I said will be. Haven't seen anyone seriously criticize him because they can't. Wait until he has a few bad games. Same thing happened with Roy. No one denied Roy wasn't a good player, they used his style to be bad for our future.
What do you expect to get in exchange for Wallace? Some of you still seem to be clinging to the stupid "blow it up" nonsense. That's not going to happen, and this team is pretty damn good right now, with Oden hopefully coming along in a month or so.
No quicker, easier way out of a disagreement when you know you can't win... Quick cop-out and point your finger at someone else.
How many players that produce largely off their athleticism and energy play at a high level into their 30s? I can't think of any. Plus I think Wallace came out as a Freshman, so he's had a long NBA career as it is. I think the smart move, as painful as it may be, is to move him if the offer is really good. But we don't really have a history of making short-term painful, smart moves. I wouldn't be surprised if he's resigned and eats a bunch of our would-be cap room. The justification will be he's better than any free agent we could pick up.
I think people have different expectations for Wallace. He's a hustle guy. He fills up a box score and people love him for it. He's not a guy who demands the ball or takes the big shot. That was Roy and with that kind of responsibility comes the criticisms that go with it.
And that more than half of that "pretty damn good" team is going to be going into free agency this summer. Wallace, Batum, Crawford, Felton, Camby, Thomas, etc etc etc. Only like two or three guys are under contract after this season. Would you rather deal Wallace or end up with nothing? Or better yet, would you rather extend Wallace for a hefty contract and see him start to slowly decay as Nik has been discussing?
There's no need to criticize Wallace even when he does fall back to earth a little bit, because his first two games haven't done anything to alter my opinion of his game -- which I like quite a lot -- It's the future version of Wallace in about 2 years that I really worry about. My only stance is that the team should be open to moving him before he really gets into his decline and his value/production fall off. If he were 25 or 26 I wouldn't be having this conversation with you; all you'd get out of me is, "fuck trading Wallace, he's clearly either our first or second best player and the heart and soul of this team." As with most things in life, timing matters.
Not many players do, but Wallace (and his career) is against the norm: 1.) He's not just highly athletic, he's a physical specimen. 2.) If you look at MP over his career, this is really only his 8th season of full play. (Kobe, a comparable all-out charger, is in his 14th year of high minutes) 3.) G-Wall has never played for a good team, he's only logged serious minutes in 2 playoff series's. One being with the Blazers. That said, he should have a few solid years left in the tank. AND, I'm willing to bet he'll take a lower contract to play for the contending Blazers.
This is a fantastic argument. Marion's production fell the year he was moved from PHO to MIA - but if we see the mid-year trade before/after, you will see that his production in MIA amd up to this year stayed the same as it was after moving from Nash for - so the smaller production is really more a "away from Nash" argument (since we can see the same year with and without Nash). On the other hand, Marion already played as many minutes as Gerald played so far in his career, 2 years before that trade. I think that at this point - unless a catastrophic injury happens (something that can not be out of the question for a Portland player) - we can assume that Gerald has 3 years or so of his current production - simply because of what we have seen from other uber-athletic players in his position (interchangeable 3/4) and given the fact that he actually has not logged as many minutes as these players. There is always a risk/reward with any player - but I suspect that offering Wallace a 2-3 years extension at his current salary (or slightly less) would be a very good investment for Portland. I agree. No need to pull that itchy trade finger just yet because of what might happen. You take risks to get to that next level - Garnett was 31 when he was traded to Boston and he is a pretty physical player... - Boston took that risk and it worked for them. The Blazers should do the same with Wallace, imho.
I'll grant that Wallace hasn't exactly racked up the career minutes that some guys have, but he's also missed a lot of games due to injury. Even if you remove his first three years where he didn't start, he's still averaging just 59 games per year.
