Twitter rumor - Blazers to deal F Gerald Wallace for picks

I used to be of the school of thought that 4 1st round picks would be a gold-mine. Recent history has beaten that out of me. The draft has turned into a crap shoot - emphasis on crap!

That is not to imply that Wallace should be untouchable. The reasons enumerated in favor of a trade are legit - just not for draft picks!

 

If it was one potentially good first round pick that had a chance of becoming anything at all like the Hornets got in the CP3 deal, I would be all over it. But we're talking about late lottery protected first rounders. Yes late first rounders have some value, but not close to the value of the teams best or second best player. I would rather have one good asset then 4 significantly less valuable assets. The team that gets the single best asset in a trade nearly always comes out on top in the long run. It's so easy to re-load mediocre assets at any offseason down the road.

 

Deron turned down an extension from NJ because of the big gap in money he would lose from waiting until this offseason, versus extending now. Nothing at all to do with 20 win teams, or wanting out of NJ. Same reason Paul kept saying he would not extend anywhere, and same as Dwight.

 

Don't forget, there are roster spots and salary space that need to be considered for draft picks as well. 4 extra first round picks can cost nearly 7-8 mil to keep depending on the #s. That eats into the capspace that we could potentially have for free agency.

Then again, draft picks are pretty liquid and easy to move.

 

Please provide the business-case analysis showing that several really bad seasons followed by a really good season (if that even occurs) is a better business decision than continuing to make the playoffs, even if it results in a first round exit.

You're making the claim that trading Wallace for future picks is a better business decision, but you really can't back it up.

 

Right, the business.

But, see, here is the problem, there is no legit confirmation that Wallace could be or could have been traded straight up for FOUR! 1st round picks. It was a complicated 3 team deal that likely had a lot of moving parts.

This value back (4 picks) keeps being thrown around as if it is gospel.

I seriously doubt that (effectively) the Blazers could ship out Wallace (and nothing else of value), and recieve back 4 1st round picks that aren't more than 4 years out (and nothing else of negative value).

So. Now that we have disposed of a fantasy trade that wasn't going to happen and isn't going to happen (ie, a strawman) a serious discussion can happen where the merits of trading Wallace for a more likely return can commence.

Begin.

 

Wallace is my favorite player and i'v been wanting him on the Blazers as long as you have. I do think if the right deal comes around we can't say he is untouchable, the only untouchable on the Blazers roster should be LMA. The deal that everyone is talking about is 4 1st that are spread out over 4 to 8 years depending on who reported it (Hollinger had it as 4 picks going to us from NJ that were one every two years, while Marc Stern had it down differently). That deal for late picks that won't be lottery picks are something that I would only do if LMA and everyone else goes down with an injury and we are forced to rebuild otherwise that is a lot of middling talent that would take us up to 8 years to cash in on, i'd much rather wait for a different deal that would give us picks in the next 2 years or young players that we can try and have hit there stride while LMA is still in his prime.

 

I actually agree with you on this. In other words if we trade him, it needs to be for a younger equally talented player. And probably at a different position. So we look for a team that needs a player like Wallace that has a duplication of good young talent at PG, SG, or Center to send us back.

That won't be easy to find but it is possible if that team believes they can re-sign Wallace.

 

You couldn't get both Deron and Dwight this summer, but I think Deron is a very reasonable target if the Nets fail to acquire Dwight Howard.

I posted this breakdown in another thread a while back:

 

Stein said multiple. Could be anything. Most plugged in guy last few years (Woj) said 3.

3 is not 4.

3 is 3. 25% less.

No info on how many years away those picks are. Anything after 3 or 4 years away from now, and those picks have nearly zero current value, either to us or to other teams in a trade.

There is no info about lottery protection, which teams the picks come from, etc.

There is no info about the other parts in the trade that are essential to make the salary numbers work.

All of that matters a lot as to the real value of a deal. I don't consider 3 picks, none of them possible lottery picks, and 2 of them 3 or more years out and a crap player on a matching contract to be anywhere the same as 4 picks in the next 4 years with two of them not lottery protected and no eating a crap player.

I very much doubt this trade was a sweet deal for us like some are implying here.

 

The Nets taking on Okur's contract and resinging Humphries have also killed any potential Wallace trade. The Nets don't have the cap space to take on lopsided salary in a trade, which is the only way we could send Wallace to Orlando and not have to take salary back in return. I'm fairly certain we arn't interested in taking on Hedo's contract