and healed. Add to all of that the open admission of using pot, his stock dropped.
Interviews with coaches indicated that he was a quick learner and was able to apply what he learned. I have heard this stated by Blazer asst. coaches as well, so its probably true. Like many young players, his defensive abilities were poor. Currently, his understanding of Portland's offensive and defensive sets is incomplete, but improving. Contrary to opinion, he has an outside shot - its actually very smooth, and he has good handles for a 6'8" player. 
As a side note, I watched him play the 3-pointer game with Rasheed before a game last year and they were tied through to the last position (left corner). Can he do it in a game? Not last year, but that shows he's working on that aspect of his game, at least.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

I had to dredge this thread up again, here are some "interesting" comments:

Vintage





> Denver has cap room, and plenty of it. Arenas seems to be there #1 pursuit. Expect him in Denver........I am After signing him, that fills their need for a PG.





> Word is Denver is not as enamored with Arenas as they were once thought to be. A lot of that is said to stem from off-court issues with Arenas. The fact T.J. Ford was mentioned as a candidate the Nuggets would be interested in only adds fuel to the fire.


QUOTE]"Nothing is locked in," Bzdelik said. "You never know, another player might surface. T.J. Ford is one of them." [/QUOTE] 


Another one




> Now, while in "theory" trading Anderson plus the 4th pick(assuming there was a prior trade) for the 3rd fills Denver's need of a G, it doesn't make sense for Toronto. Anderson is a solid player, when healthy........ But Anthony is part of the Big 3 Cant Miss prospects. Not only that, but Carmelo probably could play SG(although he is best suited for SF IMO). Don't forget either, that Rodney White did pretty well at SG towards the end of the year......perhaps Denver wants to go with a taller lineup with White at SG.........but I think they'll look to add more talent.


from RoByG



> Denver is NOT going to trade the highly coveted Carmelo Anthony for the #4 pick and Qyntel Woods, they can get so much more than this for Carmelo.





> Carmelo puts people in the seats,





> Most NBA fans realize that Carmelo Anthony WILL NEVER NEVER NEVER get traded for the #4 pick and DEREK ANDERSON


Some interesting thoughts:



> It’s not that Anthony couldn’t do wonders for the Nuggets. He would no doubt be a key piece in the future of the franchise. However, the Nuggets were looking for the player who could bring enough attention to Denver to make players want to play in Denver- LeBron James.





> "We have to bring in veteran guys who are winners, want to be in Denver and have playoff experience," said Bzdelik. "You get too many young players, then there's no internal leadership. If we had what this team did last year - seven guys who are 22 or younger - it won't work."





> Denver needs to acquire players who other players would like to play with. Carmelo Anthony is not the answer, although he does help.





> The Nuggets are going to have the advantage money-wise in the free agent market, but they need to make their team attractive for those players to take their money. That, more than anything, is the likely reason that the third pick will be available to other teams.





> "I'm looking to see what's happening with free agents and what type of players they will sign that are proven players that will help you win," Howard said. "Any rookie out of the draft will be an added plus. It will definitely help.





> "My decision doesn't depend on what is going to happen with a rookie. My decision is based on free agents. We need some free agents that are proven players."




And Lastly an interesting comment from Kiki himself



> There are some very, very interesting players in this draft. And, typically, the top three players are not always the best players," said Vandeweghe.


[


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

Ok, so Denver is no longer enamored with Arenas. Fine. Denver still wont trade Carmelo for Derek Anderson and the 4th pick. They could get much better. 

And if Denver does that trade, and assuming Portland gets the #4 pick, Denver will regret it........and Portland's GM will look like a genious.


But dont count on that to happen. 

I still stand by what I said.........Carmelo will not be a Blazer if Portland ends up offering #4 and Derek Anderson.


----------

