And that... ladies and gentleman is why we need a trade if we wanna be elite

[Drink Your Milkshake]

The team is doing good, but they could be doing a lot better. Just because Portland has a winning record doesn't mean everything is perfect and team can't improve. LaMarcus has yet to prove himself, the PG situation is still hazy, the emergence of Batum has created an even bigger problem with the whole Webster/Outlaw debate. Reaf's contract makes this a prime time to straighten out the roster with a trade.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

Let the cake bake. We lost to a VETERAN team.

We should be thrilled if the Blazers win 50 this year, and contend next year.

iWatas

If we find a fantastic trade, we should make it. Otherwise,
with each passing day,
the Blazers get better,
the Celtics get worse (older).

 

[BrianFromWA]

1.) Yeah, the Clippers did get ripped off. Camby sucks
2.) He's a fucking rookie. People are climaxing over Rudy, even though Gasol has been better
3.) Lateral move to change playing style
4.) Superfrugal move. Had nothing to do with basketball
5.) He was getting 13 MPG on the Spurs. Diamond in the rough
6.) Bibby isn't the same player he was before. He wouldn't push you over the top.
7.) He's playing less than 10 MPG
8.) Yeah, Clippers got robbed again.
9.) You're kidding right? I wish you posted this first, it would have discredited your whole argument. RJ doesn't defend, fails at passing, his shooting is meh at best, and doesn't get anyone in seats. Vince does all of those things, and is a better scorer. People make a big shit about Vince's contract, but RJ's is much, much worse.


1.) Devin Harris, Ryan Anderson, Keyon Dooling, an unprotected first, a good post defender, and a good perimeter defender for J-Kidd and change.
2.) Kenyon Martin for 3 first round picks.
3.) Grant Hill for Ben Wallace

I really don't feel like going on.

Hey guess what...for all the reasons you post for why each one of those trades, well, I'm not exactly sure why...but the point is every single one of my posted trades happened in the last 18 months. Grant Hill for Ben Wallace??? Kenyon (2004)? Fine. Joe Barry Carroll for Parish and McHale! What just happened?

And I don't understand how RJ's contract is "much, much worse" when a) it's shorter and b) it's less per year than Vince's extension.
If you want to say the value MIL gets is less than NJ gets from Vince, that's an argument you can make. But the contracts themselves? I think you're wrong on that one, and there's not much wiggle room. www.storytellerscontracts.com

All I'm saying (and have been saying) is that for every Rod Thorn and Gregg Popovich, there are at least a couple of Wallaces and Baylors and Isiahs. For every Paul Allen, there is a couple of Herb Kohls, Robert Sarvers, Don Sterlings. To insinuate there aren't, or that lopsided (to your eyes) trades don't happen in revisionistic. And for better or worse, you have to include economic factors in trade scenarios too. Penny pinching for some is worth giving up talent. Saving $$ is worth giving up talent. A #27 pick to KP is worth much more than it is to Steve Kerr.

 

[#1_War_Poet_ForLife]

The last two were all I could come up with before I have to leave . I'm sure there are others I'm overlooking.

Purely by numbers, RJ's contract is better than Vince's. If you put play to it, it's not even close.

 

[BrianFromWA]

I'm willing to debate the 2nd point. I only get to watch a few Nets games a year on LP, and MIL doesn't interest me much. But my understanding was that Vince was almost Zach-level radioactive in trade talks, since his contract was a year longer than RJ's (who's younger, right?).

For the first point, I'm very willing to concede that the trade landscape over the last 2 years has been very different than it has before. I just don't think "lopsided" is as easy to define anymore for NBA GMs (who are of differing quality), and that we have all the pieces (young talent, young "projects", big contracts, cash, etc) to make most GMs want to trade with us.

 

[#1_War_Poet_ForLife]

I think you do have the pieces. I think Pritch will use those pieces to get more than fair value. However, I think some are overvaluing the pieces (someone on the Nets board said they wouldn't give Batum straight up for Carter)

 

[shamelessblazer]

I think you do have the pieces. I think Pritch will use those pieces to get more than fair value. However, I think some are overvaluing the pieces (someone on the Nets board said they wouldn't give Batum straight up for Carter)

that was thinking team needs and contractual situations, not talent level.