Hypothetical trade…
by Wolf21 on Dec 24, 2009 9:34 AM CST
40 comments
Wolves get:
Oden
Outlaw
Blake
Blazers get:
Jefferson
The Blazers area mess at C and could use Jefferson to fill that roll. Przybilla and Oden are both out for the year and they really don’t have any one else.
I know Oden is a huge risk, but he gives us the exact kind of center we need (if he gets healthy)…long, athletic, and a defensive presence. Plus he seems like a great kid. Outlaw gives us our three. The Blazers have Webster and Batum to fill that roll, and since he is also injured I think they may be willing to let him go. Judging by the post below, Rambis doesn’t think Love and Jefferson are a championship combination. Blake is an expiring and makes this work financially.
Would the Blazers be desperate enough to do this and would the Wolves be willing to take on the risk?
0 recs |
40 comments
Email
Print
Comments
oden?
We would need more, because Oden is a big, big, big risk.
by PoohRubio on Dec 24, 2009 9:59 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
The deal is basically Jefferson for Oden. Blake and Outlaw are FAs and could be signed outright this summer -not much point trading value for them. On top of that, Outlaw is out for awhile too. In terms of who’s playing now, Jefferson for a mid level PG (of all positions) would be a disaster PR wise.
Portland absolutely should do this deal, but they won’t -thankfully. They believe that Oden is chosen one. They took him #1 over Durant and giving up on him now would be admitting that mistake too early for them. I think they’re going to ride him out and go down with that ship.
You’re right though that Oden is what the Wolves need on the court. Problem is that the guy can’t stay healthy and has some very troubling signs that he’s going to be a chronically injured big. There’s absolutely no way you could trade Al for Oden and expirings unless you’ve decided to basically cut bait with Al for financial reasons. Even in that case there should be better options as far as expiring + prospect (A. Randolph?).
by Blond Ricky on Dec 24, 2009 10:02 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Blake was just an expiring throw in to make it work. He can sit on the bench until this rebuilding/throw away season is over. I know Outlaw is inj and a free agent this summer, but if he signs with us great, I like him if not he is an expriring. Either way great. I really don’t think Al is in the the future for this team and a shot at a guy like Oden who is still relatively cheap is worth it to me since I am almost to the point of letting Al go for exprinings a draft choices.
by Wolf21 on Dec 24, 2009 10:21 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This is a trade neither team would probably do
Though, I might. Essentially it gives the Wolves 2 things: more cap space and a roll of the dice that Oden can actually play basketball at some point. At the cost of Al Jefferson. I dunno. I’m feeling pretty pessimistic right now and am wondering whether there will be any players currently on the roster around when the Wolves next make the playoffs, so I might do this, since it’s essentially another lottery ticket, but it’s dubious value.
Portland, however, obviously would not. They won’t give up on Oden yet, and besides, they need a real big with defensive chops.
by Eric in Madison on Dec 24, 2009 10:11 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't be too surprised if one of these guys was on our next playoff team
If nothing else, we could sign Love to a veteran’s minimum.
by Mplax on Dec 25, 2009 12:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No Thanks
I wouldn’t go near Oden, which is too bad b/c he does seem like a good kid.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Dec 24, 2009 10:19 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Key point:
“the exact kind of center we need (if he gets healthy).” Oden is never healthy and he probably won’t be healthy in the future. He’ll maybe not get injured for one season in his career, but I would question this trade for Minnesota (if it happened). It doesn’t help that Greg is out for the season.
First of all, we have no need at all for Steve Blake. We already have Jonny and Ramon. We don’t need anyone getting in the way of their playing time this season. They need to play as much as possible to become better.
The thing I like most about this trade is getting Travis Outlaw. Outlaw is a very good SF with a nice 3 pt shot. He’s an explosive athlete on offense.
However, overall, I would say NO because we’re not getting enough for Al and we won’t need 2/3 of the players we get this season.
by KGMN on Dec 24, 2009 10:51 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Once again...
I DON’T want Blake either. He just makes it work financially. He can sit at home for all I care like Blount. Also, how any more games are we going to win with Jefferson or without him. This year is obviously not about winning. I doubt we are really going to get an impact player for Al. Maybe Houston would give us Ariza and expirings for Al. I would LOVE that (no kidding). They need a center as Yao is always inj and we need Ariza and the expiring money would be a bonus. We could even throw in Gomes if they wanted a serviceable F.
by Wolf21 on Dec 24, 2009 11:51 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think part of it is that I don't like the players that we get.
I don’t like Oden at all and I don’t like Ariza at all (like you suggested right above).
I don’t want the Wolves to have 2 players who aren’t even going to play one game for them. It’s just annoying that they’re on the roster, making money, but not even practicing with Minnesota.
I understand that Blake’s in there to make salaries work, but I just don’t want him in there if he’s not going to play. I don’t want him if he is going to play either because he would limit Jonny’s and Ramon’s playing time.
by KGMN on Dec 24, 2009 12:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd say yes
If I had any confidence in Greg Oden’s ability to be healthy. Even so I’d probably say YES. I’d guess my Friends over at Blazers Edge would scream no in horror.
by Jose Cordoba on Dec 24, 2009 11:13 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Jeffersons great but not the defensive presence Oden can be.
by philthebballplayer on Dec 27, 2009 8:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Make it Oden and Fernandez
Have the Wolves sweeten the deal a bit if needed.
That’d fill two needs on the team and better prepare for the Rubio era.
by ckb on Dec 24, 2009 12:08 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Not worth the risk
While I do agree that the wolves will eventually need to get rid of Big Al because him and Love can’t coexist, Oden isn’t the answer. He’s a good player when healthy and would fit in nice, however he can’t stay healthy. He’s not going to do us any good sitting in the stands.
by Bad News Wolves on Dec 24, 2009 12:29 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Oden's a bust
I wouldn’t even give up Sasha for Oden he’s too big of a risk!
by RB10 on Dec 24, 2009 12:38 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
really?
I would give up Sasha for a flyer on Oden in a heartbeat.
by TheEvilProfessor on Dec 24, 2009 2:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yea i was a little over exagerating...
but you get the point don’t you?
by RB10 on Jan 1, 2010 7:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No GM would give up anything of value
to take a flyer on Oden at this point. He is worth far more to the blazers than any other team because of the draft pick they spent. He may turn out, but any GM who makes a serious trade for Oden at this point will get fired if he doesn’t stay healthy.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jan 2, 2010 10:11 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I know some high school kids I’d trade Sasha for. At least they have potential.
by Wolf21 on Dec 24, 2009 2:29 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Can anyone give me an example
of some players (particularly bigs) who missed the majority of their first three seasons and went on to a good career?
by Rumblebee on Dec 24, 2009 1:15 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Thinking about Portland's end
Makes absolutely no sense for them. They trade quality depth at PG and SF while giving up one of the best (if not the best) young defensive centers in the league. Granted, Oden is always injured and may never be what he should. In that case, the value of the trade might swing in their favor.
But why trade that depth and risk Oden blowing up again for a single player they have absolutely no need for? They already have their PF for years to come in LaMarcus, and there is no way they would play post-shackled 6-9 Al Jefferson alongside him or off the bench. Even if Jefferson proves to be the runaway value in this trade, it makes no roster or play-style sense for them.
by nja700 on Dec 24, 2009 1:17 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I am not sure they would do it...
but I think moving Al for more than cap space and picks will not be easy as he is not a mobile 4 nor a defensive 5. I think we need to move him now before the salary cap lowers even further making his contract too costly. I would also trade Al for Noah and cap space. I would trade him to anyone for that matter for just cap space. I just want to unload him and we play him at the 5 a position that Portland also is now in great need of definitelty now and possibly for the future (Oden’s knees) and I would gladly take on his Oden’s risk to unload Al.
by Wolf21 on Dec 24, 2009 2:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd argue the opposite
Al’s value will probably go up moreso than down. First, never trade someone while coming back from injury because the uncertainty surrounding it reduces value. Second, old or new cap, his contract’s good value for what he produces. Third, his contract is good enough value that it’s one other teams would like to get their hands on if they needed to reduce payroll by unloading a max player (the Wolves might have to throw in other pieces). Also, why trade him while the team has so much potential cap space? A deal like his is much better moved after the team is close to the cap because they could make a trade with relatively equivalent salaries and possibly get a decent return.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Dec 24, 2009 2:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'll end it right now, we(Portland) would not do this deal.
It would never happen because Oden has too much potential and is too good ofa defensive player, and in a league where big men that are physical if scarce, Kevin Pritchard would not trade Oden just to make an attempt to help this season. Plus, with Oden and Outlaws injuries Portland will be able to resign them for much cheaper if they want to than if they were healthy, and when they return late this season watch as the Blazers make a strong postseason push with everyone back but Joel.
by philthebballplayer on Dec 27, 2009 8:45 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
So let's assume you're right about not needing another big this season
And I think you are, especially after watching PTB against the Nuggets on Jesus’s Birthday. But what if Pritchard is looking at the money tied up in Miller, and questions about Oden’s long-term viabilty and Pryz’s age/offensive skills. Wouldn’t he at least have to think about getting some one like Jefferson for this year and next?
I wouldn’t do it if I were the Wolves—too much to lose if Oden can’t come back, or turns out to be injury prone. And I also understand the risk/reward of doing the deal if you’re KP. But still . . .
by PoorDick on Dec 27, 2009 8:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Seems like many fans on both sides hate this trade...
which makes me think it is balanced. I actually think we/the Wolves could do better with Al as trade bait. I think the Bulls, Cavs, Heat, Knicks, Raptors, Warriors, Rockets, and Kings just off the top of my head would make better trade partners for various reasons. Also, I think some of these teams lining up to sign big talent this summer will not be attractive enough for anyone of value to sign with them, and I think acquiring Al in some sort of mutil-player/team deal is better than nothing for a team say like the Knicks who will have little talent if none of the big names sign this summer. Having said that, I wouldn’t mind if the Wolves got Oden, Outlaw and more cap space from Portland.
by Wolf21 on Dec 27, 2009 10:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
In this case
The “both sides hate it” part means it doesn’t make sense for either squad. I can see how that logic works in other trades, but this one just doesn’t make sense for multiple reasons other than talent.
by nja700 on Dec 28, 2009 2:22 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This trade doesn't make sense for either side.
If Oden could stay healthy than this trade would be great for the wolves but he can’t so he’s not worth Big Al.
Outlaw is a free agent next offseason and I don’t think he’d resign here.
For portland why would they want to pair Big Al with LMA when they’ve watched there frontcourt take apart a Big Al and Love frontcourt multiple times. There starting frontcourt would have trouble against taller teams such as the Lakers.
by Bad News Wolves on Dec 28, 2009 8:54 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
It does make sense...
Oden is the type of center we need. Outlaw is the kind of SF we need. Oden comes with risk; that’s the only reason we would be able to get him. If he works out great. If not, his contract is not that bad. By trading Al for Outlaw, we are creating the cap space needed to sign him rather than have Al’s contract and Outlaw’s contract if we get him this summer anyway plus we can still go after someone else we need. Why wouldn’t Outlaw want to play here? I know we are not LA or NY, but he would get a lot more PT here than in Portland where they have two other decent SFs. It’s not that crazy that Portland would do this. LMA is not better than Al, and Al is not the risk Oden is. If Oden never returns to form (which is possible) they could do a lot worse trhan Al. Also, I threw this idea out there, but I also stated later in the post that I thought we could do better with an Al trade due to Oden’s risk. However, if Oden did get healthy I don’t think we could do better with an Al trade. It’s a gamble.
by Wolf21 on Dec 28, 2009 2:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So you think an LMA and Big Al frontcourt would work?
I don’t think so, both guys are below average defenders and even with Pryz off the bench who knows if he comes back to full strength. Even if Pryz does come back he’s a 25 minute off the bench guy, occasional start guy. With the Lakers locking up Pau for a long time and already having Bynum and Odom locked up teams are going to have to get bigger in the west if they want to compete with the Lakers. Portland is looking to be a contender and with a Big Al and LMA frontcourt they would get killed in a playoff series. If Oden doesn’t work out they will need another true center if they want to compete.
For the wolves if Oden works out, than it would be a great trade but if he doesn’t than this trade is a mistake for both teams.
As far as Outlaw signing here he would get playing time and money but I think there are better teams that could offer him close to the same money and a better chance at winning a championship.
I agree we will eventually need to get rid of Big Al because we won’t be able to compete with bigger teams in the future but I think we could get a much safer deal that might not have quite the upside but won’t have the huge downside either.
by Bad News Wolves on Dec 28, 2009 4:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I have to disagree with the comment about all west teams needing to get bigger.
You simply won’t find that many big frontcourt players who are talented enough to challenge the lakers head on. You need to have a strong frontcourt that won’t let the lakers get to the spots on the floor they want to. To beat a team you attack their weaknesses…not their strengths. He who dictates the terms of battle wins. You need to build a team that exposes the lakers weaknesses. Any the lakers are still soft. Neither Gasol or Odom are consistently aggressive and are prone to soft play. Bynum is injury prone. Hardly a good reason to start blowing stuff up.
by TheEvilProfessor on Dec 28, 2009 5:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I understand your point
But how exactly do you attack the Lakers weaknesses? I guess a good way to attack them would be at the PG spot, considering they only have Fisher there. Even if you keep them off their spots, they still have enough length and post moves to get a good shot off. Basically it comes down to having at least one stud post defender, if not two (Perkins and Garnett come to mind). Size isn’t necessary, but it helps a hell of a lot against that team.
In addition, I take issue with them being called soft. They’re actually one of the top defensive teams, in no small part because of the lenght of their 7-footers.
Watch last year’s Finals and tell me that Gasol is still soft. He bangs and rebounds well enough, and he definitely is a better defender than Al. Bynum’s one of the best young post players in the league, and as long as he’s healthy for the playoffs there are almost no good matchups for him outside of Howard or Oden. Not only that but he’s one of the better post defenders in the league too. Maybe what you’re saying is true for Lamar, but he’s still super-versatile and would need a long, active cover on him. This is a tough team.
by nja700 on Dec 28, 2009 5:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
the lakers trounce the weak teams
but are prone to inconsistency which is why they don’t have very many signiture wins this year. That is what I meant by soft. Against elite competition, they don’t always show. players who aren’t soft get up to play against the best. They tend to bring their A game. The lakers have enough talent to coast, but they are also their own worst enemy…very apathetic.
by TheEvilProfessor on Dec 28, 2009 7:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That makes more sense
It does seem to happen from time to time. Though when these games start to count more, that will change. I don’t see them coasting in the playoffs. This team is far too balanced and far too talented for them to mess up when it really matters. They’re so good on both sides of the ball that I don’t really see any other team in the West threatening them if health isn’t an issue.
It’s also worth pointing out that the Spurs haven’t ever really been that sort of team either, even in their championship years. You always hear something to the effect of “they never really get going until late in the season.” I get the feeling that the Lakers are saving themselves as much as possible, much like the Cavs did last year or like the Spurs have always done. Especially with the Kobe’s hands and Bynum’s knees.
by nja700 on Dec 28, 2009 8:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
The lakers are legit. If you can build a team that is good about always getting up to play the best I think they would do as well as anyone else against the lakers. Draft the best players who are naturally driven and focused and that’s all you can ask for. THen it is all about trying to round out your roster.
I would love to pick up MOnroe later in the draft as a rotation big, but don’t see alot of bigs this year that really get up to the top level competition. That should correct itself come NCAA tourney time.
by TheEvilProfessor on Dec 28, 2009 8:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, no real "true" centers that get me excited yet
Lots of really talented (and sometimes undersized) power forwards. Not exactly a team need, even if some of them are really athletic. Hopefully one of the guys who can play center in this draft is avaiable when we pick and he pans out.
At least there aren’t many PGs outside of Wall in this draft to tempt Kahn. Outside of Wall or Favors, just don’t give me another PF or PG, please. We already have Frankeinstein’s roster as it is.
by nja700 on Dec 28, 2009 9:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You may not need to be huge up front
but LMA and Big Al wouldn’t get it done. The Lakers only big weakness is at point guard and with Kobe that weakness isn’t huge. While I do agree that you need to attack team’s weaknesses you also need to at least limit their strengths. You don’t have to have size to stop the Lakers frontcourt but it helps. Plus on defense the Lakers give other teams fits in the frontcourt with their length (Kevin Love).
Also Gasol has shed the soft title. While he’s still not the toughest guy in the post he’s definitely improved in that category.
by Bad News Wolves on Dec 28, 2009 6:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Where it doesn't make sense
Even when completely ignoring talent and potential, it still doesn’t work. I’m not saying it’s a bad trade, I’m just saying that they wouldn’t trade 3 quality players (one of whom is a superb post defender) for one player who isn’t a very good fit on their team next to another scoring PF. The T-Wolves would like it since it balances out our roster and gives us depth at multiple positions, but the Blazers lose depth and roster flexibility. You’re only looking at the positives of how it affects the Wolves while rationalizing every obvious problem it would create for the Blazers. Timberwolves might take it, but even considering Oden’s risk I see virtually no way they do it.
The only way they do it is if they have lost all faith in those 3 players and they think they can get more by trading Al Jeff in the future. Unless Pritchard knows something that nobody else does, then he’d be silly to take this deal. I doubt he’d make almost any deal for Oden, let alone this one.
by nja700 on Dec 28, 2009 5:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
