Top 5 Free Agent Targets

[julius]

well we can't have that...

the question is which 6'4 PF should the club target?

STOMP

Adrian Dantley.

 

[crandc]

Imho, if (by some miracle) Kobe opted out and signed in Portland (and it didn't end up costing us Rudy, Greg, LaMarcus or Rudy), the three things would be true.

1. KP would be a freaking genius.
2. A vocal minority of fans would bitch very loudly
3. We'd win the title next year.


But it won't happen. Kobe would never leave LA.

1. KP would be breaking his pledge about character guys
2. true
3. Roy would have to go because Bryant is not going to back up anyone
4. I would never root for this team again
5. They would not win because Bryant would be too disgruntled and everyone else required to kiss his butt
6. Fortunately it does not have a snowball's chance in hell of happening.

 

[Wheels]

1. KP would be breaking his pledge about character guys
2. true
3. Roy would have to go because Bryant is not going to back up anyone
4. I would never root for this team again
5. They would not win because Bryant would be too disgruntled and everyone else required to kiss his butt
6. Fortunately it does not have a snowball's chance in hell of happening.

You dont think that they would just throw them both out there at the 2 and the 3 and make other teams adjust to us?

 

[crandc]

You dont think that they would just throw them both out there at the 2 and the 3 and make other teams adjust to us?

Um, no, because that deal is not going to happen. The only time they will play on the same team is at all star games and maybe on the Olympics.

 

[Fawzi83]

1. KP would be breaking his pledge about character guys
2. true
3. Roy would have to go because Bryant is not going to back up anyone
4. I would never root for this team again
5. They would not win because Bryant would be too disgruntled and everyone else required to kiss his butt
6. Fortunately it does not have a snowball's chance in hell of happening.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out

 

[Wheels]

Um, no, because that deal is not going to happen. The only time they will play on the same team is at all star games and maybe on the Olympics.

I agree that its not gonna happen but I was referring more to the fact that you said Roy would have to leave.. as if there wouldnt be room for 2 all-star talents.

 

[crandc]

I agree that its not gonna happen but I was referring more to the fact that you said Roy would have to leave.. as if there wouldnt be room for 2 all-star talents.

Two all stars in the same position can cause problems. At any rate, not something I am losing sleep over.

Back to the topic, the needs IMO are: a banger as backup PF, possibly starting point guard, and small forward is open - we really don't know how Webster will play or how Batum will pan out. If I were listing in order of need that is how I would put it and if I were a betting woman that is how I'd wager KP would work. I base that on the Blazers do not have a banger at all so that is biggest need. They do have a point guard rotation although it could use an upgrade. KP might wait on the small forward to see how Webster and Batum fare.

But who knows.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Two all stars in the same position can cause problems. At any rate, not something I am losing sleep over.

Back to the topic, the needs IMO are: a banger as backup PF, possibly starting point guard, and small forward is open - we really don't know how Webster will play or how Batum will pan out. If I were listing in order of need that is how I would put it and if I were a betting woman that is how I'd wager KP would work. I base that on the Blazers do not have a banger at all so that is biggest need. They do have a point guard rotation although it could use an upgrade. KP might wait on the small forward to see how Webster and Batum fare.

But who knows.

I think you are dead on for what it's worth. This off season might go a little ways into showing us which direction the team really wants to go. If they settle for Blake and add some beef then Nate will get his way and we will play slow. If KP adds a player like Felton, Kidd, Nash, etc. then KP is truly sending a message to Nate saying he wants to run. Just like he has told all of us he has wanted to since he got here.

 

[crandc]

I think we can see pretty positively that Kidd and Nash are not targets, because of age if nothing else. If the team goes for a starting point guard they will go for a relatively younger one.

However, we are all speculating.

 

[Wheels]

I think we can see pretty positively that Kidd and Nash are not targets, because of age if nothing else. If the team goes for a starting point guard they will go for a relatively younger one.

However, we are all speculating.

so I take it youre not on the Andre Miller bandwagon?

 

[Mediocre Man]

I think we can see pretty positively that Kidd and Nash are not targets, because of age if nothing else. If the team goes for a starting point guard they will go for a relatively younger one.

However, we are all speculating.

I am not so sure. IMO Bayless IS the starting PG of the future. Bringing in a better vet like Kidd or Nash to groom him wouldn't be a bad idea at all. But again, like you said, that is pure speculation. Both savvy vets who have been deep into the playoffs???

 

[Rastapopoulos]

I might be in the minority, but I don't think we'll sign an even halfway "name" free agent. And I'm okay with that (unless we can get Ramon Sessions, who could be Aaron Brooks II). That doesn't mean we won't use our cap space: I think we'll use it in a trade with a team that wants to dump salary. We can bundle our cap space with a couple of cheap players, take on a NASTY contract (which, if it's someone like Zach Randolph, we can then cut or do a Stephon Marbury/Jamal Tinsley with) with the aim of moving up in the draft to get our PG of the future.

Which is NOT Bayless. I'm hoping it's Rubio, but I would be sort of intrigued by Brandon Jennings. Or even Stephen Curry (who supposedly has a promise from the Knicks that he'll be taken at 8).

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Here we go on the FA's
1. Turkoglu.

Turkoglu is Mike Miller in a better system. He's fool's gold. Do you really want him handling the ball like he does for the Magic when you've got Brandon Roy? And his defense is laughable. I hope Webster will do everything good that Turkoglu does that doesn't involve ball-handling.

We do NOT need to target a SF. SFs are like appendixes or coccixes - they're useless extra appendages that only need to hit 3s and play defense (okay, in that respect they're not like coccixes, even if mine can do that). Unless you are Scottie Pippen or Grant Hill. In which case you're really just a big guard.

2. Artest.

Artest's usefulness can be fully attributed to Rick Adelman. Rick Adelman can out-PJ Phil Jackson when it comes to getting use out of psychos. He is beloved amongst the malcontents of the NBA: Rod Strickland loved him, Latrell Sprewell loved him, he rescued Chris Webber's career, he got good use out of Jason Williams, the list goes on. You think Artest and Nate would even remotely see eye to eye? I think not. I am content to admire Ron Ron from afar. Like Gilbert Arenas, he's top entertainment PROVIDED he's not on your team.

3. K*be.

This is not even worth commenting on. We do have some standards. I think Machiavelli had Kobe in mind when he wrote "his vicious cruelty and inhumanity, along with numerous wicked deeds, do not permit us to honor him among the most excellent of men".

4. Kidd. See Turkoglu. Old, experienced and a great mentor for Bayless who could take over in a year or two.

TOO old. And all the mentors in the world aren't going to turn Bayless into a PG. The sooner people realize that, the better for their mental health.

There is only one unrestricted free agent who would transform this team into a winning machine. We all know it, we're just scared to admit it. It's obviously Rasheed Wallace.

 

[LittleAlex]

I might be in the minority, but I don't think we'll sign an even halfway "name" free agent. And I'm okay with that (unless we can get Ramon Sessions, who could be Aaron Brooks II). That doesn't mean we won't use our cap space: I think we'll use it in a trade with a team that wants to dump salary. We can bundle our cap space with a couple of cheap players, take on a NASTY contract (which, if it's someone like Zach Randolph, we can then cut or do a Stephon Marbury/Jamal Tinsley with) with the aim of moving up in the draft to get our PG of the future.

Which is NOT Bayless. I'm hoping it's Rubio, but I would be sort of intrigued by Brandon Jennings. Or even Stephen Curry (who supposedly has a promise from the Knicks that he'll be taken at 8).

If KP takes on another horrible contract to take a risk on drafting a point guard then he should be fired that day.

The very last thing this team needs is yet another youngster who might or might not pan out. The whole reason KP got that cap room was to get a proven player to address short comings on the current team. A rookie point guard isn't going to accomplish that and may not address anything at all.

That said, I am under the impression KP will do nothing with the cap space. It will get used to cushion the big contracts Portland will be giving Roy and LMA. The team is going to look pretty much the same next year as this one. So we better hope that a couple of guys make a big leap this summer, since that is going to be the only real changes we are likely to see.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

If KP takes on another horrible contract to take a risk on drafting a point guard then he should be fired that day.

Why? It ain't your money. And who's the big name player coming to Portland in 2010? There aren't any good PGs are there?

The very last thing this team needs is yet another youngster who might or might not pan out.

I would disagree. The very last thing this team needs is Steve Blake as its default PG.
Blake is too limited.
Sergio is great, but can't play D or shoot, so Nate won't give him minutes.
Bayless is just horrible as a PG (the numbers back me up - go on over to Blazers' Edge if you don't believe me).

We've got to get the PG of the future lined up and fast.

The whole reason KP got that cap room was to get a proven player to address short comings on the current team.

And who is that player? All the PGs available as UFAs are too old (Miller, Kidd) or lack a vital skill (Bibby - defense). There are better players available by trade (some say Hinrich, I say possibly a motivated Baron Davis, but admit that's probably too risky) who have nasty contracts that we can use our cap space to absorb. Cap space can be used more than just for signing FAs is my main point.

A rookie point guard isn't going to accomplish that and may not address anything at all.

Who knows? Tony Parker did okay as a rookie. Derrick Rose wasn't looking too shoddy out there. Even Kirk Hinrich looked pretty good as a rookie. And of course Chris Paul wasn't exactly hurting his team as a rookie. But hey, if you think Steve Blake is good enough, then we can keep HIM around as de facto starter.

That said, I am under the impression KP will do nothing with the cap space. It will get used to cushion the big contracts Portland will be giving Roy and LMA.

If that happens it will be an admission that Paul Allen is seriously feeling the pinch. The only time you need cap space as a cushion is if you're not prepared to pay the luxury tax. Paul Allen used to be prepared to do anything it took for this team.

 

[mook]

I think we can see pretty positively that Kidd and Nash are not targets, because of age if nothing else. If the team goes for a starting point guard they will go for a relatively younger one.

I don't really see that.

I think it's highly likely we pursue a championship next year. All championship teams have a few over-30 players having key roles. It'd be pretty ridiculous for us to expect to win it all without a single player who has that kind of experience. Point guard seems the natural upgrade.

I actually really like Kidd for this team now. He spreads the floor (he suddenly became a phenomenal three point shooter), he's a rugged defender and rebounder, and he's been to the Finals.

He sucks at defending fast point guards, which certainly concerns me. I'd rather have Andre Miller, but in a pinch I'll take Kidd. He's basically a much, much better version of Steve Blake but with a post up and passing game and fast break and....well, come to think of it, he's like Blake in that he hits threes and sucks at defending speed. But he's better than Blake at everything else.

Anyway, much like the Bulls of the 90's or the Spurs of this decade, we've got roughly a 8-10 year championship window. Nobody worried much that David Robinson and Sean Elliot wouldn't be around for the length of Duncan's career, or that Horace Grant and BJ Armstrong weren't around for all 6 rings.

Why should we be that concerned that our PG is young enough to fit in the window with Aldridge/Roy/Oden/Fernandez? There's no guarantee that the core can stay healthy throughout that entire window, or that some of those players won't eventually decide to leave for whatever reason.

You use up a guy like Andre Miller or Kidd or Nash or whatever you think will work for a year or two, and when they are done you see who else you can plug in there.

 

[mook]

Just to add to my prior point--imagining the "all chemistry" team I think a lot of fans hear envision, the closest approximation in the real world I can think of is the recent Detroit Pistons.

From the 2003-04 season until 2007-2008, they kept 4 starters (Sheed, Billups, Prince, Hamilton). For three straight years they also had Ben Wallace.

That's not exactly a super-long stretch.

Yet many here think we need the point guard right now that will be playing alongside Aldridge, Roy, Oden and Fernandez in 2015.

Guess what--the odds are that there is no Aldridge/Roy/Oden/Fernandez team in 2015, because inevitably something will change. Somebody will get offered better money or injured, or, as with the Pistons, they'll just kind of get stale and we'll need to move in a new direction.

We're in a new era in Blazerville, and it happened when it became obvious to everybody that a championship window isn't that far in the distance. In such an era, you stop thinking about winning three and four years from now, because so much will happen by then that it's pointless to plan for it. You start finding guys who fit the team next year. If they happen to also be young, well, that's just gravy.

 

[Masbee]

I agree Mook that the season the Blazers had, and the vaulting of Roy into the realm of Top 10 players and budding SuperStar has changed things.

I think that is why I now have interest in Andre Miller, for example.

Last summer, I had Zero interest in Miller. Bottom line - didn't fit the age requirements.

Now, as you say, you would rather he were younger. But, it is no longer a deal killer. Because he fills other needs so well, he is worth a long look as an option for the cap space.

I hope the team continues to try to make a lopsided trade for a younger and good player. But if they can't make that happen, I hope they make a play on the best fit and the best player they can get, not just on the youngest player they can get.

 

[LittleAlex]

Why? It ain't your money. And who's the big name player coming to Portland in 2010? There aren't any good PGs are there?

It is, however, my favorite team. Watching the team make a deal like that would make me very, very angry. I didn't say anything about 2010. In fact, I mentioned that I didn't believe KP would bring in any free-agents this year or in the near future. Nor do I think he will make a trade.

In other words, I believe KP was lying when he said he would wait until the end of the season to make changes. I don't think he has ever intended to make any changes to the current roster save some filler at the end of the bench.

I would disagree. The very last thing this team needs is Steve Blake as its default PG.
Blake is too limited.
Sergio is great, but can't play D or shoot, so Nate won't give him minutes.
Bayless is just horrible as a PG (the numbers back me up - go on over to Blazers' Edge if you don't believe me).

We've got to get the PG of the future lined up and fast.

Who knows? Tony Parker did okay as a rookie. Derrick Rose wasn't looking too shoddy out there. Even Kirk Hinrich looked pretty good as a rookie. And of course Chris Paul wasn't exactly hurting his team as a rookie. But hey, if you think Steve Blake is good enough, then we can keep HIM around as de facto starter.

I don't recall saying I thought Steve Blake should start, or even be on the team. I believe I have said many times in other posts I feel Blake is a poor back-up, much less starter. I have no idea if Bayless is the answer or not. I am pretty sure Sergio isn't.

If there were a point guard as good as Parker, Rose or Paul in the draft then Portland would be well served to get them. Sadly there isn't one even close to that good. Anyone Portland drafted would be a project, and I believe we have all seen how Nate treats projects at that position. Getting another point guard in the draft assures Blake the starting job for at least another year (and into the foreseeable future if that draftee doesn't pan out). I don't think that is acceptable, and you seem to agree.

I don't mean to imply I think there aren't any point guards in the draft better then Blake. Probably half of them are. I am saying that they won't better enough to force Nate's hand and make Nate play a guy he doesn't "trust". Nate trusts Blake and it is going to take a special talent to make Nate go away from him. That player does not exist in this draft.

And who is that player? All the PGs available as UFAs are too old (Miller, Kidd) or lack a vital skill (Bibby - defense). There are better players available by trade (some say Hinrich, I say possibly a motivated Baron Davis, but admit that's probably too risky) who have nasty contracts that we can use our cap space to absorb. Cap space can be used more than just for signing FAs is my main point.

Sure, Portland could use the cap space to take back money that is more then they give the other team. KP even mentioned it in an interview a week ago. My contention is that KP will not do so. He will do what he did at the trade deadline this year. Namely, nothing.

Once again, I didn't say the team shouldn't make a move. Nor did I say what players I think Portland should go get. I did say I was against the team taking on a bad contract to get a high draft pick they would use to get a point guard project. If the team made trade to get a good player with a large contract that fills a hole on the team I would be happy as hell. I just don't think Portland is going to do that.

I think this has more to do with over-valuing the current roster then it does the ability of the potential targets. The very fact he praised both Blake and Outlaw in that same interview tells me that. KP will ask for way too much in return in any deal he might make. Whatever trade value Blake and Outlaw might have had was shot to hell in the playoffs.

If that happens it will be an admission that Paul Allen is seriously feeling the pinch. The only time you need cap space as a cushion is if you're not prepared to pay the luxury tax. Paul Allen used to be prepared to do anything it took for this team.

I think the results of all that spending soured Allen on the idea of having a huge payroll. I am pretty sure he isn't going to go down that path again. Not using RLEC was a good indicator of this.

 

[STOMP]

There is only one unrestricted free agent who would transform this team into a winning machine. We all know it, we're just scared to admit it. It's obviously Rasheed Wallace.

sig material

Not that I totally disagree, as I think even at 35 he'd fit in pretty well with this club and I think his bad rep is mostly silly. But man... I'd laugh my ass off for the rest of the offseason if that were to happen. Imagine the outrage from Jason Twit & Clownzano.



STOMP

 

[oldmangrouch]

sig material

Not that I totally disagree, as I think even at 35 he'd fit in pretty well with this club and I think his bad rep is mostly silly. But man... I'd laugh my ass off for the rest of the offseason if that were to happen. Imagine the outrage from Jason Twit & Clownzano.



STOMP

I agree. I would welcome Sheed back, but I doubt he would want to put up with the BS. I also doubt kp is ready to defy the media that openly.

 

[hasoos]

I would concentrate on backup PF, and maybe taking a shot at Sessions. I can guarantee somebody is. Good PG are rare, and he is worth the risk.

 

[MAS RipCity]

I would concentrate on backup PF, and maybe taking a shot at Sessions. I can guarantee somebody is. Good PG are rare, and he is worth the risk.

Disagree

Chris Paul
Deron Williams
Tony Parker
Chauncey Billups
Derrick Rose
Russell Westbrook
Baron Davis
Rajon Rondo
TJ Ford
Jason Kidd
Andre Miller
Mike Bibby
Mario Chalmers
Devin Harris
Mo Williams
Ramon Sessions
Aaron Brooks
Gilbert Arenas
Mike Conley
Steve Nash
Monta Ellis
Jameer Nelson


Thats 22 off the top of my head who are anywhere from Elite to Good.
PGs are not rare, we just do not have a good one..yet (Bayless will be there, he just needs time). I think we just need a solid vet PG for a couple years before JB takes over.

 

[Minstrel]

Disagree

Chris Paul
Deron Williams
Tony Parker
Chauncey Billups
Derrick Rose
Russell Westbrook
Baron Davis
Rajon Rondo
TJ Ford
Jason Kidd
Andre Miller
Mike Bibby
Mario Chalmers
Devin Harris
Mo Williams
Ramon Sessions
Aaron Brooks
Gilbert Arenas
Mike Conley
Steve Nash
Monta Ellis
Jameer Nelson

I'd only say the ones I bolded are good point guards. Monta Ellis, Mo Williams and Gilbert Arenas are no more point guards than Dwyane Wade is. I think those players could be fine alongside a shooting guard like Roy, but they're not real point guards. The others are subpar to average players.

I agree that good point guards aren't super rare, but that's about 14 point guards and there are 30 teams. So only about half the teams have one.

I do think Bayless can be either a good point guard or a good combo guard, but he's probably at least two seasons away. I'd love to get either a good veteran to bridge the gap until Bayless is ready or a young player who's got more certainty than Bayless (like Ramon Sessions).

 

[Masbee]

Disagree

Chris Paul
Deron Williams
Tony Parker
Chauncey Billups
Derrick Rose
Russell Westbrook
Baron Davis
Rajon Rondo
TJ Ford
Jason Kidd
Andre Miller
Mike Bibby
Mario Chalmers
Devin Harris
Mo Williams
Ramon Sessions
Aaron Brooks
Gilbert Arenas
Mike Conley
Steve Nash
Monta Ellis
Jameer Nelson


Thats 22 off the top of my head who are anywhere from Elite to Good.
PGs are not rare, we just do not have a good one..yet (Bayless will be there, he just needs time). I think we just need a solid vet PG for a couple years before JB takes over.

Adds:

Jose Calderon
Kirk Hinrich
DJ Augustin
Raymond Felton

 

[mook]

Man, you look at that list of point guards and it becomes pretty obvious that we can do a lot better than Steve Blake. He might not be the worst starting PG in the league, but he's a lot closer to the bottom than the top.

 

[Wheels]

Man, you look at that list of point guards and it becomes pretty obvious that we can do a lot better than Steve Blake. He might not be the worst starting PG in the league, but he's a lot closer to the bottom than the top.

no kidding.. I always just in my mind thought "middle of the pack" now its "lower 1/4 of the league" that put things into perspective lol.

 

[Masbee]

no kidding.. I always just in my mind thought "middle of the pack" now its "lower 1/4 of the league" that put things into perspective lol.

Nah. I think Blake is in the middle group. The bottom half of the middle group. But, still in the middle group. You know, 40th percentile among starters.

 

[maxiep]

Frye is gone. He and Nate don't see eye to eye.

Of course, but it's always been that way. Frye is 6'11 and Nate is 6'4.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

If there were a point guard as good as Parker, Rose or Paul in the draft then Portland would be well served to get them.

Well of course. They'd also be well-served to get one worse than those - say Deron Williams, Chauncey Billups, Rajon Rondo, Steve Nash, younger Jason Kidd... Or one that will be as good as one of the listed in a few years.

Sadly there isn't one even close to that good.

You don't know that. Nobody thought Tony Parker would be good, otherwise he wouldn't have slipped to the last pick of the first round. Nobody thought Rajon Rondo would be that good. Steve Nash, John Stockton also slipped. You just can't tell. It's not quite as unpredictable as good quarterbacks (there are fewer false positives - Antonio Daniels, perhaps) but nobody thought Chris Paul would be that good. Especially not John Fuckhead Nash.

Anyone Portland drafted would be a project, and I believe we have all seen how Nate treats projects at that position.

Poppovich is just as harsh, but look at Tony Parker. Just because Nate benched Bayless doesn't mean he'd bench somebody who could actually play point guard. I actually predicted that Bayless would get very little PT this year after watching him Summer League. (And I could show you the posts if I could get in to That Other Site.) At the time the major dilemma amongst posters seemed to be whether Bayless would be starting at the beginning of the season or just by the All-Star break.

Getting another point guard in the draft assures Blake the starting job for at least another year (and into the foreseeable future if that draftee doesn't pan out). I don't think that is acceptable, and you seem to agree.

I agree that that would be unacceptable, but don't with the first part. My plan is twofold: acquire an older FA and a younger PG of the future. Dispose of all of the PGs we currently have, if that helps in the plan.

I don't mean to imply I think there aren't any point guards in the draft better then Blake. Probably half of them are. I am saying that they won't better enough to force Nate's hand and make Nate play a guy he doesn't "trust".

That's why you trade Blake. He can't play him if he isn't there. Sergio got decent burn when Blake was out.

Nate trusts Blake and it is going to take a special talent to make Nate go away from him. That player does not exist in this draft.

Again, with emphasis: you don't know that.