Twitter rumor - Blazers to deal F Gerald Wallace for picks

The first rule of Gerald Wallace is you don't talk about Gerald Wallace (especially trading him)!!

 

Or keep them both. I really don't see the need to trade any of these guys. I love our team right now. (wait till after a loss and my mind may change)

 

This I agree with 100%. I think we are just a healthy oden away from contention.

 

Nah, not really. Don't get me wrong I'm happy to have him and I've liked his game for a long time, but given his age and injury history I'd part with him for the right price -- If he keeps it up he might even be worth a good player and some picks!

To be clear, I'm thinking long-term here, not what he provides to the win-loss column right now.

 

Trade. Value.

 

Yes, let's trade Gerald Wallace who is much better than Batum, so we can go ahead and overpay Batum next year.

Overpaying role players is going to hurt teams in this new CBA. Giving 43 million to Afflalo was idiotic of the Nuggets, I'm afraid we will do the same with Batum.

 

I just can't imagine what kind of player we could get for Wallace. Who wants him? A team that is good that thinks he can put them over the top. But that team will not have a good draft pick, and I doubt that they would part with anyone who is good enough that we could build around.

So I say enjoy watching this guy play. For all we know he could keep it up for another 3 years.

 

3 years(including this one) is a safe bet

You only trade Wallace in a package if he brings back a star or a younger player of equal value(and who exactly would do that).

If not, lolllllllllllllll

 

+1. I think we're there already. Especially with our roster, in a short, compressed season. We really have a good overall balance. We get 1-2 guys to really step above expectations, and we could kill it, especially if we're striding in April. Even more so if we get a healthy Oden for the late stretch.

Happens every year in MLB and NFL. Blazers are in a good position, I believe.

 

To tell the truth, although I never posted about it, I was leaning more towards your point of view when this thread was beginning. However, the more I think about it, I really think the Blazers might have something special right now and looking to the future right now might just be the wrong move. Of course, for the right package, any player is available, but for what I would assume most teams would be offering, I just think that GW in this shortened season could very well be the energy (and talent) guy needed to keep this team fueled and headed towards a great season.

 

multi-team trades can solve this dilemma.

 

You might be right, I guess we'll have a much clearer picture heading into the trade deadline.

 

Wallace is helping but Felton is really hurting my trade package for Rondo.

Le'Sigh.

 

So you trade away a great player who is in his prime, for a draft pick. Then you HOPE that player one day becomes as good as Wallace (which will most likely not happen). Then what do you do once that player enters his prime? Trade him for a younger pick, because he won't play forever?

If you are constantly preparing for the future, and sacrifice for the present, you could be constantly chasing wins. Like maybe we shouldn't have signed Thomas/Crawford and let our rookies stink it up out there to develop them "for the future". I think you should only do that if you totally suck anyway and are not putting a good product on the court. But I think it's better to try and put the best team possible on the court each year.

 

I think Felton is playing better than his stat line indicates. He's missing some shots that I"m sure he'll start putting down later in the year.

 

It's why Rich Cho was fired. Loser mentality.

 

I think the original trade proposal was Wallace for 4 picks ... that would have been a lot of liquidity for a team with a pretty bleak outlook at center in about 6 months. Regardless it didn't happen and it may or may not be revisited so enjoy GW while you have him, but don't hold on too tightly.

 

Looks like they would have been in the lower part of the 1st round too. Not even lotto picks. Quality big men are the first ones taken. Would we be able to get anyone better than Joel Freeland (who we'll bring over next year).

 

I really don't want to get dragged back into the minutiae of this argument again and rehash things too much, but what I mean by "liquidity" is that those just become assets that don't necessarily represent players you ever draft. Since there are no details to work with it's hard to project how exactly they can be combined in trades, but it's possible you can move up in the draft if you can dangle multiple lower picks, or maybe you trade a player and pick(s) for a big man ... it's just flexibility.