I don't know what Hickson has been doing, but it seems his work ethic and hustle is really rubbing off on Aldridge. I also noticed that they really click with each other. They are constantly communicating with each other and are understanding position for helping the other be in the best possible position for the rebound. Now I've also seen Aldridge rub off on Hickson on the offensive end. Hickson seems even more agressive on the offensive end, and he isn't rushing his shots like I remembered him doing last season and the start of this season. He is taking his time on fakes and up and unders to get the best possible shot. Also, if he is surrounded, he is learning to pass out instead of trying to score on a impossible attempt. I know most of you agree that we should keep Hickson now, but I think we will see just how important his hustle and hard work does for this team. He has become our new "Brian Grant". Remember Grant was somewhat of an undersized PF at 6'9"; but he played much like a strong PF. And putting things really into perspective. Aldridge and Hickson this year combine for: 33.1 PPG, 20 rebounds, 2.1 blocks, 3.5 assists, and 1.2 steals. That's a pretty sick front court!
My fear with Hickson is that he may be a bit of a quirky dude mentally. He seems to disappear emotionally sometimes in games and there is probably widespread caution around the league that when /if he signs a decent multi-year contract, it will be that Hickson that shows up most nights, not the hustle guy.
Actually, if Portland were smart, they'd trade Hickson and filler to a team for a player making around that for a few more years, then renounce everyone this off season and have 14-15 under the cap. Hickson and a MLE player do not make this a championship caliber team. But, for shits and giggles, trading Hickson to a team that needs some front court scoring and rebounding to get it over the top for a young player and a pick makes sense. Then go out with your 15 mm in cap room and sign a difference maker or add two 7-8 mm guys
Nah I disagree man. And to be frank, the whole "Going young" thing is still fine with Hickson, since he's just as young as everyone else. Chemistry is a big concern and it seems Aldridge and Hickson have it.
also, we're currently projected to have roughly 13 or so in space. Trading hickson for someone making the same then limits us to 9 million or so in space. Is Hickson and MLE guy worse than traded guy and 9 million player?
And I don't get it MM. I mean you talk about this pick or player making the same amount and there is a huge whole. For one, if you are talking about a team wanting to get over the hump and add Hickson would mean that pick is gonna be a very late first rounder. Then our pick will be around 12-14 anyway. Then there would be concern with chemistry on this new player you suppose we get in return. I also suspect that player we get in return would be much older; which contridicts your need to get younger. Fact is, Hickson and an MLE player may not get us into contention next season, but your scenario doesn't get us there either. And thinking we would get some miraculous diamond in the rough in this summer's draft is more of a gamble. The sure bet is to go with what is working. Find a vet MLE player that can fill some of the holes that we had this year and go strong into next. Keeping the core together only makes us better going into next season. And we seem to forget just how young Batum, Leanord and Lillard are. They have an opportunity to become much much better; which only increases our chance of contention.
Keep Hickson and bring him off the bench in case we luck into a real center*. He's playing out of his mind and his hustle really does rub off on everyone around him. *Not likely.
I like it. Trade Hickson for an expiring contract and draft pick(s). Go after a big name in the summer (Pek). The bench will start to fill up with guys who want to be here because the Blazers are a top team. Also, hopefully a few players off this year's bench will develop and contribute next year.
No we need to trade Hickson asap he is scoring, rebounding, defending and playing his azz off, we can't have that! Next thing you know we will be winning close games and if we're not careful we might even make the playoffs. He's been our most consistent player are you idiots out of your minds? I can't believe all this nutjob talk about trading Hickson. We finally luck out and bring in a guy that can do all the things the team needs and some yahoo's want to trad him. Incredible!
And it really seems like he is happy in Portland. I just don't get it sometimes. We get a player that wants to be here and performing out of his mind, only to want to trade him off for some unrealistic try at some big named free-agent.
No we need to trade Hickson asap he is scoring, rebounding, defending and playing his azz off, we can't have that! Next thing you know we will be winning close games and if we're not careful we might even make the playoffs. He's been our most consistent player are you idiots out of your minds? I can't believe all this nutjob talk about trading Hickson. We finally luck out and bring in a guy that can do all the things the team needs and some yahoo's want to trad him. Incredible!
Well that is a nice short term way to look at it. Who cares what his contract status is, what will happen this summer, what a salary cap is or what flexibility the Blazers have with Hickson Forget all that, that doesn't matter. All that matters is we finally lucked out with Hickson (because Lillard and Batum don't count). Hickson is playing well, don't trade him. Trade the players that aren't playing well . . . it is so simple!
Ya, I was looking earlier, and I think teams like Indiana, Philly, Boston, GS, , Minny, LAL would all like to add a player like Hickson. Philly to get into the playoffs, and the others to give them a shot at winning
The cap should be around 60 mm. Giving us 15 mm if we renounce everyone including Hickson. Hickson's cap hold will be 8 mm, leaving us with around 7 mm to sign someone. Trading Hickson to a team for a player making 4-5 mm would not only give us that layer, but also still keep us around 10-11 mm in cap space
Oh goodie, another fan who only looks at the basic stats. But he scores, and rebounds, and, and ,and Now look what the guys Hickson guards are doing to us. It's a virtual wash. Hickson has been a great addition, but giving him the 8 mm or so he will command next off season is foolish. Why not trade him and get an asset or two rather than let him walk for nothing?
I actually just read that earlier, that projection looks like cap might go up to 60, so that does change it a little, sorry. I still like Hickson's hustle off the bench for us, provided someone wasn't going to give him a foolish contract. If we were able to get him at 6-7, I'd be happy with that deal, and then having 9 million left to spend on someone else. Jack, Redick, basically, a 1/2. As for the teams you mention, I do agree that a lot of playoff teams would likely be intrigued by him. I don't know about Minnesota. I also don't kno about LA, and how he'd fit with Dwight. I think Boston is a definite possibility. Indiana as well. GS has Landry off the bench for them. Hickson was excited about the possibility of going there last season, apparently. That's the biggest issue, IMO, is his ability to veto any trade. I also struggle with a few of those teams finding a player I'd actually want to get in return.
