SodaPopinski

Pretty good breakdown if you ask me. I'll draw everyone's attention to the portion in red at the bottom. That is precisely the reason why we need to trade one or more of these guys, and get some talent in return. Simply letting them come off the books does us no good. Can't say I'd like to be in John Nash's shoes right now.

-Pop

__________________

Dan

what championship experience does NVE have, that Cassell doesn't already have..ooh..by winning 2?

__________________
A Buddhist walks up to a hot dog vendor and says "Make me one with everything".

when will the loss of life end?

The world respects the power of our example, not an example of our power.

I'd like to say I made this, but I didn't

Trader Ed

There be a whole lot of filler required for any of our 3 expiring type deals...

I still like the idea of getting Hoiberg. Now if we could get Murray and Hoiberg for DA.... why why why... I would....

__________________
"The whole is greater than the sum of its parts..."

Heart, desire and hustle! Its the fire within that makes a champion.

e_blazer1

And since when isn't the financial health of a franchise an important consideration?

IMO, there's no way that the Blazers plan on trading more than one of their three expiring contracts. After the extensions for Theo, Miles, and Randolph, the Blazers are committed to somewhere around $48 million next season. Add in another first round draft pick and you're pushing $50 million. I have a hard time believing that the Blazers plan on carrying much more than $60-$65 million in salary. NVE, Damon, and SAR are all in the $11-$14 mil range so that means we're unlikely to trade more than one of them unless we get ending contracts back.

My bet is that if any of them get traded, it's NVE to clear room for Telfair to get more minutes. Shareef could go, but only if a team is willing to part with a significant player. I still think the most likely thing is NO trades before the deadline. That way Nash has the opportunity to consider all of his options next summer. He could re-sign SAR or do a sign-and-trade at a lower value than his current contract (Sheed got around $10 mil and I have a hard time seeing SAR getting more than that). Damon could be re-signed for slightly better than MLE money to play one more year in front of Telfair, or Nash may look for 2-for1 deal with SAR that brings back a PG and a SG.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens, but I think that the idea of picking up multiple max players for our ending contracts is ludicrous.

__________________
Blazermania is BACK!!!

Kmurph

IF Nash doesn't make any trades beofre the trade deadline eblazer, then he should to be fired IMO.

Having 3 expired contracts and getting nothing in return for them is completely unacceptable.

furthermore, banking on a sign and trade for those players in the offseason is a VERY risky propostion. First of all they don't have to work with POR at all, they could just walk for nothing, and what you are assuming is that POR could sign a player to a better deal (lower money) and then trade them for good talent.

That is flawed logic IMO. First of all, what player is going to sign a contract with POR , and then allow themselves to be traded w\o their input of WHERE they specifically want to go? Particularly, when they FINALLY have the freedom to CHOOSE where they want to go?

and what team would agree to a S & T with POR (to help the player get more $$) and then trade good prospects to POR when they could just sign that player outright? What is the bigger gamble there?

That the player has to sign for less money? OR that POR overplays their position and gets NOTHING in return? History shows teams cave first.

Add that to the fact that all three players are VETERAN players who have made their fortunes already (relatively speaking), and aren't young players looking to get paid per se (all players want to get paid, but veterans may be more willing to play for less, especially SAR who has yet to see the playoffs), and the chances of POR getting any sort of meaningful help via an offseason S & T is laughable IMO.

So then you are talking money, and I don't buy that one of the world's richest men, and an avid bball owner\fan, might let all three walk to save money at the COST of making his team WORSE than it currently is. I don't think Paul Allen is cheap and I don't think he is stupid either, and doing so would essentially be admitting to both.

__________________
Quit the Webster hate

Public Defender

The Blazers seldom make deals with Seattle, but I think it'd be a pretty good move to send Van Exel north for Flip Murray and a throw-in to balance the contracts.

As for what Portland will do between now and the trade deadline, I'm with Kmurph. The Blazers ought to trade either Damon or Abdur-Rahim in February so they don't have to worry about getting completely shafted in the offseason. I think without too much worry, Portland can let one of the two high-priced free agents walk with nothing in return. But they can't let both walk - the Blazers will wind up with a far worse team than what they have now, and as far as ticket sales and the team's long-term future are concerned, that's unacceptable.

I think Nash has to try to trade Abdur-Rahim at the deadline, if he wants to get anything for him (and he damn well better want to get something for him - he was the plum in the Wallace trade!). After screwing around Abdur-Rahim leading up to the season, saying he's going to start, then that he may have to come offf the bench, saying he's going to be traded, then saying the Blazers aren't getting any offers.... Abdur-Rahim is not going to "play ball" and go through a sign and trade with Portland - or at least, you can't count on that. Damon, on the other hand, might, but what team is going to give up a good player for our undersized shooting-guard-in-a-point-guard's body?

__________________
Next year...

RedHot&Rolling

Thanks SodaPopinski - great read.

I agree that the Blazers don't want to let those contracts just "go away" to save money. The contracts are "assets" which need to be replaced. Even getting extra Picks would be better than the small savings.

I - like everyone else - have no clue WHO Nash might like or be looking at in trade. I hope he pulls a rabbit out of his hat and presents us with a surprise like the SAR & Theo deal. A trade where we can say.....Yeah, that's the right idea.

I also see BIG NEED for the team to balance out the roster (we have too many SF's and not enough of the other positions).

Thanks again.

OUT

__________________
Trail Blazers Fan since Walton was injured the first time!
OSU Beavers Alumni & Fan since Ralph Miller's Orange Express -

"Fans cheer when they have reason to." Stop the programmed noise!!

e_blazer1

Banking on a sign and trade for SAR is a risk only if you think there's going to be a team out there that will have cap space to pay him what he wants and that is a team he will want to play for. According to Storyteller's data, teams that could have enough cap space next year to make a play for him are: Atlanta, Charlotte, Cleveland, LA Clippers, and Seattle. Of those, Cleveland is going to spend most of their room re-signing Ilgauskas and Seattle is going to spend theirs re-signing Ray Allen. No way that Reef wants to go back to Atlanta or play for the dismal Bobcats. The Clippers have Elton Brand at the PF spot and aren't likely to see SAR as a piece they want to spend money on. I don't see much chance that SAR will just take a MLE deal just to spite the Blazers, especially if the Blazers are willing to try to help him get bigger dollars in a sign-and-trade.

Bottom line, I don't see it as much of a risk to wait for next summer. Sure, if somebody ups the ante considerably prior to the deadline, by all means make a trade. But don't just make a trade to make a trade. The last thing we want is someone else's retread "star" at a huge salary.

__________________
Blazermania is BACK!!!

crandc

So in other words, it's better for Nash to trade Reef for someone who can't or won't play than to take a chance on a sign-and-trade next year, when he would have a lot more flexibility?

I disagree.

Trader Ed

Not trying to speak for KMurph, but I do not think KMurph or anyone else wants a trade just for trading purposes. No GM is going to do that unless it accomplishes something for us in trade or monetary value

__________________
"The whole is greater than the sum of its parts..."

Heart, desire and hustle! Its the fire within that makes a champion.

deanwoof

Just throwing this out there:
If done in the correct order, these teams can sign a FA for what they have left capwise, THEN resign their own FA. (which is what Portland should have done THIS summer instead of LAST summer)

__________________

e_blazer1

I wasn't trying to imply that KMurph wanted to make a bad trade.

I guess I'm just trying to throw a little light on why it probably isn't reasonable for us to expect that Nash is going to trade all of his ending contracts away by the deadline. Patterson and Nash have said over and over again that they are not willing to make trades that bring back longterm high cost players. Fiscal responsibility is a part of their charge in managing the Blazers.

Sure, Paul Allen is extremely rich and wants to win, but I suspect he's wondering about now why he has to pay double what the Pistons and Spurs were paying when they won their titles and he's getting squat to show for it. Mr. Allen has shown that he's willing to step up to the plate and spend money in order to make a play for a title. Continuing to spend big money with only mediocre results is stupid and I don't see Paul Allen as a stupid man.

I hope some GM out there decides that Reef is worth a young prospect and another player with an ending contract. That would be ideal.

__________________
Blazermania is BACK!!!

e_blazer1

From Larry Coon's CBA FAQ page:

27. Can a team sign all the free agents it wants (up to the cap limit) and THEN re-sign its own free agents using the Bird exception?

Yes, but there's a restriction. A team's free agents continue to count as team salary (against the salary cap). This charge is called the "free agent amount." So there may not be enough money under the cap to sign another team's free agent, because the team's own free agents are taking up all the cap room.

Neither Seattle or Cleveland would have any cap space without renouncing Ray Allen and Ilguaskas, respectively.

__________________
Blazermania is BACK!!!

Hype #9

Expiring contracts, in reality, are at their highest value right before the Trading Deadline. Before a trade happens, we'll have to sit tight for awhile.

__________________
b-07-r

roY.