Why make a trade?
You are not authorized to post a reply.
  1. truebluefan
    truebluefan
    Posts: 55

    Posted 08/13/2010 8:40 AM

    The last couple of weeks we have all been debating the need to make a trade, this all started cp3. We did have some fun discussions about it, but really i think the question needs to be asked does this team need to make a trade just to make one. I think that a lot of fans want a trade just because they see other teams being active in the market and adding players and they feel left out. The teams that are making these moves are out of desperation, whether it to try and keep their star player or just to stop the bleeding of less wins every year. We have a core of players that i think 99% of teams and fans would love to have on their teams and a bench that could start most of those teams. What fans need to remember is that this team as been a winner and improved each year with out adding big names in the off season (I know some think Dre was a big name last year). We have not seen this team at full strength, yet we improve each year, we have become a 50 win team with a unstable line up because of injury, so if the reports are right about people being ready to go opening night we should just look forward to what this team could accomplish this season. So I ask again does this team really need to make a trade or should we see what a healthy team can do? I say if it is not broke don't fix it.
  1. The Unholy
    The Unholy
    Posts: 352

    Posted 08/13/2010 8:50 AM

    no we're good. it's just portland is so boring in the off season that we need to over analyze EVERYTHING.
    I am a fan of high octane motion offense
  1. DHawes22
    DHawes22
    Posts: 6488

    Posted 08/13/2010 9:06 AM

    Personally, I don't think we need to make a trade just to make one, but to thin out our stacked roster. We have a lot of great talent who deserves minutes and history tells us teams with a great 8-9 man rotation are more successful than teams that go 12 deep.
    I am a fan of
  1. Kim~
    Kim~
    Posts: 1137

    Posted 08/13/2010 10:43 AM

    Why ??   because Blazer fans are still drunk off the kool aide and the pritch slap era. It was so fun, no one wants it to end. So they want to bring every big name here, thinking that is better than what we have. 
     Even though we have a great team.
      I still disagree that any team can have too much talent.
    Injuries and foul trouble are a reality in the NBA.
    I  see a move of Rudy and possibly Bayless eventually depending on what EW brings, but if we are going to blow up our roster to get a pg, I want Rondo !!
    I am a fan of scrapping !
  1. truebluefan
    truebluefan
    Posts: 55

    Posted 08/13/2010 11:07 AM

    Kim with talent comes ego and this team aside from Rudy seems to have a good balance of ego to talent guys with a lot of talent want playing time. You can can only play so many talented guys you need guys that know that they are role players not game changers. we have that now, we need this team to stay healthy and gel. I personally we would rather give this team another year to reach full potential and win or at least make a run at multiple titles than sell our soul for one possible title run. So yes you can have to much talent.
  1. ***Jason***
    ***Jason***
    Posts: 259

    Posted 08/13/2010 11:11 AM

    We don't 'HAVE' to make a trade... but if there's a trade that makes you better, ie. win more games, you do it. This team is good, but probibly not a championship team. Rudy needs to go and we still don't have an inside post up easy basket type of a scorer (we're hoping it's Greg). Andre is getting older and his contract is ending. Other than Camby, who's really a 5, we don't have a great option to back up Lamarcus at the 4. Our other PG's are unproven. We're not perfect. There is always work to be done and the off-season is usually when you do it. Teams with shorter lineups typically win more games. In the playoffs, teams shorten their lineups even more. Only 5 can play at a time. You have to consolidate your roster and get your talent out on the floor if you want to advance. Nobody can score or play defense from the bench. As fans I think sometimes we fall in love with what we have and forget to move forward. Whenever these trades do happen, by the time the new players fit in, they become home town and everybody is fine.
    I am a fan of Im a fan of the nba, players and owners, doing what they have to to earn the fans back.
  1. Matt Todd
    Matt Todd
    Posts: 8

    Posted 08/13/2010 11:57 AM

    I completely agree with Jason, Blazer fans fall in love with the players here and forget that this is still a business.  You may love all your roll players who may or may not have potential, we need to thin out our "stacked" roster and we need to get roll players that can score that can defend we need a 4 that is a big body that wont post up for a hook or a fade away.  It would help tremendously if we had a star Pg that could take some pressure off B-Roy ( preferably a pass first defensive minded Pg who can shoot the ball well).  This team is a 50 win team as is. If we want to improve in the playoffs then we need someone who can come off the bench and play like an All Star who can score and defend. 

    Now I'm not a fan of going 10-11 deep into our bench each game so we can get our young "roll" players minutes.  In the playoffs if we're sending rookie's in against all star vets we're going to get eatin alive because our rookies aren't Derrick Rose or LBJ.  If we want to win during the season we can stay just how we are and lose in 6 games in the playoffs.  If we want to win in the playoffs we have to improve our bench.
    I am a fan of Getting a champoinship in Portland
  1. Kim~
    Kim~
    Posts: 1137

    Posted 08/13/2010 2:48 PM

    Trueblue ,  sarcasm does not translate here. 

     I'm tired of the pg musical chairs, and not one wanting a blockbuster trade...  If fans are going to pull names out of air that Portland should trade for, Rondo is my choice.  He is, imo, the best pg in the league, and a player that fits Nates system. Too bad Nash was so in love with Telfair. 

      I am also tired of the Rudy drama even though I like him.  He isnt going to fit any better in the future than he did last season.  The additions this summer are a strong indication that Rudy will NOT see the playing time he wants in a Blazer uniform.  My jury is still out on Bayless until I see EW.

    No one will ever convince me that if  you have too much talent, you trade them.  For what ? Less talent ??  And that in turn makes your team better ?  Doesnt add up to me, but thats my opinion.
    I am a fan of scrapping !
  1. Blazers4Life247
    Blazers4Life247
    Posts: 250

    Posted 08/13/2010 3:29 PM

    it's about having the right mix of talent not the most talent overall. they have to fit right together like a jigsaw puzzle=chemistry. but it has to be at the right positions, what does this team need? a back up pf, a starting pg or capable back up pg who can spread the floor & shoot lights out, and a capable back up sf(in my opinion). overall the talent on this team is good but not great. remember we need players who are capable of competing with the powerful western conference. this team is way to young if u ask me. with our only true vets being andre miller & marcus camby
    I am a fan of ;]
  1. ***Jason***
    ***Jason***
    Posts: 259

    Posted 08/13/2010 3:54 PM

    Actually, in a way Kim, believe it or not...  :)

    YES! when you have too much talent you trade it for less talent. And that in turn DOES make your team better. Here's an equation that may help.

    A team with 10 GREAT players and 5 BAD players beats a team with 5 GREAT players and 10 GOOD ones.

    If the NBA lets you have a 15 man roster, you can theoretically go 3 deep at every position. When we're 3 deep at any position, people start talking about 'so and so' being left out and having no minutes. That's because you start with your best 5 and you start sneaking people in late in the first quarter. Throughout the rest of the half as you continue to sneak subs in, you start sneaking your starters back in until you have the line up you want out there to end the half. The second half, you do it again. Lots of people won't play... or if they do, won't play much. The idea is to focus your talent on 1-8 or 1-10 because those are they guys that are going to play. 9-15 or 11-15 are basically your farm team. They're here to contribute as much as they can and hopefully develop into a player we can use here as either a player or a bargaining chip in a deal.

    This is a fact... The good teams rely on their starters and have shorter lineup of > 10 players that actually play.

    In the playoffs... most teams shorten their lineup to 8 or 9. That's how you win.

    What you ultimately want to do is concentrate you talent on fewer players  - so for example a 2 for 1 deal where the net result may be giving up more talent, but in practical terms you're bringing back 1 player who will play more minutes makes more sence than having very talented players on the bench waiting for their chance to play. Unless there are more injuries than you anticipate, it doesn't really matter if your bench 11-15 is buzz lightyear, blaze, that kid from the mattress world commercials, you, and me... Right?

    Obviously I completely over simplified that, but does it make sense? or no...
    I am a fan of Im a fan of the nba, players and owners, doing what they have to to earn the fans back.
  1. DDL_12
    DDL_12
    Posts: 78

    Posted 08/13/2010 4:39 PM

    because we need every player to fit well with each other, and our best player (roy) doesnt fit with our current starting point gaurd (miller) thats why u need to make a trade. thats a stupid Q
    I am a fan of B-Roy schooling kobe & the lakers
  1. Kim~
    Kim~
    Posts: 1137

    Posted 08/13/2010 6:15 PM

    Bring forward these message boards from the last year, no one was worried about how Dre fit with Roy . 
     Blake ( who the Lakers now signed since he is so bad ) was garbage to Blazer fans.
     Then look again at the Blazer record last season with the starting lineup of Dre,Roy,Nic,LA and Marcus.  Roy and Dre can play with anyone. It was just a rough transition. The youngsters need to be patient and learn from Miller and Camby who wont be here forever.

    Sorry Jason, good points, I'm still not buying. Someone should tell the Heat,Celtics and Lakers they have too much talent and they cant win that way. ;)

    What if (and it happens here) either 1 or 2 get hurt ??
      #3 sucks and we gave away a better player. All I'm saying :)

     

    I am a fan of scrapping !
  1. RipCityRevival
    RipCityRevival
    Posts: 684

    Posted 08/13/2010 6:59 PM

    The only reason why I think the Blazers NEED to make a trade, is to make Rudy happy and get the negative attitude out of the locker room. If he doesn't want to be here, it will disrupt the whole chemistry of the room and increase tensions all around. It is bad for everyone to keep him. In regards to Andre, I have heard that he has kept in shape this offseason and looks really good. I would not object to keeping him. I think that we are still too clogged at the back up guards and I don't think Bayless is a true PG to back up Miller. This makes me feel like a trade needs to happen. Whether it really does or not, is probably up in the air. I just see Rudy becomoing a distraction at some point.
    I am a fan of Good basketball, great fans and Rip City!
  1. TayC
    TayC
    Posts: 1804

    Posted 08/13/2010 8:27 PM

    Posted By RipCityRevival on 08/13/2010 6:59 PM
    The only reason why I think the Blazers NEED to make a trade, is to make Rudy happy and get the negative attitude out of the locker room. If he doesn't want to be here, it will disrupt the whole chemistry of the room and increase tensions all around. It is bad for everyone to keep him. In regards to Andre, I have heard that he has kept in shape this offseason and looks really good. I would not object to keeping him. I think that we are still too clogged at the back up guards and I don't think Bayless is a true PG to back up Miller. This makes me feel like a trade needs to happen. Whether it really does or not, is probably up in the air. I just see Rudy becomoing a distraction at some point.

    I think you just plaguerised my mind........

    Rudy is acting like a bad egg, and no one wants that... I do have faith in Bayless, would love to coaches working with him more and more, and sure playing time would be great, but as for backup to Dre, i would rather he have a better teacher.
    You look at Phoenix, Nash and Dragic, Nash was the mentor for this guy, taught him something new each day, Dragic surprised EVERYONE when he threw up that 20+ in the playoffs, their relationship with each other off the court blossomed into a double trouble scenario.  So Im thinking in the best interests of Jerryd, get him someone who can shoot the ball in the manner that he would. Leads me back to my " Sign AI for a year" who knows he might like what we got to offer in terms of teamwork on top off MAJOR Individual Talent.

    There is no need for a trade in terms of increasing the teams overall ability to succeed, but for the overall well being of the team, i think Rudys got to go, before game 1.
    I am a fan of The Blazers ♂, the £-Train, and of course, The ¤ King. ™
  1. DDL_12
    DDL_12
    Posts: 78

    Posted 08/13/2010 8:36 PM

    even befor andre signed with the blazers i knew they wudnt fit, and i was right
    I am a fan of B-Roy schooling kobe & the lakers
  1. cransford24
    cransford24
    Posts: 269

    Posted 08/13/2010 9:26 PM

    Posted By DHawes22 on 08/13/2010 9:06 AM
    Personally, I don't think we need to make a trade just to make one, but to thin out our stacked roster. We have a lot of great talent who deserves minutes and history tells us teams with a great 8-9 man rotation are more successful than teams that go 12 deep.


    I completely agree.  If u look at the top two playoff teams this year (the lakers and celtics)  both of them only had 8 or 9 players actually getting minutes.  The lakers basically only played fisher, kobe, artest, gasol, bynum, farmar, brown, and odom, while the celtics only gave significant minutes to rondo, allen, pierce, kg, perkins, robinson, tony allen, sheed and glen davis.  But also i think that the blazers have more problems than just too much depth.  They also really need a better pg than miller, and they also need a good backup for lamarcus.  That is why I think they should  trade away 3 or 4 of our players for a better starting pg like maybe a devin harris or someone with similar ability to him because that would mostly solve our too much depth problem and also our pg problem.  Than they do that they should sign someone like lois amundson or trade for someone like derrick favors to backup lamarcus.  By doing that the blazers would solve basically all of their current roster issues and also put them in a great position to compete for a championship. 
    I am a fan of the Blazers draft selections. Feels good to finally be able to say that
  1. BDawg
    BDawg
    Posts: 1593

    Posted 08/13/2010 9:34 PM

    A trade, or possibly more, NEED to happen for the following reasons:

    1)to better balance the roster, thinning the log jams and filling the back-up 4 spot
    2)LONG TERM vs short term.  Dre was as responsible for the 50 win season as any other Blazer, but is now declining, while the Blazer core is still peaking.  Long term...need a different body at PG, preferrably, as mentioned, a pass first defensive minded PG that can shoot AND score well enough to draw some of BRoys defensive attention.  Ideally, bringing in a PG roughly the same age as our core (Roy, LA, Oden...so that we're not playing Kim's musical chairs at PG for a few years)  This is necessary not only for a title push, but maybe more importantly, elongating Roy's career.  One more knee surgery, and he's bone-on-bone.  Not much meniscus left.  Where would this roster be without BRoy?  We may find out much sooner than expected if he doesn't get some help soon.  If LA had developed into the 2nd option offensively that was initially envisioned, this would be a different team.  With the team at or over the cap, their only means of acquiring a good player is thru player movement and the use of the expiring contracts, one of which...coincidentally, is Miller.  That is why the talk about the PG position Kim.  We have to think about the team in 2011/12 and 2013/14...not just 2010/11.  Again, LONG TERM.  Where will Miller be in terms of effectiveness when the rest of this Blazer team is ready to make THAT push....the title push and is peaking?  It's not that we don't like, or even love, Dre.  It's the nature of the biz.  

    Let the BDawg bashing begin...:) 
    I am a fan of players that play with PASSION and PRIDE
  1. cransford24
    cransford24
    Posts: 269

    Posted 08/13/2010 10:50 PM

    agreed.  miller is old and also isnt really the best fit with the blazers since he scores almost all of his points inside.  That wouldnt be a bad thing if brandon roy didnt also score most of his points either in the paint or from mid range.  The reson it is bad to have both of your gaurds do all of their damadge in the paint is that it is way easier to plan how to defend a team like that since basically all the opposing team has to do is put 3 or 4 guys in the paint on d.  that is why if the blazers do trade miller for another pg they should trade him for either mike conley, johnny flynn, or jameer nelson.  also devin harris would be a slightly better fit than miller since he is better at shooting 3's than miller, could take pressure off roy, will be good for at least 5 or 6 more years, and is a good passer.
    I am a fan of the Blazers draft selections. Feels good to finally be able to say that
  1. barnettfan
    barnettfan
    Posts: 392

    Posted 08/14/2010 6:09 AM

    I think our big trade is going to happen more so near the deadline. I think Rudy might get traded before the season starts just to make our 15 man roster and it will probably involve draft picks from a for sure lottery team. I think we might just hold our cards and see how the season progresses before we make the or A big move. As far as Miller is concerned he did fine. He scored more points than Blake ever did but he usually  did it when Roy was off or injured and when LA was off. Plus he really did not have a center to dish off to until they got Camby. Bash Miller all you want I personally thought he did a good job with what he had to work with last year. As far as him not having a good Three range so? I think we have enough people to shoot them and personally shooting a three is a little overrated. Ray Allen got 8 in one quarter in one game and went what
    4 -56 in the rest of the playoffs? Ill take the consistant 15 -20 footers and penetration to the hoop anyday.
    Now all that being said If Miller does not work out this season via having all the tools at his disposal than I believe he will be in the mix before the trade deadline along with a few others to try for someone big.
    JMO
    I am a fan of
  1. rasheedfan2005
    rasheedfan2005
    Posts: 52

    Posted 08/14/2010 9:47 AM

    better back up for LA? we got camby (reliable vet) and pendergraph (young energy spark), we've got plenty of bigs with oden and joel the thrilla pryzbilla in the middle. we need to deal bayless rudy and cunningham for a star PG or some draft picks. IMO cunningham is going to be travis outlaw but not quite as good. i say sign AI for as little as possible and see if he produces, have AI run the offense with roy oden/pryz LA/camby and batum and have miller come in with a running team (soemthing like pendergraph, babbit, rudy, LA) we can go small and fast with LA at center or he should start working the 3 ball so we can go huge with oden camby and LA at SF, he has a pretty shot if he just added a little range he could be rasheed wallace but with a higher percentage, more determination to win, and a better attitude.
    I am a fan of the thrylla starring down punks
  1. cransford24
    cransford24
    Posts: 269

    Posted 08/14/2010 4:35 PM

    Posted By barnettfan on 08/14/2010 6:09 AM 
    As far as him not having a good Three range so? I think we have enough people to shoot them and personally shooting a three is a little overrated. Ray Allen got 8 in one quarter in one game and went what
    4 -56 in the rest of the playoffs? Ill take the consistant 15 -20 footers and penetration to the hoop anyday.
    Im not saying that its worse to have a consistent mid range game than it is to have a good, but streeky three point game, but i do think that at our point gaurd position we need a shooter just because if both the blazers starting gaurds and our best backup gaurd(bayless) get their points by driving to the rim than the opposing teams defense will have a very easy time deffending the blazers since they would basically be able to just have all 5 men only start gaurding us when we advance past 20 ft.  Also a good shooting pg would do great with brandon because when brandon is being double teamed or when the opposing teams d is focusing all their attention on brandon he can just kick it out to the pg for a wide open trey.
    I am a fan of the Blazers draft selections. Feels good to finally be able to say that
  1. Blazers4Life247
    Blazers4Life247
    Posts: 250

    Posted 08/15/2010 1:12 AM

    mo willams.
    I am a fan of ;]
  1. TJ31
    TJ31
    Posts: 190

    Posted 08/15/2010 2:10 AM

    Monta Ellis.  I can picture him now driving to the hoop with his tony parker speed and dishing out to Roy or Batum for the trey, or creating tons of space for our posts to work down low because the defense is to worried about Monta and Brandon.  Plus the Warriors won't ask much givin what they got for Stephen Jackson.  A Rudy/Bayless/Przybilla trade will not only solve our PG problem for the long term future (no more musical chairs after that, Kim), it helps thin out our team, while also making our bench better by keeping Andre.  We could have a 2nd unit of Matthews, Miller, and Camby, while keeping either Ellis or Roy at SG, and playing Camby at PF or C while keeping either Oden or Aldridge in.  If a trade like that goes through, we're looking at 60+ wins.
    I am a fan of
  1. cransford24
    cransford24
    Posts: 269

    Posted 08/15/2010 11:07 AM

    i cat see andre accepting 15 minutes per game which is what hed get behind ellis so i couldnt see that working out.  But if we gave the warriors miller/rudy/williams or babbit that would still help us out and make us younger at pg.  Also if we were to do a trade similar to that one our bench would still be very good since we would have bayless, mathews, cunningham, camby and pryzbilla coming off the bench.
    I am a fan of the Blazers draft selections. Feels good to finally be able to say that
  1. Kassandra
    Kassandra
    Posts: 466

    Posted 08/16/2010 9:02 AM

    so what i'm seeing here is that a lot of people are using frivilous excuses to defend their desire to make a big trade. unfortunately, there is no reason to go out and actively seek any deal (sans dispensing of Rudy). let me dispell some myths:

    inside post: Oden, Alridge and Camby. that's Oden's offense; despite what people seem to think, Aldridge can play inside (come on, we've all seen it). Camby is a veteran who can play inside or out (in fact, due to age, probably better inside).

    backing up pf: Camby, Cunningham, Pendergraph. obviously, Camby is diverse enough to play pf since he has shown that throughout his career; Cunningham gives us athleticism and nearly mistake-free play (he also shot 80% from the field and 83% from the line last year); Pendergraph is the closest thing we have to an enforcer we have (Pryzbilla is probably next on that list). we're deep and diversified at pf.

    Andre old: Andre is getting up there in years, but he's still a couple or three seasons from slowing down. keep in mind, he's not suffered a career-shortening injury in his nba tenure. that mere fact extends a career beyond a player's age. i've seen nothing in his play that indicates he's beginning to slow down.

    of course, with Nate as coach, the rotation is likely to be 10, perhaps nine. however, having talent beyond that is not a bad thing. last season we all saw the value in being very deep. given that, i can't imagine why we wouldn't want to have some talent on the end of the bench.

    the only reason someone would advocate making a major trade at this point is merely for the sake of making a trade. if something comes along that makes sense, then take a look at it. however, we're not in desparate need of anything at this point.

    ~ Kassandra
    I am a fan of my team fighting to win each and every game.
  1. Kassandra
    Kassandra
    Posts: 466

    Posted 08/16/2010 9:10 AM

    * note: Cunningham shot 60% from the field last season, rather than 80% -- my oops!

    ~ Kassandra
    I am a fan of my team fighting to win each and every game.
  1. RipCityRevival
    RipCityRevival
    Posts: 684

    Posted 08/16/2010 10:22 AM

    Pretty much what I said, if Parker or Paul were still on the market, then I would be tempted to try and make something happen, but outside of moving Rudy I don't see an absolute need to make a trade.
    I am a fan of Good basketball, great fans and Rip City!
  1. Blazers4Life247
    Blazers4Life247
    Posts: 250

    Posted 08/16/2010 11:15 AM

    parker is trying to become a knick next yr along with carmelo anthony. 

    we should get mo williams. trade rudy and prizbylla and the money lines up perfectly ( http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine )mo williams can either start or come off the bench. i like monta ellis but he is getting paid to much money for us to make that trade in my opinion. at least with mo williams he'd be able to accept a back up role since he won't be seeing much time with the cavs. they are trying to put ramon sessions(who they as the starter and want gibson to get plenty of playing time this yr. not to mention to they wanted to trade mo before/during the draft. we'd be basically giving up nothing to get a pretty good player...
    I am a fan of ;]
  1. ***Jason***
    ***Jason***
    Posts: 259

    Posted 08/16/2010 11:44 AM

    Posted By Kassandra on 08/16/2010 9:02 AM
    so what i'm seeing here is that a lot of people are using frivilous excuses to defend their desire to make a big trade. unfortunately, there is no reason to go out and actively seek any deal (sans dispensing of Rudy). let me dispell some myths:

    inside post: Oden, Alridge and Camby. that's Oden's offense; despite what people seem to think, Aldridge can play inside (come on, we've all seen it). Camby is a veteran who can play inside or out (in fact, due to age, probably better inside).

    backing up pf: Camby, Cunningham, Pendergraph. obviously, Camby is diverse enough to play pf since he has shown that throughout his career; Cunningham gives us athleticism and nearly mistake-free play (he also shot 80% from the field and 83% from the line last year); Pendergraph is the closest thing we have to an enforcer we have (Pryzbilla is probably next on that list). we're deep and diversified at pf.

    Andre old: Andre is getting up there in years, but he's still a couple or three seasons from slowing down. keep in mind, he's not suffered a career-shortening injury in his nba tenure. that mere fact extends a career beyond a player's age. i've seen nothing in his play that indicates he's beginning to slow down.

    of course, with Nate as coach, the rotation is likely to be 10, perhaps nine. however, having talent beyond that is not a bad thing. last season we all saw the value in being very deep. given that, i can't imagine why we wouldn't want to have some talent on the end of the bench.

    the only reason someone would advocate making a major trade at this point is merely for the sake of making a trade. if something comes along that makes sense, then take a look at it. however, we're not in desparate need of anything at this point.

    ~ Kassandra

    Inside post: Aldridge can play inside? Huh?!?! I haven't seen it. Camby? Getting better inside with age? Ummm, no. Anybody that's ever played knows when you get tired is when you start shooting jumpers. Nobody gets better inside with age. It doesn't work that way. Is it Oden? Man! I Hope so. THAT'S why we drafted him. Time will tell. We haven't had a good low post option since Zach left. That's a fact.

    Backing up PF: We're shallow and young. Camby can play it well, but he'll be starting or backing up the 5. Maybe this isn't the BIGGEST concern... but it is a concern for sure.

    Andre Old: I like Andre. Dude is always healthy. Lets the game come to him and brings what you need every night. Doesn't force his game (other than forcing drives and taking some bad shots at times). Good for another 2 or 3 years? Not unless you want to extend him again before the end of the season at 35 or 36 years old. This one has to be addressed. Either we're going with Bayless and the rookies, or we're making a trade. It looks like we're going with bayless and the rookies, cause it's starting to look like we're going to hang on to his expiring contract. Either way, you can't think of the blazers future with andre in mind much beyond this season.

    I'm not saying we're desperate as far as this next season goes, but there are some pretty legit reasons to be talking to other teams about fixing some needs.
    I am a fan of Im a fan of the nba, players and owners, doing what they have to to earn the fans back.
  1. ***Jason***
    ***Jason***
    Posts: 259

    Posted 08/16/2010 11:55 AM

    p.s. It's not that you don't want talent on the bench... it's that you want more talent on the floor. The idea is to consolidate your talent higher up the bench so that you have the best players possible that will contribute to W's and L's more than the guy selling pop corn in the 300 level.
    I am a fan of Im a fan of the nba, players and owners, doing what they have to to earn the fans back.
  1. Crim
    Crim
    Posts: 398

    Posted 08/16/2010 12:22 PM



    Andre old: Andre is getting up there in years, but he's still a couple or three seasons from slowing down. keep in mind, he's not suffered a career-shortening injury in his nba tenure. that mere fact extends a career beyond a player's age. i've seen nothing in his play that indicates he's beginning to slow down.



    This is actually the opposite of the common consensus these days, look at Grant Hill who was plagued with injuries when he was young,
    I am a fan of Not Feeding the Trolls.
  1. mr.e503
    mr.e503
    Posts: 14

    Posted 08/16/2010 3:08 PM

    I been checking and hoping for a big move that would improve the team everyday. Today I decided to check up on some NBA History for some more perspective. Take it how you want it but this is just shortened version of what I found.

    First -The Blazers got Drexler in 83-84 and added pieces (Porter, Kersey, and Duckworth) for 6 years before adding (Buck, Cliff, Mark, Wayne and Drazen) to the mix and making it to the 89-90 NBA Finals. Oh Yeah, they also changed Coaches and got Rick Adelman. hm?....Then after the transition in 95-96 with a New Arena it was another 4 years before that teamed gel-ed enough to make it to the Western Conference Finals. Oh and that was also caped off with a new Head Coach Mike Dunleavy . hmm?

    Second - The Bulls got MJ in 84-85 and wasn't able to reach 50 wins until 87-88 and didn't make it to the Finals until 90-91. But that was also after adding a well supportive cast, oh and lets not forget a new Head Coach Phil Jackson which would lead to repeat three-peats. hmmm?

    Last - Of course the Lakers have always been good more times than not. But they didn't prove dominant again until 99-00 which is 4 years after acquiring Shaq and Kobe. Oh yeah that was also the year they hired a new Head Coach maybe you heard of him, his name is Phil Jackson. Who just might get his 4th three-peat or 12 Championship in 20 years....HMMMM?

    Anyways I just think history shows that teams need more than just 1 or 2 years playing together before you can expect anything great. Unless you manage to put together a team of All Stars (Boston 07-08) (Miami maybe 10-11) it won't happen the 1st year. They say we have all the money and an owner that is all about winning. Sure we can talk the talk I just don't think we have the guts to walk the walk. So if we were to change anything maybe we should get a New Head Coach, because if history three-peats itself then I think we would be better.
    I am a fan of GETTING BETTER AT ALL COST!
  1. TayC
    TayC
    Posts: 1804

    Posted 08/16/2010 3:35 PM

    Posted By mr.e503 on 08/16/2010 3:08 PM
     Last -. Oh yeah that was also the year they hired a new Head Coach maybe you heard of him, his name is Phil Jackson. Who just might get his 4th three-peat or 12 Championship in 20 years....HMMMM?



    Which is exactly why Los Angeles is going to be the hardest team portland faces.
    I'd say Miami, but i talked to Brandon Roy, and he said, he aint showin up to that game. hahaha
    I am a fan of The Blazers ♂, the £-Train, and of course, The ¤ King. ™
- Hide
   
  
 
 
   

    Recent Discussions

  1. summer moves and upcoming draft

    Started by Ricky on 05/19/14 at 12:19 PM

    Paul Allen said how do we get better?  I see no activity in the draft with no draft picks.  The trade possibilities are limited because of the value of our bench players.  We have no cap space.  So I think the improvement of our b...
  2. RipCity Movie!

    Started by Andrew Linares on 05/15/14 at 7:30 PM

    San Antonio game 2

    Started by buffielea on 05/05/14 at 2:02 PM

    Going to game 2 in SA and looking to see if any one else is?  Trying to find where the best seats for BLAZER fans are?
  3. tOfficial 2014 Trailblazer playoff Thread

    Started by Nate Caraway on 04/20/14 at 6:17 AM

    First Game starts tonight. Houston is a tough first round opponent and they play exceptionally well at home. If we can steal a game or two at their place, I feel like we have extremely good chances. 

    P.S. Would anybody happen to have a...

  4. Blazers quiz

    Started by cm_flippin on 04/02/14 at 10:49 PM

    There are many questions and you don''t have to register, you can continue as a guest. Didn''t know about Sporcle though, thanks.

  5. Free Agency 2014 + Aldridge's Comments

    Started by NickPitherUK on 02/18/14 at 6:57 AM

    We won''t have the cap space to sign any of those guys
  6. What happened

    Started by benh7777 on 02/12/14 at 10:22 PM

     

    The Blazers were winning!  That is the key word, were.  Blazers are living proof that you can live and die by the jumper.  Lately it has been dying.

     

    Thank God they are 19 games over 500.  Mayb...

  7. Spencer hawes

    Started by jamsmashers on 02/13/14 at 1:03 PM

    Hawes will be a hot commodity by the trade deadline, I would think the sixers could find a better offer.

    However, I do believe Mo Williams could have somewhat of  a high trade value. Olshey needs to make a deal to get a big man while we...

Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  ... 
Active Forums 4.1
NOT LICENSED FOR PRODUCTION USE
www.activemodules.com
The latest from
Everybody
Nic Caldwell updated their fan statement / MrCramer23 joined group Jones Soda / Ricky created new forum topic summer moves and upcoming draft / Agnes uploaded new photo / cm_flippin commented on Blazers quiz / NickPitherUK updated their scrapbook / Qualab and RipCityRevival are friends now / daddy updated their Starting 5 / MJB uploaded new video /