A Long Term Plan

[BClutch]

We've all heard the off season talk about getting a point guard/figure out our SF spot/backup PF. While there may be a place for each of those, there isn't a lot out there that's a significant upgrade. If we make a big move on trade day we might get a little better, but would it be enough to put us over the top?

Pritchard has shown patience not making a move with Raef's expiring contract last season when he perhaps could have traded it for a better upgrade than we can get this summer. So the question is, did he make a mistake or could this be a long term plan? Remember, we're talking about Mr. master of long term planning here.

All of this points in one direction for the right move, towards something further down the line. A bigger upgrade, a better piece.

Many teams in the league are looking for financial relief but they know they have until next years trade deadline before they're liable for any luxury tax for the year. That's the move date. KP is waiting for a fire sale. Big pieces for cap space. Maybe no specific player is in mind yet, only possibilities. But there are some intriguing possibilities out there.

So don't be surprised when KP trades off a bunch of our perpetual bench warmers, injury reserves, and picks for bits of cap space and sits on it. Getting the Blazers the best angle possible for a mid season deal. No upgrades this trade day, the same guys are going to be heading into training camp this season. But come February all bets are off.

 

[andalusian]

I think we basically had 3 options for the upgrade:

1. Trade deadline with Raef. - Nothing was there that was deemed worthwhile.
2. Draft day under the cap
3. Next trade deadline under the cap if nothing happens at 2.

Between 2 and 3 - something happens, I am willing to bet. It's the last time we have cap space for a while.

It seems like KP and company like to make small changes during the year - so I am willing to bet that something happens with 2. Only if all else fails - something will happen at 3.

 

[oldmangrouch]

At this point, I don't see the purpose of a long-term plan. The 2011 lock-out and revamping of the CBA/salary cap is going to completely change how teams operate.

I'm not optimistic a deal gets done, but not because of any plan. More likely, it will be because KP is too attached to "his" current roster.

 

[BClutch]

At this point, I don't see the purpose of a long-term plan. The 2011 lock-out and revamping of the CBA/salary cap is going to completely change how teams operate.

I'm not optimistic a deal gets done, but not because of any plan. More likely, it will be because KP is too attached to "his" current roster.

That's an interesting way of putting it. I'm not sure if I understand what you're trying to say though. It sounds to me like 'planning is pointless because the rules will change someday', or 'we need to make a move now because we might not be able to in two years,' but I'm not totally confident in my assessment.

I don't think it would be in the Blazers long term best interests to make their big move on draft day unless Pritchard catches someone bending over for a Pritch-slap. Sure freeing up more cap space with a series of smart deals is great, but a lot of getting the best deal out of others is timing.

By the trade deadline there will be teams afraid that their superstars will leave them for the 2010 free agency class. The Hornets could be going under. A trade demand could be made from some quality player on a team with the injury bug. Each of these hold much more potential for the Blazers getting a big piece to turn themselves into a long term powerhouse/contender/dynasty than any of the pieces that seem to be available on draft day.

 

[oldmangrouch]

That's an interesting way of putting it. I'm not sure if I understand what you're trying to say though. It sounds to me like 'planning is pointless because the rules will change someday', or 'we need to make a move now because we might not be able to in two years,' but I'm not totally confident in my assessment.

I don't think it would be in the Blazers long term best interests to make their big move on draft day unless Pritchard catches someone bending over for a Pritch-slap. Sure freeing up more cap space with a series of smart deals is great, but a lot of getting the best deal out of others is timing.

By the trade deadline there will be teams afraid that their superstars will leave them for the 2010 free agency class. The Hornets could be going under. A trade demand could be made from some quality player on a team with the injury bug. Each of these hold much more potential for the Blazers getting a big piece to turn themselves into a long term powerhouse/contender/dynasty than any of the pieces that seem to be available on draft day.

IMHO, we need to make moves now to try to make a run the next 2 seasons. Stern's goal is to make the NBA like the NFL, with large scale roster turnover every off season. That's going to force everybody to change the way they plan and construct their rosters.

 

[BClutch]

IMHO, we need to make moves now to try to make a run the next 2 seasons. Stern's goal is to make the NBA like the NFL, with large scale roster turnover every off season. That's going to force everybody to change the way they plan and construct their rosters.

Interesting. Link please?

If that's true than we could have an advantage over the rest of the league with Paul moneybags on our side.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Interesting. Link please?

If that's true than we could have an advantage over the rest of the league with Paul moneybags on our side.

Sorry, I don't have a link readily available, but the gist of Stern's plan: a hard cap; modify or eliminate Bird rights; no guaranteed and/or long term contracts. Stern apparently views the NFL as a model of financial stability, and seems oblivious to concerns that their inflexible cap system is harming the quality of the on-the-field product.

 

[GrandpaBlaze]

I'm not optimistic a deal gets done, but not because of any plan. More likely, it will be because KP is too attached to "his" current roster.

I don't assign such blindness to KP. Both Sergio and Bayless had chances to show their mettle and earn serious playing time, both failed miserably. Sergio shows occasional glimpses of promise (just as he did as a rookie) but his weaknesses are too obvious and not changing. He is a fail.

Bayless doesn't have the luxury of multiple seasons to look back upon but although he showed occasional flashes of promise, I will admit to being one who was underwhelmed with his overall performance and just don't see him fitting with the Blazers near-term. Perhaps long-term he can be another Billups as some have suggested but I don't see that coming anytime soon and I'm not sure that we as fans or Bayless himself have the patience to have him sit on the bench hoping eventually it "clicks" and he is suddenly great.

I'm sure KP has copies of the various scouting reports on the Blazers noting weaknesses and how to best attack/defend the Blazers (i.e., our points of weakness). I expect KP not to say "I'm looking for X or Y" but support his team. It is not like we have a Marbury (or Miles) that is an obvious problem that we're just looking for someone to take, so there is no reason to bash anyone or hint at potential moves but I'm sure he is seriously considering all options, especially with watching the playoffs and noting things that work and don't against our direct competition and our exposed weaknesses.

I fully expect to see activity either on draft day or once the trading/offer season is open.

Gramps...

 

[LittleAlex]

I am with oldmangrouch on this one. I don't see any reason to believe KP will make many changes to the roster outside the 10, 11, and 12 spots on the bench.

KP has said multiple times that he is making retaining Blake and Outlaw priorities. KP has stated in interviews he doesn't believe the team needs any major changes at all.

I am starting to come around to the notion that KP overvalues his players to the point where they become impossible to move.

The fact that he let RLEC go to waste still pisses me off.

 

[BClutch]

I am with oldmangrouch on this one. I don't see any reason to believe KP will make many changes to the roster outside the 10, 11, and 12 spots on the bench.

KP has said multiple times that he is making retaining Blake and Outlaw priorities. KP has stated in interviews he doesn't believe the team needs any major changes at all.

I am starting to come around to the notion that KP overvalues his players to the point where they become impossible to move.

The fact that he let RLEC go to waste still pisses me off.

Agreed. Actually I wouldn't be surprised if we head into next season with the minimum allowed players on our roster.

I don't think it's a 'KP overvalues his players' problem. I think it's a 'many players on the blazers roster are more valuable to us than they are to other teams/what we'd be able to get for them' issue.

I doubt he'd have let RLEC go if there was anything worth taking. It's too bad there wasn't anything there for it but a deal for the sake of a deal isn't a good idea. Now we are one of a few teams with significant cap space heading into the off-season/next season where we'll hopefully be able to pick up a big upgrade, maximizing our players value.

 

[LittleAlex]

Agreed. Actually I wouldn't be surprised if we head into next season with the minimum allowed players on our roster.

I don't think it's a 'KP overvalues his players' problem. I think it's a 'many players on the blazers roster are more valuable to us than they are to other teams/what we'd be able to get for them' issue.

I doubt he'd have let RLEC go if there was anything worth taking. It's too bad there wasn't anything there for it but a deal for the sake of a deal isn't a good idea. Now we are one of a few teams with significant cap space heading into the off-season/next season where we'll hopefully be able to pick up a big upgrade, maximizing our players value.

I still believe it was KP's job to make something good happen with that asset and he failed.

His job is to go get players he wants, not players other teams are offering. Some players are impossible to get, but outside of a select few most players can be acquired for the right deal.

What he needed to do was take a chance and instead he stood pat. I think he fucked up bad when he played it safe. Further, I think Portland's title chances took a huge hit because of it.

The cap space Portland has is nearly worthless due to this years craptastic free agent pool. Even if Portland tries to keep that space, Roy and LA are going to eat it up next year so they can't make any noise next summer. It's now or never I am afraid answer will be never.

The only hope is that Portland makes a trade where they take back more salary then they give. Unfortunately the same problem exists this offseason that existed during last season. Namely, teams aren't going to be offering different players then they were last Feb. If KP couldn't make a good deal happen then, why assume he will be able to now?

 

[Minstrel]

His job is to go get players he wants, not players other teams are offering. Some players are impossible to get, but outside of a select few most players can be acquired for the right deal.

And what if the deal that can get that player is a bad one for Portland? Most players are available, but that doesn't mean any are available in a deal that helps Portland.

What he needed to do was take a chance and instead he stood pat.

No, what he needed to do was make the team better, not take a chance just to take a chance. If there wasn't a good deal available, he'd be a terrible GM if he made a deal "just to take a chance."

Further, I think Portland's title chances took a huge hit because of it.

Without knowing any of the deals available, what do you base that on?

The cap space Portland has is nearly worthless due to this years craptastic free agent pool.

Yet, even if the trade market at the deadline was "craptastic," RLEC was really valuable?

 

[andalusian]

Tempest in a teacup.

KP has been super-active during draft day for 3 years running and very quiet during trade-deadline for 3 years line. It's a pattern that is hard to ignore.

I believe that they really thought at the start of the year that they would need a trade come trade deadline to make it into the playoffs - and that's why they were hyping the Raef asset so much - with the team winning at a much higher clip than they were expecting come deadline - they had the luxury of being selective and keeping young, attractive assets and still make the playoffs which was their target.

In hind-sight it is clear that they had good assessment of the team's ability to make the playoffs around the deadline and took the long-term look that they only make great deals - since they did not think there was one there - they did not make them. However - with cap space, lots of trade assets and additional time to evaluate their assets they are now ready and primed to make their move.

I suspect that the volume of deals on draft night will not be to the tune we have seen last years unless a deal that brings a veteran PG is reached, otherwise - they will just make some small deals during the draft and go after Miller or Sessions in free agency.

 

[LOTBfan]

they will just make some small deals during the draft and go after Miller or Sessions in free agency.

Honestly, I think we will get Sessions-ish quality pg with a cash offer as a free agent for a much better deal than having to take the same quality player, along with a huge contract for a trash player at the trade deadline.

Sessions for example we already know will not be bought back out by the bucks, so we just have to beat out the other teams looking to spend money in the FA market (which is almost nobody) instead of meeting their trade demands.

RLEC was nice, but if the only good offer we got to use it included we give up rudy, and take on an 80 million dollar contract to boot for example, then I firmly believe that KP made the right decision.


In short, I agree with your assessment.

 

[LittleAlex]

And what if the deal that can get that player is a bad one for Portland? Most players are available, but that doesn't mean any are available in a deal that helps Portland.

No, what he needed to do was make the team better, not take a chance just to take a chance. If there wasn't a good deal available, he'd be a terrible GM if he made a deal "just to take a chance."

Without knowing any of the deals available, what do you base that on?

Yet, even if the trade market at the deadline was "craptastic," RLEC was really valuable?

What I said was KP needed to make a deal available, not rely on what another team wanted to deal. That's one of the major facets of his job.

I think of it like sales, to be honest. A good salesman sells you something you want. A great salesman convinces you you want what he has to sell. KP so far has been a good, but not great, salesman. I was sort of hoping for great.

 

[Minstrel]

What I said was KP needed to make a deal available, not rely on what another team wanted to deal. That's one of the major facets of his job.

Yes, "available." If a good deal for Portland wasn't available, then he was smart not to make a deal.

I think of it like sales, to be honest. A good salesman sells you something you want. A great salesman convinces you you want what he has to sell. KP so far has been a good, but not great, salesman. I was sort of hoping for great.

You can say that about any GM at any time. Every deadline, you can say "He should have made a great deal...I don't care who was available or how much other GMs valued what he had, his job is to sell other GMs on what he has to sell."

By that measure, every GM fails almost every day. Why didn't the Spurs add a good/great player to augment their aging roster? Don't talk to me about lack of trade bait, RC Buford's job is to sell other GMs on what he has. Name any GM you think is great (anyone in history). I can play the same rhetorical game that you are and show how he's actually not very great, because he failed to "sell" other GMs on what he had during most of his time as GM.

 

[LittleAlex]

Yes, "available." If a good deal for Portland wasn't available, then he was smart not to make a deal.



You can say that about any GM at any time. Every deadline, you can say "He should have made a great deal...I don't care who was available or how much other GMs valued what he had, his job is to sell other GMs on what he has to sell."

By that measure, every GM fails almost every day. Why didn't the Spurs add a good/great player to augment their aging roster? Don't talk to me about lack of trade bait, RC Buford's job is to sell other GMs on what he has. Name any GM you think is great (anyone in history). I can play the same rhetorical game that you are and show how he's actually not very great, because he failed to "sell" other GMs on what he had during most of his time as GM.

Great GM? Jerry West with the Lakers. He was even a good gm for the Lakers when he worked for Memphis.

Hell, Bob Whittsit was great for awhile until he started to believe the NBA was a fantasy league and decided locker room chemistry was overrated.

It does not appear to me KP is even trying to bring in an established good player. Though he kills in the draft, his track record with vets is nearly non-existent (Resigning a guy you already have doesn't count. Also, I don't like Blake much, so that signing would be a negative IMHO). If James Jones is the signing you are going to hang your hat on then you need serious improvement.

I would rather he go down swinging for the walls then get thrown out with even taking a single shot at the ball.

We will have to agree to disagree.

 

[Minstrel]

Great GM? Jerry West with the Lakers. He was even a good gm for the Lakers when he worked for Memphis.

Most trade deadlines and off-seasons he failed to turn his non-stars into good/great players through trade. His job is not to accept what other GMs are willing to trade but to sell what he has. On that, he failed 99% of the time (the other 1% of the time being, of course, his great trades).

Jerry West--not a great salesman, didn't do a big part of his job.

The fact is, we simply have no idea what deals were actually possible (with or without brilliant salesmanship). No matter how great a salesman you are, you're not going to be able to trade an iron coin for a gold coin among a group of people picked for their evaluation skills. You're basically blaming Pritchard for not making your desires come true, with no knowledge of whether it was even possible for him to do so. That's my problem with your position. Saying, "Well, that's what salesmanship is for" is simply a non-point. "Salesmanship" isn't magic...everything is not made plausible just by invoking that word.

 

[Ed O]

Hell, Bob Whittsit was great for awhile until he started to believe the NBA was a fantasy league and decided locker room chemistry was overrated.

You're mixed up.

It's not like he suddenly changed philosophies... he was the same guy, making the same kinds of decisions throughout his career.

It's people (evidently people like you) that put too much stock in something ethereal like "chemistry", rather than just admitting that once the team started to do less well, then suddenly Whitsitt's decisions weren't good enough.

A GM should be measured on results, no question, but I don't think it's at all accurate to say that he had a philosophical shift that suddenly made him a bad GM.

Ed O.

 

[LittleAlex]

You're mixed up.

It's not like he suddenly changed philosophies... he was the same guy, making the same kinds of decisions throughout his career.

It's people (evidently people like you) that put too much stock in something ethereal like "chemistry", rather than just admitting that once the team started to do less well, then suddenly Whitsitt's decisions weren't good enough.

A GM should be measured on results, no question, but I don't think it's at all accurate to say that he had a philosophical shift that suddenly made him a bad GM.

Ed O.

The more important thing I mentioned was Whitshit treating the team like it was a fantasy NBA team rather then an actual NBA team. He couldn't stop messing with it even after it was fine. Chemistry was a secondary problem to the main one. Namely, too many guys with similar skills who couldn't co-exist on the same team. That plus over-valuing guys he drafted in the past (Detlif and Kemp being the biggest examples).

I also didn't mean say he was a bad GM. I did say he had an excellent track record up to when he took a few gambles that didn't payoff. If what I said came off differently, then my bad.

I meant to imply that KP should be a bit more like Whitshitt and take some risks instead of standing pat and staying safe.

 

[LittleAlex]

Most trade deadlines and off-seasons he failed to turn his non-stars into good/great players through trade. His job is not to accept what other GMs are willing to trade but to sell what he has. On that, he failed 99% of the time (the other 1% of the time being, of course, his great trades).

Jerry West--not a great salesman, didn't do a big part of his job.

The fact is, we simply have no idea what deals were actually possible (with or without brilliant salesmanship). No matter how great a salesman you are, you're not going to be able to trade an iron coin for a gold coin among a group of people picked for their evaluation skills. You're basically blaming Pritchard for not making your desires come true, with no knowledge of whether it was even possible for him to do so. That's my problem with your position. Saying, "Well, that's what salesmanship is for" is simply a non-point. "Salesmanship" isn't magic...everything is not made plausible just by invoking that word.

West guys he needed when he needed them. He didn't have to turn over the roster every season, so saying he didn't make big deals every year is pointless. I certainly don't expect KP to make a big deal every year, or every other year. I feel very strongly that given the assets KP had at his disposal, West would have gotten something done.

What I am trying to say is that I am extremely disappointed in KP for not turning Portland's best trade asset into anything at all. Even trading it for a guy whose contract came off the books in 2010 would have been acceptable. As it stands, RLEC was well and truly wasted. I place the blame for this squarely on KP's shoulders which seems fitting to me.

The whole reason KP grabbed RL in the first place was to use his expiring contract to acquire talent. That fact that he was unable to doesn't diminish the fact that his strategy failed miserably.

I doesn't matter much to me when he would have used it. I don't mean to single out the trade deadline. He could have used it during the draft. I recall hearing him say he didn't use RLEC at that time because he thought it would be more valuable at the trade deadline. That fact that it wasn't more valuable then means he fucked up. Bad.

It is true that I have no idea what was out there being offered. It is also true that KP can't work magic and whip up my ideal player at the drop of a hat. The fact that he got RL for the explicit reason to turn his contract into a quality player and was unable to get that done IS a failure on his part. As it stands, Portland paid a guy 16 million a season for nothing.

In response to the thread title, I do believe Portland had a long term strategy 4 years ago. I just think that strategy has failed and I don't believe KP has a back-up plan.

 

[BalancedMan]

West guys he needed when he needed them. He didn't have to turn over the roster every season, so saying he didn't make big deals every year is pointless. I certainly don't expect KP to make a big deal every year, or every other year. I feel very strongly that given the assets KP had at his disposal, West would have gotten something done.

What I am trying to say is that I am extremely disappointed in KP for not turning Portland's best trade asset into anything at all. Even trading it for a guy whose contract came off the books in 2010 would have been acceptable. As it stands, RLEC was well and truly wasted. I place the blame for this squarely on KP's shoulders which seems fitting to me.

The whole reason KP grabbed RL in the first place was to use his expiring contract to acquire talent. That fact that he was unable to doesn't diminish the fact that his strategy failed miserably.

I doesn't matter much to me when he would have used it. I don't mean to single out the trade deadline. He could have used it during the draft. I recall hearing him say he didn't use RLEC at that time because he thought it would be more valuable at the trade deadline. That fact that it wasn't more valuable then means he fucked up. Bad.

It is true that I have no idea what was out there being offered. It is also true that KP can't work magic and whip up my ideal player at the drop of a hat. The fact that he got RL for the explicit reason to turn his contract into a quality player and was unable to get that done IS a failure on his part. As it stands, Portland paid a guy 16 million a season for nothing.

In response to the thread title, I do believe Portland had a long term strategy 4 years ago. I just think that strategy has failed and I don't believe KP has a back-up plan.

Funny, I thought it was to turn Sebastian Telfair into Brandon Roy. Magic!

I trust that if there were something good out there, KP would get it. He's shown me nothing to think that he isn't on the ball with GM decisions. Why would a team trade a 2010 expiring for a 2009 expiring (RLEC)...the 2010 FA year is much more valuable for teams. By not trading for another player, he's hedging that we'll be able to use our cap space to pickup undervalued talent; there aren't many teams with capspace, and although there are no superstars, we may be able to get a buyer's discount on the players that actually are available.

I was a bit disappointed to, at the time, but who knows if a decent player was available. In KP we trust!

 

[BClutch]

What I am trying to say is that I am extremely disappointed in KP for not turning Portland's best trade asset into anything at all. Even trading it for a guy whose contract came off the books in 2010 would have been acceptable. As it stands, RLEC was well and truly wasted. I place the blame for this squarely on KP's shoulders which seems fitting to me.

The whole reason KP grabbed RL in the first place was to use his expiring contract to acquire talent. That fact that he was unable to doesn't diminish the fact that his strategy failed miserably.

I doesn't matter much to me when he would have used it. I don't mean to single out the trade deadline. He could have used it during the draft. I recall hearing him say he didn't use RLEC at that time because he thought it would be more valuable at the trade deadline. That fact that it wasn't more valuable then means he fucked up. Bad.

It is true that I have no idea what was out there being offered. It is also true that KP can't work magic and whip up my ideal player at the drop of a hat. The fact that he got RL for the explicit reason to turn his contract into a quality player and was unable to get that done IS a failure on his part. As it stands, Portland paid a guy 16 million a season for nothing.

In response to the thread title, I do believe Portland had a long term strategy 4 years ago. I just think that strategy has failed and I don't believe KP has a back-up plan.

Perhaps KP decided RLEC was more valuable to us so that we have cap space to play with this summer? It's not possible to evaluate the RLEC decision until after this coming years trade deadline and seeing what happens with the cap space.

You think the strategy has failed? Would it be your opinion that we should scrap the team and start over?

 

[Minstrel]

What I am trying to say is that I am extremely disappointed in KP for not turning Portland's best trade asset into anything at all. Even trading it for a guy whose contract came off the books in 2010 would have been acceptable.

That would have been worse. Letting RLEC expire now gives Portland cap room. In 2010, after extensions to Roy and Aldridge, they wouldn't have had cap room even with an expiring deal of RLEC size. So an expiring contract in 2010 would have been useless. Keeping and letting RLEC expire gives Portland cap room now and a chance to acquire a good player like Andre Miller or Ramon Sessions.

The whole reason KP grabbed RL in the first place was to use his expiring contract to acquire talent. That fact that he was unable to doesn't diminish the fact that his strategy failed miserably.
...
The fact that he got RL for the explicit reason to turn his contract into a quality player and was unable to get that done IS a failure on his part. As it stands, Portland paid a guy 16 million a season for nothing.

Wrong. LaFrentz was part of the deal to get the #7 pick from Boston. If you'll recall, that pick was used to draft Randy Foye, who was then dealt to Minnesota for Brandon Roy. Quite a failed transaction there. All Portland got was Brandon Roy.

LaFrentz was not viewed as a positive at the time of the trade. He was an extreme negative which Portland took on in order to turn Telfair and Ratliff (another terrible contract) into the #7 pick. Pritchard did not acquire LaFrentz in order to "turn his contract into a quality player." Trying to turn an expiring contract into a quality player is something all teams try to do when a bad contract is in the final year and it rarely works.

It helps to get your facts right when attempting to blast someone.

In response to the thread title, I do believe Portland had a long term strategy 4 years ago. I just think that strategy has failed and I don't believe KP has a back-up plan.

It definitely failed. In those four years, all Pritchard has accomplished is turning arguably the worst franchise in basketball into a mid-50 win team with a ton of talent that is still improving.

The question is, after failure like that, what should Portland do now?

(Yes, I'm being sarcastic. The idea that Pritchard's "four year plan" was to acquire Raef LaFrentz, turn him into a good player a few years later and everything else that he's done was incidental is flatly ridiculous. Pritchard's four-year plan has clearly been to rebuild the franchise with young talent and he's done an amazingly good job of that. LaFrentz was a speculative asset over the past year which was completely incidental to the "plan." Expiring contracts are rarely traded into good players...Pritchard clearly would have liked to use it that way if possible, but evidently it wasn't. A shame, but claiming that Pritchard messed up badly when you have no idea what was possible is silly.)

 

[LittleAlex]

Perhaps KP decided RLEC was more valuable to us so that we have cap space to play with this summer? It's not possible to evaluate the RLEC decision until after this coming years trade deadline and seeing what happens with the cap space.

You think the strategy has failed? Would it be your opinion that we should scrap the team and start over?

The part of the strategy that was centered around RLEC failed. I don't understand how that relates to all of the other moves KP made. So no, I don't think they should scrap the whole thing.

In fact, I haven't even said that the team is bad right now. They are a good team without making a single move. However, I have a hard time seeing the current incarnation winning a title. It appears that KP believes they can.

If KP is correct then I will never have been more happy to be wrong.

About the cap space. I mentioned above that I think it is foolish to believe KP will do more with that then he did with RLEC. He has less value to work with, though it is more flexible.

I will go on the record as saying I hope KP proves me horribly wrong, pulls a fantastic deal out of his hat and makes me eat my words.

 

[LittleAlex]

That would have been worse. Letting RLEC expire now gives Portland cap room. In 2010, after extensions to Roy and Aldridge, they wouldn't have had cap room even with an expiring deal of RLEC size. So an expiring contract in 2010 would have been useless. Keeping and letting RLEC expire gives Portland cap room now and a chance to acquire a good player like Andre Miller or Ramon Sessions.




Wrong. LaFrentz was part of the deal to get the #7 pick from Boston. If you'll recall, that pick was used to draft Randy Foye, who was then dealt to Minnesota for Brandon Roy. Quite a failed transaction there. All Portland got was Brandon Roy.

LaFrentz was not viewed as a positive at the time of the trade. He was an extreme negative which Portland took on in order to turn Telfair and Ratliff (another terrible contract) into the #7 pick. Pritchard did not acquire LaFrentz in order to "turn his contract into a quality player." Trying to turn an expiring contract into a quality player is something all teams try to do when a bad contract is in the final year and it rarely works.

It helps to get your facts right when attempting to blast someone.



It definitely failed. In those four years, all Pritchard has accomplished is turning arguably the worst franchise in basketball into a mid-50 win team with a ton of talent that is still improving.

The question is, after failure like that, what should Portland do now?

(Yes, I'm being sarcastic. The idea that Pritchard's "four year plan" was to acquire Raef LaFrentz, turn him into a good player a few years later and everything else that he's done was incidental is flatly ridiculous. Pritchard's four-year plan has clearly been to rebuild the franchise with young talent and he's done an amazingly good job of that. LaFrentz was a speculative asset over the past year which was completely incidental to the "plan." Expiring contracts are rarely traded into good players...Pritchard clearly would have liked to use it that way if possible, but evidently it wasn't. A shame, but claiming that Pritchard messed up badly when you have no idea what was possible is silly.)

Blasting you? That's crazy talk. I have expressed my view of the situation without any kind of personal attack what so ever. Not sure how that could be a "blast". In fact, I take a damn dim view of people who do attack others on forums.

You are correct and I was wrong about Raif. He was part of bring Roy to Portland which was awesome and stupendous. A move for which KP will have my gratitude for years to come. I bought season tickets because we drafted Roy and LA. I don't know how I could show my appreciation more then that.

That said, I distinctly recall KP talking up RLEC afterwards as a great asset. As this year came closer he mentioned it more and more. It sure seemed like KP felt it was an awesome asset to have, yet it fell flat. I believe that is on KP and no one else.

I honestly can't imagine how my questioning of KP's non-move this year has anything to do with past moves. In fact, I have stated several times that KP kills in the draft. I trust KP to draft well every year without fail. To say I believe all of his other moves incidental is odd. Can't I question and be upset about one thing he did while acknowledging he has done a great many things I approve of? Apparently the answer is no. I may either believe he walks on water and every single thing he does is gold or I can believe that all of his moves are shit and the team is worthless as constructed.

Neither is true. I believe the team is good (quite good in point of fact). I think the team can be made great next year with the right vet. I believe KP is not going to get the right vet because he over-values some of the players on the team which makes it harder for him to move them. He may yet prove me wrong and grab a guy who makes a big splash. No one this board would be happier about that then me.

 

[Minstrel]

Blasting you? That's crazy talk. I have expressed my view of the situation without any kind of personal attack what so ever. Not sure how that could be a "blast". In fact, I take a damn dim view of people who do attack others on forums.

You're misunderstanding me. The "someone" that I was referring to you blasting was Pritchard. Not me.

That said, I distinctly recall KP talking up RLEC afterwards as a great asset. As this year came closer he mentioned it more and more. It sure seemed like KP felt it was an awesome asset to have, yet it fell flat.

That's part of the salesmanship you wanted him to display. It's harder to sell an asset that you downplay. Pritchard talked about it like it was valuable. It could have been valuable, in the right situation...if a team was so desperate for cash savings that they were willing to give up a good player just to get rid of a contract. That was never a sure thing. Look at history...every bad contract becomes an expiring contract in the final year. How many of them are traded straight up for a good player?

I honestly can't imagine how my questioning of KP's non-move this year has anything to do with past moves. In fact, I have stated several times that KP kills in the draft. I trust KP to draft well every year without fail. To say I believe all of his other moves incidental is odd. Can't I question and be upset about one thing he did while acknowledging he has done a great many things I approve of? Apparently the answer is no.

It's not that you're "questioning one thing." You claimed that his "four year plan has failed and he apparently has no back-up plan."

Would you like to retract that? If not, you are claiming that by not turning LaFrentz into a good player, his team-building for the past four years has been a failure. That seems like a pretty tough claim to support.

As for whether the team is good enough to contend with the current players (bear in mind that all of the core except maybe Roy are still pre-prime and so are likely to get better) and whether Pritchard will be able to do something with the cap space, those are perfectly reasonable things to question. What I was criticizing about your position was:

1. Claiming Pritchard "failed" at the trade deadline simply because he didn't make a deal (without knowing what deals were possible, there's no way to know whether he did the right thing or wrong thing)

2. Claiming that his "four year plan" has now failed due to not trading RLEC

I don't think you have supported either of those claims.

 

[oldmangrouch]

If KP's plan was to turn the RLEC into something of value, then the plan failed.

We can't say with 100% certainty that *was* the plan. Nor can we say with 100% certainty whose fault it was the plan failed. That makes everything said here speculation.

So what? We speculate about stuff all the time!

 

[LittleAlex]

You're misunderstanding me. The "someone" that I was referring to you blasting was Pritchard. Not me.



That's part of the salesmanship you wanted him to display. It's harder to sell an asset that you downplay. Pritchard talked about it like it was valuable. It could have been valuable, in the right situation...if a team was so desperate for cash savings that they were willing to give up a good player just to get rid of a contract. That was never a sure thing. Look at history...every bad contract becomes an expiring contract in the final year. How many of them are traded straight up for a good player?



It's not that you're "questioning one thing." You claimed that his "four year plan has failed and he apparently has no back-up plan."

Would you like to retract that? If not, you are claiming that by not turning LaFrentz into a good player, his team-building for the past four years has been a failure. That seems like a pretty tough claim to support.

As for whether the team is good enough to contend with the current players (bear in mind that all of the core except maybe Roy are still pre-prime and so are likely to get better) and whether Pritchard will be able to do something with the cap space, those are perfectly reasonable things to question. What I was criticizing about your position was:

1. Claiming Pritchard "failed" at the trade deadline simply because he didn't make a deal (without knowing what deals were possible, there's no way to know whether he did the right thing or wrong thing)

2. Claiming that his "four year plan" has now failed due to not trading RLEC

I don't think you have supported either of those claims.

1.) Quite true, we will both never know for sure what was available. So be it. I am entitled to the opinion that there were moves he could have made but didn't due to over valuing players on the team. There is evidence that would suggest KP feels some of his players are worth more then they actually are. His comments about locking up Outlaw and Blake being a big priority being the biggest. Could that be a smoke-screen to try and convince other GM's they are worth more then they are? Sure. If it is, and it works, then I was mistaken.

2.) Either I didn't explain myself well, or you misunderstood. The four year plan specifically as it related to RLEC failed. The over all plan has many, many more facets then that, like every good plan. In every other case I can think of KP has succeeded more then I would have hoped. That is why this particular failure is so puzzling. Once again, I am ONLY referring to the failure to utilize RLEC in a meaningful way.

How about this: The fact that the man who was able to convince New York to take Stat-Bo off our hands with his bloated ass contract sure seems like the type of guy who could make something of RLEC. In fact you might say KP's past performance is what set me up for disappointment when nothing happened.

 

[Ed O]

How about this: The fact that the man who was able to convince New York to take Stat-Bo off our hands with his bloated ass contract sure seems like the type of guy who could make something of RLEC. In fact you might say KP's past performance is what set me up for disappointment when nothing happened.

The Randolph trade was not that bad for the Knicks nor that good for the Blazers.

The Blazers had to take on Francis deadweight and the Knicks were able to get out from under Randolph's contract relatively easily. It didn't work out for the Knicks, but it was a good gamble and didn't cost them anything. The Blazers' main asset they acquired was Rudy, and it's conceivable that they would have been able to get him without the trade exception from NY. They could have later made the same deal the Knicks did and come out ahead, IMO, of where they did.

Ed O.