No Roy Amnesty and Oden will be a Blazer

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
I trust Story's numbers over everything, including the ESPN trade machine.
 
magnifier661 said:
This firing makes me feel that Allen will not give up on his franchise guard and center. I think Cho was ready to use the amnesty on Roy and play hard ball with Oden. I believe this gamble was something Allen didn't want to happen.

I expect both Roy and Oden to be Blazers for quite sometime. I think the only way Roy leaves Portland is when he decides to medically retire.
Click to expand...

I don't know, you could make an argument for the exact opposite. Maybe Paul is in a mood to trade everyone, I want to win before I die, this team aint getting it done, get me some trades! And Cho couldn't trade Roy or Oden, so Paul is going to try to find someone who can.

barfo
 
barfo said:
I don't know, you could make an argument for the exact opposite. Maybe Paul is in a mood to trade everyone, I want to win before I die, this team aint getting it done, get me some trades! And Cho couldn't trade Roy or Oden, so Paul is going to try to find someone who can.

barfo
Click to expand...

You could be right too. I'm just thinking Allen has been pretty loyal to his players, moreso than the management. Regardless, we will soon find out what the true motive behind it is soon enough. It's clear Allen had an agenda, so let's see where it leads us.
 
If an amnesty is one of the options to come out of the next CBA, I think the team would be absolutely moronic if they choose not to waive Roy. If they keep him, they stand to be hobbled not just with his contract, but with his inability to accept that he is no longer the player he once was.
 
Natebishop3 said:
If an amnesty is one of the options to come out of the next CBA, I think the team would be absolutely moronic if they choose not to waive Roy. If they keep him, they stand to be hobbled not just with his contract, but with his inability to accept that he is no longer the player he once was.
Click to expand...

This is the real issue for me. If they keep him I don't see him being able to easily accept a lesser role, which means we'll be saddled with trying to squeeze him into the lineup instead of trying to find or groom somebody else. I'm not saying it's going to be easy to replace what he used to be, but keeping a continually diminishing Roy isn't fair to the rest of his healthy teammates and frankly I think it will continue to stunt LMA, because as we saw in the playoffs Roy doesn't really look for him except on pick and pops and that's not how I want to see our real franchise player used.
 
Natebishop3 said:
If an amnesty is one of the options to come out of the next CBA, I think the team would be absolutely moronic if they choose not to waive Roy. If they keep him, they stand to be hobbled not just with his contract, but with his inability to accept that he is no longer the player he once was.
Click to expand...

The guy came off of the bench after his surgery. How many other 3-time All-NBA and All-Star players in the NBA would do that without having a meltdown? Plus, he clearly outplayed his replacement in the playoffs.

Why are so many posters convinced that Roy can't face some reality? He already gave up his starting spot to an average player, and handled it very well, IMO. It wasn't until Nate sat him in the playoffs that he finally let go of his frustrations, and the next two games after that were outstanding. He didn't say anything about starting until after the season, and the people bashing him for it are some of the same posters who advocated an open tryout at the PG position when Miller was brought in to back up BLANKY. If Roy beats out Matthews, he should start. Why that is even an issue makes no sense.

Without Roy, the Blazers would have been swept. No doubt about it; he's the only player on the team that can create his own offense no matter who is defending him. Look at what Marion did to Durant last night in the 4th, and compare it to what Roy did to Marion in Game 4.

Don't hire Nate as GM, please.
 
Last edited:
barfo said:
I don't know, you could make an argument for the exact opposite. Maybe Paul is in a mood to trade everyone, I want to win before I die, this team aint getting it done, get me some trades! And Cho couldn't trade Roy or Oden, so Paul is going to try to find someone who can.

barfo
Click to expand...

I wish I could believe that - but I suspect the OP is correct. This team is going to unfurl their flags, sound the drums, and march right off a cliff.
 
PapaG said:
The guy came off of the bench after his surgery. How many other 3-time All-NBA and All-Star players in the NBA would do that without having a meltdown? Plus, he clearly outplayed his replacement in the playoffs.

Why are so many posters convinced that Roy can't face some reality? He already gave up his starting spot to an average player, and handled it very well, IMO. It wasn't until Nate sat him in the playoffs that he finally let go of his frustrations, and the next two games after that were outstanding. He didn't say anything about starting until after the season, and the people bashing him for it are some of the same posters who advocated an open tryout at the PG position when Miller was brought in to back up BLANKY. If Roy beats out Matthews, he should start. Why that is even an issue makes no sense.

Without Roy, the Blazers would have been swept. No doubt about it; he's the only player on the team that can create his own offense no matter who is defending him. Look at what Marion did to Durant last night in the 4th, and compare it to what Roy did to Marion in Game 4.

Don't hire Nate as GM, please.
Click to expand...

Do you think Roy, in his current status, is a max contract player? Forget all the bullshit you just said because none of it matters. It doesn't matter what happened two seasons ago with Blake and Miller, it doesn't matter if Roy was a three-time all-star or an all-nba player. The only thing that matters is how Roy plays going forward. Can he recapture his All-Star, All-NBA status or will he continue to fade away? I feel, and I know I'm not the only one, that Roy is done being the superstar player that he was, and at this point can only hope to either alter his game or contribute one decent game out of three or four. Is that the kind of player that you want eating up a large portion of your cap space? Would you want to continue to invest that money and space in someone if there is a hard cap put in place?

Roy might give you a warm, fuzzy feeling because of what he accomplished in Portland, but warm, fuzzy feelings don't win championships.

Don't hire PapaG as GM, he still thinks it's 2007.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Do you think Roy, in his current status, is a max contract player? Forget all the bullshit you just said because none of it matters. It doesn't matter what happened two seasons ago with Blake and Miller, it doesn't matter if Roy was a three-time all-star or an all-nba player. The only thing that matters is how Roy plays going forward. Can he recapture his All-Star, All-NBA status or will he continue to fade away? I feel, and I know I'm not the only one, that Roy is done being the superstar player that he was, and at this point can only hope to either alter his game or contribute one decent game out of three or four. Is that the kind of player that you want eating up a large portion of your cap space? Would you want to continue to invest that money and space in someone if there is a hard cap put in place?

Roy might give you a warm, fuzzy feeling because of what he accomplished in Portland, but warm, fuzzy feelings don't win championships.

Don't hire PapaG as GM, he still thinks it's 2007.
Click to expand...

This argument is like watching a dog chase his tail. True Roy will be paid too much for his skill level due to his knees. But even with his diminished ability his offensive skills are still better than most players we have, so I think Papa G's point is why get rid of one of the few guys who can score.........if you don't have to. If the amnesty clause forces you to make that decison immediately then yes you may have to.

But if we are still over the cap and the cap is not hard, and waiving him simply just gets us a average player in return, then you have to think twice. Technically Roy has had one bad year, in a season where he had two knee operations. We don't know for certain that he will "continue to slide". So if the new CBA lets the Blazers play it out for a couple of years, I say do it. Make sure he can't come back before you cut him. because either way its Pauls money and either way Paul is paying him.
 
Last edited:
Pinwheel1 said:
This argument is like watching a dog chase his tail. True Roy will be paid too much for his skill level due to his knees. But even with his diminished ability his offensive skills are still better than most players we have, so I think Papa G's point is why get rid of one of the few guys who can score.........if you don't have to. If the amnesty clause forces you to make that decison immediately then yes you may have to.

But if we are still over the cap and the cap is not hard, and waiving him simply just gets us a average player in return, then you have to think twice. Technically Roy has had one bad year, in a season where he had two knee operations. We don't know for certain that he will "continue to slide". So if the new CBA lets the Blazers play it out for a couple of years, I say do it. Make sure he can't come back before you cut him. because either way its Pauls money and either way Paul is paying him.
Click to expand...

Bingo. I think you have it right here.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
This argument is like watching a dog chase his tail. True Roy will be paid too much for his skill level due to his knees. But even with his diminished ability his offensive skills are still better than most players we have, so I think Papa G's point is why get rid of one of the few guys who can score.........if you don't have to. If the amnesty clause forces you to make that decison immediately then yes you may have to.

But if we are still over the cap and the cap is not hard, and waiving him simply just gets us a average player in return, then you have to think twice. Technically Roy has had one bad year, in a season where he had two knee operations. We don't know for certain that he will "continue to slide". So if there is the new CBA lets the Blazers play it out for a couple of years, I say do it. Make sure he can't come back before you cut him. because either way its Pails money and either way Paul is paying him.
Click to expand...

The point is, if the amnesty is presented and it takes him off the books completely, it opens up a lot of cap space that would not have been opened up otherwise. The amnesty is a one-shot deal, and you don't have time to think about it. The opportunity is given and you either act or you don't. Will there be a hard cap? Who knows, but if there's an opportunity to get Roy's albatross off our books, we have to do it. Unless you think Roy is going to return to form, there's no reason to keep him around for that cost if we can dump him.
 
PapaG said:
The guy came off of the bench after his surgery. How many other 3-time All-NBA and All-Star players in the NBA would do that without having a meltdown? Plus, he clearly outplayed his replacement in the playoffs.
Click to expand...

Roy had minor knee scopes, the kind that hundreds of NBA players have had and come back after a few weaks. The team had a much better record without Roy on the active roster than with him this year. You're correct most All-star players can't accept a dimenisioned role. Just like McGrady was unhappy in Houston. Francis was unhappy in NY. Iversion was unhappy in Detroit. When a former all-star can no longer carry a team like they could in their glory days it's best for the player and the team to part ways.

Sure Roy may accept being a backup better than the above three, but he won't be happy with a diminished bench role here. Do you think he was happy coming off the bench this season? Was he happy when most of the reporters tried to interview LaMarcus first? While I don't think addition by subtraction has ever worked for this team, if you can get a benefit (free salary cap space) by subtracting Roy then parting ways with him would bring this franchise closer to a title.
 
Natebishop3 said:
The point is, if the amnesty is presented and it takes him off the books completely, it opens up a lot of cap space that would not have been opened up otherwise. The amnesty is a one-shot deal, and you don't have time to think about it. The opportunity is given and you either act or you don't. Will there be a hard cap? Who knows, but if there's an opportunity to get Roy's albatross off our books, we have to do it. Unless you think Roy is going to return to form, there's no reason to keep him around for that cost if we can dump him.
Click to expand...

I agree that is the point, and waiving him more than likely will NOT open up any cap space. We will still be at the max. But we will have to see how it plays out.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
I agree that is the point, and waiving him more than likely will NOT open up any cap space. We will still be at the max. But we will have to see how it plays out.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about waiving him? I said the team would be moronic if they didn't use the amnesty on him.
 
Draco said:
Roy had minor knee scopes, the kind that hundreds of NBA players have had and come back after a few weaks. The team had a much better record without Roy on the active roster than with him this year. You're correct most All-star players can't accept a dimenisioned role. Just like McGrady was unhappy in Houston. Francis was unhappy in NY. Iversion was unhappy in Detroit. When a former all-star can no longer carry a team like they could in their glory days it's best for the player and the team to part ways.

Sure Roy may accept being a backup better than the above three, but he won't be happy with a diminished bench role here. Do you think he was happy coming off the bench this season? Was he happy when most of the reporters tried to interview LaMarcus first? While I don't think addition by subtraction has ever worked for this team, if you can get a benefit (free salary cap space) by subtracting Roy then parting ways with him would bring this franchise closer to a title.
Click to expand...

Seriously you don't think the schedule had a say in that? Shit we debated for a month how the schedule in April was going to knock us out of the playoffs. So I guess we should waive Wallace too becasue they both came back around the same time.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Who said anything about waiving him? I said the team would be moronic if they didn't use the amnesty on him.
Click to expand...

I am under the impression that by using the amnesty clause you are in fact waiving him. Am I wrong?
 
Pinwheel1 said:
I am under the impression that by using the amnesty clause you are in fact waiving him. Am I wrong?
Click to expand...

You're removing him from the salary cap, but still paying him, so he essentially comes off the books. Waiving him outright wouldn't take him off the books AND we would still pay him his salary. Also, I might be wrong, but if you waive a player another team is a period of time to claim him off waivers. I don't think that's the case with the amnesty. I think he's just gone and he's a free agent.
 
Natebishop3 said:
You're removing him from the salary cap, but still paying him, so he essentially comes off the books. Waiving him outright wouldn't take him off the books AND we would still pay him his salary. Also, I might be wrong, but if you waive a player another team is a period of time to claim him off waivers. I don't think that's the case with the amnesty. I think he's just gone and he's a free agent.
Click to expand...

OK waiving was the wrong choice of words. I should have used "getting rid of".....
 
Pinwheel1 said:
So was Kobe.
Click to expand...

I'm not certain what this statement is supposed to be arguing? In all honesty Kobe looks like he's about a year or two away from the glue factory himself. Just because Roy hit his expiration date 10 years early isn't a valid reason for keeping him on the roster.
 
Nikolokolus said:
I'm not certain what this statement is supposed to be arguing? In all honesty Kobe looks like he's about a year or two away from the glue factory himself. Just because Roy hit his expiration date 10 years early isn't a valid reason for keeping him on the roster.
Click to expand...

But Roy saved us, turned water into wine, and walked across the Willamette River to lead us not into temptation, but to deliver us from evil, for thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory... forever and ever.... amen.
 
Natebishop3 said:
The point is, if the amnesty is presented and it takes him off the books completely, it opens up a lot of cap space that would not have been opened up otherwise. The amnesty is a one-shot deal, and you don't have time to think about it. The opportunity is given and you either act or you don't. Will there be a hard cap? Who knows, but if there's an opportunity to get Roy's albatross off our books, we have to do it. Unless you think Roy is going to return to form, there's no reason to keep him around for that cost if we can dump him.
Click to expand...

You do know that the Blazers will still be over cap, even after his contract is completely off the books right? So what advantage are you talking about? We will still have just as much flexibility with or without Roy's contract the next 2 years. If we use the Amnesty Clause, it will only free up a roster spot. Also, we have no idea when we must have to use the Amnesty. If we must use it in a certain time period, like let's say, 6 months after the new CBA is implemented; then absolutely we should use it. If we have a window to decide when to do it and just have 1 shot, then what does it matter if we wait?

We still have to pay the full amount of the contract, so it's not a money savings. The only possible money savings would be from luxury tax.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
Seriously you don't think the schedule had a say in that? Shit we debated for a month how the schedule in April was going to knock us out of the playoffs. So I guess we should waive Wallace too becasue they both came back around the same time.
Click to expand...

WIN!
 
Natebishop3 said:
But Roy saved us, turned water into wine, and walked across the Willamette River to lead us not into temptation, but to deliver us from evil, for thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory... forever and ever.... amen.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And most recently was responsible for one of the biggest comebacks in NBA playoff history. Can't just toss this guy away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PapaG
Roy Amnesty and the Full MLE
Replies
13
Views
639
barfo
barfo
Rastapopoulos
"Brandon Roy" rule won't be used on Brandon Roy (and that's good)
2
Replies
49
Views
5K
e_blazer
e_blazer
OSUBlazerfan
Woj: Roy not Oden, will break Blazers
Replies
24
Views
2K
Natebishop3
Natebishop3
magnifier661
Amnesty clause part duex?
Replies
11
Views
715
Draco
Draco
P
New CBA, Franchise tag and Oden
Replies
7
Views
892
3RA1N1AC
3RA1N1AC

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top