Will Rudy End Up A No-Show?

[MikeDC]

I'm not really seeing how either side is in a good spot. If Rudy sits, he gets no money and the Blazers get no value. If Rudy reports, they have to pay him but there's little role for him and it's awkward for everyone. A pick seems fair value, but I suppose it's always possible to try and use him in a consolidation trade.

 

[mgb]

Showing up is not the same as playing well. Do you really think Nate would force him into a game against his wishes?

You can't be fined for not playing well.

I think by that time Rudy will be wise enough to realize that by playing well it only helps his cause so he will be playing his best. If by then he still doesn't get it then it's a lost cause and so what we might have lost a late round draft pick that PA can easily buy if he wants, but then again we still might be able to include him in a trade. We shall see.

 

[mook]

A pick seems fair value, but I suppose it's always possible to try and use him in a consolidation trade.

I think that's the real key. We've got no reason to unload him for nothing. But an opportunity may come along where he can be included in a package with other talent for an upgrade at PG.

Count me in the category of "not being impressed with a late first round pick." If that's all Rudy is worth, jeez. I'd rather just hang onto him and see if he can turn things around after having his ego smacked around a little. We can buy a 25th or so pick a lot of years--what's the point in trading him for something we could probably buy? (Assuming we had the roster space for such a guy.)

 

[e_blazer]

I think that's the real key. We've got no reason to unload him for nothing. But an opportunity may come along where he can be included in a package with other talent for an upgrade at PG.

Count me in the category of "not being impressed with a late first round pick." If that's all Rudy is worth, jeez. I'd rather just hang onto him and see if he can turn things around after having his ego smacked around a little. We can buy a 25th or so pick a lot of years--what's the point in trading him for something we could probably buy? (Assuming we had the roster space for such a guy.)

Exactly right. I hope that Cho is looking, at a minium, to upgrade our backup PG spot. Nothing against Bayless, but the thought of him running the team if Miller got hurt does not fill me with confidence.

 

[Masbee]

The roster is as unbalanced as it's ever been.

I am surprised that there are any fans that think this. I, and others who more or less agree on the likely rotation of Nate, see a pretty solid, well balanced roster.

As is. Right now. With no other moves.

We have been discussing this since draft day. Nothing has changed to change the dynamic.

Rudy is gone. Either traded or sits out. Either way. Don't care.

These are the starters:

Miller, Roy, Batum, Aldridge, Oden.

These are the probable regular rotation players in order of minutes:

Bayless, Matthews, Camby, Cunningham, Pryz.

The rest of the roster, consisiting of rookies and 2nd rounders, are injury backup players.

The roster is balanced. The roster is fine.

 

[Natebishop3]

Rudy is making peanuts the next two years. Real Madrid could probably float him some endorsement deals in Spain to make up for sitting out the season, and once he does, the shit is on Cho big time to do something.

Cho has been WOOFING to the media about not being intimidated by Rudy, and not caving in to Rudy. Rudy should call his bluff and see what happens.

Meh, I think that's a best case scenario actually. I would rather Rudy sit out, go back to Europe and boost his value. I'd rather him playing hard in Europe than sand bagging it here. If he sits out two years, we can tender him a qualifying offer and have him sit in Europe like Josh Childress.

 

[andalusian]

Meh, I think that's a best case scenario actually. I would rather Rudy sit out, go back to Europe and boost his value. I'd rather him playing hard in Europe than sand bagging it here. If he sits out two years, we can tender him a qualifying offer and have him sit in Europe like Josh Childress.

Do not think this works under the CBA. The Childress situation happened because he was a RFA - Rudy is not, he is under contract.

 

[BGrantFan]

Honestly I don't care if we decide to stand pat with him and he calls the bluff and doesn't show up. He loses any chance of coming back to the nba and we lose what is looking like a late first round on a team that doesn't seem to like to make consolation trades. So we basically lose a first round pick that would sit on the bench... oh noes!.

I don't think we should be caving to a unhappy player that has been sandbagging. Take a hard stance on this so in the future if someone tries to pull this they can see what happened to Rudy.

The guy DID come back from back surgery way ahead of schedule. Did he do that so he could then tank and kill his trade value? That makes no sense to me.

 

[BGrantFan]

Put me in the category of "happy Blazer fan". If our biggest issue going into camp is whether a backup 2G that we don't need and who isn't costing the team much in salary will show up or get traded, we're in a pretty good spot.

The biggest issues to me are whether Oden will be ready for camp, and how Roy's knees hold up during camp.

 

[e_blazer]

The biggest issues to me are whether Oden will be ready for camp, and how Roy's knees hold up during camp.

Agreed. But you wouldn't think that from the amount of time spent on this board worrying about what's going to happen with Rudy.

 

[Draco]

I want to see us hold on to Rudy.

These emotional situations can change on a whim, I mean last year we were talking about him clearly being the second best guard behind Roy and possibly running both of them in the backcourt together. If he has one good month of play, earns a spot in the rotation and is playing 25mpg everyone will forgive him and he will be happy to be playing well. The I heart Rudy stuff will make a comeback. So that is the upside scenario, the downside is he sits out and we lose the chance to get a late pick for him.......

Upside>>>Downside

 

[Natebishop3]

Do not think this works under the CBA. The Childress situation happened because he was a RFA - Rudy is not, he is under contract.

That's what I mean... sit on him for two years until he becomes an RFA and then sit on his NBA rights until he wants to come back. Let him get his value back up in Europe.

 

[MARIS61]

I am surprised that there are any fans that think this. I, and others who more or less agree on the likely rotation of Nate, see a pretty solid, well balanced roster.

As is. Right now. With no other moves.

We have been discussing this since draft day. Nothing has changed to change the dynamic.

Rudy is gone. Either traded or sits out. Either way. Don't care.

These are the starters:

Miller, Roy, Batum, Aldridge, Oden.

These are the probable regular rotation players in order of minutes:

Bayless, Matthews, Camby, Cunningham, Pryz.

The rest of the roster, consisiting of rookies and 2nd rounders, are injury backup players.

The roster is balanced. The roster is fine.

I agree with the lineups you see happening, but am horrified by them rather than comforted.

Basically, SG is our only solid position. Roy, either Rudy or Wes backing him up.

SF is next best, but vastly depleted since last year. Batum with no legitimate backup, but Rudy and maybe Wes can fill in against certain SF's.

PG Miller is a lazy old guy who fails to inspire his teammates and who's disappeared every year he made the playoffs. No legitimate backup at PG.

PF LaMarcus is a tad better each year, but isn't being taught much. We have no legitimate backup at PF.

C Starter will be whomever is not injured on any particular night. With not one, not 2, but 3 very good defensive centers you'd think we'd be set but odds are great that we won't get a combined 82 games out of the bunch of them due to their fragility and current career-threatening injuries. Maybe we'll have a backup for awhile.

Last year's team was better than this one.

The team 2 years ago was better than last year's.

Next summer we finish blowing this one up and trade the fragments for 1 futile title attempt through a bunch of aging, troublemaking veterans.

 

[Natebishop3]

I agree with the lineups you see happening, but am horrified by them rather than comforted.

Basically, SG is our only solid position. Roy, either Rudy or Wes backing him up.

SF is next best, but vastly depleted since last year. Batum with no legitimate backup, but Rudy and maybe Wes can fill in against certain SF's.

PG Miller is a lazy old guy who fails to inspire his teammates and who's disappeared every year he made the playoffs. No legitimate backup at PG.

PF LaMarcus is a tad better each year, but isn't being taught much. We have no legitimate backup at PF.

C Starter will be whomever is not injured on any particular night. With not one, not 2, but 3 very good defensive centers you'd think we'd be set but odds are great that we won't get a combined 82 games out of the bunch of them due to their fragility and current career-threatening injuries. Maybe we'll have a backup for awhile.

Last year's team was better than this one.

The team 2 years ago was better than last year's.

Next summer we finish blowing this one up and trade the fragments for 1 futile title attempt through a bunch of aging, troublemaking veterans.

We need a backup power forward in the worst way. I don't see a way that Camby is our backup power forward AND Prz plays center.

 

[mook]

We need a backup power forward in the worst way. I don't see a way that Camby is our backup power forward AND Prz plays center.

Aldridge played 37 mpg. So really you are talking about an 11 mpg player. Camby can definitely handle the backup 4 for that kind of minutes.

Assume Camby goes down, you only need 11 minutes out of Pendergraph or Cunningham. Maybe not ideal, but if you got a more talented 3rd stringer PF he'd probably be complaining about minutes.

 

[Minstrel]

When everyone is healthy, I see Camby as both the backup power forward and backup center. Simultaneously (though, probably shouldn't sub him in both positions simultaneously).

If someone goes down for a significantly amount of time...then yeah, things start needing to happen. Like...Przybilla plays decently, and/or Cunningham plays decently and/or a trade happens.

 

[Loyalty4Life]

So what if Cho holds out leading to Rudy holding out?

Hold on...I'm thinking about it.

I would retweet this if I could.

 

[espn_hall_of_famer]

I agree with the lineups you see happening, but am horrified by them rather than comforted.

Basically, SG is our only solid position. Roy, either Rudy or Wes backing him up.

SF is next best, but vastly depleted since last year. Batum with no legitimate backup, but Rudy and maybe Wes can fill in against certain SF's.

PG Miller is a lazy old guy who fails to inspire his teammates and who's disappeared every year he made the playoffs. No legitimate backup at PG.

PF LaMarcus is a tad better each year, but isn't being taught much. We have no legitimate backup at PF.

C Starter will be whomever is not injured on any particular night. With not one, not 2, but 3 very good defensive centers you'd think we'd be set but odds are great that we won't get a combined 82 games out of the bunch of them due to their fragility and current career-threatening injuries. Maybe we'll have a backup for awhile.

Last year's team was better than this one.

The team 2 years ago was better than last year's.

Next summer we finish blowing this one up and trade the fragments for 1 futile title attempt through a bunch of aging, troublemaking veterans.

I agree with the others that with LMA playing 35+ minutes as the norm anyway, you'll likely see Camby play those extra minutes. He's more of a PF playing out of position at the center in the past, so he'll be a perfect fit to backfill those PF minutes since he's obviously not going to be getting his normal "Camby minutes" with Oden now healthy and the main starter and not having to worry about the fouls nearly as much as last year with the huge increase in wing defending.

And I think Cunningham is really sprouting and will be even better, so he'll easily fill in any SF minutes that we lost with Webster. I'd much rather have Cunningham playing the SF spot and Babbitt filling in the rest of the void than have Martell out there jacking away bad shots.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Martell didn't really take bad shots, he just had bad results

 

[hasoos]

I think the answer to your question is another question. Can Rudy afford not to show up? When Rudy came here he had to buy out his contract in Europe. The question is, has he paid that off yet? Because if he hasn't, he needs cash in order to pay it off, which I don't see happening if he doesn't show up and is suspended indefinitely.

 

[Draco]

Rudy's camp is spouting off tought talk, because thats the only thing they can do. When the Blazers actually start playing games there is no way Rudy will hold out. We heard the same banter from Sergio for how many years? It's just a frusterated player attempting to do the only thing in their power, but when the deadline comes these guys always report.

Can you think of one player who has sat out an entire season in the NBA?

 

[espn_hall_of_famer]

Goodbye Spain in the world championships. So much for Rudy's value.

Please welcome our 15th member of the roster soon to be send to the inactive list.

 

[Masbee]

I agree with the lineups you see happening, but am horrified by them rather than comforted.

Maybe you should start watching Laker or Miami games then.

Seriously, there is NO team that has "legit backups" at every single position.

It is an absurd strawman (something you are very familiar with) to claim as a negative the failure of the Blazers to achieve something no team does.

As for the starters and backups, there is no such thing on most teams. Starters rotate out and subs come in. Except in very limited minutes and blowouts there will always be one and usually two starters on the floor at all times.

The Blazers have a team with multiple players that can cover more than one position. Subsitions can occur throughout the game. No "platoons".

Miller can play 1 or 2.
Roy can play 1, 2 or 3.
Batum can play 2, 3 or 4.
LA can play 4, or 5.
Oden is a pure 5.
Bayless can play 1 or 2.
Matthews can play 2 or 3.
Cunningham can play 3 or 4.
Camby can play 4 or 5.
Pryz is a pure 5.

If all healthy Nate can play a lot of big lineups that should be hard for most teams to handle. If injuries or matchups dictate Nate has the ability (and long-time shown preference) for playing lots of small-ball.

No "legit" backup PG? Could be a problem if Miller gets hurt, something that has never happened before. Otherwise, Bayless is trying to become a "legit" backup PG. If he fails this year, it may limit his NBA prospects and he knows it. Regardless, he fills in nicely as a guard that defends the PG and plays SG on offense next to Roy. And charges into the paint when he is out there without Miller or Roy. Our PG minutes on offense are all well coverered by Miller, Bayless and Roy.

SG you claim is our "best" position, seems no better or worse to me. If Roy goes out we have a challenge to make it work for any extended period, especially on the offensive end. But with the excellent size our team now posseses, all of our rotation guards can help defend the 2 spot, and the versitile Batum can take minutes there as well.

SF if Batum gets hurt I think we are well covered with Matthews, Roy and Cunningham able to take over the rotation there.

PF you claim is a weakness, yet LaMarcus play the most minutes on the team, Camby is more a 4 than a 5, and at this point in his career becomes one of the better backup Power Forwards in the NBA. How on earth that is a "weakness" escapes my feeble brain.

Center, we have 3 solid defensive rebounding and injury-prone centers (and LaMarcus can play backup center better than most NBA backup C's) and somehow you turn the caution of 3 legit 7 footers into a disaster.

There is nothing any of us can do about Oden's health. Or Pryz. Or anybody else. We can't trade Oden for Howard. We could only trade him for a small or for another injury prone big or a far less talented one.

Me, considering what the team had to work with, I am happy they traded for Camby and have locked up the versitile LaMarcus, giving us options to man the paint.

If healthy, I see this roster as a dark-horse contender. I don't expect complete health, so, I don't think this is the year the Blazers make a run. In which case, why are you fretting so much about lack of "legit" backups to this or that spot?