Who are you least attached to?

[Rastapopoulos]

We have 16 players right now. If we don't do a trade, somebody's got to be waived before the start of the season. I'm not asking who you think is the scrubbiest player, I'm asking now who you would least mind seeing included in a trade (let's assume you think that the trade is a fair one). So, if Brandon Roy mugged your Granny, but Dante Cunningham saved your kitten from a tree, then you would pick Roy as least attached, even though you recognize that Roy is more valuable. Get it? Good.

 

[Blazer_Mullet_Man]

Rudy Fernandez. Rudy, light me up and score 40 on me, Fernandez. Next, Oden. Greg, take me before Durant and I'll play in 28% of the games, Oden.

 

[andalusian]

Andre Miller. Not a fan, despite the fact that I recognize that he is a good player.

 

[Ed O]

Pendergraph. I don't like how his noise to production ratio is so incredibly out of balance.

Ed O.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Pendergraph. I don't like how his noise to production ratio is so incredibly out of balance.

What if his production IS noise?

 

[illmatic99]

Pendy, Dante, Mills, and all our rookies, I don't really care much for. They can all be throw-ins in a trade if needed.

If we're talking significant players, I would be pretty apathetic if we trade away Joel, because I think he's done.

 

[HailBlazers]

The bottom seven of course!

 

[LameR]

Elliott Williams cuz we haven't seen him at all really.

Then Rudy/Mills, Babbit, Johnson.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Mills, 'cause he's the lowest pick of the bunch. Least invested=easiest to part with.

 

[Draco]

I voted Patty but could also have gone with Pendegraph. Jeff has virtually zero chance of ever being an acceptable role player in the NBA. He was absolutely atrocious last season, clearly our worst player and cost the team wins. Shavlik Randolph or Jarron Collins would have been more productive if they had the chance to be on the roster.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Is Pendergraph by default valuable because we're so thin up front (especially given Greg and Joel starting the season slowly)?
Makes me think that a consolidation trade better bring back someone 6'10" or taller.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

All right - who picked Roy?

 

[THE HCP]

How can people say Andre. He was arguably our 2nd most valuable player last year.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

How can people say Andre. He was arguably our 2nd most valuable player last year.

Because it's not about who's most valuable. You can even pick Roy if he pisses you off. Remember, if he goes, it's in a fair trade (which, let's hope, is for Deron Williams).

 

[Masbee]

Ok, this is a strange poll, and I don't quite get it, but I picked Matthews.

Can't miss what you never had.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Are those the only choices? I picked #17. I would not miss him one bit if he were gone.
Sure would be great to replace him
Seems like we could get someone better in that role
Could be wrong though
Like that's never happened before
On second thought no, he would not be missed
Wesley Matthews is another guy I thought about choosing because he has never really been here
Never the less, I chose #17

 

[Ed O]

What if his production IS noise?

Then he's signifying nothing.

Ed O.

 

[anonymous gambler]

I wonder who picked Brandon Roy?

 

[andalusian]

How can people say Andre. He was arguably our 2nd most valuable player last year.

So what. During a nice portion of the JailBlazers era ZBo was our best and most valuable player and many were not attached to him.

What does one has to do with the other.

 

[oldmangrouch]

All of the above. I stopped getting attached to players after the demise of the Drexler teams. Any trade that improves the team is a good trade.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Then he's signifying nothing.

Aye, there's the rub.

 

[noknobs]

So what. During a nice portion of the JailBlazers era ZBo was our best and most valuable player and many were not attached to him.

What does one has to do with the other.

There's a difference between not being that attached to a guy, and picking him as the one you're least attached to out of 16 guys. A list that includes 3 rookies and Mills... I don't know how people can pick Andre or any of the top 6 guys either. Back in the day I wasn't that attached to Zach, but I would of picked someone other than him, like V. Lenard or Ha or J. Dixon.

 

[andalusian]

There's a difference between not being that attached to a guy, and picking him as the one you're least attached to out of 16 guys. A list that includes 3 rookies and Mills... I don't know how people can pick Andre or any of the top 6 guys either. Back in the day I wasn't that attached to Zach, but I would of picked someone other than him, like V. Lenard or Ha or J. Dixon.

There is no difference at all about matters of like and dislike, and if I get to choose to select one guy to replace on this team for equivalent value, based on the criteria that I am not attached to him - the one I would choose is Miller. As simple as that.

I do not really care about him, If magically all the Blazers players would be traded to other teams next year and would still play in the NBA - I would like each and every one of them to succeed, but I do not care about Miller. What's so hard to understand. I do not care about him, not attached to him at all. Would like him to succeed as long as he is a Blazer, because he is a Blazer, but would not care otherwise.

 

[BBert]

Ok, this is a strange poll, and I don't quite get it, but I picked Matthews.

Can't miss what you never had.

My thinking too, initially. But then I thought about it some more and picked Mills. I'm not invested in him at all and he's at the bottom of the rotation imo.

 

[BBert]

Are those the only choices? I picked #17. I would not miss him one bit if he were gone.
Sure would be great to replace him
Seems like we could get someone better in that role
Could be wrong though
Like that's never happened before
On second thought no, he would not be missed
Wesley Matthews is another guy I thought about choosing because he has never really been here
Never the less, I chose #17

Clever.

 

[noknobs]

There is no difference at all about matters of like and dislike, and if I get to choose to select one guy to replace on this team for equivalent value, based on the criteria that I am not attached to him - the one I would choose is Miller. As simple as that.

I do not really care about him, If magically all the Blazers players would be traded to other teams next year and would still play in the NBA - I would like each and every one of them to succeed, but I do not care about Miller. What's so hard to understand. I do not care about him, not attached to him at all. Would like him to succeed as long as he is a Blazer, because he is a Blazer, but would not care otherwise.

I interpreted the poll as we have to cut one to get down to 15, so I assumed we would get no value back, which is where my comments were coming from. Now I read the OP and see that's not the case. Carry on.

 

[SpamKing]

Rudy. Fuck Rudy...

 

[MARIS61]

Wow, the aboriginal hate is overwhelming here.

I picked Miller, simply because his presence stalls our getting a much-needed younger PG for the title runs.

 

[Nikolokolus]

I'm least attached to Maris61 ... I'd trade him for nothing but the cap room.

 

[espn_hall_of_famer]

I interpreted the poll as we have to cut one to get down to 15, so I assumed we would get no value back, which is where my comments were coming from. Now I read the OP and see that's not the case. Carry on.

I read it wrong too. I was thinking we cut Patty Mills to get to 15.

If we get to replace one player and get equal value for the player, then I might think about Roy. I mean I love him and all, but equal value means I get an all-star player who is highly thought of around the league, but I don't need to run a slower style offense and don't need to worry about his nagging ligaments possibly causing more and more issues as time goes on? Maybe I find a blockbuster name that can get the ball into Oden early and often and run a fast break really well to go with the other all-star/leadership qualities. Might be worth it.