Using $8m a Year on Hickson - Should that Be the Offseason Plan?

Hickson isn't much of a destination, but he's a good stepping stone. If we can get him on a reasonable contract ($8mil/year is reasonable for a big with his rebounding skills and defensive liabilities), it probably is a good move to lock him up long-term. It positions you for trading him or Aldridge for some other pieces a year or two down the road.

He's a little like Crash was to us. Gerald Wallace didn't make much sense to our team after Roy and Oden crashed and burned, but I don't think any Blazer fan regrets his acquisition (as it led to us eventually drafting Lillard.)

And if Leonard develops into the center we all hope for, Hickson may have a long future on this team as a big man off the bench.

 

If he plays 80 games this season at his current MPG, he'll be worth about 8.13 Win Shares. Multiply that by 1.47 and you get $12 million. Multiply that by 1.86 and you get $15.1 million.

 

Blazinaway, we need to be stayinaway from this guy. I would not go as far as calling him a cancer, but he tends to be lazy and selfish. Horrible defensive player.

 

Stat geeks put his numbers up with other bigs around the league for us!

 

Paul Millsap signed for about $8mil/year (thanks to Portland). Hickson is about the same level of talent/type of player, IMO. Maybe Hickson is a worse defender, but not by much if you play him at PF. He's a much better rebounder than Millsap though by TRB%, which is saying a lot.

Hickson is kind of in a rare category--he's a high quality role player who neither defends nor scores nor passes extremely well. But his TRB% is elite this year, above guys like Duncan, Robinson and Olajuwon (although a tier below the ultimate rebounder Dennis Rodman).

He's kind of a hard guy to figure out a true market value for, because there just aren't many examples out there of one-dimensional players whose only dimension is elite rebounding. He's kind of like the Steve Kerr of boards.

 

For who? It's easy to say that you wanted a lopsided trade, but that's no guarantee, and the people available in free agency this year aren't much better and certainly aren't younger. JJ is only 24. He's averaging a double double. If we lose him, I doubt we pick up someone who can replace his production.

A bird in the hand...

 

Im all for resigning him for around 6-8m a year for 3-4 years. Mostly iv soured on the big free agents and would like an off season of JJ Reddick/babbit/hickson/someone else. This team shown the ability to gut and grind out games leaving me thinking we need depth instead of a big name move.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

It seems to me that the question is whether Meyers Leonard is going to develop into a starting-caliber C in the next couple of years. If so, then tying up $8M or so in Hickson doesn't make sense. Freeland and Babbitt are a lot cheaper options at the backup 4 spot. Leonard is RAW, but he's athletic. I think he can develop, but the question is how long will it take for him to get there? I guess there's some merit to signing Hickson and plan on trading him when Leonard is ready. Tough call.

 

Yes. With that in mind, we should go after Jarrett Jack as a combo 1/2 bench player. What are your thoughts?

 

A 30 mpg elite rebounder, even as a backup, is a decent value at that price. You can get by with cheaper options like Babbitt and Leonard, but those two aren't good enough to be the best bench guys on a team hoping to make a deep playoff run. Hickson is.

 

His PER for and against say so though

 

It doesn't have to be done immediately. And of course it isn't guaranteed. That's why it is a risk/reward question. The reward for keeping JJ isn't extremely high.

The current list of players with JJ isn't going to be a title contender, even if Lillard turns out to be a top 5 PG (I'll change my mind if Meyers turns into a top 3 center, but that isn't going to happen). So even if we don't replace JJ's production, it's not like it is the end of the world. We might get some better draft picks. We don't have to spend the money immediately if we don't see a "needle mover".

 

Do you think it was worth it to trade Przybilla, Cunningham and Marks for Gerald Wallace? That didn't really "move the needle much." But a couple years later we've got a ROY starting PG as a result.

Hickson doesn't have to make us a title contender. It's very tough for a small market team to make any FA signing that does that. It could, however, position us to move up another tier. Just like Crash did.

 

At the time, I thought Crash would be a needle mover, so yes I thought it was worth it at the time. Also, I wouldn't really consider $8M per year for JJ to be a GREAT deal like the Crash deal looked to be at the time.

 

With Wes Batum and Lillard all legit threats from behind the arc, and Aldridge a great shooter from a step inside, I don't think the Blazers really need to spend its recourses on Redick. I understand he can also dish, but he is not a PG. The Blazers need a ball handler more than Redick.

As far as Hickson or another C, I really don't know, but I do trust Olshey to have a better trash of which players are actually attainable. If the Blazers felt the could get an upgrade on D, then I think you take the chance and let Hick go.

 

You are right. They do not play well when teams pressure them. They need another ball handler. I would kill for a really good back up PG that would allow Lillard to play 10 minutes a game at the 2.

Back up 2 and a big physical center is the priority for me. It used to be SG but Wes has stepped up and Batum and Barton can help out. If Lillard could play a little SG as well....... the offense would be fun to watch.