Three way!

[B-Roy]

Phoenix gets SSSSSSSSSWWWWWWWWWWWWWIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNNDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDDDDDDDDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Rastapopoulos]

I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings.

I shouldn't really respond, but it always amazes me when people act as if my disagreeing with them or thinking they've said something stupid is a sign that somehow they've hurt my feelings. Why on earth would you think that? I don't think anything you've said reflects your opinion of me, and even if I did I would be crazy to give a shit, because nothing you've said gives me cause to value your opinion. So don't worry, you don't have to be sorry. I hope that brightens your day.

 

[Natebishop3]

I shouldn't really respond, but it always amazes me when people act as if my disagreeing with them or thinking they've said something stupid is a sign that somehow they've hurt my feelings. Why on earth would you think that? I don't think anything you've said reflects your opinion of me, and even if I did I would be crazy to give a shit, because nothing you've said gives me cause to value your opinion. So don't worry, you don't have to be sorry. I hope that brightens your day.

Okay, ignore the fact that you overreacted to something that really shouldn't have drawn your ire.

You think that Bayless is a shooting guard and that he won't work on this team. I compared your opinion to Maris'. I didn't call you dumb. I didn't say you were stupid. In fact, the post didn't even really mention you at all. So why did it bother yo so much? Hmm? Or are you just voicing something that has irritated you for a while now?

Sorry, but this:

Originally Posted by Rastapopoulos View Post
1. It's "I". You are not the Queen. I assume.
2. Only if you have a serious Maris obsession. And that does indeed appear to be the case.
3. I've been saying this since we drafted Bayless. And that includes watching just about every game in Summer League. So I think I can "own" that opinion for myself.

Was an overreaction to this:

what? We call this disease "Maris syndrome."

 

[free_lafrentz]

I'd rather deal with New Jersey or Toronto than Chicago. They have more valuable assets.

 

[LittleAlex]

I would rather deal with Detroit then any of these other teams mentioned. Not sure how the salaries work, but if we can steal Maxiel and Prince from the Pistons we are playoff contender now and for the next several years.

 

[Shooter]

Portland sends out RLEC, Travis, Blake and Sergio and gets Deng and Hinrich

I'd hate to give up RLEC. He's been shooting the lights out every night, and grabbing about 15 rebounds a game. We'd be crazy to trade that kind of talent. Plus, he has the coolest initials in the league . . .

 

[NattaNerNuttaMan]

ah, another trade where we are sending out our last 5 or 6 guys from our bench and getting back pretty good players.

I know, right?!? It's starting to be an all too common battle rythm here. Give up pine-foder and pull in multiple starters...and in all this the team giving away the biggest piece is getting least in talent back?!? I don't see it.

Like I stated above...there is no way Phoenix would seen Deng's name float around and except Outlaw instead...and also put out....with Nash leaving after next year...Bayless would be a must in any trade talks involving Phoenix and Portland.

I know, I know....you like and want him in your future plans...but you have to give up talent to get talent...and when an (26 year old!) All-Star is being dealt (even if it is to the other team in a three-way) they can and will, if not from Portland, get a package of young talent and picks for Amare from somebody else.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

I know, right?!? It's starting to be an all too common battle rythm here. Give up pine-foder and pull in multiple starters...and in all this the team giving away the biggest piece is getting least in talent back?!? I don't see it.

Are you saying that it doesn't happen in this league? After just about every trade somebody says that one of the teams got screwed by the other, and not just in trades involving Memphis. We tend to look at trades solely from a talent viewpoint, whereas GMs have to worry about the bottom line. And in this economy, that's going to be more and more of a concern. Except, perhaps, if your owner is still fantastically wealthy...

Like I stated above...there is no way Phoenix would seen Deng's name float around and except Outlaw instead...and also put out....with Nash leaving after next year...Bayless would be a must in any trade talks involving Phoenix and Portland.

Look at Deng's contract. And look at his injury history and performance last year. He's a big risk. Outlaw, on the other hand, is cheap, more spectacular, and low risk.

It's funny: since I made this proposal, the common wisdom seems to be that Chicago will get Amare without giving up Deng at all. If you thought Phoenix was being screwed by my proposal (which saves them a lot of money and, at least the second version, gets them Thomas, supposedly now their main target), what do you think of that?

Anyhoo, I've got another 3-way, because a new rumor says that Golden State is interested. So how about:

Portland gives up: RLEC, Travis
Portland gets: Stephen Jackson (my main incentive - he's a huge playoff performer) and Ronny Turiaf (good guy, better defender as backup PF than any of ours)

GS gives up: Brandan Wright, Stephen Jackson, Ronny Turiaf
GS gets: Stoudemire and Goran Dragic

Phoenix gives up: Stoudemire and Dragic (dumping a failed draft pick)
Phoenix gets: RLEC, Outlaw and Wright.

I think Phoenix make out like bandits here: big money off the books, Wright is a great young PF and Outlaw is cheap and solid.

Would we do it? I think Jackson would be a big risk, big reward player: he transformed that team when they acquired him and he does have a championship ring. I'm not sure GState would give him up, because he is their Captain Jack, but on the other hand, they have just a ton of perimeter players. GState of course gets Amare. Mind you, Amare without Jackson is a risk - who's that team's leader now?

 

[Nikolokolus]

Are you saying that it doesn't happen in this league? After just about every trade somebody says that one of the teams got screwed by the other, and not just in trades involving Memphis. We tend to look at trades solely from a talent viewpoint, whereas GMs have to worry about the bottom line. And in this economy, that's going to be more and more of a concern. Except, perhaps, if your owner is still fantastically wealthy...



Look at Deng's contract. And look at his injury history and performance last year. He's a big risk. Outlaw, on the other hand, is cheap, more spectacular, and low risk.

It's funny: since I made this proposal, the common wisdom seems to be that Chicago will get Amare without giving up Deng at all. If you thought Phoenix was being screwed by my proposal (which saves them a lot of money and, at least the second version, gets them Thomas, supposedly now their main target), what do you think of that?

Anyhoo, I've got another 3-way, because a new rumor says that Golden State is interested. So how about:

Portland gives up: RLEC, Travis
Portland gets: Stephen Jackson (my main incentive - he's a huge playoff performer) and Ronny Turiaf (good guy, better defender as backup PF than any of ours)

GS gives up: Brandan Wright, Stephen Jackson, Ronny Turiaf
GS gets: Stoudemire and Goran Dragic

Phoenix gives up: Stoudemire and Dragic (dumping a failed draft pick)
Phoenix gets: RLEC, Outlaw and Wright.

I think Phoenix make out like bandits here: big money off the books, Wright is a great young PF and Outlaw is cheap and solid.

Would we do it? I think Jackson would be a big risk, big reward player: he transformed that team when they acquired him and he does have a championship ring. I'm not sure GState would give him up, because he is their Captain Jack, but on the other hand, they have just a ton of perimeter players. GState of course gets Amare. Mind you, Amare without Jackson is a risk - who's that team's leader now?

I actually like this a lot. Stephen Jackson has some questionable shot selection (who doesn't in a Nellie ball system?) but is otherwise a pretty complete player and I love Turiaf's game.

I'd do it.

 

[Ed O]

Portland gives up: RLEC, Travis
Portland gets: Stephen Jackson (my main incentive - he's a huge playoff performer) and Ronny Turiaf (good guy, better defender as backup PF than any of ours)

GS gives up: Brandan Wright, Stephen Jackson, Ronny Turiaf
GS gets: Stoudemire and Goran Dragic

Phoenix gives up: Stoudemire and Dragic (dumping a failed draft pick)
Phoenix gets: RLEC, Outlaw and Wright.

I think Phoenix make out like bandits here: big money off the books, Wright is a great young PF and Outlaw is cheap and solid.

Would we do it? I think Jackson would be a big risk, big reward player: he transformed that team when they acquired him and he does have a championship ring. I'm not sure GState would give him up, because he is their Captain Jack, but on the other hand, they have just a ton of perimeter players. GState of course gets Amare. Mind you, Amare without Jackson is a risk - who's that team's leader now?

Golden State cleans up in this situation. Amare becomes an MVP candidate on that team.

I really would not like this deal as a Portland fan... Jackson and Turiaf? Ick.

Ed O.

 

[Masbee]

Are you saying that it doesn't happen in this league? After just about every trade somebody says that one of the teams got screwed by the other, and not just in trades involving Memphis. We tend to look at trades solely from a talent viewpoint, whereas GMs have to worry about the bottom line. And in this economy, that's going to be more and more of a concern. Except, perhaps, if your owner is still fantastically wealthy...



Look at Deng's contract. And look at his injury history and performance last year. He's a big risk. Outlaw, on the other hand, is cheap, more spectacular, and low risk.

It's funny: since I made this proposal, the common wisdom seems to be that Chicago will get Amare without giving up Deng at all. If you thought Phoenix was being screwed by my proposal (which saves them a lot of money and, at least the second version, gets them Thomas, supposedly now their main target), what do you think of that?

Anyhoo, I've got another 3-way, because a new rumor says that Golden State is interested. So how about:

Portland gives up: RLEC, Travis
Portland gets: Stephen Jackson (my main incentive - he's a huge playoff performer) and Ronny Turiaf (good guy, better defender as backup PF than any of ours)

GS gives up: Brandan Wright, Stephen Jackson, Ronny Turiaf
GS gets: Stoudemire and Goran Dragic

Phoenix gives up: Stoudemire and Dragic (dumping a failed draft pick)
Phoenix gets: RLEC, Outlaw and Wright.

I think Phoenix make out like bandits here: big money off the books, Wright is a great young PF and Outlaw is cheap and solid.

Would we do it? I think Jackson would be a big risk, big reward player: he transformed that team when they acquired him and he does have a championship ring. I'm not sure GState would give him up, because he is their Captain Jack, but on the other hand, they have just a ton of perimeter players. GState of course gets Amare. Mind you, Amare without Jackson is a risk - who's that team's leader now?

I am not a fan of Jackson.

No interest in having him on the Blazers - at all.

Turiaf is ok as a backup 4, but that is not the Blazers pressing issue right now.

 

[oldguy]

I don't see KP bring SJ to Portland. Not after the fiasco in Detroit. SJ was one of the guys that actually went into the stands to punch it out with Piston fans. He was also busted for firing shots outside of a strip club in Indianapolis.

I just don't think he meets the character qualifications of the Blazers.

 

[free_lafrentz]

Are you saying that it doesn't happen in this league? After just about every trade somebody says that one of the teams got screwed by the other, and not just in trades involving Memphis. We tend to look at trades solely from a talent viewpoint, whereas GMs have to worry about the bottom line. And in this economy, that's going to be more and more of a concern. Except, perhaps, if your owner is still fantastically wealthy...



Look at Deng's contract. And look at his injury history and performance last year. He's a big risk. Outlaw, on the other hand, is cheap, more spectacular, and low risk.

It's funny: since I made this proposal, the common wisdom seems to be that Chicago will get Amare without giving up Deng at all. If you thought Phoenix was being screwed by my proposal (which saves them a lot of money and, at least the second version, gets them Thomas, supposedly now their main target), what do you think of that?

Anyhoo, I've got another 3-way, because a new rumor says that Golden State is interested. So how about:

Portland gives up: RLEC, Travis
Portland gets: Stephen Jackson (my main incentive - he's a huge playoff performer) and Ronny Turiaf (good guy, better defender as backup PF than any of ours)

GS gives up: Brandan Wright, Stephen Jackson, Ronny Turiaf
GS gets: Stoudemire and Goran Dragic

Phoenix gives up: Stoudemire and Dragic (dumping a failed draft pick)
Phoenix gets: RLEC, Outlaw and Wright.

I think Phoenix make out like bandits here: big money off the books, Wright is a great young PF and Outlaw is cheap and solid.

Would we do it? I think Jackson would be a big risk, big reward player: he transformed that team when they acquired him and he does have a championship ring. I'm not sure GState would give him up, because he is their Captain Jack, but on the other hand, they have just a ton of perimeter players. GState of course gets Amare. Mind you, Amare without Jackson is a risk - who's that team's leader now?

Apart from Monta I wouldnt want to deal with the Warriors.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Golden State cleans up in this situation. Amare becomes an MVP candidate on that team.

Really? With Nellie's history with big men? Fine, then they can throw us Randolph instead of Turiaf!

I really would not like this deal as a Portland fan... Jackson and Turiaf? Ick.

Here's why I WOULD do it. I used to hate Jackson, even when he was starting for your world championship Spurs: he seemed like a black hole and a turnover waiting to happen. I couldn't understand why Pop could stand him. Turns out that Popovich knows a bit more than I do about basketball. Now, of course he knew enough not to re-sign Jackson (although, as I understand it, they did make an offer) and Jackson goes off and gets involved in the Basketbrawl. You know what? So what. I come from a country that lionized [video=youtube;ovYWY4Pf9_M] so it takes more than that to put me off a player. But look at the effect he had on Golden State. Look at how he steps up in big games. Look how much he cares about the game. We need someone like that - he's like the best features of Ron Artest and Rasheed Wallace. He's still a black hole and a turnover waiting to happen, but so was Sam Cassell, and so is Travis, and Jackson appears to have an amazing lockerroom presence (and can seriously play defense). And a championship ring.

But hey, it's not going to happen, so...

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Apart from Monta I wouldnt want to deal with the Warriors.

Why would any good team want Monta? He's the epitome of volume scorer on a losing team. He's a poor man's Allen Iverson. He's a too-small, non-defending shooting guard. And he can't even shoot three pointers! He's a poor man's Tony Parker with every ounce of his point guard abilities surgically removed.
Let the Warriors keep his scooter-crashing ass.

 

[MrJayremmie]

I'd def. take Monta Ellis. Not SJ though. His off-court problems and this off-season where he demanded his salary be restructured because Monta and Biedrins were getting more than him turned me off to him. On the court, he does seem like a black hole and I strongly dislike a lot of his shot selection, but the guy can play some good D, which I like. We could definitely do worse.

 

[Masbee]

Really? With Nellie's history with big men? Fine, then they can throw us Randolph instead of Turiaf!



Here's why I WOULD do it. I used to hate Jackson, even when he was starting for your world championship Spurs: he seemed like a black hole and a turnover waiting to happen. I couldn't understand why Pop could stand him. Turns out that Popovich knows a bit more than I do about basketball. Now, of course he knew enough not to re-sign Jackson (although, as I understand it, they did make an offer) and Jackson goes off and gets involved in the Basketbrawl. You know what? So what. I come from a country that lionized Eric Cantona so it takes more than that to put me off a player. But look at the effect he had on Golden State. Look at how he steps up in big games. Look how much he cares about the game. We need someone like that - he's like the best features of Ron Artest and Rasheed Wallace. He's still a black hole and a turnover waiting to happen, but so was Sam Cassell, and so is Travis, and Jackson appears to have an amazing lockerroom presence (and can seriously play defense). And a championship ring.

But hey, it's not going to happen, so...

So a part of your argument is:

We have Travis Outlaw, and he turns the ball over a lot and he is a black hole, so all those stupid turnovers that Jackson gets and all those times he turns into a black hole and all those times he takes bad shots - it's OK, because Jackson brings........

wait for it - intangibles.

Here is the problem: We are trying to UPGRADE. So trading for the same thing doesn't help us.

As for the lockerroom presence, I don't really know what you mean. And thusly, will ignore it. Taking Brandon Roy's best friend off the team and trading for a "lockerroom presence", let's call that a wash.

Also, what is Stephen Jackson's shooting percentage in game winning shots situations?

Outlaw is 6 out of 7 the last two seasons.

As for the defense. I haven't seen Jackson play consistent defense since - ever. He was pretty good with the Spurs (duh, plus playing for a contract), but drove Pop crazy with his many lapses. In Golden State he is a bad defender imo. Gambling for steals and playing tough D for a couple of possessions per game does not a good defender make.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Here is the problem: We are trying to UPGRADE. So trading for the same thing doesn't help us.

I think we have conclusively established that for you, if you can't put a number to it, it doesn't exist. Otherwise there is no way in hell you could say that Stephen Jackson is "the same thing" as Travis Outlaw.

As for the lockerroom presence, I don't really know what you mean. And thusly, will ignore it.

How much in life gets ignored by you? A lot, I imagine. Okay, how about I tell you there's a stat called "cohesionality" that can be computed by a complicated equation and Jackson's score is 200% of Travis's?

Taking Brandon Roy's best friend off the team and trading for a "lockerroom presence", let's call that a wash.

I agree that Travis is well-liked. I'd rather trade Bayless myself, but I know half the board would crap its pants at that suggestion.

Also, what is Stephen Jackson's shooting percentage in game winning shots situations?
Outlaw is 6 out of 7 the last two seasons.

Fair point (not surprising that it deals with something quantifiable). But of course you don't know what Jackson's % is.

Funny how Travis bails us out, but half the time he's on the court when the boat's taking on the most water. Here's another #: what's Travis's +/-?

As for the defense. I haven't seen Jackson play consistent defense since - ever. He was pretty good with the Spurs (duh, plus playing for a contract), but drove Pop crazy with his many lapses. In Golden State he is a bad defender imo. Gambling for steals and playing tough D for a couple of possessions per game does not a good defender make.

Maybe - I'm not sure. However, I don't think much of Kobe Bryant's defense for the same reason, yet he gets voted all-defense perennially. My guess is that both take it easy because they're needed on 'O'. Maybe if Jackson was part of a better team, his D could improve. Call it the "Paul Pierce Effect". He certainly played LeBron James pretty even last time they faced up, and what Blazer player could say that?

 

[Masbee]

I think we have conclusively established that for you, if you can't put a number to it, it doesn't exist. Otherwise there is no way in hell you could say that Stephen Jackson is "the same thing" as Travis Outlaw.



How much in life gets ignored by you? A lot, I imagine. Okay, how about I tell you there's a stat called "cohesionality" that can be computed by a complicated equation and Jackson's score is 200% of Travis's?



I agree that Travis is well-liked. I'd rather trade Bayless myself, but I know half the board would crap its pants at that suggestion.



Fair point (not surprising that it deals with something quantifiable). But of course you don't know what Jackson's % is.

Funny how Travis bails us out, but half the time he's on the court when the boat's taking on the most water. Here's another #: what's Travis's +/-?



Maybe - I'm not sure. However, I don't think much of Kobe Bryant's defense for the same reason, yet he gets voted all-defense perennially. My guess is that both take it easy because they're needed on 'O'. Maybe if Jackson was part of a better team, his D could improve. Call it the "Paul Pierce Effect". He certainly played LeBron James pretty even last time they faced up, and what Blazer player could say that?

Dude - Whatever.

You are the one that brought up Travis Outlaw.

Let's simplify this for you. No confusing stats involved.

I don't want Jackson on this team regardless of who we would trade to get him.

Forget his stats. When I watch him play, I usually say, "Thank god that guy is not on our team, he is an inefficient, annoyingly streaker scorer who has too high an opinion of his abilities, and he is an overrated defender, who seldom tries hard. What good does it do to play hard on defense once in a blue moon?"

The Warriors can have him for all I care.

Trading Bayless for him would be a return to Nash era GM'ing.

DON'T WANT HIM! GOT IT!