So read after the jump if you follow MLB.

Continue reading this post »

There is no question that Brandon will start at the 2. There is talk that he may play some PG, but it is questionable how good of an idea that is and until it happens we have every reason to believe he'll get most of his minutes at the 2.

Wesley Matthews is clearly being paid to be the new backup SG. I'm excited to see what he can do. I think he'll be a clear upgrade at the position. There is a chance that he is a product of the Utah system, but his shooting and defensive skills should translate to any system. He's young enough to continue to develop his game. He should get the lion's share of the backup minutes at SG.

Jerryd played well enough in his opportunities at SG last season. He certainly got more run there than anybody expected due to Brandon's injuries and Rudy's ineffectiveness. While JB's offensive skills allow him to be reasonably effective at SG, every move the team has made since drafting JB has pointed to the team's desire that he earn his minutes at PG. I think that is a smart move. He will always struggle to defend bigger SGs and has a tougher time getting his shots off over taller non-PGs. Despite his limitations, Bayless certainly looks to be the guy who would get minutes in the case of injury or foul trouble to Roy or WM.

Which leads me to the real point of this post... Where does Elliott Williams fit on this team? The obvious answer is that he likely won't have a role this season, but there has to be some longer-term plan for him or why did we draft him? Does he fit on this team looking to the future? How do we help him develop so we are not looking at another Rudy situation in a couple of years where he has talent, but no real trade value or role on this team? It seems like Williams believes he has PG skills, but I haven't read much that suggests to me that the team or the "so-called experts" believe that to be in his NBA future. There has been a lot of talk that a non-traditional PG could fit well with Brandon Roy. Somebody who could defend the PG position and play off the ball on offense. It will be interesting to see if Elliott could fill that role for this team.

We have 3 rookies for 2010-11. We are in an enviable position of not really needing any significant contribution from any of them to reach the team's goals this season. It is interesting that the guy drafted in the 2nd round has received a lot more attention from BEdgers than the guy drafted with our 1st round pick. No doubt that is because we have seen Armon play since he was drafted. It also because we see a role for Armon. Unless more moves are made that change the PG position or he is sent to D-league, he will be the 3rd string PG. He'll get spot minutes this year and with an aging veteran starting PG have a chance to earn a more significant future role on the team. Babbitt looks to be the 3rd string SF and should get spot minutes with more opportunity as injuries and/or foul trouble create a larger role for him. Babbitt has one problem that Armon doesn't have which is that both players in front of him are either expected to have a long-term role on this team (Batum) or have a long-term contract (Matthews).

Elliott is buried on the depth chart even more than Babbitt. Nobody in front of Babbitt is a 2-time all-star and the indisputable team leader. Let's assume that the team makes JB earn his minutes at PG. That puts Elliott as the #3 SG. Can he climb from that role unless WM flops or Roy's injuries become a recurring dilemma? Should we give him an opportunity to see how he plays with Roy and defends the point? Seems like that might be the best way to give him an opportunity to have a real role with this team.

I thought I would attach a Youtube of Elliott playing against Kansas last season. He hits a big shot and misses a big shot in the last minute of the game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcIJI4f5xbg

Who thinks Elliott is going to find a role on this team?

The rumors swirled on draft night, stirred by comments from Nic Batum, that Portland might be a future home for TP. One had to wonder if the salary tax flexibility created by the addition of Gomes' partially guaranteed contract would be a key to adding Parker without giving up a key piece. While others might be willing to move LaMarcus or Nic in a deal to land TP, I suspect most people want to see what this team can do healthy next season, trying to add some pieces around our core instead of shipping off key people. Unfortunately, the rules prohibiting a trade packaging Gomes with other players makes it hard to make a deal work between Portland and SA. Gomes for McDyess (a contract that SA might want to get rid of) almost works but doesn't get it done. There are deals that work for Parker either before or after July 1, but I don't see why SA does any of them if Nic is not included. Do they really want to create space for George Hill that badly? TP's deal is expensive, but doesn't go beyond next season. While Parker is the better player at the moment, age, contract and need issues make it very difficult to justify moving Nic to get him. I would love to have Parker on the team, but I can't see it happening.

I have heard the idea floated of a Michael Beasley for Gomes deal. I'm not sure if Miami gives Beasley away for nothing. If they are planning to waive Gomes, couldn't they find a team with cap space enough to absorb Beasley's deal who would take him for a 2nd round pick? Remember that even after Gomes is waived, he is owed over $2M. I can't believe there won't be better offers for Beasley. I have yet to mention the questionable fit of Beasley with the Blazers. We don't want to go back to the Whitsitt days of acquiring talent that doesn't fit together properly.

A interesting PF target that could work in a deal for Gomes is Brandon Bass. There were many Blazer fans looking at him as an interesting target last off season. Orlando is paying luxury tax money for his contract and might be interested in finding a less expensive option for his backup role. Jason Maxiell is another potential target, but I think Bass is the more likely of the two to be moved.

Another trade that might be available that we could consider is Gomes for Reggie Evans of Toronto. Evans gives us more of the inside "banger" at PF that we have wanted to back up LaMarcus. This could be part of a separate, but related deal to land Jose Calderon, but wouldn't necessarily need to accompany another deal. It is interesting that we are so motivated to land TP with his questionable defense and quickly dismiss Calderon. I think the bigger question with Calderon is will his offensive form return to what it was 2-3 years ago, or is what we saw last year what we are going to get in the future. Calderon could likely be had for a package of Andre Miller and Rudy. If you combine the 2 deals, Evans and Calderon, Toronto would see dramatic future cap savings. With Bosh ready to move on, unless they can put together a decent S&T for Bosh they are needing to start over. I can't see them turning this down. I can definitely see the Blazers turning it down. Those contracts are ugly and the players have flaws, but Calderon shooting touch and PG skills could be a nice fit with the Blazers assuming he returns to form. I haven't looked closely at the luxury tax implications, but I suspect they are ugly and we would have to really like Calderon to make the move. Perhaps keeping Gomes to waive his contract would make it more palatable to swallow Calderon's deal. Would Toronto do the Calderon deal if we aren't also giving salary relief with Evans? If we view backup PF as one of our biggest needs then Evans may make sense by himself. However, I don't see that as our biggest need. Even if we do, perhaps we would prefer to target Udonis Haslem in free agency to Evans.

It still seems equally or more likely that we waive Gomes without trading him and use the savings to become a player in free agency using the MLE. Our need for a veteran player who can provide some minutes on the wing seems like a bigger need than backup PF, especially if Rudy is moved. There are some interesting names that might be available for mid-level money (or less) including:  Mike Miller, Kyle Korver, Raja Bell,  JJ Redick, John Salmons, Anthony Morrow, Matt Barnes, Roger Mason and Al Harrington. I like Redick and Morrow but I'm not sure if they are realistic targets as they are restricted and their teams may opt to hang onto them. Do we want to go through another Milsap RFA drama this summer? Miller may be the most realistic if we can sell him on his role here and he doesn't get offered more money elsewhere. Barnes (has a player option and may not opt out) and Mason both have reputations as good perimeter shooters, but really aren't that great. They could fit as veterans to provide bench depth on near vet minimum deals.

So what is the best move? I think some will like Calderon (with or without Evans) while others will hate it. Andre Miller fans will hate it and Bayless fans probably don't want a younger highly paid PG. I think talent-wise Calderon is the best result, but it really puts us in a bad salary situation for the future. I would look hard at a deal for Calderon, but probably pass. We need to have the flexibility to sign some of our young guys in the future. I think we should try to get a sense from Mike Miller's agent whether we are a likely destination for his client. If that has legs, I think Mike Miller on an MLE deal is more attractive than Calderon. If that looks like a long-shot I would look hard at an Orlando deal for Bass. Not an area of need necessarily, but talent upgrade on a reasonable deal. Lastly, I would roll the dice on one of the RFA's and hope for the best.

Thoughts??

While much of the BE speculation has been packaging Gomes in a trade to benefit from his partially non-guaranteed contract, waiving his contract prior to July 1 will provide the team with significant cap savings into next season. I believe these savings are approximately $3M (which translates to $6M if the Blazers venture into lux tax land). The Blazers have always had the opportunity to use the MLE this off season, but it was not very attractive to anybody watching the Blazer bottom line. The luxury tax is awfully punitive to those that go over. I have been of the opinion that we would not use the MLE due to these financial constraints. Now, if we feel there is a good target in free agency, the suits may feel much more free to agressively pursue a targeted FA.

Seems like Mike Miller and Kyle Korver are the most frequent names mentioned who might be available for the Mid-level. Any other names that jump out? Does anybody like Gomes better than the possible alternatives? How does signing a mid-level player now affect our future luxury tax situation? We may not want to sign a guy, even if we are under the tax for next season, if it is going to put us in a tough situation in future seasons beyond next season.

Thoughts?

Obviously, we will miss Brandon's scoring, but even when he isn't scoring Brandon frequently creates problems for the other team by occupying the other team's best defender and punishing the other team for playing a weak defender. Could Phoenix adjust their defensive alignment with Brandon out? How would we attack them if they did? I think it is interesting to consider.

In our first game after Brandon's recent injury, we were facing the Thunder. In the previous game against the Thunder Andre Miller had abused Russell Westbrook, getting him in foul trouble and scoring in the post. The Thunder came out early in the game with Sefolosha guarding Miller and Westbrook shifted over to guard Rudy Fernandez. There is no way a team could pull a stunt like this is Brandon is playing. Westbrook would have been destroyed by Brandon. Rudy, however, did not take advantage of a smaller player guarding him. He had an OK game, scoring in his usual way, on long-distance jumpers when left open. Miller had a great game against a larger player known as a quality defender. I can't really remember if OKC stuck to this defensive alignment for long or if they switched out of it before long, but they definitely didn't fear putting a smaller player on Rudy.

Similarly, Andre Miller had a really good game (more like a really good first half) against the Suns in our most recent meeting. Nobody abuses Nash completely because he evens the score on the offensive end so often, but Miller did take it right at Nash when Nash was defending and got him in foul trouble. I think this is going to be a key to this series. We have to make Nash work on defense and hopefully have a couple of games where his effectiveness is limited by foul trouble. I'm worried if the Suns will try to protect Nash by switching his defensive assignment to guarding Rudy. Again, I don't have confidence that Rudy can take advantage of the smaller player. The good news is that Richardson is not the defensive player that Sefolosha is. I think Miller can still take advantage of that matchup. Even if he does it doesn't create the desired effect of getting Nash into foul trouble (assuming the refs will even be willing to make calls against Nash).

Do you think this is a defensive alignment the Suns will employ? I think the obvious counter-tactic the Blazers could employ is going big with Martell next to Batum on the wing. Posting up is not necessarily Martell's strength, but I doubt that Phoenix would try to defend Martell with Nash if we made the adjustment. I'm not sure that the coaching staff will adjust quickly if Phoenix does switch up the defense. I'm also concerned that decisions will be made based on protecting Rudy's fragile psyche over what may make the most sense on the court. Would the Blazers pull Rudy out pretty quick if the matchup dictated that was the right move? Some tough decisions for the coaching staff created by Roy's absence.

This is not a post to say that I would rather sneak into the draft lottery than make the playoffs. I absolutely want to see this team make the playoffs and with a healthy Brandon Roy I think it will happen. Three points to make in this post:

1) It seems that most of the trade suggestions we have seen have had an emphasis of finding a big man that can fill the void resulting from the injuries to our bigs. I, also, had made suggestions to get Haywood, but I don't think we should have gotten in a bidding war with Dallas to get him here, There may be other Centers available that could help us this year. I think those options have been pretty well covered in other FanPosts. I'm not sure we've discussed what moves might be available that do nothing to help us this year, but could be the final piece to a future championship. I think we all agree that the goal is a future championship and not a one-time visit to the WCFs.

2) I think most still believe that the biggest hole on the Blazers roster is starting PG. Many thought we would fill that need through RLEC or with our cap space after last season. We did land a starting PG with the cap space. I doubt any of us would like to think that our window for a championship is limited to the career longevity of Andre. Many would argue the Andre is the wrong fit for this team anyway. People love Blake/Jerryd. People hate Blake/Jerryd. If we make a move at the dealine (and I'm fine if KP decides to stick with the existing team) I'd like to see it be a move that moved us in a direction to answer the question mark at PG. Some may feel the greatest need is somewhere else. Great! Who should be target that takes us to the next level in the future and who might be available?

3) Shrinking the roster a bit this year may actually make us a better team this year. It certainly would clear some minutes to be able to evaluate some players that need to get some run on the court.

Here is a suggestion of what I'd like to see us looking for:

http://www.realgm.com/src_checktrade.php?tradeid=5460291

SUMMARY:

Blazers get: Mark Blount & Ricky Rubio

Minny gets: Steve Blake & Martell Webster

Could Blount actually help us this year? Heaven sakes, let's hope not. This trade almost certainly makes us worse this year. It is still far more likely that Minny would be the team to turn this deal down. We could sweeten the offer including a draft pick and/or one of our Euros (Claver or Freeland might get it done). The Wolves might consider some offer for Rubio as Flynn has been a solid rookie and Sessions has been playing well recently (averaging 11 points and nearly 6 assists) in his last 5 games (8 & 3 for the season). Minnesota might wait for someone willing to give up a high draft pick for this year's draft. Is there going to be teams willing to offer that? I just don't see how Rubio fits into the Timberwolves future. I know there is a lot of hesitation from fans to add a young PG to this team. I don't care about young or old if the guy can play. But Rubio can't shoot!! Neither could Jason Kidd when he came into the league. There is a whole lot to like about Rubio.

What other moves might be out there that thin the roster this year and add a piece for the future? What PGs that fit our window might be available? If you don't like Rubio, who do you like? Is this the type of move we should be looking for?

There seems to be a division among those who think a trade is needed to thin out the ranks in the backcourt while adding a center and those that dislike the idea of an in-season trade. Antonio Harvey on the post-game show ( I also heard him say the same thing earlier in the day) was ranting that the only teams that make in-season moves are bad teams and championship contenders... and we're neither. Antonio is a likeable guy, but I think he's dead wrong here. If we assume, however, that he is correct in his belief that we are a good team, but not a title contender this year... then you have to re-assess what are your goals are for this year??? What should the goals be???

1) Develop the young guys - Is that what we're doing? Does anybody believe that Jerryd isn't headed to 3rd on the PG depth chart unless a trade is made? If Jerryd takes some of Rudy's minutes at the backup 2... aren't we trying to develop Rudy's NBA game at his natural position also? DC and Pendy are getting some floor time to develop, but are arguably not a big key in the Blazers move from "good team" to "title contender". Martell is developing really nice right now and Nic will be back soon. Continued development of Jerryd, Rudy, Martell, Nic and to some degree LaMarcus should be a big goal. Anything DC and Pendy give us is gravy. 

2) Make the Playoffs and try to position yourself to get out of the first round of the playoffs - It seems like we can make the playoffs standing pat. We've played well enough since Przy went down to feel confident. At the same time, we look ill prepared without a center to win in the playoffs. Will Juwan hold up for 41 more games and post-season? Plus, there are some teams making a hard push for our playoff spot right now (OKC, Memphis, NO). It wouldn't take much of a drop off to find ourselves on the outside looking in. I'd like our goal to be getting deeper into the playoffs, despite our injury issues. That experience is key for going from "good" to "title contender".

3) Don't trade key players for the future to get marginally better this year - Remember Antonio's assumption we're not a title contender this year, but KP should look hard into the future. If there are players on this team that are not part of our future and have trade value, we should look to move them if it helps us.

So if these are the goals (and I say the should be) this is a trade proposal to achieve those goals. I want to come clean that I didn't come up with this trade on my own. This was suggested by a moderator on a different site (maybe someone has suggested it here and I've missed it). I give him credit anonymously (I don't want to plug another site on BE). I think it's the best suggested trade I've seen. It's a 3 team trade and those never seem to happen but I think this would benefit all 3 teams...

Continue reading this post »

As we look at trades right now, the goal should be filling in the gaps for this year and making the team better for the future. Other teams are looking to steal from us as they may feel we are desparate to make a move. We need to resist that type of deal and only do something that makes sense now and for the future.

This trade suggestion is based on the idea that the gap we need to fill is at Center. I think we can agree on that. In fact, it would be nice to add 2 big bodies. The biggest future need for this team is at backup PF. This trade would achieve both of those goals.

This suggestion involves us eating a bad contract in the deal. The assumption is that the other team wants to dump a bad contract and is willing to give up a young talent to achieve the cap space they want. There is no doubt that if they don't care about clearing space, this deal is dead in the water. I think we can agree that this team would like to clear cap space. Obvioiusly, if they can do it without losing a young talent they would opt that way. I'm more interested in your thoughts on whether you like the deal from the Blazers perspective. It's a little outside the box and many will hate it I suspect.

I think this deal works with the cap rules, but I'm sure you'll all correct me if it doesn't. Other players could be shuffled in to accomplish the same idea if it doesn't exactly work with the filler contracts.

Continue reading this post »

There is angst in Blazerland! Free Bayless the masses scream! I enjoyed Ben's great post about Jerryd's improved play and agree that he has earned more minutes. Where does he get them? The obvious answer is he'll get some run at the backup 2 position until Rudy gets healthy, but in the long run we need to learn if Bayless is a PG. I certainly don't want to see any more of Miller and/or Blake playing the "2". Bad idea that is now a proven failure! People are up in arms about coaching decisions and how the PG minutes are distributed, but there is no way that a 3rd string PG is going to get consistent minutes. If Bayless is going to get minutes it's because Blake or Miller have been demoted to the #3 PG. There are certain facts that make this an extremely difficult decision for the coach. Who is the odd man out as the #3 PG?

1). If and when this team is healthy, there should be no available minutes at the 2 for any of our 3 PGs. Roy should play at his natural position as much as possible and Rudy should get the backup minutes. While the team is short-handed, Bayless needs those minutes. How is it possible that Bayless got zero opportunity in the 2nd half of last night's game backing up the 2? Ridiculous!!

2). Blake led this team to 54 wins last year as the starting PG. I think the coaches are more comfortable with Blake on defense than Miller or Bayless currently. Is that like winning the beauty contest at a uni-brow convention? Bottom line is I don't find it surprising that the coach is hesitant to relegate Blake to 3rd string at this point. Many feel like this is Nate's biggest failure. I think there are very few coaches who would be comfortable making Blake a 3rd stringer right now. As a talent, there are likely few GMs looking for a player who can do what Blake does. As an expiring contract he does have some trade value.

3.) Miller was signed for $7M+ a year to be our 3rd stringer? Let's be honest! KP signed him to be our starter and the whole NBA world is shocked that it hasn't played out that way. Is he the ideal complement for Roy? It doesn't appear that he is. Can we or should we demote him to 3rd string? Again, I don't think there are any NBA coaches that would put their big $$ off-season free agent aquisition at the end of the bench. Is this a failure by Nate? Hard to see it that way.

4.) I don't know if Bayless is our PG of the future, but in my opinion the decisions we made this past off-season were made with the intention that he is our PG of the future. Does anybody believe that KP sees Blake or Miller as the long-term solution at PG? There were younger options at PG if KP wasn't looking for a short-term solution while Bayless grew into the starting PG role. If that is the plan, there has to be a plan to help him develop. That plan has to include opportunity this year on the floor as a PG. Doesn't it? If he stays the #3 PG there will not be minutes!

So what is the solution?

We should move Miller to the starting unit and let him know he has until the trade deadline to show that he can mesh with Brandon in that role. He should also be on the floor to finish games.

I would go to Bayless right now and tell him that he's getting all the backup minutes behind Brandon until Rudy is healthy. Try to pair him mostly with Miller and have Miller guard the opposing teams "2" on defense. That would mean that Blake would be my first sub off the bench so that when Roy is ready for a breather, Miller is ready or near ready to come back in. I would also tell him that if he can show the ability to play defense on the oppposing PG at this level, he will be the backup PG after the trading deadline.

Let Blake know that he's the backup PG now and that he better find his shooting touch or he's going to lose that spot. By the trading deadline, make a decision as to which of the veteran PGs blends best with the rest of the team. Move the other guy (there has been a lot of talk of moving Miller, but he didn't generate much interest as a FA last summer and I think there would be a bigger market for the SBEC than for Miller) or be prepared to put one of the vets as your 3rd string guy who won't see the floor unless there is foul trouble or an injury to the guys ahead of him on the depth chart. By the end of the season you'll have seen enough of Jerryd to know what you have and how to plan for the future.

Oh, and by the way, you don't fire the coach over this. All 30 GMs would have taken GO means KP made the only decision he could at that time. All 30 coaches in the league would have been in an impossible situation with 3 PGs who all deserve floor time. I'm sure not everybody agrees with that, but I think it has been an impossible situation for Nate to keep everyone happy. Our veteran PGs have not played to their potential. Some of that may be Nate's fault, but Blake missing wide open 3's isn't Nate's fault. Miller not being a perfect fit for what this team needed is not Nate's fault. He does, however, need to make the right decision on how to move forward. This is what I think he needs to do!

I am not disappointed that we have added Andre Miller to our team. I think his ability to create easy opportunities for himself and others is exactly what this team needs. I do think that Ramon Sessions is a very similar player who we could have gotten for similar $$ per year (obviously would have been a longer deal and more guaranteed money). It is uncommon for a GM to look at two players with similar skill sets and similar salary demands and choose the older player who is past his prime and less likely to improve his skills.

However, there are reasons that KP made the choice that he made...

Continue reading this post »

Let's look at a few basic stats for each player (last 20 games):

Andre Miller 16.2 Pts/game, 5 Reb/game, 6.2 Assists/game, 2.6 Turnovers/game

Ramon Sessions  13.4 Pts/game, 4.4 Reb/game, 8.2 Assists/game, 2.3 Turnovers/game

Steve Blake  11.6 Pts/game, 2.9 Reb/game, 5.5 Assists/game, 1.7 Turnovers/game

Obviously, you can often make numbers say whatever you want them to but these numbers speak to me. I can understand people who are of the opinion that Blake is a better fit next to Roy than Miller or Sessions. I can understand the opinion that Hinrich is a better option next to Roy than Miller or Sessions. Perimeter shooting ability is a nice skill to posssess. However, I completely fail to understand people who think Miller is the right option. Sessions and Miller possess nearly the identical skill set currently. Miller is at an age that his skills will almost certainly decline over the next few years. Sessions is at an age that his skill set should improve noticeably AND THEY ARE VIRTUALLY THE SAME PLAYER RIGHT NOW! The Bucks have the right to match any offer to Sessions, but they also drafted a PG with their pick at #10. I'm not sure what their breaking point for matching an offer is, but they are very unlikely to match an offer large enough to land Andre Miller. Jason Kidd is off our list now (reportedly has come to terms with the Mavs). Can we cross Miller off the list also?

Assuming Harris is unavailable, our options at PG should be Hinrich, Sessions or Blake. It seems the general consensus is that a decision to go with Blake is a decision to hope that Bayless develops... or a decision to hope that the rest of the team develops enough (ie Oden) that having an "adequate PG" is good enough. I've also read how Sessions would duplicate Bayless' skills. Bayless' strength may be penetrating to the basket, but to those people who think Sessions duplicates Bayless... please looks at Sessions stats again. I won't bother to show the gory details of Bayless' stats over the last 20 games. I have a lot of faith in Bayless. If it turns out we get Sessions and Bayless develops then we'll have the fortunate problem of having 2 "starting quality" PGs. I'm afraid if we go with Blake and Bayless and Bayless doesn't develop as we hope, we'll end up with 2 "backup quality" PGs. That would be a shame!

Can somebody please make a case for Miller that makes sense? I honestly think it can be done. It will probably emphasize experience and readiness to burst open that title window. I doubt I'll agree with it, but at least maybe I'll understand better. 

Who's your "and 1"

Maybe a post like this has already been done, I'm sure some of this has been discussed on the main page and in the myriad of Hedo posts, but I thought it would be interesting to get the "and 1" ideas all together.

Assumption #1 - All this Hedo talk is not a smokescreen. KP would lose all credibility with agents and future free agents. We want him and will get him. He'd like a ring and he isn't going to get it in a Bosh-less Toronto.

Assumption #2 - The Hedo hate is largely a result of feeling that he's going to eat up all the cap space and we won't be able to fill other needs we see as more pressing. There may be other reasons for Hedo hate, but there are plenty of posts for that. This is not that post.

Assumption #3 - We might all like the Hedo move better if we thought something else is coming also.

So let's hear your ideas of how to get Hedo "and 1" or 2 or whatever complimentary move you would want to do if we sign Hedo. Try to keep things realistic. I suspect the strongest push will be a Blake & Outlaw for Hinrich. If that's the move explain why the Bulls would do that now that BG is a Piston. A salary dump is tough to buy. Convince me!

Here's my move... and it won't take anybody by surprise who has noticed the repetitive nature of my posts lately. Before you sign Hedo, convince Milwaukie that you are going to sign Ramon Sessions to a deal that they won't want to match. I think a MLE deal for 5 years (similar to the Ariza signing) or a 4 year deal that averages slightly over the MLE. If they are convinced, perhaps they would sign Ramon to a MLE deal and do a S&T for Outlaw. They lost Jefferson and CV, need scoring punch whether off the bench or starting at both forward positions. If they are not convinced we sign Sessions to an offer sheet. We still move Outlaw in this deal (S&T with the Bucks matching) or another deal (maybe for somebody's trade exception). It only eats up about $2M of our cap space. We rescind all rights to players except Claver. We have to convince Hedo to wait until the Sessions deal is sealed. Why would he wait? Because if Milwaukie matches the offer for Sessions we'll have the cap space to throw Hedo an extra $4-5M. After we land Sessions we still have $7.5M of cap space (I'm hoping, depending on the cap) to sign Hedo to a deal that averages close to $8.5M/year on a 5 year deal.

Why Sessions? This is the case I have made previously:

We need a PG to play decent defense and create high percentage shots for his teammates. If the guy can score that would be great! I don't care if he scores from the inside or the outside. All the talk of PGs needing to hit perimeter shots to space the floor is exhausting. We have other players on our roster that can punish a team if they pack it in too much. If a PG spaces the floor with perimeter shooting the benefit is creating easy shots for his teammates. If a PG creates easy shots for his teammates with penetration and pass... JUST AS GOOD! Put pressure on the defense and create opportunities. That is what we need.

It would also be nice to have a player who fits our window for a title run. Our window may or may not open next year, but whenever it opens it ought to be open for the next 8 years after that.

I like Hinrich. I love Devin Harris. If we can swing a trade that lands us one of these guys... Great! But we have no ability to get them if their teams don't offer them in trade to us. It is out of our control. Make the necessary phone calls KP, but in the end if the offers on the other end of the phone are terrible or non-existant, make a move that you don't have to have another GM sign off on. I know that technically to get Sessions, the Bucks GM would have to decide to let him go. My point is that signing him to the offer sheet is within our control.

If the Bucks decide to match the offer anyway...FINE!!! Then I don't care which of Blake, Miller or Kidd KP decides to settle for, but at least we made an offer to the one free agent that meets our needs and could be available. How does Miller or Kidd fit our needs better than Sessions? They have playoff experience. I guess that's something we need, but I like extending the window. If Bayless doesn't develop, we won't have cap space again.

So who is your "and 1"? Is this Hedo & Sessions option remotely realistic? Would Hedo go to Toronto if our deal starts at $7.5M and averages $8.5M?

I'm sure many of you would really like to keep Sessions and I honestly think Bucks management will do just that if the $ are around a mid-level deal. On the other hand, if the Blazers come and sign Sessions to a 4-yr deal averaging $7M would you be in favor of retaining Sessions? Would your GM and owner? I would think you would go with Ridnour and Jennings and let Sessions go for that kind of money. I know you can sign him and stay under the cap, even at $7M and maybe you would want to. I think this may be a better option for you.

S&T - Sessions for Travis Outlaw ($3.6M expiring)

Now I'm not here to convince you that Outlaw is your answer for the next decade at sf, but he's not garbage either. He's on a reasonable deal that is expiring. You would have Bird rights to retain him if you chose to or let him go after a season. He was the 3rd leading scorer on a team that won 54 games this season. He can play the 3 and the 4 (he was actually slightly better at the 4 for us, creating mismatches with other PF). For us he was instant offense off the bench. He finished 6th in 6th man of the year balloting last year, mostly because of his ability and willingness to take the big shot in the 4th quarter. He was 6 for 7 in last minute game winning shot opportunities last season. I think it was John Hollinger who voted him for 6th man of the year arguing that no other bench player had single-handedly won his team 6 games last season. By the way, he only got 1 first place vote in that balloting. On the other hand, he doesn't get nearly as many rebounds as he should considering his ability to jump out of the gym. He gets out of place on defense far too often. He is a 6-yr vet, but still very young as he came straight from High School. Super locker room guy! The biggest argument from Blazers fans against trading him is because he is the glue in that locker room and Roy's best friend. It would seem you guys have a need at the 3 with Jefferson gone. It would seem that a guy with a knack for scoring fits well with your needs right now. He's on a deal that is VERY affordable for what he brings. I know you have some young 3's, but if they show enough this coming year then you can let Outlaw go. If they don't, you'll be glad that they are not all you have.

You could almost make the case, I wouldn't really try to, that Outlaw fits your needs enough that it would be a good deal even before you consider the $$$ saved on a Sessions deal. Is there a better deal out there for the Bucks? Would you match the $7M? Would you rather just see Sessions go and not get Outlaw?

I think it makes too much sense to not happen UNLESS Blazers and Bulls decide to swing a deal that brings Hinrich to the Blazers. It is not all that unlikely that our GM likes Sessions better than Hinrich (although most Blazer fans like Hinrich's 3-pt shooting as a complement to B Roy's to helps open up the court).

What do you think?

This is all pure speculation and if any of this goes down as I suggest, I will be as surprised as any of you. The major point of this speculation is that POSSIBLY what we do may be determined by what another team, picking in the lottery, does. Also, that who we draft totally depends on which free agent we have decided to target and that depends not only on who we want, but who we think we can sign. Many of the free agents I would imagine KP has interest in have been rumored to be difficult to pry away from their existing clubs.

So let's make some assumptions that seem to be true based on the rumors we are hearing.

Continue reading this post »

My first post. Be Gentle!

It seems many of the posts (except for Hinrich and Conley) targeting specific players with our money under the cap have been free agents. There are only a few teams under the cap that can compete with us for free agents and spend more than the MLE. The problem is the lack of FA players that fit our needs that are worth going over the MLE to get. Andre Miller, Hedo, Varejao, Kidd... the list goes on, but I'm not sold on the available FA's. I like the idea of a trade better if we can find a trading partner. I like Conley and Hinrich but don't think some combination of Sergio/Blake/Outlaw/Picks/Cash get it done. Seems like a majority of Bedgers don't like the idea of giving up more than that for either of these guys. I would agree.  I like Sessions, but am very reluctant to wait 10 days after the beginning of the free agent period to find out if our plan to nab Sessions will be successful.

The alternative to a FA is to find a player under contract from a team that is trying to shed salary. We can take back more in salary than we send out. I would think there would be several good options to consider in this category. I encourage your thoughts on this type of player. There are probably even better options out there than what I'm going to suggest.

Last week Ben made a good argument for moving up to grab a young pg. I like the idea of having options in case Bayless doesn't develop. I believe in competition. Bayless should earn his floor time and I don't buy that having a 3rd pg is giving up on Bayless. Dave made a solid argument for adding a veteran pg. Could we do both? Would that be ridiculous? Maybe. Or maybe we get the veteran backup pg and a young backup pf?

Here is my thought. We target Milwaukee's #10 draft pick and Luke Ridnour. What would it take? The primary thing it would take is a decision by Milwaukee that they will not go over the luxury tax limit and that they want to keep Ramon Sessions more than they want the player available at #10. Currently most of the rumors are that they would be interested in a pg (Flynn. Evans, Jennings) or a pf (Clark, Blair). All of these young players come with question marks. Sessions has been a big fan favorite and most will be very disappointed to lose Sessions. The luxury tax decision has already been made. I would be shocked to see them go over the cap. The Bucks may find a better way to shed salary, but I don't know that they'll find takers for Richard Jefferson's deal in this economy. I don't see this trade any less likely than the Hinrich and Conley musings that have been all over Bedge.

What do we give up? I would offer some combination of Sergio/cash/2nd round pick(s)/future protected 1st and our salary cap space. Is this enough to entice Milwaukee? Not if they have figured out some other way to keep Sessions! If they haven't, they get a replacement for Ridnour in Sergio who may have nearly as much potential as some of the pgs available in the draft. We get Ridnour who has a contract for 1 more year at $6.5M. He would be a solid option if Bayless isn't ready to be a more steady backup to Blake. If Bayless is ready, Ridnour is nice depth in case of an injury. I trust KP to make the right call with the #10 pick. I would love to see Brandon Jennings fall (espn reports he is dropping) and grab him there. I could see taking Blair, but I am more worried about the long-term need for a starting pg more than for the short-term need for a backup pf. We would still have some picks to grab a young pf and some cap space to find a veteran pf to come in. In 2 years you have Bayless and the young pg KP chooses to compete for the starting pg position. This deal is absolutely the best value we could hope to get out of Sergio. I'm sure it may be overly optimistic, but I would take Sessions over anybody at #10. The Bucks might also. We can sweeten the pot if needed.

Those PTB fans looking for veteran leadership with the cap space may not like finding it in what I would hope would be a 3rd string pg. There are others adamantly opposed to adding more rookies. I doubt Milwaukee would want our #24 pick as they are shedding salary. If we only want 1 rookie then use #24 on Claver and leave him in Spain. I don't see how 1 rookie is a bad move, especially one with upside like Jennings, Blair or Evans.

What do you think?