What the Hickson Decision Could Mean to Our Future Roster

In discussing whether or not the Blazers should trade JJ with my father-in-law, I laid it out to him in terms of extremes and what that would mean to the future of the roster (he still didn't bite...), and I thought it was an interesting and eye-opening perspective worth bringing here. While there's obviously plenty of wiggle room for things to happen between the following two extremes, I think it provides some decent insight on the decision...

Extreme #1: All in on J.J. Olshey decides to keep Hickson and lock him up long-term with most of our cap space, resigning himself to the fact that he won't be able to get the C upgrade he's wanting on the open market.

-Keeping JJ past the deadline, the team rallies around each other and makes the playoffs (remember we're talking extremes), but realistically are in over their heads and are bounced 6 games into the first round.
-Our draft pick ends up higher than its current protection and is shipped off to Charlotte.
-The front line we build around is now LMA, JJ and Meyers Leonard, and using what little cap room remains, Olshey picks up a bench scorer.

End Result: The downside is minimal roster improvements, lack of cap flexibility and banking on internal development of a LOT of guys, (not to mention a big investment in a guy who greatly disappointed when financially secure). The upside is roster continuity and cohesion - something very rare in the NBA these days. Ultimately, this doesn't seem like the path to a championship run to me...

Extreme #2: Olshey decides he HAS to trade JJ at the deadline. Knowing about his NTC, Olshey can only target teams with a solid shot at a ring (OKC, MIA, CHI, NYC, SA, LAC) and will be looking for expiring contracts, young/cheap players and picks. The following trades work with the above teams:
OKC w/ the potential of swapping some picks (I'd demand Toronto's guaranteed lotto pick)
CHI Do we have any interest in a high-potential rookie PG to back up Lillard? Who knows. We'd need them to throw in picks here. They also have a TPE of $5M so they could essentially just buy Hickson from us with that, not a ton of potential there...
MIA- nothing works w/ what we'd want
NYC- have a ton of big bodies, don't see a fit there, only player we'd want is Shumpert and don't see NYC giving him up.
SA- don't see a great fit w/ them straight up. We'd likely want Leonard, they have a lot of long term deals we wouldn't want...
LAC- another trade where we'd have to see a pick come back. Olshey would obviously want Bledsoe, but I have a hard time seeing them give him up leading into the playoffs...
EDIT: Hickson's from ATL and they could look to be buyers at the deadline to get into the playoff mix, so perhaps there's a fit there and either of these trades fit what we may be looking for...

So in trading Hickson, ideally we can bring back at least 2 young pieces - a cheap/young player and a pick. On top of that, selling him for cents on our current talent dollar, we'd likely miss out on the playoffs securing our own draft pick this year (adding another player/asset) AND have the ability to play Meyers more, hopefully furthering his development. Heading into the offseason, it's hard to envision us doing much worse with our cap room than a Hickson-level player, either by way of unbalanced trade or FA signing...

So comparing extremes, the important question to ask is, does this make us a title contender (otherwise, what's the point?):
#1 doesn't do much but keep the ship afloat, perhaps adding another bench piece or two.

#2 further develops a nice young piece (Leonard), improves our odds ad adding another cheap asset via the draft (our own pick), and adds another cheap young asset or two or three via a trade...

The talent in this upcoming draft is looking very much more like a brick than a pyramid, so 2 mid-round 1st round picks wouldn't be the worst thing in the world this year...

 

It's well thought out and written. I happen to agree that trading Hickson now is the best course t=for the team to take, but I think you are severely over valuating JJ Hickson. No team is going to give us a top 3-4 pick or a young prospect and a 1st for him. Without Bird rights his value is not that high

I also don't agree that Meyers Leonard is a nice young piece. Stotts really hasn't also in the last few games

 

I think Hickson is mentally checked out of a lot of defensive possessions. I believe that if he signs a decent contract here we will see more and more of that. He seems like a quirky kind of dude and Stotts is on him constantly about bad D.

I say trade him if possible, get what you can, otherwise let him walk and try to develop Leonard.

 

On extreme 2; remember that if hickson is traded before the deadline; he loses his bird rights. So a team like okc or other contenders can't even resign him this offseason because they are all over cap.

What really needs to happen if we are planning on shipping hickson is sign and trade this summer. Then teams over cap can keep him.

 

With the exception of OKC, none of these teams' picks will even be in the teens, so it's not like they're giving up a ton with the pick. Also most of the cheap/young players I included are developmental/end of the bench type of guys... The idea, obviously, being that whoever trades for him would be hoping he would be that added dynamic to be enough to put them over the top. I don't think a lowish pick and a young player who's not getting burn is all that much to ask from a team that is convinced that he could make the difference in their title run.

I'd be really surprised if any team that talks to Olshey about JJ is doing so with anything other than this year in mind...

 

Definitely another option, but that definitely risks losing our lotto pick as well as valuable developmental time for guys like Freeland, Claver, and most importantly, Leonard.

 

There's a third option: letting him walk at season's end and trying to take that cap space to get players that fit a little better - defensive minded big, a 2 guard who can score off the bounce and a competent backup point guard top the list of needs. Those needs might be worked out with trades into that capspace or signing guys outright.

I bring this up because I find option 1 unpalatable and I think option 2 is incredibly unlikely to happen before the deadline, especially since he can veto a trade and because his contract is about to expire anyway.

 

Option 2 wouldn't work for that reason though. Why would a team like OKC get rid of any value for a mid season rental? Even if they wanted to keep him, they really couldn't. They can't even sign and trade him because they will be over cap.

Hickson would most likely veto any trade involving a rebuilding team in lotto hell. There really isn't any reason for him to accept a move like that. Also, he is getting a lot of burn in Portland and putting up great numbers because we are so thin. What better place can he showcase his talent for contract than Portland?

 

And that's why it's a long-shot he'll be traded.

 

I think that's the most likely scenario. The way JJ's playing, he's pretty well priced himself out of the Blazers' equation because he's not a great fit at C and we can't afford that much money for a backup PF. I am seeing occasional flashes out of Barton that make me wonder if he would be okay as the 2G backup. If so, then having $13M or so to spend on a C and a backup PG is definitely do-able.

 

I agree with you. I would see more Matthews being traded than Hickson. Not because we want to use Matthews; but Hickson is basically untradeable until at least this off-season. At least with Matthews, you have a multi-year player that has good value.

BTW... I don't think we should trade Matthews btw.

 

Very doable actually. You could offer the center 11-12 mil per and the back-up PG/SG combo 2.5 mil per and still have 1.5 mil to offer other role players that may help our team.

 

They'd give up value for the rental if they felt his rebounding was a valuable piece for their stretch run, and that it might help them win a title.

 

I think Barton will be a valuable guy off the bench, but he needs more time. Probably gonna be slow developing like Leonard but may be worth the wait.

 

Such as?

 

Honestly, we'd be lucky to get a second round pick and an expiring mid-level contract for Hickson. He's definitely worth more than that in terms of raw production, but because of his circumstances the Blazers have almost no leverage in a deal.

 

How about offering a back loaded contract to Hickson? Maybe 6 mil first year, 7 second and 8 third? Then you could offer 6-7 million for a Reddick and use MID MLE of 2.5 grabbing a solid role player?

 

Reddick would be nice, but really that team would have all of the defensive issues it currently has with the added downside that all of the team's cap flexibility evaporates for quite awhile without it being good enough to contend.

Personally I think the best avenue is going to be signing a wing and then trying to do an unbalanced trade for the defensive minded big man that they can play next to Aldridge