We NEED to get Rasheed Wallace

[A.J.]

-= original quote snipped =-



They stole my trade idea.

lol, I also heard another one where they include Prince also.

[JustinSane]

Pistons fan here. Would you consider adding another lottery protected future first to Jackson/Scola/Head/#25 for Sheed? I don't think Jackson/Scola/Head/#25 is fully equal value, though it is certainly a legitimate offer and I am probably biased in favor of the Pistons.

[A.J.]

Pistons fan here. Would you consider adding another lottery protected future first to Jackson/Scola/Head/#25 for Sheed? I don't think Jackson/Scola/Head/#25 is fully equal value, though it is certainly a legitimate offer and I am probably biased in favor of the Pistons.

No way. As much as I like Sheed's skills, why would you give up on Scola that quick?

[moofs]

Head, Jackson, Scola, 25th pick for Sheed can work, would they do it though? I dunno there is one part saying not a chance in hell, the other saying they get 2 expirings and a talented international PF.

NO.

No way. As much as I like Sheed's skills, why would you give up on Scola that quick?

You wouldn't, especially not given the salary and age disparities.

p.s. Pistons fan, while Rasheed should still have value, I'd think (without checking around the league) that your range of options on what you can get back may be somewhat limited because of how much will have to be given up. You probably need to find a team that wants to cut salary without losing too much talent, which is not really us.

[Guy986]

I would do Head, Scola, Jackson and #25 for Sheed in a second.

Scola, as good as he is, isn't the perfect fit next to Yao. Normally i love Hustlers but His mid range jumpshot is too shaky, his defense is below average and although he has nice post moves, he isn't a good finisher. Scola can only hope to ever be as good as sheed.

[moofs]

And the facts that Sheed is 34 next year and makes over 13 million, while Scola is 27 and makes 3 mean nothing to you?

Someone (I can't remember who, just that he is famous for knowing the game very well) said one time that the reason most ex-NBA players don't make good GMs isn't because they can't evaluate talent, it's not because they can't play the politics, it's not because they don't know how to put a team together character or talentwise, it's because they mangle the cap.

What happens after next year? How much would Sheed cost us to keep, because you know if he leaves, we're toast, right? If we could resign him, we'd likely be tied to a PF who is going to be 35-37 on a 3 year contract in the 6-10mil range, 4.5 if things are bright and sunny (they never are). That doesn't sound so good to me. Say we let him expire instead, we now need to find a good PF to replace him, AND the money his leaving freed up doesn't put us very far under the cap, so we're still stuck with the MLE. Great.

You always, always, always, always, always consider the cap before all other factors.

Past that, Scola's defense is not below average, it's either average or above average (if you consider how his hustle affects team defense, rather than focusing on man-to-man defense), and he IS a good finisher, even if he doesn't dunk the ball. His mid-range isn't shaky, but it's not as reliable as it possibly could be (mind you, that's said without stats backing it up. They may disagree with me)

Rasheed, from a purely basketball standpoint, if he was several years younger, would be far better than Scola, true. Given his salary and age though, I'm not seeing how he's a better fit for this team. His age may not matter as much on offense yet, but on defense it's bound to matter more and more every year. Moreover, the PF position was NOT our problem last year, injuries and a complete lack of outside shooting were. Rasheed is CAPABLE of shooting from outside, but he's far from being an expert at it (again, 35%. T-Mac is capable of shooting 3's too, but do you really want him out there either?). It's also pretty close to being a trade that would push us into luxtax territory, and Les has said he isn't going there unless it's an absolute dinger of a trade that's guaranteed to push us over the top.

..Actually, let me put this a different way. That trade would be very similar to Horry/Cassell/Brown for Barkley. It's wouldn't be as big as that one was, but it would have a similar construction. How did you like the outcome of that trade?

p.p.s. if we did this trade, we'd better not have anything anywhere else that needs to be shored up, because we just gave away our biggest non-critical trade piece (BJ expiring). Miller/Hedo/etc are either long shots or bad ideas as-is, but without BJ they almost can't happen. Technically, not even realistically.

[TMU]

OMG, moofs posted again. Let's all just ignore him once more; he's so annoying with his logical posts.

[moofs]

Yeah, sorry. Gimme a minute and I'll go slap that jackass around with a dirty trout. If you're lucky we might even manage to get his strait jacket and drool guards back on!

[Guy986]

And the facts that Sheed is 34 next year and makes over 13 million, while Scola is 27 and makes 3 mean nothing to you?

Not really. Sheed can play till 40 and he'll still be more productive than Scola. His body length and shooting range are something that Scola doesn't have and never will posess. In addition, considering Tmac's gradual decline in recent years, our window of opportunity is closing as we speak. Tmac has already lost a step or two and theres a possibility that he might retire when his contract is over. We need to make a move now. I believe Rasheed is the last piece to the puzzle.

Someone (I can't remember who, just that he is famous for knowing the game very well) said one time that the reason most ex-NBA players don't make good GMs isn't because they can't evaluate talent, it's not because they can't play the politics, it's not because they don't know how to put a team together character or talentwise, it's because they mangle the cap.

What happens after next year? How much would Sheed cost us to keep, because you know if he leaves, we're toast, right? If we could resign him, we'd likely be tied to a PF who is going to be 35-37 on a 3 year contract in the 6-10mil range, 4.5 if things are bright and sunny (they never are). That doesn't sound so good to me. Say we let him expire instead, we now need to find a good PF to replace him, AND the money his leaving freed up doesn't put us very far under the cap, so we're still stuck with the MLE. Great.

I would resign Sheed to a 3 year extension at 6-10 Million a year. That is a very reasonable deal considering Sheed's talent. Kenny Freaking Thomas is making 8 million a year. Guess what, when Scola's rookie contract is over, he's likely to command the MLE or something very close to that. I'll rather give Sheed an extra million or two especially since he is the ideal fit next to our franchise big man.

You always, always, always, always, always consider the cap before all other factors.

Agreed. But you alway always always have to consider improving your team. I'll much rather be the NY knicks than the LA clippers.

Past that, Scola's defense is not below average, it's either average or above average (if you consider how his hustle affects team defense, rather than focusing on man-to-man defense), and he IS a good finisher, even if he doesn't dunk the ball. His mid-range isn't shaky, but it's not as reliable as it possibly could be (mind you, that's said without stats backing it up. They may disagree with me)

Scola's defense is suspect at best. Not because he doesn't try, mind you, but due to his physical limitation. He is a 6'9 PF that has average mobility, and zero hop. There isn't another starting PF for a playoff team in the NBA that is as limited as Scola physically. Scola is skilled, no doubt, but his athleticism is in the bottom tier of the league as far as PF go. If he wasn't such a badass hustler, he would've been a complete liability on Defense. He's like a skilled Ryan Bowen with a little more size.

Offensively Scola is very talented. He has surprising handle and passing skill for his size. He's also a good post up scorer, with quite a few move in his arsenal. If only he can convert his layups(his hop severly limits his ability to finish), he might be a reliable post scorer in the NBA someday. Unfortunately he isn't a very reliable mid range shooter. I dont know about you but i cringe whenever i see him attempt those open 17 foot jumpshots. If i can have a quarter whenever i hear someone say "Scola has to make those open Js" i'll be able to buy myself a nice dinner. He has awful form on his jumpshot and ,as a result, he's not a consistent FT or mid range shooter.

Rasheed, from a purely basketball standpoint, if he was several years younger, would be far better than Scola, true. Given his salary and age though, I'm not seeing how he's a better fit for this team. His age may not matter as much on offense yet, but on defense it's bound to matter more and more every year. Moreover, the PF position was NOT our problem last year, injuries and a complete lack of outside shooting were. Rasheed is CAPABLE of shooting from outside, but he's far from being an expert at it (again, 35%. T-Mac is capable of shooting 3's too, but do you really want him out there either?). It's also pretty close to being a trade that would push us into luxtax territory, and Les has said he isn't going there unless it's an absolute dinger of a trade that's guaranteed to push us over the top.

Rasheed is STILL better than Scola. Offensively and Defensively. And its not even close. Rasheed shoots 35% from 3, that's very good for a 6'11 powerforward. If Tmac can convert 3s at a 35% clip, i would be happy too see him shoot them. But he doesn't. He shoots at like 20 something percent.

..Actually, let me put this a different way. That trade would be very similar to Horry/Cassell/Brown for Barkley. It's wouldn't be as big as that one was, but it would have a similar construction. How did you like the outcome of that trade?

Barkely was a much better player than Rasheed but Barkley was an undersized 4 so he doesn't age well. Rasheed's skillset and size will allow him to play well into his 40s(if he wants to play that long) and be productive. And besides, Horry and Cassell were young and good. Besides Scola, who else on that trade is worth keeping?

p.p.s. if we did this trade, we'd better not have anything anywhere else that needs to be shored up, because we just gave away our biggest non-critical trade piece (BJ expiring). Miller/Hedo/etc are either long shots or bad ideas as-is, but without BJ they almost can't happen. Technically, not even realistically.

I'll rather have Rasheed than Miller/Hedo. Its easier to get a backup 2/3 then a good PF with good Defense and 3 point shooting. I think this boils down to whether you think Rasheed can help improve us significantly. I think he can and thats why i'll pull this trade in a second.

[moofs]

And the facts that Sheed is 34 next year and makes over 13 million, while Scola is 27 and makes 3 mean nothing to you?

Not really. Sheed can play till 40 and he'll still be more productive than Scola. His body length and shooting range are something that Scola doesn't have and never will posess. In addition, considering Tmac's gradual decline in recent years, our window of opportunity is closing as we speak. Tmac has already lost a step or two and theres a possibility that he might retire when his contract is over. We need to make a move now. I believe Rasheed is the last piece to the puzzle.

Few NBA players can play till they're 40 without losing out on defense (Bruce Bowen aside, but since he plays dirty and gets away with it that doesn't really count). I can only think of a handful that were still good defensively after 35-36. You'll also notice that Rasheed's percentages were pretty low this year. Whether that's an aberration or a sign of impending age, I have no idea, but it would be a huge warning flag with me. I do agree that his game should age reasonably well though, given the style of play I usually see from him and how smart he is about the court, but it's still going to age.

Someone (I can't remember who, just that he is famous for knowing the game very well) said one time that the reason most ex-NBA players don't make good GMs isn't because they can't evaluate talent, it's not because they can't play the politics, it's not because they don't know how to put a team together character or talentwise, it's because they mangle the cap.

What happens after next year? How much would Sheed cost us to keep, because you know if he leaves, we're toast, right? If we could resign him, we'd likely be tied to a PF who is going to be 35-37 on a 3 year contract in the 6-10mil range, 4.5 if things are bright and sunny (they never are). That doesn't sound so good to me. Say we let him expire instead, we now need to find a good PF to replace him, AND the money his leaving freed up doesn't put us very far under the cap, so we're still stuck with the MLE. Great.

I would resign Sheed to a 3 year extension at 6-10 Million a year. That is a very reasonable deal considering Sheed's talent. Kenny Freaking Thomas is making 8 million a year. Guess what, when Scola's rookie contract is over, he's likely to command the MLE or something very close to that. I'll rather give Sheed an extra million or two especially since he is the ideal fit next to our franchise big man.

Wouldn't recommend using Kenny Thomas as an comparison example, considering that he's a great example of a terrible contract that has helped financially strap a really bad team. Smart teams don't throw around too many bad contracts, and we just finished getting rid of our last bad one (thanks again, CD).

Signing older players to big contracts is a high risk move. Our GM focused on risk management at MIT. I seriously doubt, for this reason alone, that he would think that the risk involved with Wallace would outweigh the risk involved with some other, smaller, acquisition.

While Scola will likely command the MLE or somewhat higher, he's still probably going to make several million less than Wallace, and won't incur any luxtax along the way.

You always, always, always, always, always consider the cap before all other factors.

Agreed. But you alway always always have to consider improving your team. I'll much rather be the NY knicks than the LA clippers.

:: shudder ::
No, you don't. You always have to have the appearance of improving your team, or some alternative facade that you can use as a marketing ploy ("we're good enough and had bad luck last year") to ensure that your customer base doesn't diminish. The NBA is a business. You always consider your bottom line.
Edit: Ew. Two paragraphs in consecutive posts ending with nearly identical sentences. I suxx. (even if they're both true, go hand-in-hand, and greatly affect each other)

From a more basketball-oriented standpoint, I'll take option C - don't avoid big contracts all-but-entirely but also don't hand out 50 million or whatever it was to Jerome James based on 3 games in a playoff series or Kelvin Cato based on a single preseason game and some practices. At least Sterling's practices don't help inflate ticket prices.

Past that, Scola's defense is not below average, it's either average or above average (if you consider how his hustle affects team defense, rather than focusing on man-to-man defense), and he IS a good finisher, even if he doesn't dunk the ball. His mid-range isn't shaky, but it's not as reliable as it possibly could be (mind you, that's said without stats backing it up. They may disagree with me)

Scola's defense is suspect at best. Not because he doesn't try, mind you, but due to his physical limitation. He is a 6'9 PF that has average mobility, and zero hop. There isn't another starting PF for a playoff team in the NBA that is as limited as Scola physically. Scola is skilled, no doubt, but his athleticism is in the bottom tier of the league as far as PF go. If he wasn't such a badass hustler, he would've been a complete liability on Defense. He's like a skilled Ryan Bowen with a little more size.

He has a 30 inch vertical (cited somewhere), it's just never used. He's of the "don't leave your feet" school, of which other attendees included Charles Oakley. 6'9", unless you're an announcer on ESPN, is not undersized, he's just not one of the taller PFs in the league. His mobility is pretty decent (I consider that part of "athleticism", rather than just jumping ability, with footwork being a close cousin). Moreover, he always runs hard, which is something that a lot of more athletic players in the league can be accused of not doing. The only guys I can remember that burned him are all-stars, and those guys generally burn everyone. Again, his team defense is absolutely great. If you check 82 games, our team rebounding and defense improve slightly with him out, but that's also typically when we send in our defensive unit against the other team's backups. (It seems a good idea to be wary of putting too much stock in each of those ratings considering they have Loren Woods, Bobby Jackson, and Gerald Green as our 3 best guys in Roland Rating.)

Offensively Scola is very talented. He has surprising handle and passing skill for his size. He's also a good post up scorer, with quite a few move in his arsenal. If only he can convert his layups(his hop severly limits his ability to finish), he might be a reliable post scorer in the NBA someday. Unfortunately he isn't a very reliable mid range shooter. I dont know about you but i cringe whenever i see him attempt those open 17 foot jumpshots. If i can have a quarter whenever i hear someone say "Scola has to make those open Js" i'll be able to buy myself a nice dinner. He has awful form on his jumpshot and ,as a result, he's not a consistent FT or mid range shooter.

I'd really want some stats to argue or agree with this point, cause I don't know if you're right, or to what degree, but I can't remember what site the by-court-section stats are. Oh well.

Rasheed, from a purely basketball standpoint, if he was several years younger, would be far better than Scola, true. Given his salary and age though, I'm not seeing how he's a better fit for this team. His age may not matter as much on offense yet, but on defense it's bound to matter more and more every year. Moreover, the PF position was NOT our problem last year, injuries and a complete lack of outside shooting were. Rasheed is CAPABLE of shooting from outside, but he's far from being an expert at it (again, 35%. T-Mac is capable of shooting 3's too, but do you really want him out there either?). It's also pretty close to being a trade that would push us into luxtax territory, and Les has said he isn't going there unless it's an absolute dinger of a trade that's guaranteed to push us over the top.

Rasheed is STILL better than Scola. Offensively and Defensively. And its not even close. Rasheed shoots 35% from 3, that's very good for a 6'11 powerforward. If Tmac can convert 3s at a 35% clip, i would be happy too see him shoot them. But he doesn't. He shoots at like 20 something percent.

Mac shot 292 last year as a 337 career 3p shooter. I don't like guys shooting a lot of 3's until they're over at least 37-39%, and don't REALLY like it until they're over 41-44%.

Sheed is currently better than Scola on man-to-man defense for certain, probably either his equal or better on team defense, maybe slightly better than him on offense (he's definitely got a wider range of abilities, but I prefer to focus on efficiency, where he was equal at best), and maybe slightly better at rebounding. Emphasis on currently. I've seen too many guys drop off like rocks from 34-36 to think that the risk involved in hoping Sheed stays at his current level is nominal. It may well happen, but the odds are not good, even with Sheed's style of playing (See: Duncan).

..Actually, let me put this a different way. That trade would be very similar to Horry/Cassell/Brown for Barkley. It's wouldn't be as big as that one was, but it would have a similar construction. How did you like the outcome of that trade?

Barkely was a much better player than Rasheed but Barkley was an undersized 4 so he doesn't age well. Rasheed's skillset and size will allow him to play well into his 40s(if he wants to play that long) and be productive. And besides, Horry and Cassell were young and good. Besides Scola, who else on that trade is worth keeping?

Jackson isn't worth keeping per se, but he could easily be better suited being traded elsewhere for someone else to fill in at a position where we're weaker. After trading Jackson and Head, we're also going to be VERY short at backup pg (Brooks) and backup sg (Harris, Francis) with only half-or-less of the MLE, the LLE, and Steve Francis as remaining assets. That scares me.

I actually thought Barkley aged reasonably well, all things considered, same as I expect Sheed to do. That wasn't really what I was getting at. There were quite a few other factors that worked against that trade that I'd rather not go into detail on. (since this argument doesn't seem to have illustrated my point as well as I'd hoped)

p.p.s. if we did this trade, we'd better not have anything anywhere else that needs to be shored up, because we just gave away our biggest non-critical trade piece (BJ expiring). Miller/Hedo/etc are either long shots or bad ideas as-is, but without BJ they almost can't happen. Technically, not even realistically.

I'll rather have Rasheed than Miller/Hedo. Its easier to get a backup 2/3 then a good PF with good Defense and 3 point shooting. I think this boils down to whether you think Rasheed can help improve us significantly. I think he can and thats why i'll pull this trade in a second.

Considering again that PF was not one of our deficiencies last year, is how much Rasheed improves us at PF, if he improves us, and for however many years he's able to improve us before his skills decline (as previously mentioned, relatively high risk, with high financial penalties if the risk becomes reality), going to be more than how much we could improve another position given similar outgoing assets with potentially lower incoming salaries? You pointed out yourself that McGrady has declined, it was said all year long, and given that, it seems to me that we're better suited taking a small risk to shore up a weakness than gambling at further shoring up a strength. The net return is more likely to be higher. If it's easier to get a good backup 2/3, why have we been stuck with Luther Freaking Head for 3 years?

[m23uza1hem36]

I wouldn't mind this deal, from a Detroits fans perspective, I just don't know if it will happen, now Sheed is worth a lot because of that expiring of 13M, he also probably won't be getting no 13m a year extensions anymore, hes going to need to take a lower "salary agreement". So he does have a lot of value but so does Tmac, I don't know, it would really help Houston and it would also give Detroit it's go-to-guy.

[JordansBulls]

Everytime lukeridnour posts, I think it's JordansBulls.

Lukeridnour, change your avatar bro. JordansBulls had it first.

And the image is from my photobucket.

[Dinky Bits]

God forbid we acknowledge the fact that Sheed is about seven years older than Scola.

The dude is past his prime. He has attitude problems, and his contract is expiring, meaning we either lose him for nothing, or have to pay to keep his thirty five year old wrinkly ass. Trading for Rasheed Wallace would be an abysmal move no matter how you look at it. We'd be losing a great hard working skilled PF who just finished third in ROY voting, for a lazy,
angry pothead.

What we NEED is some depth on the wings. What we NEED is a reliable third scorer. What we NEED is to stay healthy. We don't NEED Sheed in any form or fashion.

[King Roosk]

God forbid we acknowledge the fact that Sheed is about seven years older than Scola.

The dude is past his prime. He has attitude problems, and his contract is expiring, meaning we either lose him for nothing, or have to pay to keep his thirty five year old wrinkly ass. Trading for Rasheed Wallace would be an abysmal move no matter how you look at it. We'd be losing a great hard working skilled PF who just finished third in ROY voting, for a lazy,
angry pothead.

What we NEED is some depth on the wings. What we NEED is a reliable third scorer. What we NEED is to stay healthy. We don't NEED Sheed in any form or fashion.

Although I think Sheed's "attitude problem" is a little overstated at times, I agree completely with Dinky on this one.

[Baller 24]

I'd love to have him, but you have to consider, the guy isn't Kareem, he isn't going to average and give you 17pts, and 10 rebounds, he is not a legit 3rd options. I'm find with acquiring ANY of the other 3. They IMO would be perfect 3rd options. You can go either way...
Billups-Tmac-Battier-Scola-Yao .....never in hell thats happening
Alston- Rip- Tmac- Scola- Yao .....my favorite, not happening either
Alston-Tmac-Prince-Scoal-Yao....possible chance, but other teams can offer much more.