piierce almost dealt to portland

roy7 · Post #1 » by **roy7** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 7:02 pm

suprising we could of had him insted of webster

Telfaire · Post #2 » by **Telfaire** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 7:12 pm

Instead of Wesbter and the additional 1st round pick that turned out to be Jack...Boston wanted the 3rd pick, to select Deron Williams. That means that they wouldn't have traded for Telfair the next year, might have picked Roy or Gay...and who knows, maybe a year after that, they would've won the Oden/Durant pick...add Big Al, and that's a scary young lineup.

Whereas we would've gotten nowehre to being a true contedner with a Pierce-Zach tandem.

Post #3 » by **Billy** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 7:19 pm

I don't totally remember, but I think PP didn't want to play here.

roy7 · Post #4 » by **roy7** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 7:21 pm

i agree we dont need pierce that would of screwed up everything we wouldnt of got roy and id rather have roy than pierce

SoHo · Post #5 » by **SoHo** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 7:43 pm

I'd just like to throw out that it seems everytime a 'superstar' is going to be dealt to Portland they nix the deal by saying they don't want to come here.

Which to me will make it terribly ironic when they start signing veteran minimum contracts and play here for rings.

In a way what I mean to say is that I'm glad all these deals didn't go down, Carter, Pierce, I know there were others, but it worked out a LOT better building KP style. Going into the future we're a team I want to root for and think has potential to be a championship contender for a long time, much better than what these types of trade would have brought.

Post #6 » by **Spykes** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 8:46 pm

I totally remember this because there was always a huge debates on the Trade Board about what else the Celtics should get beyond the #3 pick and an expiring contract. This poster named "KyleDOG" posted a Pierce to Portland trade nearly ever day that summer and he'd always sneak in Travis or Telfair (when we thought he had a ton of potential) into the deal.

As draft day got closer and and rumor kept gaining steam, KyleDOG proclaimed that the deal would without a doubt go do. After draft day came and went, I never saw him again. :lol:

Monkeyfeng06 · Post #7 » by **Monkeyfeng06** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 8:53 pm

Consider this a warning for trolling.

Post #8 » by **BlackMamba** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:31 pm

Telfaire wrote:Whereas we would've gotten nowehre to being a true contedner with a Pierce-Zach tandem.

totally agree. i like waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay much better how the blazers are right now.

Monkeyfeng06 · Post #9 » by **Monkeyfeng06** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:40 pm

Monkeyfeng06 wrote:Consider this a warning for trolling.

what? how is this trolling... :nonono:

i'm just saying thanks for dwill! i mean you guys have brandon roy and alridge in return.. (next year's draft) it was a good draft for both teams...

god!

CeltsfanSinceBirth · Post #10 » by **CeltsfanSinceBirth** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:24 pm

It worked out better in the end for both teams IMO. At the time these rumors came up, I didn't think it made a lot of sense for Portland. Pierce is a good player, but I'm not sure if a team of him and Randolph make the playoffs in the stronger Western Conference. You guys have done an excellent job of rebuilding through youth thus far. When you guys drafted Fernandez, I thought you guys got away with a steal. Can't wait to see this kid play.

Since I'm here already, mind if I ask you guys some questions?
1) What would the Blazers have done if Toronto took Aldrige at 1 instead of Bargnani?
2) Webster or Outlaw - who's going to be better?

breaker91 · Post #11 » by **breaker91** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:24 pm

I'm not sure what monkeyfeng posted, but if it was a comment on John Nash (the GM who pulled the trigger on #3 for #6 and 27) then I have no quarrel with that. Nash was such a crappy GM. I bet the guy still thinks Telfair will turn into a superstar.

I remember a quote of his in a newspaper last season where he said the Blazers would regret the Celtics trade that netted us B-Roy even though Brandon was putting up 17 ppg and Seabass was 3rd string behind West and Rondo.

Post #12 » by **BlackMamba** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 11:11 pm

well, i don't know if the blazers would have taken bargnani or stayed with thomas, maybe even draft morrison.

was KP targetting zach's replacement, any big man or the best player available?

and webster and outlaw is a big question mark. it took for outlaw a lot to be were he is right now but he seems like he has the attitude and the will, plus sick athletithism.

webster seems to have a more pure talent, specially with his shot, and is supposed to be better.

right now i say they are even and they show they could end up being the same type of player.

Post #13 » by **Mr Odd** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 11:19 pm

Monkeyfeng06 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

what? how is this trolling...

i'm just saying thanks for dwill! i mean you guys have brandon roy and alridge in return.. (next year's draft) it was a good draft for both teams...

god!

Obama wouldnt like you using the Lords name in vien!!
Bad Monkeyfeng, bad!!

I also agree that the Blazers did good in the draft. :wink:

Khazim · Post #14 » by **Khazim** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 11:41 pm

CeltsfanSinceBirth wrote:1) What would the Blazers have done if Toronto took Aldrige at 1 instead of Bargnani?
2) Webster or Outlaw - who's going to be better?

We would have taken Roy at 4. Then maybe take Gay at 6. We would certainly still have Randolph.

I personally think Webster, but there are a wide range of opinions around here.

PDXKnight · Post #15 » by **PDXKnight** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 12:12 am

I think it's safe to say it's a good thing the blazers didn't trade for kidd, Carter, or Pierce. They were all close to becoming blazers at certain points and if the Blazers would've acquired them, it would've overlooked the need to rebuild. That team might have been successful for a couple of years but our current team looks so much brighter.

Monkeyfeng06 · Post #16 » by **Monkeyfeng06** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 2:34 am

Mr Odd wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Obama wouldnt like you using the Lords name in vien!!
Bad Monkeyfeng, bad!!

I also agree that the Blazers did good in the draft.

by god i mean dalai lama! he doesn't mind me using it! :wink:

Bustabucket · Post #17 » by **Bustabucket** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 7:37 am

It may very well be a good thing in hindsight that we didnt trade for any of them, but I cant help but feel disrespected. If they are such great players, they should be able to make a team better.

swede · Post #18 » by **swede** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 7:40 am

WHO THE FK CARES. FK THE HYPOTHETICALS.

Andre 2999 · Post #19 » by **Andre 2999** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 8:14 am

Spykes wrote:I totally remember this because there was always a huge debates on the Trade Board about what else the Celtics should get beyond the #3 pick and an expiring contract. This poster named "KyleDOG" posted a Pierce to Portland trade nearly ever day that summer and he'd always sneak in Travis or Telfair (when we thought he had a ton of potential) into the deal.

As draft day got closer and and rumor kept gaining steam, KyleDOG proclaimed that the deal would without a doubt go do. After draft day came and went, I never saw him again.

I totally remember that! :nod: