I meant a PG who could shoot AND defend, something no one would accuse Blake of. The Hornets lost when CP3 was on the floor too, so I guess he's a decent backup on a sucky team he had free reign on? As to signing Andre Miller are you saying we are desperate to make a move? That was CLEARLY the impetus behind the Miller signing. Miller turned out quite good in certain circumstances. Rip would cost twice as much. I don't see much comparison really, I mean Rip is NOT a position of need like PG.
Allow me to draw your attention to this stat: Chris Paul: total +/- +9 (!). +/-/min +.005 (Both good for second best on that benighted team. Paul was the only non-scrub with a positive impact.) Darren Collison: total +/- -177 (worst on the team). +/-/min -.083 (only 4th worst). So: the Hornets actually outscored the opposing team when Paul played, which considering how god-awful they were, is quite a testament to his greatness. With Collison, they did worse than with practically any other player. It's not clear, and even if that were the reason, it was the right move. Miller turned out to be an inspired signing, and if we don't want him, he's a trading chip. So, "desperate" or not, if this is a similar move, I'm all for it. The fact remains we have too many players. To my mind Bayless has proved he's not a PG, and Rudy has proved that he and Nate can't coexist. But at the moment, we'd keep them and have to cut somebody else. I think Rip Hamilton (although I'd prefer Prince, if he's healthy) would help us more than either in the foreseeable future, not least because he's won a championship. Neither Blake nor Nate seemed to think Miller fulfilled a position of need, did they? PF was not a "position of need" for the Lakers last year, yet they re-signed LaMar Odom. Did they screw up? Of course not. It's about the squad as a whole. You can play Brandon and Rip together in a big lineup, or you can play Brandon and Miller and Roy in a small lineup. It never hurts to have starter-quality players on your bench.
Maybe I'm obtuse, but I didn't find anything in his play last year to think that he would intentionally give up millions of dollars to sit out of basketball for a year. Even if you think ill of Rudy, which amazingly many people now do, wouldn't that lead you to think that he'd rather get PAID for doing nothing?
I think there's a growing perception that he sandbagged it at the end of the season ... I don't share that opinion, but I've heard it more than once.
If you read between the lines it is a demand rather than a request. He's interested in playing in the ACB again and if you believe Quick, he could sit out a year to do just that. That could change if he's traded to a situation that he wants: Big Market, bigger role.
Exactly the way I read it too. His instinct is to probably return to Spain, but if the NBA makes him an offer he can't refuse he'd probably like to give it another go in someplace where he'll have a ton of minutes and a style that he thinks will give him the best chance at success. Failing in his second year was probably quite the embarrassment for him.
According to this, the Celtics have expressed interest in Rudy. Now that ESPN Trade Machine has been updated, we're free to suggest trades like this: Big Baby and Rasheed's contract (still on the books - his last gift to the Celtics) for Rudy, Pendergraph and Joel If we have to trade Rudy, I wouldn't mind that. Big Baby sure impressed Ron Artest in the playoffs, and would be a better backup big than Pendergraph, with more talent than Przybilla.
I'd do that deal, Ray Allen is ancient, Tony Allen just left in free agency so Rudy would fill an obvious hole and Davis would be a nice energy guy with some skill and he's a proven playoff performer. As for Sheed I guess I'd assume he'd definitely retire and probably wouldn't want to come back here.
I don't like it either, but the point is to give the Blazers the best chance at winning, and keeping him for spite hurts that goal. 1) we don't get whateve we would have received in a trade, no matter how small. 2) You have an unhappy, bithching player in the lockerroom that could disrupt or split the team. 3) Other players around the league might look at the Blazers as a petty organization and be less inclined to join in the future. The best thing to do with a player you don't plan on using is to get him off the roster for whatever you can get.. If you can get a good trade, that's a bonus, if all you can get is a second rounder, well, that's better than nothing.
Bottom line: Rudy can't force a trade, and the Blazers can't force him to contribute. It's a stalemate that nobody wins.
Absolutely. The one clear note in all of this: It's in both Rudy's and the team's best interest to part ways (If Matthews is aded).
I really think that Rudy will go back to being a solid contributor on another team. I suspected that he would sand bag it last season after Sergio was traded, and his play only cemented my thoughts further. I think Rudy intentionally played like shit to either force a trade or his release from the team outright. He wasn't the same player last season. He didn't play with the same flair, or with the same intensity. It was obvious that he was a shell of himself, and I think Rudy will continue to play like shit until he finds himself on a roster of his liking. To think, I used to list Rudy as one of my favorite, if not my favorite, players on the team.
I just listened to a Jason Quick audio clip here: http://bit.ly/cfDXyK he mentioned that Rudy asked for a trade before the deadline ... which was the first I had heard that. If that's true then it does bring into question Rudy's effort and performance last season.
I don't think there's any question about it. His performance in the playoffs was the smoking gun, pointing to his desire to leave the team and play in Europe or a bigger market.
