Wolves/Blazers deal

weasel · Post #1 » by **weasel** » Thu Feb 23, 2012 5:47 pm

Blazers are weak at PG and C. We're weak at SG/SF. This trade works on the trade machine and adds wins to both teams.

Wolves Out: Ridnour, Randolph
Blazers out: Matthews

I believe the trade would also work with Crawford if he becomes available to trade on 3/1. I'm not sure if he is or not though.

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=86we69h

Esohny · Post #2 » by **Esohny** » Thu Feb 23, 2012 6:02 pm

I'd do it in a heartbeat. I imagine that Portland would want a pick added, at least.

B Calrissian · Post #3 » by **B Calrissian** » Thu Feb 23, 2012 6:20 pm

I don't think they'd trade Matthews for those two but I'd be more than fine with Crawford.

Mr Dew · Post #4 » by **Mr Dew** » Thu Feb 23, 2012 9:25 pm

The Blazer aren't weak at C anymore now that they've picked up Przybilla. Aside from trading one of our top 4 guys (Love, Rubio, Pek and DWill), I'd give up anyone else for Matthews and I'd give up DWill if it meant Batum.

weasel · Post #5 » by **weasel** » Sun Mar 4, 2012 6:13 am

I'd like to update this deal, and have Crawford as the piece we recieve.

Give us a starting lineup of Rubio/Crawford/Martell/Love/Pek.

Devilzsidewalk · Post #6 » by **Devilzsidewalk** » Sun Mar 4, 2012 6:34 am

I'd throw in the Memphis 1st for Matthews. Also we'd need to take back another player, probably Nolan Smith or Rhino

Post #7 » by **Calinks** » Sun Mar 4, 2012 7:34 am

southern wolf · Post #8 » by **southern wolf** » Sun Mar 4, 2012 9:33 am

weasel wrote:I'd like to update this deal, and have Crawford as the piece we recieve.

Give us a starting lineup of Rubio/Crawford/Martell/Love/Pek.

That's more realistic, but I still think Portland are going to want more than Luke and AR

eyeteeth · Post #9 » by **eyeteeth** » Sun Mar 4, 2012 6:55 pm

Portland looks adrift without a decent point guard. They play in the same division as us. I'm not saying I wouldn't want Matthews or Batum, but I honestly think right now with the play we are getting from Ridnour and, increasingly, Webster, we might be less imprived than Portland would be by this trade.

I just think that we could find a trading partner that wouldn't be competition for playoff spots.

earthmansurfer · Post #10 » by **earthmansurfer** » Sun Mar 4, 2012 9:11 pm

Cou you please updates titles to be more realistic?

There is no deal, so say so.

ctmagic · Post #11 » by **ctmagic** » Sun Mar 4, 2012 9:20 pm

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1090 ... l-crawford

I'd be happy with Crawford, Rubio,Crawford,Webster,love,pek would be tight butt hole

moss_is_1 · Post #12 » by **moss_is_1** » Sun Mar 4, 2012 9:24 pm

earthmansurfer wrote:Cou you please updates titles to be more realistic?

There is no deal, so say so.

If there was a trade, it would say official or something in the title...

Foye · Post #13 » by **Foye** » Sun Mar 4, 2012 9:40 pm

moss_is_1 wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:Cou you please updates titles to be more realistic?

There is no deal, so say so.

If there was a trade, it would say official or something in the title...

Speaking of trades...I know the trade deadline hasn't arrived yet but this season must have the least trades ever so far.

weasel · Post #14 » by **weasel** » Mon Mar 5, 2012 12:19 am

earthmansurfer wrote:Cou you please updates titles to be more realistic?

There is no deal, so say so.

You came to a message board expecting to find breaking news? :roll: