# Jermaine wants to come back



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

..according to this:



> Jermaine O'Neal, former MVP candidate of the Pacers, is hoping for a trade to the Trail Blazers, according to BenMaller.com NBA moles. O'Neal played the first four years of his pro career with the Blazers and still makes his offseason home in Portland. Jermaine is set to make $18 million dollars in 2006-07, the Blazers could deal Theo Ratliff ($11.6 Mil) and Darius Miles ($7.7 Mil) to Indiana to match up salaries


Yeah, I can see the Pacers jumping all over THAT one.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

meru said:


> ..according to this:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I can see the Pacers jumping all over THAT one.



Maybe not, but throw in our pick and they would. Throw Zach in there instead of Theo, include JJ, tough but maybe worth it to get Jermaine back. I don't think he's a savior, but he is a "star" player in the league that would make us better than Zach does


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

I think this city would go nuts if Jermaine came back. It'd be great, IF he could stay healthy, which seems to be a problem the last few seasons.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

I haven't been following this story, so someone help me out. Why would the Pacers want to get rid of Jermaine? Are they starting a rebuilding plan?


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

Talkhard said:


> I haven't been following this story, so someone help me out. Why would the Pacers want to get rid of Jermaine? Are they starting a rebuilding plan?



yeah he would have to pull an artest for that to happen.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

O'Neal wants to be traded. Bird came out and said he would look into all options to improve the team. Then said that Jermaine might not be the leader he thought he would be.


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

OK - if Jermaine requested a trade, and included the Blazers on his short list of preferred teams, here are the reasons the Pacers might consider it. 

#1 - they're not helping out an Eastern Conference rival. 

#2 - they could request the following: 
a.) that the Blazers give up their 2007 pick (the Greg Oden year) and the one in 2009 (thus avoiding the "no trading picks in consecutive years" rule)
b.) that the Blazers send Zach Randolph (not a bad move, since Z-Bo's from Indiana)
c.) Blazers add in Darius Miles (Pacers could use some athleticism) 
d.) and possibly, that the Blazers add a promising youngster (Travis Outlaw, Jarred Jack, or Viktor Khryapa) to balance salaries. 

I think it'd be a bit of a gamble for the Pacers, on Randolph returning to form, Miles behaving, and on getting a major stud in the draft. Seems pretty fair to me.


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

IMO this trade is all about the pick...without the pick it doesn't happen.

How much better would this team really be with Jermaine? IMO we would be a contender for the 7th/8th seed in the west, maybe the 5/6 if we overachieved.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

Blake miles theo or xbo and the 30th pick? 

just think of what Shaq got in return JO cant be worth as much as shaq, [;us he has been injured as of late so maybe we can keep the high pick and get morrison or something.

funny how he still calls portland home guess the vines of oregonia stayahericus transplanti wrapped around him very well. hehe transplants


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

While Jermaine is a better player then Zach, he is also far more injury prone. There is no way in hell I would trade our 2007 first rounder along with Zach for him. Outlaw, Khryapa, Blake, or a future first rounder (2008+) though I would definitely consider. Really though, Jermaine is a serious injury risk, that concerns me a lot (he's missed about half the games in each of the last two seasons, though some of that was the Brawl suspension). I'd love to have him back anyways.


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

Anyone else having trouble getting into the link?

And what the hell is benmaller.com?

-Pop


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Foulzilla said:


> While Jermaine is a better player then Zach, he is also far more injury prone. There is no way in hell I would trade our 2007 first rounder along with Zach for him. Outlaw, Khryapa, Blake, or a future first rounder (2008+) though I would definitely consider. Really though, Jermaine is a serious injury risk, that concerns me a lot (he's missed about half the games in each of the last two seasons, though some of that was the Brawl suspension). I'd love to have him back anyways.




He missed half the games last season for fighting, not injury. Zach missed a lot of the season last year due to injury and surgery. Zach is younger, Jermaine is better. Jermaine wants to play here, Zach doesn't. Jermaine is a percieved star, Zach isn't yet. To me it's a no brainer. The Pacers would do this if we include or swap picks this year I think, scary but again give to get I guess.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Foulzilla said:


> There is no way in hell I would trade our 2007 first rounder along with Zach for him... I'd love to have him back anyways.


I agree with this. Why trade a good chunk of our team, PLUS a draft pick that could very likely turn out to be as good or better than Jermaine is? There is no reason to go nuts and overpay. 

I'd hang onto that draft pick, unless there was some high degree of confidence that adding Jermaine to whatever players we'd have left after the trade would get us out of next year's lottery.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

ok let's see here....

I would love to have Jermaine O'Neal back in POR...

Given the nature of this years' pick (Top 3)...I would have ZERO interest in dealing that pick

Projecting forward (a team with a top 3 pick and O'Neal on it)...I would not be opposed to dealing the 2007 pick as part of a deal to get Jermaine...I would prefer it was top 3-5-10 or lottery protected...a 2008 pick would be ideal. 

Sending Zach back would seem to make the most sense...

I would think a young player would need to be included as well...Outlaw makes the most sense IMO...I would prefer POR hang onto Webster,Telfair, Jack (in that order) anyone else on the roster is up for grabs as far as I am concerned..

A deal involving Zach, Outlaw, Blake? and a future pick for O'Neal and filler?


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

If we landed Jermaine, and kept our pick this year, landed Morrison, we wouldn't have to worry about our '07 1st being an Oden candidate.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

As a follow up....

PG Telfair
SG Webster
SF Morrison
PF O'Neal
C Przybilla

does not = #1 overall in 2007


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

I agree Schilly...IF POR lands O'Neal and a Morrison (or another player with that top 3 pick)...and can retain Pryzbilla (not necessary)...chances are POR becomes a much more competitive team...


Zach, Outlaw, Blake and a future 1st for Jermaine and filler

PG Telfair, Jack
SG Webster, Dixon
SF Morrison, Khryapa
PF O'Neal, Skinner
C Pryzbilla, Theo, Ha

Re-signing Lenard wouldn't necessarily be a bad move either (if they could convince him to re-sign)

and then POR still has Miles to deal and the DET pick and 2nd ropunder to add another player (Hassan Adams? Mike Gansey?) or use with MIles to deal him away...


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

mediocre man said:


> He missed half the games last season for fighting, not injury.


He was suspended for 25 games. He missed 38. This season he has missed 30 games. I don't see how he could not be considered an injury risk. For comparison, Theo Ratliff has played in more games both seasons then Jermaine. However, like I said, I would take him back anyways. It just adjusts the price I would be willing to play.


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

If you're including a pick, just top 3 protect it for the next couple of years...


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

The authenticity of this article is questionable at best. I don't believe a word of it.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Foulzilla said:


> He was suspended for 25 games. He missed 38. This season he has missed 30 games. I don't see how he could not be considered an injury risk. For comparison, Theo Ratliff has played in more games both seasons then Jermaine. However, like I said, I would take him back anyways. It just adjusts the price I would be willing to play.



If I recall correctly wasn;t it a groin and then a shoulder injury? Not too concerned since it doesn't appear to a chronic injury each year. I definately see you point though.


----------



## dwood615 (Jul 20, 2004)

i would want JO back but not for a high price due to the fact of the injuries....but i'd say zach would HAVE to be part of the deal as well as darius cuz the way he has been acting this year


but i dont see a trade falling through like that...realistically


----------



## dwood615 (Jul 20, 2004)

Kmurph said:


> I agree Schilly...IF POR lands O'Neal and a Morrison (or another player with that top 3 pick)...and can retain Pryzbilla (not necessary)...chances are POR becomes a much more competitive team...
> 
> 
> Zach, Outlaw, Blake and a future 1st for Jermaine and filler
> ...


what about miles...lol


also if you look at it like that....

clears up the point guard jam
clears up the small forward jam
we rid of zach
we get JO
joel may want to resign to a more competative team
voshon may want to resign to a more competative team
if neither of them resigned we could resign someone else because JO is a good player people want to be around good players


with that team we would be back in the playoffs next year


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

I think just about everybody would give up Zach and/or Miles for O'Neal - but that's because we'd give up both of them for a bag of charcoal at this point.

There's a reason that the Pacers are thinking about getting rid of O'Neal: he's just not that great. Granted he's a bit better than Zach (because he blocks the odd shot or two) but not much, and he has a HUMUNGOUS salary. I say offer any combination of Zach, Miles and Theo (and Dixon and Blake) but no more, and if they don't like that, no biggie.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Theo and Miles? Abso-freakin-lutely. Jermaine and Zach could man the 4/5 spots and our pick could be plugged into the 3 spot (or Webster could be in the long run).

Theo, Miles, and our 2006 pick? Maybe, but probably not unless there was a deal in place to trade Zach for value. Zach and Jermaine together wouldn't be optimal, and giving up our 2006 pick would be too much without getting something for Zach.

Theo, Miles, and our 2007 pick? Maybe, and probably "yes" if we can top-3 protect the pick.

Zach and our 2007 pick? Again: Maybe, and probably "yes" if we can top-3 protect the pick.

Zach and our 2006 pick? No. Zach's about 3 years younger than Jermaine and the improvement wouldn't be enough to justify losing this year's pick.. although it would be enough to spoil a legit chance at Oden next year.

Ed O.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

I don't know Meru. I think the one main thing Jermaine offers us is respectability around the league. Players don't want to come here as it stands. Jermaine is seen as an all star in the prime of his career. If nothing else he might attract more players. he also has the respect of officials and the NBA. These are really important things when you have a young team. Another thing he brings is merchandising. I know here in Houston a lot more people know who Jermaine Oneal is than Zach Randolph. It helps sell, thus making the Blazer brand more popular.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Do the deal if it doesn't include the following:
- Telfair
- Webster
- Randolph
- The 2006 #1 Pick.
- Jack


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> There's a reason that the Pacers are thinking about getting rid of O'Neal: he's just not that great.


Agreed. He never played very hard when he was in Portland. He used to come off the bench with this sort of Sunday-in-the-Park stroll, like he didn't have a care in the world, and then he'd trot up and down the court like he was trying to save his energy for something more important later on that evening. I can't remember him ever diving for a loose ball, or going 100% for a whole game.

In my opinion, he's one of those talented players who will never be what he should be because he doesn't have the fire in his belly. We've had too many of those guys in Portland. I say pass on Jermaine.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

BenMaller.com = a guy I know at 7Eleven.


----------



## Stepping Razor (Apr 24, 2004)

While the provenance of this rumor seems dubious at best, the Blazers should definitely take a shot at bringing back JO if he has any interest in coming back.

I would give up any package that doesn't include Telfair, Webster, or this year's top-4 pick. If the cost to get Jermaine includes one of those three, I'm not sure it's worth it.

Stepping Razor


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

All I know is that some of this thread cracks me up.

First of all we have a lot of people concerned about JO's "injury problem." In case you haven't been paying attention to recent events, Zbo hasn't been that healthy himself lately. See gimpy knee outages over the last 2 seasons. Even when he is out there, he probably doesn't put out half the effort JO does. On the other side, Jermaine injury he had was a separated shoulder, which is not a chronic issue. 

Secondly, remember its not the Pacers want to get rid of him, its he no longer wants to be with the Pacers. If you remember, earlier in the year another key player to that franchise bailed because he was not happy with the situation there. Has anybody ever thought about the fact that maybe it could be other issues which make him want to leave, such as butting heads with Carslisle, or the direction management is taking the team by trading for softies like Peja Stoijakovich? Maybe its the fact he is surrounded by a bunch of softies and is sick of having to hold down the whole middle by himself. Larry Bird has always kept a very solid policy of not keeping players on the team who didn't want to be there.

Lastly, chances are that JO will be better and or equal to anybody in this years draft, and he is ready to play now, not years from now. A front line with him and Pryz would be defensively formidable as it gets, rebound like mad, and play where guys of that size are supposed to: In the paint. 

Portland should take any chance to get an all star player without giving up their youthful core that they can get. They won't get many chances to do so. :banana:


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

If we draft Morrison and then deal for JO, were outta the Oden race so I would definatley include a top 3 protected 1st rounder in 07' for JO. We need players that WANT to play here, and that would be fan favorites. Just think of the popularity boost this team would get with both Jermaine O'Neal AND Adam Morrison.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> O'Neal wants to be traded. Bird came out and said he would look into all options to improve the team. Then said that Jermaine might not be the leader he thought he would be.


Do you have a link for this?


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

We have enough youngsters. For JO to return I would offer:

Zach
Darius
Travis
2007 1st rounder (unprotected)

Blazers draft Morrison with the 2006 pick and go with for 2006:

Bassy/Jack
Martell
Morrison
Jermaine
Joel

This lineup gets the team back in the playoff hunt. Joel comes back after seeing where the team is now headed.


----------



## Backboard Cam (Apr 29, 2003)

Talkhard said:


> He never played very hard when he was in Portland.


Something tells me he'd get more minutes this time, and not garbage minutes.

He's not the best player in the league, but he's still great. I'm sure the Blazers are considering a lot of players, and they'd be stupid to not consider O'Neal. And if Ben Maller is right and Jermaine WANTS to come to Portland... then this seems like a no-brainer- it just depends on what Indiana wants from us.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

IF the Pacers are thinking about a possible future without Jermaine it is for several reasons:

1) The trade of Ron Artest effectively ended the current Pacers group as a contending team.

2) They don't have the (healthy) pieces to quickly vault back to the mix. Especially when you consider Peja may sign with another team and/or likely wants more money than this small market team can and should pay him. Especially when you consider that Detroit sets a bar that is so high right now.

3) Jermaine is injured a lot. They wonder if they can count on him.

4) Jermaine is not the player he seems to be. He is good, but with an on-floor plus/minus ratings that have long been subpar for a "SuperStar". His guady stats hide the fact that his team often did just as well when he was in his suit (well, when they had Artest anyway).

5) Jermaine is due to make around $20,000,000 per season for the next 4 years. Only Tracy McGrady, Kobe, Shaq, KG, and Duncan will be paid as much money the next 4 seasons.

Look at that list again.

Which name doesn't quite belong?

Jermaine is good when healthy, but he isn't Kobe good. Or Duncan good. And now is not the time for a franchise in a bad financial mess to "overpay" for talent.

I just can't fathom Jermaine EVER being seen as a good value on the contract he has.

Getting out from under the worst years of his monster deal is why Indy would look to trade him.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Masbee said:


> 5) Jermaine is due to make around $20,000,000 per season for the next 4 years. Only Tracy McGrady, Kobe, Shaq, KG, and Duncan will be paid as much money the next 4 seasons.
> 
> Look at that list again.
> 
> ...


Tmac, KG and Jeramine. :biggrin:


----------



## Justinmoney85 (Apr 10, 2006)

i would send zach and darius along with our 2nd 1st round pick this year for Jermaine. Then take morrison and a PF/C with our high second round pick, somebody like Justin Williams

then our depth chart would be

PG Telfair/Jack/Blake
SG Webster/Dixon
SF Morrison/Outlaw/Khryapa
PF O'Neal/Khryapa/Williams
C Phyz/Skinner


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

Masbee's right, JO has an enormous contract and I think we'd get tired of him after a year if he was often injured and was never the leader we expect him to be. Call me crazy, but I'd rather hold off.


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

Cmon nashy boy get a trade to get jo back in town.If we can get him by trading miles,z-bo,theo dixon blake any combo do it.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> IF the Pacers are thinking about a possible future without Jermaine it is for several reasons:
> 
> 1) The trade of Ron Artest effectively ended the current Pacers group as a contending team.
> 
> ...


Excellent post. JO is one of those guys whose rep is better than his actual play. And at his salary, what team can afford that? I think he should go to the Knicks because everybody else on that team is living off their past press clippings and making way more money than they should. He'd fit in perfectly.


----------



## BealzeeBob (Jan 6, 2003)

www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060411/COLUMNISTS01/604110421/1088/SPORTS04

Just to add a little fuel to the fire.

Go Blazers


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

Why are you guys all so in fear of giving up draft picks to get Jermaine back? If Jermaine were to come to Portland, many of you are scared that we won't get a crack at Greg Oden. You do realize he'll be a top 2 pick and bringing in Jermaine most likely won't have the Blazers be at the bottom of the league right? So you'd be out of the Oden race anyways. Give up the 2007 1st round pick. The 2006 draft pick is a toss up. It would be an enticing piece for Indiana for them to rebuild with. We should be more than happy to have anyone trying to get Theo/Miles/Zach right now. I'd be the first one on their doorsteps helping them load their furniture in the U-Haul. 

I have this feeling that if Indiana were to pull a Jermaine trade with Portland and get this year's pick, they'd use it to draft Adam Morrison and let Peja walk. That is instant rebuilding right there.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

An interesting proposal.

If a trade were to take place between the teams (and I doubt it would be), I think it'd have to be a 3 team deal. Of course I have no idea who it would include.

I think we'd have to send out something like Zach + Outlaw + a pick (hopefully not this years 1st pick) for Jermaine...but I sincerely doubt that Indiana would bite at that.

I'm in no way a big fan of Jermaines, and he has had issues with health this year (and some others) but I'd take his contract and his "game" over Zachs..and especially Dorkius.

I think this is just wishful thinking.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Blazer Maven said:


> We have enough youngsters. For JO to return I would offer:
> 
> Zach
> Darius
> ...


I wouldn't give up the 2007 pick for anything.

I suspect we'll still be a lotto team, even if we're a late lotto team. Even a 1% chance at Greg Oden (or Kevin Durant or Thaddeus Young) is a chance you HAVE to keep.

How about this: (not my idea, it's cribbed from another website)

Zach, Miles, Blake plus our number one pick in 2006 for Jermaine, Danny Granger and their #1 pick (mid first round)

That actually seems decent to me.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> If I recall correctly wasn;t it a groin and then a shoulder injury? Not too concerned since it doesn't appear to a chronic injury each year. I definately see you point though.


And a hyperextended knee, thanks to Ben Wallace.

Basically, he's just had some bad fluke injury for the past 3 years.


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

Fork said:


> I wouldn't give up the 2007 pick for anything.
> 
> I suspect we'll still be a lotto team, even if we're a late lotto team. Even a 1% chance at Greg Oden (or Kevin Durant or Thaddeus Young) is a chance you HAVE to keep.
> 
> ...


Great trade i like it.Very good post i will rep u.


----------



## Stepping Razor (Apr 24, 2004)

Fork said:


> I wouldn't give up the 2007 pick for anything.
> 
> I suspect we'll still be a lotto team, even if we're a late lotto team. Even a 1% chance at Greg Oden (or Kevin Durant or Thaddeus Young) is a chance you HAVE to keep.
> 
> ...


I don't think there's any way Indy would do that. My impression is that they love Granger. If they're willing to throw in the towel on Jermaine (and I'm skeptical) I can't see them ditching Granger in the same deal. Even to move up in the draft.

Stepping Razor


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

For those of you complaining about his salary...would you rather be paying 20 million a year to Jermaine Oneal, or would you rather be paying 20 million for Zbo and Ratliff? Think about what you are saying...All Star..or two over paid scrubs...All Star...or Two Overpaid scrubs...


I do not think you really need to think that one over do you? :biggrin: 

:clown:


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

I'm sure Z-Bo would be happy to go back home if given the opportunity....

but, who is Ben Maller and how does he know more than what Indiana's press knows?..


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I could actually see a 3 team deal with Minnesota as being more plausible....and no, we wouldn't end up with KG.


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

Im assuming we wouldn't get kg or jo or pretty much anyone that would help us.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

Fork said:


> I wouldn't give up the 2007 pick for anything.
> 
> I suspect we'll still be a lotto team, even if we're a late lotto team. Even a 1% chance at Greg Oden (or Kevin Durant or Thaddeus Young) is a chance you HAVE to keep.
> 
> ...


Except that Granger is the best young prospect the Pacers have seen in a while. I wouldn't trade him for even Zach Randolph and Darius Miles, let alone package him with a mid-first rounder and Jermaine O'Neal for Zach, Miles, a 4th string PG, and a high draft pick in a weak draft.


----------



## ThereIsNoTry (Oct 23, 2005)

Theo Ratliff, Zach Randolph, Darius Miles, JJack, and Detroits pick for Jermaine O'Neal, Austin Croshere, Tinsley, and Harrison.

PG- Telfair // Tinsley
SG- Martell // Dixon
SF- Morrison // Outlaw
PF- O'Neal // Croshere
C- Joel // Harrison

Other guys: Khryapa, Blake, Skinner


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

ThereIsNoTry said:


> Theo Ratliff, Zach Randolph, Darius Miles, JJack, and Detroits pick for Jermaine O'Neal, Austin Croshere, Tinsley, and Harrison.
> 
> PG- Telfair // Tinsley
> SG- Martell // Dixon
> ...


**** that i would never do that trade.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

I would give up Jack to get Jermaine. I love the guy, but he is our future backup PG and Jermaine is a all-star PF. 

Zach Randolph, Brian Skinner, Travis Outlaw, Steve Blake, Detroits 1st rounder and a lotto protected 1st rounder in 2007(Unprotected in 08') for Jermaine O'Neal and Sarus. That would be my preferred deal. Indiana wont want Darius IMO, as they already have Granger. We could deal Miles and our 2nd rounder to Houston for Howard and their 1st rounder!! Draft Morrison with our pick, and Josh McRoberts with Houstons pick


PG- S.Telfair/J.Jack
SG- M.Webster/Sarus
SF- A.Morrison/V.Khryapa
PF- J.O'Neal/J.McRoberts
C- J.Pryzbilla/T.Ratliff


----------



## JFizzleRaider (Nov 1, 2004)

ThereIsNoTry said:


> Theo Ratliff, Zach Randolph, Darius Miles, JJack, and Detroits pick for Jermaine O'Neal, Austin Croshere, Tinsley, and Harrison.
> 
> PG- Telfair // Tinsley
> SG- Martell // Dixon
> ...


I would do it, gives us Jermaine, we keep our 1st rounder, get rid of problem children Miles and Randolph. WE no longer have Theo which is good. WE give up Jack but eh, we get Tinsley who should be a great backup/starter. Plus I believe this gives Joel a reason to resign with us


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

hasoos said:


> For those of you complaining about his salary...would you rather be paying 20 million a year to Jermaine Oneal, or would you rather be paying 20 million for Zbo and Ratliff? Think about what you are saying...All Star..or two over paid scrubs...All Star...or Two Overpaid scrubs...
> 
> 
> I do not think you really need to think that one over do you? :biggrin:
> ...


I assume you are referring to my post.

And yes, it was a one-sided post that only talked about J.O.'s salary and the Pacers situation.

Note, I didn't say we should not trade for J.O, especially if he WANTS to come here (a dubious claim at best).

Only pointing out that giving up too much for him would be a mistake. An overrated player (by many), with injury issues, on a HUGE deal - that player isn't worth a whole lot to me.

And by pointing out his HUGE salary, it should go without saying that the only trade the Blazers should consider is one where they dump their big contracts. Otherwise, it is unworkable. This means Zach (with his own injury issues) MUST be going out as his $55million over the next 4 years & $73 million over the next 5 years (with much of it deferred payments), counteract part of the salary of J.O. of $82 million over the next 4 years.

Jermaine has been a better player than Zach. I know that. But if he comes to the West, he will find it very hard to make the All-Star team again, yet he is being paid like a SuperStar.

Trading Zach for J.O. will make the Blazers salary situation WORSE than it already is. I don't know if that is the direction the team needs to be moving.

Unless we can craft a deal where they take Zach and Theo or Darius, without sending back equally nasty contracts - except for J.O.'s python buster.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

The problem with the Pacers will be the SF position:

They're already loaded up with a solid (Peja) and a project (Granger). That means Outlaw and Miles won't be very attractive to them: two of the pieces we have to offer. 

If Portland was intent on keeping Randolph and the pick and sent them Ratliff, Indiana would have no one to start at the four save for a Pollard/Harrison/Foster platoon. 

So we'd have to deal Ratliff or Miles in a 3-way to a team who needs a center but is flush with PFs/Sfs.

None are coming to mind.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Samuel said:


> The problem with the Pacers will be the SF position:
> 
> They're already loaded up with a solid (Peja) and a project (Granger). That means Outlaw and Miles won't be very attractive to them: two of the pieces we have to offer.
> 
> ...


You have to remember that Peja is a free agent, and Granger might be able to play more then one position, one of them being the shooting guard spot that was vacated by Miller this year.


----------



## adotjames (Jun 21, 2005)

I would give up every single one of our draft picks for the next decade to get JO back. Just think how awesome it would be to have a power forward who could actually outrebound a few point guards.


----------



## Stepping Razor (Apr 24, 2004)

Samuel said:


> The problem with the Pacers will be the SF position:
> 
> They're already loaded up with a solid (Peja) and a project (Granger). That means Outlaw and Miles won't be very attractive to them: two of the pieces we have to offer.
> 
> ...


Why not ship out Zach? 
Why would we want to keep Zach if we're bringing in JO at his spot?

Stepping Razor


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

Samuel said:


> The problem with the Pacers will be the SF position:
> 
> They're already loaded up with a solid (Peja) and a project (Granger). That means Outlaw and Miles won't be very attractive to them: two of the pieces we have to offer.


Peja is a free agent, and Granger is nowhere close to being a project. I'd love to have him start next year.



> I would give up every single one of our draft picks for the next decade to get JO back. Just think how awesome it would be to have a power forward who could actually outrebound a few point guards.


Sorry, Jermaine isn't a good rebounder. Terrible at boxing out, and often doesn't even try. He does get outrebounded by guards/forwards often.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Pacers Fan said:


> Peja is a free agent, and Granger is nowhere close to being a project. I'd love to have him start next year.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, Jermaine isn't a good rebounder. Terrible at boxing out, and often doesn't even try. He does get outrebounded by guards/forwards often.


In your opinion, what would it take for the Blazers to get O'Neal back?


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Stepping Razor said:


> Why not ship out Zach?
> Why would we want to keep Zach if we're bringing in JO at his spot?
> 
> Stepping Razor


Call me crazy, but Zach is 3 years younger than Jermaine and not that much worse. Remember how good Randolph was when Sheed was here? 

I think that with another scoring big man, Randolph could flourish. He could be the perimeter player he's already starting to become this year. 

But trading _Randolph_ for O'Neal? Isn't that a little more redundant? 

Neither shoots especially well from the field or from the line. And both have had significant injury problems in the last few years (O'Neals' being more of the nagging type). 

If both are even _comparable_, and Zach is 3 years younger, I keep the younger of the two. If Zach gets healthy, who knows how much better he'll get. 

O'Neal will turn 28 this October, and when that enormous contract ends, he'll be 31. Randolph will be entering his prime at the same time.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Samuel said:


> Call me crazy, but Zach is 3 years younger than Jermaine and not that much worse. Remember how good Randolph was when Sheed was here?
> 
> I think that with another scoring big man, Randolph could flourish. He could be the perimeter player he's already starting to become this year.
> 
> ...


Ok your crazy! :clown: 

:biggrin: 

:banana: 

I'm sorry I just can't see keeping any player who is turning into the next Antoine Walker.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Samuel said:


> Call me crazy, but Zach is 3 years younger than Jermaine and not that much worse. Remember how good Randolph was when Sheed was here?
> 
> I think that with another scoring big man, Randolph could flourish. He could be the perimeter player he's already starting to become this year.
> 
> ...



Crazy.

Jermaine Oneal is twice the defensive player that Zach is.


----------



## Stepping Razor (Apr 24, 2004)

Samuel said:


> Call me crazy, but Zach is 3 years younger than Jermaine and not that much worse. Remember how good Randolph was when Sheed was here?
> 
> I think that with another scoring big man, Randolph could flourish. He could be the perimeter player he's already starting to become this year.
> 
> ...


The only huge advantage I see for JO is that he plays D. Otherwise I agree they are pretty similar, although I do think JO is a bit better in most areas of the game. He is older, though.

But could they play together? Neither can play the 3. Could Jermaine play the 5, next to Z-Bo at the 4? Would our offense not be horribly stagnant with them both running in the post? Would we get slaughtered on D by a team with size? I'm not sure it would work.

Z-Bo at the 4 with Sheed at the 5 worked (for the 5 games freaking Mo Cheeks figured out to do it before Sheed was traded), but Sheed is bigger than JO and much better on the perimeter on offense.

Stepping Razor


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

That's why with Aldridge, Zach has someone else who the team can go to in the post. God I say this in every thread now..


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

Jo and Zbo toeghter :clap:


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

Jo and zbo could play toeghter , zach is a better scorer Jo is better all around , put jo at the 5 and zbo at the 4


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

adotjames said:


> I would give up every single one of our draft picks for the next decade to get JO back. Just think how awesome it would be to have a power forward who could actually outrebound a few point guards.


Ouch.

I agree that Jermaine is somewhat overrated (moreso his salary than his rep), but I'd take him for the right price (no duh!). Considering the current state of the team (ownership/finances/future), the only way the Trail Blazers can afford to bring in Jermaine is if they somehow ship out the contracts of both Theo and Zach. Since Miles has to be dealt, one way or the other, it would be nice if he were part of the (probably 3 team) trade as well. I could live with that (since we'll be drafting a big anyway :biggrin: ). It's the finer details of draft picks and throw-ins that will throw off the scales. I don't think we should be giving away high lotto picks on top of it.

Speaking of teams with lots of big salaries to dump, does anyone know how a New York / Indy trade might work out for both teams? Could New York get him without giving up Curry or Frye? Would they want to? If they gave up Curry, would Frye and Jermaine work together?


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

The thing about wanting to pair Zach and JO together is, realistically, we would HAVE to give up our 06 1st rounder. I mean, their is a slight possibility that we could get JO in a Zach package that doesnt include our pick this season, but without Zach the deal gets very difficult. 

But I do agree, Zach and JO would be amazing. I too feel that Zach needs another post scorer to be at his best. Remember how good he was a manuvering into the lane for those putbacks back when we had Sheed? God that combo would make me inclined to include the 06 1st rounder, granted Indiana sends us their 1st this season. But, we need a SF and by the time Indiana picks, all the 1st and even 2nd tier SF's would be gone(Gay, Adam, Andrea, Carney, probably Brewer). Maby we could deal our pick, Theo, Travis, Blake, Detroits pick for Jermaine and their own 1st rounder(16). Then send Miles to NY for Mo Taylor and Denvers 1st(21). THEN, trade 16 and 21 to get higher and take one of Adam, Gay, Carney or Andrea. 

PG- Telfiar/Jack
SG- Webster/Dixon
SF- Adam, Gay, Carney or Andrea/Viktor
PF- Zach/Skinner/Viktor
C- Jermaine/Skinner


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

I realize that the Jermaine talks are just that, talk..but for the sake of argument, lets act like it's real.

That out of the way, Jermaine and Zach in the paint would be a mistake. Zach hasn't shown that he's willing to be a secondary (at best) offensive threat in the forward position with someone who's also an inside threat.

We'd need to have a non offensive ball hog in the PF or C spot, if we somehow got Jermaine.

Someone who does the dirty work, and can keep the defense honest, but not a terribly important "paint" factor.

Joel or Brian Skinner would be perfect in that role. Not Zach.

And we'd need a really good shooting SF and SG, and a PG who likes to pass into the paint and makes the occasional jumper.

Hm..

Webster, Morrison, Telfair, Joel (or Skinner if Joel bolts), Jermaine?


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

SMiLE said:


> I realize that the Jermaine talks are just that, talk..but for the sake of argument, lets act like it's real.
> 
> That out of the way, Jermaine and Zach in the paint would be a mistake. Zach hasn't shown that he's willing to be a secondary (at best) offensive threat in the forward position with someone who's also an inside threat.
> 
> ...



You lost credbility with Morrison when you made this comment. 
And we'd need a really good shooting SF and SG, and a PG who likes to *pass* into the paint 


LOL sorry couldn't resist


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> You lost credbility with Morrison when you made this comment.
> And we'd need a really good shooting SF and SG, and a PG who likes to *pass* into the paint
> 
> 
> LOL sorry couldn't resist


I don't follow.

For my scenario to function at it's best, at least as much as it could right offt he bat, it means we need to have a SF and a SG who can hit jumpers (both webster and morrison are more likely to hit jumpers than our current SG and SF) and also a PG who likes to pass to the paint (and occasionally hit a jumper).

How is that not true of what I said? 

Webster and Morrison should be the SG/SF combo, and PG could be Jack and Telfair, both of which can make passes to players in the paint as long as they aren't dunder-heads or butter fingers.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

Blazer Freak said:


> In your opinion, what would it take for the Blazers to get O'Neal back?


Honestly, I just don't see anything happening. The Blazers have some really nice youth, but I don't think the Pacers are going to trade their best player for a worse player and some projects. I'd love to get Przybilla in a sign & trade, though, but of course, not for O'Neal.


----------



## ThereIsNoTry (Oct 23, 2005)

Offensively, as individuals Randolph and Jermaine O'Neal are very close. But it seems if O'Neal was down there the team offense would just be more flowing. Not catching, facing do some weird pump fake and shoot a fade away.


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

It's been a while since I threw out the suggestion of Miles + Randolph + the 2007 + the 2009 pick for Jermaine, and having followed the discussion here, I think it's still a respectable offer, and one that Indiana would have reason to like _if_ they really wanted to deal Jermaine. 

The Pacers would want a post threat to replace O'Neal, and Randolph gives them that. They'd get the 2007 pick that might give them a shot at Oden, or one of the other hot prospects projected to enter the draft next year, assuming the Blazers don't suddenly skyrocket to the playoffs in a year (I doubt it). The Blazers unload Darius Miles to a team that's a perennial playoff contender, and if that doesn't get him motivated, nothing will. But just to smooth that part, the Blazers kick in the 2009 pick... when if all goes well, Portland will back in the playoffs. 

And I liked the thinking of going with a good shooter out of the draft in this case, someone like Adam Morrison. 

PG: Telfair / Jack (Blake maybe)
SG: Webster / Dixon (Lenard sounds like he's bolting)
SF: Morrison / Outlaw
PF: O'Neal / Khryapa
C: Przybilla / Ratliff

That's a team that would be a whole lot better than the Blazers are now, in part, because of addition by subtraction, but also because of addition by addition with JO. O'Neal's a better defender and passer and just all-around smarter than Z-Bo. And as another poster said, he doesn't have the problem of slowing turning into Antoine Walker (or maybe not so slowly, as seems to be happening with Zach).


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

jo get hurt a lot now i dont know if we want to go down the stale davis route giving up JO ironically for stale but now giving up a jo like player for the new stale aka JO agian? 

JO is good dont get me wrong but with his injuries his isnt worth as much as he was 3 years ago, so I dont want to OVER pay for an injuried p[layer that wants out of pacerland, remember what LA got for shaq it wasnt as much as some want to give up for JO. REMEMBER this isnt the healthy JO that was in pacerland after the Stale davis trade, this is the badly dinged up several times over JO while not as bad as walton on celtics but very close. The chance that JO gets hurts is 80% every season of his MASSIVE contract sitting on the bench, is he ready to be that veteran leader that doesnt start due to injury?

How many more season and injuries does JO have left in the tank? it cant be too many anymore.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Here is my dream scenario....

Theo Ratliff, Jarrett Jack, Travis Outlaw, Detroits 1st(#30) and our 2006 1st rounder(#1) for Jermaine O'Neal, Indiana's 2006 1st rounder(#16) and a re-signed Freddie Jones

Darius Miles and Juwon Dixon for Mo Taylor, re-signed Jackie Butler and Denvers 1st(#21)

Trade #16 and #21 up to secure JJ Reddick(Im not a huge fan of his, but think that he would get numerous open looks with Zach and Jermaine in the post)

Use our own 2nd rounder on Justin Williams


PG- Sebastion Telfiar/Steve Blake/Rick Brunson(FA)
SG- JJ Reddick/Fred Jones
SF- Martell Webster/VK
PF- Zach Randolph/Brian Skinner/VK/Justin Williams
C- Jermaine O'Neal/Brian Skinner/Justin Williams/Ha


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

SMiLE said:


> I don't follow.
> 
> For my scenario to function at it's best, at least as much as it could right offt he bat, it means we need to have a SF and a SG who can hit jumpers (both webster and morrison are more likely to hit jumpers than our current SG and SF) and also a PG who likes to pass to the paint (and occasionally hit a jumper).
> 
> ...




Sorry I missed that. I was thinking you meant a SF that can pass into the middle


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

ThatBlazerGuy said:


> Here is my dream scenario....


If you're gonna dream, at least dream big.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

ThatBlazerGuy said:


> Here is my dream scenario....
> 
> Theo Ratliff, Jarrett Jack, Travis Outlaw, Detroits 1st(#30) and our 2006 1st rounder(#1) for Jermaine O'Neal, Indiana's 2006 1st rounder(#16) and a re-signed Freddie Jones
> 
> ...


Sounds like a nightmare to me. Brunson? Reddick? Give me a break.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

ThatBlazerGuy said:


> Here is my dream scenario....
> 
> Theo Ratliff, Jarrett Jack, Travis Outlaw, Detroits 1st(#30) and our 2006 1st rounder(#1) for Jermaine O'Neal, Indiana's 2006 1st rounder(#16) and a re-signed Freddie Jones
> 
> ...



guh..


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

J.J. Redick as our starter!....


:laugh: thats a good one...


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> J.J. Redick as our starter!....
> 
> 
> :laugh: thats a good one...


Yeah, don't we already have a rookie shooting guard?


----------



## Zuca (Dec 4, 2003)

You may try to work something like Theo+Zach+Detroit pick for JO and a resigned Pollard to backup Przybilla (course, if your team resign him)...


----------



## PaCeRhOLiC (May 22, 2005)

LMAO at this thread...


----------



## ThePrideOfClyde (Mar 28, 2006)

No, no, no. We've had JO once, and that was enough. I love the guy, and the way he plays, but he is too old. We need to concentrate on developing our young players into all stars and that's it. Too many times before have the Blazers traded younger potential for aging all stars. Not again. Please, not again.

All we need to do right now is get a good draft pick (AMMO) and trade Miles. From there we can build a contender. I still have hope in Randolph. He just needs some leaders around him. 
It is not the time to start dismantling the team just because of one bad season with the core group we had. It is the time to keep the team together for longer than a season, so that we can get comfortable as a unit and as a *team*. Do not lose hope, folks. Do not lose hope.


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

PaCeRhOLiC said:


> LMAO at this thread...


Obviously Bird is going to blow the team up with everybody but Granger available. So why can't we dream for JO?


----------



## ThePrideOfClyde (Mar 28, 2006)

deanwoof said:


> Obviously Bird is going to blow the team up with everybody but Granger available. So why can't we dream for JO?


If he had any common sense whatsoever, then the reason for his LMAO'ing this thread was due to the sheer stupidity of anyone in their right mind wanting JO back in portland. Were on the right track here, folks. Let's not derail the train just yet, huh?


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

You have to be on the rail before you derail. :biggrin:


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

Public Defender said:


> It's been a while since I threw out the suggestion of Miles + Randolph + the 2007 + the 2009 pick for Jermaine, and having followed the discussion here, I think it's still a respectable offer, and one that Indiana would have reason to like _if_ they really wanted to deal Jermaine.
> 
> The Pacers would want a post threat to replace O'Neal, and Randolph gives them that. They'd get the 2007 pick that might give them a shot at Oden, or one of the other hot prospects projected to enter the draft next year, assuming the Blazers don't suddenly skyrocket to the playoffs in a year (I doubt it). The Blazers unload Darius Miles to a team that's a perennial playoff contender, and if that doesn't get him motivated, nothing will. But just to smooth that part, the Blazers kick in the 2009 pick... when if all goes well, Portland will back in the playoffs.
> 
> ...


That trade is heavily favored in the pacers direction :laugh:


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

Where does it explicity say JO wants to come back?


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Fork said:


> I wouldn't give up the 2007 pick for anything.
> 
> I suspect we'll still be a lotto team, even if we're a late lotto team. Even a 1% chance at Greg Oden (or Kevin Durant or Thaddeus Young) is a chance you HAVE to keep.
> 
> ...



Substitute Juan Dixon for Blake, so we can keep Blake...
Maybe get back Fred Jones instead of Granger.. but am fine with Granger too

leave out the picks and throw cash at them


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

I would trade the 2007 pick in any trade that brought in kg,dwight howard,or chris bosh.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

To anyone that says JO doesnt play with heart, go watch the Indiana-NJ game.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

when and where? plus i guess JO doesnt want to come back to play for the blazers but after his retirment


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Samuel said:


> Neither shoots especially well from the field or from the line. And both have had significant injury problems in the last few years (O'Neals' being more of the nagging type).
> 
> If both are even _comparable_, and Zach is 3 years younger, I keep the younger of the two.


I don't believe that they're very close in ability. O'Neal is definitely the more efficient scorer. O'Neal has a 1.06 PPS vs. 0.96 PPS for Randolph (PPS stands for points per shot, and it's a better measure of scoring efficiency than FG% as it gives three-pointers more weight and credit to drawing and making free throws). O'Neal is a better passer and rebounder and a _far, far_ better defender. O'Neal is a big reason why Indiana has been a very good defensive team that last few seasons. He's a good individual defender and an excellent team defender.

Basically, there's no aspect of the game that I don't see O'Neal having an advantage in and, on defense, that advantage is vast. Randolph's only advantage is his youth, but it's only a three-year difference and it doesn't trump being the significantly worse player.

If Portland could turn any of their assets, outside of Telfair, Webster and their 2007 pick, into O'Neal, I'd be all for it.


----------

