Quick says look for a trade on draft night for a center

[KeepOnRollin]

I think Olshey is hoping MEM beats LAC here in the first round. He is after Jordan. I not thrilled with DeAndre but a lot of Centers have some kind of tick and I can't debate that he isn't an upgrade. Just not thrilled with his contract either (makes 11 MIL a year also). That is my guess though. If LAC bombs out then it is Jordan.

 

[PapaG]

You guys wanna take this stuff to PMs? Really clogging up the thread.

No, I'm just going to put whoever this is on ignore. Much easier.

 

[Mediocre Man]

My understanding was that in essence, we can. We can go over the cap to sign JJ, and can trade for a guy with a similar new salary? Is there a precedence to this?

This is how it works. In order for the Blazers to have the cap room the desire, they need to renounce Hickson as well as Maynor. You can do a S&T, but it's trickier under the new CBA. Because we would be under the cap, we would also lose one of the exceptions. (MLE, I think?)

I rambled and answered nothing. Sorry

 

[PapaG]

This is how it works. In order for the Blazers to have the cap room the desire, they need to renounce Hickson as well as Maynor. You can do a S&T, but it's trickier under the new CBA. Because we would be under the cap, we would also lose one of the exceptions. (MLE, I think?)

I rambled and answered nothing. Sorry

The short answer is that you can't 'cheat' on cap space. It's going to be a solid number going into FA.

 

[Blazinaway]

No, I'm just going to put whoever this is on ignore. Much easier.

LOL, no surprise, still no idea/opinion on what we should do for our C? thx for contributing

 

[Mediocre Man]

The short answer is that you can't 'cheat' on cap space. It's going to be a solid number going into FA.

I'd like storyteller or Brian from Wa to clarify though. I wonder if certain things are done by certain dates or whatever that we could use more exceptions to sign guys and such

 

[illmatic99]

Olshey has repeatedly mentioned "maximizing" our cap space. Hopefully, he actually follows through. It's not cheating or circumventing, it's just being smart.

 

[RR7]

...

89. Can a free agent be signed and immediately traded?

There is a rule that allows teams to re-sign their own free agents for trading purposes, called the sign-and-trade rule. Under this rule the player is re-signed and immediately traded to another team. This is done by adding a clause to the contract stipulating that the contract is null and void if the trade to the specific team is not completed within 48 hours. To qualify for a sign-and-trade, all of the following must be true:

The player must re-sign with his prior team -- a team cannot include another team's free agent in a sign-and-trade.
The player must finish the preceding season with that team (deals are no longer allowed that sign-and-trade players who are out of the league, such as the sign-and-trade that sent Keith Van Horn from Dallas to New Jersey as part of the Jason Kidd trade in 2008).
The player cannot be a restricted free agent who has signed an offer sheet with another team (see question number 43).
Starting in 2013-14, the team receiving the player cannot be above the "apron" ($4 million above the tax level) after the trade1, 2.
Starting in 2013-14, the team cannot receive a player in a sign-and-trade if they have used the Taxpayer Mid-Level exception (see question number 25) that season.1
The trade must be completed prior to the first game of the regular season (sign-and-trades are not allowed once the season begins).
The player cannot be signed using the Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level exception, the Taxpayer Mid-Level exception, or any exception that cannot be used to offer a three-year contract (see question number 25).
A sign-and-trade deal can be made with a free agent who has been renounced, as long as all the above criteria are met. Sign-and-trade contracts must be for at least three seasons (not including any option year) and no longer than four seasons.

 

[BrianFromWA]

I'd like storyteller or Brian from Wa to clarify though. I wonder if certain things are done by certain dates or whatever that we could use more exceptions to sign guys and such

Sorry. What's the question?

 

[oldmangrouch]

So, after nearly 300 posts we have come to the following conclusion:

Every player available is available because they have question marks or a bad contract (or both). The team either does something that involves risk - or does nothing at all.

 

[Natebishop3]

So, after nearly 300 posts we have come to the following conclusion:

Every player available is available because they have question marks or a bad contract (or both). The team either does something that involves risk - or does nothing at all.

Shit, I think that could be said about almost every free agent. Very rarely does a sure thing come along, and only a select few teams actually have a shot at signing them. For the Blazers it's always going to be about taking risks. We sure took a lot of risks in the mid-to-late 90s and it paid off.

 

[RR7]

Shit, I think that could be said about almost every free agent. Very rarely does a sure thing come along, and only a select few teams actually have a shot at signing them. For the Blazers it's always going to be about taking risks. We sure took a lot of risks in the mid-to-late 90s and it paid off.

Yeah, it's just getting lucky on those risks, but it's always going to take a degree of luck. It's just deciding which gamble do you want to make. With Cs, first, you can gamble on passing on a trade, in the hopes of getting a FA to come here. All things aren't equal, so you likely overpay slightly, but that's possibly ok. You can gamble on all of the available Cs. We can go older stop gap who has fallen out of favor his last few stops it seems, in Dalembert. Though he'd been linked before to Miami, so who knows. We can go for young, athletic upside, but questionable intelligence in McGee. Similar makeup in a sense with DeAndre Jordan. Can risk on injuries with Bynum. Can risk on age, and expiring deal of Gortat, who had his best year alongside Nash. Can risk on nobody. Can risk on someone in the draft being ready to help immediately.
ALWAYS going to be some risk with anyone. And maybe more so for a small market team looking to take the next step. Might pay off, might not. But there are no perfect choices.

 

[Boise Blazer]

It seems then that knowing that we aren't going to just get the perfect fit at center then the Blazers need to sit down and rank or prioritize the pros and cons of available players or options. Using that info on the available players they need to decide that with the good of each player comes the bad but which player helps us the most overall and how he fits into our plans. Almost like in the espn trade machine where it shows plus/minus wins with the trade. The direction they go will also show just how strongly they feel about "long term plans"

 

[Natebishop3]

Yeah, it's just getting lucky on those risks, but it's always going to take a degree of luck. It's just deciding which gamble do you want to make. With Cs, first, you can gamble on passing on a trade, in the hopes of getting a FA to come here. All things aren't equal, so you likely overpay slightly, but that's possibly ok. You can gamble on all of the available Cs. We can go older stop gap who has fallen out of favor his last few stops it seems, in Dalembert. Though he'd been linked before to Miami, so who knows. We can go for young, athletic upside, but questionable intelligence in McGee. Similar makeup in a sense with DeAndre Jordan. Can risk on injuries with Bynum. Can risk on age, and expiring deal of Gortat, who had his best year alongside Nash. Can risk on nobody. Can risk on someone in the draft being ready to help immediately.
ALWAYS going to be some risk with anyone. And maybe more so for a small market team looking to take the next step. Might pay off, might not. But there are no perfect choices.

Centers are the biggest gamble around. That's why get paid so much and why they tend to stick around so long after they've lost a step. I would take Jordan over McGee. It would be worth paying a little extra to LAC to get him I think. McGee reminds me too much of Travis Outlaw. Tons and tons of raw talent, but zero smarts. He isn't the kind of player that gets you to the next level.

Dalembert wouldn't be bad, but he's the very definition of a stopgap. Signing someone like Dalembert would only make sense if we had a legit center waiting in the wings. I'm not convinced that Leonard is that guy. He has a lot of talent, but he hasn't shown even the slightest defensive ability. That's concerning, because we don't need another scoring big man. We have LMA. We need a defensive anchor. Someone like Camby when he was younger, or Theo Ratliff. If we would have been able to get Hibbert, that would have solidified our frontcourt for years to come. Unfortunate things worked out the way they did.

I wonder if Milwaukee would bite on a deal that clears some of their shittier contracts and sends us Larry Sanders for Batum, Leonard, and Barton. Then we could use our cap space to go out and sign a shooting guard or a small forward to replace Batum.

 

[magnifier661]

I wonder if Milwaukee would bite on a deal that clears some of their shittier contracts and sends us Larry Sanders for Batum, Leonard, and Barton. Then we could use our cap space to go out and sign a shooting guard or a small forward to replace Batum.

I would trade batum and Leonard for sanders and any shit contract. Adding sanders paired with Aldridge would be the perfect compliment.

 

[Natebishop3]

I would trade batum and Leonard for sanders and any shit contract. Adding sanders paired with Aldridge would be the perfect compliment.

Well, and they'd clear Gooden and Mbah a Moute, who account for about 11 million in cap space for two more years, but are both under 10 in PER.

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=cndr7o5

 

[magnifier661]

Well, and they'd clear Gooden and Mbah a Moute, who account for about 11 million in cap space for two more years, but are both under 10 in PER.

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=cndr7o5

But sanders contract is pretty good right? I mean lets say we add sanders and golden; which is around a 18 mil salary. Removing batum is 12 mil; which applies sanders at 6 mil per.

We would need a capable sf in this scenario be either by free agent signing or trade. I would even use freeland and space to try and land igs.

Edit: I didn't catch your trade machine. That's actually a good deal

 

[Rhal]

But sanders contract is pretty good right? I mean lets say we add sanders and golden; which is around a 18 mil salary. Removing batum is 12 mil; which applies sanders at 6 mil per.

We would need a capable sf in this scenario be either by free agent signing or trade. I would even use freeland and space to try and land igs.

Edit: I didn't catch your trade machine. That's actually a good deal

They might move sanders in the right deal if they don't want to pay him the max that he will get next year in fa.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

[OregonHuskerMan]

Batum, Meyers and absorbing 2 horrible contracts is a LOT. Not sure there is a half decent SF on the market to round out our starting 5. Maybe Igoudala? Thats about all.

 

[Blazinaway]

There is a good thread on another trade board where there is a good idea, accepted by both sides for a "stopgap" C if our other choices fall through. That C is Brendan Haywood (assuming he passes physical), decent D and rebounder. He's on a cheap 2 yr contract for just over 2 mil per, Char would take back Freeland and we send a 2nd rdr (maybe two 2nds), or possibly send 3 mil with Joel.

What's cool about this we get a decent C and REDUCE our capspace a bit. Again not a bad stopgap idea at all if other C ventures do not pan out.

 

[Pinwheel1]

There is a good thread on another trade board where there is a good idea, accepted by both sides for a "stopgap" C if our other choices fall through. That C is Brendan Haywood (assuming he passes physical), decent D and rebounder. He's on a cheap 2 yr contract for just over 2 mil per, Char would take back Freeland and we send a 2nd rdr (maybe two 2nds), or possibly send 3 mil with Joel.

What's cool about this we get a solid C and REDUCE our capspace a bit. Again not a bad stopgap idea at all if other C ventures do not pan out.

How bad is the stress reaction in his foot that ended his season?

Hopefully Haywood would be a last last last resort option.

 

[Blazinaway]

How bad is the stress reaction in his foot that ended his season?

Hopefully Haywood would be a last last last resort option.

don't know about the injury and yes it's a last resort stopgap IMO, but it at least could get us a backup C with experience and we get rid of Freeland and reduce capspace by a small amount