The Magloire Trade
Apparently Steve Patterson and Kevin Pritchard are reading my blog and thank goodness. I guess they heard my plea for NBA action in the sports dessert that is the summer. Now that Landis has managed to ruin the short lived joy gleaned from the Tour de Lance (that name is sticking, at least here), and the Giants have managed to squander some pretty good talent and a very weak division, I need something to supplement my growing football fever. So, even though most of my sports reading these days is about football, the action is still in hoops.
The Blazers made their 7th trade of the offseason this past week when they sent Ha, Brian Skinner and Steve Blake to Milwaukie for Jamal Magloire. Frankly, I think this is probably a win/win, but I really like the trade for the Blazers, even though it is a bit surprising.
What they gave up –
1. Ha – Ha is huge. I mean really big. Not only is he a legit 7’4 or 7’5, but he is pretty thick. You can see why anyone who knows basketball would have walked into a gym, seen him and started drooling. The problem is he can’t play….at all. He doesn’t know how and has shown zero signs of learning. He is timid and lost and has no discernable skills in spite of the fact that he’s been with the Blazers a couple (three?) years now. In other words, he has the unteachable trait of height, but nothing else. He did not show that he had taken any steps forward in summer ball. Bottom line, he wasn’t going to play this year and probably wouldn’t help ever, but certainly not in the next couple of years. No loss.
2. Skinner – I like Skinner. He works hard and is an underrated athlete. I always thought that if he could get 30 minutes a game he could be in the top 10 in the league in rebounding and is a pretty good defender. Problem is that he is a liability on offense and not good enough anywhere to really justify those 30 minutes in the NBA. He’s a good backup and can play physical in the half court and get out and run a bit. Probably a great practice guy who could fill in as a starter for 10-15 games a year at the 4 or the 5. But that’s not only his current status, that’s his ceiling. And now the Blazers are pretty deep in the front court with Raef, Zach, Aldridge and Joel. He has some value, but the Blazers didn’t need him and he certainly wasn’t a part of the long term plan.
3. Blake – Here’s the tough one. Not only is Blake a very good, underrated true point guard, but he was also one of the more popular Blazers. The crowd loved Blake because he seems like a genuinely good guy and teammate who plays hard at both ends every night and cares more about winning than stats or highlights. Those guys are very rare these days as everyone knows and the Portland crowd lives for them, which partially explains all those empty seats in the Rose Garden the last couple years. The problem with Blake was that he was better than the other PGs on our roster, but not going to be great. He is always going to be solid, but not great. We’re hoping Jack will be great and he can’t get out on the floor if the solid guy on the roster is outplaying him before he becomes great. Make sense? Probably only barely at best. Blake should have been our starting guard based on current ability, but Portland has to get their young guys on the floor because their potential is so much higher and we have to see if it is for real. So, while Blake was a bigger loss than most people will realize, he probably had to go. That said, it also hurts that last year he was Portland’s most reliable outside shooter, could play both guard positions and didn’t seem to mind whether he was starting or coming off the bench. I hate losing him. Apparently the Blazers wanted to ship Dixon out and man, that would have been better.
What we get –
1. Magloire – First, we get one of the better true centers in the league. Seriously. After Shaq, who himself is a shadow of his former greatness, the top true centers in the league is pretty barren of actual basketball talent. And so, a mediocre player like Magloire is near the top of the list. He could easily average a double/double, he’s durable and is a decent shotblocker. He’s not a great defender or great athlete, but most nights, he will be the best center on the floor and that is worth something.
2. Front court depth – You really can’t have too much in the NBA. I think this is actually perfect because it allows Joel to come off the bench which he is better suited to do, but it also allows the Blazers to bring Aldridge along slowly and play him mostly at the 4 behind Zach. Of course, as every Blazer fan is buzzing about, it also should clear the way to be able to trade Zach….I guess. The thing worth remembering is that at this point, Zach is still the Blazer’s only low post offensive threat at the forward position. Just having some good bigs out there isn’t enough on a team that has the scoring problems the Blazers have. I think it is more important for sustaining injuries, keeping guys fresh and giving you the option to go with some very big lineups.
3. Back court space – As referenced above, it also clears the way for the Blazers to play their ultra young back court. If you have a guy like Blake outplaying the young guys, you can’t really keep playing Jack 35 minutes a game before the crowd storms the floor and in wild, random riot. But at this point, Roy, Jack, Spanish Chocolate and eventually Dickau should all be able to find some minutes at the one or two. Notice I don’t mention Dixon because no one here expects Dixon to be on the roster and he is a terrible PG anyway and should play exclusively as a 2 off the bench.
So, I think the Blazers got way more than they gave up. A few other notes about this trade.
First, it is surprising that the Blazers brought in someone in their prime to go along with the rebuilding, but I like the move because it tells me the Blazers haven’t become so myopically focused on developing youth that they have scrapped being competitive altogether.
Second, Magloire has a good contract. 8 Mil this year and then he’s a FA, but the Blazers have his full Bird rights which means they should be able to provide the most attractive offer if they want to keep him around. But they also have the option to clear his salary off the books if they need FA money.
Third, I want to go on record now about this alleged trend in the NBA to move away from big traditional centers. I keep hearing the game is more uptempo now and focused on perimeter scorers and you just don’t need size like you used to in today’s NBA. What? Since when? Exactly two teams in the entire league made a concerted effort to play uptempo all the time and reduce their need for inside post-up players who could score in the half court. 2. Not 20. 2!!. Phoenix and Toronto. Both those names are significant. Phoenix, because their popularity, and exciting style along with their success thanks to a great coach and loads of talent has led to this ridiculous conclusion that there is some sort of anti big or even uptempo trend in the NBA. There isn’t. Even the increased scoring has more to do with free throw attempts than a change in style of play.
Toronto is important because it helps prove my point. Toronto sucked. So, you can’t just throw out a group of guys and tell them to run and gun and get the success Phoenix enjoys. Well, guess what, the other coaches and GMs in the league mostly know that which is why everyone is still looking for big guys who can play in the half court. Look at the top teams other than Phoenix and tell me what trend you see: Dallas (plays Damp and Diop big joint minutes and Diop was one of the keys to their success); SA (plays TD and usually a true 5 right next to him and plays mostly in the half court); Miami (the decidedly down-tempo Shaq), Detroit (a bit of an exception at center, but does not play uptempo at all); Cleveland (they throw it in to Z a lot); Clippers (Grand Kaman is a run last true 5). See a trend here. Except Phoenix, the top teams, don’t run particularly often and rely heavily on a true center.
My point is the game has not become some free-wheeling run and shoot fest with a reduced need for size. Only one team has done that and done it well. Everyone else, is still playing like they were 5 years ago, with the only difference being now their guards get to go to the foul line every time they shoot.
All of that to say, that there is no reduced need for big men and having more is better. So, having Magloire is better. I hate losing Blake, but it’s for the best. As for Milwaukie, I loved their trade of TJ for Charlie V and I figured they would go after a PG. I would have thought they could get more for Magloire, but maybe not and Blake should be a great fit on a team that now has quite a few scoring options. Blake is steady, will distribute and doesn’t need to over dribble or shoot to keep himself in the game. Redd, Simmons, Bogut and Vilanueva should all be relieved that Blake will be running the show instead of Mo.
That’s all for now. More when I get back from Hawaii.
Apparently Steve Patterson and Kevin Pritchard are reading my blog and thank goodness. I guess they heard my plea for NBA action in the sports dessert that is the summer. Now that Landis has managed to ruin the short lived joy gleaned from the Tour de Lance (that name is sticking, at least here), and the Giants have managed to squander some pretty good talent and a very weak division, I need something to supplement my growing football fever. So, even though most of my sports reading these days is about football, the action is still in hoops.
The Blazers made their 7th trade of the offseason this past week when they sent Ha, Brian Skinner and Steve Blake to Milwaukie for Jamal Magloire. Frankly, I think this is probably a win/win, but I really like the trade for the Blazers, even though it is a bit surprising.
What they gave up –
1. Ha – Ha is huge. I mean really big. Not only is he a legit 7’4 or 7’5, but he is pretty thick. You can see why anyone who knows basketball would have walked into a gym, seen him and started drooling. The problem is he can’t play….at all. He doesn’t know how and has shown zero signs of learning. He is timid and lost and has no discernable skills in spite of the fact that he’s been with the Blazers a couple (three?) years now. In other words, he has the unteachable trait of height, but nothing else. He did not show that he had taken any steps forward in summer ball. Bottom line, he wasn’t going to play this year and probably wouldn’t help ever, but certainly not in the next couple of years. No loss.
2. Skinner – I like Skinner. He works hard and is an underrated athlete. I always thought that if he could get 30 minutes a game he could be in the top 10 in the league in rebounding and is a pretty good defender. Problem is that he is a liability on offense and not good enough anywhere to really justify those 30 minutes in the NBA. He’s a good backup and can play physical in the half court and get out and run a bit. Probably a great practice guy who could fill in as a starter for 10-15 games a year at the 4 or the 5. But that’s not only his current status, that’s his ceiling. And now the Blazers are pretty deep in the front court with Raef, Zach, Aldridge and Joel. He has some value, but the Blazers didn’t need him and he certainly wasn’t a part of the long term plan.
3. Blake – Here’s the tough one. Not only is Blake a very good, underrated true point guard, but he was also one of the more popular Blazers. The crowd loved Blake because he seems like a genuinely good guy and teammate who plays hard at both ends every night and cares more about winning than stats or highlights. Those guys are very rare these days as everyone knows and the Portland crowd lives for them, which partially explains all those empty seats in the Rose Garden the last couple years. The problem with Blake was that he was better than the other PGs on our roster, but not going to be great. He is always going to be solid, but not great. We’re hoping Jack will be great and he can’t get out on the floor if the solid guy on the roster is outplaying him before he becomes great. Make sense? Probably only barely at best. Blake should have been our starting guard based on current ability, but Portland has to get their young guys on the floor because their potential is so much higher and we have to see if it is for real. So, while Blake was a bigger loss than most people will realize, he probably had to go. That said, it also hurts that last year he was Portland’s most reliable outside shooter, could play both guard positions and didn’t seem to mind whether he was starting or coming off the bench. I hate losing him. Apparently the Blazers wanted to ship Dixon out and man, that would have been better.
What we get –
1. Magloire – First, we get one of the better true centers in the league. Seriously. After Shaq, who himself is a shadow of his former greatness, the top true centers in the league is pretty barren of actual basketball talent. And so, a mediocre player like Magloire is near the top of the list. He could easily average a double/double, he’s durable and is a decent shotblocker. He’s not a great defender or great athlete, but most nights, he will be the best center on the floor and that is worth something.
2. Front court depth – You really can’t have too much in the NBA. I think this is actually perfect because it allows Joel to come off the bench which he is better suited to do, but it also allows the Blazers to bring Aldridge along slowly and play him mostly at the 4 behind Zach. Of course, as every Blazer fan is buzzing about, it also should clear the way to be able to trade Zach….I guess. The thing worth remembering is that at this point, Zach is still the Blazer’s only low post offensive threat at the forward position. Just having some good bigs out there isn’t enough on a team that has the scoring problems the Blazers have. I think it is more important for sustaining injuries, keeping guys fresh and giving you the option to go with some very big lineups.
3. Back court space – As referenced above, it also clears the way for the Blazers to play their ultra young back court. If you have a guy like Blake outplaying the young guys, you can’t really keep playing Jack 35 minutes a game before the crowd storms the floor and in wild, random riot. But at this point, Roy, Jack, Spanish Chocolate and eventually Dickau should all be able to find some minutes at the one or two. Notice I don’t mention Dixon because no one here expects Dixon to be on the roster and he is a terrible PG anyway and should play exclusively as a 2 off the bench.
So, I think the Blazers got way more than they gave up. A few other notes about this trade.
First, it is surprising that the Blazers brought in someone in their prime to go along with the rebuilding, but I like the move because it tells me the Blazers haven’t become so myopically focused on developing youth that they have scrapped being competitive altogether.
Second, Magloire has a good contract. 8 Mil this year and then he’s a FA, but the Blazers have his full Bird rights which means they should be able to provide the most attractive offer if they want to keep him around. But they also have the option to clear his salary off the books if they need FA money.
Third, I want to go on record now about this alleged trend in the NBA to move away from big traditional centers. I keep hearing the game is more uptempo now and focused on perimeter scorers and you just don’t need size like you used to in today’s NBA. What? Since when? Exactly two teams in the entire league made a concerted effort to play uptempo all the time and reduce their need for inside post-up players who could score in the half court. 2. Not 20. 2!!. Phoenix and Toronto. Both those names are significant. Phoenix, because their popularity, and exciting style along with their success thanks to a great coach and loads of talent has led to this ridiculous conclusion that there is some sort of anti big or even uptempo trend in the NBA. There isn’t. Even the increased scoring has more to do with free throw attempts than a change in style of play.
Toronto is important because it helps prove my point. Toronto sucked. So, you can’t just throw out a group of guys and tell them to run and gun and get the success Phoenix enjoys. Well, guess what, the other coaches and GMs in the league mostly know that which is why everyone is still looking for big guys who can play in the half court. Look at the top teams other than Phoenix and tell me what trend you see: Dallas (plays Damp and Diop big joint minutes and Diop was one of the keys to their success); SA (plays TD and usually a true 5 right next to him and plays mostly in the half court); Miami (the decidedly down-tempo Shaq), Detroit (a bit of an exception at center, but does not play uptempo at all); Cleveland (they throw it in to Z a lot); Clippers (Grand Kaman is a run last true 5). See a trend here. Except Phoenix, the top teams, don’t run particularly often and rely heavily on a true center.
My point is the game has not become some free-wheeling run and shoot fest with a reduced need for size. Only one team has done that and done it well. Everyone else, is still playing like they were 5 years ago, with the only difference being now their guards get to go to the foul line every time they shoot.
All of that to say, that there is no reduced need for big men and having more is better. So, having Magloire is better. I hate losing Blake, but it’s for the best. As for Milwaukie, I loved their trade of TJ for Charlie V and I figured they would go after a PG. I would have thought they could get more for Magloire, but maybe not and Blake should be a great fit on a team that now has quite a few scoring options. Blake is steady, will distribute and doesn’t need to over dribble or shoot to keep himself in the game. Redd, Simmons, Bogut and Vilanueva should all be relieved that Blake will be running the show instead of Mo.
That’s all for now. More when I get back from Hawaii.
Comments