Hmmm. Id like a bit more of a proven commodity. Not that Im not willing tpo give up Crabbe. I would rather give Crabbe and another player or two for a more proven defender. But your question is valid because Noel is probably the only realistic guy out there for us. We aren't getting Whiteside in a trade without gutting the team. Same with a Drummond or an AD, so with that said? Yes, I would. It would help our cap as well.
so I'm confused... you're saying that I'm not familiar with Rasheed's history or is it that he's a substantially worse person then multiple drunk driver/woman beater Rod Strictland who he was traded for? Regardless, this hypothetical Cousins trade is ridiculously lopsided in talent being swapped and again, no team is going to trade a dominant player within the conference so why even split hairs about it? STOMP
I'm just saying that sometimes players get a reputation as a big enough a-hole that it damages their value around the league and sometimes franchises dump such players at clearance prices to start fresh. Rasheed was an example. Zach was also an example. There are lots of examples in league history. Is Cousins at that point yet? Probably not, but he's got a growing list of dumb moves on his resume.
I think your claims of why Wallace was traded are dubious at best. Rasheed was traded after his rookie season to Portland. On that Bullets team were a couple of 22 year old PFs named Chris Webber and Juwan Howard, while their starting PG was Brent Price. Rod Strictland was in his prime and an established stud. This was no dump of talent but rather trading surplus at a position for talent at a position of dire need. Cousins is one of the elite talents in the league producing stats at levels Sheed never approached at any point of his All Star career. If DC is to be traded it will be for a King's ransom (intentional pun, 5 yards) as I'm sure there will be a big bidding war if he's on the block. Portland would have to sweeten their offer substantially to even be in the conversation, and even then I'm sure they'd much rather send him to the East if trade offers are relatively equal. I understand wishful thinking, but anyone thinking this has a chance of happening should take off the homer glasses. STOMP
DeMarcus Cousins is like a wild Mustang that isn't broken yet...he'll rub you against the fence and buck you off if he can....the real question is...do the Blazers have a bona fide Horse Whisperer to break him....if they do, he's a champion
I wasn't referring to the trade to acquire Wallace, I was referring to the trade shipping his ass to Atlanta after he'd worn out his welcome here. The Blazers got Shareef, Ratliff, and Dickau in exchange for Sheed. Those guys were nice players, but nowhere near the talent that Sheed was at the time. Sheed played exactly one game for the Hawks before they sent him to Detroit in a salary dump. Had Sheed not been the malcontent hothead that he became towards the end of his time here, pure basketball talent should have returned a better player than the Blazers ended up with. But, yeah, Cousins is younger and a stud and the Kings would want more than the Blazers are likely going to want to offer.
funny... when the deal that shipped Wallace out of Portland went down, it was near universally hailed as a tremendous haul of talent for Portland in this very forum community. Pretty sure you were here right? Maybe you recall that I was pretty much the only voice who weighed in dissent saying Nash got fleeced? While the board reveled in the trade calling Ratliff & SAR All Stars who were going to lead Portland to the playoffs, I called them an oft injured one trick pony on the wrong side of 30 (TR) & a redundant talent to Zach (SAR) who was a terrible fit with what was in place. When Wallace was traded again the next day to Detroit, I stated that was the salary space clearing+1st round picks/turn the page deal to take if you had to move him if he'd indicated privately he wasn't going to resign. Thats been revealed by Wallace to be exactly what happened behind the scenes. I'd also taken a very lonely stance over Nash trading down to acquire Martell & Jack, & passing on the opportunity to draft Chris Paul. Nash justified that move because Telfair (who he'd drafted the year prior) was so going to be so awesome. Again the board loved that move, I hated it saying ST had no jumper to spread the D. The board also overwhelmingly loved it when he maxed out Theo, while again I shook my head siting his age & injury history. While beloved for answering fans emails, Nash made one horrible move after another which I'm guessing wasn't endearing him to the veterans who could see the writing on the wall. While not talking to the PDX press Bozos certainly earned Sheed a daily thrashing in the O, what moved him out of town was him indicating he was leaving the upcoming offseason. "Worn out his welcome here" is revisionist history, Nash actively driving the team into the ditch while this board applauded was reality. I don't think the judgement of the worst GM in the history of the franchise holds much water in the point you're trying to make that he should have garnered more in return and trying to equate his situation to DMC's. With the salary cap constrictions at the time & his relatively huge salary, not many teams could put together reasonable packages for Sheed and fewer still could do so and still have winning on the horizon to entice him to resign. An opportunity to win is what RW has since indicated he was looking for then. With the salary cap going way way up recently and the current CBA caps on max salaries, most teams have the space to max out an elite talent like Cousins without gutting their rosters. Yes they are/were both hotheads, but very different dynamics between the two situations. STOMP
Wow. I think I hit your long-standing Rasheed Wallace nerve. Yes, on reflection I remember that you were always against trading Wallace and that you thought that Nash got fleeced. I don't want to dive into that quagmire again except to say that I've always been of the opinion that Nash had little choice but to move Rasheed. The same dynamic that you talk about as Atlanta's reason for moving him immediately, his desire to play on a championship contender and not being willing to re-sign with a non-contender, were in play in Portland as well. IMO, the Sheed defenders always underplayed the "Jail Blazers" dynamic and just passed it off as a vendetta by the Oregonian. To this day, any talk around the country about the Blazers' history brings up that era and that nickname. I suspect that the directive to move Wallace came from PA. You've seen how he went all-in on character guys this summer. I think the opposite was true at the end of the Wallace-era. Could Nash have gotten more for Wallace? Maybe, but it was definitely a buyer's market on the guy. I've always been of the opinion that had Wallace not been such a jackass, the Blazers either would have retained him or they would have been able to move him for better players. Sheed shafted us fans and we ended up with several years of crappy basketball as a result. You, obviously won't agree with, but I guess at this point it doesn't really matter. I didn't intend to say that Cousins and Wallace are the same situations. I was just pointing out that there are sometimes situations beyond basketball talent that cause teams to make moves and sometimes the return the team nets is less than what you'd otherwise expect. Cousins actions on and off the court have probably tainted his reputation a bit, but probably not to the degree that Wallace had hit by the end of his tenure in Portland. He does have the ending contract issue and that will be a concern for the Kings, if they think he won't re-sign, and for any team that might make an offer for him. Given the right situation, I wouldn't mind seeing the Blazers take a gamble on him. Better teammates around him and a winning situation could make him happier and more successful. I doubt that the Kings would be interested in a deal with a Western Conference team and I doubt that an offer of CJ and, say Plumlee would get their attention, but stranger things have happened in the NBA.
that was my long-standing John Nash nerve. Every move he made was the wrong one including that trade where backed into a corner and forced to make a move he should have taken Detroit's offer. My point was basing any overarching NBA trend insights on one of his moves is a bad idea. GM-ing the Blazers from playoffs to their worst record post expansion period at their very being in just 3 years, what astounds me the most is that posters still defend him. STOMP
I'd agree that Nash indisputably made the Blazers worse. I don't have any reason to defend him, but I do think there's probably more backstory than we fans are aware of. Taking over after the Whitsitt era was a no-win situation and I suspect Paul Allen and the Vulcans played a big part in giving Nash his marching orders. Ancient history at this point.
of course there is, as there always is. I feel I know more then enough to pass judgement on his decisions though. I didn't like them when he made them and they looked worse and worse as time passed. STOMP
The real question is whether Philly would do Noel for Crabbe, and its very likely a no from their end - we IMO would have to add a pick at least. Keep in mind Crabbe is a 21 mil per yr contract with the trade kicker so he probably is a "negative" contract
