I think they'd trade him to anyone who wants him just for the first 2 (rather than get nothing next year), and we've got nobody I'm all that attached to.
Funny guy, you are. Nets were offering Brook Lopez, Marshon Brooks, and 3 draft picks. That's two talented young players, plus cap relief--exactly what you said Orlando would trade Howard for. They didn't. If they wouldn't accept that package, there's no way they'd take anything we'd offer.
This thread makes me ask 2 questions: 1. Of the 30 teams, we are (were) in about the top 5 for cap space available for signings. How much of that will be used only on minor players, how much on a big time star, and how much will be wasted and not used? According to the Blazers Edge article cited here a week ago, even if we had used none this summer, only about half would be available next summer. It's complicated and doesn't simply carry over. It's this summer or never to use this temporary advantage that we have. 2. Each summer, the early July signings get even more frenzied than the previous summer. Is this good, or could the rules be changed to spread them out over a longer time, allowing less of an emergency feeling?
I don't know what the answer is jlprk, but I am curious to see if the year that the CBA's super punitive tax kicks in, changes behavior.
A team gets to make an offer to only one really good player, which is almost always matched. If new rules could slow the process, we could get more than one chance to use this large cap space we have. Maris' tick...tick pressure is real and I wish it weren't.
I'm not sure what stars the Blazers lost. The only star players who moved were Steve Nash and Ray Allen, both at the tail ends of their careers, hoping to chase a ring. Oshley already made it clear the Blazers are not going to pursue aging stars. Dwight Howard is jerking around 3 or 4 teams. Deron Williams decided to stay put, so did Tim Duncan, not that there was ever any doubt. Maybe the Blazers should have gone after Jarrett Jack? So easy to carp. Let's hear what they SHOULD have done. Right, of course, Whitsitt would have found a way to get Nash, Duncan, Howard, Allen, Williams and win as many championships as he already has ... zero.
Nash and Allen both signed for 3 years, which is nothing to sneeze. In those 3 years Nash will produce far better than any point guard Portland has ever had at any time in it's 4+ decade history. At 9 mil a year. Probably the best deal of the century so far for PG's. Allen signed at $3 mil a year, and will out-produce anyone we have coming off the bench at much higher salaries. Nash will most likely sign another contract when this one expires and be a top PG well into his late 40's. For what we're willing to pay Batum we could have had both of them. Most likely Whitsitt would have targeted Nash and Howard, filling the 2 most obvious persistent needs we've been without since, well, since Bob Whitsitt was GM. Nash has been saying for 2 years he'd be interested in playing here, and a 5 year contract would have sealed the deal. Howard will have to go wherever he is traded. Duncan and Williams stayed put simply because they received no better offers. GM's these days have no sales skills. They don't sell the franchise or city to the player, they simply offer as much money as their owner will let them and cross their fingers. They have no idea what motivates a player to choose where he will play and where his kids will go to school... BRING BACK BOB!
You can argue Steve Nash, at this moment, is better than any point guard on the Blazers and that is no doubt correct, although whether that will be true in 3 years is guesswork. My point was that the Blazers already made it clear they were NOT going after aging stars, so their not chasing Nash is not a suprise. You can disagree, but you can hardly claim some sort of betrayal. Duncan probably did not get other offers because he's always said he's a Spur for life. And Williams made little attempt to test the market. It's one thing to disagree with this or that move the team makes, hell, we all do. My inability to take you seriously, Maris, is that you scorn EVERY move they make. Everyone they draft sucks, everyone for whom they trade sucks, every free agent they sign sucks, every coaching candidate sucks. And everyone whom they don't draft, sign, trade for or hire is a sure future hall of famer. Even Monia, Khyrapa, Telfair et al. I honestly can't remember, maybe it's happened but I sure can't recall, any instance post Whitsitt when you said "good move, Blazers" or even "I'll wait and see and evaluate based on what happens". I mean, some people spend their whole lives unable to get over the boyfriend/girlfriend/spouse they broke up with. Just keep hoping he/she/they will come back. And everyone else in the world gets compared unfavorably to the one who left. But at a certain time you just have to wake up and realize Bob Whitsitt is not coming back. So just evaluate moves on their merit and don't hate every one just because someone other than Whitsitt made them.
I have never understood the ignore feature. If you have to ignore people because they make you that upset on the internet, how do you handle real life? Plus, you miss out on pure comedy.
Pure nonsense. I have been an avid fan and enthusiastic supporter of many, many moves the team has made, and been ridiculed for it here by so-called fans. Players and personnel I applauded the Blazers for acquiring post-Whitsitt include Sergio, Rudy, Viktor K., Batum, Camby, Flynn, Wes, Travis, Sergei M., Oden, Joel P., Ha, Ime U., Gerald Wallace, Martell, Blake and KP. Personnel I came to appreciate after initial reluctance included Andre Miller and Nate McMillan. Recent personnel they've reportedly pursued that pleased me include Sloan and Hibbert. As for the absurdity of referring to Nash as an "aging" player, the 2-time NBA MVP finished 9th in the MVP voting this year (that's 9th out of 478 players). http://www.nba.com/playerfile/steve_nash/career_stats.html
You say the only 5 players worth pursuing are your list of 5. Then why did so many teams go after players you didn't list? They seem to disagree with you. What they should have done is to have gone after the best player they would have succeeded in getting. Blazers management surmised that it was Hibbert, and they were wrong. You say, "It's alright, we all make mistakes and blow a one-time cap advantage, no problem."
You say that since Olshey announced Policy X, that makes Policy X correct. That doesn't properly answer Maris saying that X is an incorrect policy.
