Trade Batum

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
B

BLAZER PROPHET

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
18,725
Likes
191
Points
63
Yes, I'm serious.

Here are my thoughts...

First, we are desperate for a long term PG to take us deep in the playoffs. We also need a back-up center as Joel's career is probably over, Camby is old and Oden is so oft injured I wonder how much playing time he can reasonably give us. A defensive minded young center could pay huge dividends in a couple of seasons.

Second, we're not going to get the PG we need by trading Rudy, Martel or Bayless. Their NBA stock is questionable. We're not trading any of our "big 3".

So what's left?

Batum.

And why Batum?

Because he has enough of that old sports term, "upside" to garner the trade we need. Also, Cunningham in some respects is a better SF (and in a few he is not). Cunningham is tougher, a better rebounder, better mid range shooter, better finisher at the rim and he plays smart. In fact,in time I think he'll be a better all-round player than Batum. And we have Webster to back him up and a potential NBA SF in Claver in Europe.

Look, I like Batum but this team will not go forward without addressing some critical needs. And sometimes a team has to trade a valued player to get what it needs to get better and I feel he's our top bargaining chip towards that end.
 
While I think some may overrate Batum's potential ceiling, saying Dante Cunningham will be a better SF is pretty ridiculous.
 
yuyuza1 said:
I still think you're nuts. Why again?
Click to expand...

Miller made us a better team when he replaced Blake in the line-up. To me, this demonstrates our need for a good PG. Without one, it's highly unlikely we will ever consider ourselves a championship caliber team. To get such a player requires us to trade a good player. It's not going to be our top 3 players and aside from Batum none of the others at this time can get us such a player. And, we have talented players to easily replace him.
 
RoyToy said:
While I think some may overrate Batum's potential ceiling, saying Dante Cunningham will be a better SF is pretty ridiculous.
Click to expand...

You might be surprised. Cunningham player better than Batum last season. And if not, the difference was too close to tell.
 
gtfo.gif
 
Trade Batum? I'm not sure. One thing I've learned recently here is that we should only trade established veterans for 18 year-old lottery picks. I'm not sure how Batum fits into this scenario.
 
Batum is a stopper that every championship team needs. You can say trade him all you want but we do not have anyone with the versatility of Batum. A player that will guard the best player on the team no matter what position he plays (unless of course its a center). Webster/Cunningham have shown they play some vicious D but neither one is a lockdown defender and neither has the ability to guard a PG or PF really. Webster is inconsitant and Cunningham is a tweaner who can't shoot the three.
I really do love all this "we need a PG" talk. We have a pg for the next year and maybe a year after that with a great prospect in Bayless. We do not need a true PG because our best player likes to handle the ball most of the time. We need a PG who can shoot and finish at the rim which Bayless has shown he can do. I don't see us needing any position save backup PF at the moment. Give Bayless another year and give him consistent playing time. When he gets 20+ minutes he delivers and it doesnt' feel like he is rushing to make things happen, give him 15m a night and he tries to do to much.
 
Rhal said:
Batum is a stopper that every championship team needs. You can say trade him all you want but we do not have anyone with the versatility of Batum. A player that will guard the best player on the team no matter what position he plays (unless of course its a center). Webster/Cunningham have shown they play some vicious D but neither one is a lockdown defender and neither has the ability to guard a PG or PF really. Webster is inconsitant and Cunningham is a tweaner who can't shoot the three.
I really do love all this "we need a PG" talk. We have a pg for the next year and maybe a year after that with a great prospect in Bayless. We do not need a true PG because our best player likes to handle the ball most of the time. We need a PG who can shoot and finish at the rim which Bayless has shown he can do. I don't see us needing any position save backup PF at the moment. Give Bayless another year and give him consistent playing time. When he gets 20+ minutes he delivers and it doesnt' feel like he is rushing to make things happen, give him 15m a night and he tries to do to much.
Click to expand...


OK, a very good post (nice to find someone who can actually think around here). Also, I have to say that Batum being a sometimes "stopper" is a point. However, that doesn't mean he's THE stopper. I also saw him get torched to the melting point last year as well. I know people will see the thread title and not even think about it, but it makes sense.


My primary point was that to get better as a team we have to trade something better than Bayless or Rudy. And since we have better replacements for Batum than any of our other starters, he's the logical choice.
 
I'm not opposed to trading Batum if we can get enough value back, I'm just not sure we would. I'd easily trade him for Deron, CP3, Rondo, Rose, Westbrook, Harris, Mayo, Curry, Brooks, or Jennings. I'd definitely consider a trade for Collision, Mo Williams, Nelson, Flynn depending on the pieces.

But I think teams would be offering players such as Stuckey, Conley, Hinrich, Calderon, or Jrue Holliday.

Right now I think Batum's true value to us is higher than his outside trade value to other teams, so we should hang onto him.
 
The step up from Blake to Miller was a pretty easy one to make... the step from Miller to someone significantly better is more difficult. Batum is more valuable to the Blazers than any upgrade we'd be able to receive at the PG spot by trading him away.

He's young and improving and is very promising on both ends of the floor. It makes no sense to trade Batum unless there's a deal that knocks our socks off.

Ed O.
 
something involving Bosh is my only thought. Unless we were to obtain Philly's pick and Iguodala with Brand....say for Pryz's contract + Batum + LMA. Then trade down with New Jersey (Philly's #2 + Rudy for Jersey's #3 + Harris)

Harris / Miller
Roy / Bayless / Webster
Iguodala / Cunningham
Favors / Brand / Outlaw
Camby / Pendergraph / Oden


When healthy, imagine Harris / Roy / Iguodala / Favors / Oden with guys like Camby + Brand + Miller coming off the bench. That's strong.
 
Last edited:
I love Roy, but honestly he can't stop anyone! Let's be real about that! LOL

Batum is nearly as soft as LMA.

I'm tired of softies on this team.
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
You might be surprised. Cunningham player better than Batum last season. And if not, the difference was too close to tell.
Click to expand...
not at small forward(and really not at all). cunningham likely hasn't even played that position in his basketball career(he didn't in college and hasn't in the pros).
 
BoomChakaLaka said:
I love Roy, but honestly he can't stop anyone! Let's be real about that! LOL

Batum is nearly as soft as LMA.

I'm tired of softies on this team.
Click to expand...

Batum plays good positional defense. His defensive weakness if his lack of strength. He'll always be a weakling.
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
Batum plays good positional defense. His defensive weakness if his lack of strength. He'll always be a weakling.
Click to expand...
Batum gives people trouble on the defensive end because of his length and quickness. He isn't going to be going out and suddenly bulking up, that wont happen. His defense doesn't rely on him overpowering the person he is gaurding, its his ability to stop the ball from getting into the players hands and when it does his quick ability to swipe at the ball and use his long arm span to make the person put up a contested shot.
 
Rhal said:
Batum gives people trouble on the defensive end because of his length and quickness. He isn't going to be going out and suddenly bulking up, that wont happen. His defense doesn't rely on him overpowering the person he is gaurding, its his ability to stop the ball from getting into the players hands and when it does his quick ability to swipe at the ball and use his long arm span to make the person put up a contested shot.
Click to expand...

Yes, we covered that. He's a good defender. But he also gets pushed around a lot. Look, he's a good player with some upside- I don't deny that. I just think it's he we would have to trade if we wanted a good PG for the future.
 
This team obviously needs more Dante Cunningham and fat rookies, and less LaMarcus Aldridge and Nic Batum.
 
BP, I see your point in the concept that to get a really good PG we would probably have to trade Batum. I think you are probably correct, and are being realistic. People are tending to forget that a very good Blazer asset is Claver over in Europe (if Rudy hasn't talked him out of giving the NBA a try). If we could get a very good, young PG, I think it would be worth it to include Batum. I don't think DC can cover quicker players the way Nic can, and DC is mostly a small PG not a SF, but without giving up something, the Blazers aren't likely to get much. We need a good young PG.
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
Trade Batum...we're not going to get the PG we need by trading Rudy, Martel or Bayless. Their NBA stock is questionable. We're not trading any of our "big 3." So what's left? Batum. And why Batum?..."upside"... he's our top bargaining chip...
Click to expand...

I like it that you're thinking boldly. When I translate the above from your logic into mine, here's what I see inside my mind.

Assumptions
1. We have a GM who cannot trade an inferior player for a superior player. He only has the talent to trade an equal for an equal. We can't come out ahead in a trade.
2. We should keep our top X players.
3. In our situation, X = 3.
4. Our top 4 players in order are Roy, Oden, Aldridge, and Batum.
5. Below our top 4 players, our players aren't good enough for our GM to get a good player.
6. We do not have a perfect roster.

Therefore (with step no. that the consequence follows from)
6. Since we do not have a perfect roster, we should make a trade.
1. Since we cannot come out ahead in a trade, we must trade a top player to get a top player.
5. The only players our GM can trade to get a good player are our top 4 players.
4. The player we trade will be Roy, Oden, Aldridge, or Batum.
2, 3. We can't trade the first 3, so the player we trade must be Batum.

Conclusion
Since we choose not to get a GM who can make trades in our favor, we must trade Batum.

Can't argue with impeccable logic, eh?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top