We absolutely need Horford

[magnifier661]

Would Atlanta be okay with sending them, batum, Leonard, claver and Barton for Horford? They could tank and grab a top 5 pick, hopefully getting wiggins in the sweepstakes

If we could somehow manage to pull this off, Aldridge, horford, Lopez, T. Rob and Freeland would be a formidable front court. It would strengthen our depth as well, allowing T. Rob to develop. Horford could slide to PF, if god forbid, Aldridge gets injured.

 

[OneLifeToLive]

Would Atlanta be okay with sending them, batum, Leonard, claver and Barton for Horford? They could tank and grab a top 5 pick, hopefully getting wiggins in the sweepstakes

If we could somehow manage to pull this off, Aldridge, horford, Lopez, T. Rob and Freeland would be a formidable front court. It would strengthen our depth as well, allowing T. Rob to develop. Horford could slide to PF, if god forbid, Aldridge gets injured.

The dynamic of the team changes so much with this move. If we absolutely need him, then I think we need to do it without Batum. Replace him with CJ

 

[magnifier661]

The dynamic of the team changes so much with this move. If we absolutely need him, then I think we need to do it without Batum. Replace him with CJ

We need a player to match salaries. Either batum or Matthews needs to be used. I picked Batum because I think wright is a decent starting SF. When CJ comes back, I could see him totally be able to start at SG after a month or two. When that time comes, Matthews could slide to starting SF.

 

[Natebishop3]

We lose one game and you essentially want to blow up the team?

 

[magnifier661]

We lose one game and you essentially want to blow up the team?

What are you talking about? How in the fuck is this considered a "blow up"? There is just one player that is in our current rotation.

Also, I've been promoting this deal for quite some time, even during the win streak.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

Hmm..I like Horford, but a couple of things come to mind..

Hawks are 8 and 8 at the moment with designs to make the playoffs at this point.

Nic just does so much..I think we as Blazers fans over value him because of that. To think that Nic, a small forward/shooting guard could yield a dominate center is a reach.

Keep working it, Brother, I like how you are thinking on the "Big" picture.

 

[Blazer Fanatic]

We need a player to match salaries.

Which his why this trade doesn't make sense to me.

 

[magnifier661]

Which his why this trade doesn't make sense to me.

How does trading batum for Horford not make sense? Horford is a team player, that would give us a dominate 1-2 punch at center. Horford and Lopez could average 25-30 minutes each, with Horford having a bit of burn at PF. Aldridge would get his normal 35+ a game. Freeland would get around 6 a game. T. Rob would get burn on injuries, garbage or foul trouble.

Add 96 minutes between center and power forward. Aldridge = 35, Lopez = 25, horford = 30, Freeland = 6

 

[magnifier661]

Hmm..I like Horford, but a couple of things come to mind..

Hawks are 8 and 8 at the moment with designs to make the playoffs at this point.

Nic just does so much..I think we as Blazers fans over value him because of that. To think that Nic, a small forward/shooting guard could yield a dominate center is a reach.

Keep working it, Brother, I like how you are thinking on the "Big" picture.

I think Horford is the main reason why they are winning. I think Batum isn't good enough to keep them winning.

Anyway, just throwing an idea out there...

 

[Natebishop3]

What are you talking about? How in the fuck is this considered a "blow up"? There is just one player that is in our current rotation.

Also, I've been promoting this deal for quite some time, even during the win streak.

You are trading a third of our team, and one of our "big three."

That's a pretty drastic change after one loss.

 

[OneLifeToLive]

When proposing deals. I think we need to remember the reasons why were successful. What about the game is the team good at? And if you were to move one piece would we continue to be good in the same manner. I like Horford and probably would go to great lengths to get him but if we made that move you suggested, would we be better? I think we would be worse. Because Nic fits into Stotts system like a glove. He can pull up for the three at any moment. He can pass and move the ball. He's a runner and great in open court. And suddenly, with Horford, Stotts would be scrambling to come up with something that would allow him to fit. Which I think in the end would set the team back in terms of wins this season.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

I think Horford is the main reason why they are winning. I think Batum isn't good enough to keep them winning.

Anyway, just throwing an idea out there...

I do think this is going to be one of the most interesting seasons at the trade deadline. Many teams at that point that now have the intent of making the play offs will start hunting for lottery balls driven by the quality of this draft class. If you think Black Friday has bargins, look out!

 

[magnifier661]

You are trading a third of our team, and one of our "big three."

That's a pretty drastic change after one loss.

How many on that third is playing during this win streak? Yep, just one player! And this has nothing to do with the loss. This has everything to do with moving the needle. I don't know why you keep bringing up "after one loss", when I've been advocating this for at least a year now. It's not like I'm trying to use the loss as an excuse.

In fact, the Asik for Lopez idea I shot down because it's a lateral move. Anyone in here that thinks Horford for Batum would make us worse is highly over valuing batum. Oh did I forget to mention that Horford and Aldridge both expire in 2 years? Doesn't this also go in line with Olshey's flexibility concept?

 

[Strenuus]

I'd say no. I'm beginning to realize that middle-of-the-road players tend to do very well here. And by that I mean, getting a Lopez. We don't have to give an arm and a leg for a big time guy, when we can give a little less and get a guy that's going to fit our system.

But with this team, I'm under the impression that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I like Horford, a lot. But, you also have to think, in the east you have to tank BIG time. I mean, you have Brooklyn, New York, a whole host of teams that are going to fight for those coveted 9-16 slots for lottery court advantage. So if you're going to tank, you're going to have to tank with a passion.

 

[magnifier661]

When proposing deals. I think we need to remember the reasons why were successful. What about the game is the team good at? And if you were to move one piece would we continue to be good in the same manner. I like Horford and probably would go to great lengths to get him but if we made that move you suggested, would we be better? I think we would be worse. Because Nic fits into Stotts system like a glove. He can pull up for the three at any moment. He can pass and move the ball. He's a runner and great in open court. And suddenly, with Horford, Stotts would be scrambling to come up with something that would allow him to fit. Which I think in the end would set the team back in terms of wins this season.

I think we'd absolutely be better. Especially since wright is a good player. It's not like he's some low end back up. Also, this move also frees up a bunch of playing time for CJ, since Matthews can move to SF.

 

[magnifier661]

How many on that third is playing during this win streak? Yep, just one player! And this has nothing to do with the loss. This has everything to do with moving the needle. I don't know why you keep bringing up "after one loss", when I've been advocating this for at least a year now. It's not like I'm trying to use the loss as an excuse.

In fact, the Asik for Lopez idea I shot down because it's a lateral move. Anyone in here that thinks Horford for Batum would make us worse is highly over valuing batum. Oh did I forget to mention that Horford and Aldridge both expire in 2 years? Doesn't this also go in line with Olshey's flexibility concept?

How is this an "arm and leg" deal?

 

[Blazer Fanatic]

How does trading batum for Horford not make sense? Horford is a team player, that would give us a dominate 1-2 punch at center. Horford and Lopez could average 25-30 minutes each, with Horford having a bit of burn at PF. Aldridge would get his normal 35+ a game. Freeland would get around 6 a game. T. Rob would get burn on injuries, garbage or foul trouble.

Add 96 minutes between center and power forward. Aldridge = 35, Lopez = 25, horford = 30, Freeland = 6

So, cut of your nose to spite your face? I just don't like the fit for what Atlanta would expect in return. I do like Horford, just not enough to blow up the team.

 

[Strenuus]

When proposing deals. I think we need to remember the reasons why were successful. What about the game is the team good at? And if you were to move one piece would we continue to be good in the same manner. I like Horford and probably would go to great lengths to get him but if we made that move you suggested, would we be better? I think we would be worse. Because Nic fits into Stotts system like a glove. He can pull up for the three at any moment. He can pass and move the ball. He's a runner and great in open court. And suddenly, with Horford, Stotts would be scrambling to come up with something that would allow him to fit. Which I think in the end would set the team back in terms of wins this season.

Well said. Repped.

 

[magnifier661]

So, cut of your nose to spite your face? I just don't like the fit for what Atlanta would expect in return. I do like Horford, just not enough to blow up the team.

I'm still wanting a reason how giving up one starter and a bunch of players that play zero minutes on the season is "blowing up" this team?

 

[Blazer Fanatic]

I'm still wanting a reason how giving up one starter and a bunch of players that play zero minutes on the season is "blowing up" this team?

Ask yourself what Horford does.

Ask yourself what Batum does.


What does Horford do that Batum cannot do, and vice versa?

 

[Pinwheel1]

Would Atlanta be okay with sending them, batum, Leonard, claver and Barton for Horford? They could tank and grab a top 5 pick, hopefully getting wiggins in the sweepstakes

If we could somehow manage to pull this off, Aldridge, horford, Lopez, T. Rob and Freeland would be a formidable front court. It would strengthen our depth as well, allowing T. Rob to develop. Horford could slide to PF, if god forbid, Aldridge gets injured.

The Blazers are at their very best when Batum is on the floor with Damian and Wes and LMA. They may not always be consistently good, but when they are clicking like in the first quarter against Phoenix...they were fun to watch.

If you take one of them out of the equation then you need to replace them with someone who has similars skills. (or better) So you are thinking that Wright would be that guy......

Adding Horford would be great, but I don't believe it would make us better this year. Maybe next year depending who we add. But if you do this, I think you have to go more minutes with two pG's in the back court. Losing Batum's play making skills (And his D)would hurt.

The one thing I disagree on for sure, is that it would help develop TRob. I see all of his minutes being eliminated with the addition of Al. Not sure how that will help him.

 

[Natebishop3]

How many on that third is playing during this win streak? Yep, just one player! And this has nothing to do with the loss. This has everything to do with moving the needle. I don't know why you keep bringing up "after one loss", when I've been advocating this for at least a year now. It's not like I'm trying to use the loss as an excuse.

In fact, the Asik for Lopez idea I shot down because it's a lateral move. Anyone in here that thinks Horford for Batum would make us worse is highly over valuing batum. Oh did I forget to mention that Horford and Aldridge both expire in 2 years? Doesn't this also go in line with Olshey's flexibility concept?

I keep bringing up "one loss" because we just won 11 straight games. That's one of the top four winning streaks in the history of our franchise. You want to trade away one of our "big three" after we just won 11 games in a row? You want to mess with our chemistry and swap out two of our starters? Horford is a really good player, but players like Batum are much more rare. How many guys can do what he does? One. LeBron. There simply are't that many wing players that can replicate what Nic Batum does. Center is not our weakness right now.

 

[magnifier661]

Ask yourself what Horford does.

Ask yourself what Batum does.


What does Horford do that Batum cannot do, and vice versa?

I have, which is why it's a no brainer. Horford is a career 20 per player, that rebounds, passes well, rebounds, has a decent mid range game and great low post game. Batum passes well, mediocre defender, shoots the three well, rebound well for a SF, can defend the PGs.

Now ask yourself this.... Can wright, with more minutes, be a good rebounding and defending SF? And can Earl Watson give us good d at PG?

 

[DaLincolnJones]

I have, which is why it's a no brainer. Horford is a career 20 per player, that rebounds, passes well, rebounds, has a decent mid range game and great low post game. Batum passes well, mediocre defender, shoots the three well, rebound well for a SF, can defend the PGs.

Now ask yourself this.... Can wright, with more minutes, be a good rebounding and defending SF? And can Earl Watson give us good d at PG?

For me, I think you have danced around the real issue on your Own. Horford is a great post player, like LMA. Nic is a great outside shooter. What has been the hallmark of this team this season? What do we do when we are at Our collective best? Why would want to change that?

 

[Strenuus]

From: Rotowire

Batum had a huge game Monday, scoring 23 points (8-12 FG, 3-5 3Pt, 4-5 FT) while adding seven rebounds and six assists in 39 minutes.

Spin: Batum is a rare fantasy commodity who can produce in nearly every facet of the game. While owners might be a little disappointed in his scoring output this season, he is a triple-double threat almost every night. Batum has been a major part of the Trail Blazers' success this season and should continue to put up gaudy numbers for the foreseeable future.

That's hard to trade. We may be overvaluing him, but when he can put up numbers like this, and get praise like that from outside... I mean, to me, in my opinion, we're trading a guy who can help out in 4-5 areas, to someone who can help 2-3 areas. That's tough for me to say "okay, lets make that trade". Though, I do see your side of it, it would still be a no for me.

 

[magnifier661]

I keep bringing up "one loss" because we just won 11 straight games. That's one of the top four winning streaks in the history of our franchise. You want to trade away one of our "big three" after we just won 11 games in a row? You want to mess with our chemistry and swap out two of our starters? Horford is a really good player, but players like Batum are much more rare. How many guys can do what he does? One. LeBron. There simply are't that many wing players that can replicate what Nic Batum does. Center is not our weakness right now.

You give us two players that demand doubles down low and it opens up the game. I'm sorry, I think Horford is more rare. Horford is hands down the way better player between the two. We have plenty of wings to still shoot from the perimeter, defend and feed our bigs.

 

[magnifier661]

For me, I think you have danced around the real issue on your Own. Horford is a great post player, like LMA. Nic is a great outside shooter. What has been the hallmark of this team this season? What do we do when we are at Our collective best? Why would want to change that?

Giving wright and CJ more burn will still give us good outside shooting

 

[Blazer Fanatic]

I have, which is why it's a no brainer. Horford is a career 20 per player, that rebounds, passes well, rebounds, has a decent mid range game and great low post game. Batum passes well, mediocre defender, shoots the three well, rebound well for a SF, can defend the PGs.

Now ask yourself this.... Can wright, with more minutes, be a good rebounding and defending SF? And can Earl Watson give us good d at PG?

I had an answer all ready to go, but Natebishop3 said what I would have responded with in general, and I rather credit him than pull a "Golliver".

The question is not whether Wright can be a rebounding, defending SF, it's who is your back up SF then? And do you not realize the reason Write doesn't play more is because Batum is invaluable in Stott's system? I don't believe Horford's ability to create for others even come's close to Batum, not does Horford spread the floor. And I have no idea what a "career 20 per player" is, but it isn't Horford. Al is Aldridge light, and I don't know that he requires a double team. This is actually my biggest objection, redundancy.

 

[Natebishop3]

You give us two players that demand doubles down low and it opens up the game. I'm sorry, I think Horford is more rare. Horford is hands down the way better player between the two. We have plenty of wings to still shoot from the perimeter, defend and feed our bigs.

I disagree. I think Wings that can score, rebound, defend, and pass are much more difficult to replace than a big man who can score and rebound. Look how many All-Star caliber bigs there are in the league right now. It's not hard to see which of the two is more unique.

 

[magnifier661]

I had an answer all ready to go, but Natebishop3 said what I would have responded with in general, and I rather credit him than pull a "Golliver".

The question is not whether Wright can be a rebounding, defending SF, it's who is your back up SF then? And do you not realize the reason Write doesn't play more is because Batum is invaluable in Stott's system? I don't believe Horford's ability to create for others even come's close to Batum, not does Horford spread the floor. And I have no idea what a "career 20 per player" is, but it isn't Horford. Al is Aldridge light, and I don't know that he requires a double team. This is actually my biggest objection, redundancy.

Easy, Matthews is big enough and strong enough to rotate to SF. Oh and he's a three point threat as well.