Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,149 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Let's try to get all the cap room we can:

Portland trades: Wallace, Anderson, Person, Stepania, Outlaw
Chicago trades: Curry, Crawford, JYD, ERob, AD, Gill, Jeffries

This trade accomplishes two things:
1) It gives us like $12M in cap room this summer
2) It accomplishes 1) without making us worse in the short term... the addition of Wallace, Anderson, and Person probably doesn't make us any worse. In the short-term, we field a lineup of

1- Kirk, Brunson, Williams
2- Anderson, Person
3- Pippen, Dupree, Outlaw
4- Wallace, Fizer
5- Chandler, Blount, Stepania

which doesn't look any worse than what we're putting out there now.

This summer, we start completely fresh. If Kobe really does test the market, we can make an offer. If not, we make reasonable offers to other players, get our high draft pick, and go from there with a fresh slate.

I'm not necessarily advocating this (or sure Portland would do it), just throwing it out there for consideration.
 

·
The Snake
Joined
·
6,527 Posts
Eh I don't like the concept of getting rid of our whole team. I think guys like AD, JYD, and Gill still have some benefit. It's the core we need to change. Shoot I'd take Curry + Crawford for arch-nemesis Reggie Miller at this point. On second though I'd rather go 0-82.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,149 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Originally posted by <b>T.Shock</b>!
Eh I don't like the concept of getting rid of our whole team. I think guys like AD, JYD, and Gill still have some benefit. It's the core we need to change. Shoot I'd take Curry + Crawford for arch-nemesis Reggie Miller at this point. On second though I'd rather go 0-82.
Well yeah, but if the core is going ot be changed, aren't we better off getting rid of 35 year old maximum salary players too?

I actually like AD and JYD a lot, but we also need to look at why they were brought here. They were brought in because we (foolishly) thought that we'd see what happened when we put Crawford and Curry on the center stage, and thus we should turn guys who could carry the load themselves (at least theoretically) into a hard working supporting cast.

Of course, we might ought to have thought that if Curry and Crawford hadn't stepped up before then putting them in positions of additiona responsibility probably wasn't the way to go, but it's done now.

And if Curry and Crawford go, then a big part of the rationale for these two goes as well :|
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,411 Posts
Blazers would be hesitant to do that trade.

IMO a trade of Curry, AD for Sheed is better for both teams.

Try and trade Crawford to the Bobcats right before the draft for their draft pick, or for some other top 8 pick.


Build around Tyson and Kirk. Keep JYD for his hustling and re-sign Gill for his D.

Cut or trade Pippen before he demands a trade and makes things worse then they already are.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,149 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Originally posted by <b>ThatBlazerGuy</b>!
Blazers would be hesitant to do that trade.

IMO a trade of Curry, AD for Sheed is better for both teams.

Try and trade Crawford to the Bobcats right before the draft for their draft pick, or for some other top 8 pick.


Build around Tyson and Kirk. Keep JYD for his hustling and re-sign Gill for his D.

Cut or trade Pippen before he demands a trade and makes things worse then they already are.
I was wondering if the Blazers would do this. On the one hand, getting both Crawford and Curry would give you a lot of young talent to work with. JYD is a nice player to have to, and a guy that the Portland community would really love. And you're moving Anderson, who despite being a good guy has a bad deal.

On the other, yeah, you're obviously taking a couple of bad deals back in the form of AD and ERob. To that all I can say though is from a salary perspective, ERob's deal expires before Andersons, and AD, despite being overpaid, still seems to be good for a double double and strong defense against all but the biggest players. Put him with DD and Zach and you've got yourself a very nice frontcourt rotation.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,802 Posts
See, I see things completely opposite. I think we need to hold onto core players: Curry, Chandler, Crawford, Hinrich, (JYD for a bench guy) and move EVERYTHING ELSE. We need to move AD, Gill, Pip, E-Rob, Fizer, and Brunson. We can keep Dupree because he is cheap. If we could move those guys and put some LEGITIMATE players around the core we would be better off IMHO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,149 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
See, I see things completely opposite. I think we need to hold onto core players: Curry, Chandler, Crawford, Hinrich, (JYD for a bench guy) and move EVERYTHING ELSE. We need to move AD, Gill, Pip, E-Rob, Fizer, and Brunson. We can keep Dupree because he is cheap. If we could move those guys and put some LEGITIMATE players around the core we would be better off IMHO.
Where did this lead to the first time around? You know, when we tried it with Brand, Miller, and Artest as young players and no one worth a damn around them?

The same thing that's happened now. Too high expectations and not enough vets lead to not enough wins and premature trades.

The point is, you are simply not going to win enough to keep people happy if you solely develop young players. We've learned this lesson.

What we need is guys in their primes who can win while we develop the youngsters. Relying on them to go out and win games is not going to get us there.

Trading AD, Pip, ERob, etc... I don't see how it's going to get us anything helpful. If we could move AD for, say, Jamison, yeah, that'd be a good deal along my line of thinking. But I don't think there's a team in the league that would give us anything for Pip or ERob. The only way we could do it is by taking on more salary. We could take on guys like Glen Robinson or Austin Croshere, and they would probably help ease the burden in the short-term because they're not over the hill and they can play (just not in accord with what they're paid). That'd all be fine with me, but Pax (and more appropriately, probably, Reinsdorf) has shown no willingness to do it.

So if they're not going to put the kids in an environment to succeed, they need to be traded and we need to create that environment by making a good mix of players we can win with now... not just young kids and over the hill old men.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top