Blazers eyeing Eddy Curry?

for that matter, he has a player option for next year as well, at 10.5 million. not that he will excercise either one, but yeah...

 

I'll put it this way. If the Blazers traded for Eddie Curry I would probably give up on them right now.

 

Maybe they do a Steve Francis and get Lee with Curry and waive Curry?

 

11 million is a helluva lot of money for an out of shape worthless layabout.

 

If Curry were the cost of doing business, we would basically be trading our cap space for David Lee.

Curry, the player, would be irrelevant. He could be cut or told not to bother coming to practice/games, etc. I am certain Portland has no interest in Curry the player. If there is any truth to this, I can only imagine that Pritchard doesn't see being able to get anything else for the LaFrentzian chunk of cap space, so is willing to spend it to acquire Lee. Allen then absorbs Curry's black hole contract and only Lee ever suits up for Portland. Curry is the teams 15th man til his contract expires (or he's waived).

 

Huh - according to this site you're right. I got my info off the ESPN Draft Machine. What's odd is that according to the site above both Jeffries and Curry have player options for '10-11, and in both cases that would be the last year of their contracts, while the Draft Machine said Jeffries had a year more on his contract than Curry. I guess if Curry does have that extra year then NY trading him makes sense, because there's no way he doesn't pick that option up.

 

...and it also notes that Curry has a trade kicker...

 

From John Hollinger's "Inside Gems" article today:

I don't always agree with everything the bald statistician has to say, but this rang pretty true for me.

 

Yeah, but how much interest did Blazers have in Steve Francis . . . and they traded for him.

I'm surprised Hollinger didn't put the two rumors together and discuss if that trade makes any sense. Lee and Curry for Raef and young prospect.

For the record . . . I'm not in love with Lee and all, I just figure if KP is really pursuing Lee, Curry might be the answer without the Blazers giving up too much of their potential.

 

That doesn't make any sense. Portland isn't going to both take on an awful contract and give up a young prospect for what could well be a half-season rental and, at best, a long-term backup.

The very most I could see is something like Lee and Curry for LaFrentz and Frye. They downgrade a lot from Lee to Frye, but they get rid of the Curry deal.

 

But isn't Lee a restricted free agent . . . giving the Blazers an option to match.

Not many teams out there can offer Lee more than the MLE. In fact it was Hollinger who said on the radio yesterday that if the Blazers can get Lee without giving up one of the big three, it would be a steal.

But I see you're point, maybe that is too much of a gamble to take given that they would be forced to take on Curry's huge contract.

 

Exactly. So if Portland really wanted Lee, why not just go after him in the off season and sacrifice no assets?

 

Because the Knicks can match the Blazer offer. The Blazers would have to offer way over value just to get the Knicks to let him go. I'm not sure with Miles back on the books that the Blazers would have enough cap space to offer more then the Knicks could match.

 

You guys realize we have contract info here, right?

I update it pretty frequently, so drop me a line if I miss something or have it wrong. Or with (constructive) criticism.

 

And yeah... I don't know that they'd necessarily waive Curry if they traded for him to get Lee, but I see no earthly reason why they'd want him either.

 

I guess if a team really wants Lee, it is best to trade for him and acquire his bird rights. But that doesn't prevent another team from giving a high-ball offer forcing the team that gave up talent to acquire Lee also have to overpay him.

If we're going to overpay for a "backup" PF, I'd rather get Paul Milsap. Though I think it's more likely he stays in Utah, and Boozer goes somewhere like Miami.

 

Thanks for the info . . . good stuff

 

Lee can always choose to accept the qualifying offer and leave the following year as a UFA, making him a 1.5 year rental. So there is risk.

Ultimately, trading for a good player who can't be a starter on the team seems a potential problem, especially when the player can be a free agent soon. That said, maybe it would work out and he'd accept a long-term reserve role. Then we'd still be in the position of trading away all our cap space and a young player (in your proposal) for a backup player. Lee may be quite a good player (I like him) but how much impact will he make as Aldridge's backup?