What is Needed Most?

[RR7]

Just curious, going forward, what people think is needed most this season. Do we need someone else who can score, to alleviate some of the pressure on Brandon. Do we have that capability currently on our roster? Do we simply need a big man to shore up our front court? Both? Neither? Nothing at all?

I am torn which is more important to us. We seem so dependant on Roy and Aldridge every night, and seemingly did before injuries as well. At least then, when Aldridge was off, we had Outlaw, Rudy, Oden, etc. to help out. Now, we don't. Miller has been stepping up the scoring lately, but it's still not enough, if Aldridge doesn't show up. We saw against the Clippers how a team could easily eliminate Roy from the game, and how badly it hurts us.

We've also seen teams trot down the lane and score seemingly at will. There's no presence down low to stop anyone from attacking the rim. And our bigs can hardly risk fouling anyone, because there's nobody behind them.

Would someone like Caron Butler, if he became available for a decent price, be more valuable to us than a simple patch of someone like Jeff Foster? I obviously know Butler is much better, but does he shore up enough weaknesses to make the higher price worth it? Or is a big man patch a better short term solution, with hoping to ride out the season, and get healthy for next year?

I know this is kind of discussed in multiple threads here, so maybe a new topic isn't quite necessary. Just curious how others are feeling, and what might be a good option of where to go with it. Trade ideas? Do you even see one happening?

 

[Wheels]

I'm not sure what is "Needed" THIS season. IMO we obviously arent going to win a championship so I see no need to mortgage the future to win 5 more games this year. If we can get something to improve us while not mortgaging the future.. ie Blake, Outlaw, Howard, possibly even Joel but to a much lesser extent. Then Why the hell not.

 

[MIXUM]

is this a serious question?

um how about a center?

 

[hasoos]

I have been mulling this over in my head for quite a while now, and to be honest, I am not sure what the team needs. When you have injury situations you learn a lot about the team, what you have, what you don't have, and what your bench guys are capable of doing. Here is what I came up with:

1. The team needs at least another player who us 6'11"+ for the front line. Preferably somebody that is very hard to move physically, and who can lay a mean pick.

2. I have been a big Aldridge supporter in the past, and I still like the guy. But I am doubting him. The part I am not doubting is his athletic gifts. What I am doubting is his motor. I know he has been hurt a lot this year which can lead to a deterioration in in production, so I am trying to keep an open mind about that. But right now, his game appears to have fallen off, and most of it seems motivational to me. I often refer to players as "Tier1", "Tier2" and "Tier3" stars. Tier 1 being Kobe/Dwade/Lebron Types. Tier 2 being Roy/Durant types. Tier 3 being the second scoring option type. I had hoped Aldridge would be a Tier 3, borderline Tier 2 player. Right now, he is a no tier player.

3. We seem to have a lot of issues with players and playing time. Part of the problem is, a lot of the guys that are 1st, 2nd and 3rd string players are really about the same talent level(outside of the "stars). The problem is, the guy in the 1st string needs to be able to set themselves apart from the others, so the argument is moot. You want more PT? Play better. You are sitting because you are not as good as this player, and it is obvious. That is the only way to keep a team happy. Establish a pecking order. Trade several run of the mill players for a higher level talent.

4. Now some here may want to burn me at the stake for this, have at it. But I am very unsure if we can build a contender around Brandon Roy. Don't get me wrong, I love Brandon as a player. But I find it very alarming that things don't seem to work a lot with Greg on the court and with Andre on the court, and I find the effort to make it work, from the coaching staff, to players on the team, pathetic at best. Right now Brandon Roy is having happen to him what happened to Dwayne Wade about 2 years ago. He is carrying too much of a load for the team, and his body is getting beat to hell because of it. We need to look at getting what I call a "Tier 2" star to take a load off of him. At the same time I am concerned. Who can you get who actually fits with him, and why is that such a problem?

Now that being said, I can see #3, and #4 being solved in one fell swoop by getting a legitimate 2nd scorer to help Roy out. Who could fit that bill?

1. Washington is having a fire sale. Caron Butler or Antoine Jamison could fill that role easily.
2. Tracy McGrady is on the outs in Houston. Perhaps if he gets bought out or is cut, we could pick him up on the cheap. He is getting to the point of his career where he needs to be the 2nd fiddle anyhow. By getting him to play second fiddle, maybe he won't get hurt so much because he isn't carrying the whole load.
3. Carlos Boozer is available and has burnt his bridges in Utah. Plus, wouldn't it be nice to have an ex Utah player in the lineup every time we play them with a score to settle? Especially a good, physical player? Problems include he is only on contract through this year, and might leave, and has a history of leaving teams and making it known years in advance of his leaving.
4. I think Brandon Bass should be available. He could provide some physicality and post scoring.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

I'd have to agree on a strong defensive center, we have shot over 50% in our last two losses, so offense does not seem to be our biggest problem. I'td be great if we could find somebody who could develope as a scorer also though. I think we need a center short and longterm considering injury issues with Oden and Przbilla, so there is no reason not to go after one right now!

 

[Wheels]

3. Carlos Boozer is available and has burnt his bridges in Utah. Plus, wouldn't it be nice to have an ex Utah player in the lineup every time we play them with a score to settle? Especially a good, physical player? Problems include he is only on contract through this year, and might leave, and has a history of leaving teams and making it known years in advance of his leaving.
.

What could we possibly give for Boozer though?

 

[hasoos]

What could we possibly give for Boozer though?

That is an interesting question. When they made the Maynor trade, they sent Eric Maynor and Matt Harprings contract out for a guy who has never played ball in the USA, and a draft pick I believe. That tells me they want to save money. The second thing being, the elephant in the room is Paul Milsap. Everybody knows they signed him to be their primary PF and planned on moving Boozer this last summer, which didn't work out. So my guess is Utah wants to offload spendy contracts, for cheaper/expiring ones. They already have their replacment PF. So they are good to go there.

So my guess is, they want expiring contracts, draft picks.

 

[Wheels]

That is an interesting question. When they made the Maynor trade, they sent Eric Maynor and Matt Harprings contract out for a guy who has never played ball in the USA, and a draft pick I believe. That tells me they want to save money. The second thing being, the elephant in the room is Paul Milsap. Everybody knows they signed him to be their primary PF and planned on moving Boozer this last summer, which didn't work out. So my guess is Utah wants to offload spendy contracts, for cheaper/expiring ones. They already have their replacment PF. So they are good to go there.

So my guess is, they want expiring contracts, draft picks.

hey if they would bite.. I'm all for it.

 

[hasoos]

hey if they would bite.. I'm all for it.

Yea the other interesting things about the previous Maynor trade was it was to a division rival. In other words, they weren't going to hold back on a deal because it was to a division rival. Either that, or they never feared Maynor would come back to bite them.

 

[illmatic99]

In order of importance:

1. Help for Roy-- Nate is relying on him way too much and is playing him way too many minutes right now. The last thing we need is a lingering injury next year as a result of overplaying him this year.

2. Center.

The order would be switched were it not for Nate riding Roy too much, for too long.

2. Tracy McGrady is on the outs in Houston. Perhaps if he gets bought out or is cut, we could pick him up on the cheap. He is getting to the point of his career where he needs to be the 2nd fiddle anyhow. By getting him to play second fiddle, maybe he won't get hurt so much because he isn't carrying the whole load.

TMac is well, well, well past the stage of being a 2nd option on offense.

 

[MIXUM]

we need to raid the wizards roster.... heyward, butler, and jamison all would be great for us

 

[Wheels]

Yea the other interesting things about the previous Maynor trade was it was to a division rival. In other words, they weren't going to hold back on a deal because it was to a division rival. Either that, or they never feared Maynor would come back to bite them.

yeah Utah has never been afraid to trade within the division. They were willing to trade with us for the #6 pick.. although that could be cause they knew what they were getting in D-Will

 

[hasoos]

In order of importance:

1. Help for Roy-- Nate is relying on him way too much and is playing him way too many minutes right now. The last thing we need is a lingering injury next year as a result of overplaying him this year.

2. Center.

The order would be switched were it not for Nate riding Roy too much, for too long.



TMac is well, well, well past the stage of being a 2nd option on offense.

Yep thats why you only pick him up for cheap. No risk that way. I actually expect for him to be a high teens scorer when he gets a year past his knee surgery. He may be like AI though, who never accepts the back seat.

 

[RR7]

A trade that doesn't necessarily help in either aspect, but was just kicking around, for the hell of it:
A 3 way trade with us, Memphis and N.O.

N.O. out: Hilton Armstrong, Morris Peterson, 1st round pick.
N.O. In: Steve Blake

Why? Blake is a 4 million dollar expiring contract. Hilton makes 2.8 million this season. Morris makes 5.8 this season. A total of 4.6 million in savings this season on the actual salary cap. The big bonus, which makes it worthwhile fo rthem togive up their draft pick, is this move gets them under the luxury tax limit. So it's an actual savings of over 8 million dollars this season. And another 6.3 next season, on Morris Peterson's deal. The combo of removing Peterson and Armstrong from next season gets them under next season's estimated LT level as well. But regardless of that, it's basically them getting 14 million dollars for their first round draft pick. Two years ago, we bought it for 3. I think they go for it. Their's obviously the bonus potential of it being in the lottery, which would be nice for us. Not sure if they would demand lottery protection.

Memphis Out: Marcus Williams, Denver's 1st round pick, Lakers 1st round pick.
Memphis In: Travis Outlaw

Going along with the rumors from the other day. 2 first rounders for Outlaw, who if he returns late in the season, can give them great bench production in a playoff push.

Portland Out: Steve Blake, Travis Outlaw
Portland In: Marcus Williams, Hilton Armstrong, Morris Peterson, 3 first round picks.

Portland does it to add assets for the offseason. We'd go into the draft with 4 first round draft picks, and over 20 million in expiring contracts with Joel, Andre Miller, and Morris Peterson. Since that's when KP likes to dmost of his trading, this gives him more ammunition for his "big day". Armstrong is kind of weak, but gives at least a tall body down low, as insurance for guys fouling out this season. It doesn't necessarily help out this season, but it does provide multiple assets for the offseason. I don't think it really wekanes us at all this season, also.

 

[hasoos]

A trade that doesn't necessarily help in either aspect, but was just kicking around, for the hell of it:
A 3 way trade with us, Memphis and N.O.

N.O. out: Hilton Armstrong, Morris Peterson, 1st round pick.
N.O. In: Steve Blake

Why? Blake is a 4 million dollar expiring contract. Hilton makes 2.8 million this season. Morris makes 5.8 this season. A total of 4.6 million in savings this season on the actual salary cap. The big bonus, which makes it worthwhile fo rthem togive up their draft pick, is this move gets them under the luxury tax limit. So it's an actual savings of over 8 million dollars this season. And another 6.3 next season, on Morris Peterson's deal. The combo of removing Peterson and Armstrong from next season gets them under next season's estimated LT level as well. But regardless of that, it's basically them getting 14 million dollars for their first round draft pick. Two years ago, we bought it for 3. I think they go for it. Their's obviously the bonus potential of it being in the lottery, which would be nice for us. Not sure if they would demand lottery protection.

Memphis Out: Marcus Williams, Denver's 1st round pick, Lakers 1st round pick.
Memphis In: Travis Outlaw

Going along with the rumors from the other day. 2 first rounders for Outlaw, who if he returns late in the season, can give them great bench production in a playoff push.

Portland Out: Steve Blake, Travis Outlaw
Portland In: Marcus Williams, Hilton Armstrong, Morris Peterson, 3 first round picks.

Portland does it to add assets for the offseason. We'd go into the draft with 4 first round draft picks, and over 20 million in expiring contracts with Joel, Andre Miller, and Morris Peterson. Since that's when KP likes to dmost of his trading, this gives him more ammunition for his "big day". Armstrong is kind of weak, but gives at least a tall body down low, as insurance for guys fouling out this season. It doesn't necessarily help out this season, but it does provide multiple assets for the offseason. I don't think it really wekanes us at all this season, also.

I have 2 problems with that scenario. The first being, we are well past the point of needing draft picks and young players, let alone draft picks and young players that are picked late in the 1st round. The second being, you are counting on KP to pull some sort of draft day magic, when it became fairly obvious last year that most GM's are wise to KP's game. None of the above options will pan out an impact player, or the chances of it doing so are slim at best.

About the only thing I like out of all those trades is Hilton Armstrong, and we already have a guy like him named Juwan Howard.

 

[RR7]

I don't think we need the late picks. But I like having the option to use the late picks as an asset to encourage someone into a trade. Especially with our pick rising by the week, and N.O's as well.

What about last year made anything obvious that opposign GMs are "wise to KP's game"? What does that even mean? That they won't deal with him? How do you figure? Teams will deal if the offer works for them, and if the owner likes the offer of saving money.

How does 20 million dollars in expirings and 4 first round picks not give us a better option at acquiring some sort of impact player over 13 million and one first rounder?

My thinking is, Blake and Outlaw likely walk. So what do we lose in this trade? 6 million dollars or so. And we gain assets. Blake and Outlaw will not be part of a sign and trade, because neither will get more than the MLE. At least, they likely will nto be involved in one. So as soon as the season ends, if we are not re-signing them, their functionality as assets to us is no longer there. They are gone. If nothing else were to come up by the trade deadline, we aren't making a mvoe, and are slipping in the standings, I make thi smove over holding on to expirings for absolutely nothing.

 

[hasoos]

I don't think we need the late picks. But I like having the option to use the late picks as an asset to encourage someone into a trade. Especially with our pick rising by the week, and N.O's as well.

What about last year made anything obvious that opposign GMs are "wise to KP's game"? What does that even mean? That they won't deal with him? How do you figure? Teams will deal if the offer works for them, and if the owner likes the offer of saving money.

How does 20 million dollars in expirings and 4 first round picks not give us a better option at acquiring some sort of impact player over 13 million and one first rounder?

My thinking is, Blake and Outlaw likely walk. So what do we lose in this trade? 6 million dollars or so. And we gain assets. Blake and Outlaw will not be part of a sign and trade, because neither will get more than the MLE. At least, they likely will nto be involved in one. So as soon as the season ends, if we are not re-signing them, their functionality as assets to us is no longer there. They are gone. If nothing else were to come up by the trade deadline, we aren't making a mvoe, and are slipping in the standings, I make thi smove over holding on to expirings for absolutely nothing.

I think it was pretty obvious that Ty Lawson was the guy KP wanted and teams moved up to block him from getting that trade. I really don't think the plan was to go in and actually draft Claver, Pendergraph and Cunningham, that's just how it worked out. There has been a lot of speculation that Bayless wasn't really the guy that KP wanted the previous year as well, and I tend to believe that. He had never even been brought in for a workout. That could all be wrong, but if I am right, that makes 2 years in a row KP has not been able to "bag his draft pick". That would indicate other GM's are wise to his game, and are taking steps to make sure he doesn't win out on draft day.

 

[RR7]

I've heard otherwise as far as working out Bayless. I can't see him wanting Augustin over Bayless, and can't see us not finding a deal with Milwaukee to move up to their spot to get Augustin, if that was the case. I don't buy for a second he liked Augustin over Bayless. From everything I heard, Bayless was 4th on his list, behind guys in the top 3. If your complaint is his inability to trade into the top 3, and that's lsoing his abiltiy, well...

Lawson was drafted by Minnesota at 18, and then traded for Charlotte's pick owned by Denver, which has protection on it, I believe lottery protected this season. Where was the jumping ahead of us, or blocking us? We could have offered this year's pick, as well as our second rounders, or next year's pick as well if we really wanted him.

How was it obvious Lawson was who he wanted? And how does your speculation of who KP wanted in the draft equate to other GMs figuring him out, and blocking his picks?

 

[hasoos]

I've heard otherwise as far as working out Bayless. I can't see him wanting Augustin over Bayless, and can't see us not finding a deal with Milwaukee to move up to their spot to get Augustin, if that was the case. I don't buy for a second he liked Augustin over Bayless. From everything I heard, Bayless was 4th on his list, behind guys in the top 3. If your complaint is his inability to trade into the top 3, and that's lsoing his abiltiy, well...

Lawson was drafted by Minnesota at 18, and then traded for Charlotte's pick owned by Denver, which has protection on it, I believe lottery protected this season. Where was the jumping ahead of us, or blocking us? We could have offered this year's pick, as well as our second rounders, or next year's pick as well if we really wanted him.

How was it obvious Lawson was who he wanted? And how does your speculation of who KP wanted in the draft equate to other GMs figuring him out, and blocking his picks?

We'll never really know. It's all speculation. My gut feeling is though that he got smoked. My part is speculation. Your part is speculation. Here is my point. Basically we didn't get what was needed. Bayless may well become a good player, but my guess is that it will take a couple of years. He reminds me a lot of Billups who took about 5 years to really hit his stride. But now back to the point. I don't see any help in the draft. Outside of a kid named John Wall, whats the point? When you are looking for help in the draft, you have to have a target. I don't see any immediate help in the draft. It's that simple.

 

[RR7]

It's more simple if you read and understood the part that I said adding draft picks was to use them as assets in a trade. I'm not looking to draft 4 young guys, and add all of them to the roster. But a pick at 24 is better than no pick at 24.

Would your thought be that allowing Outlaw and Blake to expire is better than getting 3 first round picks for them?

 

[Kaydow]

We'll never really know. It's all speculation. My gut feeling is though that he got smoked. My part is speculation. Your part is speculation. Here is my point. Basically we didn't get what was needed. Bayless may well become a good player, but my guess is that it will take a couple of years. He reminds me a lot of Billups who took about 5 years to really hit his stride. But now back to the point. I don't see any help in the draft. Outside of a kid named John Wall, whats the point? When you are looking for help in the draft, you have to have a target. I don't see any immediate help in the draft. It's that simple.

I'm not disputing your point, but there are supposedly some "quality" big men in this draft. I haven't seen too many of these guys yet.


http://sportales.com/basketball/2010-nba-mock-draft-lottery-picks-never-to-early-to-predict/

 

[hasoos]

It's more simple if you read and understood the part that I said adding draft picks was to use them as assets in a trade. I'm not looking to draft 4 young guys, and add all of them to the roster. But a pick at 24 is better than no pick at 24.

Would your thought be that allowing Outlaw and Blake to expire is better than getting 3 first round picks for them?

So you are saying trade draft picks for a vet? I guess if you have faith in KP to pull it off. History right now shows KP has no record of trading for veterans. Don't you find it strange that a guy that has been here for as long as he has now has not once traded for an impact veteran? Outside of drafting help for the team, all KP has done is sign a free agent here or there, and most of them are to fill generic positions on the team. Juan Dixon. Steve Blake. Juwan Howard. But trades for a vet? That is crazy talk.

 

[RR7]

For as long as he has been here? He's been in charge for what, 3 years now? Or rather, this is the third year he is in charge. He had no reason to add a veteran that first season. A vet wasn't going to add anything to the team. So for one year now, he hasn't added a vet. Let's run him out of town. He's done nothing for us.

To further elaborate, he took over in 2007 as GM. We added Oden and Rudy through the draft. He got rid of Zach Randolph. He traded away a vet unwanted by the team, and most fans. It was a rebuilding season, so adding in another vet to take away time from Aldridge, Roy, etc. would have been pointless. Oden goes down, so there is even more reason to not add a vet during the season. Go into the 2008 draft, and he made moves for Bayless and Batum, who he saw as two good pieces for our team. They have both looked good in moments, and look to be solid pieces of our core going forward. He failed to add a vet at the deadline last season. Only deal that sounded reasonable was Batum for Gerald Wallace. Then this offseason he tried to add a few through signings, and ultimately did add Miller. Where is he failing here? What other vets did he miss on that you knew would be a great fit for our team, knwoing more than he does?

 

[Mediocre Man]

Hmmm.....

Portland needs a consistent third scorer, but I'm not sure Nate really knows how to coach a team with three quality scorers.

Portland needs some interior defenders, but if there are any out there, they won't come cheap.

I think in all seriousness, and not trying to be Chicken Little, the Blazers should try and figure out what they want to do NEXT season, and start that process this season.

For example

If they want cap space then try and trade Joel, Miller and Webster to Houston for T-Mac.

If they know they aren't going to re-sign Blake and Outlaw, then try and get something of value for them at the deadline.

If they know, or think rudy won't be happy in a back up role, or in a 3 guard rotation, then deal him as well.

If they have a player they are targeting in the draft then do what you can now to get him, by acquiring picks

Portland needs to have players with defined roles, but that is almost impossible with this roster.


If you could get Houston to bite on that deal, and get T-Mac, it would be awesome. Even with Roy and Aldridge's salaries, Portland would have close to 12 million in cap space in one of the best FA markets ever.

 

[hasoos]

For as long as he has been here? He's been in charge for what, 3 years now? Or rather, this is the third year he is in charge. He had no reason to add a veteran that first season. A vet wasn't going to add anything to the team. So for one year now, he hasn't added a vet. Let's run him out of town. He's done nothing for us.

What like 3 years isn't enough time to get a single trade done for a vet or impact player when your team stinks? What do you think his job? Some GM's careers at teams don't last 3 years, and most of them pull a trade off. The closest thing KP has had to bringing in a vet on a trade is when James Jones came along for the ride from PHX, and actually turned out to fill a hole on a bad team.

 

[RR7]

So he should add a vet just to make you feel better, even if they don't help the team? I can think of one deal, as mentioned above, that seemed reaosnable he didn't do. "Rumored deal" Of Wallace for Batum. What other vet deals were making us a much better team? When you are rebuilding, early on, what NEED was there for a vet? What vet was going to help?

 

[BlazerCaravan]

I'm not sure what is "Needed" THIS season. IMO we obviously arent going to win a championship so I see no need to mortgage the future to win 5 more games this year. If we can get something to improve us while not mortgaging the future.. ie Blake, Outlaw, Howard, possibly even Joel but to a much lesser extent. Then Why the hell not.

Exactly. What's most needed is patience.

 

[RR7]

I'm all for patience with future pieces. I am not at all suggesting a move that hurts future pieces to our club. Moves involving guys like Blake and Outlaw, IMO, don't affect the future direction of the club, with their impending free agency.

 

[Kaydow]

For as long as he has been here? He's been in charge for what, 3 years now? Or rather, this is the third year he is in charge. He had no reason to add a veteran that first season. A vet wasn't going to add anything to the team. So for one year now, he hasn't added a vet. Let's run him out of town. He's done nothing for us.

To further elaborate, he took over in 2007 as GM. We added Oden and Rudy through the draft. He got rid of Zach Randolph. He traded away a vet unwanted by the team, and most fans. It was a rebuilding season, so adding in another vet to take away time from Aldridge, Roy, etc. would have been pointless. Oden goes down, so there is even more reason to not add a vet during the season. Go into the 2008 draft, and he made moves for Bayless and Batum, who he saw as two good pieces for our team. They have both looked good in moments, and look to be solid pieces of our core going forward. He failed to add a vet at the deadline last season. Only deal that sounded reasonable was Batum for Gerald Wallace. Then this offseason he tried to add a few through signings, and ultimately did add Miller. Where is he failing here? What other vets did he miss on that you knew would be a great fit for our team, knwoing more than he does?

He's done some good things, but he whiffed on the RLEC. We'll probably never know what was on the table, but the perception is we could have gotten a really good player in return but KP didn't want to fuss with the chemistry. And that lead to a pretty dreadful summer with Hedo, and then Millsap (unless you buy the "toxic offer" theory to force Utah's hand) So we ended up with 33 year old (PG) Miller - not exactly what people had hoped for.

 

[RR7]

True, w ewon't know, which makes it tough. Some like to think the offers were poor. Some like to think teams were throwing studs at us for simply the contract. Likely somewhere in between, and my guess is closer the the former than the latter.

I think the Miller signing would have looked ok had Nate just fucking started him inthe beginning of the season, as opposed to bouncing around 4 different lineups before having his hadn forced. At times they don't look great, but Miller and Roy have looked more comfortable with eachother as time has gone on, and if we had gone at that lineup from day 1 of pre-season, we would have potentially worked out the kinks by now. I still think it was a good signing that could be torpedoed do to bad coaching.