Even if it was about Matthews(idk if it was), Matthews is in the starting lineup now. You can say the Blazers didn't know that would happen but that's exactly the point some people are making here. You don't know what the future holds so giving away free talent for nothing(draft pick doesn't help this season) is a shortsighted move.
Jerryd's value around the league wasn't very high and trying to predict that Roy's knees were going to implode two weeks later isn't very realistic. Plus getting a draft pick is actually the opposite of a short-sighted move.
With everything that has come out about Roy it seems like predicting that his knees would implode seems pretty realistic. I mean, isn't that why people are saying they gave Matthews such a big contract? Getting an unknown draft pick back for Bayless seems pretty short-sighted to me. It had less to do with the pick anyways and more with clearing space for other players and that definitely is short-sighted. Just because you replace him with a rookie means nothing. It's more about why they did it and not what they got in return. They were looking for more minutes for other players, not a draft pick.
You're missing the point. It's not that the team should have predicted Roy's knees "blowing up." Teams in general should know that things change from year to year, things aren't static. Trading a guy because right now he's blocked is a bad idea. That's making a prediction and generally an irrational one: that nothing will change for the next several years. As for his value being low around the league, that argues against making a trade.
His value was also fairly low from the team's perspective (whether that was right or wrong is a different question)
I agree with you on that. I just think the supposed logic of why his value was low with Cho (I'm a part-time poet), that he was blocked and therefore worthless to the team, was suspect. Of course, if the reason the Blazers didn't value him was because they think he's not talented, then that's fine as a reason to trade a player. If that's the case, time will tell as to whether they made the right talent evaluation.
I think they had decided that he wasn't a point guard (a talent based judgement) and that he didn't really have a spot in the rotation (a role based judgement). The trade isn't looking so great with New Orleans early success and the fact the he appears to be finally carving himself out a role with the Raptors, but in terms of why they traded him and the risk-reward calculus they did to come to the conclusion to trade him, I can live with it -- even if it ends up being a "loss" for the Blazers.
If you're right about their thinking, then it still boils down to "He was blocked at the time, so give him away for very little." Essentially, throw talent away to "clean up the roster." This is even if we stipulate that Bayless isn't and never will be able to play point guard. If that's what Cho was thinking in making the trade, I think it's a terrible process. He might get "lucky" and not get burned if Bayless never develops...but that doesn't change the process being poor. And with Roy being hurt (not predictable to this extent, but the fact that changes happen to the roster is predictable), and Bayless showing he can score the ball, it's already looking like a damaging trade for Portland.
I think the gamble is that the Hornets pick had a decent chance of being a top ten draft choice this year ... that doesn't even mean the Blazers intend to keep that draft pick, but it's an asset that can be used in other trades ... we still have to see what the pick turns into before we can totally judge the trade.
Isn't it top-ten protected, though? I agree that the deal can't be entirely judged now. I just don't like the concept of trading a player due to a current roster conflict, especially when the player in question is young and still under team control for a while.
Bayless sucks. I am so glad he's gone. Cho didn't make the decision. McMillan wanted it. Cho was brand new and got the best anyone could for Bayless, known around the league as a failure. You can criticize McMillan for somehow not playing him right (I disagree), but you shouldn't criticize Cho for the decision. You could for what he got for him (I disagree). Anyone can see that Bayless has no position. If he's gotten good stats per minute in limited minutes in 10 games on a bad team in Toronto--big deal, that's their mistake, not ours.
That "bad team in Toronto" is 3 games worse than us. Wouldn't that mean Matthews' is a bad signing as well since he has gotten good stats on a bad team too? Bayless would be helping us a hell of a lot more than Rudy, Johnson, Mills, and maybe even Roy at this point. That pick better be turned into something special, or is was a stupid move to deal it. Supposedly this team was going to compete, so trading away a solid reserve is dumb. And ya, I don't think Cho really had anything to do with his trade. Nate calls most of the shots anyway.
Larry Miller said that the Blazers were aware of Roy's knee problems even when they extended his contract in 2009. I assume somebody told Cho about Roy's knees prior to Cho trading Bayless for a future NBDL player.
The recent rumor here in Portland is that Nate wanted to extend his contract another two years this summer, but was rejected by the team, who may want to move in another direction. Quick (I think) reported that this week on one of the sport shows. Are you basing your bolded statement in fact, or are you just speculating to try and blame Nate for yet another thing?
So, a coach on an expiring contract is calling all of the shots? I find that hard to believe, but if it is true, that is even more troubling in terms of the direction of the franchise, isn't it?
I think part of the reason that Bayless was traded was because Rudy was playing so well in the preseason. Thus, there was no room for Bayless at point guard OR shooting guard. Suddenly, the Blazers shut down trade talks for Rudy (remember Quick's tweet?) and dealt Bayless. Sadly, Rudy hasn't produced SINCE preseason .
It's easier to believe than Bayless fans blaming Cho for making the decision about 2 minutes into his job, having the authority to override the rest of the bureaucracy (including McMillan, you claim) who wanted Bayless to stay. Clearly, the Blazer & Vulcan bureaucracies made the decision, all were on board, and Cho was just the guy who looked for the best deal. It was easy to be unanimous about a good athlete in the wrong sport, with a clueless lack of basketball instincts.
