Trade non-injured players for Travis Outlaw

[ssspence]

In response to John Hollinger's article about the shortage of bodies on the Blazers, and in a variation of an idea that's being batted around here, I suggest a trade that could net Portland a few players who could present insurance for them at very thin positions.

Scal and Giddens for Outlaw

Hollinger points out the Blazers need a "stretch 4" and that's essentially Scal's game. Giddens can also play a little at the SF for them where they're thin. Would they rather have these two guys than one who is injured, and whose contract is expiring at the end of the year?

I'd rather have the upside of Outlaw for the end of the season then either of these guys now. And the two for one creates a roster spot we could use to go out and sign a player who could be valuable, like Stackhouse.

Thoughts?

 

[Redz]

Are they that desperate for a body?

[ssspence]

Are they that desperate for a body?

I mean -- two guys instead of a guy they're paying to be out possibly for the rest of his deal? I actually think Scal could see minutes on the Blazers.

[Redz]

Are they that desperate for a body?

I mean -- two guys instead of a guy they're paying to be out possibly for the rest of his deal? I actually think Scal could see minutes on the Blazers.

Yeh, I guess I meant bodies (plural), but same difference.  Injured or not, Outlaw is ten times the talent of those two combined.

It would be really shortsighted.

I'd love for the C's to get Outlaw somehow though.

[ssspence]

Are they that desperate for a body?

I mean -- two guys instead of a guy they're paying to be out possibly for the rest of his deal? I actually think Scal could see minutes on the Blazers.

Yeh, I guess I meant bodies (plural), but same difference.  Injured or not, Outlaw is ten times the talent of those two combined.

It would be really shortsighted.

I'd love for the C's to get Outlaw somehow though.

god it's so bad for these two that they can't even be traded for a guy who is out for the rest of his contract. ugh.

maybe they'd want to do it for scal alone. they'll likely use outlaw's expiring deal at some point anyway -- they could do the same with scal.

[Lucky17]

Are they that desperate for a body?

If they were, they'd simply cut an end of bench player (Patty Mills, or Jeff Pendergraph) and sign a FA out of the D-League.

Bet they'd like to have Ime Udoka back, eh?

[ssspence]

Are they that desperate for a body?

If they were, they'd simply cut an end of bench player (Patty Mills, or Jeff Pendergraph) and sign a FA out of the D-League.

Bet they'd like to have Ime Udoka back, eh?

maybe they'll that too. but scal is a better combination of defender and shooter at the 4 than anyone they can sign out of the d-league.

excellent point on udoka. they could use his versitility.

[Redz]

Are they that desperate for a body?

I mean -- two guys instead of a guy they're paying to be out possibly for the rest of his deal? I actually think Scal could see minutes on the Blazers.

Yeh, I guess I meant bodies (plural), but same difference.  Injured or not, Outlaw is ten times the talent of those two combined.

It would be really shortsighted.

I'd love for the C's to get Outlaw somehow though.

god it's so bad for these two that they can't even be traded for a guy who is out for the rest of his contract. ugh.

maybe they'd want to do it for scal alone. they'll likely use outlaw's expiring deal at some point anyway -- they could do the same with scal.

My bad Sspence.  I don't pay much attention to contracts and didn't realize Outlaw was an expiring.

[scoop]

The problem is that Outlaw may not be back until April or something. It's a foot fracture, he may very well be out for the season. It's always difficult to predict how fractures heal. Then you'd need to get back into game form and work him into the system. All these with the play-offs starting - and this is a best case scenario.

Anyway I don't think the Blazers do this (they'd certainly not take Giddens, why is he in the deal? To force them to waive one of their players and waste the money in Giddens?): Outlaw's contract for this season is unguaranteed, so they can get something better out of him (probably by sending him as a complementary piece in another deal).

I don't like Outlaw, even though he'd fit a need. Taller Tony Allen in regards to inconsistency. Subpar defender. Not a good rebounder. Doesn't pass the ball. Takes lots of shots. Relatively inefficient. 

[ssspence]

The problem is that Outlaw may not be back until April or something. It's a foot fracture, he may very well be out for the season. It's always difficult to predict how fractures heal. Then you'd need to get back into game form and work him into the system. All these with the play-offs starting - and this is a best case scenario.

Anyway I don't think the Blazers do this (they'd certainly not take Giddens, why is he in the deal? To force them to waive one of their players and waste the money in Giddens?): Outlaw's contract for this season is unguaranteed, so they can get something better out of him (probably by sending him as a complementary piece in another deal).

I don't like Outlaw, even though he'd fit a need. Taller Tony Allen in regards to inconsistency. Subpar defender. Not a good rebounder. Doesn't pass the ball. Takes lots of shots. Relatively inefficient. 

Did you just compare Outlaw to Tony Allen? I get he's not perfect, but one guy is a 4th quarter assassin, and one guy is a basket case. You guess which is which.

I'm talking about trading him for Scal. You wouldn't do it? If he never plays, fine. If he does and likes playing with Rondo and Perk for years to come, he resigns.

[scoop]

The problem is that Outlaw may not be back until April or something. It's a foot fracture, he may very well be out for the season. It's always difficult to predict how fractures heal. Then you'd need to get back into game form and work him into the system. All these with the play-offs starting - and this is a best case scenario.

Anyway I don't think the Blazers do this (they'd certainly not take Giddens, why is he in the deal? To force them to waive one of their players and waste the money in Giddens?): Outlaw's contract for this season is unguaranteed, so they can get something better out of him (probably by sending him as a complementary piece in another deal).

I don't like Outlaw, even though he'd fit a need. Taller Tony Allen in regards to inconsistency. Subpar defender. Not a good rebounder. Doesn't pass the ball. Takes lots of shots. Relatively inefficient. 

Did you just compare Outlaw to Tony Allen? I get he's not perfect, but one guy is a 4th quarter assassin, and one guy is a basket case. You guess which is which.

Absolutely. Outlaw is a better player than Allen but not because of his higher BBIQ or reliability. I agree he's an assassin - too bad you never know if he's going to murder his own team.

I'm talking about trading him for Scal. You wouldn't do it? If he never plays, fine. If he does and likes playing with Rondo and Perk for years to come, he resigns.

I think Scal will be more necessary - if the roster stays as it is - than most people are assuming. If Outlaw doesn't play we lose whatever Scalabrine brings. If he plays, it's a crap shot: depending on his form after recovering for a fractured foot, he can be a decent contributor or subtraction by addition. The only reason I'd do this trade would be if I had another trade lined up where Outlaw's unguaranteed contract would be more valuable than Scalabrine's guaranteed contract.

[ssspence]

The problem is that Outlaw may not be back until April or something. It's a foot fracture, he may very well be out for the season. It's always difficult to predict how fractures heal. Then you'd need to get back into game form and work him into the system. All these with the play-offs starting - and this is a best case scenario.

Anyway I don't think the Blazers do this (they'd certainly not take Giddens, why is he in the deal? To force them to waive one of their players and waste the money in Giddens?): Outlaw's contract for this season is unguaranteed, so they can get something better out of him (probably by sending him as a complementary piece in another deal).

I don't like Outlaw, even though he'd fit a need. Taller Tony Allen in regards to inconsistency. Subpar defender. Not a good rebounder. Doesn't pass the ball. Takes lots of shots. Relatively inefficient. 

Did you just compare Outlaw to Tony Allen? I get he's not perfect, but one guy is a 4th quarter assassin, and one guy is a basket case. You guess which is which.

Absolutely. Outlaw is a better player than Allen but not because of his higher BBIQ or reliability. I agree he's an assassin - too bad you never know if he's going to murder his own team.

I'm talking about trading him for Scal. You wouldn't do it? If he never plays, fine. If he does and likes playing with Rondo and Perk for years to come, he resigns.

I think Scal will be more necessary - if the roster stays as it is - than most people are assuming. If Outlaw doesn't play we lose whatever Scalabrine brings. If he plays, it's a crap shot: depending on his form after recovering for a fractured foot, he can be a decent contributor or subtraction by addition. The only reason I'd do this trade would be if I had another trade lined up where Outlaw's unguaranteed contract would be more valuable than Scalabrine's guaranteed contract.

ugh