LA gone before or on draft day

Appreciate all the work you put in. It's a relatively ugly block to read. So there have been 35 ASs in the last 6 years to get to UFA status. Of those, 21 have left there teams as an UFA.

Kirilenko, Artest, Baron Davis, Steve Francis, Elton Brand, Amare, Caron Butler, Boozer, Bynum seems included, though he didn't leave via UFA, Okur, Arenas, Chandler, Deng, Harris Iguodola, Kaman, West, Josh Howard, ......

I guess there's a "trend". Though I don't see many in similar situations, with a team that definitely wanted them back, and were willing to pay them the max, and they just walked because they wanted to play elsewhere. Steve Francis didn't leave NY for nothing. He wa straded here. And was beyond washed up. Guys like him, Okur(??really?)Arenas(They couldn't offer him what he wanted by rule), Kirilenko left during the lockout, Redd signed his 2nd big deal with Milwaukee, left when he was done.

Meh. I guess if your argument is that Aldridge is going to pull a "Michael Redd" or a Gilbert Arenas, but I don't see those situations as anywhere near comparable. Bosh and Lebron are two big ones whose teams likely wanted to keep them, and they left. PHX didn't want Amare back a that price. Utah didn't want Boozer back. I think it becomes a much different "trend" to try to find anyone outside of the big 3 who really fit a similar situation, where they got to UFA, their teams wanted ot keep them, could offer the most money, might offer reasonable chance ot contend, and the player said no and walked for less money/shorter deal in exchange for nothing.

 

The supposed cleveland offer, which we have no clue if it is as we assume, isn't really that great. #1 isn't likely going to be a franchise changer and whoever we would pick will have huge ? We all know this. TT is okay but is more like Hickson then Millsap and 19 is going to most likely be a rotation player at best. Its not a blow your socks off offer but it's not bad.

A few of the questions that should be asked before a good conclusion can be made on the trade is:

What direction does the franchise want to go in

What will it take to keep LA in Portland

Is this the best offer we can get this off season for LA

Can we get a better offer for LA next season or has his value peeked

Ignoring the first three ill just address the last one. I don't think that the cleveland offer is the best Portland can do. LAs game isn't going to change next year and if we put him on the block either at the trade deadline or after the season we will still get great offers so we might as well keep him and see what we can get next season.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

Sounds like you are making the argument FOR trading LaMarcus.

If keeping him and signing him to a Franchise Player SuperMax contract is going to be a bad deal, then trading him now, while he has significant value, and specifically trading him for lottery picks and/or young players is the best thing for the team, according to your post.

 

Yes and no. I think that LMA's value is at it's highest with multiple years left on his contract. With one year, his value decreases. I think Rhals question #3 is the most important one. Is the rumored CLE deal the best we can get. Previously I was not keen on it. But after thinking a while, I've come to like it. Though I do still wonder if we can't get a better deal.
The latest I'd wait to trade LMA in order to maximize the return is the trade deadline - at that point we might get a better offer than the CLE rumor.

 

Thanks for providing this. But it is ignoring a huge part of the analysis:

How many of those free agents left their previous team even though their previous team matched any other offer?

 

Just to throw fuel on the fire:


Brendan Bowers @BowersCLE 2 minutes ago
According to Chad Ford, OKC, MIN & POR "have been the most proactive in trying to get the No. 1 pick" espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/… #Cavs

However, given earlier reports that the Cavs were rebuffed for Aldridge, perhaps the Blazers offered Batum?

 

MN chip is Derrick Williams

OKC's is ....Lamb? Future low firsts?

 

Its kinda sad how weak this draft is that if we traded Batum for the #1 pick I wouldn't even get that excited.

 

What about Leonard + 10 for 1? Certainly Batum + 10 should get you 1 in this draft. But who would you want that bad? Len?

 

I'd be shocked if Leonard+10 was enough for #1. Heck I doubt Leonard+10+our greek+our second rounders+Claver+Barton would be enough for #1 especially with the reports that the Cavs are really overvaluing the #1 pick.

 

Best we could try to offer is 2016 pick. Along with 10, young player(Leonard?).

 

Forget that.

If Neil wants that pick he will have to ship out LMA.

 

We can't trade any additional first round picks with our #10(which has to be traded on draft night) because of that rule were you have to have a draft pick every other year. Since Charlotte owns ours we can't offer a first rounder in the next few years.

 

You can say the next available pick, with the first year right now it can be available being 2016. And it falls under the condition that it has to be 2 years removed from the previously dealt pick.

 

No GM would ever do that.

 

It would be LaMarcus Aldridge for #1, Tristan Thompson or Dion Waiters and Anderson Varejao. I just have a bad feeling about Nerlens Noel.