Professional and College Basketball Forums banner
1 - 20 of 51 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
670 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Abdur-Rahim rumor heating up?
sportsline.com's Mike Kahn says the Blazers have no interest in the long term contracts that are hitched to both Antawn Jamison and Keith Van Horn. Does that mean the Blazers have turned their attention to a Rasheed Wallace-for-Shareef Abdur-Rahim swap?

It doesn't appear they want Zydrunas Ilgauskas since they already did their deal with Cleveland for Miles, so that leaves Shareef Abdur-Rahim coming from Atlanta, possibly with Chris Crawford, Dion Glover or local product Dan Dickau for cap purposes. That could happen any minute.
What do you all think? I know we've already discussed the possibilities of getting SAR to death (with people taking both sides), but here it is popping up once again...
 

·
Top Of The Pops
Joined
·
27,472 Posts
SAR, with the possibility of Dickau, would be a pretty interesting pick-up. I like SAR's ability a lot...and considering the other crap flying around for Wallace, SAR would actually be a relief as the return.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,377 Posts
Where would SAR play though? I don't think he can play center like Sheed can. I'm not sure he could play the 3 as well. I don't know much about him. Then you would have two PF's who deserve to start.
 

·
Schilster Supreme
Joined
·
13,610 Posts
Just foood for thought

Rasheed ranks in the top 20 of the NBA for:
Ranks #17 in the NBA in Minutes Per Game(38.3)

SAR ranks in the top 20 of the NBA for:
Ranks #19 in the NBA in Points Per Game(19.9)
Ranks #12 in the NBA in Rebounds Per Game(9.4)
Ranks #16 in the NBA in Field-Goal Percentage(0.488)
Ranks #10 in the NBA in Free-Throw Percentage(0.87)
Ranks #19 in the NBA in Minutes Played(1559.0)
Ranks #12 in the NBA in Field Goals Made(312.0)
Ranks #4 in the NBA in Free Throws(227.0)
Ranks #8 in the NBA in Free Throw Attempts(261.0)
Ranks #10 in the NBA in Defensive Rebounds(288.0)
Ranks #14 in the NBA in Defensive Rebounds Per Game(6.7)
Ranks #8 in the NBA in Total Rebounds(403.0)
Ranks #11 in the NBA in Points(855.0)
Ranks #5 in the NBA in Double-doubles(21.0)
Ranks #17 in the NBA in Field Goals Per 48 Minutes(9.61)
Ranks #7 in the NBA in Free Throws Per 48 Minutes(6.99)
Ranks #15 in the NBA in Free Throw Attempts Per 48 Minutes(8.04)
Ranks #16 in the NBA in Points Per 48 Minutes(26.3)
Ranks #6 in the NBA in Total Efficiency Points(955.0)
Ranks #10 in the NBA in Efficiency Ranking(22.21)
Ranks #9 in the NBA in Efficiency Ranking Per 48 Minutes(29.4)

I know Stats don't mean much and Shareef would have more competition for scoring. But I like the Free throw issue, as far as getting to the line a lot, something Rasheed doesn't do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,001 Posts
I like SAR a lot. If we didn't have ZR and we had to move Rasheed, I'd be falling all over myself for this deal.

As it is, though, while my preference is to keep Rasheed, we could do a LOT worse than taking on SAR. He's young, he's a good offensive player, and his contract is a manageable length.

He and ZR would be a nightmare on defense (for Portland fans) and I question how well their offensive games would mesh, but SAR's good enough that acquiring him might some day allow us to move Zach if we got enough talent. SAR is that good.

In the mean time, he could be plugged in at the 3 and most nights do a decent job, I think.

In comparison to Jamison, or KVH, this would be an awesome acquisition for Rasheed. In comparison to keeping Rasheed, it's tough for me to be excited over.

Ed O.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,927 Posts
I have said that if I am forced to give up Rasheed...SAR is about the only one I'd accept. I do not like Dickau or any other person we'd get in that trade though. Terry?????

still makes me want to say "bleck"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,878 Posts
Who is SAR?

Hmmmm too bad he is not in 25 categories?

What team does he play for?

:rofl:

Psssssttttttttttttt, My persistance may pay off !
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
990 Posts
Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
SAR, with the possibility of Dickau, would be a pretty interesting pick-up. I like SAR's ability a lot...and considering the other crap flying around for Wallace, SAR would actually be a relief as the return.
Speaking of SAR, I owe you a response on that subject (cite crashes are an unfortunate thing).

As many know I do not like Raheem, I find him to be overrated and I believe that a combo of he and Randolph at forward would be the worst defensive tandem in the history of basketball.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,878 Posts
By the way, anything off O-Live is not worth repeating IMHO
 

·
Schilster Supreme
Joined
·
13,610 Posts
Portland could do a real simple Sheed for Shareef and Nazr deal.

Helps portland out at the 3,4,and 5.

Shareef gets more steals per game, but less blocks. Also it is hard to tell how his defense is until you spend a few games watching him play d exclusively.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,377 Posts
Originally posted by <b>The Enigma</b>!
As many know I do not like Raheem, I find him to be overrated and I believe that a combo of he and Randolph at forward would be the worst defensive tandem in the history of basketball.
My thoughts exactly. I really don't like the tandem of SAR and Z-Bo...too much of the school of fundamental ole' defense.
 

·
Top Of The Pops
Joined
·
27,472 Posts
Originally posted by <b>The Enigma</b>!

As many know I do not like Raheem, I fund him to be overrated and I believe that a combo of he and Randolph at forward would be the worst defensive tandem in the history of basketball.
Well, I was going to post this in response to Ed's post, but you make the same point even more emphatically about SAR's "bad defense."

I think Abdur-Rahim's bad defense is drastically over-stated. He's not a great defender, but he's far from terrible. He's got very good lateral quickness, challenges shots and stays with his man well.

He's a downgrade, defensively, from Wallace but I don't think he's really below average.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
670 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
By the way, anything off O-Live is not worth repeating IMHO
It actually came from Mike Kahn on CBS Sportsline...here is the link to the original story LINK

O-Live just summarized the portion regarding the Blazers.
 

·
Top Of The Pops
Joined
·
27,472 Posts
Originally posted by <b>antibody</b>!

Huh? Have you watched any Hawk games the past few years?
Hey, hey, let's not go there, kiddo. Judging from your comments about Pippen, one might wonder if you've watched Blazer games from the past few seasons. But there's no point using that tack.

Let's keep it civil. There's no worthwhile analysis in implying that the other person simply hasn't watched the other player. It's just a way to disparage the other poster's opinion without having any valid points to make.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,411 Posts
I dont know about thsi trade.

I kinda like SAR, but he IMO is Jamison with a shorter contract.

He cant play D, and has never lead his team past what, 30 wins?




I wouldnt complain but pickin up SAR would simply be a small bandaid for the franchise, when we actually need surgery not a bandaid.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,855 Posts
I can't really understand the logic of getting SAR for Sheed. Basically, it still leaves Portland with 3 PF's up front with DD, Zach and SAR. Only this trio would be worse defensively. From what i've seen, Shareef is not a SF. He likes to go to the basket and play in the paint. How is he going to open up the paint for Zach ?

SAR is similar to Jamison. They are both 3/4 tweeners, they put up similar stats (when Jamison was with Golden State), both solid rebounders and they both play really bad defense. You guys hated the Jamison idea, yet you think SAR is a good return ? :uhoh:
 

·
Top Of The Pops
Joined
·
27,472 Posts
Originally posted by <b>Scinos</b>!

You guys hated the Jamison idea, yet you think SAR is a good return ? :uhoh:
SAR is a superior talent and has a far superior contract status.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
990 Posts
This had to be concluded...

Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
Terry is not a top point guard.
Name 10 better.

And having the league's top shot-blocker is like having the league's stop steal man...a nice trivia point, but not terribly impactful on actually winning games.
That’s absurd.

A shot blocker the caliber of Ratliff anchors a team’s total defense enabling parameter players to concentrate more energy towards contesting shots from the outside, pressuring ball handlers and jumping screens. With a dominant shot blocking presence as the second line of defense parameter players are afforded a safety net if in fact they are beat off the dribble.

In the grand scheme of things this greatly improves a teams overall defense in a way the box score will not readily indicate.

Use that as trivia food if you like but don’t fool yourself, people who actually understand the game of basketball realize what a difference dominant shot blocking makes.
I've never heard anyone but you describe the Hawks as "talented," including columnists and GMs / coaches that columnists invariably quote on the subject of the Hawks.
I stated that last seasons Hawks were talented and their starting 5 indeed was. In the eastern conference they were predicted by many to make the playoffs while the organization went as far as to guarantee the playoffs.

The Hawks were a disappointment to many (including myself) as no one predicted them to be as bad as they were.

This is what ESPN had to say about the Hawks during the preseason of the 2002-03 season:

“Hawks look like playoff contenders on paper, which is exactly what we wrote last season… “
…Interesting how things turned out both seasons don’t you think?


Terry/ Dickau/ Davis
Newble/ Glover
Robinson/ Ham
Raheem/ Henderson
Ratliff/ Mohammed

… Not the greatest of teams but certainly talented enough to exceed 35 wins in the eastern conference (on paper that should have been a .500 eastern team).

That's because ignoring the box score in order to find other, magical reasons to overvalue / undervalue players used to be the favorite game, though lacking in logic.

"Can't win," "doesn't help his team," "just puts up stats," "isn't clutch," are just nonsensical ways to get around inconvenient facts.
2002-03 statistics…

Study those convenient facts then inform us as to why exactly that team managed to win only 35 games.

You even choose to ignore the leading "intangibles" measure of +/-, since that also doesn't back up your point except, perhaps, in one season.
I utilized the +/- of his last full season of play (the season I specifically indicated as my point of reference at the beginning of my post) not just "one season".

Details...

Essentially, your position is, "Sure he puts up nice production, and sure his team does better when he's around than when he's not around, but he's still a big loser."
My position is that he has little effect on the outcome of games because he concedes as much as he contributes and that his contributions come more so at the expense of those around him (his teammates) then to the benefit of them.

Because "winning" is not a skill.
Perhaps I can state that better (pardon the confusion)…

A winning mentality is a quality, an intangible (a skill). That is not to say that the player’s team will win but that their contributions greatly facilitate it. There is a difference between a player who produces and one who does what necessary to win.

Bill Russell’s greatest attributes were his hustle, his will to win and his overall winning mentality.

Those my friend are part of a skill set (mental qualities I would term skills).
 
1 - 20 of 51 Posts
Top