OT: Blair's knees

[Fez Hammersticks]

According to Chad Ford (Insider) Blair's knees have been "red flagged"

Word from the physicals is that his knees aren't in great shape at all.

Link

 

[Nikolokolus]

That's not so good.

 

[cdub503]

if he fell to 24....would you take him?

 

[Da_O]

No way he falls to us, so no use in talking about him. I can nearly guarantee that New Jersey will take him with #11 and if they don't then Chicago would take him with #16.

 

[illmatic99]

Maybe KP's spreading rumors again....

Aso, he'd fit in pretty well here considering BRoy and GO were both flagged prior to being drafted.

 

[BasX]

No way he falls to us, so no use in talking about him. I can nearly guarantee that New Jersey will take him with #11 and if they don't then Chicago would take him with #16.

For New Jersey it's either him, Johnson or Clark. But Rod Thorn is smart, he may pass on him now, allowing him to fall.

 

[BlazersBlood]

That's good news if we don't trade up. He would be a great value pick at that point.

I wonder if those knees would hold up for just 10-18 minutes a game.

 

[Minstrel]

That's good news if we don't trade up. He would be a great value pick at that point.

I wonder if those knees would hold up for just 10-18 minutes a game.

Yeah, he probably wouldn't even need to survive 18 MPG. Aldridge should be a 35 MPG player, which leaves 13 MPG for a backup to absorb.

 

[B-Roy]

Now there's no point in drafting him.

We can't use his knees anymore for a knees transplant with Oden.

 

[Ed O]

No way he falls to us, so no use in talking about him. I can nearly guarantee that New Jersey will take him with #11 and if they don't then Chicago would take him with #16.

You know that trades are allowed in the NBA, right?

Ed O.

 

[Ed O]

Maybe KP's spreading rumors again....

Aso, he'd fit in pretty well here considering BRoy and GO were both flagged prior to being drafted.

And Batum...

Ed O.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

I wish it were a smokescreen but the guy did tear both his ACL's in HS.

 

[Da_O]

You know that trades are allowed in the NBA, right?

Ed O.

Yes Ed O I do know that.

If you read my post, I say no way is he going to fall to us. Anyone outside of the top five isn't worth trading up for, and I certainly don't think we should give away integral pieces for a backup PF.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I think this is nothing but good news for Portland. At #24 you take him because he is then a high risk/high reward guy. This draft sucks, and while there may be some good players to emerge from it, I think it's a crap shoot where we are picking. If the Blazers somehow keep the pick....which I doubt.....he would be a fantastic one if he is still there.

 

[RickyRubio]

How many games did he miss in college due to his knees?

http://stats.nj.com/cbk/players.asp?id=73251

hmm... looks like zero.

 

[BasX]

How many games did he miss in college due to his knees?

http://stats.nj.com/cbk/players.asp?id=73251

hmm... looks like zero.

He also only played 2 years

 

[RickyRubio]

He also only played 2 years

And?

 

[Ed O]

Yes Ed O I do know that.

If you read my post, I say no way is he going to fall to us. Anyone outside of the top five isn't worth trading up for, and I certainly don't think we should give away integral pieces for a backup PF.

Your post did not contain the final sentence, and I'm not sure that your position stands up to scrutiny.

The Blazers have second round picks and Paul Allen money and the #24. Getting up to the mid-teens with those pieces doesn't seem at all out of the question.

As for whether Blair is WORTH trading up for? That's what we are discussing, but you said it's not worth discussing since he won't slide to us.

Ed O.

 

[RickyRubio]

I think we need a vet backup PF rather then a rookie.

 

[SteelBlaze1]

I think we need a vet backup PF rather then a rookie.

Sign McDyess...

 

[RickyRubio]

Sign McDyess...

I don't think he would come to Portland, though.

 

[SteelBlaze1]

I don't think he would come to Portland, though.

I agree...he may be more of an east coast guy...even though he did play for Phoenix at one point. I would think he would go where the money (Paul Allen) is and the chance to win a championship (Portland).

We will see. KP may not even have him on is radar.

 

[RickyRubio]

I agree...he may be more of an east coast guy...even though he did play for Phoenix at one point. I would think he would go where the money (Paul Allen) is and the chance to win a championship (Portland).

We will see. KP may not even have him on is radar.

Don't get me wrong, I hope your right!!! But I remember something like he refused to play for Denver and wanted to go back to Detroit in the AI trade. But maybe that had something to do with past beef with Denver?

I would love to take McDyess to backup and teach LMA!

 

[Da_O]

Your post did not contain the final sentence, and I'm not sure that your position stands up to scrutiny.

The Blazers have second round picks and Paul Allen money and the #24. Getting up to the mid-teens with those pieces doesn't seem at all out of the question.

As for whether Blair is WORTH trading up for? That's what we are discussing, but you said it's not worth discussing since he won't slide to us.

Ed O.

It is out of the question. If you think 4 2nd round picks and just money are going to buy us into early or mid-teens, you're delusional. I've never seen it happen.

For a backup 4 and a player with knee problems, it would be foolish to trade integral pieces away.

Like I've stated, I'm pretty positive the Nets take him at #11. Most mock drafts have him going there, even Rod Thorn has said that he needs a moose and Blair is the perfect fit for that role.

I'm tired of frivolous threads spent on acquiring players, that we have no business discussing, because they're outside the realm of possibility. Mainly it was Rubio but now it's Blair. Before, Blair looked like he could fall to our range and I was optimistic about getting him. With combine workouts and interviews his stock has skyrocketed. I no longer see him as a possibility.

 

[BrianFromWA]

so you're saying that it's impossible to go from having the #4 pick to having both the #2 and #6? That would be frivolous?

Or trading the #7 pick for a future (conditional) first and the #31? (See PHX, Luol Deng). That would be frivolous to talk about?

Those have both happened in the most recent "weak drafts". Still think it's frivolous? Then I can't help you. Marcus Camby for a 2nd rounder?

Sometimes people WAAAY overestimate the intelligence and problem-solving skills of NBA GMs. Sometimes they underestimate it. To say that discussing anything in that realm is frivolous would be, to me, short-sighted.

 

[BasX]

And?

Just a point that needs to be said.

 

[Da_O]

so you're saying that it's impossible to go from having the #4 pick to having both the #2 and #6? That would be frivolous?

Or trading the #7 pick for a future (conditional) first and the #31? (See PHX, Luol Deng). That would be frivolous to talk about?

Those have both happened in the most recent "weak drafts". Still think it's frivolous? Then I can't help you. Marcus Camby for a 2nd rounder?

Sometimes people WAAAY overestimate the intelligence and problem-solving skills of NBA GMs. Sometimes they underestimate it. To say that discussing anything in that realm is frivolous would be, to me, short-sighted.

Marcus Camby was strictly a cap move, it wasn't about the 2nd rounder. Marcus Camby isn't what I call a great player to begin with.

In both those moves, we had to give up pieces, not just 2nd rounders and money. We're talking about a backup PF here, not a potential starter. Giving up important pieces for a backup PF, who will only play 10-15 minutes a game, is foolish.

Yes I still think it's frivolous.

 

[BrianFromWA]

"strictly a cap move"....that's the entire point of why these trades aren't frivolous! Of COURSE in a normal environment where everyone had an owner like PA, this wouldn't be feasible--but it's not a normal environment like that. You think that times are so great (compared to 2004) now that no one would even possibly consider the #7 for #31 and next year's pick? You don't think KP would be on that like a vulture? MEM, OKC, WAS are all teams in the top 5 shopping their pick. I doubt it's b/c they can't find a good player there, it's that they're using it at leverage to get rid of bad contracts/get into a better financial place. You can't just discount things as "strictly for cap reasons" and then declare discussion frivolous and still make sense. And I'm just talking Top 5 teams. I'm not going into GSW at 7, TOR at 9, Indiana, etc.

 

[Da_O]

"strictly a cap move"....that's the entire point of why these trades aren't frivolous! Of COURSE in a normal environment where everyone had an owner like PA, this wouldn't be feasible--but it's not a normal environment like that. You think that times are so great (compared to 2004) now that no one would even possibly consider the #7 for #31 and next year's pick? You don't think KP would be on that like a vulture? MEM, OKC, WAS are all teams in the top 5 shopping their pick. I doubt it's b/c they can't find a good player there, it's that they're using it at leverage to get rid of bad contracts/get into a better financial place. You can't just discount things as "strictly for cap reasons" and then declare discussion frivolous and still make sense. And I'm just talking Top 5 teams. I'm not going into GSW at 7, TOR at 9, Indiana, etc.

I don't believe this whole, "times are tough" so teams are going to make stupid deals. If so why didn't we get anything for Lafrentz? As much as you say people overestimate GM's intelligence, you are in the group that underestimates it.

now that no one would even possibly consider the #7 for #31 and next year's pick?

No I don't. When we gave up that next year's pick, we were a bad team. So the other team should expect a pretty high pick next year. Now that we've just made the playoffs, teams aren't going to trade their top ten picks for a pick in the 20's.

The Marcus Camby thing is entirely different from my argument. I'm talking about acquiring a high pick for just 2nd rounders and cash isn't going to happen. And I don't think trading pieces away like Outlaw or Bayless is worth moving up in this weak, weak draft; especially for a backup PF.

 

[PapaG]

"strictly a cap move"....that's the entire point of why these trades aren't frivolous! Of COURSE in a normal environment where everyone had an owner like PA, this wouldn't be feasible--but it's not a normal environment like that. You think that times are so great (compared to 2004) now that no one would even possibly consider the #7 for #31 and next year's pick? You don't think KP would be on that like a vulture? MEM, OKC, WAS are all teams in the top 5 shopping their pick. I doubt it's b/c they can't find a good player there, it's that they're using it at leverage to get rid of bad contracts/get into a better financial place. You can't just discount things as "strictly for cap reasons" and then declare discussion frivolous and still make sense. And I'm just talking Top 5 teams. I'm not going into GSW at 7, TOR at 9, Indiana, etc.

I wouldn't be so fast to assume that Paul Allen will just throw money at long contracts. He allowed the Rose Garden to go into bankruptcy once before, and that was in flush economic times. And moving up to get DeJuan Blair? Why? I do realize that wasn't necessarily your argument, but I've seen it made in this thread. Trade up into the lottery to get an undersized backup PF with bad knees? I don't get it.