Thats not the problem. The problem is, who will pull the trigger from the other side? I have seen several trade "rumor" shows on NBATV over the last few days, and the weirdest thing is even the agents are saying that there are no trade rumors with legs right now.
Scalabrine, Bass and Hinrich aren't Cs either. Why not figure out some trades to actually help the team, then, as opposed to just dumping Webster.
I don't think that will be very attractive to teams. Would you do the same for Rudy/Outlaw/Blake. Some team out there will either want Rudy, Batum or Bayless if they are considering trading with Ptd (IMO). Heck if you believe rumors, the Wiz wanted Rudy AND Batum for Haywood.
hah! I was just having this convo over @ OLive, and here's what I came up with: Miller (25) // Bayless (23) // Blake ??? Roy (25) // Rudy (23) Batum (30) // Roy (10) // Webster (8???) Aldridge (25) // Outlaw (15) // Dante-Pendy (8???) Howard (20) // Aldridge (15) // Dante-Pendy (13)??? Switch Oden with Howard for next year, and Aldridge getting more mins @ the 4.
Webster is Mr. Consistent next to Dalembert. Dalembert was crap when Andre was with the Sixers. I don't want to give up Outlaw for two main reasons: (a) Outlaw, when healthy, is our second best "get a bucket when you absolutely have to" player behind Roy (b) I think Outlaw is actually pretty much the heart of the Blazers. Everybody loves him, he has an infectious personality and he's the kind of guy that is at the core of team chemistry. Trading him would be like shooting everybody's favorite puppy. And he has a much more reasonable contract than Webster, and doesn't have the fragile psyche. Do you really want to trade your star player's best buddy? And one of the few people to get Aldridge to open up?
So... you play Blake ZERO minutes, and Outlaw NO minutes at the three (and only 15 total), both of which are unrealistically small, and you STILL only have 8 minutes left for Webster? I think that makes my point.
outlaw is a free agent this summer though. His expiring money may be a more tradeable asset and unless he's willing to stay in Portland for less money, he's more likely to get traded.
That's what I was trying to do. One of either Outlaw or Webster (along with Blake) have to go. There are too few minutes for either of them to be effective, but even then I'd probably keep Outlaw because he can switch onto PF if needed, which Webster can't do.
Yes, unless some other team throws money at him, and maybe even then. I think he's a loyal guy (like McDyess back in the day) and I think he has a lot of teammates, and Roy in particular, who will lobby hard to keep him. If there were teams (and Boston and Memphis have been mentioned in the past) who really wanted him and were prepared to offer us something stellar for him right now, then maybe he's traded. But if he ends the year with us, I see him being re-signed. UNLESS (a) we can't ditch Webster AND (b) Paul Allen's situation changes and suddenly the money dries up.
This is Outlaw's big money offer. He's going to go to the highest bidder. I'm not sure, I'd guess he'd be in the $6-7 million dollar a year range ending at $8-ish.
I know, but my solution is this: Quit trying to make people happy. Some players sit on teams, that is just a fact of life. Better players play, worse players sit. Except when Nate is coach, and you have to virtually trade some players off the team to get him to quit playing them. I don't feel sorry for any player who has to collect an NBA paycheck while playing zero minutes. So sad!
That's part of why I've only come up with a small range, because I set myself the following restrictions: 1) Must be with an Eastern Conference team (I think everyone in the West hates the Blazers) 2) Must either feature a fairly scrubby player with an expiring contract (Scalabrine, Brown), or a player we can use with a contract that his team regrets (Bass, Hinrich).
I think that's shortsighted and leads to underachieving teams. You should never be hired in management with that attitude. It's not a matter of feeling sorry for them, it's a matter of squeezing the most out of them. Some players only play well when they feel threatened (otherwise they just relax). Others, and it's my firm impression that Martell is one of these, only play well when they don't. If we had hardly anyone at the swing position, then Martell would be much more valuable to us. As it is, that's crowded with players who deserve minutes more than he does, and meanwhile, we're STARVED for big bodies.
I haven't. I am assuming it will return to that team dynamic when Outlaw returns. However, I don't think there is anyway in the world that KP trades anyone in the middle of a season. Nate is going to have to figure it out. Too bad I have almost zero faith that Nate is capable of solving this puzzle.
Management of a basketball team and management in business are two different things, don't try to make them the same because they are not. If they were, Gilbert Arenas would have already been fired and his contract torn up. The NBA is dominated by the players with a higher talent level who can make a difference in a game. You win by having them out on the floor playing well together. Not by having the happiest role players.
Thanks for your help. Right, none are centers. But getting Hinrich also means getting rid of Blake, which means two players get crunched into one. It doesn't solve all the minutes problems, but it does a little, and even if not, Hinrich is a better defender than either, and has proven to be a very good +/- guy for the Bulls. Meanwhile both Bass and Scalabrine are primarily 4s. Bass is younger and more athletic than Howard, better than Pendergraph, and bigger than Cunningham. Scalabrine would be there when we need to drag a 4 out of the paint to guard him at the 3 point line. I'd love to get Gortat for Webster, but the Magic are NOT trading Gortat, so there's no point in suggesting it.
