'Short' time till the Draft

TBpup · Post #241 » by **TBpup** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:28 am

Does said player have a gold medal?

I have no idea what medals they may have won in their junior high track and field day. :wink:

LicketyBrindle · Post #242 » by **LicketyBrindle** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:28 am

d-train wrote:
LicketyBrindle wrote:
Charcoal Filtered wrote:Murphy and Dunleavy have one year remaining on thier contracts. For 2011/2012, after Granger the next highest contract is 2.7M to Dahntay Jones.

Andre Miller and Camby were also seen as big name splashes. You of all people should understand we are not going to get an all-star for scraps.

I agree that we aren't going to give up scraps. I don't know what type of package we can put together, but I would be all for giving up talent if it nets us Granger. We aren't going to get Granger for nothing. You gotta give to get. I thought that Murphy and Dunleavy had this year and next year on their contracts. That would make them more tradeable if they got an expiring back this year.

You don't get better by trading talent for talent. Davis is still capable of having a bigger impact on winning games than Granger and you wouldn't have to give up a LA type player to get him.

Davis is a better playmaker than Miller is (probably better than Roy too) and he can shoot the ball. Davis doesn’t get great stats but he is one of those players that are a lot better than his stats.

Yes you do. You can trade young talent for veteran talent and get better. You can also trade talent at one position for talent in another that is of more need and get better. I really don't have any idea where you come from most of the time with your line of thinking.

Also, Davis is not a playmaker anymore. He would be a horrible fit for Por. Horrible.

NikeZ15 · Post #243 » by **NikeZ15** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:29 am

Thank you sir.

hondaaccord · Post #244 » by **hondaaccord** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:31 am

LicketyBrindle wrote:
d-train wrote:
I agree that we aren't going to give up scraps. I don't know what type of package we can put together, but I would be all for giving up talent if it nets us Granger. We aren't going to get Granger for nothing. You gotta give to get. I thought that Murphy and Dunleavy had this year and next year on their contracts. That would make them more tradeable if they got an expiring back this year.

You don't get better by trading talent for talent. Davis is still capable of having a bigger impact on winning games than Granger and you wouldn't have to give up a LA type player to get him.

Davis is a better playmaker than Miller is (probably better than Roy too) and he can shoot the ball. Davis doesn’t get great stats but he is one of those players that are a lot better than his stats.

Yes you do. You can trade young talent for veteran talent and get better. You can also trade talent at one position for talent in another that is of more need and get better. I really don't have any idea where you come from most of the time with your line of thinking.

Also, Davis is not a playmaker anymore. He would be a horrible fit for Por. Horrible.[/quote]
Seems like the best way to get good in the NBA is to offer salary relief...

cucad8 · Post #245 » by **cucad8** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:32 am

TBpup wrote:
Does said player have a gold medal?

I have no idea what medals they may have won in their junior high track and field day.

So he was a track star in junior high, eh? :wink:

TBpup · Post #246 » by **TBpup** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:32 am

Thank you sir.

Sorry....I'm just not at liberty to comment. But I've seen some very interesting ideas.

NikeZ15 · Post #247 » by **NikeZ15** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:33 am

It's completely understandable.

LicketyBrindle · Post #248 » by **LicketyBrindle** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:33 am

d-train wrote:Vince Carter does help make a team better.

Another gem from D-Train......I'm soooooo glad he has no say in the direction the Blazers are going.

Effigy · Post #249 » by **Effigy** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:36 am

LicketyBrindle wrote:
d-train wrote:Vince Carter does help make a team better.

Another gem from D-Train......I'm soooooo glad he has no say in the direction the Blazers are going.

Are you sure he doesn't? He's been wanting to can Kp forever. Maybe he is one of those mental midgets who say no to KP and yes to Bernie Bickerstaff.

Wizenheimer · Post #250 » by **Wizenheimer** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:37 am

TBpup wrote:
so say the rumors

Also, so say people who work for other teams that I've talked to.

great...so KP has spent a lot of time making lowball offers to other GM's. I think there is probably quite a bit of fire behind that smoke of rumors that other NBA execs think KP is arrogant and grossly overvalues his assets in trade discussions.

Diogu for Ruffin....Green for Wafer..zowie!

it amuses me a little that some of the same people here that desperately want Nate gone, and also think the Blazers need major adjustments to their roster, will continue to defend KP. KP loves Nate as the coach and this Blazer roster is his...he's the architect

LicketyBrindle · Post #251 » by **LicketyBrindle** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:39 am

Bonzi wrote:
LicketyBrindle wrote:
d-train wrote:Vince Carter does help make a team better.

Another gem from D-Train......I'm soooooo glad he has no say in the direction the Blazers are going.

Are you sure he doesn't? He's been wanting to can Kp forever. Maybe he is one of those mental midgets who say no to KP and yes to Bernie Bickerstaff.

Maybe you're right. Lol.

d-train · Post #252 » by **d-train** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:49 am

Bonzi wrote:
LicketyBrindle wrote:
d-train wrote:Vince Carter does help make a team better.

Another gem from D-Train......I'm soooooo glad he has no say in the direction the Blazers are going.

Are you sure he doesn't? He's been wanting to can Kp forever. Maybe he is one of those mental midgets who say no to KP and yes to Bernie Bickerstaff.

I spend a lot of time chatting with mental midgets that can't read.

I haven't been a longtime proponent of firing KP. I have posted a lot in response to misrepresentations of his record. For mental midgets that can’t read, that might sound like I'm a proponent of firing him.

cucad8 · Post #253 » by **cucad8** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:50 am

Yeah, I remember you being a proponent of 7 seconds or less because you said you didn't care if you won, as long as it was entertaining.

SoHo · Post #254 » by **SoHo** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:52 am

I think any deal that brings an all-star to this team has to be considered. Regardless of how you feel about the young players on this team, only Roy has shown the ability to play consistently at a very high level.

Adding a second player who has already proven they can play at that level would be huge. Of course the outgoing package is important, and I don't want to see KP do a 180 and send all our young guys packing. Hopefully KP can find a balance between potential and proven play, even if that means we overpay.

EGame · Post #255 » by **EGame** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:56 am

Okay TBPup, here is a question for you that I don't think has been asked/answered yet. If this rumored deal is completed and this "star" we get, whomever it may be, comes to the Blazers iwhat is your opinion on the matter? Is it someone who can A. Help us get out of the first round and then B. help us potentially be Championship contenders? Can you give your opinion on that or does that have to be confidential as well?

Post #256 » by **DeBlazerRiddem** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:58 am

I can only imagine Batum is our most attractive "incentive" piece to make a big deal go through... This makes me sad

Bob loblaw · Post #257 » by **Bob loblaw** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 6:01 am

EGame wrote:Okay TBPup, here is a question for you that I don't think has been asked/answered yet. If this rumored deal is completed and this "star" we get, whomever it may be, comes to the Blazers iwhat is your opinion on the matter? Is it someone who can A. Help us get out of the first round and then B. help us potentially be Championship contenders? Can you give your opinion on that or does that have to be confidential as well?

If it might save KP's job, I think it is safe to say the player is a game changer or KP is really off his rocker.

EGame · Post #258 » by **EGame** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 6:01 am

Well if it nets you Bosh, you do, easily. Of course, you try and dengle around trading Batum, but in the end if that is what Toronto would be asking for is Batum then you end up pulling the trigger (this goes for any team who we are trading with near the level of Bosh).

Village Idiot · Post #259 » by **Village Idiot** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 6:02 am

It isn't Bosh because he's larger than LeBron.

Granger everyone likes so that fits the bill. Batum working out (implied to prove his shoulder is ok for a medical check?)

Granger was an all-star (albeit as a reserve) but hasn't medaled in anything as far as I know. He's as big as LeBron heightwise but not as big in bulk or status.

He has BYC status until July 1st which could be why a third team is being involved.

Bob loblaw · Post #260 » by **Bob loblaw** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 6:11 am

I don't think Granger will save KP. The trade must be for a star player, while Granger is very good, he is hardly a star. It is (in order of likelyhood), Nash, Parker, Paul, Nowitzki, Melo.... and thats all I can come up with. And the only two realistic canidates are Nash and Parker. Paul is a pipedream, but a wonderful pipedream.