Olshey Article (Great Read)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
fighting back urge to post a picture of a double headed dildo...
 
Good article. Pretty much the way I see it. If the Pacers don't match on Hibbert, then the Blazers should go ahead and match on Batum. If we lose out on Hibbert, hello rebuild. In KP we trust?
 
Pritchard is STILL in charge of our future. He refuses to die!
 
If Indy matches Hibbert like we expect, I would match for Batum. I think he is a better asset to have than any cap space. Thc chance of trading him next year is better than picking up a SF in
the draft that won't be ready for 2-3 years. If he works out at all.
 
It is indeed a very well written article and I think it hits the nail squarely. If Indy matches our offer (and I think they will) we destroy our cap space by resigning Batum.

If I were a gambling man, I'd assume we're not getting Hibbert, pass on Batum, look forward to a top 5 pick next year in the draft and use our cap space then to try and pick off a nice free agent. Meanwhile, let the kids get some playing time and experience.

BTW, posting the link is worthy of a rep- but do I really have to rep MM? OK, OK, just kidding.'
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
It is indeed a very well written article and I think it hits the nail squarely. If Indy matches our offer (and I think they will) we destroy our cap space by resigning Batum.

If I were a gambling man, I'd assume we're not getting Hibbert, pass on Batum, look forward to a top 5 pick next year in the draft and use our cap space then to try and pick off a nice free agent. Meanwhile, let the kids get some playing time and experience.

BTW, posting the link is worthy of a rep- but do I really have to rep MM? OK, OK, just kidding.'
Click to expand...

I was teasing about the rep thingy, I'm not really sure how it works anyway?
 
Pinwheel1 said:
If Indy matches Hibbert like we expect, I would match for Batum. I think he is a better asset to have than any cap space. Thc chance of trading him next year is better than picking up a SF in
the draft that won't be ready for 2-3 years. If he works out at all.
Click to expand...

Good point. With the demise of Base Year Compensation provisions with the current CBA, I think Nic would become tradeable right away.
 
e_blazer said:
Good point. With the demise of Base Year Compensation provisions with the current CBA, I think Nic would become tradeable right away.
Click to expand...

Tradeable to Minnesota? Who else is going to want him at 12/per? Know that I'm half kidding here, I know some idiot GM would take him on for potential but just not sure how many will be willing to at that price.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
If Indy matches Hibbert like we expect, I would match for Batum. I think he is a better asset to have than any cap space. Thc chance of trading him next year is better than picking up a SF in
the draft that won't be ready for 2-3 years. If he works out at all.
Click to expand...

This really wouldn't make any sense. Batum would be way over payed, and the only team that was interested in paying him that much is the only team we couldn't trade him to.
 
Mediocre Man said:
This really wouldn't make any sense. Batum would be way over payed, and the only team that was interested in paying him that much is the only team we couldn't trade him to.
Click to expand...

So no team who needs a good SF would be interested? Maybe a sign and trade? Maybe even 2 years from now? Three years from now. He would still be an asset this way.

As far as Minnesota, how long is the time frame? I thought it was one year. Can we not trade for Millsap?
 
Pinwheel1 said:
So no team who needs a good SF would be interested? Maybe a sign and trade? Maybe even 2 years from now? Three years from now. He would still be an asset this way.

As far as Minnesota, how long is the time frame? I thought it was one year. Can we not trade for Millsap?
Click to expand...

He can't be traded to the team that offered the contract for the length of that contract, so in Minnesota's case, 4 years. I'm not sure if that means from us, or from anyone. Nic can't be traded until Dec sometime, and that would only be with his permission, which lasts a full year

As for him being an asset, only 1 team was interested in offering him that much money. Nic is a role player that has horrible on/off court stats. Just my opinion, but I wouldn't be interested in that
 
Mediocre Man said:
He can't be traded to the team that offered the contract for the length of that contract, so in Minnesota's case, 4 years. I'm not sure if that means from us, or from anyone. Nic can't be traded until Dec sometime, and that would only be with his permission, which lasts a full year

As for him being an asset, only 1 team was interested in offering him that much money. Nic is a role player that has horrible on/off court stats. Just my opinion, but I wouldn't be interested in that
Click to expand...

I think other teams were interested in Nic, but he or his agent chose Minnesota early on and had no desire to talk to anyone else. I think Toronto showed interest, and New Orleans. Besides I am not talking about right now. I am talking about Nic as an asset down the road. We may not want to move him, but in a few years I would rather have him as an option to trade as opposed to not having him at all. At that point he would only have a year or two left on his contract and the cap could be higher and the perception of his 11-12 million contract may not seem as high.

I do see your point and it is valid. I just would lean towards keeping him over keeping the cap space.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
I think other teams were interested in Nic, but he or his agent chose Minnesota early on and had no desire to talk to anyone else. I think Toronto showed interest, and New Orleans. Besides I am not talking about right now. I am talking about Nic as an asset down the road. We may not want to move him, but in a few years I would rather have him as an option to trade as opposed to not having him at all. At that point he would only have a year or two left on his contract and the cap could be higher and the perception of his 11-12 million contract may not seem as high.

I do see your point and it is valid. I just would lean towards keeping him over keeping the cap space.
Click to expand...
Cap space has certainly never been our friend.
 
It's so refreshing to have someone in charge that seems to have a plan (other than to "let it bake").
 
Really nice summation by Arnovitz. Let's all hope that Olshey has enough pull to keep the Blazers on the right path.
 
Good read, but I dont like the idea of Babbitt starting if we dont keep Batum.
 
BoBoBREWSKI said:
Good read, but I dont like the idea of Babbitt starting if we dont keep Batum.
Click to expand...

I would prefer Wes. I know that makes us really small, but unless Claver is more mobile than we think, I would rather have Elliot and Wes in the starting line-up. Either way it shows how bad we need Nic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Darkwebs
TrueHoop: Did Roy say trade Miller or trade me?
2 3 4
Replies
98
Views
7K
Natebishop3
Natebishop3
Nikolokolus
Why a long range plan matters
Replies
14
Views
790
Pinwheel1
Pinwheel1
Wheels
Coming Soon: Ads on NBA Jersey's
2
Replies
41
Views
5K
<-=*PdX*=->
<-=*PdX*=->
Boise Blazer
Olshey Accelerated Rebuild Due To Portland's Intense Devotion To Blazers
2 3
Replies
65
Views
3K
jlprk
jlprk
SlyPokerDog
OT - The Knicks' secret weapon: The unlikely bonus
Replies
23
Views
1K
Masbee
Masbee

Users who are viewing this thread

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