Suns Looking to move Amare East

msiris · Post #41 » by **msiris** » Fri Feb 6, 2009 3:09 pm

Rockmaninoff wrote:Oh, I'm sure that he would be professional about it; I just don't see Amar'e (yeah, he actually changed the spelling of his name; a little eccentric, but I like that) as a guy that Hammond and Skiles would target.

I am kind of getting sick of that line of thought. At this point it should be about getting the fans back and I think he can do that along with winning some games. Fans will get sick of watching guys who do not bring anything to the table. Does it matter if we have AS over RJ for the next two years?

jokeboy86 · Post #42 » by **jokeboy86** » Fri Feb 6, 2009 4:13 pm

"start spreading the news, he's leaving today"

EastSideBucksFan · Post #43 » by **EastSideBucksFan** » Fri Feb 6, 2009 4:31 pm

jokeboy86 wrote:"start spreading the news, he's leaving today"

More to come?!?!?!?

:wink:

blueedwards · Post #44 » by **blueedwards** » Fri Feb 6, 2009 4:43 pm

Sounds like Amar might be going to Portland for Aldridge and LaFrentz.

EastSideBucksFan · Post #45 » by **EastSideBucksFan** » Fri Feb 6, 2009 4:56 pm

blueedwards wrote:Sounds like Amar might be going to Portland for Aldridge and LaFrentz.

Sonnuva B!

Amare and Oden?!?!?

You've got to be kidding me, that frontcourt could dominate the west for the next decade.

What happened to sending him East?

EastSideBucksFan · Post #46 » by **EastSideBucksFan** » Fri Feb 6, 2009 5:00 pm

http://www.dallasbasketball.com/fullColumn.php?id=1307

Theres the link on the rumor

Listening to Blazer fans they are not too happy about it

Hopefully they have a change of heart and come to the conclusions that RJ/Aldridge is better than Outlaw/Amare

LUKE23 · Post #47 » by **LUKE23** » Fri Feb 6, 2009 5:02 pm

I wouldn't make that move if I'm the Blazers. Keep the young core together, stay cap-flexible. Does Amare over Aldridge get them past the Lake Show? I am dubious.

Rockmaninoff · Post #48 » by **Rockmaninoff** » Fri Feb 6, 2009 5:09 pm

EastSideBucksFan wrote:
Hopefully they have a change of heart and come to the conclusions that RJ/Aldridge is better than Outlaw/Amare

I think RJ/Aldridge are better teammates for their franchise player (Brandon Roy), but maybe that's just me?

worthlessBucks · Post #49 » by **worthlessBucks** » Fri Feb 6, 2009 5:16 pm

That would be quite the downer if Portland is removed from the short list of potential RJ destinations. Ugh.

REDDzone · Post #50 » by **REDDzone** » Fri Feb 6, 2009 7:13 pm

Portland easily wins this trade IMO.

Amare the better shot blocker, rebounder, and scorer.

Watched a ton of Portland games last year, all Aldridge ever does is shoot 18 foot jumpers. Amare can mix it up.

Chapter29 · Post #51 » by **Chapter29** » Fri Feb 6, 2009 11:06 pm

Aldridge? Well still not a fair trade for Amare, imo, but probably better than anything we can offer. Interesting that the Portland fans are upset by that. Aldridge is a nice player, but not the same caliber, I don't think.

Amare is a great player and clearly better than anyone on our team. So arguably we maybe should give up anyone on our roster for him. But I am not sure. The players I would work hard to keep are Bogut, M&M and Sessions, but would likely have to concede at least one of these guys. They can have anyone else, including future picks.

I'd love for us to trade for him attitude an all, perhaps a change of scenery would do him some good.

europa · Post #52 » by **europa** » Sat Feb 7, 2009 3:14 am

REDDzone wrote:Portland easily wins this trade IMO.

Amare the better shot blocker, rebounder, and scorer.

Watched a ton of Portland games last year, all Aldridge ever does is shoot 18 foot jumpers. Amare can mix it up.

I like Aldridge and I do think there's a question as to whether Stoudamire is the right fit for a rising Portland team given his attitude issues. But he is a superstar talent who is still in his prime so if you're going to roll the dice, that's a pretty good gamble to take. Oden thus far has shown no signs he can be a go-to offensive player so that will make Stoudamire happy since he'll be the offensive focal point in the frontcourt.

aaprigs311 · Post #53 » by **aaprigs311** » Sat Feb 7, 2009 3:26 am

I think you have to make that trade if you're Portland. Maybe try to squeeze something else out of it. Amare, Roy, Oden is a great foundation. Maybe they don't compete with LA/SA this season, but they'll be a force in the very near future.

Nebula1 · Post #54 » by **Nebula1** » Sun Feb 8, 2009 4:03 pm

I like both guys, but I would not trade Aldridge for Amare. Aldridge has a tremendous career in front of him.

europa · Post #55 » by **europa** » Mon Feb 9, 2009 8:46 pm

I've heard some rumors that the Pistons are getting into the mix with Sheed possibly heading to Phoenix. The Suns like Stuckey reportedly so he might also be part of the offer if talks get serious.

Kerb Hohl · Post #56 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 9:14 am

This may hurt our RJ trade aspirations:

http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wireta ... for_amare/

JoeHova · Post #57 » by **JoeHova** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 10:15 am

If only RJ expired in 2010 he could be moved so easily for an expiring deal. His contract is really terrible, although he might have been worth the money when he signed it. I wonder what happened to him specifically, did the injuries catch up to him? Did he lose too much athleticism? Did he get lazy? Did he fall in love with trying to score to the detriment of all the things that made him a good player in the first place? His rebounding and assists are way down from the years when he was good and his defense slipped pretty badly.

Oh well. Anyway, even if Portland moves LaFrentz in a different deal, there are other expirings out there. I'm not too worried about losing any one team. Portland would seemingly be a good fit in the sense that they need a SF but I've always been skeptical of them wanting to pay big money to an average guy like RJ when they'll have to start paying their young guys soon. I know Paul Allen is extremely rich but I think they've been making more of an effort to stick to a budget lately.

GrandAdmiralDan · Post #58 » by **GrandAdmiralDan** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 1:23 pm

JoeHova wrote:Anyway, even if Portland moves LaFrentz in a different deal

Also, LaFrentz has a large enough salary that whoever acquires him from Portland could immediately turn around and use him in another trade for another player or players, and most of those trades wouldn't require aggregating LaFrentz's salary with other salaries so there would be no trade restriction problem.

Unfortunately, whoever does acquire LaFrentz likely would be very interested in the financial savings his contract represents to turn around and trade him away for other contracts.

blueedwards · Post #59 » by **blueedwards** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 3:02 pm

Might as well change the topic. Amar might be staying in the west headed for Portland. There goes our huge expiring LaFrentz. Might have to be ready to trade within the division now for Wally or Nestrovic. Hurry up Hammond!

eagle13 · Post #60 » by **eagle13** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 1:39 am

GrandAdmiralDan wrote:
JoeHova wrote:Anyway, even if Portland moves LaFrentz in a different deal

Also, LaFrentz has a large enough salary that whoever acquires him from Portland could immediately turn around and use him in another trade for another player or players, and most of those trades wouldn't require aggregating LaFrentz's salary with other salaries so there would be no trade restriction problem.

Unfortunately, whoever does acquire LaFrentz likely would be very interested in the financial savings his contract represents to turn around and trade him away for other contracts.

Suns might be willing to deal LaFrentz (& 1st?) for RJ right right after Suns/Blazers deal. Suns would be much stronger for this year's playoffs having RJ off bench as super 6th man - and Suns would be adding little if any salary more than they now have.

Also 3 way works

Blazers
- Aldridge, LaFrentz, 1st
+ Amare

Suns
- Amare
+ Aldridge, RJ

Bucks
- RJ
+ LaFrentz, 1st

add picks & other players as needed.