Offers for Jack, Outlaw, & Draft Picks

Jsun947 · Post #1 » by **Jsun947** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 2:50 am

The Blazers are running a 10 man rotation. Next year we are adding at least 2 more players to the roster (Oden, Rudy Fernandez).

What offers do you have for a package of

Outlaw, Jack, Lafrentz (12.7 mil expiring next year) Portland's 2008 1st, and 2nd round picks via Indiana, Memphis, and New York.

We are not willing to take on salary for 09/10 unless its a star caliber player

Needs:
Top draft pick (7+)
Relieve ourselves of Darius Miles
Star caliber player (Not a C or PF.)

*********FRYE IS ALLOWED TO BE SUBED FOR OUTLAW********

RoxFan08 · Post #2 » by **RoxFan08** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 2:55 am

Mmm, not giving up much to get a "star caliber player" particularly a young one. Maybe you could spin that package into a Michael Redd, if you consider him a star. I think Milwaukee would wait and see if your pick was lottery or not before making the trade. Don't know if you could do much better than that.

No one will trade you a high pick for any combination of that (unless your pick is also high, and you want to trade up a few spots).

No one will take Miles or LaFrentz unless you are taking a bad contract back or "sweetening" it. Maybe then you get expirings.

Gotta give value to get value.

Edit: And lets face it. 2nd round picks don't generally amount to a hill of beans. If a team REALLY wants one, they can buy them from some of the cheaper owners in the NBA.

DanTown8587 · Post #3 » by **DanTown8587** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 3:00 am

Great, except Portland is in no need to trade anyone of the team right now. Plus, Nate likes the deep rotation. And they love Jack, cause they can play him at the one or two. Sorry boss, no deals involving Portland. They need LaFrentz to come off the book to afford extensions for Roy-Webster-Aldridge

deviljets7 · Post #4 » by **deviljets7** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 3:03 am

Maybe if you wait until the Summer when Raef is an expiring, you could get something closer to what you're looking for. Nothing against Frye, Jack, Outlaw or your #1, but they aren't valuable enough to get an all-star when packaged with a non-expiring. See the Ray Allen trade as a comparison.

Jsun947 · Post #5 » by **Jsun947** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 3:08 am

This is more of a offseason discussion.

Note: It says we are adding 2 more players NEXT season.

Bac2Basics · Post #6 » by **Bac2Basics** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 3:19 am

Portland fan seems unwilling to give anything of significant value at similar value to their expectations.

They seem to think that J. Jack is on the same level as Mo Williams or Mike Bibby as far as talent when their's no evidence to this point.

schwartz57 · Post #7 » by **schwartz57** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 3:27 am

what would portland say to this deal...

Portland Recieves: Michael Redd and Dan Gadzuric
Milwaukee Recieves: Outlaw, Webster, Lafrentz, and a future first round pick

I think its a pretty even deal. Portland gets a great scorer to go with their core of oden roy and aldrige while the bucks gain a wing defender in outlaw as well as a large expireing next year in lafrentz

DeezXXnutZ · Post #8 » by **DeezXXnutZ** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 3:33 am

Portland says none of the above are on the market and Michael Redd is not a player we are interested in trading for........

ahartleyvu · Post #9 » by **ahartleyvu** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 3:39 am

I'd give Shawne Williams for Jack, but doubt you guys would want to do that deal.

xxSnEaKyPxx · Post #10 » by **xxSnEaKyPxx** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 4:00 am

ahartleyvu wrote:I'd give Shawne Williams for Jack, but doubt you guys would want to do that deal.

Funny, I was thinking the same thing. I don't think Portland, nor most Indiana fans would agree though.

Portland probably doesn't view Williams the way we do. That being said I don't think many Pacer fans think Jack has the value Portland thinks he does.

I think Jack is a good player, but I don't really see him being a long term starter. I'd love him to back up Tinsley though. I love Williams and his potential, but we are so deep at the wing position, especially with Granger being our future SF in my eyes. I would do this.

Does Portland really need a SF? I don't even know.

yaomac11-1 · Post #11 » by **yaomac11-1** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 4:06 am

i just put this together quickly, its not the best trade but see what you think http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/traderesult?players=2768~550~2015~976~2763~1051~3018~295&teams=10~10~10~22~22~22~22~22&te=&cash=10:22

maybe houston puts a pick in there also, i dont know

DeezXXnutZ · Post #12 » by **DeezXXnutZ** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 5:10 am

yaomac11-1 wrote:i just put this together quickly, its not the best trade but see what you think http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/traderesult?players=2768~550~2015~976~2763~1051~3018~295&teams=10~10~10~22~22~22~22~22&te=&cash=10:22

maybe houston puts a pick in there also, i dont know

There are too many flaws with this trade for me to even begin to state..If we were going to make a trade (which I highly doubt will happen) it would be to trade depth in order to bring in a big name player..So we would have to be bringing less players back then we are dealing out...

I could see this deal as interest to us if we are dealing with Houston:

Blazers trade: Josh McRoberts and Taurean Green

Rockets Trade: Aaron Brooks

zong · Post #13 » by **zong** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 5:13 am

Delfino or Dixon + Future 2nd Rounder for Jack? both are expirings and know their roles well

Simulack · Post #14 » by **Simulack** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 5:18 am

This has been brought up on the Bucks board by others... Depends on how you think Redd and Roy can co-exist. Something like:

Milwaukee trades:
Michael Redd
Charlie Bell

Portland trades:
Travis Outlaw
Jarret Jack
Raef LaFrentz
2008's first round pick

Other ones have been proposed with Webster in there instead of Jack, the pick or both.

EDIT: Somehow missed the other Redd trade. Do most Portland fans agree Redd is a player of no interest? I said this on the Bucks board but others disagreed. I personally don't see why they would want him but wanted other opinions.

sipclip · Post #15 » by **sipclip** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 5:47 am

Travis Outlaw should be untouchable. Not only is the guy a freak athlete but he's put in tons of work on his jumper to the point where it's becoming automatic and it's impossible to block. A few years down the line I could see him easily averaging 20+ pts a game while playing great defense on the other end.

SoHo · Post #16 » by **SoHo** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 6:00 am

I personally think Redd could be a very solid addition to the Blazers roster, the problem is that he plays the same position as Roy. I don't know if he is capable of defending SFs or what, I assume he is at least capable...but I don't know. So that alone makes it somewhat of a stretch.

I think his shooting would be a stupendous addition in Portland, but I just can't see Portland trading away enough to get him considering how well Webster and Jones have been playing at SF and that both are still relatively young (Webster especially).

I really don't know if Portland makes many trades unless they are clear opportunities to get a young (and good) PG...very unlikely with what we have to give. Otherwise it's a salary dump of Darius (who nobody wants even if we include Jack or Outlaw) or a move up in the draft, which is impossible to figure out now, considering we don't know where any team is going to end up.

NBAMAN2006 · Post #17 » by **NBAMAN2006** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 7:09 am

I like the Redd idea, but I think the deal would have to be Webster instead of Outlaw.

Imagine surrounding Oden and LA with two shooters of the caliber of Redd and James Jones. Wow.

Still, Blazers dont do it. They are deadset on waiting, keeping the young talent for a year or two and then deciding what to do. Right now is too early.

skones · Post #18 » by **skones** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 7:23 am

NBAMAN2006 wrote:I like the Redd idea, but I think the deal would have to be Webster instead of Outlaw.

Imagine surrounding Oden and LA with two shooters of the caliber of Redd and James Jones. Wow.

Still, Blazers dont do it. They are deadset on waiting, keeping the young talent for a year or two and then deciding what to do. Right now is too early.

I think it might have to be Webster and Outlaw. If that's not possible, Milwaukee would DEFINITELY want Outlaw over Webster.

waverider · Post #19 » by **waverider** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 3:34 pm

NBAMAN2006 wrote:I like the Redd idea, but I think the deal would have to be Webster instead of Outlaw.

Still, Blazers dont do it. They are deadset on waiting, keeping the young talent for a year or two and then deciding what to do. Right now is too early.

I agree with you, there is NO hurry as the "cake" is baking just fine. And what's a bonus IMO is that Webs and TO are in that time of their young careers that they are improving the most rapidly, there the longer we keep them IMO the greater will be their trade value - especially this summer. Of note is that FRYE has also been playing a lot better the last several weeks, his value continues to increase as well.
Bottom line is Blazers are in a great position, they can let their boatload of talent to develop and field offers if they come, and only make a move if they get what they consider a very good trade.

cucad8 · Post #20 » by **cucad8** » Mon Jan 7, 2008 4:06 pm

I'd personally prefer giving up Outlaw over Webster. I think Webster can do what Outlaw has shown this year, if his number was called as often as Outlaw's is. A tiny bit younger, and we would have Frye as our backup 4 anyways. I think ultimately Webster will be a better player than Outlaw will be, if given the same opportunity.
I wouldn't mind the Redd deal, and trading Outlaw and Jack, but would prefer moving either our pick next year, or having some protection on the pick if it was this year. But, I know many Blazers fans disagree with me ecause of the illustrious cap space in '09 plan.