Thread Tools

Display Modes

**sa1177** · 06-12-2006, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reep

I added the 10th pick in to ease the pain of Portland losing the 4th pick. This deal could easily be worked out by dropping the 10th pick out and/or adding #30 or #31.

I like the idea of adding a scorer and solid citizen. I'm just not sure the cost in potential of the 4th pick is worth it. Next year, Ray would be better, in four years, I'm wondering if we would be regretting it (think Dale Davis v. Jermaine). In my mind, the 10th pick softens the blow.

I agree with what you are saying although in this years draft I would swap the #4 pick in a second for a proven commodity like Ray Allen. Ray has got 4-5 good years left in him and after that probably another 1-3 years of decent play. His strength is his shooting obviously which is something that IMO generally doesn't decline very much with age. The guy could play until he is 36, 37 and still be canning jumpers with regularity.

**Minstrel** · 06-12-2006, 06:08 PM

Allen's game is not predicated on athleticism (though he does have the athleticism to attack the hoop), so he may age gracefully.

On the other hand, sometimes shooting is the first thing to go, which would really hurt Allen's value.

I would guess he has at least five good years left in him. Possibly more, but that would be good luck.

**sa1177** · 06-12-2006, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minstrel

Allen's game is not predicated on athleticism (though he does have the athleticism to attack the hoop), so he may age gracefully.

On the other hand, sometimes shooting is the first thing to go, which would really hurt Allen's value.

I would guess he has at least five good years left in him. Possibly more, but that would be good luck.

Shooting is the first thing to go? I simply can't think of any great shooter that lost their shooting touch before they lost other parts of their game.. Perhaps you could make the arguement about Steve Smith but he was never half the shooter Ray is.

RedHot&Rolling · 06-12-2006, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed O

Ray Allen is a good enough player that if you can get him for almost nothing, you do it. And while moving down 6 spots is NOT nothing, it's certainly not a very high price to pay.

Would Allen be good enough to drag us into the playoffs? Almost certainly not. But he'd be a stabilizing factor and he's got enough years in him to make Portland relevant again.

But wouldn't Chicago rather have Ray Ray than Theo? It's not like they're hurting for guards, but he'd immediately become their best player and trading, say, Gordon would be a lot easier. A team like the Bucks might be willing to move Magloire in a deal with Gordon as the key player.

Ed O.

Yeah, just good enough to drag us out of good draft choices but no better. Unless combined with other trades for young, promising players -I'd pass. Mediocrity is not my goal for the team.

**Minstrel** · 06-12-2006, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sa1177

Shooting is the first thing to go? I simply can't think of any great shooter that lost their shooting touch before they lost other parts of their game.. Perhaps you could make the arguement about Steve Smith but he was never half the shooter Ray is.

Shooting isn't always the first thing to go, but I do recall various players' shooting touch deserting them precipitously. Steve Smith is one example, Mitch Richmond and Glen Rice also pop to mind. Pippen, while never a great shooter, suddenly lost his shooting touch entirely, long before other skills eroded.

**sa1177** · 06-12-2006, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minstrel

Shooting isn't always the first thing to go, but I do recall various players' shooting touch deserting them precipitously. Steve Smith is one example, Mitch Richmond and Glen Rice also pop to mind. Pippen, while never a great shooter, suddenly lost his shooting touch entirely, long before other skills eroded.

I'll give you Mitch and Smitty but I don't recall Glen Rice ever losing his touch. He just never got any minuted late in his career.

**Storyteller** · 06-12-2006, 10:45 PM

Ray and #10 for Theo and #4? How fast can I sign up?

But Seattle is not going to give Allen to the Blazers....

Samuel · 06-12-2006, 11:16 PM

I'm guessing some team out there is willing to give up more than market value for Ray Allen.

And despite Seattle's newfound alliegence to Moneyball-type payroll efficiency, I don't think they're at 'dump Allen for capspace' desperation levels yet.

**SheedSoNasty** · 06-12-2006, 11:21 PM

Let's not forget what Baron Davis was acquired for... Or Vince Carter... Or Shaquille O'Neal.

A deal like this doesn't sound too out of reach if you ask me.

chromekilla · 06-12-2006, 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SheedSoNasty

Let's not forget what Baron Davis was acquired for... Or Vince Carter... Or Shaquille O'Neal.

A deal like this doesn't sound too out of reach if you ask me.

I agree that is what i hate whenpeople say it isint feasible when u look at some of the deals ,boy.

wastro · 06-12-2006, 11:55 PM

I'd sign off on that trade, but I doubt the Sonics or Blazers front offices would.

Anonymous Gambler · 06-13-2006, 07:16 AM

I'd do that trade in a second were I the Blazers! Ray Allen is a great player and would be the perfect mentor to Webster.

mediocre man · 06-13-2006, 07:51 AM

Didn't Ray Allen not really like Nate? I thought I read that somewhere.

Thread Tools Display Modes

Thread Tools

Display Modes