nj + pdx + dallas

Yadadimean · Post #41 » by **Yadadimean** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 6:41 am

Mr Odd wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

I dont see Blake & Jack both being traded.
I cant see just Devin, Sergio and Green as
the Blazers PGs. I think Blake would prob
stay & have Blake & Devin battle it out.. .

sounds good to me too. i would love to keep Jack, but I wouldn't hesitate to move him if he was the main piece involved in a deal that landed us Harris.

SabasRevenge! · Post #42 » by **SabasRevenge!** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 6:47 am

IMO Harris would be an almost ideal backcourt mate for Roy

DanBlazer · Post #43 » by **DanBlazer** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 6:58 am

Mr Odd wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

I dont see Blake & Jack both being traded.
I cant see just Devin, Sergio and Green as
the Blazers PGs. I think Blake would prob
stay & have Blake & Devin battle it out.. .

Jack can be taken out of the trade, however I don't know if NJ will accept if he is taken out or insists he be included in the deal. If they would take Taurean instead that would be sweet.

pr0nny · Post #44 » by **pr0nny** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 7:03 am

Harris would be awesome, take Jack, I'll drive him to the f***ing airport

FGump · Post #45 » by **FGump** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 7:06 am

You guys are making this wayyyyyyyyyy more difficult than it is.

From Portland's end, the PPP of Harris doesn't matter one iota.

And from the report, you don't have to worry about Stackhouse or Kidd or the rest of the deal.

The idea is, you get Harris. And you give up something outgoing that matches Harris in talent and salary. (It may wind up going to Dallas, it may wind up going to NJ, but that doesn't matter from your end. It's Harris in, and a player or players out.)

So all you have to ask is: who would we give up, to get Devin Harris? And the answer has to be at least 3.1M in contracts going out, so you can take back Harris.

It's not nearly as difficult as you're making it.

[As an aside, I don't think Dallas is interested in trading Harris. But we'll see.]

SaintofKillers · Post #46 » by **SaintofKillers** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:59 am

http://www.northjersey.com/sports/nets/14896561.html

The Nets are discussing a complicated three-team scenario with the Mavericks and Blazers in which Kidd would go to Dallas, league sources said.

In return, the Nets would get back young players (Jarrett Jack and Travis Outlaw), expiring contracts (Devean George, DeSagana Diop), Jerry Stackhouse, draft picks and cash. More players, including other Nets, would be involved.

Jugs · Post #47 » by **Jugs** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 1:23 pm

can we PRETTY PLEASE keep Outlaw??

My favourite Blazer

Wizenheimer · Post #48 » by **Wizenheimer** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 2:21 pm

SaintofKillers wrote:http://www.northjersey.com/sports/nets/14896561.html

The Nets are discussing a complicated three-team scenario with the Mavericks and Blazers in which Kidd would go to Dallas, league sources said.

In return, the Nets would get back young players (Jarrett Jack and Travis Outlaw), expiring contracts (Devean George, DeSagana Diop), Jerry Stackhouse, draft picks and cash. More players, including other Nets, would be involved.

that may have been discussed from NJ's end, but I'm extremely sleptical that Kevin Pritchard would trade Outlaw in a package to get Devin Harris. Jack and Webster + filler...maybe; jack and outlaw...no

I'm also a bit skeptical about the reports that the deal 'fell through' because of Harris's ankle sprain. KP has talked incessantly about only making moves for the future, not for this season. Harris would be a good PG for the future for portland, although not exceptional. His assist numbers are a little low considering his salary, and his perimeter shooting is suspect. But he would significantly improve the blazers perimeter defence, and his age matches the core. I don't believe the ankle sprain would have killed the deal from KP's perspective, even though it would have hurt portland's chances for the playoffs this year.

If NJ was demanding Outlaw...that's what killed the deal, IMO

spree2kawhi · Post #49 » by **spree2kawhi** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 2:49 pm

there are not too many deals in which I'd give up outlaw if I were you... from a distance I'd consider him a keeper.

roy, webster, outlaw

or

harris
roy
webster

dunno, I'd keep outlaw...

waverider · Post #50 » by **waverider** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:09 pm

Wizenheimer wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

that may have been discussed from NJ's end, but I'm extremely sleptical that Kevin Pritchard would trade Outlaw in a package to get Devin Harris. Jack and Webster + filler...maybe; jack and outlaw...no

I'm also a bit skeptical about the reports that the deal 'fell through' because of Harris's ankle sprain. KP has talked incessantly about only making moves for the future, not for this season. Harris would be a good PG for the future for portland, although not exceptional. His assist numbers are a little low considering his salary, and his perimeter shooting is suspect. But he would significantly improve the blazers perimeter defence, and his age matches the core. I don't believe the ankle sprain would have killed the deal from KP's perspective, even though it would have hurt portland's chances for the playoffs this year.

If NJ was demanding Outlaw...that's what killed the deal, IMO

Agree, this deal would not fall through IMO just because of Harris's ankle, just BS IMO. I like the trade but would not want TO traded, much prefer Webs/Jack and pick/filler to NJ.

FGump · Post #51 » by **FGump** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:12 pm

The Nets are discussing a complicated three-team scenario with the Mavericks and Blazers in which Kidd would go to Dallas, league sources said.

In return, the Nets would get back young players (Jarrett Jack and Travis Outlaw), expiring contracts (Devean George, DeSagana Diop), Jerry Stackhouse, draft picks and cash. More players, including other Nets, would be involved.

One day, NJ has an aging Kidd that they can't get offers for.

The next day, some hack reporter in NJ is saying that Dallas and Portland together are working hard to send NJ all of the following for that same Kidd:
Outlaw, Jack, Diop, Stackhouse, George, picks, and cash

And for further spice, we hear elsewhere that such an offer isn't enough (!) and the Nets want Stackhouse offloaded elsewhere for an expiring or they'll say no.

To all of that, I'm with Cuban responding to the reporter: put down the crack pipe, druggie.

There is no way Portland does that. Or Dallas. And if all those people lost their mind, you can damn sure bet that NJ wouldn't hesitate a microsecond before signing such a deal and RUNNING it to the league office before everyone else woke up to reality.

That "report" is soooooooo bogus. What a joke.

PDXKnight · Post #52 » by **PDXKnight** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:08 pm

Outlaw's definitely not being shipped out in a trade for harris. I like what harris could bring to this team but no THAT much.

Post #53 » by **BlackMamba** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:11 pm

well, no way outlaw is leaving portland, so yes, i think that deffintelly killed the deal.

and if that was a real proposal i think the nets have serious mental issues.

Post #54 » by **Billy** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:19 pm

I'm reluctant to part with Martell, but certainly am not interested in parting with Outlaw.

In all I think the idea of getting Harris in essentially a "fell off the back of the truck" kind of deal is a pipe dream. Certainly stranger things have happened, but I'd be shocked if Portland could actually get him without having to part with someone rather important (which Portland wouldn't seem too inclined to do for Harris).

Telfaire · Post #55 » by **Telfaire** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:37 pm

I'd trade Outlaw only for Josh Howard.

Charlie78 · Post #56 » by **Charlie78** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:44 pm

I think you have to look at it in three ways. First no way is channing in the deal unless we are getting some kind of functiong 4/5, because we would have absolutely no depth whatsoever at those spots.

Second we cant give up blake and jack because of simliar depth concerns at the 1/2 spot. At least if we give up jack blake can play some 2 while harris is down and then backup the two when he comes back. But wuthout him we have to go to a bigger lineup with martell or jones filling in at the two which to me is not a good lineup for us.

Third I think any deal where we give up more than two quality pieces is a no go for us. I would love to take jack or martell and our pick and turn them into harris, but outside of that I am not interested. Our young players have value and KP is going to try to underpay not overpay to bring in guys right now.

Our main selling point is that we have Raefs huge contract which although it has two years is still pretty valuable in this context we need to use that as leverage not get caught up in being a facilitator just to make a move.

Yadadimean · Post #57 » by **Yadadimean** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:47 pm

yea I doubt Roy's best friend is getting traded.

Post #58 » by **Spykes** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:52 pm

Wizenheimer wrote:If NJ was demanding Outlaw...that's what killed the deal, IMO

Klinky · Post #59 » by **Klinky** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 5:07 pm

Seriously on the trade front, the only people I'd be willing to part with at this time is: Jack, Green, LaFrentz, McRoberts & Miles - basically our scraps... Our core is solid and I think that we're going to go up a level when Oden starts playing. I feel it'd be valuable to wait for Oden and see who settles down and who shakes loose. Oden is going to change our style of play quite a bit. Who knows, maybe once Oden is in it will lessen the pressure on needing such a good PG. It'd be nice to have, but I feel that Webster & Outlaw are having very valuable breakthrough seasons & neither are worth trading. Also I would really feel bad for Blake if he was involved in any deal. Didn't we already shaft the guy once?

dirkforpres · Post #60 » by **dirkforpres** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 6:26 pm

Dallas gets boned in this trade... Harris isnt going anywhere for a long time... This was definately a rumor.