Blazers front office decision nears on trade

[MIXUM]

http://ken-berger.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/11838893/19681410?source=rss_blogs_NBA

Berger: Center Decision Coming Soon

• Trail Blazers executives remain in wait-and-see mode as they closely monitor the team’s performance with 6-9 Juwan Howard – drafted the same year as assistant coach Monty Williams – starting at center after the loss of Greg Oden and Joel Pryzbilla. GM Kevin Pritchard and assistant GM Tom Penn are traveling with the team on its current East Coast trip, and rival execs expect the Blazers’ brain trust to soon make a recommendation to ownership about whether to trade for a big man or ride it out with Howard. The Wizards’ Haywood, whose $6 million contract expires after the season, would be a major upgrade. Haywood also would be a close match in a deal that included point guard Andre Miller. But as noted above, any move by the Wizards to acquire a point guard is hamstrung by the uncertainty surrounding Arenas’ suspension and criminal sentence.


Its funny that the 2 big centers I could see us making a push for were playing in back to back games of this road trip. hayward and dalemburt. either would be welcomed IMO.

 

[RR7]

HAYWOOD!

How can you want the guy that bad, and can't remember his fucking name. HAYWOOD.

HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD
HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOODHAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOODHAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOODHAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOODHAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOODHAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOODHAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOODHAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOODHAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOODHAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOODHAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOODHAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOODHAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD HAYWOOD

 

[MIXUM]

Taylor (Corvallis)

Any chance the blazers make a run at a big man this month?
John Hollinger (12:18 PM)

More than a chance; they're trying really hard to do something. The problem is that they don't want to give up any of their young guys, and that's all anyone asks about. If they could do a deal that only cost them Blake or Outlaw I think they'd go for it; both are free agents this summer and I don't think they expect Outlaw to stay.


really... hcp says they arent.

 

[MIXUM]

Beth (Seattle)

With Roy's bad hammy.... do you think the Blazers still make the playoffs? Seems like with him healthy it would be hard.
John Hollinger (12:23 PM)

I think they'll make it as long as Roy only misses a handful of games ... it's too bad they couldn't get him to hold back longer before returning, you could see this injury coming from a mile away

i know why i like hollinger... complete opposite of hcp.

 

[OSUBlazerfan]

Taylor (Corvallis)

Any chance the blazers make a run at a big man this month?
John Hollinger (12:18 PM)

More than a chance; they're trying really hard to do something. The problem is that they don't want to give up any of their young guys, and that's all anyone asks about. If they could do a deal that only cost them Blake or Outlaw I think they'd go for it; both are free agents this summer and I don't think they expect Outlaw to stay.


really... hcp says they arent.

KP Overvaluing his players once again

 

[illmatic99]

WTF.

I wouldn't want to give up Rudy, Nic, or Bayless for a half-year rental in Haywood either. Quit complaining.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

It's not just getting a big man.

With Bayless, Miller, Rudy, Batum, Roy, Webster, Blake (Outlaw?) . . . this second half of the season is going to be drama packed. Even taking Blake and Outlaw out of the equation, Miller, Bayless, Rudy, Roy, Batum, Webster . . . not enough minutes to keep everyone happy.

For the sake of chemistry, use one of these valuable assets to balance out the roster.

 

[Wheels]

WTF.

I wouldn't want to give up Rudy, Nic, or Bayless for a half-year rental in Haywood either. Quit complaining.

seconded

 

[MIXUM]

Jaynes weighs in


Everyone says it — including me, all the time — that the reason the Trail Blazers have trouble making a trade is that they overvalue all their players to a great extent.

But just a thought after another improbable road victory, this time in Philadelphia, where they’ve often found it difficult to win with all their supposedly best players in the lineup.

What if all these guys really are this good? I mean, it’s possible, isn’t it? Yes, it is. But if so, it’s probably still going to be difficult to get equivalent value in return for them because nobody will quite believe they’re this good. It’s just so improbable that one roster could be this deep.

What I like about the way the Trail Blazers play without Brandon Roy, by the way, is how much better ball movement they usually get. That doesn’t mean I want Portland to deal Roy. It doesn’t mean I don’t think Roy is the key to this team. He’s a budding superstar.

What I do think is possible is that the Trail Blazers can have this kind of ball movement when Roy is in the game and be an even better team. He’d still get his points but probably in easier fashion and other players would get better shots, too.

 

[OSUBlazerfan]

WTF.

I wouldn't want to give up Rudy, Nic, or Bayless for a half-year rental in Haywood either. Quit complaining.

Sorry, didnt make it clear, wasnt just talking about haywood

I actually want them to trade for Dalembert...

but what im sick of, is KP trying to package Blake and Outlaw for the last like 3 years and no one wants THAT PACKAGE!! GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD KP!!!

 

[hasoos]

My guess is nothing happens, as per normal operations. But if you really want to know how important this is, look at which games the Blazers have won and lost, and look at the rebounding count. The Blazers win when they outrebound their opponent. Now the question is, how much of this depends on the ability for Juwan Howard to score on top of the rebounding battle? He has brought a good solid 10 points per game, and the ability to hit that open jumper at the top of the key. Something Joel and Greg can't do.

 

[MIXUM]

so howard is gonna play 40 more games starting at center and be healthy?

riiiiight

 

[hasoos]

so howard is gonna play 40 more games starting at center and be healthy?

riiiiight

I guess my question to you Mixum, is what do you expect the team to gain out of this? What is the goal? Is your goal to make the playoffs? Do you think addding a center would make the Blazers a contender? I think they can make the playoffs as is. I don't think adding a center makes them a contender. So that being said, making a move like that is a lateral move to me. Its making a move for the sake of making a move.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

so howard is gonna play 40 more games starting at center and be healthy?

riiiiight

I could see Howard staying healthy. He doesn't try to do too much on the court or throw his body around alot. Even his hard fouls are really him just delivering a hard blow with his hands and arms.

What I can't see is the team continuing to be effective with Howard starting at center (and no real back up) ,. . especially in the playoffs. But the team has surprised to this point so who knows . . .

 

[drexlersdad]

i know why i like hollinger... complete opposite of hcp.

skinny and white?

 

[MIXUM]

Heres my thinking for the 1000th time.

1. Oden and Pryz... Oden is injury prone. Pryz isnt gonna be ready at best till January and thenn wont be near game shape till March. Translation, not only do we need a center today but next year. Do you have confidence in oden staying healthy? By late November we will be right back to where we are now. Blazer fans have to realize... if you have oden... you need quite the backup center. WE NEED A CENTER NOW AND NEXT YEAR. Pryz would be greta trade bait next year with an expiring contract.

2. With a legit center we not only SHOULD make the playoffs but could get a 2nd round appearance but only with a legit trade for a center. I want playoffs. I think that will tell us a lot
about our core if we can get there. I think its a major step backwards with or without injury excuses. If we are really that good... we should always make the playoffs. Next year the west will be even harder with no guarantee that we get a spot.

3. Playoffs with a first round exit would satisfy me BUT... getting there at this point with no trade seems impossible. Thunder just dont lose anymore. Jazz are playing great ball. Which means us or houston. Maybe the suns fall apart but i doubt it. Not to mention the Grizz and Hornets coming strong.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

I hate agreeing with Mixum . . . but if a trade for a solid and servicable center doesn't make us a contender. Why does a young injury prone center coming back next year, make us a contender next year?

And if a trade isn't going to make us a contender this year, shouldn't we be looking to trade Miller while he has value or roll the dice that the Blazers are contenders in Miller's last year?

I think the Blazers should be looking to make a move for this year and the future . . . and I don't see waiting for the summer as being some big advantage for the Blazers. maybe there will be a free agent center we can get for the MLE ?

 

[MIXUM]

exactly go-time.... everyone keeps making it sound like we are set at center for next year, its not reality... its wishful thinking. oden is injury prone. accept it and things will be clearer for you.

truth is... id bet anything we are in the exact same situation next year. exact. thats assuming we dont deal now but man... we need a trade badly.

 

[mook]

I guess my question to you Mixum, is what do you expect the team to gain out of this? What is the goal? Is your goal to make the playoffs? Do you think addding a center would make the Blazers a contender? I think they can make the playoffs as is. I don't think adding a center makes them a contender. So that being said, making a move like that is a lateral move to me. Its making a move for the sake of making a move.

Assuming Howard doesn't sustain an injury, than I agree. But that's a pretty big assumption. If Howard goes down, we only have two bigs on this team--a somewhat gimpy Aldridge and a rookie second round pick. Yuck. And it's not like we have a coach who excels at coaching small-ball.

The team isn't a contender this year, but that doesn't mean you don't make a deal, even at the expense of a young talent. The team needs to continue to develop, and the young players need to continue to learn how to play next to a quality center. Making it to the playoffs and getting swept in the first round is not the kind of player momentum I'd like to build on next year.

Besides, if we do get swept in the first round, having barely squeaked in as a 7th or 8th seed, how valuable a trade asset does Rudy, Bayless or Webster look to other teams?

Dalembert somewhat intrigues me. He's only 28, so he's got several "prime" years ahead of him. He pulls down 9 boards and 2.2 blocks in just 25 mpg, which tells you he can be productive in limited minutes (much like Joel). Next year he makes $13 mil, but it expires after that, so you can probable move him (or Joel) later if both Joel and Oden fully recover.

Dalembert isn't an ideal candidate, though. He seems more like a true center instead of a PF/C that I'd prefer.

Watching the Sixers trot out the relic of Allen Iverson definitely drove home the point that they need some help at the 1/2, and that's the only area we're loaded.

Miller, Mills and Outlaw for Dalembert kind of makes sense for both teams, and works on ESPN. I'm becoming a huge fan of Miller, so I'm not excited to see him leave, especially with how he's been playing lately. And Mills is a really, really nice prospect. But we can pretty easily replace most of their production, while we can't turn Howard or Pendergraph into a 6'11 shot blocker.

 

[BBert]

What I like about the way the Trail Blazers play without Brandon Roy, by the way, is how much better ball movement they usually get. That doesn’t mean I want Portland to deal Roy. It doesn’t mean I don’t think Roy is the key to this team. He’s a budding superstar.

What I do think is possible is that the Trail Blazers can have this kind of ball movement when Roy is in the game and be an even better team. He’d still get his points but probably in easier fashion and other players would get better shots, too.

QFT!! Nate, Roy, please remove head from arse. Thank you.

 

[BlazerWookee]

skinny and white?

Repped

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Assuming Howard doesn't sustain an injury, than I agree. But that's a pretty big assumption. If Howard goes down, we only have two bigs on this team--a somewhat gimpy Aldridge and a rookie second round pick. Yuck. And it's not like we have a coach who excels at coaching small-ball.

The team isn't a contender this year, but that doesn't mean you don't make a deal, even at the expense of a young talent. The team needs to continue to develop, and the young players need to continue to learn how to play next to a quality center. Making it to the playoffs and getting swept in the first round is not the kind of player momentum I'd like to build on next year.

Besides, if we do get swept in the first round, having barely squeaked in as a 7th or 8th seed, how valuable a trade asset does Rudy, Bayless or Webster look to other teams?

Dalembert somewhat intrigues me. He's only 28, so he's got several "prime" years ahead of him. He pulls down 9 boards and 2.2 blocks in just 25 mpg, which tells you he can be productive in limited minutes (much like Joel). Next year he makes $13 mil, but it expires after that, so you can probable move him (or Joel) later if both Joel and Oden fully recover.

Dalembert isn't an ideal candidate, though. He seems more like a true center instead of a PF/C that I'd prefer.

Watching the Sixers trot out the relic of Allen Iverson definitely drove home the point that they need some help at the 1/2, and that's the only area we're loaded.

Miller, Mills and Outlaw for Dalembert kind of makes sense for both teams, and works on ESPN. I'm becoming a huge fan of Miller, so I'm not excited to see him leave, especially with how he's been playing lately. And Mills is a really, really nice prospect. But we can pretty easily replace most of their production, while we can't turn Howard or Pendergraph into a 6'11 shot blocker.

How about Brand?

 

[e_blazer]

3. Playoffs with a first round exit would satisfy me BUT... getting there at this point with no trade seems impossible. Thunder just dont lose anymore. Jazz are playing great ball. Which means us or houston. Maybe the suns fall apart but i doubt it. Not to mention the Grizz and Hornets coming strong.

Last 10 games for the teams we're competing with for a playoff spot:
Blazers 6-4
Thunder 6-4
Jazz 6-4
Mavs 6-4
Clippers 6-4
Hornets: 7-3
Grizzlies: 7-3
Suns: 4-6
Spurs: 5-5
Rockets: 5-5

So, in other words, over the past 10 games two contenders have gained 1/2 game on the Blazers, two have dropped back a half game, and one has dropped back a full game. Roy missed two of the past 10 games and half of two other games.

Sometimes I think we forget that other teams play their own schedules and deal with their own adversities. Over the next 10 games, if the Blazers can play .500 ball, they won't lose any significant ground in the playoff race.

 

[Wheels]

Last 10 games for the teams we're competing with for a playoff spot:
Blazers 6-4
Thunder 6-4
Jazz 6-4
Mavs 6-4
Clippers 6-4
Hornets: 7-3
Grizzlies: 7-3
Suns: 4-6
Spurs: 5-5
Rockets: 5-5

So, in other words, over the past 10 games two contenders have gained 1/2 game on the Blazers, two have dropped back a half game, and one has dropped back a full game. Roy missed two of the past 10 games and half of two other games.

Sometimes I think we forget that other teams play their own schedules and deal with their own adversities. Over the next 10 games, if the Blazers can play .500 ball, they won't lose any significant ground in the playoff race.

well said to put things in perspective.

 

[Pinwheel1]

QFT!! Nate, Roy, please remove head from arse. Thank you.

Yes I especially loved the ball movement at the end of the Washington game. Instead of ROY time we had.............."Here you shoot! No you shoot it" time.

 

[mook]

How about Brand?

He's paid $18 mil just for the 2012 season. I don't think anyone wants that contract.

If Philly ever orchestrates a buyout for that monstrosity, then yeah, sure I'd be happy to add him on to the team for the MLE.

 

[BBert]

Yes I especially loved the ball movement at the end of the Washington game. Instead of ROY time we had.............."Here you shoot! No you shoot it" time.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Jaynes weighs in


Everyone says it — including me, all the time — that the reason the Trail Blazers have trouble making a trade is that they overvalue all their players to a great extent.

But just a thought after another improbable road victory, this time in Philadelphia, where they’ve often found it difficult to win with all their supposedly best players in the lineup.

What if all these guys really are this good? I mean, it’s possible, isn’t it? Yes, it is. But if so, it’s probably still going to be difficult to get equivalent value in return for them because nobody will quite believe they’re this good. It’s just so improbable that one roster could be this deep.

What I like about the way the Trail Blazers play without Brandon Roy, by the way, is how much better ball movement they usually get. That doesn’t mean I want Portland to deal Roy. It doesn’t mean I don’t think Roy is the key to this team. He’s a budding superstar.

What I do think is possible is that the Trail Blazers can have this kind of ball movement when Roy is in the game and be an even better team. He’d still get his points but probably in easier fashion and other players would get better shots, too.

I completely agree ... repped in fact.

 

[e_blazer]

Just to be clear, the underlined text is a quote of Dwight Jaynes's blog. So I guess you really should rep him.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Just to be clear, the underlined text is a quote of Dwight Jaynes's blog. So I guess you really should rep him.

d'oh. I hate it when people quote stuff but don't but it in a quote block.