Gerald Wallace very available

[SheedSoNasty]

Like Kwame for Gasol?

Or Dale Davis for Baron Davis?

So many people really don't take into consideration the history of trading star level players for non-star level players. Contracts and expiring deals along with chemistry are huge factors when teams make trades, not just talent.

 

[Masbee]

I have been reading a lot of Gerald Wallace rumors lately, and Charlotte is obviously in trade mode. ESPN is saying they offered Wallace to the Kings for Brad Miller. Am I the only one who thinks he would be a great fit here? I love Batum, but Wallace is already where he aspires to be. Maybe a Frye/Outlaw package could get the job done? Thoughts?

Yo. We got your shit covered right here in this thread from 2 months ago:

http://www.sportstwo.com/forums/showthread.php?t=127011

Needless to say, we were all over the possibilities of plucking from the Bobcats best assets from their impending fire sale. Lots of Gerald Wallace discussion in there, much of it good. Check it out.

 

[number 10]

I think that's a bad deal for Portland. May and Thomas are worthless. Carroll is a negative.

The only positive asset we'd be getting is Wallace, and we give up and take on too much to make it worth it, in my opinion.

Ed O.

Given that I'm a Blazer fan, it's better to try and tilt a trade in favor of everyone else. Freeland/Kopo are the sweeteners for Sacramento, obviously if it's not needed they can be removed.

Also, look at what the Blazers give up - Outlaw, 6 minutes of backup PF, and the euros, who will likely only contribute, if they ever do at all, in a few years. IMO that's reasonable for a big upgrade right now. Also, with the Blazers' scouting, Paul Allen's cash, and the numerous 2nd rounders, I don't see any reason why KP can't find the next Freeland or Koponen.

 

[alex42083]

Not to go off topic.. but wow, how did Matt Carroll score a contract with five years remaining at more than $5 mil per? This is the same guy that played for us?? He got a better contract than Travis, and Travis is 10x better.

 

[DaRizzle]

I'd like to see any unbiased party (non-Laker fan or Chris Wallace) claim or justify it was a good trade for Memphis.

http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=10585

Sorry but here is a Wallace speech (paraphrased) to season ticket holders...I cant help it if it was the vogue thing to do was to bash the trade by just looking at it from the surface. Read his reasons instead of screaming "unfair"!!!


edit: sorry, that was another article saying it wasnt all bad. here is the Wallace speech:
http://3shadesofblue.blogspot.com/2008/02/wallace-explains-pau-trade-to-ticket.html

 

[Ed O]

Given that I'm a Blazer fan, it's better to try and tilt a trade in favor of everyone else. Freeland/Kopo are the sweeteners for Sacramento, obviously if it's not needed they can be removed.

I understand that you'd rather err on the side of having a deal lean against the Blazers' interest, but as the deal is constructed I don't think Portland should do it.

We take on a bad contract. We give up a lot of assets. I don't think that it's something that Portland should do. I'm ALL FOR consolidation, but I'm not in favor of bad deals in order to consolidate.

Also, look at what the Blazers give up - Outlaw, 6 minutes of backup PF, and the euros, who will likely only contribute, if they ever do at all, in a few years. IMO that's reasonable for a big upgrade right now. Also, with the Blazers' scouting, Paul Allen's cash, and the numerous 2nd rounders, I don't see any reason why KP can't find the next Freeland or Koponen.

I think he will find diamonds in the rough in the future, no doubt. I don't think that giving away these guys in this kind of deal makes sense. It's just too much.

Frye only gets a little run for Portland, but that's at least the result of the way our team is built as much as an indicator of his capabilities. Presumably Charlotte, if they were to trade for him, would consider him as more than a bit player off the bench.

Ed O.

 

[Denny Crane]

Or Dale Davis for Baron Davis?

So many people really don't take into consideration the history of trading star level players for non-star level players. Contracts and expiring deals along with chemistry are huge factors when teams make trades, not just talent.

I think in Gasol's case, he was being booed at home by the fans and basically the team was forced to trade him for whatever they could get. They weren't exactly bargaining from a position of strength...

 

[number 10]

I understand that you'd rather err on the side of having a deal lean against the Blazers' interest, but as the deal is constructed I don't think Portland should do it.

We take on a bad contract. We give up a lot of assets. I don't think that it's something that Portland should do. I'm ALL FOR consolidation, but I'm not in favor of bad deals in order to consolidate.

But I don't think we give up (m)any assets that can't be easily replaced, I don't really see what exact assets you think the Blazers are giving away.

• Outlaw is replaced by Wallace.
• Backup PF minutes are replaced (admittedly slightly weakened) by May/Thomas/Batum?
• And, given recent history, the value of stashed euros is about = $3 million and maybe some 2nd rounders. That's not a whole lot to give up in return for a nice upgrade in talent right now.

The way I see it, the only major asset lost is Paul Allen's money. Carrol and Thomas both get a lot of money to sit on the bench, not to mention Wallace's contract.

I think he will find diamonds in the rough in the future, no doubt. I don't think that giving away these guys in this kind of deal makes sense. It's just too much.

But why exactly is it too much, if KP has the means to find similar players in the future? Why can't it be just like trading a closer in baseball? Valuable player, sure, but easily replaceable.

Frye only gets a little run for Portland, but that's at least the result of the way our team is built as much as an indicator of his capabilities. Presumably Charlotte, if they were to trade for him, would consider him as more than a bit player off the bench.

Ed O.

If I understand you correctly, if Charlotte values Frye as a lottery pick PF, that means Portland should value him likewise? That still doesn't change the fact that he's a bit player in Portland's system, and likely will be until the end of his contract. So regardless of how highly other teams might value him, his actual value to Portland is very low. Therefore, his only value to the Blazers is as a trade asset, in which case the only problem with trading him in this deal is that he might bring back more later, which personally I highly doubt.

 

[Ed O]

But why exactly is it too much, if KP has the means to find similar players in the future? Why can't it be just like trading a closer in baseball? Valuable player, sure, but easily replaceable.

If I understand you correctly, if Charlotte values Frye as a lottery pick PF, that means Portland should value him likewise? That still doesn't change the fact that he's a bit player in Portland's system, and likely will be until the end of his contract. So regardless of how highly other teams might value him, his actual value to Portland is very low. Therefore, his only value to the Blazers is as a trade asset, in which case the only problem with trading him in this deal is that he might bring back more later, which personally I highly doubt.

Bottom line: I believe we can get more for these pieces than Wallace and salary cap deadweight.

That's something that neither you nor I can know until and unless we trade them.

Ed O.

 

[GrandpaBlaze]

Is there ever gonna be a thread like this where you guys will ever think you actually have to give up one of your good players to get a good player?

Nah, we're just trying to be like the Lakers and get a Pau Gasol for our castaways.

Gramps...

 

[number 10]

Bottom line: I believe we can get more for these pieces than Wallace and salary cap deadweight.

That's something that neither you nor I can know until and unless we trade them.

Ed O.

Fair enough, I hope you're right. Care to give some examples though? Also, say come trade deadline this is the only deal available, do you do it?

 

[Ed O]

Fair enough, I hope you're right. Care to give some examples though? Also, say come trade deadline this is the only deal available, do you do it?

Well, I'd think that a Frye + Outlaw and Randolph is workable, and that's better for Portland than your proposed deal. Beyond that ... ? I'm not sure. Maybe push for Luol Deng or wait to see if another young SF with a big contract becomes available.

I would not do this deal... I like Wallace a lot but I would rather wait for another deal to come along and/or take our chances with some cap space.

Ed O.

 

[Minstrel]

If the rights to Koponen were the sweetener that made an Outlaw + Frye deal for Gerald Wallace deal work, I'd definitely throw him in. I'd want to hold onto Freeland, though. A young and possibly good big man is a pretty valuable asset.

I'm an enormous fan of Wallace, and I think he's right at the borderline of star. A defensive stopper on the wing (with the defensive flexibility to credibly guard 4s) who has the ability and mentality to take the ball to the rim and rebounds well? He'd be a rather perfect addition. Yes, he doesn't shoot the three-ball well...haven't we been complaining that the team is too perimeter jumper happy and we need someone besides Roy who will attack the hoop?

Wallace as the starting small forward with Batum slotting in as the backup and a very young understudy would be a rather fantastic situation.

And still retaining the RLEC for a future deal or cap space would leave the team's deal-making flexibility intact.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Am I crazy to see a little Jerome Kersey in Gerald Wallace?

 

[Drink Your Milkshake]

Proposed Trade at ESPN
Portland Trades:
Martell Webster
Sergio Rodriguez
Reaf LaFrentz
$3MM Straight Cash Homie

Charolette Trades:
Gerald Wallace
Nazr Mohammed

I'd much rather trade away Webster in this situation because of Outlaw's ability to play both Forward spots. But if Outlaw instead of Webster was a deal breaker for Charlotte, I'd give in.

 

[craigehlo]

Yes, he doesn't shoot the three-ball well...haven't we been complaining that the team is too perimeter jumper happy and we need someone besides Roy who will attack the hoop?

That's what I like him along with his defense. He doesn't force bonehead shots and plays within his game. He's got a nice knack for getting free under the hoop and getting cheap buckets too. He's a perfect fit with LMA and Roy.

 

[Drink Your Milkshake]

Well besides the fact that numbers dont work out...Is there ever gonna be a thread like this where you guys will ever think you actually have to give up one of your good players to get a good player? I dont think Ive heard Roy, Oden, or LMA name in any fantasy trade proposal in here or bbf.....ever

That's because they're not available. Why would we propose trade that we know would never happen? Gerald Wallace would not require a player like Oden/Roy/LMA anyway. Charlotte is looking for cap relief. They want him out of there, so his trade value is lower than it would normally be as well.

 

[Drink Your Milkshake]

I know everyone is ignoring me, but I just improved my already excellent trade. Both Charlotte and Sacramento get rid of some ugly contracts. Charlotte gets Outlaw to cheaply replace Wallace, Miller and Frye to add some depth to their frontcourt. Sacramento gets rid of two players that aren't part of their future for cap relief, Freeland and Kopo, and Portland's 1st rounder. Blazers give up a lot, but consolidation is what's needed.

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/featur...~22~23~30~23~30~23~23~22~22~22&te=&cash=23:22

[/trademachine-bation]

Yeah that trade is horrendous for Portland. KP got Pritchslapped hard on that one. Gerald Wallace isn't that good and his trade value isn't very high to begin with.

 

[Drink Your Milkshake]

http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=10585

Sorry but here is a Wallace speech (paraphrased) to season ticket holders...I cant help it if it was the vogue thing to do was to bash the trade by just looking at it from the surface. Read his reasons instead of screaming "unfair"!!!


edit: sorry, that was another article saying it wasnt all bad. here is the Wallace speech:
http://3shadesofblue.blogspot.com/2008/02/wallace-explains-pau-trade-to-ticket.html

Everybody knows it was a behind the scenes deal. Give us all a break.

 

[DaRizzle]

Everybody knows it was a behind the scenes deal. Give me a break.

Please explain what that even means...its such a cop out

...and dont even mention Jerry West because he was long gone from Memphis when this happened. It cracks me up/pisses me off when people try to use that as some kind of argument

 

[Drink Your Milkshake]

Please explain what that even means...its such a cop out

...and dont even mention Jerry West because he was long gone from Memphis when this happened. It cracks me up/pisses me off when people try to use that as some kind of argument

Yet you think it's perfectly normal to act like it was a fair an even trade. Get your hypocritical shit out of here. 99% of basketball commentators, employees, and fans have all pblically said the fair wasn't trade. Yet you're acting like it's common knowledge how fair it was. Give us a break.

 

[DaRizzle]

Yet you think it's perfectly normal to act like it was a fair an even trade. Get your hypocritical shit out of here. 99% of basketball commentators, employees, and fans have all pblically said the fair wasn't trade. Yet you're acting like it's common knowledge how fair it was. Give us a break.

lol...posts like yours above are a dime a dozen on the topic. Nobody cares to actually back it up with actual reasons. Care to ACTUALLY respond to what their GM's reasoning was? Care to show me the better trade for them? There was a rumor the Bulls were offering their overpaid, under-performing, locked up for several years talent. NOBODY came out and said "Hey we offered this awesome package! Wtf?".

 

[Drink Your Milkshake]

lol...posts like yours above are a dime a dozen on the topic. Nobody cares to actually back it up with actual reasons. Care to ACTUALLY respond to what their GM's reasoning was? Care to show me the better trade for them? There was a rumor the Bulls were offering their overpaid, under-performing, locked up for several years talent. NOBODY came out and said "Hey we offered this awesome package! Wtf?".

Everything you say can be applied to yourself. 99% of the world disagrees with you, BUT YOU CLAIM YOU AND YOU ALONE ARE CORRECT. Take your off topic trade talk out of this thread and off the fucking BLAZERS board for that matter. *edited: No personal attacks*

 

[DaRizzle]

Everything you say can be applied to yourself. 99% of the world disagrees with you, BUT YOU CLAIM YOU AND YOU ALONE ARE CORRECT. Take your off topic trade talk out of this thread and off the fucking BLAZERS board for that matter. Fucking troll.

Wow...now Im a "fucking troll"...damn maybe I should have told you what I really thought about your "lets kill all the Christians" thread....anyways...

It is not me and me alone. I am the only one who has given any reasons justifying my view here(which I guess is trolling to you). You on the other hand keep saying "but everybody says...blah blah blah". At first I was right there with you the day the trade happened saying "holy shit...how?!?" and so was every commentator. They are paid to say shit so they say "wow look at this lopsided talent trade" rather than actually breaking it down and trying to see the motivation behind Memphis's decision....but yeah, Im a "fucking troll" and all your "points" were spot on

 

[Iwatas]

Wallace and Mohammed works for Outlaw and Raef. Mohammed is an overpaid stiff with years left on his contract... I bet they'd be happy to get rid of him as well.They could sell the trade on the basis of Outlaw's outside shooting.

I'd be happy to see Frye go as well, if that was the deal.

iWatas

 

[bluefrog]

I think the biggest plus would be gaining a lock down perimeter defender which is one of the Blazer's biggest weaknesses as illustrated in the Clippers and Magic game.

 

[Jurassic]

It is not me and me alone. I am the only one who has given any reasons justifying my view here(which I guess is trolling to you).

I'm not saying that I think you are a troll (nor am I saying that you are completely innocent in this thread) but recently I got shit from a certain Laker mod for going into that forum and saying something that he disagreed with. Then accused me of constantly saying things to get a rise out of Laker fans.

So I know how you feel. You state your opinion, back it up, and then get personally attacked just because you are a fan of a different team. I guess it goes both ways. Everybody (a lot of staff included) needs to grow the hell up and realize that we can disagree on things and have intelligent debate without personal attacks and bitching.

 

[DaRizzle]

I'm not saying that I think you are a troll (nor am I saying that you are completely innocent in this thread) but recently I got shit from a certain Laker mod for going into that forum and saying something that he disagreed with. Then accused me of constantly saying things to get a rise out of Laker fans.

So I know how you feel. You state your opinion, back it up, and then get personally attacked just because you are a fan of a different team. I guess it goes both ways. Everybody (a lot of staff included) needs to grow the hell up and realize that we can disagree on things and have intelligent debate without personal attacks and bitching.

I read that...I agree with you, you shouldn't have gotten shit for what you wrote/being there, only a little friendly shit talking back.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

I'd like to see any unbiased party (non-Laker fan or Chris Wallace) claim or justify it was a good trade for Memphis.

If was not a good trade for Memphis, at all. Other GMs were mystified.

I don't think Laker fans would take the trade back, if it were so balanced.

 

[axs88]

On the Gasol trade: saying it made sense for Memphis because Kwame's was the biggest expiring contract available is laughable. Since when does it matter if they get X amount expiring in 1 player or 2-3? A lot of GMs came out saying that last time they asked, Gasol was off limits (at least for a fire sale like this), and then BHAM, he is a Laker. I am pretty sure if they sent out feelers around the league that all they wanted was expiring contracts and cheap young talent (on the level of Crittenton, LOL), they could have gotten AT LEAST one more solid prospect in addition to Marc and maybe 2 or 3 players equalling Kwame's deal.. perhaps even dumping a bad contract like Cardinal's in the process.