BLAZINGGIANTS
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2008
- Messages
- 22,032
- Likes
- 14,611
- Points
- 113
The first rule of Gerald Wallace is you don't talk about Gerald Wallace (especially trading him)!!
Twitter rumor - Blazers to deal F Gerald Wallace for picks
- Thread starter SlyPokerDog
- Start date
Welcome to our community
Be a part of something great, join today!
The first rule of Gerald Wallace is you don't talk about Gerald Wallace (especially trading him)!!
Further
Guy
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2008
- Messages
- 11,099
- Likes
- 4,039
- Points
- 113
Or keep them both. I really don't see the need to trade any of these guys. I love our team right now. (wait till after a loss and my mind may change)
magnifier661
B-A-N-A-N-A-S!
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2009
- Messages
- 59,328
- Likes
- 5,588
- Points
- 113
Nikolokolus
There's always next year
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2008
- Messages
- 30,704
- Likes
- 6,198
- Points
- 113
Nah, not really. Don't get me wrong I'm happy to have him and I've liked his game for a long time, but given his age and injury history I'd part with him for the right price -- If he keeps it up he might even be worth a good player and some picks!
To be clear, I'm thinking long-term here, not what he provides to the win-loss column right now.
Fez Hammersticks
スーパーバッド Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2008
- Messages
- 29,266
- Likes
- 9,952
- Points
- 113
Trade. Value.
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2007
- Messages
- 14,538
- Likes
- 7,949
- Points
- 113
Yes, let's trade Gerald Wallace who is much better than Batum, so we can go ahead and overpay Batum next year.
Overpaying role players is going to hurt teams in this new CBA. Giving 43 million to Afflalo was idiotic of the Nuggets, I'm afraid we will do the same with Batum.
Overpaying role players is going to hurt teams in this new CBA. Giving 43 million to Afflalo was idiotic of the Nuggets, I'm afraid we will do the same with Batum.
Pinwheel1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2008
- Messages
- 23,423
- Likes
- 15,995
- Points
- 113
I just can't imagine what kind of player we could get for Wallace. Who wants him? A team that is good that thinks he can put them over the top. But that team will not have a good draft pick, and I doubt that they would part with anyone who is good enough that we could build around.
So I say enjoy watching this guy play. For all we know he could keep it up for another 3 years.
So I say enjoy watching this guy play. For all we know he could keep it up for another 3 years.
3 years(including this one) is a safe bet
You only trade Wallace in a package if he brings back a star or a younger player of equal value(and who exactly would do that).
If not, lolllllllllllllll
BLAZINGGIANTS
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2008
- Messages
- 22,032
- Likes
- 14,611
- Points
- 113
+1. I think we're there already. Especially with our roster, in a short, compressed season. We really have a good overall balance. We get 1-2 guys to really step above expectations, and we could kill it, especially if we're striding in April. Even more so if we get a healthy Oden for the late stretch.
Happens every year in MLB and NFL. Blazers are in a good position, I believe.
Further
Guy
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2008
- Messages
- 11,099
- Likes
- 4,039
- Points
- 113
Nah, not really. Don't get me wrong I'm happy to have him and I've liked his game for a long time, but given his age and injury history I'd part with him for the right price -- If he keeps it up he might even be worth a good player and some picks!
To be clear, I'm thinking long-term here, not what he provides to the win-loss column right now.
To tell the truth, although I never posted about it, I was leaning more towards your point of view when this thread was beginning. However, the more I think about it, I really think the Blazers might have something special right now and looking to the future right now might just be the wrong move. Of course, for the right package, any player is available, but for what I would assume most teams would be offering, I just think that GW in this shortened season could very well be the energy (and talent) guy needed to keep this team fueled and headed towards a great season.
Nikolokolus
There's always next year
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2008
- Messages
- 30,704
- Likes
- 6,198
- Points
- 113
multi-team trades can solve this dilemma.
Nikolokolus
There's always next year
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2008
- Messages
- 30,704
- Likes
- 6,198
- Points
- 113
Fez Hammersticks
スーパーバッド Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2008
- Messages
- 29,266
- Likes
- 9,952
- Points
- 113
Wallace is helping but Felton is really hurting my trade package for Rondo.
Le'Sigh.
Le'Sigh.
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2009
- Messages
- 14,608
- Likes
- 5,486
- Points
- 113
So you trade away a great player who is in his prime, for a draft pick. Then you HOPE that player one day becomes as good as Wallace (which will most likely not happen). Then what do you do once that player enters his prime? Trade him for a younger pick, because he won't play forever?
If you are constantly preparing for the future, and sacrifice for the present, you could be constantly chasing wins. Like maybe we shouldn't have signed Thomas/Crawford and let our rookies stink it up out there to develop them "for the future". I think you should only do that if you totally suck anyway and are not putting a good product on the court. But I think it's better to try and put the best team possible on the court each year.
If you are constantly preparing for the future, and sacrifice for the present, you could be constantly chasing wins. Like maybe we shouldn't have signed Thomas/Crawford and let our rookies stink it up out there to develop them "for the future". I think you should only do that if you totally suck anyway and are not putting a good product on the court. But I think it's better to try and put the best team possible on the court each year.
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2009
- Messages
- 14,608
- Likes
- 5,486
- Points
- 113
I think Felton is playing better than his stat line indicates. He's missing some shots that I"m sure he'll start putting down later in the year.
It's why Rich Cho was fired. Loser mentality.
Nikolokolus
There's always next year
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2008
- Messages
- 30,704
- Likes
- 6,198
- Points
- 113
I think the original trade proposal was Wallace for 4 picks ... that would have been a lot of liquidity for a team with a pretty bleak outlook at center in about 6 months. Regardless it didn't happen and it may or may not be revisited so enjoy GW while you have him, but don't hold on too tightly.
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2009
- Messages
- 14,608
- Likes
- 5,486
- Points
- 113
Looks like they would have been in the lower part of the 1st round too. Not even lotto picks. Quality big men are the first ones taken. Would we be able to get anyone better than Joel Freeland (who we'll bring over next year).
Nikolokolus
There's always next year
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2008
- Messages
- 30,704
- Likes
- 6,198
- Points
- 113
I really don't want to get dragged back into the minutiae of this argument again and rehash things too much, but what I mean by "liquidity" is that those just become assets that don't necessarily represent players you ever draft. Since there are no details to work with it's hard to project how exactly they can be combined in trades, but it's possible you can move up in the draft if you can dangle multiple lower picks, or maybe you trade a player and pick(s) for a big man ... it's just flexibility.
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2008
- Messages
- 26,096
- Likes
- 9,073
- Points
- 113
A) Wallace is not in his "prime." His "prime" was two years ago when he was an All-Star. This, by definition, is the downside of his career. I'm happy he's here, and I don't want to trade him for an exception (like Lamar Odom, who's arguably a better player).
A1) But to say that he's untouchable is laughable. LOL that we needed him to beat the Kings at home by 22. Even if it's true, what does that say about the talent level overall of this team?
B) Wallace has been in the league since 2001. How many times has he played 72 games in a season?
C) I'm wondering why LMA got 5 years to shed the LaMarshmallow label, but Batum (in his 4th now) is considered chopped liver.
D) Wallace could potentially be gone this summer. Isn't it sacrificing a bunch of wins (next year and going forward) to get absolutely nothing for him just walking away?
E) There is an enormous chasm between "putting the rookies out there to let them stink it up" and "getting value from an all-star on the downside of his career who may walk in July." To not acknowledge that is beyond homerific.
F) The player we pick with the draft doesn't have to be as good as Wallace. He has to be as good as the difference b/w Wallace and Batum, at a position of need. There are only 240 minutes a game to go around.
G) I understand that many don't have the capacity or don't like to think strategically about basketball (and that's fine), but I'm pretty sure that the 9.5M in space that GW's contract is taking up (maybe coupled with some picks?) combined with the rest of our roster makes us not only prime trading partners (for players as good or better than Crash) but also a FA destination you have to look at. Hypothetical pipe dream...would you rather have LMA, Matthews and Wallace or LMA, Batum, Deron Williams and Dwight Howard?
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2008
- Messages
- 26,096
- Likes
- 9,073
- Points
- 113
No one here has the foggiest clue why Rich Cho was fired. Was is that he wanted to suspend Roy for bitching after Game Two? Was it that he kept trying to trade away players PA liked? Was it that he differed with Nate over the direction of the team? Was it the gulf between PA and his management team?
I'm pretty sure it wasn't due to a mentality that has put OKC as favorites in the Western Conference.
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2009
- Messages
- 14,608
- Likes
- 5,486
- Points
- 113
Brian,
- How do you know Wallace is not in his prime? Do players magically exit their prime at a certain age? He looks very good to me on both ends of the court. Let his play on the court decide that.
-Who said Batum is chopped liver? And what do you think he has to do with this?
- Wallace could test the FA market, but will he give up 11.5 mil? Portland will have a ton of cap space, and can re-sign him easily.
- Since you're so good at thinking "strategically" look at unrestricted free agents who are better than Wallace who would fit in well in Portland. There are some very old players like Garnett, Duncan, Nash. I really don't see any of those guys signing here...Nash maybe, we don't need to lose Wallace to acquire a top level FA.
-In terms of trading, perhaps we could package him for a nice piece, but this thread is about dealing him for lower end draft picks(which at their positions, would likely give us players who don't pan out, or backups).
- Why are you even brining up Deron and Dwight? Deron wants to be in NJ, he demanded a trade to go there. Dwight wants to be in a big market. Your "strategy" is like dumping a cute, nice girl because you're fantasizing about getting a super model. I"m not against dealing Wallace if the right trade comes along, but dealing him for crap so something unlikely "might" happen is dumb.
- How do you know Wallace is not in his prime? Do players magically exit their prime at a certain age? He looks very good to me on both ends of the court. Let his play on the court decide that.
-Who said Batum is chopped liver? And what do you think he has to do with this?
- Wallace could test the FA market, but will he give up 11.5 mil? Portland will have a ton of cap space, and can re-sign him easily.
- Since you're so good at thinking "strategically" look at unrestricted free agents who are better than Wallace who would fit in well in Portland. There are some very old players like Garnett, Duncan, Nash. I really don't see any of those guys signing here...Nash maybe, we don't need to lose Wallace to acquire a top level FA.
-In terms of trading, perhaps we could package him for a nice piece, but this thread is about dealing him for lower end draft picks(which at their positions, would likely give us players who don't pan out, or backups).
- Why are you even brining up Deron and Dwight? Deron wants to be in NJ, he demanded a trade to go there. Dwight wants to be in a big market. Your "strategy" is like dumping a cute, nice girl because you're fantasizing about getting a super model. I"m not against dealing Wallace if the right trade comes along, but dealing him for crap so something unlikely "might" happen is dumb.
RR7
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2008
- Messages
- 18,793
- Likes
- 13,312
- Points
- 113
Your "hypothetical pipe dream" is just that and really has no business being in the discussion. Unless, in that same way, I can say that moving Wallace strictly for picks, some of which come 6 years from now would lead to a disgruntled LaMarcus that ends with him demanding a trade, and I ask do you prefer Wallace, LMA, Batum or pieces we get from LMA, picks 6 years from now and an overpaid Batum as a RFA because he's now the best player on our roster?
Nikolokolus
There's always next year
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2008
- Messages
- 30,704
- Likes
- 6,198
- Points
- 113
Sedatedfork
Rip City Rhapsody
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2008
- Messages
- 7,992
- Likes
- 4,410
- Points
- 113
You nailed that one.
Hah. It happens every now and then. We will have to see how the year plays out. I doubt that Paul Allen will authorize a midseason trade of a crowd favorite unless the team is out of contention or it is a deal that you can't refuse. Mags comparison of the current team with the makeup of the 98/99 team is kind of interesting. Wallace does seem to have the same physical presence as Brian Grant, but BGrant was a rebounder first and foremost with a decent post game. Wallace is more like a tasmanian devil. I use to get the nickname "Ball Seeking Missile" when I was younger and balled and that kind of reminds me of G Wallace. He doesn't care what it takes, he's going for the ball or for position.
The_Lillard_King
Westside
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2008
- Messages
- 12,405
- Likes
- 310
- Points
- 83
Only been two games, but I think this Wallace thread is a good example that once posters take positions, it's hard for them to get off the postion no mattter the facts.
Not throwing stones, as I am probably guilty of this too. But it is interesting to see. Hope this thread stays alive. If Wallace leads the Blazers to a first round playoff win, some will still defend the position he should have been traded. If Wallace gets hurt or starts to suck, then some will scramble and write books explaining why it was still smart not to trade him.
Not throwing stones, as I am probably guilty of this too. But it is interesting to see. Hope this thread stays alive. If Wallace leads the Blazers to a first round playoff win, some will still defend the position he should have been traded. If Wallace gets hurt or starts to suck, then some will scramble and write books explaining why it was still smart not to trade him.
Nikolokolus
There's always next year
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2008
- Messages
- 30,704
- Likes
- 6,198
- Points
- 113
My only contention is that this team has a pretty bleak future at the five spot and they have a small surplus of talented wings ... I would prefer to see this team be proactive about its future if it can and trading a guy with a bad injury history who is about to turn 30 is a pretty decent strategy -- a couple of excellent games doesn't change that long range outlook.
Boise Blazer
Thread Lightly
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2008
- Messages
- 7,265
- Likes
- 2,592
- Points
- 113
We have had so much lets downs with hope for and planning for the future that I have fallen into a "lets do it now" attitude. And Im not sure why but I have to have enough hope in management to be able to make moves down the road if needed. So for now Wallace on a team that has struggled to score at times and is based upon "scrap and hustle" he is just too important right now to sacrifice that. Especially if its for picks that are back to "hope for future".
craigehlo
Elite Wing
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2008
- Messages
- 6,201
- Likes
- 2,334
- Points
- 113
Amen to that. Wallace is like Brain Grant in his prime, completely "un-scoutable" (if that's even a word). You have no idea what he's going to do, you just know he's going to outwork you.
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2008
- Messages
- 26,096
- Likes
- 9,073
- Points
- 113
A) LMA is locked up for 4 more years. If you think he's demanding a trade if we trade Wallace (even for just 4 firsts) then we don't need to have a discussion anymore.
B) How does the "hypothetical pipe dream" have no business being in the discussion? Please enlighten me on another team that this summer could have an All-Star in LMA, rights to Oden and Batum, 9 1sts in the next 5 drafts and space for two max players.
C) In your hypothetical, what are you getting in return for LMA (more picks?) that you're forcing Batum to be resigned at an overpaid price as our best player?
Similar threads
