Odom Vs. Bass. Both can play the role of backup PF, Odom would also need minutes at SF, which IMO is a minus, not a plus, he's also older but probably the better player. Both play for good teams in our confrence, both teams would suffer greatly from losing them. Assuming both are willing to take our money (Bass may agree to slightly less than the full 7.7) the question is - who's the better fit, and who's "former" team do we want more badly to hurt.
I'd take Bass, because I really don't think Odom fits our culture and probably has a beef being our rival and all...
Odom is twice the player Bass is. He can play, as you say, both forward spots. If the cost of acquisition was similar the Blazers would be foolish to choose Bass over Odom. Ed O.
Better player? Lamar Odom. Better fit? Probably Brandon Bass. And Bass would come a lot more cheaper than Odom in the long run.
I agree. I don't understand how getting a starting SF capable of playing backup power forward would be a better fit than a guy who would only be the backup power forward. Ed O.
Odom eats too much god damn candy. That will probably shorten his career. And maybe that's why he's so inconsistent, such poor nutrition.
I'll actually be pissed off if the only cap space in the Blazers' foreseeable future is used on an undersized back-up PF who is a marginal defender. Brandon Bass does nothing to help this team get past the Lakers.
I'm down to zero on my list, just like I started it. KP was never going to make a move. The deals on the table now are the same deals that were on the trade deadline, and they didn't get done then, so why would they get done now? We aren't offering any different pieces. They aren't either. So why would anybody expect anything to change?
Jefferson and Carter were the deals that were assumed at the trade deadline. How are they still on the table?
I don't know.. I just think Odom's best position is still PF. And the Lakers were best when he was playing PF with Gasol at C, and Ariza at SF. He could take more advantage of his skillset against other PFs. He can certainly play SF, but can Odom defend SFs for 25-30 mins a game as he gets older? He's obviously the better player, but I also think his inconsistency will make us go Travis Outlaw-crazy.
Why the fuck would I be talking about deals for guys that have already been traded? Hello Captain Obvious!
You posted that the same deals "on the table" at the deadline were still "on the table". I'd like to know which deals you are talking about. If you're going to criticize Pritchard, some specific knowledge of "on the table" deals would aid your argument. Otherwise, it comes off as ignorance.
Odom is easily the better fit, IMO. Playing small forward is a plus...he's currently a significantly better player than Batum, so being able to play Odom alongside Aldridge is a good thing. Having Odom take all the power forward minutes that Aldridge doesn't play (12, for example) and a decent number of small forward minutes (24, say) gives him a large role, commensurate with his ability, yet still leaves Batum 24 minutes at small forward. That's plenty to allow Batum to continue to develop, improve and contribute. Odom provides passing like Turkoglu did, scoring and significantly better rebounding and defense than Turk. I think he's both a much better fit and much better player than Bass.
OK, but where does that leave Travis Outlaw? Odom is the superior player to Bass (probably Outlaw too) but he's also a player that would demand 2-3 times as many minutes as Bass and leave Outlaw out of the rotation.
It's highly unlikely but what-if the Raptors are willing to swap Jose Calderon for Blake and Outlaw? Check Out this team: Calderon/Bayless Roy/Rudy Batum/Odom/Webster Aldridge/Odom Joel/Oden
