Saturday, August 05, 2006

Just Say No

Blazer vs. Blazer will return next weekend but I want to talk about the latest rumor that I didn't get a chance to talk about yesterday because I wanted to give Ken his due, namely Darius Miles to the Knicks for Quentin Richardson.

Two words: Ugh. Why???

I know we've all been fascinated and excited by the trade bonanza this off-season (myself included) and I know we're all eager to see the rear of Mr. Miles exiting stage right (myself included) but that doesn't mean that any move is a good move. I wonder if we're becoming the frat boys who, having had six or seven shots, now can't differentiate and will just drink anything that's put in front of them. Sorry, but it's time for somebody to cut us off.

The problems with Quentin Richardson:

--He has a long, semi-expensive contract, almost exactly as long and semi-expensive as Miles'. If we get him we'll be as married to him as we are to Miles now.

--He's a head case people! The next team he's on will be his fourth team in as many years. The Clippers didn't want him. The Suns didn't want him. Now the Knicks don't want him. And he supposedly filled a need for at least two of those teams. (I don't understand why the Knicks got him in the first place with all of those score-first guards already.) Does this seem eerily familiar? It should. Two years ago that was Darius Miles.

--Yes, he can shoot 3's well and yes, he's a good rebounder for a guard, but he's also a black hole and a career 40% shooter. He only shot 35% last season. Didn't we just get done with a bunch of low-percentage shooting guards? Aren't we tired of that yet? Besides, do you REALLY want to see this guy and Zach on the floor at the same time? I can already hear the cries. "Why don't we ever move the ball? Why can't [insert young player here] score? Why don't the guys listen to Nate?"

Everybody remembers the huge 3-point shooting game he put up on us when he was in Phoenix, but that was one game in, what, around 415 for him now? If he did that all the time he would never have been on the market in the first place. He'll put up that number of shots every game if you let him, but they ain't going in like that every game. Which means if we get him you better get used to a lot of, "Quentin for three...miss! Duncan rebounds, outlet to Parker, to Bowen...JAM with authority!"

--He's listed as a guard/forward, but that's mostly because New York already has 96 guards and forward is where they stuck him. He's undersized for a small forward and his rebounding advantage goes bye-bye there. He's really a 2-guard. But we have Webster and Roy both wanting some minutes at that position, plus Webster maybe needing some minutes at the 3 (if you do believe in Richardson as a small forward). Roy needs to handle the ball some to be effective and Webster is supposed to be our main outside shooter, both of which would be inhibited by playing Q-Rich many minutes.

In short, this seems a lot like trading a player who's pretty disruptive off the court and sort of disruptive on it for a player who's pretty disruptive on the court and sort of disruptive off it, with no cap relief included and no improved prospects of making another deal down the road. That's not a good idea.

The Whitsitt era should have taught us that not all trades are created equal. Yes, we want to get rid of Darius, but putting ourselves in a nearly identical situation in doing so doesn't help anything. I'd avoid this deal like the plague.

--Dave (


Anonymous Earl said...

Please God no! Darius for Q-Rich? this is such a bad idea. In Phoenix he led the league in three pointers made... but only shot 35% from 3. Now that's not horrible but to take 8 per game and only make 35% that's no good. He also only shot 39% that year. Why would be trade for a volume shooter that shoots such a low percentage. Also he's not known as a defender either. He's undersized at the 3, we already have a couple 2's that need playing time to get better and can already shoot better than him anyway. If his contract was expiring next year I'd be fine with this, but that's not happening. If New York hadn't made the offer already I'd say let's do a sign and trade for Jared Jeffries with Washington.

PLEASE!!! Don't make this trade. I'd rather have Darius.

1:11 PM  
Blogger Ken said...

Thanks for letting me rant yesterday, Dave, It was a blast.

Q Rich? I have no real feelings about this one way or the other. Getting rid of Darius and enjoying the benefits of someone else's honeymoon period might not be the worst thing. However, this does have the stench of a trade for the sake of trading which might not be the best thing.

I call it 50/50.

1:59 PM  
Blogger Dave said...

Like Earl said, if the contract situation were better I might like it more, but we're going to be married to this guy and I don't like that. Isn't there an old story about the cursed coin that has to be sold for less and less each time it's transferred until somebody gets stuck with it because no less can possibly be offered? That's how I feel with both these guys. I don't want to be the last guy holding the bag, so to speak.


2:04 PM  
Anonymous Earl said...

Sorry to chime in again but I just can't stop thinking about how bad this could be. We are all talking on this forum about how great it would be if we can get improved ball movement, but this would be a step backward. He likes to shoot, but doesn't shoot well. The last two places was perfect for him. In Phoenix Nash got him shots so it was ok to shoot, that was his job. In New York everyone was just there to get their own so it didn't matter if he was shooting a lot. Here that would not be his role. At least Darius knows how to get others involved. Anyway you know how I feel about it, I'll digress now.

2:09 PM  
Blogger lyle said...

playing devils advocate here:

if all things are equal with him and miles (attitude, contract, taking up playing time from people who need it more/want it more)...

i'd say q-rich is more valuable to us right now simply because he's a three point shooter (not saying his terrific or even good) and that'll stretch out the defense more when we're in a position now where we need that. i mean, we really have turned into a front-court heavy team this summer, and all those guys can use any amount of space they can get.
even if richardson is taking a lot of shots, and missing most of them... he's still got the reputation as a long range shooter who can occasionally go off.

4:54 PM  
Anonymous Dr. Dave said...

Keeping in mind this is only a rumor, I'll bite anyway.

This would not be good for Portland. Apparently there is some thinking out there (around the league) that the Blazers are desperate and might chase after any ol' bone thrown our way. It seems Q's only likely contribution would be experience, a little rebounding and a weak threat at some outside shooting. Darius brings much more to the floor imo. Yes, we need to keep shopping him and yes, he has said he wants to go. As I've mentioned in an earlier post, it would be to his advantage to play like we know he can play and bring his value back up. If that happens we might get some serious offers.

I get the feeling Zach is staying for now. Let's see what universe Miles is living in at training camp and go from there ( the Rotund One is ready to launch..). Management DOES need to be vigilant and protect their investment at almost any cost. As for the trade rumor; yes, Dave, we can do much better.

8:17 AM  
Blogger BLAZER PROPHET said...

I'm not opposed to this trade. It allows us to move Webster to SF and find more PT for Roy at his best position (PG). QR can be our "veteran presence" off the bench and he can shoot pretty well. I think I'd do it.

8:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


3:24 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home