# Dallas "Final" Offer



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

According to Dallas newspapers, here is Dallas' "final" offer for Rasheed:

Jamison, Delk, and Najera.

Should the Blazers do this? I really think so. But the fact that they haven't yet tells me they won't.

PBF


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Pass. Jamison and ZR would be the worst defensive combination this side of ZR and KVH. And Jamison's contract is simply terrible.

Delk and Najera are worthless (in that players of their caliber can be signed any summer with less than the full MLE), so I don't see them being any kind of factor in a trade other than filler.

Ed O.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

I do not think it will be a FINAL offer

As Dallas is not doing extremely well, pressure may increase to the point they make a better offer.

With all these teams now seemingly bidding for Sheed... too bad they can not get get a three way going

Something like this.. throwing out names...
send us Najera (I like his energy)... and Jamison and Delk to Phoenix
Phoenix sends us Marion....
POrtland also sends something to Phoenix

Jamison and Delks contracts are better than Marions very long $ contract. It woudl come off their books sooner


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

I agree...POR should pass on this. The ONLY way DAL gets Sheed is by including Howard in the deal. Otherwise they can continue their struggles for all I care. But I see no reason for POR to help them out.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

That wouldn't be a bad deal actually. Jamison is a very efficient player, averaging 16 ppg and shooting 51% from the field. Those other two are good role players.

We'll be getting rid of a major bad apple, and we'll have Jamison on the team as opposed to letting Wallace go for nothing.


----------



## BLAZER PROPHET (Jan 3, 2003)

Couldn't they throw in a good Bar-b-que Ribs place or something like that?


----------



## antibody (Apr 4, 2003)

No way. Bad deal for Portland...talent wise, future trade values, contracts, etc. Ed O pretty much said it all.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ProudBFan</b>!
> According to Dallas newspapers, here is Dallas' "final" offer for Rasheed:
> 
> Jamison, Delk, and Najera.
> ...


This is thrilling news.

It's their final offer, which means no more of their weak offers...hopefully, Nash will turn this down and end Dallas' involvement.

Honestly, Dallas was of no interest to me...the only players I could be interested in (Nowitski, Nash) they wouldn't have dealt, and everyone else is either a step back or not enough.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

they need to package Jamison, Howard and their first round draft pick for this coming year to be worth it. that's actually a pretty fair trade, when you think about it. 

that pick won't be great, but given that we already have two picks, it does increase our odds somewhat of getting at least one real impact player out of next year's draft. 

we'd have a future of Jamison, Zach, Howard, Woods, Outlaw and three draft picks this year. that's a lot of SF's and PF's, but it leaves us in great shape to make other trades.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> the only players I could be interested in (Nowitski, Nash)


Not Finley?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KokoTheMonkey</b>!
> 
> Not Finley?


Not really. Finley is a very good player, but doesn't possess a particularly unque or hard-to-find skillset. In my opinion, he's a little bit better a version of Bonzi Wells with a better attitude.

While I didn't agree with tossing away Wells for very little, I also didn't think the Blazers were losing someone really hard to replace.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Throw in a 1st rounder and I'd prolly do it.....I really don't like najera just because he causes so many problems for us....we need more players like him and Ruben...to get at them defensively. Sheed's D is better then Jamison's but his D is getting worse...I saw the Spurs game and Duncan owned Sheed a few times baseline...the past few years Sheed was in PDX..Duncan didn't come close to do anyhting like that. Jamison is younger..can grab rebounds...delk is a scrub and should be cut..and I think Najera could really really help us out...like I said throw in a 1st rounder and I'd do it. We would have 3 1st rounders and that could come in VERY handy on draft day.


----------



## The Professional Fan (Nov 5, 2003)

I'd do that trade in a heartbeat.

Jamison is a proven scorer
Delk is an awesome outside shooter
Najera gives big effort, night in and night out. Come to think of it, all three of those players give effort night in and night out. Giving up Sheed for three players you know are going to show up every night and do their jobs? And all three have something to contribute to the Blazers talent wise as well? Isn't that a no brainer? It is for me.


----------



## blazerfan4life (Dec 31, 2002)

NO i would not do it....we need a better center then we have now and you all know how hard it is to pry on of those from any team and why send him where he has a better chance to get a ring send him to the Clippers or Cavs....:laugh:


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

This is a mediocre trade offer.

As others have said, Jamison doesn't fit well with Zach. He is a poor defender. He has never started on a winning team. He has a bad (MAX til 07/08) contract, which would prevent the Blazers from the possibility of cap room two summers from now (when T-Mac could opt out). All flexibility is lost. 

No matter what anybody says about Delk and Najera as players, they are filler, that neither add, or subtract significant value in the deal. If those type of players are needed by the Blazers, they can easily be picked up during the summers as FA's using exceptions.

I am sorry, but the only players on Dallas that would make me think about a trade with them are Dirk (fat chance Dallas even thinks about trading him) or Nash. They are unlikely to trade Nash, especially since they lost Nick (why did they make that trade again?????), but if we send them Jeff McInnis to tide them over, maybe they can run the point by committee - Antoine Walker and Michael Finley are outstanding passers for their positions. Walker has experience running point forward. Later they can trade either Walker or Finley for a starting PG.

Why would they even consider all this trouble? Because Nash has a player option this summer that he will exercise. Dallas will have to give him a raise. His raise, plus all their other big, long contracts will have Dallas at $80mil a year for a long time.

How about Sheed and Jeff for Nash, Jamison and Josh Howard. Josh Howard is payment for the Blazers taking on Jamison's contract.

The Blazer's later trade Jamison for a Center or a 3 point shooting SF.


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

What Dallas paper said this? Ive checked the Dallas Morning News and the Fort Worth Star Telegram and can find no such offers... I did find several articles refuting the trades and saying unless Portland comes up witha super sweet deal its a no go.


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon...mavs/stories/011304dnspomavsbriefs.7b67e.html


----------



## Linde (Jun 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Masbee</b>!
> ...
> 
> How about Sheed and Jeff for Nash, Jamison and Josh Howard. Josh Howard is payment for the Blazers taking on Jamison's contract.
> ...


rofl
and i thought that only your players hit the bong
our starting pg
our starting sf
our 6th man
for sheed and mcinnis ?
lol


----------



## antibody (Apr 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Linde</b>!
> rofl
> and i thought that only your players hit the bong
> our starting pg
> ...


I would hardly call Howard a starting player at all. He appears to be a good player at his age but let's not put too much value into Josh Howard right now. I doubt this would happen as well but Howard is not worth as much as you think. Probably like Woods is to Portland fan's such as myself.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Dragnsmke1</b>!
> What Dallas paper said this? Ive checked the Dallas Morning News and the Fort Worth Star Telegram and can find no such offers... I did find several articles refuting the trades and saying unless Portland comes up witha super sweet deal its a no go.


So there you have it.

Dallas says Portland needs to "sweeten" the deal when what they are offering is a player on a MAX contract who COMES OFF THE BENCH, and they are getting return the most instant salary relief available in the NBA - $17mil off their books, which could be worth $34mil in savings to the Dallas Mavs if the lux tax is in effect for one more season.

If they really think Portland has to pony up more than the HUUUUGGE value to them of rescuing them from SALARY HELL, of course there won't be any deal.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Smoke, the more emphatically they deny the more serious the talks IMO.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Linde</b>!
> 
> 
> rofl
> ...


I didn't say Dallas would do it did I.

I said (if I were Blazer GM) I wouldn't deal with Dallas for anything less.

'course, if you had read the entire post, you would already know this. Some people are just naturally slow, I guess. No need for the chemical "enhancement".


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

DAL fans are delusional. Not ONE of them can give a good reason for us to trade Sheed and his EXPIRING $17mil in contract, for Jamison or Walker and filler. NOT ONE...except for the asinine "Rids POR of problem child". Ridiculous....

If DAL wants Sheed, then Howard is AT MINIMUM coming back as part of the deal. Did you not hear John Nash's "stringent" demands as part of any trade POR may consider? Apparently not. You can whine all you want about no way you woud take Sheed, no way would you give up Howard...blah, blah, blah. But it won't make a difference. If a deal is made b\t these two teams, it won't resemble the one posted here.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Just a thought

Portland trades: 
SF Qyntel Woods (4.6 ppg, 3.4 rpg, 1.0 apg in 14.3 minutes) 
SF Rasheed Wallace (16.8 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 2.7 apg in 38.6 minutes) 

Portland receives: 
PF Antoine Walker (16.5 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 5.1 apg in 37.9 minutes) 
PG Tony Delk (6.6 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 16.3 minutes) 
SF Josh Howard (8.4 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 1.3 apg in 23.1 minutes) 
Change in team outlook: +10.1 ppg, +7.0 rpg, and +3.5 apg. 

Dallas trades: 
PF Antoine Walker (16.5 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 5.1 apg in 37.9 minutes) 
PG Tony Delk (6.6 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 16.3 minutes) 
SF Josh Howard (8.4 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 1.3 apg in 23.1 minutes) 

Dallas receives: 
SF Qyntel Woods (4.6 ppg, 3.4 rpg, 1.0 apg in 31 games) 
SF Rasheed Wallace (16.8 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 2.7 apg in 33 games) 
Change in team outlook: -10.1 ppg, -7.0 rpg, and -3.5 apg. 

TRADE ACCEPTED


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

WE DONT WANT SHEED!!!!!

He doesnt do anything beyond what Dirk and Walker do.

As stated inb the Dal forum inless you get Duncan or Shaq trading is pretty meaningless.

If your going into the "defensive presence" of Sheed he really doesnt have that. Hes another PF who prefers the long range jumper.

Even in your own forum yall argue as to wether hes really a defensive guy or not. How many Defensive teams has he made?

If the Mavs want anybody from the Blazers its gonna be either Randolph abd Patterson, taking Sheed off your hands is just a favor.

Walker AND Jamison for Sheed...must be out your natural mind to even begin thinking hes worth that much...


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

oh yeah, Josh Howard does start for Dallas.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

No one even said Walker and Jamieson.


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> No one even said Walker and Jamieson.


went back and reread, my badd.


----------



## antibody (Apr 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Dragnsmke1</b>!
> oh yeah, Josh Howard does start for Dallas.


He may start for Dallas but let's get real. He isn't starter quality right now. And I've noticed he starts here and there and every game so I have a hard time saying he is a starter. And to say Sheed doesn't have a defensive presence is a joke. He's been a very good low post defender over the years. News Flash for you...he has been guarding SF's all year. He has been a very good defender of PF's over the years and has held his own against the best. He is a much better defender than Dirk or Walker would ever think about being. And wanting Randolph from Portland is like saying Portland wants Dirk...it ain't going to happen.


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>antibody</b>!
> And wanting Randolph from Portland is like saying Portland wants Dirk...it ain't going to happen.


thats kinda my point...


When has anyone except for Dirk and Nash been a consistint starter for the Mavs? Howard has started a major majority of the games hes played in or gotten starter minutes(35 plus). That makes him a "starter"


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Jack Ramsey thinks Dallas should want Sheed for his defense:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=ramsay_drjack&id=1708392




> The Cure
> If the Mavs hope to return to last season's form, they must improve their defense in transition and in the paint. Since that is unlikely with their existing personnel, I expect the Mavericks to deal for a quality big man before the trade deadline in February. Portland's Rasheed Wallace would be a positive addition.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

He's started 11 of 28 games. And at 23mpg he is not getting Starter minutes.


----------



## antibody (Apr 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Dragnsmke1</b>!
> 
> 
> thats kinda my point...
> ...


First, what is your point. Nobody here talked about getting Dirk so bringing up Z-Bo is a moot point don't you think. That is probably true about Dallas and it's starters. They seem like they go with a different 5 each game. That will catch up to them in the long run.


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Masbee</b>!
> Jack Ramsey thinks Dallas should want Sheed for his defense:
> 
> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=ramsay_drjack&id=1708392


of your gonna use one article from espn you also got to use the one next to it.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?id=1708460


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>antibody</b>!
> 
> 
> First, what is your point. Nobody here talked about getting Dirk so bringing up Z-Bo is a moot point don't you think. That is probably true about Dallas and it's starters. They seem like they go with a different 5 each game. That will catch up to them in the long run.


There is nobody Dallas wants from Portland except one of those 2, and we all know Portland aint giving that up(unless its a no brainer). All this Dallas/Portland talk is coming out of Portland.
Dallas has $ untouchables and Portland doesnt want whats left especially for what theyd have to give up.

I hate to break it but Rasheed is walking at the end of this year and so is Walker.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Dragnsmke1</b>!
> 
> 
> of your gonna use one article from espn you also got to use the one next to it.
> ...


Which is all well and Dandy due to the fact that if this deal happens Antawn will be in Dallas and Antoine will be in Portland.

Antawn has agreed to come off the bench already, why mess with that. Like it or not Rasheed does bring significant Defensive inside presence. And he can, at times, be one of the better inside offensive presences in the game. On Portland he has lost focus and needs a fresh start.

I wouldn't consider it doing us a favor, I think it would be oing Dallas a favor for giving them a player that certainly is a solid defensive match for Duncan and Garnett. Also Sheed doesn't need his touches, which may fit in with Dallas crew f scorers better than Walker who fires at will.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Dragnsmke1</b>!
> 
> 
> All this Dallas/Portland talk is coming out of Portland.
> .


Actually the Walker aspect came from David Aldridge.


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> He's started 11 of 28 games. And at 23mpg he is not getting Starter minutes.


Youre right if you look at it purely from the #'s standpoint.

Im lookig at his last 15 games because thats when he started getting his chance to pay. the 10-13 games bfore that he was getting 3-4 min a game. way to bring up your min per game in such a short time.


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> 
> Which is all well and Dandy due to the fact that if this deal happens Antawn will be in Dallas and Antoine will be in Portland.
> 
> ...


what favor. what security is there that Sheed will resign. Dallas could end up giving away Jamison for nothing, that is doing Porland a favor because thats what Portland is getting for Rasheed if they dont make a move within 5 weeks. Thats doing a favor for Portland.


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon.../mavs/stories/011204dnspomavsbriefs.7661.html


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Dragnsmke1</b>!
> 
> 
> what favor. what security is there that Sheed will resign. Dallas could end up giving away Jamison for nothing, that is doing Porland a favor because thats what Portland is getting for Rasheed if they dont make a move within 5 weeks. Thats doing a favor for Portland.


Considering Cutting salary is also a main motivator to Portland then Sheed walking at the end of the summer is not a big issue to the Blazers. Not the mention that he likely could bring a amore tantalizing package in a S&T than in a swap with Dallas.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Dragnsmke1</b>!
> http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon.../mavs/stories/011204dnspomavsbriefs.7661.html


What does the Story say I don't feel like registering.


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon...ories/stories/011404dnspocowlishaw.2f972.html


Cuban claims there's nothing to it, but Monday in New York he also said, "They would have to make us a sweetheart bargain that we couldn't say no to." 

How about just saying the team has no interest in Wallace? There's a difference between toughness and whining, and the Mavs need the former. 

How does bringing in a moody power forward from the NBA's worst defensive team fix what ails these Mavs? It doesn't. It shouldn't be considered, regardless of the price tag. 

What's more likely and more palatable to consider (at least for me, I don't have to play for him) is the arrival of Riley next off-season. Whatever magic Nelson worked to get 60 wins out of this team a year ago isn't happening.


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> 
> What does the Story say I don't feel like registering.


Donnie Nelson, the Mavericks' president of basketball operations, knows that rumors and rumors of rumors are a way of NBA life. 

But one thing has bothered him about all the speculation surrounding the Mavericks – the inclusion of Antawn Jamison's name. 

"Arguably, he's been our most consistent player," Nelson said before the Mavericks' 115-102 loss to the Detroit Pistons. 
The Mavericks like the way Jamison has bought into the system and changed his game to come off the bench. They also say they have no intention of making any panic move


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

That is one Columnists opinion of the scenario in Portland. The fact of the matter is Sheed is the only Player on Portland who really plays good D. Well him and Reueben. But Stoudamire. McInnis and Randolph basicly look like matadors letting the bull run past, Oley!! ALso Sheed has been relegated to guarding SF's not PF's this season. Sheed is a very good post defender not necessarily a preimeter defender.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Dragnsmke1</b>!
> 
> 
> Donnie Nelson, the Mavericks' president of basketball operations, knows that rumors and rumors of rumors are a way of NBA life.
> ...


Again no mention of Walker....


----------



## antibody (Apr 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Dragnsmke1</b>!
> http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon...ories/stories/011404dnspocowlishaw.2f972.html
> 
> 
> ...


Who cares what Cuban says or doesn't say. He's not going to say much to begin with either way. Portland as a team isn't good defensively this year but Sheed is very good for a PF. Lumping him in with the team just doesn't work. He has played well against all of the really good PF's over the years. You obviously don't watch many Blazer games or you would know that fact. He may not be the best but he is much better than what the Mavs have for defense.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Defensively I think Sheed is on Par with say KG. Very solid but not a defensive behemouth like Ben Wallace.

Maybe Dr. Jack got Wallaces confused, I mean he is kinda old now.


----------



## blazerfan4life (Dec 31, 2002)

*ok lets end this now*

Nash has said..he will not trade WALLACE unless it is for a player of his caliber..and clearly the players that Dallas has us taking is no..NO where near his caliber...unless they threw in a DIRK or a NASH..this deal is not going to get done..i don't see our GM just trading to trade...and if he does...he will not last that long has our GM


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> Defensively I think Sheed is on Par with say KG....


That would be a stretch.  (pun intended)


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> That is one Columnists opinion of the scenario in Portland. The fact of the matter is Sheed is the only Player on Portland who really plays good D. Well him and Reueben. But Stoudamire. McInnis and Randolph basicly look like matadors letting the bull run past, Oley!! ALso Sheed has been relegated to guarding SF's not PF's this season. Sheed is a very good post defender not necessarily a preimeter defender.


a columnist who in Dallas has a VERY good reputation.

As Ive stated can Sheed stop Shaq and Duncan?

Can he be stopped by Shaq and Duncan?


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> 
> Again no mention of Walker....


If this is in reference to my earlier post I already apologized for my misintupritation.

If this is saying that you could see a Walker for Sheed I dont think Sheed plays thpoint forward position and thats what Dallas wants the team to start leaning towards.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Dragnsmke1</b>!
> 
> 
> a columnist who in Dallas has a VERY good reputation.
> ...


actually, historically Sheed has held Duncan and KG far under their seasonal averages on more than a few occasions, and when he has guarded Shaq, he's done it mostly by himself, and did fairly well.

Ok, conversely, can Dirk, or the Twon's stop Shaq and Duncan (or KG, or Webber)?


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Dragnsmke1</b>!
> 
> 
> If this is in reference to my earlier post I already apologized for my misintupritation.
> ...


I can kind of appreciate that, but with one of the best PG's in the game why do they need a Point Forward? Is it a way of appeasing Walkers need for the ball?

I was refering to the fact that the erticles you are presenting only talk about Jamieson, not Walker.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Dragnsmke1</b>!
> 
> Cuban claims there's nothing to it, but Monday in New York he also said, "They would have to make us a sweetheart bargain that we couldn't say no to."


Of course he'd say that. What would he say, "We made a million ridiculous offers and I was laughed off the phone each time"? Do you think he would say that, if all his offers were rebuffed?

Whenever these trade talks fail, invariably the rebuffed party says he never had any interest and "we like who we have."

Judging reality from statements to the media is a losing game.


----------



## Bwatcher (Dec 31, 2002)

Minstrel, you should know better than talking sense! 

After all, Cuban has gone from his point of view (before the season began) that Blazer management didn't have the cahones to make a big deal, to the point of view that unless they make him a sweetheart deal, nothing is going to happen. I mean, first you insult their fortitude, then you expect them to give you a deal that you can't refuse. Surely, this is Reality. Why question it!


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Bwatcher</b>!
> Minstrel, you should know better than talking sense!
> 
> After all, Cuban has gone from his point of view (before the season began) that Blazer management didn't have the cahones to make a big deal, to the point of view that unless they make him a sweetheart deal, nothing is going to happen. I mean, first you insult their fortitude, then you expect them to give you a deal that you can't refuse. Surely, this is Reality. Why question it!



 

when did this happen?


----------

