Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Schilster Supreme
Joined
·
13,610 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I kninda went into this yesterday but thought it may merit a thread unto itself.

I was thinking about several circumstances dealing with the many ways Rasheed and how he can be handled, as far as trading, S&T, Signing or simply letting him walk.

Those would be the causes, but what we haven't spoken about too in depth is what would the effect of each scenario be on the team. Yes we have to some extent, but I really think we can use this thread to reaal get into what the particular fallouts may be should we follow each course.

Obviously the tradeing one is tough to speculate, the best we can do is try to generaliz based on what the Blazers stated criteria is.

Have fun with this one. :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,708 Posts
As I've posted all over the place, I like the idea of keeping Wallace and trading Zach.

Zach is hitting a wall and while it can be argued he could some day learn to pronounce the word 'defense', let alone spell it, he should have a very high trading value. He & one of our 1st round picks may garner us a decent center that we could live with. From there, we draft a real NBA PG and we have the makings of a team again.

While Wallace may not be as dogmatic offensively as Zach, he can create his own shot and plays excellent defense. He runs the floor well and can pass out of a double team. I also think that in each of the last 3 seasons he's improved his overall attitude.

If we keep Zach, I seriously doubt we would be a playoff team for some years unless he dramatically changes his ability to play defense. Also, if we keep him, what will we do if Outlaw develops?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
300 Posts
I'll take a very simplistic stab at resigning Sheed:

Potential negatives:

-relentless Oregonian sniping
-further fan base deterioration
-continued status as media's favorite franchise to bash (Jailblazers syndrome continues)
-less cap space in the future

Potential positives:

-retain our best player
-better defense
-keep a piece that may help attract free
agents down the road
-high trade value if resigned to fair contract (6-9 mil)
-stay competitive, especially when other bad contracts expire (Damon, DD)
-help develop Zach
-oh yeah, keep winning


I think the positives outweigh the negatives, despite all the bad PR.
 

·
Schilster Supreme
Joined
·
13,610 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Originally posted by <b>BLAZER PROPHET</b>!
As I've posted all over the place, I like the idea of keeping Wallace and trading Zach.

Zach is hitting a wall and while it can be argued he could some day learn to pronounce the word 'defense', let alone spell it, he should have a very high trading value. He & one of our 1st round picks may garner us a decent center that we could live with. From there, we draft a real NBA PG and we have the makings of a team again.

While Wallace may not be as dogmatic offensively as Zach, he can create his own shot and plays excellent defense. He runs the floor well and can pass out of a double team. I also think that in each of the last 3 seasons he's improved his overall attitude.

If we keep Zach, I seriously doubt we would be a playoff team for some years unless he dramatically changes his ability to play defense. Also, if we keep him, what will we do if Outlaw develops?
Here is a problem I see with this solution. Sheed 29 Zach 22 that's the ages of the players.If we trade Zach we trade a very very solid part of the future foundation. In addition The PR nightmare of another "jermaine Scenario" would be devastating to the organization. Here we have a young gun who plays harded than he looks capable of doing, and we move him inturn to save Sheed?

IMO the Blazers would kill any positive PR they have fought to regain.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,001 Posts
Originally posted by <b>Skelton</b>!

I think the positives outweigh the negatives, despite all the bad PR.
I agree... the key to trading him is finding a deal that's MORE positive than re-signing him. If the team can't, they should make a committment to 'Sheed (in the press and to his face, if not by an extension (unless the extension is cheap, of course)) and make the best of it.

Ed O.
 

·
Grumpy Pragmatist
Joined
·
3,410 Posts
An interesting problem.

Current NBA rules expressly try to prevent "baseball" style trades - ie a high paid vet for prospects/draft picks. This is idiotic, but until someone finds a way to dynamite Stern out of office, there is nothing to do about it. The best the Blazers could hope for would be a "prospect" PLUS one or more garbage contracts. That is no way to rebuild.

A S&T *might* be more feasible, but only if Sheed can be signed to a deal more in tune with his actual value.

If Sheed would agree to a contract that made fiscal sense, why trade him? He is overpaid, but far from worthless. Having him around, if he wasn't an albatross on the salary cap, would be part of the solution - NOT part of the problem! (I know, the "Sheed is the anti-christ" crowd will never understand that.)

If Sheed does con someone into a $15 mil a year offer.....letting him walk is the best option. We don't want him back if he is overpaid, and he will still be untradeable. In the short term, we will just have to accept the negative impact on Zach's game. In the long term, we should be able to get far enough under the cap to attract some decent players. Of course, this option really only works if we trust Patternash to draft wisely during the down times!
 

·
Schilster Supreme
Joined
·
13,610 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Originally posted by <b>Skelton</b>!
I'll take a very simplistic stab at resigning Sheed:

Potential negatives:

-relentless Oregonian sniping
-further fan base deterioration
-continued status as media's favorite franchise to bash (Jailblazers syndrome continues)
-less cap space in the future

Potential positives:

-retain our best player
-better defense
-keep a piece that may help attract free
agents down the road
-high trade value if resigned to fair contract (6-9 mil)
-stay competitive, especially when other bad contracts expire (Damon, DD)
-help develop Zach
-oh yeah, keep winning


I think the positives outweigh the negatives, despite all the bad PR.
The team isn't winning enough now to be say "keep winning". In addition resigning him and then Zach in 2005 likely will combine for 20 mil in salaries, for those 2 alone, not to mention the 8mil of Derek, 6mil of Rueben and the contracts of by then 3 addition 1st rnd picks. Portland would be handcuffing themselves into replacing Dale and Damon with draft picks and MLE's.

I would consider the limitations that a deal starting at (mil a very negative strike to this team in it's current situation.
 

·
Grumpy Pragmatist
Joined
·
3,410 Posts
Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!


I agree... the key to trading him is finding a deal that's MORE positive than re-signing him. If the team can't, they should make a committment to 'Sheed (in the press and to his face, if not by an extension (unless the extension is cheap, of course)) and make the best of it.

Ed O.
Good job Ed! That is why YOU are now a Mod, and Schilly is back in the minors!:grinning:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,224 Posts
Originally posted by <b>Oldmangrouch</b>!
Current NBA rules expressly try to prevent "baseball" style trades - ie a high paid vet for prospects/draft picks. This is idiotic, but until someone finds a way to dynamite Stern out of office, there is nothing to do about it. The best the Blazers could hope for would be a "prospect" PLUS one or more garbage contracts. That is no way to rebuild.
i dont see how this relates to what everyone was talking about, or why anyone would think stern wouldnt let a "baseball" go through.....

what do you think the stephon marbury trade was????

:confused: :confused: :confused:

4 players who have never played a game before (2 players who have never set foot on a court, vujanic and lampe, and two draft picks) and a 2players who have an expiring contracts, one who hasnt played in 2 years and the other who was cut (knowingly) the day after the trade was made.

doesnt get that much like a "baseball" trade unless someone is getting babe ruth
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
300 Posts
Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!


The team isn't winning enough now to be say "keep winning". In addition resigning him and then Zach in 2005 likely will combine for 20 mil in salaries, for those 2 alone, not to mention the 8mil of Derek, 6mil of Rueben and the contracts of by then 3 addition 1st rnd picks. Portland would be handcuffing themselves into replacing Dale and Damon with draft picks and MLE's.

I would consider the limitations that a deal starting at (mil a very negative strike to this team in it's current situation.
I think all the trade talk has contributed to the current slump. The bottom line: Sheed is worth resigning if it's a reasonable contract. I can't stand any of the current rumored trades. If we want Zach to really shine, first of all, we need a good PG, and secondly, we need a threat like Sheed. The former ain't happening (please at least bench Damon, Mo) so Rasheed is our best alternative.

I think we're looking at some very bleak years if we truly go into rebuild mode.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,708 Posts
Schilly, I beg to differ. Or maybe I missed your point (I'm getin' old ya know)

If we keep Wallace and trade Zach, there's no problem. While Wallace plays for the next 4 years (he won't be all that old), we hopefully groom Outlaw to take his place and we have a nice easy progression from one above average PF to another.

If we keep both Zach & Wallace, then I see your pont. That we cannot do.

If we trade Wallace and keep Zach, then if/when Outlaw comes along we have a Jermaine situation.
 

·
Schilster Supreme
Joined
·
13,610 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Actually I think the Sheed sitution is not limited to talent on the floor.

So if Portland resigns him they have gone against the perceived "plan" and the 3 points, in the department of character. In addition it would chew up the precious cap space they look to have in 2005.The talent issue isn't arguable. He definately is a big impact on the floor.

That said trading him isn't necessarily a good solution either as it more than likely will affect the teams success on the floor for this season and likely next. But the Blazers could bring in a contract or 2 that fits with the summer of 2005 plan and brings in prospects and or Picks that would help the future of this team.

Letting Him walk by no means helps the team be successful, but definately helps in the salary situation.

To me a S&T is the most logical scenario, unless of course a better than expected deal comes across Nash's desk between now and February 19th.

I'll choose to not respond to Oldmangrouches attempt at humor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,927 Posts
If Sheed would agree to a contract that made fiscal sense, why trade him? He is overpaid, but far from worthless. Having him around, if he wasn't an albatross on the salary cap, would be part of the solution - NOT part of the problem! (I know, the "Sheed is the anti-christ" crowd will never understand that.)
:clap: :clap: :clap:
 

·
Grumpy Pragmatist
Joined
·
3,410 Posts
The Marbury trade is an interesting situation.

As I said on another thread, I firmly believe Marbury engineered this deal, the same way his behind-the-scenes antics forced the T'Wolves to deal him to the Nets.

In any event, the Knicks wanted him badly enough that they equalized the salaries by adding in guys with expiring contracts.
Does anyone want Sheed that desperately? Doubtful.

The deals offered for Sheed, at least the ones we have heard about, are very different. IE: the supposed Sheed for K-Mart, but we had to eat Mutombo's contract.

A real "baseball style" trade would be Sheed for Martin straight up - but that is the kind of deal the rules prohibit.
 

·
Schilster Supreme
Joined
·
13,610 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Originally posted by <b>BLAZER PROPHET</b>!
Schilly, I beg to differ. Or maybe I missed your point (I'm getin' old ya know)

If we keep Wallace and trade Zach, there's no problem. While Wallace plays for the next 4 years (he won't be all that old), we hopefully groom Outlaw to take his place and we have a nice easy progression from one above average PF to another.

If we keep both Zach & Wallace, then I see your pont. That we cannot do.

If we trade Wallace and keep Zach, then if/when Outlaw comes along we have a Jermaine situation.
Except one major issue...Travis will have to be able to play SF in this league. He is 6'7" maybe 6'8" and currently around 200lbs he has to grow at least 2"s and put on a minimum of 40lbs to hold down the PF spot.
 

·
Schilster Supreme
Joined
·
13,610 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Originally posted by <b>bfan1</b>!


based on this then we also have to get rid of Ruben, Q, Zach, and Damon.
While I don't disagree, Sheed is perceived to be the worst of the lot.

Rueben plays so hard that most forgive him, and don't take him serioulsy. He doesn't have a very visible downside attitude wise, but we all know the rap sheet.

Damon will be gone after next year.

Q and Zach get chalked up to youth and neither makes much money now.

I fully undderstand and agree, but if yout look at the PR circus that has been Rasheed he should be the first to go. This is purely from the PR perspective.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,708 Posts
Schilly, I see your point. I thought I read where they were hoping he wold bulk up a bit in the next couple of years and play PF due to his 'hops'.
 

·
Schilster Supreme
Joined
·
13,610 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
This is a tough topic and to sopme extent I am going to play "Devils advocate". Here is what I see of this team.

They are on a definate downward trend, the core of 2-3 years ago is not there anymore, or has eroded.Sheed is the best player but ina great sense the biggest headache to the organization. His deal expires after this season, and should he become too surly for Nash to want to re-resign, that leaves Portland with Zach, Derek, Qyntel and Damon as the best players IMO. Of course Sheed could choose to walk on his own taking less elsewhere.

I think this team is in an ugly situation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
670 Posts
Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!

I think this team is in an ugly situation.
This is the first time in many years that I cannot look forward to better things in the future. There just isn't much room for optimism with respect to the near future of this franchise. I really hope they prove me wrong, but barring a lucky draw or two in the draft lottery I don't see many things to get too excited about with this team, and I've been an avid fan for over 25 years.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top