I am surprised I haven't seen a thread about this. During last night's game, David Aldridge said the Blazers were going to give it 2 more weeks, and if things didn't dramatically improve, they were going to start trading off vets for young players.
no he said early january and it was basically the berger article he was referring too. and if its really true.... those guys will be traded cause after this trip we will be lucky to be 12-14... 13-13 at best
also.... i agree with jaynes. who can you really trade? miller might be our best player as sad as that sounds.... we have no other decent pg that isnt dleague garbage.... and we are gonna start marks at center for 50+ games? hahahaha i dont think they can trade vets if they wanted too. Andre Miller has become an incredible story for this franchise. Face it, he’s a guy who was their third choice when he signed as a free agent and a player who had to call out the head coach in a profanity-laced tirade just to get himself into the starting lineup. And he’s the team MVP this season, a guy able to make things happen for himself and his teammates. And the guy is a warrior. He brings it hard every night.
The only way I see it is if we got something special. I do not consider draft busts or late 1's special. His two week claim probably just coincides with all of the trade restrictions that are lifted Dec 15th.
No doubt Wes has value and would be what we should be targetting. The players we are talking about are the veterans on the backside of their careers like Joel, Camby, and Dre.
The man was in the media room eatin cookies and checking his facebook page all night, how would he know?
I hope to hell the NBA league pass broadcasts the Blazer announcers a little more during this road trip compared to the last trip. Nothing is more annoying then listening to a different team of announcers in 4 different cites quote the exact same "speculation" that they all read on Hoopshype.com, and then treat it as Gospel. I understand that their listeners may not have read it, but for those of us with the league pass, it gets really old after two weeks. And of course opposing announcers take great joy in any misery with regards to the other team. Hope to hear Mike and Mike tonight.
I think Aldridge has some legit resources in the team offices. The thing is, even if the team wants to do something, they may not be able to do something. It takes at least 2 teams to make a trade happen. The other thing that I would throw out there is the possibility that Lamarcus might be the odd guy out. He still has a lot of value through out the league, but if you are going to move forward and not count on Greg Oden ever coming back, you need to get more physical up front. Lamarcus would probably be fine if teamed with Oden and the spacing worked out. But as is, the team lacks physical toughness and Lamarcus does not and will not ever bring that to the table. Meanwhile there are teams like New Jersey who are looking for somebody to open space for Brook Lopez who have been rumored to want to trade Favors, who is almost the exact opposite of Aldridge. He plays almost exclusively in the paint.
I'm with Hasoos. Plus I didn't hear the quote as being 'two weeks, if it ain't better, we blow this shit up asap'. It sounded morel like we'll evaluate in two weeks and if things are clearly bad we'll start looking for deals for younger guys and think about a longer term picture of success since the short term plan left by the prior GM has failed. All of that takes time so no way in hell anything happens two weeks from now even if they commit to major changes. It'll play out over a longer time frame if at all. Also consider that if we want to move Dre or Camby or Pryz that no one may offer us what we think is fair and we may be better off keeping the expirings or non-guaranteeds so in the end nothing may happen at all. So I guess I wasn't surprised there wasn't a thread on this because it doesn't seem to add that much to what's already known. My first triple negative! Does that make it positive?
That depends on what question you are asking. What question are you asking? Because the question I am asking is, how can the team improve its front line toughness and rebounding, which I view as the primary problem right now. The directives that were listed above is that the Blazers would be looking for younger players to strengthen the team. The names that come to mind immediately for me are Favors and Larry Sanders of Milwaukee. Both of these players will be excellent front line players who would bring toughness and size to the front line, and they both primarily play in the paint rather than trying to "post up" 18 feet from the hoop.
If you have such a negative view of his future, who would you compare him to? Some say Bosh, are you saying Sheldon Williams? I will fully admit I have not seen enough of him on the court to form an opinion.
+1 on this. I like Favors. Am intrigued with him as a prospect. I don't care to move LA for him. I look at last night's game,a nd I know it was a brief stretch, but we did alright for a bit with Aldridge at C. Against arguably the best C in the league. Aldridge looked I'd say just as good defending Howard as Joel and Camby did, for the most part. I wonder if part of our evaluation this season lies in seeing if Aldridge can play C for this team in longer stretches. And then maybe you can look to bring in a tougher PF alongside him.
Josh (Portland) Any ideas about Portland's rumored youth movement? John Hollinger (3:08 PM) Look, it makes all kinds of sense to trade Miller + Przybilla and people here were talking about it before the season ... just with an eye toward a very different type of move than they'd be looking at right now. I don't see them rushing into anything, certainly Rich Cho isn't somebody prone to acting rashly ... but I do think Miller is certain to be gone by the deadline, and Przybilla at least 50-50.
