One Aldridge Trade Thread to Rule Them All

[Rastapopoulos]

And I'm the homer?

No, but you are a homer. This is THE Homer:

 

[e_blazer]

I want one Aldridge thread to kill the rest. Damn, I'd rather have two years of his services and lose him for nothing than take one of these lame trades that keep getting posted.

 

[GriLtCheeZ]

did anybody see LMA answering questions on twitter the other day? im trying to find them right now but he answered about what he thought about the offseason moves, how him and t-rob will blend together and a couple of other interesting topics. im trying to find them right now but if somebody else is more twitter savvy then myself please feel free to put them up here.
He said he really liked the moves and was excited to see what we have in training camp. was also excited about the addition of trob and said that Damian is going to be a beast. I know you cant always believe what people say but atleast he acknowledged the questions from fans when he really didn't have to. I personally don't think LMA is for sure out the door. if we win next year and Damian and nic takes that next step I think LMA stays

Lamarcus Aldridge ‏@aldridge_12 28 Jul
“@tyshad21: @aldridge_12 How are you and Thomas gonna work? #ripcity”. Good! I like his game

 

[e_blazer]

Rubbish. Most Blazer fans think Lillard is already as good as Rose and Aldridge is better than Noah. The vast majority of Blazer fans would laugh my trade suggestions off as ludicrously undervaluing the Blazer players.

I think that Rose was clearly better than Lillard pre-injury. It remains to be seen how much difference there will be post-injury. I flat out know that Aldridge is a better player than Noah.

 

[Denny Crane]

The Bulls had the best record in basketball two straight seasons. Then Rose got hurt. OK, so maybe he won't come back 100%, but that remains to be seen. If he doesn't, it won't matter what the Bulls do - they won't be championship contenders. You do remember they made the ECF in Rose's MVP year. You know, one more MVP than the guy you think is better than him (and 8+ better PER, too).

I saw what the Heat did. They have LeBron who is in a class by himself. I don't know any combination of other players beats them. Though if Wade seriously declines, it will be him pretty much by himself. And chrissy bosh, oooooooh. Does Rose/Butler/Deng/Mirotic(and Taj)/Noah have what it takes to beat LeBron, Bosh, and 33 year old Wade two seasons from now? Hell, LeBron may not even be on the Heat then.

Guys I think are in Rose's class as PG are few. DWill, Paul, Westbrook, Curry. Maybe I'm leaving someone out (NOT Lillard). The jury is out on Lillard. Stat padder on a 33 win team, a sieve on defense. Not saying he won't be great. I actually hope he does step up his game like Rose did. Rose was a sieve on defense his first couple of seasons, too.

Due to the way the Bulls cap space works, they're likely to re-sign Deng. They'll be able to amnesty Boozer, sign Mirotic, and pay Deng Max (if they choose) and be under the LT, including all the cap holds and other guys' salaries. If they let Deng walk, they'd have a couple $million under the cap to replace him, which is a tough thing to do.

That Bobcats pick is fully unprotected in 2016. If the Bulls do win 60+ games the next three seasons, maybe win a championship, it'd be like when the Celtics got 1st pick and drafted Len Bias. What a huge shot in the arm to get #1 in the draft while championship contender!

Yeah, yeah, the Bobcats are going to try and win. And sure, past performance isn't a guarantee of future performance. But one .500 season in the history of the franchise, 33, 26, and 18 wins (going the right direction for the Bulls!) the past three seasons, and I think it's a lot better bet than hoping a Spurs pick might turn into a superstar.

Obviously the Bulls have assets you want, or you wouldn't keep making lopsided trade proposals to get a bunch of them.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

a more realistic proposal would be mirotic and cha pick with boozer, if boozer falls off a cliff and or is injured

basically a salary dump, because boozer is still a useful player at this point

 

[Pinwheel1]

Boozer sucks. Not because he has no talent, (because he does) but because no one likes playing with him. For him to be effective the offense needs to run through him. But why would Chicago do that when they have Rose. Utah could not wait to get rid of him for the same reason. DWill hated playing with him. Chicago needs to pay to get rid of him and his salary, not benefit by trading him.

 

[PapaG]

a more realistic proposal would be mirotic and cha pick with boozer, if boozer falls off a cliff and or is injured

basically a salary dump, because boozer is still a useful player at this point

How is it a salary dump? Boozer has two more years on his contract. Same as LMA.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

How is it a salary dump? Boozer has two more years on his contract. Same as LMA.

no, like if boozer was just pure salary, not a player

 

[Drttimmy]

It's often said a fair, balanced agreement is one where both sides feel they get shorted. Seems to be the case here, based on both sides' comments.

Aldridge is not only an All-Star, but an All-Star at a talent deprived position in the NBA. How many teams have legit low post threats you can run an offense through? Not many and Chicago is one of them. The contention that it leaves them void of a backup power forward seems a little petty considering what they get in return. Plus, they get a two guard who fits their system and is just entering his prime.

From Portland's perspective, if they can get a young, talented big in return like Asik, it's probably the best consolation prize you can hope for. They may be able to get a borderline all star at a wing position, but I'd rather have a talented big.

Personally, I'd wait it out and hope Love and the T'Wolves get disgruntled enough with each other, that we can swing a Love for Aldridge swap.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Doesn't matter: Portland comes off worst in that three-way. We may have to trade Aldridge but damned if I'm giving up Batum. (Also: who's Houston's SF now? And that would be pretty rich given that Parsons was the one who worked tirelessly to recruit Howard.)

Parsons' performance last year was on par with Batum's, and he costs less than 1/10 as much.

Monroe + Asik is better than Aldridge, IMO.

Mags' deal makes sense for all three teams. I would also think DET & HOU might consider swapping Lin and Stuckey in the deal.

 

[Pinwheel1]

I
Personally, I'd wait it out and hope Love and the T'Wolves get disgruntled enough with each other, that we can swing a Love for Aldridge swap.

I am all for waiting it out, but if you do then sending Aldridge to place where he does not want to go, towards the end of his contract , would not be smart for the team getting him.

IMO there are very few scenarios that will work. Now or later

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Parsons' performance last year was on par with Batum's, and he costs less than 1/10 as much.

...making him very valuable to Houston. He's also the guy that recruited Dwight Howard and their only SF that I can see. I don't think the trade makes sense for Houston.

I also don't believe that Parsons would really that great for another team. I'm suspicious of a player who wasn't a world-beater when playing in the French League (yes, I mean Parsons - that's where he was before Houston called him back) suddenly emerging. It's possible, but I think he may have benefited from Houston's breakneck pace scoring system.

Also: just look at him. Do you honestly believe he's a good defender? I know you shouldn't judge a book by its cover, but... just look at him!

Monroe + Asik is better than Aldridge, IMO.

If they were combined into one player, maybe. But that's like saying Gerald Wallace + Kyle Korver > Lebron because one shoots better and the other defends better.

It's not the worst trade idea, but I don't see anybody going for it.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

...making him very valuable to Houston. He's also the guy that recruited Dwight Howard and their only SF that I can see. I don't think the trade makes sense for Houston.

You think that Houston would prefer Parsons/Asik to Aldridge. I respectfully disagree. I might even disrespectfully disagree.

If they were combined into one player, maybe. But that's like saying Gerald Wallace + Kyle Korver > Lebron because one shoots better and the other defends better.

Except that it's not like saying that, because Wallace doesn't defend better, and because Lebron does so many other things better than either one.

But strawman/poor analogy aside, you obviously would need to look at the way the entire frontline rotation would be affected. Monroe/Robinson and Asik/Lopez v. Aldridge/Robinson and Lopez/Leonard.

Basically, we would be replacing Aldridge/Leonard in our rotation with Monroe/Asik. I don't think it's at all a stretch to say that the gap between Asik and Leonard is greater than the gap between Aldridge and Monroe. So the overall impact on our team this year would be, IMO, a net positive, in addition to the increased growth potential.

 

[dviss1]

Parsons' performance last year was on par with Batum's, and he costs less than 1/10 as much.

Monroe + Asik is better than Aldridge, IMO.

Mags' deal makes sense for all three teams. I would also think DET & HOU might consider swapping Lin and Stuckey in the deal.

Batum>>> Parsons

Parsons' contract>>> Batum's contract

I'd still rather have Batum

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Batum>>> Parsons

">", perhaps, but ">>>"? What causes you to see the production gap as being so large, that is, as large as the contract gap? They appear to have been roughly equal last year.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

">", perhaps, but ">>>"? What causes you to see the production gap as being so large, that is, as large as the contract gap? They appear to have been roughly equal last year.

Parsons did indeed have a very good year. And is signed to a ridiculously low contract. But that means he's going to think he's owed a HUGE contract next time to make up for the bargain he's been up to this point.

Maybe we're all deceived about Batum, but I still see him as more talented and as a possible all-star, particularly if Aldridge is traded. I just don't think you give up Batum just to make an Aldridge trade work. And I think Houston is not going to do a trade where they have to give up Parsons, who complements their setup, even more now they have Howard. Also, while we're using BasketballReference, let's see how they do Head to Head...

Finally, can you see Parsons doing this:

[video=youtube;qHeLM-PgGyk]

Finally, finally: nut punches. Nic gives 'em, Parsons receives them - from his own teammates!

[video=youtube;KfAscH_l0ps]

(With this and the Dee Bost thing it's going to look like I'm obsessed - but it's not me! It's YouTube - they keep popping up when I just type in the names.)

 

[Rastapopoulos]

You think that Houston would prefer Parsons/Asik to Aldridge. I respectfully disagree. I might even disrespectfully disagree.

But you're saying WE should prefer Parsons/Asik to Aldridge? Because we could do the Batum for Monroe thing independently, so essentially we're acting as if Parsons/Asik is the best we could get for Aldridge. And that's assuming we would even want to do the Batum for Monroe, which I don't think we should. So this trade is based on two ideas that I contest:

1. Asik + Parsons is the best we could get for Aldridge
2. Monroe for Batum is a good trade for us.

Putting two bad ideas together does not make one good one. Yes, each trade makes sense - for the other team.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

But you're saying WE should prefer Parsons/Asik to Aldridge? Because we could do the Batum for Monroe thing independently, so essentially we're acting as if Parsons/Asik is the best we could get for Aldridge. And that's assuming we would even want to do the Batum for Monroe, which I don't think we should. So this trade is based on two ideas that I contest:

1. Asik + Parsons is the best we could get for Aldridge
2. Monroe for Batum is a good trade for us.

Putting two bad ideas together does not make one good one. Yes, each trade makes sense - for the other team.

I'm not looking at each independently--I'm looking at it holistically. In my opinion, Parsons/Monroe/Asik as a whole is better than Batum/Aldridge, considering cumulative skill-sets, age of best player, and salary obligations and expectations. I see this as a deal which makes all three teams better.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Maybe it's the Suns we should be trading with.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

I'm not looking at each independently--I'm looking at it holistically. In my opinion, Parsons/Monroe/Asik as a whole is better than Batum/Aldridge, considering cumulative skill-sets, age of best player, and salary obligations and expectations. I see this as a deal which makes all three teams better.

As I said, it's not the worst. But (to summarize):

1. it brings in players that their respective team likes and is happy with just to facilitate a trade for another guy. I don't think that's good practice. If this was a fantasy distribution of players it might even make sense, but I think a good GM takes loyalty into account, and the Rockets owe Parsons a lot.
2. I don't think Monroe is a good player to have. The Pistons have sucked epically while he put up good numbers. That smacks of Shareef Abdur-Rahim/poor man's Al Jefferson.
3. Our need for Asik has diminished. It would be nice to have him, but he's not filling as huge a hole as he would have before we got Lopez.
4. Asik is all-defense, no offense. Monroe is all-offense, no defense. You can hope that two one-dimensional players cancel each others' deficiencies out, but I'm not sure it would work.

I just don't see it happening. And I'm glad.

 

[dviss1]

As I said, it's not the worst. But (to summarize):

1. it brings in players that their respective team likes and is happy with just to facilitate a trade for another guy. I don't think that's good practice. If this was a fantasy distribution of players it might even make sense, but I think a good GM takes loyalty into account, and the Rockets owe Parsons a lot.
2. I don't think Monroe is a good player to have. The Pistons have sucked epically while he put up good numbers. That smacks of Shareef Abdur-Rahim/poor man's Al Jefferson.
3. Our need for Asik has diminished. It would be nice to have him, but he's not filling as huge a hole as he would have before we got Lopez.
4. Asik is all-defense, no offense. Monroe is all-offense, no defense. You can hope that two one-dimensional players cancel each others' deficiencies out, but I'm not sure it would work.

I just don't see it happening. And I'm glad.

I concur. All great points. Repp'd.

 

[magnifier661]

I'm not looking at each independently--I'm looking at it holistically. In my opinion, Parsons/Monroe/Asik as a whole is better than Batum/Aldridge, considering cumulative skill-sets, age of best player, and salary obligations and expectations. I see this as a deal which makes all three teams better.

This....

Lopez and asik would be a hell of a center combo. Robinson and Monroe is a strong rotation too. Monroe would be like Aldridge, in which he could move to center if we need more offense.

The parson/wright combo would be fine at sf too.

I agree that Detroit would probably swap stuckey and Lin.

 

[magnifier661]

As I said, it's not the worst. But (to summarize):

1. it brings in players that their respective team likes and is happy with just to facilitate a trade for another guy. I don't think that's good practice. If this was a fantasy distribution of players it might even make sense, but I think a good GM takes loyalty into account, and the Rockets owe Parsons a lot.
2. I don't think Monroe is a good player to have. The Pistons have sucked epically while he put up good numbers. That smacks of Shareef Abdur-Rahim/poor man's Al Jefferson.
3. Our need for Asik has diminished. It would be nice to have him, but he's not filling as huge a hole as he would have before we got Lopez.
4. Asik is all-defense, no offense. Monroe is all-offense, no defense. You can hope that two one-dimensional players cancel each others' deficiencies out, but I'm not sure it would work.

I just don't see it happening. And I'm glad.

There is three very important intangibles.

1.) Monroe will be a restricted free agent and we will most likely have him for another 4 years. Probably cheaper than Aldridge.

2.) we overpaid for batum and parson will be much cheaper.

3.) all the players coming back are younger, with the exception of asik. But all players totally fit Lillard and a pick and roll offense.

The one thing we really suck at is setting up a pick and roll. Asik and Monroe are really good at doing that. Parson is fucking deadly from the perimeter and actually likes to drive to the basket as well.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

There is three very important intangibles.

"Intangibles"? Do you mean "factors we haven't mentioned yet"?

1.) Monroe will be a restricted free agent and we will most likely have him for another 4 years. Probably cheaper than Aldridge.

As well he should be, because he's half the player.

2.) we overpaid for batum and parson will be much cheaper.

If we overpaid for Batum, why would Detroit do it? Parsons will be cheaper until he isn't, because he's been underpaid. Again: shitty move by Houston if they do this. Not a good message. Not saying that would mean it wouldn't happen, but a good GM takes that into account.

One very important point about this trade: it doesn't come close to working salary-wise. Portland sends out $26.2M in salary and gets back $13.4M. Mess around on trade machine and see if you can make it work. (Detroit and Houston swapping Lin and Stuckey makes absolutely no difference to that imbalance because they earn the same, or at least, count the same against the cap.)

 

[magnifier661]

"Intangibles"? Do you mean "factors we haven't mentioned yet"?

As well he should be, because he's half the player.

If we overpaid for Batum, why would Detroit do it? Parsons will be cheaper until he isn't, because he's been underpaid. Again: shitty move by Houston if they do this. Not a good message. Not saying that would mean it wouldn't happen, but a good GM takes that into account.

One very important point about this trade: it doesn't come close to working salary-wise. Portland sends out $26.2M in salary and gets back $13.4M. Mess around on trade machine and see if you can make it work. (Detroit and Houston swapping Lin and Stuckey makes absolutely no difference to that imbalance because they earn the same, or at least, count the same against the cap.)

We would need to take back gooden from Detroit.

 

[Draco]

We would need to take back gooden from Detroit.

Charlie "gooden" Villanueva.

 

[magnifier661]

Charlie "gooden" Villanueva.

Yes!

 

[PtldPlatypus]

We would need to take back Villanueva from Detroit.

Still doesn't work for Houston. Best way to make it work would be for Villanueva to come to Portland and Camby to go to Detroit, but not until after 9/10 (after which point Camby can be traded in concert with other players).

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Bill Simmons belatedly jumps on the bandwagon:

The Bulls could slap together a good Aldridge package featuring Carlos Boozer, their unprotected 2014 no. 1 pick, then two of the following: Jimmy Butler, prized European prospect Nikola Mirotic, and/or the rights to Charlotte's future no. 1 pick (unprotected by 2016). If I'm running Portland and I could add Butler, Mirotic, an unprotected 2014 no. 1 and Boozer (who could give them 80 percent of Aldridge's stats) for someone who might not want to play for me? I'm doing that one. That's 90 cents on the dollar. (Here's where everyone in Chicago screams: "NOOOOOOOOOOO! We can't trade Jimmy!!!!")