Twitter rumor - Blazers to deal F Gerald Wallace for picks

Brian,


- How do you know Wallace is not in his prime? Do players magically exit their prime at a certain age? He looks very good to me on both ends of the court. Let his play on the court decide that.

-Who said Batum is chopped liver? And what do you think he has to do with this?

- Wallace could test the FA market, but will he give up 11.5 mil? Portland will have a ton of cap space, and can re-sign him easily.

- Since you're so good at thinking "strategically" look at unrestricted free agents who are better than Wallace who would fit in well in Portland. There are some very old players like Garnett, Duncan, Nash. I really don't see any of those guys signing here...Nash maybe, we don't need to lose Wallace to acquire a top level FA.

-In terms of trading, perhaps we could package him for a nice piece, but this thread is about dealing him for lower end draft picks(which at their positions, would likely give us players who don't pan out, or backups).

- Why are you even brining up Deron and Dwight? Deron wants to be in NJ, he demanded a trade to go there. Dwight wants to be in a big market. Your "strategy" is like dumping a cute, nice girl because you're fantasizing about getting a super model. I"m not against dealing Wallace if the right trade comes along, but dealing him for crap so something unlikely "might" happen is dumb.

 

Your "hypothetical pipe dream" is just that and really has no business being in the discussion. Unless, in that same way, I can say that moving Wallace strictly for picks, some of which come 6 years from now would lead to a disgruntled LaMarcus that ends with him demanding a trade, and I ask do you prefer Wallace, LMA, Batum or pieces we get from LMA, picks 6 years from now and an overpaid Batum as a RFA because he's now the best player on our roster?

 

Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

 

Hah. It happens every now and then. We will have to see how the year plays out. I doubt that Paul Allen will authorize a midseason trade of a crowd favorite unless the team is out of contention or it is a deal that you can't refuse. Mags comparison of the current team with the makeup of the 98/99 team is kind of interesting. Wallace does seem to have the same physical presence as Brian Grant, but BGrant was a rebounder first and foremost with a decent post game. Wallace is more like a tasmanian devil. I use to get the nickname "Ball Seeking Missile" when I was younger and balled and that kind of reminds me of G Wallace. He doesn't care what it takes, he's going for the ball or for position.

 

Only been two games, but I think this Wallace thread is a good example that once posters take positions, it's hard for them to get off the postion no mattter the facts.

Not throwing stones, as I am probably guilty of this too. But it is interesting to see. Hope this thread stays alive. If Wallace leads the Blazers to a first round playoff win, some will still defend the position he should have been traded. If Wallace gets hurt or starts to suck, then some will scramble and write books explaining why it was still smart not to trade him.

 

My only contention is that this team has a pretty bleak future at the five spot and they have a small surplus of talented wings ... I would prefer to see this team be proactive about its future if it can and trading a guy with a bad injury history who is about to turn 30 is a pretty decent strategy -- a couple of excellent games doesn't change that long range outlook.

 

We have had so much lets downs with hope for and planning for the future that I have fallen into a "lets do it now" attitude. And Im not sure why but I have to have enough hope in management to be able to make moves down the road if needed. So for now Wallace on a team that has struggled to score at times and is based upon "scrap and hustle" he is just too important right now to sacrifice that. Especially if its for picks that are back to "hope for future".

 

Amen to that. Wallace is like Brain Grant in his prime, completely "un-scoutable" (if that's even a word). You have no idea what he's going to do, you just know he's going to outwork you.

 

I think the term you're looking for here is "straw-man."

 

And if you think moving Wallace leads to Dwight and Deron coming here, discussion also ends just as quickly. You hang on to that pipe dream, if you think it's reasonable, while at the same time, saying we should move pieces, because we can't win now with what we have. I'd say our odds of winning a title this season with our current group are better than our odds of landing Dwight and Deron this offseason. If that's where we differ, we can just agree to disagree. I've seen this pipe dream with Chris Paul for the last 4 years or more, it seems, from Blazer fans. Not going to give a second thought to Deron and Dwight.

 

Same straw man of landing Dwight and Deron, while we're on hypotheticals. Neither is realistic.

 

We couldn't keep Oden or Batum if we wanted cap room for two max free agents, they'd both need to be cut. We'd also have to cut Crawford, Felton, and obviously Wallace.

 

You're ignoring the dropoff from Batum to Babbit, or whoever becomes our backup SF. We'd need a player to replace Batum's role for 25+ minutes a night off the bench. Losing Wallace for nothing weakens our team in TWO positions; we'd have a significant downgrade at the starting SF spot and a significant downgrade for our 6th man.

 

Ok so you think Craig Smith is basically as valuable off the bench as Nic Batum. But you also think Batum is about as valuable as Gerald Wallace.

So combining those if you believe Wallace is about as valuable as Craig Smith I understand wanting to dump him for late first round picks.