# Fair deal for Kirk Hinrich?



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

I know there's a thread on Hinrich, but I want to discuss this trade in particular.

This is dependent on Chicago selecting Rose.

POR sends

-#13
-Webster/Frye
-Raef Lafrentz
-Jack if needed (Probably not)

CHI sends

-Kirk Hinrich
-Andres Nocioni

The general consensus from Chicago fans is a thumbs up. 

What do Portland fans think?


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

B-Roy said:


> I know there's a thread on Hinrich, but I want to discuss this trade in particular.
> 
> This is dependent on Chicago selecting Rose.
> 
> ...


No. We should just wade it out until next summer. Reaf's contract is valuable because there is only one year left. Kirk still has 3-4 years left at $9+ million per. See what we actually need after integrating Oden/Rudy/lottery pick/Pettri Kopenen.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

I'm not thrilled at the idea of acquiring Kirk because his shooting woes scare the **** out of me. I think guys who aren't as good on the defensive end but far superior on the offensive like Barbosa, Mo Williams, or the Raptors duo could be better. Saying that, if Pritchard believes Kirk would be a great fit then I support him in his decision. Kirk's value is in the absolute pits right now, we could probably get away with trading Raef, Jack, and this year's pick for him. I still like the idea of Barbosa more.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Sambonius said:


> I'm not thrilled at the idea of acquiring Kirk because his shooting woes scare the **** out of me. I think guys who aren't as good on the defensive end but far superior on the offensive like Barbosa, Mo Williams, or the Raptors duo could be better. Saying that, if Pritchard believes Kirk would be a great fit then I support him in his decision. Kirk's value is in the absolute pits right now, we could probably get away with trading Raef, Jack, and this year's pick for him. I still like the idea of Barbosa more.


x2.

I don't really care for Hinrich, and would rather stay put. But, if KP likes him, then in KP I trust. I would rather keep Webster out of the deal though.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

I'm coming around to the idea of bringing in Hinrich if KP and the gang believe he's the next big piece to the puzzle.
This guy is not a bum player. The Bulls were in disarray last year. I'm not too high on sending Webster out though. If the Bulls would want Frye, I'd part with him.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

He had a bad year, but that doesn't mean he's a bad player. His value is also lower which is one of the reasons we can get him for a mediocre package like this.

I find it funny how everyone seems high on drafting Westbrook because of his defensive ability, when Hinrich is an even better defender and a seasoned veteran. Two things this team desperately needs.

At the price of a pick we probably aren't going to use, an expiring contract, and one of our young players, I think it's the perfect deal. We also bring in Nocioni, who also gives us more depth at the SF position.

At some point, if the right deal comes along, you just have to pull the trigger.

Part of me thinks it's better to send Webster. There will be too many SFs and SGs for Webster to get as many minutes as he did this year.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Keep Webster out the deal and let Jones go. I would suggest that one of Frye or Outlaw must go, but I like both and would only be willing to give either up for someone of greater value, such as Calderon, Harris, or even Barbosa. I've spent a lot of time watching Kirk and while is defensive is very good, his shooting is regularly abysmal. I think it is necessary to have a consistent shooter at the PG position, as there will almost certainly be players who sag to cover the likes of Oden or Aldridge. Kirk frightens me with that. I'd sacrifice a little defense in order to get some better shooting. Barbosa and Mo Williams look like good options here, although their defense is suspect. This lineup looks pretty good though if we gave up Frye, Jack, and Raef for Kirk and Nocioni. 

PG- Kirk, Blake, Sergio
SG- Roy, Rudy
SF- Webster, Nocioni
PF- Aldridge, Outlaw or Fye
C- Oden, Joel

I'm probably a bigger fan of Nocioni than I am Kirk.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Sambonius said:


> Keep Webster out the deal and let Jones go. I would suggest that one of Frye or Outlaw must go, but I like both and would only be willing to give either up for someone of greater value, such as Calderon, Harris, or even Barbosa. *I've spent a lot of time watching Kirk and while is defensive is very good, his shooting is regularly abysmal.* I think it is necessary to have a consistent shooter at the PG position, as there will almost certainly be players who sag to cover the likes of Oden or Aldridge. Kirk frightens me with that. I'd sacrifice a little defense in order to get some better shooting. Barbosa and Mo Williams look like good options here, although their defense is suspect. This lineup looks pretty good though if we gave up Frye, Jack, and Raef for Kirk and Nocioni.
> 
> PG- Kirk, Blake, Sergio
> SG- Roy, Rudy
> ...


Are you talking about this season? His shot started to look good last season but then he started failing.....well the whole Bulls team did. I think he's at least a decent shooter. Especially with the amount of open looks he'll be getting w/ the Blazers.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

B-Roy said:


> Are you talking about this season? His shot started to look good last season but then he started failing.....well the whole Bulls team did. I think he's at least a decent shooter. Especially with the amount of open looks he'll be getting w/ the Blazers.


I watched less of him last season than seasons prior. People say he had a bad year last year, but I think that it is more of the norm for him than an anomaly. He shot worse his first 2 years in the league, and just about the same his third as he did last year. He's only had one season where he shot at a decent clip with referring to field goal percentage. That is very bad. He's just not reliable enough to have as your starting PG, especially with the contract he has. I think you'd be better off with a Derek Fisher. Our point guard must shoot the ball well, and only 1 season for Kirk has been just that.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

I think his shot is starting to come around. Everyone on the Bulls team took a big dip in FG% this year. I'm confident Hinrich will be able to shoot, but it's not like he really needs to shoot much anyways.


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

for those that are *****ing about brining in hinrich's contract, what about bringing in both hinrich and nocioni?? do you realize that is 3 and 4 years, respectively? i guess that would round out the core of Hinrich, Roy, Nocioni, Lama and Oden. With Rudy, Outlaw, Joel and Blake as our 9 man rotation. Not too shabby if you ask me. Every year bring in a seasoned vet and a solid rookie?


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

B-Roy said:


> I think his shot is starting to come around. Everyone on the Bulls team took a big dip in FG% this year. I'm confident Hinrich will be able to shoot, but it's not like he really needs to shoot much anyways.


Do you realize that last year he shot BETTER than his first two years in the league and just about the same as his third season in the league? If you look at his history, you would see that this type of shooting for Kirk is pretty regular for him. He only had 1 season in his NBA career where he shot at a pretty good clip. He will definitly need to shoot to keep the defense honest, or teams will just double the likes of Oden and Aldridge. I don't think he's the answer.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Sambonius said:


> Do you realize that last year he shot BETTER than his first two years in the league and just about the same as his third season in the league? If you look at his history, you would see that this type of shooting for Kirk is pretty regular for him. He only had 1 season in his NBA career where he shot at a pretty good clip. He will definitly need to shoot to keep the defense honest, or teams will just double the likes of Oden and Aldridge. I don't think he's the answer.


Then who is? At least shooting a decent clip in one season means he is capable of shooting well.

Our future point certainly isn't in the draft, if you weigh so much on offense. Nor is it in any of the other PGs you mentioned because they'd likely be too expensive, or they are just downright terrible on defense. Wasn't in the consensus that we needed a great defender at the PG position? Now there's a chance to obtain Hinrich on the cheap and people are saying it's a bad idea?

I don't think our offense isn't going to be as big of an issue as you're making it out to be. If anything, Hinrich is only going to help our offense with his good passing skills. Hinrich can shoot.....I really don't think that's a problem.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

B-Roy said:


> Then who is? At least shooting a decent clip in one season means he is capable of shooting well.


Anything can happen once. Darius Miles looked like a future all-star, Jerome James looked like a decent center, and Theo Ratliff was the greatest shot blocker of all time, etc. One season out of 5 or six seasons in the league don't make me confident one's shooting. 



> Our future point certainly isn't in the draft, if you weigh so much on offense. Nor is it in any of the other PGs you mentioned because they'd likely be too expensive, or they are just downright terrible on defense. Wasn't in the consensus that we needed a great defender at the PG position? Now there's a chance to obtain Hinrich on the cheap and people are saying it's a bad idea?


Agreed that the draft isn't where we go to find our starting PG for next season. I think Barbosa is on the cheap, Mo Williams is definitly on the cheap, TJ Ford is. The list isn't long, but I think we should exhaust all options before turning to a guy with a guy who can't shoot consistently and still has a lot of money owed to him for the next few seasons. Some people value the idea of a great defender at the PG, and others value great offense, and others value in between. I'd like to have both but Steve Nash is a horrible defensive player, as are most PGs, so the issue of defense at that position may be a bit overrated, just a bit. I'm not saying it's a bad idea to acquire Kirk, I'm just saying there are red flags and I'd like to see other options looked at before we jump on our first opportunity. 



> I don't think our offense isn't going to be as big of an issue as you're making it out to be. If anything, Hinrich is only going to help our offense with his good passing skills. Hinrich can shoot.....I really don't think that's a problem.


I didn't say the Blazers would have an issue on the offensive end, I said Kirk might due to his checkered past regarding his FG% and overall inefficiency from the field. I don't recall it, but I do hear from numerous Bulls fans that Kirk has issues with getting the ball into the post. That's something else to look at considering our game plan is going to be that for the most part. 

I'd like to see some of the more savvy board members show some details defensive numbers regarding Kirk and comparing him to guys like Barbosa, Mo Williams, Devin Harris, and even Rondo. I'm not talking about steals per game, I'm talking about the technical stuff like their opponent scoring averages, +/- when on the court, etc. That would really be appreciated.


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

B-Roy said:


> Then who is? At least shooting a decent clip in one season means he is capable of shooting well.
> 
> Our future point certainly isn't in the draft, if you weigh so much on offense. Nor is it in any of the other PGs you mentioned because they'd likely be too expensive, or they are just downright terrible on defense. Wasn't in the consensus that we needed a great defender at the PG position? Now there's a chance to obtain Hinrich on the cheap and people are saying it's a bad idea?
> 
> I don't think our offense isn't going to be as big of an issue as you're making it out to be. If anything, Hinrich is only going to help our offense with his good passing skills. Hinrich can shoot.....I really don't think that's a problem.


I can't really argue with the stats, but being a Bulls fan who's watched Kirk since he's been on the team, he's definitely good enough to be able to shoot when he has to. Perhaps I'm just nutty.

He really does have a solid shot, he just has a tendency to fall into slumps (which he worsens by taking bad shots). When he's out there doing his thing, he can be a very solid offensive player - he just doesn't show it too often, and I think it can mostly be attributed to him trying to initiate the offense and look for others. His shooting suffers because of this.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

King Joseus said:


> I can't really argue with the stats, but being a Bulls fan who's watched Kirk since he's been on the team, he's definitely good enough to be able to shoot when he has to. Perhaps I'm just nutty.
> 
> He really does have a solid shot, he just has a tendency to fall into slumps (which he worsens by taking bad shots). When he's out there doing his thing, he can be a very solid offensive player - he just doesn't show it too often, and I think it can mostly be attributed to him trying to initiate the offense and look for others. His shooting suffers because of this.


Would it be fair to say then that he isn't a guy you want initiating the offense?


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

> Anything can happen once. Darius Miles looked like a future all-star, Jerome James looked like a decent center, and Theo Ratliff was the greatest shot blocker of all time, etc. One season out of 5 or six seasons in the league don't make me confident one's shooting.


All it does is show that he's capable of shooting well. That's all. But under Nate's system, you would expect him to become better, not worse.



> Agreed that the draft isn't where we go to find our starting PG for next season. I think Barbosa is on the cheap, Mo Williams is definitly on the cheap, TJ Ford is. The list isn't long, but I think we should exhaust all options before turning to a guy with a guy who can't shoot consistently and still has a lot of money owed to him for the next few seasons. Some people value the idea of a great defender at the PG, and others value great offense, and others value in between. I'd like to have both but Steve Nash is a horrible defensive player, as are most PGs, so the issue of defense at that position may be a bit overrated, just a bit. I'm not saying it's a bad idea to acquire Kirk, I'm just saying there are red flags and I'd like to see other options looked at before we jump on our first opportunity.


Hinrich took a step back in regards to defense this season. But it might have something to do with the Bulls completely sucking and also losing their coach. Nate is a defensive minded coach, and I can see Hinrich becoming an even better defender than he already is. I've watched Williams and Barbosa a lot. And sometimes it just seems to me that they DON'T want to play defense. I don't like trusting players that are solely offensive minded. As for TJ Ford....I just don't want him. Too many injuries and not worth what we could give up. Unless it's just Jack. 
Thing with Nash is, he had Marion and Bell. Two great defenders that took the pressure off of him needing to defend.
I understand your concern, but with the package we're giving, I don't know how it can get any cheaper. This is a great deal for Portland, and if offered, KP would have to think long and hard about pulling the trigger.




> I didn't say the Blazers would have an issue on the offensive end, I said Kirk might due to his checkered past regarding his FG% and overall inefficiency from the field. I don't recall it, but I do hear from numerous Bulls fans that Kirk has issues with getting the ball into the post. That's something else to look at considering our game plan is going to be that for the most part.
> 
> I'd like to see some of the more savvy board members show some details defensive numbers regarding Kirk and comparing him to guys like Barbosa, Mo Williams, Devin Harris, and even Rondo. I'm not talking about steals per game, I'm talking about the technical stuff like their opponent scoring averages, +/- when on the court, etc. That would really be appreciated.


I don't know about that, but his numbers would probably be pretty bad for this year, considering the whole Bulls roster played poorly. But Hinrich is a very capable player. More so than an offensive minded PG like Williams or Barbosa. IMO, at least.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Sambonius said:


> Would it be fair to say then that he isn't a guy you want initiating the offense?


Why does it matter that much in Portland though? We have a ball dominating 2 guard in Brandon Roy, who is most certainly going to have the ball in his hands a lot as well.


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

Sambonius said:


> Would it be fair to say then that he isn't a guy you want initiating the offense?


Ideally, he's a combo guard. He's not the best distributor, no.

I think he's a solid starter, though, and certainly better than Mo Williams. I like Barbosa, though I'm not sure he's the better overall fit.

By no means is Kirk the perfect PG, but I do believe that he would thrive in a new location (in this case, Portland). I think he'd feel less pressure on the Blazers and be able to play well on both ends for you.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

B-Roy said:


> Why does it matter that much in Portland though? We have a ball dominating 2 guard in Brandon Roy, who is most certainly going to have the ball in his hands a lot as well.


Precisely, I don't think it does. If you take play making out of the equation, you're going to be comparing defense to shooting and penetrating. D'Antoni didn't preach defense, Nate has. Look at what he's got out of Martell in just a few seasons. He's probably our best man to man defender. It's possible that Nate could do the same with Barbosa who has a very efficient player on the offensive end, defensive is where it gets tricky, but with Martell, Roy, Oden, and Aldridge all very capable defenders, a weaker PG on the defensive end, might not hurt, much like Steve Nash in Phoenix.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Sambonius said:


> Precisely, I don't think it does. If you take play making out of the equation, you're going to be comparing defense to shooting and penetrating. D'Antoni didn't preach defense, Nate has. Look at what he's got out of Martell in just a few seasons. He's probably our best man to man defender. It's possible that Nate could do the same with Barbosa who has a very efficient player on the offensive end, defensive is where it gets tricky, but with Martell, Roy, Oden, and Aldridge all very capable defenders, a weaker PG on the defensive end, might not hurt, much like Steve Nash in Phoenix.


From what I've seen, it's going to be really hard for guys like Barbosa to play good defense. I don't know. I HIGHLY dislike Barbosa though. Maybe it's because he's really a shooting guard, but I just don't see him working in Portland.

And what about Martell. He's playing slightly better defense after 2 years. Yeah, he'll improve, but I'll be damned if we have to wait a few years before a guy like Barbosa starts playing better defense.

The reason I like this deal is because Hinrich is already a good defender. No waiting, just impact. I think that's what we need at the moment.


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

B-Roy said:


> I know there's a thread on Hinrich, but I want to discuss this trade in particular.
> 
> This is dependent on Chicago selecting Rose.
> 
> ...


Yes I like it, I like it alot. I hate to give up Webster but you really have to think about this one. Hirich would really shine in Portland under Nate and playing with Roy. As for Nocioni goes every successful team needs that good character guy who knows how to play dirty. I would rather trade Jones insted of webster. Although you would be a fool just to say no and not even think about it if they wanted webter.


----------



## c_note (Jan 30, 2007)

Not for Webster. If it's Frye, I'd do it.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

I would much rather give up Outlaw than Webster. I just don't think Outlaw has the best basketball IQ, and in the long run Webster will be a better all around player. 

Hinrich is a second tier PG in the NBA, and probably falls somewhere around 10ish overall if you take age and everything else into account.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

I think both sides benefit from this deal, though I have this sneaking suspicion that Martell is going to have his "Travis" year in 2008-2009, where he fully emerges from that "three year incubator" he's been in and becomes a legit NBA starter.

For whatever reason I think Kirk would be a really nice addition to the roster and I tend to look at this past year in the context of the Bulls team as a whole having a very down year.

We all know Brandon is this team's play-maker in crunch time, which means Kirk doesn't need to bear the full burden of initiating, which from the sounds of things is where he's gotten in trouble.

A backcourt rotation of Roy, Hinrich, Blake, Fernandez has a nice ring to it ... of course this leaves El Chacho rotting on the bench for much of the year barring any major improvements in his shooting and/or defense this offseason, and one wonders if it wouldn't also be worth cutting bait with him this off-season in a trade (Rudy's bestest buddy or not).


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

I'm with most . . . if KP trades for Hinrich, then he must see something in Hinrich and that is good enough for now (KP has earned that).

I don't see KP pulling the trigger on the deal. At 9 mil/yr the analysis for KP has got to be does he see Hinrich as the starting PG for the next 4 years, because that is the financial commitment to making the trade. It is too big of a gamble to take on Hinrich. This is not a team that is ready to start taking on bad contracts, and after last year, it appears the Bulls overvalued Hinrich and gave him a overly lucrative contract.


----------



## blzr610 (May 24, 2006)

I say we should wait until the trade deadline to see how well Martell and Travis have stepped up their game before we include them in a trade. I'd hate to see either of them turn into a 20/5/5 player on another team and have every basketball pundit bashing the Blazers for giving them away prematurely, like the Jermaine O'Neal debacle. I don't see any other team needing Hinrich to the degree that we do, so waiting may be the best option.


----------



## dwood615 (Jul 20, 2004)

the thing with fans liking it an gms liking it is completely different i made the mistake of talkin to another teams fans before...

it doesnt work out


how many times has a gm made a deal that the fans didnt like...hundreds probably...

so who cares about the fans


from a business side it would be good for chi-town

they cut hinrichs deal to 1 year
they get two lotto picks
they get a young player in webster or frye
and jack only has 1 year left on his deal so they audition him out while they rebuild






would i do it???


NO...


reason:dont like the contract and thats money we could spend elsewhere


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

NO

These are the types of deals that you end up regretting more times than not down the road...

Here we are once again...POR needs a vet...POR needs a PG...Oh look, there is one potentially available, let's go and throw some young talent at them...overpay and fix all our needs....

There is no rush here...Hinrich is ok...I certainly wouldn't give up a Webster\Frye AND the #13 for him though...Nor would I sack a majority of our cap space for a mid level PG...There is no rush...POR could just as easily swing this type of deal at midseason or work a S&T next offseason....

Unless the deal is a sweet one for POR...then I think they are better off...keeping Webster\Outlaw and the #13...and trying to parlay a way into the top 10...grab another young player...add ODen and Rudy...let the team gel another year...and then look for more substantial moves (adding a star or more vets) at the trade deadline or next offseason.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Kmurph said:


> NO
> 
> These are the types of deals that you end up regretting more times than not down the road...
> 
> ...


The roster state of the freaking roster is BAD. Next year, we'd add Oden/Fernandez, 4 draft picks, and our roster is already loaded. Stockpiling young players is going to be bad especially when these young players aren't even going to get any signifigant playing time.

Oden/Przy/Raef
LA/Frye
Webster/Outlaw/Jones
Roy/Fernandez
Jack/Blake/Sergio

+4 draft picks. 

Are you kidding me. That's way too many players for one player to have a breakout year. And explain why we're overpaying. Portland fans seem to value their players 3X as much as they seem to be worth to other teams.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

B-Roy said:


> The roster state of the freaking roster is BAD. Next year, we'd add Oden/Fernandez, 4 draft picks, and our roster is already loaded. Stockpiling young players is going to be bad especially when these young players aren't even going to get any signifigant playing time.
> 
> Oden/Przy/Raef
> LA/Frye
> ...


Why in the **** do you have The HUman Turnover starting? I agree with everything else though eace:


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

mediocre man said:


> Why in the **** do you have The HUman Turnover starting? I agree with everything else though eace:


I was just listing our players.


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

B-Roy said:


> The roster state of the freaking roster is BAD. Next year, we'd add Oden/Fernandez, 4 draft picks, and our roster is already loaded. Stockpiling young players is going to be bad especially when these young players aren't even going to get any signifigant playing time.
> 
> Oden/Przy/Raef
> LA/Frye
> ...


We are not adding +4 players. I am fine with trading all of our 2nd rounders + player(s) for 1st rounder next year or the year after.. Pritchard has always been clear with his plan. In 2009, with the cap space, Pritchard will add veterans. But until then, let Oden, Rudy and the rest of the Blazer lineup gel for another year. There is no rush in adding an average point guard with a big contract.

Seriously, I can't possibly picture Hinrich being a championship point guard. We still have Pettri /#13/Roy to try out at point guard. Pritchard will make his move next year.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Balian said:


> We are not adding +4 players. I am fine with trading all of our 2nd rounders + player(s) for 1st rounder next year or the year after.. Pritchard has always been clear with his plan. In 2009, with the cap space, Pritchard will add veterans. But until then, let Oden, Rudy and the rest of the Blazer lineup gel for another year. There is no rush in adding an average point guard with a big contract.
> 
> Seriously, I can't possibly picture Hinrich being a championship point guard. We still have Pettri /#13/Roy to try out at point guard. Pritchard will make his move next year.


Even adding 2 players is too much. And I highly doubt we'd be able to trade these picks for something that we'd actually want.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

Balian said:


> We are not adding +4 players. I am fine with trading all of our 2nd rounders + player(s) for 1st rounder next year or the year after.. Pritchard has always been clear with his plan. In 2009, with the cap space, Pritchard will add veterans. But until then, let Oden, Rudy and the rest of the Blazer lineup gel for another year. There is no rush in adding an average point guard with a big contract.
> 
> Seriously, I can't possibly picture Hinrich being a championship point guard. We still have Pettri /#13/Roy to try out at point guard. Pritchard will make his move next year.


But right now, we have an opportunity we didn't expect. We may not be able to get a PG of Kirk Hinrich's quality via free agency. Then what? Soon we're going to have to re-sign our young guys to big contracts, and the free agency window will be closed.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

I think B-Roy's original offer for Hinrich/Nocioni is to much. #13 and either Jack, Webster, or Frye should be enough for Hinrich. I dont want Nocioni


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

B_&_B said:


> I think B-Roy's original offer for Hinrich/Nocioni is to much. #13 and either Jack, Webster, or Frye should be enough for Hinrich. I dont want Nocioni


We're already getting Hinrich on the pretty cheap. And the salary doesn't match with your trade.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

OK, 3 quick points.

1) If you find the player you are looking for, you grab him. Waiting another year if the player you really want is available now makes no sense.

2) Kirk would be a modest upgrade, but let's not get carried away.

3) Consider the cost-benefit analysis. If we draft somebody like Gordon or Westbrook, all it costs us is his rookie salary. (and the patience to sit thru his learning curve) If we trade for Kirk, it costs us both more money AND the talent we give up. We are paying a significant price just to avoid having to spend a season or two developing a guy who may be just as good as Kirk.

Sorry, but I don't see how this pencils out!


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

Yega1979 said:


> But right now, we have an opportunity we didn't expect. We may not be able to get a PG of Kirk Hinrich's quality via free agency. Then what? Soon we're going to have to re-sign our young guys to big contracts, and the free agency window will be closed.


What then? Perhaps one of our prospects at point guard (Pettri/Sergio/Roy/#13/etc) works out. Perhaps there will be another, better free agent. Perhaps another trade scenario will present itself. Right now, the option of Brandon Roy being our point guard is better and cheaper than trading for Hinrich.

All of these possibilities combined is A LOT MORE LIKELY than Hinrich(11.5 pts/6.0 ast/2.09 TO/*.414 FG/.350 3pt*)working out and winning championships for the Blazers.

Kirk Hinrich was the leader for the Bulls last year. Look how that turned out.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Balian said:


> What then? Perhaps one of our prospects at point guard (Pettri/Sergio/Roy/#13/etc) works out. Perhaps there will be another, better free agent. Perhaps another trade scenario will present itself. The option of Brandon Roy being our point guard is better than Hinrich.
> 
> All of these possibilities combined is A LOT MORE LIKELY than Hinrich working out and winning championships for the Blazers.
> 
> Kirk Hinrich was the leader for the Bulls. Look how that turned out.


Why? Why? Why?

The Bulls imploded last season. Everyone took a step back. But factors like the coach, the Kobe trade rumors, and other random junk contributed to everyone playing poorly. Hinrich won't need to be the leader in Portland. He'll fit right in as a more than competent role player.

I love how everyone assumes worst possible outcome with Hinrich, and best possible outcome with our players.


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

B-Roy said:


> Why? Why? Why?
> 
> The Bulls imploded last season. Everyone took a step back. But factors like the coach, the Kobe trade rumors, and other random junk contributed to everyone playing poorly. Hinrich won't need to be the leader in Portland. He'll fit right in as a more than competent role player.
> 
> I love how everyone assumes worst possible outcome with Hinrich, and best possible outcome with our players.


And I love how you assume the very best possible outcome with Hinrich and the worst outcome for our players. Even at the very best, Hinrich is pedestrian and probably would not help us win championships. Out frankly, Hinrich set a short ceiling that is quite easy to surpass.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Balian said:


> And I love how you assume the very best possible outcome with Hinrich and the worst outcome for our players. Even at the very best, Hinrich is pedestrian and probably would not help us win championships.


When did I ever say that? I just think this is a good deal. Not everyone on the Blazers roster is going to become a stud. And with Rudy/Oden, it just seems unlikely anyones going to have a breakout season.

Hinrich is a clear upgrade at PG. You still haven't explained why Hinrich is so "pedestrian".


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

I am luke warm on getting Hinrich, but don't want Nocioni.


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

B-Roy said:


> When did I ever say that? I just think this is a good deal. Not everyone on the Blazers roster is going to become a stud. And with Rudy/Oden, it just seems unlikely anyones going to have a breakout season.
> 
> Hinrich is a clear upgrade at PG. You still haven't explained why Hinrich is so "pedestrian".


Last Year
11.5 pts
6.0 ast
2.09 TO
*.414 FG
.350 3pt

*Career
14.4 pts
6.4 ast
2.35 TO
*.414 FG
.377 3pt*

Hell, even Jarret Jack had a better season shooting than Hinrich.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Balian said:


> Last Year
> 11.5 pts
> 6.0 ast
> 2.09 TO
> ...


Hinrich played great the season before the last one. Then the whole team just imploded last season. He's capable of playing at a high level. And with less pressure on the Blazers squad, you'd expect him to go back to his old self.


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

B-Roy said:


> Hinrich played great the season before the last one. Then the whole team just imploded last season. He's capable of playing at a high level. And with less pressure on the Blazers squad, you'd expect him to go back to his old self.


Yeah, he will go back to his *0.414 FG* and *.3XX 3pt* *CAREER averages*. No thanks.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Balian said:


> Yeah, he will go back to his *0.414 FG* and *.3XX 3pt* *CAREER averages*. No thanks.


I'd expect 45% shooting and 38% from 3. With decent assist numbers and good solid defense. (which is what he's more known for anyways.)


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

IMO Hinrich is overated...certainly not worth the #13, Lafrentz contract and a Webster\Frye....

I think making that sort of deal is selling POR short...big time...I would be willing deal any\all of those assets for the right player...but Hinrich is not that player...



> The roster state of the freaking roster is BAD. Next year, we'd add Oden/Fernandez, 4 draft picks, and our roster is already loaded. Stockpiling young players is going to be bad especially when these young players aren't even going to get any signifigant playing time.
> 
> Oden/Przy/Raef
> LA/Frye
> ...


1) I don't think the roster state is bad at all...Not sure what you are refering to here.
2) I HIGHLY doubt POR adds 4 new draft picks to the roster
3) I agree that there needs to be some consolidation, but that doesn't mean it has to be THIS deal, or THIS offseason...I would rather see POR trade UP in the draft by consolidating assets to add another young top 10 pick, keep LaFrentz's contract and go after vets next offseason...

As for not enough time for young players...that is bogus...good players play...period...IF they are good enough they will earn the minutes....let competition decide who does\doesn't "get enough" minutes....


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Kmurph said:


> IMO Hinrich is overated...certainly not worth the #13, Lafrentz contract and a Webster\Frye....
> 
> I think making that sort of deal is selling POR short...big time...I would be willing deal any\all of those assets for the right player...but Hinrich is not that player...
> 
> ...


Then what do you think a package of Raef, #13, Webster/Frye can really get?


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

^ if someone says chris paul or deron williams i'm going to E-slap the crap out of you.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

deanwoof said:


> ^ if someone says chris paul or deron williams i'm going to E-slap the crap out of you.


That's the thing. There is no one else! Hinrich is a second tier point that can be gotten on the cheap, but Portland fans have to realize that you have to give some to get some.

If anyone can provide me with an alternate solution, I'd be more than willing to listen.


----------



## ucatchtrout (Feb 11, 2004)

All the trade proposals I have seen for this guy seem like we are giving away too much. If Chicago wants to get rid of him then its a buyers market....not a sellers market. No reason to throw the whole farm at them. Jack or Blake and an pick or two ought to be enough to get the deal done.

A trade for Hinrich will be difficult to pull off. Hinrich is a base year compensation player this year. Even though his 11.25 million salary would count against our cap, Chicago can only take 5.5 million and change for him. Because of this, Raef and his 12 million dollar deal can't be a part of a trade for Hinrich. The only way to do a deal now with the Bulls for Hinrich is to package a bunch of our young guys with small contracts. Jack, Blake, etc plus picks. Or, we could wait until after July 1st when he will no longer be counted as a base year player. But thats after the draft, so we still need to figure out what to do then with the number 13 pick. It seems to me awfully complicated to work a deal to get this guy. Is he that good? Do we really envision him as a starter on a championship team? If we don't, we are stuck with his contract for quite a while and lose the cap flexibility we gained when we got rid of Miles. I hear everyone wants a new PG. I don't think dealing for one just for the sake of dealing for one is worth it. I think if we bring in a new guy we need to see him as a significant upgrade over Blake and Sergio and as someone who would be a starter on a championship team or it isn't worth doing. Everyone whines about Sergio not getting enough minutes to develop. That won't happen if we bring in another guy. We should develop the guys we have or trade them. Except for Jack. I've already decided about him. Time for him to go.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> Then what do you think a package of Raef, #13, Webster/Frye can really get?


I don't know...I think there is a good chance we are all going to find out though....

I think the situation in NY bears watching...#6 pick, they want to unload salary to go after Lebron(fool's gold if you ask me..I mean chances of acquiring him)...If your Pritchard is there a player at that pick enticing (and\or other players?) enough to take on some bloated salaries? Not sure there is...


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Kmurph said:


> I don't know...I think there is a good chance we are all going to find out though....
> 
> I think the situation in NY bears watching...#6 pick, they want to unload salary to go after Lebron(fool's gold if you ask me..I mean chances of acquiring him)...If your Pritchard is there a player at that pick enticing (and\or other players?) enough to take on some bloated salaries? Not sure there is...


Portland could take back Zach Randolph. *ZING!*

Kidding. :clap2:


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

ucatchtrout said:


> All the trade proposals I have seen for this guy seem like we are giving away too much. If Chicago wants to get rid of him then its a buyers market....not a sellers market. No reason to throw the whole farm at them. Jack or Blake and an pick or two ought to be enough to get the deal done.
> 
> A trade for Hinrich will be difficult to pull off. Hinrich is a base year compensation player this year. Even though his 11.25 million salary would count against our cap, Chicago can only take 5.5 million and change for him. Because of this, Raef and his 12 million dollar deal can't be a part of a trade for Hinrich. The only way to do a deal now with the Bulls for Hinrich is to package a bunch of our young guys with small contracts. Jack, Blake, etc plus picks. Or, we could wait until after July 1st when he will no longer be counted as a base year player. But thats after the draft, so we still need to figure out what to do then with the number 13 pick. It seems to me awfully complicated to work a deal to get this guy. Is he that good? Do we really envision him as a starter on a championship team? If we don't, we are stuck with his contract for quite a while and lose the cap flexibility we gained when we got rid of Miles. I hear everyone wants a new PG. I don't think dealing for one just for the sake of dealing for one is worth it. I think if we bring in a new guy we need to see him as a significant upgrade over Blake and Sergio and as someone who would be a starter on a championship team or it isn't worth doing. Everyone whines about Sergio not getting enough minutes to develop. That won't happen if we bring in another guy. We should develop the guys we have or trade them. Except for Jack. I've already decided about him. Time for him to go.


We can just make the trade happen after June 30th. I think that is when the BYC status is over.


----------



## ucatchtrout (Feb 11, 2004)

Yes. But that is after the draft, so the 13 pick can't be part of the deal. 

The thing is though....Hinrich isn't worth all that. Like I said, Its a buyers market for Hinrich right now.

He had a bad year, and isn't that much of an upgrade over what we have. Why give up our cap space, plus talented young players, plus draft picks for a player who isn't that much better than what we have? Makes no sense to me. Better to stick with what we have, trade Jack, and give Sergio the minutes everyone says he needs to develop.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

I agree that the proposal is too rich, but I wouldn't mind getting KH if the price was a little less. I don't want to also take on Nocioni, and so that makes trades difficult but still doable. If we send Raef and one of Outlaw/Web/Frye, we would be sending out 15.9-16.7 mil and KH would make 10.25mil. The Blazers would need to take back at least 12mil and up to 20.8mil, so the Bulls would need to add another contract of at least 1.75mil. Cedric Simmons,Thabo Sefolosha, Joakim Noah, Tyrus Thomas or some others could be added, but I don't think they would want to add Thomas or Noah or maybe Sefolosha as a throw in, so it would most likely be Simmons. 

Then the Blazers would need to get rid of one or more of our PG's somewhere, and I don't think that the Bulls would want them, so we would need to find some way to send out Jack, maybe for a future lotto protected 1st from a below cap team or team with an exemption. 

Out 
Raef + Outlaw

In
KH and Simmons

Send Jack out

Kinrich/Blake/Sergio
Roy/Fernandez
Webster/Jones/(13th pick, Alexander/Greene/Budinger/Batum)
Aldridge/Frye/McRoberts/Simmons
Oden/Przybilla

Then we draft a C with one of our second round picks. Perhaps we could also cut Simmons or McRoberts and add an MLE vet or another second rounder/koponen/freeland.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

ucatchtrout said:


> Yes. But that is after the draft, so the 13 pick can't be part of the deal.
> 
> The thing is though....Hinrich isn't worth all that. Like I said, Its a buyers market for Hinrich right now.
> 
> He had a bad year, and isn't that much of an upgrade over what we have. Why give up our cap space, plus talented young players, plus draft picks for a player who isn't that much better than what we have? Makes no sense to me. Better to stick with what we have, trade Jack, and give Sergio the minutes everyone says he needs to develop.


What would constitute a "good" upgrade then? Aside from the impossibles. (Paul, Parker, etc.)


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

B-Roy said:


> What would constitute a "good" upgrade then? Aside from the impossibles. (Paul, Parker, etc.)


Jose Calderon for example.


----------



## JAFO (Jul 2, 2006)

Kmurph said:


> NO
> 
> These are the types of deals that you end up regretting more times than not down the road...
> 
> ...


Thank you, Kmurph! I think I hear the voice of reason in your post (sometimes I read out loud). To those who want to bring in either Hinrich or T.J. Ford, I say "Just say NO!" I think they are both over paid and over rated. To prove that he is not on a down-hill slide, Hinrich is going to have to play a lot better this coming season than he did this past season. Only, I don't want him trying to do it as a Blazer.  The only way I would accept a trade for Hinrich is if Chicago managed to include the #1 pick in the deal. Something I don't think they are willing to do.

The Blazers, I think will be a lot better off without Hinrich ... and with Webster\Outlaw, Frye and the #13 and looking elsewhere. Patience people and have faith in KP. The Blazers will get their PG.

JAFO


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Yega1979 said:


> But right now, we have an opportunity we didn't expect. *We may not be able to get a PG of Kirk Hinrich's quality via free agency.* Then what? Soon we're going to have to re-sign our young guys to big contracts, and the free agency window will be closed.


I doubt it. When you have young players the caliber of Oden, Roy and Aldridge and plenty of cap space the free agents will come.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> I doubt it. When you have young players the caliber of Oden, Roy and Aldridge and plenty of cap space the free agents will come.


I dunno, Zags. I'd like to think you're right but I can't recall any significant free agents coming to Portland when Drexler and the crew were challenging for championships. Yes there's more player movement through free agency now than there was then but still, I'm skeptical.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> I doubt it. When you have young players the caliber of Oden, Roy and Aldridge and plenty of cap space the free agents will come.


They don't just come out of the forest though. How many top PGs will be free agents during the window of time that we'll have cap space, and out what are their chances of not being retained by their current teams?


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Yega1979 said:


> They don't just come out of the forest though. How many top PGs will be free agents during the window of time that we'll have cap space, and out what are their chances of not being retained by their current teams?


What he said. 

I would like to keep cap flexibility for 2009, but if something better comes along now then take it (although I don't think Hinrich is that piece). There's a good chance nothing we need will be available in 2009.


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

Balian said:


> Jose Calderon for example.


Calderon's not going anywhere - not for a low price, anyhow...


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

PorterIn2004 said:


> I dunno, Zags. I'd like to think you're right but I can't recall any significant free agents coming to Portland when Drexler and the crew were challenging for championships. Yes there's more player movement through free agency now than there was then but still, I'm skeptical.


its not like that era of the Blazers had any gaping hole in the lineup comparable to the ones currently existing at PG and SF. Okay the 5 spot with Duck and Cliffy wasn't HOF but they were at least decent NBA players and that spot always commands a premium. Given that they'll have both cap space, available minutes, and 3 (maybe 4) young stars in place, I think it's reasonable to think that this will be a more attractive situation to Free Agents then yesteryear.

Thats not to say that they should only be looking to build through the draft and down the road Free Agency. I'm sure that they will work be working the phones exploring trade options for Vets at their weak spots... but to me Kirk Hinrich isn't the guy. Also, I expect the Bulls to go for Rose and see Kirk as a much better fit beside him then Gordon. 

STOMP


----------



## MrJayremmie (Dec 29, 2007)

> OK, 3 quick points.
> 
> 1) If you find the player you are looking for, you grab him. Waiting another year if the player you really want is available now makes no sense.
> 
> ...


That is what i think also.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

What about Raef+Jack for Hinrich?

Maybe the 13th pick if it's not enough.


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

Rudy(sg) + Roy(pg) *>>>* Roy(sg) + Hinrich(pg)


The combo that we will have is much better and cheaper. Just stay put. Try #13, Pettri Koponen, or Roy as pg first.


----------



## drinking_rogue (May 4, 2008)

I think we're better off rolling with Blake and Roy at PG than bothering with a deal for Hinrich.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Money to spend and a solid nucleus of players that go fairly deep into the playoffs will entice free agents without a doubt.


----------



## DonCorleone (Jul 1, 2005)

B-Roy said:


> What about Raef+Jack for Hinrich?
> 
> Maybe the 13th pick if it's not enough.


The real question is whether or not the Blazers would want Hinrich even if they didn't have to trade _anything_ for him. Do not underestimate the salary cap implications. Do the Blazers really want to tie up close to $10 million a year for the next 5 years on a player that on paper looks to be a Steve Blake clone? Look at the comparison...


Blake is _less than one year older_ than Hinrich, something I don't think most people realize.
Blake and Hinrich are both 6'3" and very similar in terms of athleticism, mentality, defensive ability, etc.
Blake has a slightly higher career 3pt percentage (.381) compared to Hinrich (.377) and their overall field goal percentages are very similar as well, with Hinrich having a negligible edge.
Blake has a slightly higher career assist/turnover ratio. When comparing the rebounds and assists per minute payed, they are very similar as well, with Hinrich having a negligible edge.
Blake makes less than half the money Hinrich makes.


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

There was a reason once upon a time that Kirk Hinrich earned his $10M/year contract and there's a reason that Steve Blake has not and is already on essentially his fifth team in five years. 

Hinrich is an upgrade over Blake without a question. With the exception of TJ Ford, there are no other PGs that are available this summer better than Hinrich, if Chicago decides to pass on Beasley. 

However, with that being said, I do not think that Hinrich, Blake, Rodriguez, and Koponen will all be on the roster next summer as it would obviously be overkill at that position.


----------



## World B. Free (Mar 28, 2008)

B-Roy said:


> I know there's a thread on Hinrich, but I want to discuss this trade in particular.
> 
> This is dependent on Chicago selecting Rose.
> 
> ...


I would do it. Only Frye, Raef and our pick. But I doubt they would do it.

I'm not sure if we can get much better then that for Raefs contract even next year. This is pretty good.

Hinrich\Blake\Sergio
Roy\Rudy\Jack
Noci*\Webster\Jones
LMA\Noci*\McBob
Oden\Joel

Not bad at all.


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

World B. Free said:


> I would do it. Only Frye, Raef and our pick. But I doubt they would do it.
> 
> I'm not sure if we can get much better then that for Raefs contract even next year. This is pretty good.
> 
> ...


So we are going to tie up some $18 mil for several years to get THIS LINEUP?

Hinrich\Blake\Sergio
Roy\Rudy\Jack
Noci*\Webster\Jones
LMA\Noci*\McBob
Oden\Joel

How the hell is it better than this lineup, where we do nothing???? On top of it, we will $18 mil more flexible in 2009?

Roy/Blake/#13/Koponen
Rudy/Roy/Webster/Blake
Outlaw/Webster/Jones
LMA/Frye/Outlaw
Oden/Pryz/Frye

Hinrich is not the answer.


----------



## World B. Free (Mar 28, 2008)

How the hell is it better? lol calm down tiger do you need a tissue?

I would take my lineup over yours no prob.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Balian said:


> So we are going to tie up some $18 mil for several years to get THIS LINEUP?
> 
> Hinrich\Blake\Sergio
> Roy\Rudy\Jack
> ...



Since we haven't seen Rudy play, Hinrich is better than he is. Hinrich would become our best defender as soon as he was traded. 

Nocioni is by far a better all around player than Travis. Two upgrades at possitions we need upgrades at


----------



## graybeard (May 10, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> *Since we haven't seen Rudy play, Hinrich is better than he is.* Hinrich would become our best defender as soon as he was traded.
> 
> Nocioni is by far a better all around player than Travis. Two upgrades at possitions we need upgrades at


Now there is a gem of logic. Care to elaborate on that pearl, MM?


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

graybeard said:


> Now there is a gem of logic. Care to elaborate on that pearl, MM?


Sure. We have no idea how Rudy's game will translate to the NBA. I think he will be good, as does KP, Nate and others within the Blazers and obviously a lot of other people. Then again Sergio, Jiri Welsch, Sergei Monya and Veektor projected well in the NBA too. You just never know

Hinrich is already a good PG, and was named to the all defensive 2nd team in the NBA. And he is still pretty young


----------



## graybeard (May 10, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> Sure. We have no idea how Rudy's game will translate to the NBA. I think he will be good, as does KP, Nate and others within the Blazers and obviously a lot of other people. Then again Sergio, Jiri Welsch, Sergei Monya and Veektor projected well in the NBA too. You just never know
> 
> Hinrich is already a good PG, and was named to the all defensive 2nd team in the NBA. And he is still pretty young


 So using your logic: Joe Schmoe who lives in outer Mongolia has never seen Michael Jordan play. But he has seen some guy down the street play. Therefore the guy down the street is a better player than MJ.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

graybeard said:


> Now there is a gem of logic. Care to elaborate on that pearl, MM?


I'd love to.

Hinrich = known commodity
Rudy = unknown commodity

unknown commodity = null until defined.

therefore 
Hinrich > Rudy until November.


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

mediocre man said:


> Since we haven't seen Rudy play, Hinrich is better than he is. Hinrich would become our best defender as soon as he was traded.
> 
> Nocioni is by far a better all around player than Travis. Two upgrades at possitions we need upgrades at


ROFL, wrong. I take Brandon Roy's defense over Hinrich any day. Oh yeah, Greg Oden will be our best defensive player. Why do people think Hinrich is a lock down defensive player? Dwayne Wade and Rip get theres regularly playing against Hinrich.

Hinrich is not better than Rudy. You are crazy to say that. Granted, we don't know how could Rudy will be in the NBA but his track record is a lot more established than the other European players you mentioned. Rudy is a rare 50/40/90 guy. Hinrich is a 40/35/80 guy who averaged a measly 11 pts last year.


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

nikolokolus said:


> I'd love to.
> 
> Hinrich = known commodity
> Rudy = unknown commodity
> ...


Remind me not to let you argue a case for me. Unbelievable. Hinrich is a known commodity of mediocrity in the NBA. On the other hand, Rudy is the best player outside the NBA. Until November, this is true:

Rudy ?????? Hinrich

Chances are, Rudy will be a lot better than Hinrich.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Balian said:


> Remind me not let you argue a case for me. Unbelievable. Hinrich is a known commodity of mediocrity in the NBA. *On the other hand, Rudy is the best player outside the NBA.*


*
*
Wow, unbelievable is right!

This is why people think PDX overvalues their players.....


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Balian said:


> Remind me not to let you argue a case for me. Unbelievable. Hinrich is a known commodity of mediocrity in the NBA. On the other hand, Rudy is the best player outside the NBA. Until November, this is true:
> 
> Rudy ?????? Hinrich
> 
> Chances are, Rudy will be a lot better than Hinrich.


You asked for the logic ... It wasn't my logic, I was just 'splaining to you that there was indeed a flow of logic buried under the assumption.

Have a nice day


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

B-Roy said:


> [/b]
> Wow, unbelievable is right!
> 
> This is why people think PDX overvalues their players.....


Dude, its not just me that says that. A lot of experts have been saying that.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Balian said:


> Dude, its not just me that says that. A lot of experts have been saying that.


Dude. Experts have been wrong before (Kwame Brown, Andreas Bargnani, Adam Morrison, etc.)

I'm hopeful that Rudy will become an outstanding *shooting guard* for the blazers, but is he a better *point guard* than Kirk Hinrich? All of this is purely academic at this point, and the simple fact of the matter is that we A) don't know how a Hinrich/Roy backcourt would operate together, and B) we don't know how a Roy/Rudy backcourt will fucntion together.

Maybe if we could all stop claiming to "know" how things are going to shake out, the better off for everyone. No?


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

nikolokolus said:


> Dude. Experts have been wrong before (Kwame Brown, Andreas Bargnani, Adam Morrison, etc.)
> 
> I'm hopeful that Rudy will become an outstanding *shooting guard* for the blazers, but is he a better *point guard* than Kirk Hinrich? All of this is purely academic at this point, and the simple fact of the matter is that we A) don't know how a Hinrich/Roy backcourt would operate together, and B) we don't know how a Roy/Rudy backcourt will fucntion together.
> 
> Maybe if we could all stop claiming to "know" how things are going to shake out, the better off for everyone. No?


What are you talking about? How a player does OUTSIDE the NBA is a known quantity. Just look at Rudy's stat this year. He played for the best league aside from the NBA, and he is the best. Its not even a contest.


----------



## World B. Free (Mar 28, 2008)

graybeard said:


> So using your logic: Joe Schmoe who lives in outer Mongolia has never seen Michael Jordan play. But he has seen some guy down the street play. Therefore the guy down the street is a better player than MJ.


Now that is just stupid. Just plain stupid. Terrible comparison. You knew it too before you posted it how stupid that was. You just couldn't be more creative.


----------



## World B. Free (Mar 28, 2008)

Balian said:


> What are you talking about? How a player does OUTSIDE the NBA is a known quantity. Just look at Rudy's stat this year. He played for the best league aside from the NBA, and he is the best. Its not even a contest.


TONS of players from over seas have dominated their leagues, then came over here and flopped. You just need to stop riding Rudys tip man.


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

World B. Free said:


> Now that is just stupid. Just plain stupid. Terrible comparison. You knew it too before you posted it how stupid that was. You just couldn't be more creative.


He was just using his logic. In other words, he was illustrating how flawed his logic was. I am glad you agreed.


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

World B. Free said:


> TONS of players from over seas have dominated their leagues, then came over here and flopped. You just need to stop riding Rudys tip man.


So what's your point? There were number one draft picks that have flopped too. Then again, there were number one picks that have turned to be hall of famers. Then again, Dirk went on to win the MVP and Ginobili went on to dominate the NBA Finals. I am simply stating that Rudy is the best player outside the NBA.


----------



## World B. Free (Mar 28, 2008)

Balian said:


> So what's your point? There were number one draft picks that have flopped too. Then again, there were number one picks that have turned to be hall of famers. Then again, Dirk went on to win the MVP and Ginobili went on to dominate the NBA Finals. *I am simply stating that Rudy is the best player outside the NBA.*


Then again, you are pointless to talk with. Then again, I am going to block you! Then again, it will save me the stress of reading your idiocy. Then again, I can't wait to block you!!!


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

World B. Free said:


> Then again, you are pointless to talk with. Then again, I am going to block you! Then again, it will save me the stress of reading your idiocy. Then again, I can't wait to block you!!!


Then again, instead of countering my argument with some semblance of a comeback, you chose to use ad hominem attacks. Can you name me a player better than Rudy outside of the NBA? We are not talking about college players either since they are not professionals.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Balian said:


> What are you talking about? How a player does OUTSIDE the NBA is a known quantity. Just look at Rudy's stat this year. He played for the best league aside from the NBA, and he is the best. Its not even a contest.


What am I talking about? Rudy's performance in the NBA is pure speculation at this point, until he laces em up and takes the floor squaring off against the best competition in the world he is absolutly an UNKNOWN quantity. Furthermore, the ACB is a good league but it is NOT necessarily the best league outside of the NBA, and interpolating his stats in that league and making projections about his output in the NBA is still just conjecture.

Having said all of that I think it's *probable *that he will have a productive NBA career (great foul-shooter, nice outside shooting), but it's far from a guarantee.


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

nikolokolus said:


> What am I talking about? Rudy's performance in the NBA is pure speculation at this point, until he laces em up and takes the floor squaring off against the best competition in the world he is absolutly an UNKNOWN quantity. Furthermore, the ACB is a good league but it is NOT necessarily the best league outside of the NBA, and interpolating his stats in that league and making projections about his output in the NBA is still just conjecture.
> 
> Having said all of that I think it's *probable *that he will have a productive NBA career (great foul-shooter, nice outside shooting), but it's far from a guarantee.


The ONLY thing I have wrote is that Rudy is the best player outside the NBA. Unless you have some argument with that, you are barking up the wrong tree. I speculated that Rudy will *probably* be a better player than Hinrich, nothing more. He is a 50/40/90 player in Europe. There is not a lot of those in Europe, let alone in the NBA.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

Balian said:


> The ONLY thing I have wrote is that Rudy is the best player outside the NBA. Unless you have some argument with that, you are barking up the wrong tree. I speculated that Rudy will *probably* be a better player than Hinrich, nothing more. He is a 50/40/90 player in Europe. There is not a lot of those in Europe, let alone in the NBA.


Well, there are better players and prospect in the NCAA, which is outside the NBA. Beasly for example

As far as Europe, there are a lot of really good players who many would consider better at the moment, but without the potential of Rudy, like Ramūnas Šiškauskas 60/41/81 (in a harder league than ACB) for example. Then there are players in Europe with lesser stats but more potential like Rubio or Gallinari, who are both significantly younger. Better is very subjective. 

I am not saying he is not the best player in Europe (I am saying he is most likely not better than all the NCAA players) but cases can easily be made for may other players including Diamantidis, Siskauskas, Papaloukas, Langdon, Fortis, Splitter, Lavrinovic and McIntiyre. Also, Marc Gasol if you consider him outside the NBA. Certainly, not all these players are better than Rudy, but at the moment, some probably are. Those that are, do not have the potential that Rudy has. But all the players I listed in this paragraph aside from Gasol are in the Euroleague this year, unlike Rudy, which is a better league than ACB.


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

GOD said:


> Well, there are better players and prospect in the NCAA, which is outside the NBA. Beasly for example
> 
> As far as Europe, there are a lot of really good players who many would consider better at the moment, but without the potential of Rudy, like Ramūnas Šiškauskas 60/41/81 (in a harder league than ACB) for example. Then there are players in Europe with lesser stats but more potential like Rubio or Gallinari, who are both significantly younger. Better is very subjective.
> 
> I am not saying he is not the best player in Europe (I am saying he is most likely not better than all the NCAA players) but cases can easily be made for may other players including Diamantidis, Siskauskas, Papaloukas, Langdon, Fortis, Splitter, Lavrinovic and McIntiyre. Also, Marc Gasol if you consider him outside the NBA. Certainly, not all these players are better than Rudy, but at the moment, some probably are. Those that are, do not have the potential that Rudy has. But all the players I listed in this paragraph aside from Gasol are in the Euroleague this year, unlike Rudy, which is a better league than ACB.


Let me clarify. Outside the NBA refers to professional players outside the NBA. The NCAA is not a professional league. All those players you have listed are great, but I am still of the opinion, with his body of work and potential, Rudy Fernandez is the best player outside the NBA. Don't get me wrong, Marc Gasol is great but hell, he wasn't even the first option for his team. You are correct, this is completely subjective but it is undeniable that Rudy is a special player. Outside of Rose, Beasley, and maybe Mayo, I would be hard press to pass up on Rudy if he had came out this year.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

If I were the Blazers, I'd propose a deal of Kirk Hinrich, Thabo Sefolosha and Cedric Simmons for Jarrett Jack, Raef LaFrentz and the 13th pick.

The Bulls get substantial future cap relief to use towards re-signing all their solid young guys (Gordon, Deng, Noah, #1 pick, possibly Thomas, possibly #13 pick). Meanwhile, the Blazers get Hinrich and a couple salary-fillers who are certainly worth a shot. In fact, Sefolosha would probably fit in perfectly on the Blazers, as his length on the defensive end would cause a lot of damage when teamed up with Travis Outlaw and Greg Oden.

*Portland Trailblazers*
PG: Kirk Hinrich...Steve Blake...Sergio Rodriguez
SG: Brandon Roy...Rudy Fernandez(?)...Thabo Sefolosha
SF: Martell Webster...Travis Outlaw...James Jones(?)
PF: LaMarcus Aldridge...Channing Frye...Cedric Simmons
C: Greg Oden...Joel Przybilla

*Chicago Bulls*
PG: Derrick Rose...Jarrett Jack
SG: Ben Gordon(?)...Larry Hughes
SF: Luol Deng(?)...Andres Nocioni
PF: Drew Gooden...Tyrus Thomas
C: Joakim Noah...Aaron Gray
_Plus, the 13th pick in there somewhere_


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Balian said:


> Let me clarify. Outside the NBA refers to professional players outside the NBA. The NCAA is not a professional league. All those players you have listed are great, but I am still of the opinion, with his body of work and potential, Rudy Fernandez is the best player outside the NBA. Don't get me wrong, Marc Gasol is great but hell, he wasn't even the first option for his team. You are correct, this is completely subjective but it is undeniable that Rudy is a special player. Outside of Rose, Beasley, and maybe Mayo, I would be hard press to pass up on Rudy if he had came out this year.


WRONG. Best league outside of the NBA is the Euroleague, and Rudy didn't even play in the Euroleague.

He's a good prospect, but best player outside of the NBA? No way.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

B-Roy said:


> WRONG. Best league outside of the NBA is the Euroleague, and Rudy didn't even play in the Euroleague.
> 
> He's a good prospect, but best player outside of the NBA? No way.


Well, he played in the Euroleague last season and was 5th in scoring per game. (Tied for 3rd per 40/pace adjusted) His numbers in the ACB the same season were very similar. 

So considering his improvement this season in the ACB, it's not a stretch to think he would have increased his Euroleague numbers as well. It's completely possible that he is the best pro player not in the NBA.

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Rudy-Fernandez-22/stats/

And even if he's only the 2nd or 3rd best...who cares? He's still a stud.


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

B-Roy said:


> WRONG. Best league outside of the NBA is the Euroleague, and Rudy didn't even play in the Euroleague.
> 
> He's a good prospect, but best player outside of the NBA? No way.


Yes, he is the best player outside the NBA ...at least viable. If you are so confident of your assertion, name me a player that is better than him. I have not seen any names yet.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Balian said:


> Yes, he is the best player outside the NBA ...at least viable. If you are so confident of your assertion, name me a player that is better than him. I have not seen any names yet.


GOD already named a bunch, and you're the one who said Rudy was playing in the best league outside of the NBA.


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

B-Roy said:


> GOD already named a bunch, and you're the one who said Rudy was playing in the best league outside of the NBA.


Yes, *HE* named a bunch of European players in his opinion that could be as good or better than Rudy. He *specifically* stated he does not know. Look at their stats and compare them to that of Rudy. You apparently have nothing to back up your statement. Provide me with stats and convince me these players are better than Rudy.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

Balian, nobody here is arguing that Rudy is not a good prospect or one of the best players in Europe (notice I say Europe and not "outside the NBA" which should included NCAA). It's just not so clear cut as say that he IS DEFINITELY the best. I think he is the best combo of current ability with potential, but even that could be disputed if you consider some of the younger players. I know that I am not able to adequately follow either the ACB league or the Euroleague since their games are not available to me. So, I really can't say who is best. All I can do is look at threads and articles by people that live in Europe and follow those leagues, and they are far from consensus over who the best player is. I know this because I made a thread in the draft section claiming that Rudy was the best (just like you) and I got hammered by lots of Europeans who totally disagreed. Some said he was top three, some top ten, but none of the Euro posters had him as THE BEST. Not yet at least.


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

Damian Necronamous said:


> If I were the Blazers, I'd propose a deal of Kirk Hinrich, Thabo Sefolosha and Cedric Simmons for Jarrett Jack, Raef LaFrentz and the 13th pick.
> 
> The Bulls get substantial future cap relief to use towards re-signing all their solid young guys (Gordon, Deng, Noah, #1 pick, possibly Thomas, possibly #13 pick). Meanwhile, the Blazers get Hinrich and a couple salary-fillers who are certainly worth a shot. In fact, Sefolosha would probably fit in perfectly on the Blazers, as his length on the defensive end would cause a lot of damage when teamed up with Travis Outlaw and Greg Oden.
> 
> ...


Ya sounds good to me! I think Kirk Hinrich would do vary well in Portland.:clap:


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

GOD said:


> Balian, nobody here is arguing that Rudy is not a good prospect or one of the best players in Europe (notice I say Europe and not "outside the NBA" which should included NCAA). It's just not so clear cut as say that he IS DEFINITELY the best. I think he is the best combo of current ability with potential, but even that could be disputed if you consider some of the younger players. I know that I am not able to adequately follow either the ACB league or the Euroleague since their games are not available to me. So, I really can't say who is best. All I can do is look at threads and articles by people that live in Europe and follow those leagues, and they are far from consensus over who the best player is. I know this because I made a thread in the draft section claiming that Rudy was the best (just like you) and I got hammered by lots of Europeans who totally disagreed. Some said he was top three, some top ten, but none of the Euro posters had him as THE BEST. Not yet at least.


+1


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

GOD said:


> Balian, nobody here is arguing that Rudy is not a good prospect or one of the best players in Europe (notice I say Europe and not "outside the NBA" which should included NCAA). It's just not so clear cut as say that he IS DEFINITELY the best. I think he is the best combo of current ability with potential, but even that could be disputed if you consider some of the younger players. I know that I am not able to adequately follow either the ACB league or the Euroleague since their games are not available to me. So, I really can't say who is best. All I can do is look at threads and articles by people that live in Europe and follow those leagues, and they are far from consensus over who the best player is. I know this because I made a thread in the draft section claiming that Rudy was the best (just like you) and I got hammered by lots of Europeans who totally disagreed. Some said he was top three, some top ten, but none of the Euro posters had him as THE BEST. Not yet at least.


I could agreed with your assessment. At least its well reasoned out, unlike another meme poster on this forum. Most of the greats you mentioned are in their late 20s or over 30. As far as I am concern, they are not viable for the NBA. Their days have long past. Langdon is a retread and have failed in the NBA. Papaloukas is 31 and now comes off the bench. Siskauskas and Diamantidis are 29/28, respectively. All of the others are at most, Darko clones. Aside from a high 3pt % avg, their statistics are less than compelling. Yes, it is hard to gauge all of them and judge which is the best player in Europe. But at the same time, I am not out of line to say Rudy is the best player outside the NBA, if you go by his body of work and potential. It's a matter of opinion. European fans have a different sensibility in terms of judging talent. No, I do not include players in the NCAA


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

Balian said:


> I could agreed with your assessment. At least its well reasoned out, unlike another meme poster on this forum. Most of the greats you mentioned are in their late 20s or over 30. As far as I am concern, they are not viable for the NBA. Their days have long past. Langdon is a retread and have failed in the NBA. Papaloukas is 31 and now comes off the bench. Siskauskas and Diamantidis are 29/28, respectively. All of the others are at most, Darko clones. Aside from a high 3pt % avg, their statistics are less than compelling. Yes, it is hard to gauge all of them and judge which is the best player in Europe. But at the same time, I am not out of line to say Rudy is the best player outside the NBA, if you go by his body of work and potential. It's a matter of opinion. European fans have a different sensibility in terms of judging talent. No, I do not include players in the NCAA


Well it looks like we are in agreement. Just remember:
*Don't mess with Jesus*










*or GOD*


----------



## angrypuppy (Jul 5, 2005)

Damian Necronamous said:


> If I were the Blazers, I'd propose a deal of Kirk Hinrich, Thabo Sefolosha and Cedric Simmons for Jarrett Jack, Raef LaFrentz and the 13th pick.
> 
> The Bulls get substantial future cap relief to use towards re-signing all their solid young guys (Gordon, Deng, Noah, #1 pick, possibly Thomas, possibly #13 pick). Meanwhile, the Blazers get Hinrich and a couple salary-fillers who are certainly worth a shot. In fact, Sefolosha would probably fit in perfectly on the Blazers, as his length on the defensive end would cause a lot of damage when teamed up with Travis Outlaw and Greg Oden.
> 
> ...





That's all? I would have thought you would have had Chicago throwing in the #1 pick to make it even.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

angrypuppy said:


> That's all? I would have thought you would have had Chicago throwing in the #1 pick to make it even.


I mean, all Chicago is doing in that trade is trading away 2 starters and getting back a bunch of guys that will _never_ see the court... you guys need a SF, right? Why don't we just throw in Luol Deng?


----------



## MrJayremmie (Dec 29, 2007)

> I mean, all Chicago is doing in that trade is trading away 2 starters and getting back a bunch of guys that will never see the court... you guys need a SF, right? Why don't we just throw in Luol Deng?


True.

Luol Deng and the #1 pick for LaFrentz, Jack, and #13.

Good trade for both sides, imo. Jack gives you a nice backup PG, LaFrentz gives you cap flexibility, and its a deep draft.

:biggrin:

Rose | Blake | Roy
Roy | Rudy | Webster
Deng | Oultaw | Webster
LMA | Frye | Outlaw
Oden | Pryzbilla


----------



## Crimson the Cat (Dec 30, 2002)

I like Hinrich, but I'd hate to see Portland overpay to get him. That's a huge risk that I'm betting Pritchard isn't willing to take, not with a player coming off a poor season. This isn't like when we acquired Frye after his down year. More is on the line.

I think some people are undervaluing Lafrentz's expiring contract. This isn't just a throw-in. I would be willing to package his contract with either the #13 or Jack. I wouldn't do both unless they added their 2nd Rounder, Gray, or Sefolosha.


----------



## angrypuppy (Jul 5, 2005)

Somehow I don't see Chicago doing cartwheels over Raef's expiring contract. They won't be players in the LeBron free agency sweepstakes, unless they let guys like Deng and Gordon walk. Unlike Memphis, Chicago isn't on the verge of financial collapse. While an expiring contract can be useful in acquiring Hinrich, it would need more than an #18 pick and a minor roleplayer to land him.


----------



## Crimson the Cat (Dec 30, 2002)

Maybe but what Chicago has to contend with is Hinrich stock has fallen. They won't get what they want, which I would think is a starter-caliber player. A lottery pick and a reserve-type guy they can plug into the rotation seems about right. 

Personally if I was Chicago, no way I deal him right now unless they can get some sort of inside talent. Hold on to him and play him with Rose. Deal him before the deadline when his stock raises.


----------

