# TO/PDX pick trade speculation [Merged]



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

*TO/PDX pick trade speculation*

From draftexpress.com



> The only question now is whether the Raptors will draft [Bargnani] at #1, or will attempt to trade down a few spots (possibly to Portland for the #4 pick in a package with Chris Bosh’s good friend and ex-teammate Jarrett Jack) to pick up a valuable asset along the way.


Would you want this? I'm torn. First off, I'm not sure that Bargnani would make it to #4. If Portland did get number one I could see them interested in Aldridge or Bargnani (Morrison, Gay, Roy may all be available at 4). If Portland picks Bargnani #1, then the deal obviously doesn't work. If Portland picks Aldridge #1, the Chicago likely picks up Bargnani.

Assuming that Bargnani escapes the first three picks, would you trade JJ just for the right to move up? I don't think I would--not in this draft. Blake, maybe, but not Jack.


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

*Re: TO/PDX pick trade speculation*

Nope not interested if it involved sending Jack away...I am not convinced that he isn't out PG of the future. IMO he and Telfair and Blake are all under consideration.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: TO/PDX pick trade speculation*

NO! Jack has too much potential to trade to move up 3 spots in a draft like this.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

*Re: TO/PDX pick trade speculation*

That's a tough one. I said no. 

If there really was one player that the Blazers decided they had to have above the others, they would probably do it. Jack will be good, but he'll never be a star. One star is more valuable than a bunch of average to good players (it's easier to replace average to good players). 

There is a lot of time and evaluating to go before the Blazers rank their priorities in this draft. For now it seems they honestly don't think there is that one sure-fire player. For now at least it seems there isn't that much difference between no. 1 and no. 4. 

Today, I don't think the Blazers would do it either. But next month, who knows?

Now, if they'd take Blake or Dixon, (or Blake and Dixon) I wouldn't think twice before pulling the trigger.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

*Re: TO/PDX pick trade speculation*

The Toronto speculation may have occurred before Bosh's comments. Chris didn't have too many good things to say about the idea of Bargnani, and I'm sure Toronto wants to keep Chris happy, so . . .


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Re: TO/PDX pick trade speculation*

Lets bring Bosh to Portland to join Jack then


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: TO/PDX pick trade speculation*



Trader Bob said:


> Lets bring Bosh to Portland to join Jack then


:clap:


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: TO/PDX pick trade speculation*

To me, Aldridge vs Roy is worth Jack. I say yes. I'd rather trade Zach for filler and #1 though and end up with Aldridge and Gay or Morrison


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

*Jack and #4 to Toronto for #1?*

I think Toronto might do this deal. The question is, would Portland?

http://draftexpress.com/viewarticle.php?a=1312


----------



## Maybeso (Jan 29, 2003)

*Re: TO/PDX pick trade speculation*

Would Brandon Roy be a better point guard than Jack? He's a little taller, has good handles, good defense, good BB IQ, but a shooting guard mentality. If we could somehow move up for a big AND be able to replace Jack with Roy, then yes, I would trade Jack. Roy would be a better combo guard than Jack.


----------



## speedythief (Jul 16, 2003)

*Re: TO/PDX pick trade speculation*

From what I've seen of Blake I think he can be a very effective back up point guard. I know you guys have a high opinion of Telfair (I don't really share it but it's beside the point) so what's not to like about this deal? Jack was what, the 20-24th pick last year?


----------



## Todd (Oct 8, 2003)

*Re: Jack and #4 to Toronto for #1?*

No thanks!


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

*Re: Jack and #4 to Toronto for #1?*

Not a good deal for us. If there was a clear-cut #1 that was a no-brainer, maybe. But I'd rather keep Jack and take our chances with the 4th pick that we'd get a player just as good.

-Pop


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

*Re: TO/PDX pick trade speculation*

Because some of us like Jack and think he will make a good if not great PG.

His ankle was hurt all of last year and it was his 1st year.


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

*Re: Jack and #4 to Toronto for #1?*

Merge


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

*Re: TO/PDX pick trade speculation*

Make it Darius and pull the trigger.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

*Re: TO/PDX pick trade speculation*

Assume for a second that Bargnani is not what Toronto is looking for, and they want to improve their backcourt, then Blazers could pick Bargnani or Aldridge. My thinking is that if Bargnani or Aldridge appear to be the real deal in workouts/evaluation, then giving up Telfair or Jack would be worth it. If Bargnani and Aldridge both appear to be no more than solid position players, then it would not be worth it to me.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

*Re: Jack and #4 to Toronto for #1?*

That's ridiculous. 

Jack plus the 4 for the #1 pick? If we do that trade, it's so we can get Bargnani, which defeats the purpose of Toronto trading down. We can still get a player we want at #4. There's zero reason to trade up to #1.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

*Re: Jack and #4 to Toronto for #1?*

I wouldn't do it. It's arguable how much value difference there is between the #1 and #4 pick this season. It's certainly not worth Jack, a guy who could be a top reserve in the NBA, to move up.


----------



## POzers (Jul 27, 2005)

*Re: Jack and #4 to Toronto for #1?*

If the Blazers could dump Miles on them and receive contracts in there last year like Mo Pete and Bonner then it might be a good cost cutting move. Then the Blazers could package that #1 pick with Zach in order to obtain a solid veteran player which Nate has said they really need.

But how could Toronto get a guarantee that Bargnani would not get drafted prior to #4? Unless, they can get Bargnani to refuse to play with anybody other than Toronto which might scare everyone else off.

All of these scenarios are highly unlikely so it just does not make sense.


----------



## MVP_23 (Jan 29, 2006)

*Raps/Por Trade...*

Toronto 1st Pick for Your Pick at 4, and Sebastian Telfair


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

*Re: Raps/Por Trade...*

That's funny, we were just discussing something very similar to this. I voted no. 

Or should I say, no way in hell? 

Or perhaps, :rotf:

Are you a Raps fan? :biggrin:


----------



## CrookedJ (May 8, 2003)

*Re: Jack and #4 to Toronto for #1?*

My thoughts as a T.O. fan - if Collangelo continues to hype up Bargnani, and then offers to trade down its cuz we'd rather take someone else, and he was trying to sell Bargnani as the #1 guy in the draft; the one that its worth trading up for.

If Portland wants Morrison, trading up is good, as its quite likely Charlotte takes him at #3. Not sure how much Nash wants Morrison, but that seems to be the feeling in other parts of the NBA.

Mo Pete is unlikely to get traded. At this point (season is still months away) he is our backcourt, and he is our veteran leader. Its really hard to speculate what Collangelo will do, and which way he wants this team to go. He has talked several times about needing the right mix of young players and vets. Currently Mo is the only decent vet we have, and there are a ton of young guys on the team.

I'd go for a Jack & #4 for #1 from the Raps perspective.


----------



## Oil Can (May 25, 2006)

*Re: Raps/Por Trade...*

Portland will not trade Telfair and 4 for pick one. That is hugely overvaluing the pick in this years draft. 

If it was next year and Oden was coming out, then yes!

Jack-maybe, and thats a big maybe. Steve Blake and the #4 is a probably. 

Juan Dixon is a certainty! How about that trade?


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

*Re: Raps/Por Trade...*

I'll give you Juan AND Blake. You'll like Blake (I'm not kidding).


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

*Re: Raps/Por Trade...*



MVP_23 said:


> Toronto 1st Pick for Your Pick at 4, and Sebastian Telfair


Why? We can stay at 4 and still get the guy Portland wants.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Re: Raps/Por Trade...*

merge police please


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

*Re: Raps/Por Trade...*

I'm content with keeping the 4th and taking either Gay, Bargnani, or Morrison.


----------



## icehawk (May 30, 2003)

As a Raptor fan, I would say no to this trade. 

While we need help at the PG position, there's no point in acquiring another backup-quality point. We already have Jose Calderon who is just as good. I'm sure we can find a backup-quality point through free agency or a minor trade without including our first in a trade-down. 

Having two other point guards around his calibre on their team, I don't see why this is even a question for Portland fans. The shot at LaMarcus Aldridge to replace Randolph is worth it.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

*Re: Raps/Por Trade...*



Sambonius said:


> I'm content with keeping the 4th and taking either Gay, Bargnani, or Morrison.


Any of those three will be SWEET!


----------



## Oil Can (May 25, 2006)

icehawk said:


> The shot at LaMarcus Aldridge to replace Randolph is worth it.



What makes you think Portland is looking to replace Zebo?


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

I thought the main reason Portland wanted the #1 pick was so we could trade down so why the heck would we trade up for it? 

I know, trade for the #1 pick and then pick Bargnani and make the Raptors trade back Jack, who they took with the #4 and another player and make them take Miles off our hands.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

What about Blake and #4 for #1. We have three PGs and then we get to control exactly who we get.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> What about Blake and #4 for #1. We have three PGs and then we get to control exactly who we get.


 I'd be perfectly happy to trade Blake to move up to #1. I don't think Blake brings anything that Jack doesn't as the backup point guard, and Jack is younger.

A good reserve point guard (who might look like a decent starter if you squint) is worth it to control who Portland gets in the draft, since Portland already has two good young point guard talents.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

mgb said:


> I thought the main reason Portland wanted the #1 pick was so we could trade down so why the heck would we trade up for it?


 :laugh: Good call! 

I was fine with that strategy, but I'd still trade Blake and the no. 4 to be able to control our destiny at no. 1. I think the trading slightly down bit was to get us a second pick in the 6-15 range. Which might be worth more than Blake.


----------



## CanJohno (Feb 11, 2005)

The Raptors homers over on RealGM think they're going to weasel us out of #4, Jack/Telfair, and Khryapa for the #1. I *attempted* to tell them, time and time again, that there's no way we make a move like that for the #1 in this draft (definitely if it were next year's draft and Oden and all of the other projected studs were in it).

Basically, the only assets I see Portland willing to trade in order to move up to #1 in this draft, would be some combination of:

Blake
Dixon
Outlaw (maybe)
#30
#31

You could probably throw Miles, Skinner, and Ratliff in there, too, but I'd think that'd make the trade worse in the eyes of Toronto (due to their larger contracts amd, in the case of Miles, a questionable attitude).


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

If the Blazers find anyone they are really interested in, and they don't think he will be available at 4, I'm sure they would consider anything to get them there. I could easily see Outlaw, any one of the PGs, or Miles (of course) in combination with the 30th pick to get there--as they should. The scouts know a lot more about these guys than any of us do. If Gay blows up in workouts and has good tests, I wouldn't be shocked to see him go #1 and Portland try and trade up to get even him. The Blazers have a lot of young sub-allstar talent on the team. If they believe anyone in this draft is an allstar-type player, they should leverage their assets to get him.

If they don't have a clear favorite, then I'm sure they will stay at 4 and pick there.

Toronto seems to make sense because they really need backcourt help, and they could get that with one of the Blazer PGs (we can really only play one at a time anyway) and an SG or other player at 4.

I would imagine that we won't know any of this for sure until we see who Toronto picks. If they pick Aldridge, I would guess nothing is happening. If they pick Bargnani, Morrison or Gay, then I think something is up. I know Colangelo is hyping Bargnani, but their number one priority is to make Bosh happy, and it doesn't sound like drafting Bargnani will do that.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Reep said:


> If the Blazers find anyone they are really interested in, and they don't think he will be available at 4, I'm sure they would consider anything to get them there.


 Great point. Just because we all seem pretty convinced that there is no clear number 1 or impact player, doesn't mean the Blazers feel that way. If they see something special, as skeptical as I am about their player evaluation, I still think they need to go after him.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Can you just imagine the media attack if the Blazers moved up from the 4 to 1 in this draft? Especially if they gave up anytihng worth anything? I mean it makes no sense. Who could we possibily want so bad? There isn't anyone. ANd then the pressure on that player next year? If he wasn't ROY the Blazers would never hear the end of it especially if the 4th pick is! I'll bet 10 million ucash points it's not going to happen.


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Great point. Just because we all seem pretty convinced that there is no clear number 1 or impact player, doesn't mean the Blazers feel that way. If they see something special, as skeptical as I am about their player evaluation, I still think they need to go after him.


It all comes down to the players. In this draft moving up from 4 to one doesn't seem like a big deal to us. But next year it's gonna be HUGE.

We'll probably hear more as we get closer to the draft. But it seems right now they'd be right as rain just staying at #4 and taking Brandon Roy. If Noah had come out they'd probably be jumping at the chance to move up to #1 for the small price of Jarret Jack and Travis Outlaw.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Great point. Just because we all seem pretty convinced that there is no clear number 1 or impact player, doesn't mean the Blazers feel that way. If they see something special, as skeptical as I am about their player evaluation, I still think they need to go after him.


Four of the top six players in this draft (Aldridge, Thomas, Gay, Bargnani) were young players with somewhat subordinate roles on successful teams. Aldridge and Gay had ball-dominating guards, Bargnani is in a European system which typically gives reduced roles to younger players, and Thomas was a young role player on good balanced team. Who knows what these guys are capable of if they are allowed to be more dominant. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Aldridge and Gay end up being much better than their current ratings. If the Blazers believe this is true, then they should go after that player while they have the chance. You don't get that many changes, and giving up one of our many young intermediate players is a small price to pay in the long run--if they see true talent.


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

Hell No moving up 3 spots isint worth jack unless lebron or dwight howard was in the draft.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

No to both trade scenarios. I want to keep Jack and Telfair. Moving from 4 to 1 isn't worth giving up a player we like.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

blake and dixon/miles + 30th or 31st for number 1!


----------



## For Three! Rip City! (Nov 11, 2003)

icehawk said:


> As a Raptor fan, I would say no to this trade.
> 
> While we need help at the PG position, there's no point in acquiring another backup-quality point. We already have Jose Calderon who is just as good. I'm sure we can find a backup-quality point through free agency or a minor trade without including our first in a trade-down.
> 
> Having two other point guards around his calibre on their team, I don't see why this is even a question for Portland fans. The shot at LaMarcus Aldridge to replace Randolph is worth it.


Calderon is worth just as much as who exactly? Blake? Maybe. Blake is pretty good though. There's no way I would give up Jack to move up three spots. Jack played all year on an ankle that needed surgery (had surgery recently and didn't take pain meds afterwards by the way), and even with the bum ankle was the toughest point guard I've seen come through these parts since Terry Porter. 

You guys can have Khryapa, Miles, Blake, Dixon, or I'd even trade you Randolf and Theo for the No 1 (not including the no4 if you get Randolf), but not Jack.


----------



## icehawk (May 30, 2003)

For Three! Rip City! said:


> Calderon is worth just as much as who exactly? Blake? Maybe. Blake is pretty good though. There's no way I would give up Jack to move up three spots. Jack played all year on an ankle that needed surgery (had surgery recently and didn't take pain meds afterwards by the way), and even with the bum ankle was the toughest point guard I've seen come through these parts since Terry Porter.
> 
> You guys can have Khryapa, Miles, Blake, Dixon, or I'd even trade you Randolf and Theo for the No 1 (not including the no4 if you get Randolf), but not Jack.


I was saying that Jose Calderon is just as good as Jack. There's no reason for Toronto to acquire a PG unless it's someone significantly better than Calderon.

I like Khryapa but we already have Villanueva and Graham at the 3 spot. Miles and Randolph don't fit our 'character' requirement. Theo's too old and Blake and Dixon aren't worth considering.

I'm just saying if the Raps aren't looking to trade down, Portland might not be the best trading partner (unless there's another team involved).


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

No way, not in this draft. As others have said, I don't think there's a huge difference in the type of player you can get with the first through fifthish picks. Plus, I'm very excited to see what kind of player Jarret turns into. 

After having so many short or unathletic point guards, Jarret Jack could very well prove to be a breath of fresh air on the defensive end and will hopefully develop a more solid offensive game.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

*Re: Raps/Por Trade...*



MVP_23 said:


> Toronto 1st Pick for Your Pick at 4, and Sebastian Telfair


How about our pick and a Maryland alumn to be named later?


----------



## cpt.napalm (Feb 23, 2005)

The thing to remember about Jack is that he was on an ankle that was at 75% he was never playing to his full ability.


----------

