# protected list



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

swiped from the usenet (and KATU)

protected
---------
Stoudamire
Anderson
Miles
Randolph
Ratliff
Abdur-Rahim
Outlaw
Davis

available
---------
Cook
Dickau
Gill
Ferguson
Patterson
Woods
Stepania

___

hm...we've basically left them crap, and Patterson. 

I wouldn't be surprised to see them take Ruben. I don't necessarily want him to be taken for nothing.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Protected Anderson and left Woods exposed?


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

A few odd choices in there I think. My expectation is to see either Gill or Cook in a Bobcats jersey next season, with my money on Cook.


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

If Woods was truly left unprotected, I wouldn't be surprised one bit if he were taken.

I could also see the Bobcats taking one of the cheap PG's (Dicakau, Gill or Cook).

Charlotte might take Stepania - they'd either have a cheap center or he'd opt out and they'd have the cap room.

Ferguson is an UFA is is not available.


It'll be interesting to see how the expansion draft shakes out.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Leaving Woods unprotected is a mistake. He may have off the court issues. But he does have NBA level talent, he is still young and his contract is cheap, and you can bet there is a team out there that thinks a change of scenery could works wonders for Q and offer him a chance to "turn his career" around. His omission off the protected list (if true) is a mistake by Nash & co.

They should have left DA on the list, his 3 years, fairly substantial money ($8-9mil) are not vey palatable, and does anyone really think he is going to like coming off the bench if POR (as Nash has promised) brings in another "premier" SG? I don't think he will, he will sulk and complain. Plus his injury history, they should have left him unprotected and hoped that CHA took him.


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

Hm, I didn't even realize Woods was on there. Wow, there's a lot of choices on your list for them to take. A lot of teams don't even have one guy worth taking, but everone on your unprotected list outside of Patterson (and Ferguson, who as SCBF says is an UFA I believe) is someone to consider.

Charlotte has said quite often that they are big on character, which is the only reason they wouldn't automatically grab Woods. His potential may be enough for them to bend their stance on that a bit though.

If his off court problems are too much for them, then they have four options to choose from -- three points and a center, all four of which are dirt cheap. I guess it depends on who else is available to them which direction they go. As I said before I think Cook is the choice if they want a PG, but if they feel they can fill up that spot elsewhere, Stepania is a pretty decent choice at center for the first year team.


----------



## Charlotte_______ (May 18, 2003)

I just made a post on who i think we should take

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=99685&forumid=117

I said Stepania for a few reasons, one he has shown flashes of good play and I think the potential is there. Two, Woods fihas Bernie's liking, but I think his past will force Bernie to pass. Three, Cook would be considered but with Dixon, Bell and Strickalnd theres no room for him. Plus there aren't too many C's to choose from, I dont know about you but I would rather have Stepania than Pachulia as my starting C.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

I just don't get it. Why protect Damon and Dale? The only reason I guess is that Nash is afraid one would be taken as trade bait. But why would we care if they were? We'd get a massive trade exemption that would be worth more than either player. Is this a "respect for veterans" deal? Very noble... I guess.

I would be *amazed* if Woods wasn't taken, and taken early (although, I guess, with nobody to compete with, he could be taken at any point. It's much more fun with two expansion teams). His domination of Summer League has to count for something. Give him 35 mpg and a free rein and I'm sure the kid can score, at least. There won't be many cheap players available you can say that about. I hope they don't take Cook, but he would be my second choice if I were them.

Hey Hap - Alvin Williams is supposed to be available...


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

I think most cities unlike ours isn't going to tollerate taking a chronic drud user as a building block for their franchise. Yes he has tallent, but I bet he doesn't get taken. My bet is on Dickau. Sad that most people here just don't care that he is such a horrible influence on any and all draft picks this year and in the future, not to mention Zach, Darius, and Travis.


----------



## Paxil (Jan 1, 2003)

I'd be happy if Woods was taken. He won't be though.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

that is definitely the nail in the coffin of the Qyntel Woods draft. 

*sigh*

I've got a bad, bad feeling that he's going to go Jermaine O'Neal on us whereever he winds up.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>meru</b>!
> 
> Hey Hap - Alvin Williams is supposed to be available...


he wouldn't be a bad backup, at this stage his career..


----------



## baler (Jul 16, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>MemphisX</b>!
> Protected Anderson and left Woods exposed?


I don't really care for Anderson, but has some experience and can help. Woods is a complete and utter failure. He is AWFUL!


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>mediocre man</b>!
> I think most cities unlike ours isn't going to tollerate taking a chronic drud user as a building block for their franchise. Yes he has tallent, but I bet he doesn't get taken. My bet is on Dickau. Sad that most people here just don't care that he is such a horrible influence on any and all draft picks this year and in the future, not to mention Zach, Darius, and Travis.


Sad? I think many/most of us diehards don't presume to "know" what the guys are really like just because we watch the games and read the O, let alone to single one out as a horrible influence on the rest of the guys that we don't know. Sure Q has had some bad moments falling flat on his face in public, but I'm for letting the management deal with the character issues. If Q really has been exposed, Nash may be doing just that. Regardless, I hardly feel that one bust for pot and the gossipy rumor-mongering that inevitably follows necessarily means chronic drug use that a city should somehow rise up in intolerance against. What exactly are you proposing Portland should do... stop caring about the Blazers because a player might be smoking pot regularly??? Since Zach was arrested for the same thing, should Nash be looking to dump him too? I'm much much more concerned that they were driving while high, then that they were smoking pot. That counts as two strikes in my book. Endangering the lives of those in the community is not OK.

I couldn't care less if Dickau is chosen as I don't think he has any chance of being more then a bit player in a good teams rotation. He's too small and slow, but he does smile and clap well.

STOMP


----------



## mackthedj (Feb 7, 2004)

> I just don't get it. Why protect Damon and Dale?


I think it's because of the expiring contracts. They either come off the books at the end of next season, or they look real attractive as trade bait. Or, maybe mgt is considering hanging on to Damon after last season


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

If the only reason to protect Dale and Damon is because they're expiring contracts, then that makes no sense. Expiring contracts are valuable trade pieces because teams want to clear cap space. But you know what you get if Charlotte takes a player in the expansion draft? A trade exemption equivalent to that player's salary! That would be MORE valuable to a team wanting to clear cap space, because they'd get the cap space NOW instead of next year.

My guess is this is part of the "cleaning up the image of the Blazers" plan - I don't think it's an accident that the only vet not protected is Ruben.

Boy, I hope that the minute we're squeakly clean we can get a new GM to muddy it up again.


----------



## Crimson the Cat (Dec 30, 2002)

Nash said he would protect players that were of greatest value to the team. I don't think Woods has a prayer of being in Portland's long-term plans. So, the only value is in trade.

I suppose Nash sees Stoudamire, Anderson, and Davis, as more valuable to the team. Contracts aside, would it be smart to lose one of these players when we don't have capable replacements as of yet. One of Nash's bargaining chips is that he doesn't HAVE to make any moves, and the team will most likely still make the playoffs next season. Because Nash doesn't yet have any guarantees that a quality point, quality off-guard, or solid reserve big man is coming over in a deal, Nash was probably left with putting the least valuable player on the table. 

When a team is stacked like Portland is, they're left with little choice.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> swiped from the usenet (and KATU)
> 
> protected
> ...



I mean no offense Hap, but why are we suppose to believe this is the list?

KATU gave it to you? what is your usenet source?


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Re: protected list*



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


some guy @ alt.sports.basketball.nba.port-blazers posted it. I don't remember exacty who, but I would assume he either got it from katu.com, or listened to their sports broadcasting.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>mediocre man</b>!
> I think most cities unlike ours isn't going to tollerate taking a chronic drud user as a building block for their franchise.


I think you have that backwards. Portland is the drud-intolerant city. Or should we just say intolerant and leave it at that?



> My bet is on Dickau. Sad that most people here just don't care that he is such a horrible influence on any and all draft picks this year and in the future, not to mention Zach, Darius, and Travis.


I'm surprised to hear you say Dickau is a bad influence. I thought he was merely a lousy player.

barfo

"Specializing in witless posts since 6/11/2004"


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

*I've got it: it's a cunning plan!*

I've cracked it! The Bobcats won't take Woods because:

Nash has cut a deal with them to take Patterson.

Yeah, that's it. Then he can look all loyal to Dale and Damon for protecting them, when really it makes no difference.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> Nash has cut a deal with them to take Patterson.


If it involves a 1st round pick this year, then I want NO part of it.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Does anyone know what players the other teams left unprotected??


----------



## BlazeTop (Jan 22, 2004)

I mean I repsect DD and what hes has done for us in the past but I dont think sacrificing our best man defender in Ruben to save him..

PS I am new what does SAR stand for?


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BlazeTop</b>!
> I mean I repsect DD and what hes has done for us in the past but I dont think sacrificing our best man defender in Ruben to save him..
> 
> PS I am new what does SAR stand for?


Shareef Abdur-Rahim


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>gambitnut</b>!
> 
> 
> Shareef Abdur-Rahim


quit being a joker, gambitnut, it stands for

Sean Alvin Rooks.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

How can we protect Darius Miles, an unrestricted free agent? Are you sure this list is accurate? If it is, I think we need to protect Patterson, and leave Davis and Anderson exposed. Portland should pray we can get rid of Anderson's horrible contract.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

*What in the world?*

Why would Nash protect Damon? You should take any chance you can get to take him off our books and get somebody else to pay his salary. DD has been rumored in trade talks, there are some teams interested in him, that is probably why he was protected. 

As for protecting woods, I am mixed, because I feel although he has off court issues, the more obvious problem with Portland is a coaching staff who is unwilling to give young guys minutes, even when players such as DA are playing at a very low level, and struggling with injuries. Woods had some good games last year in the few times he played. He also had some horrible ones. Basically what happens to most rookie type players (not that he is a rookie, but his amount of playing time sets him about equal to one). 

To me the sad thing is, Portland continues to stick by a coaching staff that is screwing up this team in the long run, and sticking by the players which I consider the worst performers on the team. Maurice Cheeks coaching staff has a record of alienating our most talented players, being out coached by other coaching staff's on a regular basis, and not giving young players any playing time so we can determine if they are any good. To top it all off, the coaching staff is not creative enough to figure out how to use Zach Randolph and Shareef Abdur Rahim on the same court at the same time. Many coaches out there would take your top 5 talented players, and made them work as an effective starting unit. Until this coaching staff is removed from this franchise, and their influence on the team and the direction it is going is gone, we are going to have a lot of sad days ahead.


----------



## Anima (Jun 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Yega1979</b>!
> How can we protect Darius Miles, an unrestricted free agent?


Miles is a RFA. He only way he could become a UFA is if Portland didn't make him a qualifying offer or if he got selected by the Bobcats.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>JohnnyCash</b>!
> Does anyone know what players the other teams left unprotected??


ANYONE???????


----------



## lalooska (Jan 17, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>JohnnyCash</b>!
> 
> 
> ANYONE???????


Try this:

Hoopsworld Expansion Protection List


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>lalooska</b>!
> 
> 
> Try this:
> ...


THANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So who do you guys think the Bobcats will select??
I think J.Dixon & D.Stevenson would be good picks, but I dont know how much $$$ they have on their contracts.


----------



## BLAZER PROPHET (Jan 3, 2003)

I also agree that we're making a HUGE mistake leaving Woods unprotected. He's young and should have one more season to prove himself. He has too much talent.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>BLAZER PROPHET</b>!
> I also agree that we're making a HUGE mistake leaving Woods unprotected. He's young and should have one more season to prove himself. He has too much talent.


How could it be a "HUGE" mistake when Woods hasnt done ANYTHING except screw up here in Portland... he wont change, let him be another teams problem... and maybe he's not working on his game like he said he was going to this offseason, Nash told Woods that he was going to be keeping tabs on him and he needed to prove himself by working hard this offseason.


----------



## lalooska (Jan 17, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>JohnnyCash</b>!
> 
> 
> THANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> ...


I'd probably take a chance on Reece Gaines, but Stevenson would be tempting. Brian Skinner, Jerry Stackhouse (he was a Tarheel, right?), Dickau or Woods, Calvin Booth, Gerald Wallac, even Piatkowski. Not too sure what else.

Looking at that list, lets hope they have a lot of luck in the FA, draft, and tarde market!


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> How could it be a "HUGE" mistake when Woods hasnt done ANYTHING except screw up here in Portland


Once again, b\c he is still very young (22yrs old). He is still on a very manageable rookie contract, and most importantly he has the talent. His off court activities (the marijuana, the trading card incident) are definitely black marks on him as a player, but another team will give him a chance, thinking that a change of scenery, and the shock of either be traded or acquired via the expansion draft, will be the motivation he needs to turn himself around. His "talent" has never been questioned, his intelligence has, both on and off the court. Every player with talent gets a 2nd chance, many get 3, 4, 5 or more.

If given consistent playing time (something he has never seen here in POR), he could turn out to be a pretty decent player. He has had flashes of good play in POR, but has been inconsistent. I think part of it has to do with his shortcomings as a player, namely his focus, lack of bball IQ and willingness to work hard, but part of it IMO has to do with our coaching staff. Trying Qyntel at PG was one of the DUMBEST moves I have witnessed. He SHOULD have seen consistent minutes at the backup SG spot, but he never did.

POR really runs the risk of this kid blossoming into a player in CHA or somewhere else, and we will have gotten NOTHING for that. THAT is a mistake IMO. I would give him one more year, and unlike some people here, I believe he DOES have trade value, not a lot of course, but I'd rather get something for Qyntel than lose him for nothing. Especially if he turns into a decent player somewhere else. Just stating "he sucks" is very shortsighted IMO.

Losing a player for nothing when you could have got some value for him is NEVER a good idea. I think many people on these boards forget that.


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

I think there's no question that Charlotte takes him - and I think there's little question that it's going to come back and bite us...

I guess we're banking on Outlaw - hopefully, he proves to be worth it.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

ESPN INSIDER thinks Charlotte will take Woods:

Insider analysis: The team could have exposed one of their higher-priced players 
like Damon Stoudamire, Dale Davis or Derek Anderson, but instead it sounds like 
they're ready to give up on Woods. He's athletic, a big-time scorer, and -- if 
he can get that marijuana problem under control -- could be the steal of the 
expansion draft for Charlotte. 

Here's the list of players ESNP INSIDER thinks Charlotte will consider:
Celtics: C.Atkins & B.Hunter
Bulls: M.Fizer
Cavs: J.Kapono
Pistons: E.Campbell
Rockets: E.Piatkowski
Pacers: P.Brezec & James Jones
Clippers: K.Dooling
Grizz: T.Bell & T.Smith
Bucks: B.Skinner
Nets: T.Slay
Magic: R.Gaines, D.Steveson & Z.Pachulia
Suns: J.White
Blazers: Q.Woods
Kings: G.Wallace
Sonics: J.James
Jazz: A.Pavlovic

http://proxy.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&id=1821533&CMP=ILC-INHEAD


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

this is a huge mistake for the blazers


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> this is a huge mistake for the blazers


how do you know? maybe the Blazers know more about how good Woods can be or will be, than we fans do.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

My theory.

We've made a deal with Charlotte that goes something like this. We leave Qyntel Woods unprotected IF they agree to select BOTH Qyntel AND Ruben Patterson. They would immediately release Patterson, but we'd still get the trade exceptions of approx. 2 million for Woods and 6 million for Patterson.

This would allow us to trade Shareef Abdur Rahim for a lesser salary, somebody like a resigned Stephen Jackson or somebody like that.

What do you think?


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Fork</b>!
> What do you think?


I think that goes against this Nash quote from a couple of days ago...

_"What Charlotte's plan is had nothing to do with us," Nash said. "What we did is protect the players we thought would be most valuable to us."
_ 

...though of course he may be lying through his teeth.

STOMP


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

If Woods is selected in the expansion draft, I'd put the odds at 40/60 he does a Jermaine on us.

If the guy turns into a 20 PPG scorer, the only people talking about his "Character Problems" will be the people right here!


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Oldmangrouch</b>!
> If Woods is selected in the expansion draft, I'd put the odds at 40/60 he does a Jermaine on us.
> 
> If the guy turns into a 20 PPG scorer, the only people talking about his "Character Problems" will be the people right here!


and they'll blame us for his problems too.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Fork</b>!
> My theory.
> 
> We've made a deal with Charlotte that goes something like this. We leave Qyntel Woods unprotected IF they agree to select BOTH Qyntel AND Ruben Patterson.


I could be wrong but I thought they were allowed to select only one player from any given team.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>barfo</b>!
> 
> 
> I could be wrong but I thought they were allowed to select only one player from any given team.


Hmmm.

What if we sew them together and call them Ruben Woods? Would that count? Boy, that'd be an athletic-pot smoking-wife beating-garbage dumping-basketball card ID showing-strip club fight getting into MONSTER! 

I haven't heard of that rule, but you are correct, so much for my theory.

Here are the rules.

A. Player Selection 

The Charlotte Bobcats Expansion Draft will take place on June 22 (if the NBA Finals extend to seven games, it will be June 23), prior to the 2004 NBA Draft on June 24. 

The Bobcats will select a minimum of 14 players who are under contract or restricted free agents for the 2004-05 season. 

The Bobcats may select no more than one player from each team. 

The Bobcats can only select players that are left unprotected by an NBA team. 

Each of the 29 NBA teams may protect a maximum of eight players on its roster who are under contract or are restricted free agents at the conclusion of the 2003-04 season. 

Each of the 29 NBA teams will designate the players on its roster who are eligible for selection by the Bobcats. 

Each of the 29 NBA teams must designate at least one player on its roster to be eligible for selection by the Bobcats, even if the team does not have eight players under contract or as restricted free agents for the 2004-05 season. 

Any player under contract selected by the Bobcats will immediately be placed on the Bobcats roster. 

Any eligible restricted free agent selected by the Bobcats shall immediately become an unrestricted free agent. 

Unrestricted free agents are not eligible to be protected nor are they eligible to be selected by the Bobcats. 
B. Pre-Expansion Draft Trades 
Teams will be permitted to enter into pre-Expansion Draft trades in which Charlotte agrees to select or not select certain unprotected players. 
C. Salary Cap 
Charlotte will be permitted to select players in the Expansion Draft without regard to the Salary Cap. 

Charlotte will have a Salary Cap in its first season equal to 66% of the Salary Cap applicable to the rest of the league and a Salary Cap in its second season equal to 75% of the Salary Cap applicable to the rest of the league. 

Charlotte will be permitted to sign any restricted free agent it selects in the Expansion Draft using the same “Bird,” “Early Bird” or “Non-Bird” Exception that the player’s prior team would have had. 

Compensation paid to a selected player under a contract protected for lack of skill will be excluded from Charlotte’s Team Salary if the player’s contract is terminated (via the waiver procedure) prior to the start of the 2004-05 season. 

A team with a Team Salary above the Salary Cap will receive a Trade Exception to replace a player (other than a restricted free agent) selected from its unprotected list. 
D. Post-Expansion Draft Transactions 
A team will not be permitted to reacquire a player that it loses in the Expansion Draft prior to the expiration of one year from the date of the Expansion Draft, unless the player is waived and not claimed by any other team.


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

I have a question for you guys. If the Bobcats take player in the expansion draft, the team losing a player gets a trade exception. Is that correct? If so SAR, Damon and DD will be a lot easier to move with the flexability many teams will have with their cap. Even a 1-2 million dollar trade exception should on 14 teams should make the summer more interesting with trade and S & T situations.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

I think Woods should get another year! He shows a lot of potential with his explosive drives to the hoop, and his smooth jump shot. His problem is he gets a little timid, just like a player named JERMAINE O'NEAL. 

Why on earth would these boneheads protect Derek Anderson????


----------

