Blazers Won't Take Free Agency Lying Down (Columbian)

[ABM]

From: Brian Hendrickson - The Columbian

TUALATIN, Ore. — Kevin Pritchard has talked about this summer for two years, and carefully orchestrating his decisions during that period to maximize his flexibility and options.

So when the Portland Trail Blazers general manager played Thursday’s NBA Draft conservatively to the point of turning draft parties into slumber parties, it only reinforced the belief that the real drama of this offseason will soon be played out on the free agent market.

The Blazers believe they could take as much as $8 million in salary cap room onto the market next month, depending on where the league sets the cap. They could use it to lure a veteran point guard like Philadelphia’s Andre Miller, or add to their versatile frontcourt by grabbing Orlando’s Hedo Turkoglu.

But however they choose to play it, Pritchard made it clear that the Blazers will not be quiet in free agency like they were on draft night.

"We’re going to be active in free agency, no doubt about it," Pritchard said. "I know I need to help this team by bringing in veterans. For us to go to the next level, we need to add some veterans."

That has been the plan since Pritchard was named the team’s general manager two years ago..................

 

[Mediocre Man]

It will be really interesting to see how KP plays this part of GMing.

He knows he needs to upgrade a couple of possitions in PG and SF. Without trading anyone SF would make the most sense to "upgrade" because that is where we are youngest, however PG is probably where we are weakest. Questions in my mind that will be fun to see KP answer

1. Does KP add 1 big name like Miller or Hedo, or a couple of smaller ones like Sessions and McDyess?

2. If KP adds a "starter" like Miller or Hedo does he trim the roster at that possition, or simply create a logjam?

3. Does he pull off a sign and trade? I have been having some fun this off season listening to KP speak. He mentioned in an interview that he didn't want to lose the talent he has been building to move up in the draft to take someone based on potential. To me that means maybe he is saving them for a sign and trade or out right trade of a vet.

4. Does he make a move for a restricted FA, or simply target UFA's. It's his first attempt at playing with this much money, so we really don't know.

 

[hasoos]

Well at least he didn't entitle it "Blazers won't be taking free agency bent over".

 

[Nikolokolus]

It will be really interesting to see how KP plays this part of GMing.

He knows he needs to upgrade a couple of possitions in PG and SF. Without trading anyone SF would make the most sense to "upgrade" because that is where we are youngest, however PG is probably where we are weakest. Questions in my mind that will be fun to see KP answer

1. Does KP add 1 big name like Miller or Hedo, or a couple of smaller ones like Sessions and McDyess?

2. If KP adds a "starter" like Miller or Hedo does he trim the roster at that possition, or simply create a logjam?

3. Does he pull off a sign and trade? I have been having some fun this off season listening to KP speak. He mentioned in an interview that he didn't want to lose the talent he has been building to move up in the draft to take someone based on potential. To me that means maybe he is saving them for a sign and trade or out right trade of a vet.

4. Does he make a move for a restricted FA, or simply target UFA's. It's his first attempt at playing with this much money, so we really don't know.

Why not both?

I'm guessing we might see a lopsided trade to get one guy and then a "splash" made to sign a higher level free agent. Theoretically a sign and trade could be done in one case to get a guy like Miller, and then the balance of the money could spent on a guy like McDyess, or a starting quality 3.

I keep trying to run through possible names and pairings of players that would seem to be complimentary.

FA Kidd, trade for Wallace
Trade for Hinrich, Sign Turkoglu
Sign Miller, trade for Prince ...

Mix and match to your heart's content

 

[Mediocre Man]

Why not both?

I'm guessing we might see a lopsided trade to get one guy and then a "splash" made to sign a higher level free agent. Theoretically a sign and trade could be done in one case to get a guy like Miller, and then the balance of the money could spent on a guy like McDyess, or a starting quality 3.

I keep trying to run through possible names and pairings of players that would seem to be complimentary.

FA Kidd, trade for Wallace
Trade for Hinrich, Sign Turkoglu
Sign Miller, trade for Prince ...

Mix and match to your heart's content

Yeah, I agree with you. I was just pinting out soe basic options.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Not to be too much of a cynic, but chasing RFAs is mostly a sham. You make your bid on a player, his original team matches, and both GMs have political cover. The original GM can say "we didn't overpay - that was his established market price", while the other GM can say "hey, we TRIED to make moves - it just didn't work out!"

If a GM is serious about getting something done, he will focus on UFAs. Even if he lacks the capspace for a straight bidding war, he can try to leverage a S&T.

 

[hasoos]

Not to be too much of a cynic, but chasing RFAs is mostly a sham. You make your bid on a player, his original team matches, and both GMs have political cover. The original GM can say "we didn't overpay - that was his established market price", while the other GM can say "hey, we TRIED to make moves - it just didn't work out!"

If a GM is serious about getting something done, he will focus on UFAs. Even if he lacks the capspace for a straight bidding war, he can try to leverage a S&T.

I completely agree. The other side of the coin is, often when retained, restricted free agents are unahappy and end up leaving anyhow. They wouldn't have got to be a restricted free agent unless the relationship between them and the team had become frayed anyhow.

 

[andalusian]

Not to be too much of a cynic, but chasing RFAs is mostly a sham. You make your bid on a player, his original team matches, and both GMs have political cover. The original GM can say "we didn't overpay - that was his established market price", while the other GM can say "hey, we TRIED to make moves - it just didn't work out!"

Well, if there is a chance they will not match and this is the guy you want, as might be the case with Sessions - it is worth a try, I suspect.

 

[hasoos]

Well, if there is a chance they will not match and this is the guy you want, as might be the case with Sessions - it is worth a try, I suspect.

I thought about what you said, and I am not so sure. Because if you make an offer to an RFA, and you have to go through the whole process of the other team either matching or not matching, you are burning time where other teams are signing free agents without that problem. By the time you find out your screwed, most of the good free agents could be gone.

 

[Mediocre Man]

A couple of things can happen though.

If the offer is structured right it could end up hurting the team that matches it (Hassell)

Also a good chance for a sign and trade, especially if the player or agent tells the team he would like to leave.

 

[illmatic99]

But Pritchard made clear that he had no intention of being a free-agency bystander while cap room is available.

This is the most encouraging sentence from that article. I had this underlying fear of KP just passing on free agency to "let it bake" organically.

 

[Mediocre Man]

This is the most encouraging sentence from that article. I had this underlying fear of KP just passing on free agency to "let it bake" organically.

He needs to subtract from the roster as well. This is what I fear KP can't do.

 

[Shooter]

"We’re going to be active in free agency, no doubt about it," Pritchard said. "I know I need to help this team by bringing in veterans. For us to go to the next level, we need to add some veterans."

AAAARRRRGGGGHHHH!!!!!!

This is what I hate about Pritchard. He's the most disingenuous GM we've ever had. It was barely three months ago--when he wasn't able to pull off a trade by the deadline--that he said he was committed to our young core, and that he really loved our young guys and believed in them, and that we just had to let them grow together, blah, blah, blah. Now, when he is unable to snag any high profile rookies, he wants us to believe that building through free agency was his plan all along.

Pritchard is an excellent GM, but he's as slippery as hell. I'd never buy a used car from him.

 

[ABM]

AAAARRRRGGGGHHHH!!!!!!

This is what I hate about Pritchard. He's the most disingenuous GM we've ever had. It was barely three months ago--when he wasn't able to pull off a trade by the deadline--that he said he was committed to our young core, and that he really loved our young guys and believed in them, and that we just had to let them grow together, blah, blah, blah. Now, when he is unable to snag any high profile rookies, he wants us to believe that building through free agency was his plan all along.

Pritchard is an excellent GM, but he's as slippery as hell. I'd never buy a used car from him.

I believe it's a combination of the two:

1) Yes, the young core of this team needs to continue to grow together.

2) It will still take some veteran skill/leadership to help take the team to the next level.

I believe Pritchard was ready to deal before last season's TD. However, he wasn't ready to include Batum in any of the proposed deals. At that point in time, Travis wasn't enough to swing the deals. However, that "may" not be the case now. Personally speaking, if the right veteran is offered, I see no reason why Pritchard can't/wouldn't include Outlaw, Blake, Channing, Bayless, and/or Martell, etc. in any potential deals.

I don't believe Pritchard was talking out the side of his neck at all. GMs generally treat each season as a clear slate. The Blazers were ousted in the 1st Round. Therefore, upgrades need to be made. It's apparent that the upgrades need to be made via trades or through free agency.

 

[TripTango]

AAAARRRRGGGGHHHH!!!!!!

This is what I hate about Pritchard. He's the most disingenuous GM we've ever had. It was barely three months ago--when he wasn't able to pull off a trade by the deadline--that he said he was committed to our young core, and that he really loved our young guys and believed in them, and that we just had to let them grow together, blah, blah, blah. Now, when he is unable to snag any high profile rookies, he wants us to believe that building through free agency was his plan all along.

You don't see a difference between mid-season strategy and post-season strategy? I don't think it's disingenuous at all to stick with your core for the home stretch of a breakout season, but later retool and upgrade the roster after the season is over.

 

[SteelBlaze1]

I thought about what you said, and I am not so sure. Because if you make an offer to an RFA, and you have to go through the whole process of the other team either matching or not matching, you are burning time where other teams are signing free agents without that problem. By the time you find out your screwed, most of the good free agents could be gone.

I agree and I hope KP doesn't sit by and watch...as we all have been doing the last week (Shaq, VC, Jefferson and soon Amare).

 

[hasoos]

But we don't want/ need any of those players/contracts.

I disagree. One more scorer last year and that Houston series would not have been so rough. A Jefferson or Carter means Brandon Roy is no longer tag teamed by Artest and Battier, and not double and triple teamed.

 

[ucatchtrout]

I tend to think his approach to free agency and trading this summer will ultimately be seen as calculating and creative as his first draft as GM was.
I believe he has a plan and players he has targeted.
I believe he has been working developing these personel moves for months.
I see his draft choices and strategy.....dumping salary and drafting a first rounder he can stash in Europe....as part of a larger plan to make more money available for adding veteran players.

 

[andalusian]

I thought about what you said, and I am not so sure. Because if you make an offer to an RFA, and you have to go through the whole process of the other team either matching or not matching, you are burning time where other teams are signing free agents without that problem. By the time you find out your screwed, most of the good free agents could be gone.

KP's mantra was always to go get the guys he want. This team will have cap space for exactly one summer. This one. If there is a guy he wants - it would be stupid not to do the best in his power to go get him - even if it means waiting. Assume that Sessions is THE guy. Should he just say - screw it, I am not going to try, I am going to offer money to someone I only want as a fall-back because there is a chance I will not get the guy I really really want?

The ability to make big trades taking more salary than sending will be out there even if he loses the guy he really wants through RFA offer. Again - this is all under the assumption that there is an RFA that is identified as THE guy the team wants.

You always try to go for the best option and have alternative plans if it does not happen. It is exactly what he did with Rudy. He could have said "he will never come over, he will get more money in Europe", so instead of taking him where I can (24) - I will just choose someome else that is my fall-back position...

It is clear he did not do it - and I suspect - that if there is an RFA he really wants as his #1 option - he will go for it.

 

[maxiep]

It takes two to tango, and right now it feels like we're the ugly girl who thinks she's hot standing in the corner waiting for the captain of the football team to ask her to dance. No one wants to deal with us.

 

[Boob-No-More]

I see his draft choices and strategy.....dumping salary and drafting a first rounder he can stash in Europe....as part of a larger plan to make more money available for adding veteran players.

Wrong. Claver's salary counts against our cap this summer whether we stash him in Europe, or sign him to a rookie contract. He counts exactly the same against our cap this summer as any other player we would have drafted at 22. This whole stashing players in Europe to free up cap space for free agency is a complete fallacy. Unless we renounce them, Claver, Koponen and Freeland all count against our available cap space.

BNM

 

[Cake]

Wrong. Claver's salary counts against our cap this summer whether we stash him in Europe, or sign him to a rookie contract. He counts exactly the same against our cap this summer as any other player we would have drafted at 22. This whole stashing players in Europe to free up cap space for free agency is a complete fallacy. Unless we renounce them, Claver, Koponen and Freeland all count against our available cap space.

BNM

Well...he counts a little bit less by staying in Europe than if we signed him.

Nearly all rookies are signed to 120% of the rookie scale number. Unsigned players count for 100% of the rookie scale number. So it saves us 200,000 or so off the cap.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Well...he counts a little bit less by staying in Europe than if we signed him.

Nearly all rookies are signed to 120% of the rookie scale number. Unsigned players count for 100% of the rookie scale number. So it saves us 200,000 or so off the cap.

But, not until he signs, or agrees to a contract. All rookies are slotted at 100% of the scale until they sign (or agree to a larger deal). If the Blazers did intend to sign him to a 120% scale contract, they would take care of any free agent business first before even talking with Claver's agent. So, in terms of impact on our cap and the amount of money we have to offer free agents, Claver counts the same as any other #22 pick - stashed or not.

BNM

 

[Blaze01]

even less than that, about 1/2...as POR has a minimum player cap hold of 450,000 up to 12 players and Claver would make 11, Freeland or Koppnen 12...I don't see the cost of retaining their cap holds on these three guys to be as prohibitive as I first thought

 

[Ed O]

I am a bit nervous that KP's not going to get much done... he had a chance at the trade deadline to get something done, and he didn't. He didn't do anything at the draft.

Well, this summer's it in terms of salary cap space and great roster flexibility. I believe that he will try to get something done--and I expect that something WILL get done--but it's the last shot the team has and waiting this long makes me nervous.

It's great to see, though, that the team is going to be aggressive. We haven't seen that in the last year.

Ed O.

 

[Cake]

But, not until he signs, or agrees to a contract. All rookies are slotted at 100% of the scale until they sign (or agree to a larger deal). If the Blazers did intend to sign him to a 120% scale contract, they would take care of any free agent business first before even talking with Claver's agent. So, in terms of impact on our cap and the amount of money we have to offer free agents, Claver counts the same as any other #22 pick - stashed or not.

BNM

If we had drafted an American player that wasn't being sent overseas, we'd have to sign him before the summer league, which begins July 11th. There's no guarantee that we have a free agent deal in place by that time.

 

[alex42083]

"We’re going to be active in free agency, no doubt about it," Pritchard said. "I know I need to help this team by bringing in veterans. For us to go to the next level, we need to add some veterans."

That was music to my ears. As much as I think KP probably wanted to add another talented rookie, it's nice to see the brass agreed that going after vets was the way to go.

And damn, how much greater would this summer be without f'ing Chris Wallace signing Darius and screwing up our cap space. We'd have $15-16 million to throw out there!! Argh, Wallace makes me angrier day after day. The guy is an asshole.

 

[Ed O]

And damn, how much greater would this summer be without f'ing Chris Wallace signing Darius and screwing up our cap space. We'd have $15-16 million to throw out there!! Argh, Wallace makes me angrier day after day. The guy is an asshole.

He was at least helping his team.

John Nash signed Miles to the freaking extension. I am angry at Nash, if I'm angry at anyone.

That cap space sure would be nice, though...

Ed O.

 

[alex42083]

He was at least helping his team.

John Nash signed Miles to the freaking extension. I am angry at Nash, if I'm angry at anyone.

That cap space sure would be nice, though...

Ed O.

Certainly John Nash had a hand, and is equally stupid for giving that extension. And I'm sure you expected to be asked, how did Miles help Memphis? He had six DNPs in the last 11 games.

 

[Ed O]

Certainly John Nash had a hand, and is equally stupid for giving that extension. And I'm sure you expected to be asked, how did Miles help Memphis? He had six DNPs in the last 11 games.

He helped Memphis by, at minimum, reducing Portland's ability to dominate in the free agency market this summer.

Ed O.