If you were GM, what would you require from Houston for Aldridge?

Oh man.... we'd lose so many games

 

Exactly

 

I don't get this notion of if we trade LA, we go into the tank. If we can pull Asik/Smith or Noah, or a decent combo of players, we won't be anywhere different from where we'd be with LA still here. If we can get value and still compete, I'm down for an LA trade.

I have no faith in LA as a true #1 option on a contending team anyway. It's not like Lebron leaving CLE, where once he leaves, you have to tank to rebuild. Look at what DEN did when they traded Melo. They got a whole bunch of decent talent (+ Felton) and still kept making the playoffs. And they didn't get any further with Melo.

 

Could you imagine if we landed wiggins with our pick, then drafted like 7 or 8 from the pick we obtained, then had over 20 mil in cap space? That would instantly turn things around.

 

This was my list as well, but I'd aske for Parsons instead of the draft pick.

So:

Asik
Monteijunas
Jones
Parsons

... Monteijunas would be a steal, has a bright future

 

A towel, to throw it in..

 

I really like Motiejunas. He looked pretty good in SL last year, but Houston didn't give him much burn so there must be something wrong.

 

Not sure he fit real well with what they did. More of an outside shooter than post presence at this point. I felt like he started getting more minutes the last half of the season. He's got tremendous hands and footwork for a big guy.

 

I agree. That move he busted on Leonard was impressive. Made him look like a child.

 

If LaMarcus walks for “nothing” we will save almost $20 million in cap room. If we strike out with trades and he enters free agency appearing destine to leave for nothing there is still a chance of him not being able to find a team that has an enticing combo of a contending roster, cap room and a city he prefers. Then he might change his mind and decide a Portland team is the best fit of the those three criteria.

To get the most in these situations you have to be willing to lose it all. If we want to hold out for the best Aldridge deal we need to be willing to not pull the trigger. Anytime you decide to absolutely trade a player away or absolutely bring a player in you limit your options.

The year before the Heat formed the big 3 they had Dwayne Wade and nothing else. They were begging him to sign an extension all season and Wade refused. Miami has not historically been a city that attracted big name free agents. Miami could have traded Wade for less value to avoid the chance of losing him for nothing. Wade visited with the Bulls at the start of free agency, Wade is from Chicago and the Bulls had a great roster with Deng, Noah and Derrick Rose.

Miami took the risk of losing Wade for nothing, if he left they would’ve had zero assets on that roster. They took a gamble and won. I’d rather see the Blazers take a similar risk with LaMarcus, stare his looming free agency down straight in the face and don’t flinch an eyelash. Take the risk of losing him for nothing, that is better than making a move just to avoid a failure. Take a chance of striking out to get a chance of hitting more than a single. A single is fine for drafts and mid level free agent signings. For All-star roster moves we should go big or bust.

 

This is Portland man. Cap space is only valuable if free agents want to sign with you. We aren't Miami, New York, or Los Angeles. Miami is much more attractive to a young, black free agent than Portland is. We will only build a contender through the draft and trades. We aren't signing a superstar. Name the last superstar player that publicly said they wanted to play in Portland? Chris Paul, maybe?

 

Lakers will have the resources, desirable location and ability to land free talent when his contract is up.

And they will probably suck this season and next; so they will have good draft picks.

 

I wouldn't trade Aldridge at all.

 

Then is he truly wants to leave; be prepared to see him in a laker uni.

 

I think he'll end up in Dallas.

 

Aldridge is in his prime now, not two years from now. By that time he'll be a relatively depreciating asset....unless the lakers have other stars at that immediate moment, its a no-go.

 

Based on houston's roster, I wouldn't trade him there at all. There's nothing of lasting value on that roster.

 

I think Aldridge will be effective into his thirties. He's a finesse guy. He's basically Tim Duncan light, without the great defense.

 

Yeah, but I doubt he'll be better than he will be in the next two years. He'll still be good, but not as good.