Thread Tools

Display Modes

afobisme · 06-05-2006, 03:20 PM

best chance to get rid of randolph is if he is traded to new york.. cuz no one else is dumb enough to take him

plus they have tons of overpaid players to offer for this overpiad player.

Kmurph · 06-05-2006, 03:27 PM

Quote:

if we trade him, it'll be for someone equally unpalatable. Steve Francis or Kenyon Martin types.

I completely disagree...Zach even with his well known flaws is still a valuable player....GM's know this better than fans and the media does....

Quote:

Given how low the opinion of Zach Randolph is around here (and this is supposed to be a Blazers fan board) it would seem to me that this may not be the best time to consider trading him

I don't necessarily think so, I don't think GM's hols as low of an opinion as fans\media do...particularly after watching guys like Sheed, Bonzi, Tim Thomas, A.Walker, J.Williams, J.Stackhouse and J.Terry all find success on other teams....

After Sheed and Bonzi...I bet a lot of teams are wondering what type of player Zach would be...away from the POR "mess"....

I don't think it is the huge mess that is percieved out there...but that is the popular assumption these days, and I can't argue that it doesn't have some merit.....from players to mgmt on down...things have been rocky in POR the last few years...

I don't think Zach is unsalvageable...and I don't think many GM's think that way either....

**Trader Ed** · 06-05-2006, 03:31 PM

With Chicago the only team out of the top 5 to be able to get to the playoffs.. adding a Randolph makes them able to take a bigger jump up... good offense, good offensive rebounder...

Zach is better NOW, than any of the top 5 prospects... he is generally a good egg, with a few small flaws...

Chicago makes the most sense to deal for Zach IMHO....

mook · 06-05-2006, 03:39 PM

well, I don't necessarily think Steve Francis is unsalvageable either. I do think it's pretty unrealistic to expect a top 5 pick from either.

just looking at your list, Kmurph, I don't see anyone immediately who was traded for a top 5 pick (although I could be wrong).

Quote:

The Blazers have a pattern recently of making trades when players are at the lowest point in their value and then looking like chumps when the players make positive contributions to their new teams. It's time to change that practice. Give Zach a chance to be a 20 & 10 player again next season and then decide whether to keep him or trade him for another player.

i've waffled on this one. until the final 20 games or so of the season, I was firmly in the "give him time" camp. but our team is so bad and he brings so many headaches with his penchant for being late and we're practically starting from scratch anyway.

I don't know. maybe we should keep him another year, maybe we shouldn't.

e_blazer1 · 06-05-2006, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kmurph

I completely disagree...Zach even with his well known flaws is still a valuable player....GM's know this better than fans and the media does....

Agreed. I almost made the same point myself, but didn't want to irritate some of my fellow GM-wannabes around here who don't think Zach is worth a worn out pair of socks.

Quote:

I don't necessarily think so, I don't think GM's hols as low of an opinion as fans\media do...particularly after watching guys like Sheed, Bonzi, Tim Thomas, A.Walker, J.Williams, J.Stackhouse and J.Terry all find success on other teams....

Looking at that list, I'm trying to think if any of the players' former teams got anything decent in exchange. Without doing the research (and I'm feeling way too lazy to do the research), I don't think so. Players dumped at the low point tend to get another chance elsewhere, but nobody's willing to give up much in the way of talent for them.

Quote:

I don't think Zach is unsalvageable...and I don't think many GM's think that way either....

I agree. I'd like our own GM (assuming we get one) to give Zach a chance to be salvaged in a Blazer uniform instead of somewhere else.

chromekilla · 06-05-2006, 03:41 PM

It really sucks we trade sheed all star we trade bonzi good player.If we cant get good value for zach keep him.

Blazer Ringbearer · 06-05-2006, 03:44 PM

I hate it when they deal away people for crap, but I think it would be a mistake to keep them both for next year.

Blazer Maven · 06-05-2006, 03:55 PM

New Jersey needs a low post scorer and time is running out for Kidd and Carter.

Richard Jefferson to Portland

Zach Randolph + future 1st round pick (lotto protected) to NJ.

Portland selects Tyrus Thomas or Lamarcus Aldridge at #4 and gets ready to roll.

chromekilla · 06-05-2006, 03:57 PM

Take out future pick and insert dixon,blake,outlaw and done deal.We still draft adam morrison and trade miles,theo for big men.We could also trade miles to them for krstic.?

deanwoof · 06-05-2006, 04:02 PM

Zach to New Orleans has never been brought up since they have cap room to absorb Zach's contract. I'm not sure what Portland would/could get back from NO.
David West is not a true PF.

They'd have PJ Brown at C to do all the dirty work, Zach as a "low post" option. Desmond Mason on the wing, Chris Paul to do what it is he does.

Hell, they'd probably swing a Zach + #30 for #12 and JR Smith. If they're afraid of Speedy Claxton leaving, we include Steve Blake.

chromekilla · 06-05-2006, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deanwoof

Zach to New Orleans has never been brought up since they have cap room to absorb Zach's contract. I'm not sure what Portland would/could get back from NO.
David West is not a true PF.

They'd have PJ Brown at C to do all the dirty work, Zach as a "low post" option. Desmond Mason on the wing, Chris Paul to do what it is he does.

Hell, they'd probably swing a Zach + #30 for #12 and JR Smith. If they're afraid of Speedy Claxton leaving, we include Steve Blake.

that trade seems horrible to me.

Blazer Maven · 06-05-2006, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chromekilla

We could also trade miles to them for krstic.?

If the Nets were freakin' idiots maybe that would work!!

Kmurph · 06-05-2006, 05:17 PM

Quote:

just looking at your list, Kmurph, I don't see anyone immediately who was traded for a top 5 pick (although I could be wrong).

I was just pulling up players that are on playoff teams...My point wasn't to compare them as players to Zach...b\c I think Zach is a much better player than most of those guys...

How about a guy like Antawn Jamison? He was traded for the #5 pick (in a deeper and better draft as well). Statistics wise they are very similar players

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/player...s?statsId=3247

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/player...s?statsId=3531

mook · 06-05-2006, 06:19 PM

well, I don't think many would say that Antawn Jamison, a guy who's put up similar numbers throughout his career AND was a key part to a very good Dallas playoff team AND generally keeps his nose clean AND doesn't have a serious injury history, is comparable to Zach Randolph.

Dallas traded Jamison when his stock was pretty high. Not skyrocketing, but he certainly wasn't viewed as a character problem on the worst team in the NBA. Randolph is also owed a lot more. When Jamison was traded, he had four years still coming to him on a max contract. If we trade Randolph, whoever gets him will owe him five years (around $18 mil more).

I'll admit, though, that the Jamison example is definitely an argument in favor of Randolph having some value. If Jamison is worth the 5th pick, then Randolph is probably somewhere between #10-20 or so, given contract, injury, recent team record, and character issues.

In retrospect, that deal of Jamison for the #5 pick (Devin Harris) sure looks good for Washington. But any GM who risks a top 5 pick is staking a lot of his reputation. If you trade the #5 pick in the wrong year, you just gave up Garnett, Pippen, Carter or Ray Allen. That's why I just don't see Randolph being worth that much.

Thread Tools Display Modes

Thread Tools

Display Modes