Quick: Blazers in talks with East team for PG and SF

Walton'sBeard! · Post #81 » by **Walton'sBeard!** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:27 am

Outlaw is a flawed player. He just doesn't fit at SF and he isn't ideal at PF. But he is a great "just throw him out there and let him play" type guy, and he creates problems for other teams when plays PF. I'd hang on to him for that reason.

I just can't wrap my head around the idea of Rudy being traded for anyone that isn't All Star material at this point. I believe management loves him that much. Unless that love is a smokecreen....

Post #82 » by **Spykes** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:29 am

d-train wrote:Outlaw is arguably the best player on the Blazers team that is not in the core big 3. The willingness of Blazer fans to trade him has no reasoned logical basis. Every year a player becomes the target of a group of fans that has to bitch and complain about something. This year Outlaw is the target.

I agree with this 100%. Even as Outlaw's name continues to pop up in trade rumors, I don't believe the Blazers would make him readily available unless they're getting a GREAT deal. The Blazer fans that are ready to trade him for a bag of stale chips are the ones who get all worked up over his awkward jumpshot and his defense that can come and go at times. But I personally believe he means a lot more to this team than people are willing to admit.

As for Deng, I tend to agree that it's more likely the Bulls are trying to trade Hinrich and Nocioni, if they are even the team that Quick was mentioning.

And as a sidepoint, it baffles me that some in here even bother to mention Harris as even a remote possibility.

Post #83 » by **kulaz3000** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:31 am

sonny wrote:
kulaz3000 wrote:
d-train wrote:I don't believe the Bulls will trade Deng and Kirk for Outlaw and change.

Yeah, but you add in a Rudy and a draft pick, then it's possible. And also having a cheap owner makes it even more possible.

I don't see us trading Deng, this goes back to when Deng was playing like crap. He's playing better so it solidifies my feelings.

The reality says, that you're right, and I'm quite positive that it won't happen. But it is deal that I would definitely want to happen.

Not to diss our players on the Blazers board, but Deng needs other really good players around him to be successful, he'll get that playing with Roy, Aldridge and Oden. Regardless of how well he plays, he mindset is of a 2nd or 3rd best player on our team. Sure, we have Rose, but he is going to take another year or two, to really take over as the man, and the leader we expect him to be.

We need to rebuild for towards the future, and my eye is set on a Rudy and Rose back court for the next decade.

Wizenheimer · Post #84 » by **Wizenheimer** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:31 am

wow...I leave you guys alone for half a day, and look what happens.

going back to Spykes OP, I'm struck by one phrase "a trade that pushes portland into championship contention". Well there's only about one trade that's been listed in this thread that would do that, and that would be Harris and Carter from NJ. And that ain't happening.

Most of those other trades would make portland better, but not enough to be "championship contenders"

Of course, it was Quick talking, and while I don't share d-train's low opinion of Quick, I don't think Quick's talent evaluation ability is all that good. So he might see a championship in a couple of players that I don't see. I also know that Quick thinks real highly of Travis Outlaw, so if he's gong out in the trade, what's coming back has to be phenomenal in Quick's eyes.

Baddy Chuck · Post #85 » by **Baddy Chuck** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:34 am

Spykes wrote:From Hoopsworld via an article in Milwaukee...

http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=11359

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/bucks/38431859.html

Don't know if there's any truth to it, that's just what I've read.

Thanks for the links.

What did you think of the RJeff/Ridnour for Raef/Webster/Frye trade?

PacificBlazer · Post #86 » by **PacificBlazer** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:38 am

It is crazy that some people have seemed to already made up their mind about Outlaw, and whether he plays good or not they still want him gone. The fact is there are many games when we would be dead when our starters are resting because no one could score. He is instant energy and offense off the bench. Also great character and all his teammates seem to love him.

PDXKnight · Post #87 » by **PDXKnight** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:45 am

magee wrote:Oden2, the Hawks have been notoriously cheap ever since the ownership took over. They WON'T re-sign both Bibby and Johnson. It's smart to get something for one of them. A pick and some cheap youth, but most importantly, a ton of cap space. Portland is who they need to trade with to facilitate that.

Fair enough, but they have been much looser with their wallets since they've been winning games IE the Josh Smith signing. Now I'm not saying they'd overpay for Bibby by any means, but if they can get him for a relatively affordable deal, it is in the realm of possibility that they retain him.

Effigy · Post #88 » by **Effigy** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:48 am

PacificBlazer wrote:It is crazy that some people have seemed to already made up their mind about Outlaw, and whether he plays good or not they still want him gone. The fact is there are many games when we would be dead when our starters are resting because no one could score. He is instant energy and offense off the bench. Also great character and all his teammates seem to love him.

Yes, I agree, I don't want to push Travis out the door, I really like him. But if we get a guy like Deng, Where will Travis get his minutes? In the 10 minutes backing up Lamarcus? What about Batum and Webster? Batum is a work in progress, Webster's hurt, can't be traded and he's such a sweet shooter he's vaulabe to bring off the bench. If we had Deng he replaces most of what Travis gives us, and can even move over and play those 10 minutes at PF so Batum and Webster can play SF. Travis would have no role on the team if we get Deng, and he would be an attractive piece to make the deal work. The guy I wouldn't want to part with is Rudy (or Bayless)

boogydown · Post #89 » by **boogydown** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:48 am

Ridnour is awful. Blake and Bayless are an upgrade over him. Jefferson individually is a different story, but does he actually help?

As for Chicago, if it involves Deng, you'd think they would request at least Rudy, possibly Bayless in a deal, and like everyone says, I cannot see Rudy being moved. Therefore, it makes perfect sense to move scrubs for Nocioni + Hinrich in a deal involving LaFrentz + Outlaw + Sergio, possibly grab Gooden for Fyre + Diogu.

boogydown · Post #90 » by **boogydown** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:51 am

Bonzi wrote:
PacificBlazer wrote:It is crazy that some people have seemed to already made up their mind about Outlaw, and whether he plays good or not they still want him gone. The fact is there are many games when we would be dead when our starters are resting because no one could score. He is instant energy and offense off the bench. Also great character and all his teammates seem to love him.

Yes, I agree, I don't want to push Travis out the door, I really like him. But if we get a guy like Deng, Where will Travis get his minutes? In the 10 minutes backing up Lamarcus? What about Batum and Webster? Batum is a work in progress, Webster's hurt, can't be traded and he's such a sweet shooter he's vaulabe to bring off the bench. If we had Deng he replaces most of what Travis gives us, and can even move over and play those 10 minutes at PF so Batum and Webster can play SF. Travis would have no role on the team if we get Deng, and he would be an attractive piece to make the deal work. The guy I wouldn't want to part with is Rudy (or Bayless)

Good luck getting Deng for Outlaw + LaFrentz + Sergio without giving up any players that would get more than 15 minutes a game in Chicago.

Baddy Chuck · Post #91 » by **Baddy Chuck** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:54 am

boogydown wrote:Ridnour is awful. Blake and Bayless are an upgrade over him. Jefferson individually is a different story, but does he actually help?

If Ridnour is awful, Blake is an awful player with a jumpshot.

tester551 · Post #92 » by **tester551** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:56 am

theanimal23 wrote:Bulls fan here, quick question: who has PTL talked to in the past? We have an insider (http://www.rumorpress.net) who has mentioned Portland talking to Chicago this past summer. Has any other team talked to PTL over the past year?

Thank You.

Knowing the way KP works, I would assume Portland has talked to EVERY team in the league MULTIPLE times on trade scenerios....

Effigy · Post #93 » by **Effigy** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:56 am

boogydown wrote:
Bonzi wrote:
PacificBlazer wrote:It is crazy that some people have seemed to already made up their mind about Outlaw, and whether he plays good or not they still want him gone. The fact is there are many games when we would be dead when our starters are resting because no one could score. He is instant energy and offense off the bench. Also great character and all his teammates seem to love him.

Yes, I agree, I don't want to push Travis out the door, I really like him. But if we get a guy like Deng, Where will Travis get his minutes? In the 10 minutes backing up Lamarcus? What about Batum and Webster? Batum is a work in progress, Webster's hurt, can't be traded and he's such a sweet shooter he's vaulabe to bring off the bench. If we had Deng he replaces most of what Travis gives us, and can even move over and play those 10 minutes at PF so Batum and Webster can play SF. Travis would have no role on the team if we get Deng, and he would be an attractive piece to make the deal work. The guy I wouldn't want to part with is Rudy (or Bayless)

Good luck getting Deng for Outlaw + LaFrentz + Sergio without giving up any players that would get more than 15 minutes a game in Chicago.

Well we'd be taking Heinrich and Noc's contract, and Deng's too for that matter which would mean all the Bulls bad contracts are off the books this off season and they can start building around Rose and re-sign Gordon if they like. Never under estimate the value of all those millions of dollars.

And to be honest, I don't care if the deal is fair for Chicago, then don't deal with us, I just personally wouldn't want to give up Rudy or Bayless when there is only one guy in that group of 3 players that I actually want.

Norm2953 · Post #94 » by **Norm2953** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:58 am

I seem to recall Isaac and Big Suke saying just yesterday that there are very few
real Blazer sources around town and I've always thought that if we are arguing
amongst ourselves about a possible deal, its not going to happen.

Teams talk all the time but unless something is offered in this economy that
out weighs the benefits of Raef's insurance paid contract, nothing will happen
until the draft.

boogydown · Post #95 » by **boogydown** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:59 am

Both Iggy and Deng struggled in their new systems when they returned this season. Obviously we know Iggy has improved, but Deng the last 9 games is 18PPG - 9RPG - 55% FG - 2 SPG.

DevilDetails · Post #96 » by **DevilDetails** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:59 am

boogydown wrote:Ridnour is awful. Blake and Bayless are an upgrade over him. Jefferson individually is a different story, but does he actually help?

As for Chicago, if it involves Deng, you'd think they would request at least Rudy, possibly Bayless in a deal, and like everyone says, I cannot see Rudy being moved. Therefore, it makes perfect sense to move scrubs for Nocioni + Hinrich in a deal involving LaFrentz + Outlaw + Sergio, possibly grab Gooden for Fyre + Diogu.

I actually think there's a pretty good shot that Rudy will be traded. I think, to be honest, the Blazers are probably a little underwhelmed by Rudy's year so far. It is pretty clear that he can't play SF or PG and he doesn't mesh well with Roy (and our defense is terrible with those two playing together, especially in transition). He has almost no midrange game and is turnover prone. He is not improving his defense and keeps making the same mistakes over and over (traveling, in particular). He is a nice piece off the bench, but he plays the same position as Roy. Basically, he's not going to be a starter for us. In that sense, he is not as attractive to Pritchard as Bayless, who still has the potential to be our starting PG, is a much better defender, and can back up both the PG and SG positions. And there aren't a ton of minutes to develop Bayless and Rudy. So, I can see Pritchard moving him in a package to get, say, Hinrich and Deng (two potential starters).

boogydown · Post #97 » by **boogydown** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 1:02 am

Hughes is a bad contract, Nocioni is one who doesn't fit with Chicago, Deng is okay if he plays like he has been doing, and we have Rose so Hinrich is not needed, but his contract isn't bad.

Post #98 » by **Spykes** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 1:08 am

Wizenheimer wrote:Of course, it was Quick talking, and while I don't share d-train's low opinion of Quick, I don't think Quick's talent evaluation ability is all that good. So he might see a championship in a couple of players that I don't see. I also know that Quick thinks real highly of Travis Outlaw, so if he's gong out in the trade, what's coming back has to be phenomenal in Quick's eyes.

Quick does think pretty highly of Outlaw, but all season long, he has also maintained that Outlaw is one of the most likely players to be traded this season. Just yesterday he was on 1080 The Fan and they asked him to name the Top 5 most likely players to be traded, and the list he gave was: #1. Frye, #2. Sergio, #3. Raef, and #4. Outlaw. And he was pretty definite that Outlaw is solidly in that #4 spot of most likely to be traded.

RingtheBell wrote:What did you think of the RJeff/Ridnour for Raef/Webster/Frye trade?

Eh. Not a fan of Ridnour's. He wouldn't start over Blake, and at his price-tag, that's a pretty big deal. I also seem to remember him and Nate had problems up in Seattle. Donno if that would still be a problem or not. The pure talent value is good for the Blazers in that deal, but I'm not overly excited by the idea.

LOOSH · Post #99 » by **LOOSH** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 1:19 am

I'd guess it's probably this:

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/t ... &te=&cash=

The "sweetening" is adding Joe Alexander IMO. They Blazers reportedly coveted him during the draft, and Chad Ford said we liked Sessions this week. The Bucks need to shed RJ now that Redd is done, and they pick up a ton of CAP room and Outlaw to build around.

This also works:

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/t ... &te=&cash=

My guess is the Bulls would probably do it considering how dysfunctional their team is and how much flexibility they would pick up here shedding all that money. I know they are dying to get rid of Hinrich, I'm not sure their thoughts on Deng.

Baddy Chuck · Post #100 » by **Baddy Chuck** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 1:21 am

LOOSH wrote:I'd guess it's probably this:

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/t ... &te=&cash=

The "sweetening" is adding Joe Alexander IMO. They Blazers reportedly coveted him during the draft, and Chad Ford said we liked Sessions this week. The Bucks need to shed RJ now that Redd is done, and they pick up a ton of CAP room and Outlaw to build around.

Bucks don't consider it. I think it'd be a tough sell Raef/Outlaw for Jefferson/Sessions let alone adding Alexander.