Merged: Hinrich to PDX Discussed?

[Masbee]

Anybody hear Ric Bucher on the radio talking about a proposed three team deal that has been discussed that would send Carlos Boozer to Chicago, Kirk Hinrich to Portland, which abosorbs the salary for Utah?

He said teams (in general) are focused on going after free agents right now, and will get back to trades like this at a later time.

These principal components seem like a good idea for each team.

Portland wants an upgrade at PG defense. And, Portland will need a PG badly if they make a Lee for Blake & Outlaw deal.

Chicago has had Hinrich on and off the block for a long time. He is going to explode if they don't do something sooner, rather than later. What the heck are they expecting to get back in a trade for this guy?

As for Boozer, Chicago has needed a low post scorer since they let Curry go. They get a 1 year look at Boozer on their team. No guarantee they can keep him, but they would have a shot, could pay him the most if inclined, and would be in the catbird seat for sign-and-trades if Boozer wanted a new address. I know the one-year rental reduces his worth, but it isn't as if they would be trading an average guard for one of the handful of 20 - 10 Bigs in the NBA.....oh wait. In some sense, they gotta take that gamble. How else do you get a big of that caliber?

Utah is in luxury tax hell. They failed to move AK-47 the last couple of season for cap relief, which brings them to this summer. Neither Okur or Boozer gave them the instant relief by opting out. Utah would rather keep Milsap than Boozer for the future. But, they might be reluctant to pay Milsap unless they are confident they can move Boozer for enough cap relief. There was a report today that Utah does not want to see Boozer in training camp, and that the feeling is mutual. That puts tons of pressure on Utah to make a deal soon.

If a deal like this goes down, I wonder what additional components would be involved? Cash, picks, young players?

Also, if this deal has been discussed, it makes some sense with the recent Lee rumor of Lee for Blake & Outlaw. New roster:

Hinrich / Bayless
Roy / Rudy
Batum / ??
LaMarcus / Lee
Oden / Pryz

With that roster I would get a journeyman PG & SF. As for minutes at SF, I would put Roy there in the small lineup and Lee there in a big lineup.

[B-Roy]

I would be hard-pressed to think Utah would want to help us.

[Minstrel]

If Portland can essentially get Boozer for cap space, is Hinrich the best they can do in routing Boozer elsewhere?

Alternatively, looking at this purely as a net-in/net-out, is Hinrich a player we would want Portland to use all their cap space on? If he were a UFA, would you be pleased if Portland offered him the largest deal they could with the money they have under the cap?

[Pinwheel1]

Originally Posted by B-Roy

I would be hard-pressed to think Utah would want to help us.

They are helping themselves. They do not want Boozer. They want Millsap. This allows it to happen. Also it assures them that we will not over pay Millsap ourselves.

[Crimson the Cat]

Whoa. That came out of left field. I like it. We "sign" Kirk Hinrich with our cap space. Utah's going to want a promising player on the cheap though in return, but that should be easy to throw in from either Portland's or Chicago's side.

We would still have Blake, Outlaw, and/or Przybilla to improve the team at small forward and/or power forward/center.

Lee would be next to impossible now, since we'd have zip to little cap space. This is due to his BYC status.

[Crimson the Cat]

Originally Posted by Minstrel

If Portland can essentially get Boozer for cap space, is Hinrich the best they can do in routing Boozer elsewhere?

Alternatively, looking at this purely as a net-in/net-out, is Hinrich a player we would want Portland to use all their cap space on? If he were a UFA, would you be pleased if Portland offered him the largest deal they could with the money they have under the cap?

With Boozer, I think I'd prefer to get creative and go after Gerald Wallace instead of Hinrich. Charlotte's interest would perk up for Boozer, I think.

As a the reward for turning in our cap-space ticket? Yeah, given what's available I'd be ok with Kirk Hinrich.

[RickyRubio]

Why do you guys think we would just intercept Boozer? The deal is...

Boozer goes to Chicago. Kirk comes to Portland. Money goes to Utah.

The deal isn't Boozer goes to Portland, money goes to Utah and Portland gets to play with Boozer.

The fuck is wrong with half you guys on this board? You need a taste of reality. Step away from the computer from time to time and take a walk.

[Masbee]

Originally Posted by B-Roy

I would be hard-pressed to think Utah would want to help us.

Help us slightly upgrade our point guard position?

Ummm, yeah, Hinrich scares the living shit out of Deron Williams. Bringing Hinrich to P-Town obliterates Utah's huge advantage in the point guard matchup.

Oh, wait.

As you can tell by the snide retort, I don't agree that Utah would see things that way. They are apt to be far more worried by their own pressing, mounting problems.

Their most important question to this deal is not, "why are we helping Portland?", but, "Is this the best deal we can get for Boozer that gives us significant cap relief?".

[Zybot]

Originally Posted by RickyRubio

Why do you guys think we would just intercept Boozer? The deal is...

Boozer goes to Chicago. Kirk comes to Portland. Money goes to Utah.

The deal isn't Boozer goes to Portland, money goes to Utah and Portland gets to play with Boozer.

The fuck is wrong with half you guys on this board? You need a taste of reality. Step away from the computer from time to time and take a walk.

Reading comprehension... Posters are saying if Boozer is out there and Utah wants our money maybe we could find a suitor for Boozer that brings us a more desirable player than Kirk from their standpoint, such as Gerald Wallace.

Edit: Maybe you can understand this better with geometry. Think of this as a triangle, where Boozer goes from Utah (Corner A) to X (corner B), X sends TAP (Totally Awesome Player) to Portland (Corner C) , Portland sends $$ to Utah (Corner A) . Now solve for X, Corner B, and TAP. Try using trigonometry equations and the Pythagorean Theorem. Make sense?

[Masbee]

Originally Posted by Minstrel

If Portland can essentially get Boozer for cap space, is Hinrich the best they can do in routing Boozer elsewhere?

Alternatively, looking at this purely as a net-in/net-out, is Hinrich a player we would want Portland to use all their cap space on? If he were a UFA, would you be pleased if Portland offered him the largest deal they could with the money they have under the cap?

Maybe because the sweetener going to Utah comes from Chicago, and in order to get Boozer for "themselves" the Blazers would have to match that sweetener? Dunno. Just a damn, incomplete rumour. That is why I asked if anybody heard Bucher in case there are missing details. The devil is often in the detail in these big deals.

[Minstrel]

Originally Posted by RickyRubio

Why do you guys think we would just intercept Boozer? The deal is...

Boozer goes to Chicago. Kirk comes to Portland. Money goes to Utah.

The deal isn't Boozer goes to Portland, money goes to Utah and Portland gets to play with Boozer.

What exactly is Chicago providing Utah? Nothing. The point is that Portland is essentially buying Boozer from Utah and sending him to Chicago for Hinrich.

That being the case, there's no reason why Portland can't buy Boozer from Utah and send him to another team, if there's another team interested. It just has to be done in the same deal, as a three-way, to avoid the waiting period to re-trade a player.

[Minstrel]

Originally Posted by Masbee

Maybe because the sweetener going to Utah comes from Chicago, and in order to get Boozer for "themselves" the Blazers would have to match that sweetener? Dunno. Just a damn, incomplete rumour. That is why I asked if anybody heard Bucher in case there are missing details. The devil is often in the detail in these big deals.

Yeah, if that's the case then it's a bit different. If Chicago is throwing in Tyrus Thomas or something, it makes more sense. Right now, Chicago is basically dealing Hinrich straight up for Boozer, Portland is getting Hinrich for cap space and Utah is trading Boozer as a straight salary dump. That seems like a great deal for Chicago and a terrible deal for Utah.

[tlongII]

I love that deal and I think it's a very real possibility the later it gets in the summer. We just need to have patience and something like this can happen for us. If Webster can get healthy we would have a monster team.

[Sug]

Originally Posted by RickyRubio

Why do you guys think we would just intercept Boozer? The deal is...

Boozer goes to Chicago. Kirk comes to Portland. Money goes to Utah.

The deal isn't Boozer goes to Portland, money goes to Utah and Portland gets to play with Boozer.

The fuck is wrong with half you guys on this board? You need a taste of reality. Step away from the computer from time to time and take a walk.

Reading comprehension is fun...can you point to the specific post where it says that?

If you are referring the to "essentially" line then I am going to be LMAO @ you.

[Masbee]

Originally Posted by Crimson the Cat

Whoa. That came out of left field. I like it. We "sign" Kirk Hinrich with our cap space. Utah's going to want a promising player on the cheap though in return, but that should be easy to throw in from either Portland's or Chicago's side.

We would still have Blake, Outlaw, and/or Przybilla to improve the team at small forward and/or power forward/center.

Lee would be next to impossible now, since we'd have zip to little cap space. This is due to his BYC status.

I don't understand.

Are you saying we couldn't trade Outlaw & Blake in a sign-and-trade for Lee if we had no cap space, even if the salaries matched? Why not?

[RickyRubio]

Originally Posted by Zybot

Reading comprehension... Posters are saying if Boozer is out there and Utah wants our money maybe we could find a suitor for Boozer that brings us a more desirable player than Kirk from their standpoint, such as Gerald Wallace.

Edit: Maybe you can understand this better with geometry. Think of this as a triangle, where Boozer goes from Utah (Corner A) to X (corner B), X sends TAP (Totally Awesome Player) to Portland (Corner C) , Portland sends $$ to Utah (Corner A) . Now solve for X, Corner B, and TAP. Try using trigonometry equations and the Pythagorean Theorem. Make sense?

This from the guy who wants to trade Roy.

Talk a walk man. It's sunny out.

[RickyRubio]

Originally Posted by Minstrel

What exactly is Chicago providing Utah? Nothing. The point is that Portland is essentially buying Boozer from Utah and sending him to Chicago for Hinrich.

That being the case, there's no reason why Portland can't buy Boozer from Utah and send him to another team, if there's another team interested. It just has to be done in the same deal, as a three-way, to avoid the waiting period to re-trade a player.

Chicago doesn't need to provide Utah with anything. That is the point of a 3 team deal. Utah is getting cap space from us. We are getting Kirk from Chicago.

So are you saying that every 3 team trade in the history of sports, each team has to give the other something in return?

Really?

:smh:

[Minstrel]

Originally Posted by RickyRubio

Chicago doesn't need to provide Utah with anything. That is the point of a 3 team deal. Utah is getting cap space from us. We are getting Kirk from Chicago.

So are you saying that every 3 team trade in the history of sports, each team has to give the other something in return?

Really?

:smh:

I think you're a bit lost.

[SodaPopinski]

I love the fact that you could have posted this thread on this board any day over the past 2 years, and most of us would have seen the subject and been like, "Yeah, I could see that."

[not the specifics of this particular one, mind you, but the "Hinrich to PDX discussed" part ...]

[Crimson the Cat]

Originally Posted by Masbee

I don't understand.

Are you saying we couldn't trade Outlaw & Blake in a sign-and-trade for Lee if we had no cap space, even if the salaries matched? Why not?

BeCause lee would be a byc player nyc could only take back the amount of his current salary while we wouldhave to take back the average amount of his new salary. Nearly impossible i believe if no cap space.

[blazerboy30]

Originally Posted by Minstrel

I think you're a bit lost.

hehe. It is like seeing a train-wreck. It is atrocious, yet you keep watching in amazement.

[Stepping Razor]

You have to figure that Utah would be getting *something* back in that scenario... maybe Tyrus Thomas or Joakim Noah from the Bulls, since they'd need to be opening up space in the rotation for Boozer? I could see that deal happening... and I think I'd like it for the Blazers, especially if we were also moving Blake/Outlaw for Lee.

Hinrich/Roy/Batum/Aldridge/Oden with bench backup from Bayless/Rudy/Lee/Joel would be, I think, a pretty marked improvement to our rotation from last year. I think that team would be a serious contender.

SR

[Denny Crane]

Someone (Bulls) would have to want Boozer.

[Stepping Razor]

Originally Posted by Denny Crane

Someone (Bulls) would have to want Boozer.

Exactly. Do you think the Bulls would be interested in a deal that brought in Boozer and shipped out Hinrich and either Thomas or Noah? (I don't really feel like I have a good sense of how highly Bulls management values their current guys.)

[Mediocre Man]

HInrich to PDX has been discussed for the last year and a half.


Note to KP. You have to give up something to get something.