DO NOT TRADE ANDRE MILLER!!!!!!!! (1 Viewer)

[PapaG]

I'm for playing out the string this year. If Marcus and Brandon can come back and produce, this team has a shot at getting past the first round, then you never know.

I've remained a rabid homer though the jailblazers, then the re-build...for what? Two years of competitive play, then re-build again? Screw that. If they blow it up this season, I'll remain a fan, but I'll be a casual one until they become relevant again.

Further, the league seems to be setting up a few 'super' teams to play against a bunch of also-rans. I have zero level of confidence that blowing it up will ever result in a Blazers contender if the league continues down the path they are currently headed.

Go Blazers

I'll add that the team hasn't lost since my epiphany.

Go Blazers!

 

[The_Lillard_King]

This is my opinion as well, especially as there is a chance that this team will be competitive in the playoffs. If Aldridge can maintain his new self, we get some nice production from Roy (even if it is for shorter minutes) - this team might be able to make some noise in the playoffs. Our perimeter defense has been much better this year, adding Camby (or replacement center/anchor) would help with out interior defense, the Lakers look slower this year, we match well with SAS. This team might be able to do something in the playoffs if the cards fall our way - and we are due for some good luck for a chance, I think. Statistically things should start to even out sooner or later.

Good point and I should have added that. If this were the east and the Blazers were sneaking into the playoffs with a losing record, then I maybe understand conceeding playoffs for the year to get better.

But the Blazers are playing well, winning and beating some tough teams. Now isn't the time to pull the plug.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Why would we do that? Presumably a team would give us more now than they would a year from now (when he's older and, in your scenario, more than a year removed from free agency)...

I think that the team should be seeking to maximize the return on him, and waiting doesn't seem like it would do that.

Ed O.

I don't think we'd get much for him this year, either. Frankly I don't think there's a trade that gets us value worth two shits for 'Dre. If there is, great. I don't see it though. Problem is we need a PG back for our PG to even think about staying competitive, and a same-position trade usually ends up a net-loss for the initiating team. It is also too late to start tanking for a good pick, so why trade him for a player that won't help us much?

I'd rather keep him, knowing he'll personally win you 5 more games this season, and prevent another 10 losses. I'm sure it looks short-sighted, but I think he's more valuable to the Blazers as a Blazer.

Of course, if by some miracle someone wants to trade Camby and Andre as a package for a point guard as good as Dre is now at 34 (that list is pretty short), then awesome possum. But I don't see that happening.

 

[Ed O]

I don't think we'd get much for him this year, either. Frankly I don't think there's a trade that gets us value worth two shits for 'Dre. If there is, great. I don't see it though. Problem is we need a PG back for our PG to even think about staying competitive, and a same-position trade usually ends up a net-loss for the initiating team. It is also too late to start tanking for a good pick, so why trade him for a player that won't help us much?

I'd rather keep him, knowing he'll personally win you 5 more games this season, and prevent another 10 losses. I'm sure it looks short-sighted, but I think he's more valuable to the Blazers as a Blazer.

I don't really think that the level of "competitive" we're at now is worth worrying about, so I think that's a basic disagreement we have in terms of whether he should be traded or not. It doesn't really matter to me whether a team wins 45 or 35 games as much as the probable arc for the franchise.

Relying on guys in their mid-30's to get into the playoffs is not the way a franchise should aspire to be.

Ed O.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

I don't really think that the level of "competitive" we're at now is worth worrying about, so I think that's a basic disagreement we have in terms of whether he should be traded or not. It doesn't really matter to me whether a team wins 45 or 35 games as much as the probable arc for the franchise.

Relying on guys in their mid-30's to get into the playoffs is not the way a franchise should aspire to be.

Ed O.

But when two young stars go down, it's not a bad plan B.

Other teams wish they had that plan B. NO and Utah are dying without their starting center alone.

 

[mook]

If Oden can come back next year, and Roy can be a reasonably productive 6th man for the next couple years, I think we have about a two year window to make a serious title run. Look at it this way. This current roster without Oden, Roy and Camby is on pace to win 50 games and be a 5th/6th seed. I know it's a big if, but if we can add Roy, in a reduced role, Oden as a starter and Camby as a back-up, this team could still contend for a title a title for a year, or two. It will take things lining up perfectly, like they did back in 1977, but I really think it's our best shot at a title.

Blowing things up will set the team back at least five years, and even then there is no guantee what you end up rebuilding will be any better than what we have now. How long did it take Orlando to rebuild between Shaq and Dwight? And, they still don't have a title. How long has it taken Chicago to rebuild post-MJ? Who was the last team to win a championship by building through the draft? Not the Lakers, not the Celtics, not the Pistons. I think you have to go back to the 1999 Spurs - who lucked out and got Duncan and had David Robinson coming back from an injury that got them in the lottery in the first place. Most champions are made by starting with a decent base - which we have now, and adding veteran pieces through trades and free agency. I'd rather take that approcah than blowing things up and completely starting over.

BNM

Great post. Especially the part cited. I'd say the odds of everything coalescing as you describe are maybe 10-15% at best, but those are the best odds we've got.

If Aldridge is truly evolving into the best scoring big man in the game, and I think he is, you need to take as many chances as you can to get him shots at the title. A PGOTF who takes 3-4 years to pan out isn't the way to go. You go the Dallas/San Antonio route, acquiring proven veterans to fill in the roles.

 

[Pinwheel1]

I don't really think that the level of "competitive" we're at now is worth worrying about, so I think that's a basic disagreement we have in terms of whether he should be traded or not. It doesn't really matter to me whether a team wins 45 or 35 games as much as the probable arc for the franchise.

Relying on guys in their mid-30's to get into the playoffs is not the way a franchise should aspire to be.Ed O.

I don't totally disagree with you on this, but the PG position seems to be different. many of them seem to play just as well when they are 35, 36, 37, 38......Maybe the thing to do is stop drafting PG's and just keep signing the old guys every 3-4 years. I thought trading Harris for Kidd was a really bad idea. I was wrong.

 

[mook]

I don't totally disagree with you on this, but the PG position seems to be different. many of them seem to play just as well when they are 35, 36, 37, 38......Maybe the thing to do is stop drafting PG's and just keep signing the old guys every 3-4 years. I thought trading Harris for Kidd was a really bad idea. I was wrong.

Yeah, I'm coming around to the "old vet" school of thought on PG's. Besides, anybody remember the last hot young PGOTF we got locked into? Damon Fucking Stoudamire.

I'd rather put my eggs in a basket like Miller or Kidd or Billups or Nash. You know what you get from night to night, and they know their job is to make the stars look good.

 

[Minstrel]

Who was the last team to win a championship by building through the draft? Not the Lakers, not the Celtics, not the Pistons. I think you have to go back to the 1999 Spurs - who lucked out and got Duncan and had David Robinson coming back from an injury that got them in the lottery in the first place. Most champions are made by starting with a decent base - which we have now, and adding veteran pieces through trades and free agency. I'd rather take that approcah than blowing things up and completely starting over.

I thought your entire post was dead-on, but especially this. This has always been my thesis, especially in discussions about blowing it up or trying to trade veterans for draft picks.

People don't like the odds of Oden coming back and giving the team a healthy season next year? How do you like the odds of acquiring a fresh superstar to catapult this team to championship contention anytime soon...lottery team or not? The fact is, the odds of finding a new superstar are exceptionally long. I definitely think the odds of Oden providing an impact season next year (if it's not wiped out by labour issues) are better, even if they're not good.

 

[hasoos]

I am going to throw out this argument for the sole reason that I think it is a valid argument towards making a trade now. Assuming that Roy's contract is an albatross for the next 4 years, the team isn't going to have the money to bring in free agents, and Portland isn't a very desirable place for free agents to play. That means the only way to bring in talent is a trade. Considering that both of these players are nearing end of career for age, they may be our only shot at improving the team for several years. If we let them move on without getting something for them, the team could be hamstrung for years. The team hasn't had a 1st round draft pick pan out in a long time, and none of the past 1st round draft picks after the Roy/Aldridge year are showing any signs of picking up their game and helping out this team any time soon. It is very hard for a team to survive such a long period without gaining any talent in the draft. If they have no money to get free agents with, then that leaves the only optoin to be a trade, and a trade being the only way you really know what you are getting in return when the player(s) are dealt for. That is how I see it. I know that the CBA won't be ratified until next year and we have no idea what the salary cap will be. But Roy's contract will continue to cost the team a lot of money, no matter what it is set at.

 

[Pinwheel1]

I am going to throw out this argument for the sole reason that I think it is a valid argument towards making a trade now. Assuming that Roy's contract is an albatross for the next 4 years, the team isn't going to have the money to bring in free agents, and Portland isn't a very desirable place for free agents to play. That means the only way to bring in talent is a trade. Considering that both of these players are nearing end of career for age, they may be our only shot at improving the team for several years. If we let them move on without getting something for them, the team could be hamstrung for years. The team hasn't had a 1st round draft pick pan out in a long time, and none of the past 1st round draft picks after the Roy/Aldridge year are showing any signs of picking up their game and helping out this team any time soon. It is very hard for a team to survive such a long period without gaining any talent in the draft. If they have no money to get free agents with, then that leaves the only optoin to be a trade, and a trade being the only way you really know what you are getting in return when the player(s) are dealt for. That is how I see it. I know that the CBA won't be ratified until next year and we have no idea what the salary cap will be. But Roy's contract will continue to cost the team a lot of money, no matter what it is set at.

Hasoos what you say makes sense except that the majority of the time the players that are being offered in a trade at the deadline are not long term difference makers. If you are a team that is close, you can often find a vet that will take you over the hump that year, or maybe the next. But we are on the opposite end of the trade. So what team needs a Vet PG or a Vet center THIS YEAR that will give us young pieces to the puzzle?

Chicago ( maybe if Noah was not coming back) Atlanta? OKC, San Antonio, Memphis?

 

[hasoos]

Hasoos what you say makes sense except that the majority of the time the players that are being offered in a trade at the deadline are not long term difference makers. If you are a team that is close, you can often find a vet that will take you over the hump that year, or maybe the next. But we are on the opposite end of the trade. So what team needs a Vet PG or a Vet center THIS YEAR that will give us young pieces to the puzzle?

Chicago ( maybe if Noah was not coming back) Atlanta? OKC, San Antonio, Memphis?

While that is often true, it doesn't mean that can't be the case here. It all depends on what the GM's goals are when they go out seeking a trade in the first place. Are a lot of teams looking for a fix so they can be better this year? Yep. But many of them are going to recognize they need to build towards the future because this year is a bust, and make the best deal they can.

 

[Pinwheel1]

While that is often true, it doesn't mean that can't be the case here. It all depends on what the GM's goals are when they go out seeking a trade in the first place. Are a lot of teams looking for a fix so they can be better this year? Yep. But many of them are going to recognize they need to build towards the future because this year is a bust, and make the best deal they can.

Yeah but I thought we were talking about Miller and Camby. Not sure anyone would trade for them for the "future". That is why I was limiting it to teams who need help now. In any event trading them IMO will not bring anything back unless someone is desperate to make a move. Unless you are strictly thinking that their ending contracts are huge for some team.

 

[hasoos]

Yeah but I thought we were talking about Miller and Camby. Not sure anyone would trade for them for the "future". That is why I was limiting it to teams who need help now. In any event trading them IMO will not bring anything back unless someone is desperate to make a move. Unless you are strictly thinking that their ending contracts are huge for some team.

No I think those players are useful to many playoff contenders. Camby is useful to every playoff contending team that is out there. Miller would be useful to many of those teams, but not all of them. He has to be a fit. Joel provides meat off the bench and another 5 fouls to throw at a Shaq or Dwight Howard. They all have their uses. But the deal has to make sense for both teams.

Nobody has even fathomed the unthinkable yet either. What if Cho happens to find a taker for Brandon? Do I think it will happen? Nope. But I have seen weirder stuff happen.

 

[Ghost Pepper]

Tell ya what? If Dre gives us a 13 and 10 game tonight against arguably the best PG in the game we keep Dre and like it for another year! Fair enough?

 

[julius]

the issue with trading Miller is that who they realistically could get for him won't help us win a title anymore than he will.