RealGM

jhern87 wrote:If we're not acquiring another PG it tells me the FO really has a lot of confidence in Bayless and his progression. Which is a good thing, I just hope it goes according to planned.

I think that as well. Blake is certainly not a long term solution. And if Bayless has not gotten past him by the Playoffs, look for a lot of pgs running free down the lane and another 1st round exit.

I'd like to see a deal get done because I think Rudy would be a great fit. I understand you wanting to keep him. However, I don't understand Webster in all the proposals. He is a bad contract due to his injuries, money, and length of the deal. The Bulls or very few teams will trade away an asset for Blake, Outlaw, and a bad contract. You have to give something to get something. I understand the Rudy love. I love that guy and I'd love to see him to next to Rudy.

didn't Batum guard some PGs last season?

i wonder if this would work:

Roy / Bayless / Mills
Batum / Fernandez
Hedo / Webster
Aldridge / Outlaw / Pendergraph
Oden / Pryzbilla

defenderofpants wrote:Roy / Bayless / Mills
Batum / Fernandez
Hedo / Webster
Aldridge / Outlaw / Pendergraph
Oden / Pryzbilla

If that's the squad then expect it to look more like this:

Roy/Bayless
Fernandez/Webster
Hedo/Batum
Aldridge/Outlaw
Oden/Przy

I don't think that it's such a bad move to not upgrade the PG position. As a matter of fact I sort of suspected it all along because of the lack of options at that position. The truth is, the Blazers may be sitting on a Gold mine in Bayless. He didn't exactly suck in his very limited time on the floor last season.

If his shot returns with more PT then the only thing that is missing from his game is experience...and that is a good thing. With how much intensity he brings to both the Offensive and Defensive sides of the ball, given a little experience he might end up being the complete package.

I don't see a lot of available 4s out there that are better than Outlaw. It was painful last year watching him at SF, a problem solved if HT is signed. Webster is the real 5th wheel. untradeable because of the injury, with no minutes available to him if he comes back healthy.

dunlop212 wrote:I don't see a lot of available 4s out there that are better than Outlaw. It was painful last year watching him at SF, a problem solved if HT is signed. Webster is the real 5th wheel. untradeable because of the injury, with no minutes available to him if he comes back healthy.

If Webster comes back healthy, it may be wise to give him the backup SF minutes. Not only would the team be better for it since a healthy Webster should conceivably be better than Batum (assuming Batum doesn't make some HUGE leap this summer), but it also shows other teams that Webster can play, thereby helping his trade value. It'd suck to see Batum riding the bench, but it might be for the best.

Let's wrap it up with a nice, big black & red bow:
Webster + Outlaw + Bayless = Etan Thomas (waive) + Madsen + Rubio.

Oden, Przybilla
Aldridge, Turkoglu
Turkoglu, Batum
Roy, Rudy
Blake, Rubio

I'm happy.


Madsen, Pendergraph play some at PF
Thomas? Cunningham?

HoopsFanAZ wrote:Let's wrap it up with a nice, big black & red bow:
Webster + Outlaw + Bayless = Etan Thomas (waive) + Madsen + Rubio.

Oden, Przybilla
Aldridge, Turkoglu
Turkoglu, Batum
Roy, Rudy
Blake, Rubio

I'm happy.


Madsen, Pendergraph play some at PF
Thomas? Cunningham?

If we could pull that deal off, I'd waive Madison and keep Thomas as the backup 4.

In a way, Hedo is a bit of a point guard. Putting him next to Roy would basically clear the need to have another distributer at the point guard spot, so it clears the way for the Blazers to start giving Bayless a bigger role IMO. Considering all the positive press that has come out as far as the Blazers' liking Bayless goes, I'd put my money there if they do end up with Hedo and without another PG (Hinrich?).

It just means that Portland won't get out of the first round again. That's a little depressing, but it's reality.

I like Blake as a person, and hs is a good shooter, but what this team needs is a PG who can penetrate and draw fouls and someone who can defend, or at least sort of stay in front of opposing PG's. Bayless is that guy, but with Blake on the roster, Nate will never play Bayless. I think this is a bad move personally.

Spykes wrote:I agree with everyone else that with Hedo, I really like Hinrich for the team. I'm OK with Blake on the offensive end of the floor with Hedo, so I don't have a problem that Hinrich doesn't add much on that side of the ball. The defensive difference between Blake and Hinrich would be a real nice upgrade tho.

That said, Hinrich really seems to be off-the-table now. I'd definitely like a Blake and Outlaw for Hinrich, but I just don't think it'll fly with the Bulls anymore. Actually, I'd LOVE a Blake and Webster for Hinrich deal, but that's far less likely.

Signing Powe could be a really interesting move. After his injury, we might be able to get him for a 1 year vet min deal.

Dice would be great, but it'd have to be a S&T and I don't think they'll have much interest in Outlaw or Webster.

i know you are tired of me by now, but since you guys like the hinrich for blake and outlaw thing, and we want rudy, and you need a reserve at the PF position, what if it was:
hinrich and Tyrus Thomas for rudy, blake, outlaw and webster(only if you dont have any open cap space to take the difference)?

we wouldnt want webster back if you can take on a little extra salary, which i assume you cant if you use it on hedu.

you then have great insurance and shot blocking and potential in thomas, and hinrich at the point. hinrich can play with roy, or bayless just fine. maybe if a third team was involved somehow you can keep webster for depth, but i dont know how that would work. i think most on the bulls board would endorse this trade because they want to eventually replace Tyrus with a 2010 PF or our pick james johnson who looks better offensively.

Clint Eastwood wrote:

Spykes wrote:I agree with everyone else that with Hedo, I really like Hinrich for the team. I'm OK with Blake on the offensive end of the floor with Hedo, so I don't have a problem that Hinrich doesn't add much on that side of the ball. The defensive difference between Blake and Hinrich would be a real nice upgrade tho.

That said, Hinrich really seems to be off-the-table now. I'd definitely like a Blake and Outlaw for Hinrich, but I just don't think it'll fly with the Bulls anymore. Actually, I'd LOVE a Blake and Webster for Hinrich deal, but that's far less likely.

Signing Powe could be a really interesting move. After his injury, we might be able to get him for a 1 year vet min deal.

Dice would be great, but it'd have to be a S&T and I don't think they'll have much interest in Outlaw or Webster.

i know you are tired of me by now, but since you guys like the hinrich for blake and outlaw thing, and we want rudy, and you need a reserve at the PF position, what if it was:
hinrich and Tyrus Thomas for rudy, blake, outlaw and webster(only if you dont have any open cap space to take the difference)?

we wouldnt want webster back if you can take on a little extra salary, which i assume you cant if you use it on hedu.

you then have great insurance and shot blocking and potential in thomas, and hinrich at the point. hinrich can play with roy, or bayless just fine. maybe if a third team was involved somehow you can keep webster for depth, but i dont know how that would work. i think most on the bulls board would endorse this trade because they want to eventually replace Tyrus with a 2010 PF or our pick james johnson who looks better offensively.

and I think it's been pretty clear from our side that Chicago isn't getting Rudy unless they really sweeten the pot, and I'm not sure they can sweeten it enough.

Blake & Webster for Hinrich and Portland might throw in an extra pick. Blake and Outlaw and Outlaw without a pick. That would be it.

If Chicago wants Rudy, they have to take Webster and they have to send back James Johnson and the 2010 1st. That would be the minimum price and frankly, it probably wouldn't be enough as far as Blazer brass is concerned.

I'd do Hinrich, Salmons and Noah for Rudy, Blake and Outlaw, but that's about it.

I don't know.. I truly feel like we're going to go after a PG once Hedo gets all wrapped up.. I'm really hoping so because Hedo isn't getting any younger and we need to try to make it happen now..

The more I think about it, the less we are really going to need a PG.

With Hedo, we are stepping up into the 1st tier of contenders, as opposed to the second tier.

When we played Houston, it was almost nice to let Brooks go off. It kept the ball out of the hands of Yao.

The two games we won, were two of Brooks top 3 games in terms of fga's which led to Yao taking taking fewer, more efficent shots. I'm not saying that defense at the PG position isn't important, but I think it has been being over-rated by us Portland fans (including myself) for quite some time.

The other teams in the west that pose a threat to us, get by with weak PG's outside of San Antonio. Every other team that has a good PG, we can let roam and shut down the rest of their roster and still be able to win.

Our biggest flaw against Houston IMO was having another cosistent scorer, not defense. Adding Turk and having Bayless play more should damn near take care of our problems IMO.

And I think I just went and talked myself into wanting Hedo.......

Bonzi wrote:I'd do Hinrich, Salmons and Noah for Rudy, Blake and Outlaw, but that's about it.

Is Oden coming back to us in that package?

HitMan52 wrote:

Bonzi wrote:I'd do Hinrich, Salmons and Noah for Rudy, Blake and Outlaw, but that's about it.

Is Oden coming back to us in that package?

That was pretty dang bad lol, I'm sorry.

Is there a halfway decent point guard we could get by trading Bayless and Webster? We'd have a perfect rotation:

PG/Blake
Roy/Fernandez
Turkoglu/Batum
Aldridge/Outlaw
Oden/Przybilla

Ken Berger reporting that the Andre S&T might still be a option


http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entr ... 3/15873023

If this has been reported i did not see it.

give me Nash or give me death!!!

ok not the death part