PDA

View Full Version : Another rumor



Ultimate Frisbee
06-10-2004, 10:52 AM
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sonics/2001952602_soni10.html



Thursday, June 10, 2004 - Page updated at 12:00 A.M.

Sonics
Sonics might be looking to deal top pick

By Percy Allen
Seattle Times staff reporter

CHICAGO The evaluation process, which began three weeks ago and will conclude seconds before Seattle selects in the June 24 NBA draft, has yet to unearth a player the Sonics feel comfortable selecting at No. 12 overall.

In part, that is why they have flown the coaching staff and various front-office and scouting personnel to Chicago, where they will sit in the stands at Moody Bible Institute and take notes on the 60 prospects.

It's an exhaustive search that begins with drills in the morning and several games in the afternoon and early evening.

But because most of the best players participate in only physical testing and interviews while skipping scrimmages, the Sonics are unlikely to find their guy this week and are more apt to discover players they might choose with their two second-round picks.

There is, however, another incentive to being at the camp, general manager Rick Sund noted days before leaving for Chicago.

"With everybody being there, all of the league's GMs and coaches, there's going to be some talk about all sorts of possibilities," he said. "A lot of talk started after the draft lottery two weeks ago, and it's only going to pick up."

Seattle, which has sought a prominent power forward the past two years, figures to be among the teams seeking to make a deal that involves either its draft picks, players or both.

With last year's top pick, Nick Collison, returning he missed the past season because of two shoulder surgeries the Sonics have committed to a young power forward.

"We're not married to our pick," Sund said. "With Nick coming back, we have the flexibility to move our pick. We've added so much youth to our team that you have to look at how viable would it be to add another young player.

"We've got a lot of options. We can trade the pick. Move the pick, whether that means going back or trying to move up higher. Draft for a specific area where we need help. Take the best player. Or take a big (player). A lot of that depends on the expansion draft."

Each team can protect eight players off its 2003-04 roster, including restricted free agents, and must submit its list before tomorrow's deadline.

Charlotte, the NBA's newest franchise, must select a minimum of 14 players from NBA rosters in the expansion draft, which will be held June 22, or June 23 if the NBA Finals is extended to a seventh game.

Seattle is expected to protect Ray Allen, Rashard Lewis, Collison, Luke Ridnour, Vladimir Radmanovic, Ronald Murray and Antonio Daniels.

The Sonics will likely expose Richie Frahm and Calvin Booth and must decide between Reggie Evans, Vitaly Potapenko and Jerome James for the eighth protected spot.

Bernie Bickerstaff, the Bobcats' general manager and coach, has said he's looking for young, athletic players with modest contracts in the expansion draft, so it would seem unlikely that Charlotte would select any Sonics.

The bigger question facing Seattle is whether Sund and coach Nate McMillan, both in the last years of their contracts, plan to tweak the current model or perform a major reconstruction of personnel.

In the days after the 37-45 season, McMillan said he favored returning most of the team. Sund said: "I don't want to do a deal just to do a deal," but insisted he'll explore a major trade.

Early speculation fueled by Internet reports had the Sonics linked with Portland in a trade involving Ray Allen and Shareef Abdur-Rahim.

Citing team policy, Sund declined to comment on the rumor. Team sources, however, said the report was bogus. Portland is shopping Abdur-Rahim, but it appears the Sonics are unwilling to part with Allen and are working toward an extension that both sides believe will be completed before training camp.

"I want to be and I expect to be in Seattle," Allen said weeks ago. "That's my intention."

Excluding Allen, Seattle's top trade assets include Lewis, Radmanovic and Murray. A combination of those players might be enough to convince Portland to deal Abdur-Rahim or Indiana to trade Al Harrington.

The Los Angeles Clippers, who have the second overall pick and need a point guard, are reportedly shopping Chris Wilcox, and Memphis' Pau Gasol may be available for the right price.

The top free-agent power forward is Kenyon Martin, but he's too costly for the Sonics, who are over the projected $45 million salary cap and have only the mid-level and million-dollar exceptions.

Even the likes of Stromile Swift may be too expensive for Seattle if it hopes to re-sign unrestricted free agent Brent Barry.

Although there is large amount of underclassmen who have made themselves available for the draft, most won't be able to help a team right away.

"It's a very good draft," Sund said. "A draft, however, in which the immediate contribution from these players won't be seen next year. More down the line. It's getting closer and closer to baseball. We're drafting younger kids who need to develop and mature."

If the Sonics keep the No. 12 pick, many NBA sources believe they will use it on a small forward who would replace free agent Ansu Sesay and back up Lewis.

"The pick itself is not going to be a make or break for us," Sund said. "We think the team can make the playoffs next year. The playoffs are our goal. We think we can get there with everybody we had last year, because they are a year older."

Ultimate Frisbee
06-10-2004, 10:59 AM
The only person that I'd consider out of the three "assets" is Murray... he could be a decent SG for us... We really don't need another SF/PF tweener...

Suaveness
06-10-2004, 11:02 AM
The only person that I'd consider out of the three "assets" is Murray... he could be a decent SG for us... We really don't need another SF/PF tweener...

He's only played one good year...and I think Al is better than he is.

Ultimate Frisbee
06-10-2004, 11:06 AM
The only person that I'd consider out of the three "assets" is Murray... he could be a decent SG for us... We really don't need another SF/PF tweener...

He's only played one good year...and I think Al is better than he is.

Oh yeah... I totally agree! :)
I guess my point is that Seattle will have to give something more if they want Al...

Also, the trade wouldn't even be close to working salary-wise...

Ultimate Frisbee
06-10-2004, 11:07 AM
One thing that I don't understand is why they want Shareef Abdur Rahim... I don't think he has ever been on a team that has been over .400 (unless you count the trailblazers in which case he didn't even play)... He is so soft

LAPacer
06-10-2004, 11:12 AM
If we could get both Flip and Lewis, might be worth Al and a Pollard/Cro combo. But It really doesn't make us that much better, and I don't think Seattle would do it.

wintermute
06-10-2004, 11:18 AM
al harrington for the #12 pick + brent barry (s & t) works for me...

bones gives us guard depth for now and we can draft someone like luke jackson as the sg of the future with the #12

Ultimate Frisbee
06-10-2004, 11:20 AM
al harrington for the #12 pick + brent barry (s & t) works for me...

bones gives us guard depth for now and we can draft someone like luke jackson as the sg of the future with the #12

Great trade... I kinda doubt they'll do it though... I really want Brent Barry... He fits our teams needs perfectly right now...

Ultimate Frisbee
06-10-2004, 11:22 AM
If we could get both Flip and Lewis, might be worth Al and a Pollard/Cro combo. But It really doesn't make us that much better, and I don't think Seattle would do it.

From what I hear, that is feasible...

Perhaps we'd have to throw in Fred or someone too though...

RWB
06-10-2004, 11:30 AM
[quote="ILovethePacers"]http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sonics/2001952602_soni10.html

[b]Excluding Allen, Seattle's top trade assets include Lewis, Radmanovic and Murray. A combination of those players might be enough to convince Portland to deal Abdur-Rahim or Indiana to trade Al Harrington. [/b


Thanks Seattle...I don't see anything happening with the Sonics, but this does help the Pacers. Keep Al's name out there and maybe his stock will continue to rise with other teams afraid on missing out. :)

ChicagoJ
06-10-2004, 12:42 PM
al harrington for the #12 pick + brent barry (s & t) works for me...

bones gives us guard depth for now and we can draft someone like luke jackson as the sg of the future with the #12

Great trade... I kinda doubt they'll do it though... I really want Brent Barry... He fits our teams needs perfectly right now...

IMO, this is pretty good but I'm not sure it solves our immediate SG problem. I see BB as the perfect combo guard, so do you think Luke Jackson could start at SG as a rookie (remember, I don't watch the semi-pro game, so I don't know much about him)?

Hicks
06-10-2004, 12:44 PM
Al for Murray and their first draft pick. That's 12 or 13 I think.

wintermute
06-10-2004, 12:48 PM
al harrington for the #12 pick + brent barry (s & t) works for me...

bones gives us guard depth for now and we can draft someone like luke jackson as the sg of the future with the #12

Great trade... I kinda doubt they'll do it though... I really want Brent Barry... He fits our teams needs perfectly right now...

IMO, this is pretty good but I'm not sure it solves our immediate SG problem. I see BB as the perfect combo guard, so do you think Luke Jackson could start at SG as a rookie (remember, I don't watch the semi-pro game, so I don't know much about him)?

actually, i would start bones at sg, with fred as the combo guard (or vice versa). the rookie sg gets spot minutes until he proves himself. this is a nice setup i think because with barry on board the rookie can be brought along slowly.

wintermute
06-10-2004, 12:53 PM
Al for Murray and their first draft pick. That's 12 or 13 I think.

it's 12. salaries don't match though, seattle would have to include someone like jerome james or potapenko.

ROCislandWarrior
06-10-2004, 02:22 PM
Al for Murray and their first draft pick. That's 12 or 13 I think.

it's 12. salaries don't match though, seattle would have to include someone like jerome james or potapenko.

JJ to give us some size.

I don't think we should throw Fred Jones into any deal UNLESS we get a starting SG in return. IMO it would be pointless for us to trade away Fred for a future 2 because...ummm...isn't that what Fred is?

I would really like to hold onto Fred for atleast 1 more year...he may explode next year..or maybe he won't. The point is none of us know which one it will be. This team doesn't need a trade to help us 4 years from know, we need a trade to help us Next Year.

Snickers
06-10-2004, 02:31 PM
Maybe I've just got a higher opinion of Rashard Lewis than most of you, but I'm kind of surprised that Seattle would consider including him as a piece of a deal to get Al.... I'd have figured him to be just as valuable, but probably more valuable than Al.... unless there's been some kind of turmoil or off-court problems with him? :confused:

I know we've got no place to play him, a guy who's a 17-ppg scorer and a career 38% three point shooter should get more attention than this. [same with Radmanovic, how did he become trade fodder?]

Maybe we could work out a three-way deal with us getting Murray and/or Brent Barry [is he on the block?], and a solid big man from someone else....

Cactus Jax
06-10-2004, 02:43 PM
Rashard Lewis would be perfect to play with Artest. The guy can shoot the ball, plus he's somewhat tall and can steal the ball fairly well.

If it's Al Harrington, Pollard/Croshere, and Freddie for Rashard Lewis, and Jerome James somehow, that would be awesome.

And maybe even Freddie wouldn't be included. :dance: :pepper:

indygeezer
06-10-2004, 02:44 PM
Agreed, Raheed Lewis is a player. I'm surprised he's even mentioned. Rodmanovich I'm not too surprised about. But from what I've read, some of their fans would send JJ away for a bag of popcorn and a new chia pet.

ChicagoJ
06-10-2004, 06:09 PM
I don't think we should throw Fred Jones into any deal UNLESS we get a starting SG in return. IMO it would be pointless for us to trade away Fred for a future 2 because...ummm...isn't that what Fred is?

Did I miss a memo?

The last I checked, he was drafted to be a combo guard, and Pacers' management has said that 'Reggie's successor is not currently on the roster.'

At 6'2", its a bad idea to think that his 'best' position is SG. His althetic ability my help him overcome that for a couple more seasons, but when his quickness/ leaping slips by just a little bit, he might be done.

Ultimate Frisbee
06-10-2004, 06:23 PM
I don't think we should throw Fred Jones into any deal UNLESS we get a starting SG in return. IMO it would be pointless for us to trade away Fred for a future 2 because...ummm...isn't that what Fred is?

Did I miss a memo?

The last I checked, he was drafted to be a combo guard, and Pacers' management has said that 'Reggie's successor is not currently on the roster.'

At 6'2", its a bad idea to think that his 'best' position is SG. His althetic ability my help him overcome that for a couple more seasons, but when his quickness/ leaping slips by just a little bit, he might be done.

Fred is 6'4"... still a little short for a SG

ChicagoJ
06-10-2004, 06:46 PM
I don't think we should throw Fred Jones into any deal UNLESS we get a starting SG in return. IMO it would be pointless for us to trade away Fred for a future 2 because...ummm...isn't that what Fred is?

Did I miss a memo?

The last I checked, he was drafted to be a combo guard, and Pacers' management has said that 'Reggie's successor is not currently on the roster.'

At 6'2", its a bad idea to think that his 'best' position is SG. His althetic ability my help him overcome that for a couple more seasons, but when his quickness/ leaping slips by just a little bit, he might be done.

Fred is 6'4"... still a little short for a SG

I don't mind admitting that I'm wrong, when I'm wrong.

But...

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/fred_jones/index.html?nav=page


... I'm right. :nunchuck:

ChicagoJ
06-10-2004, 07:14 PM
I don't think we should throw Fred Jones into any deal UNLESS we get a starting SG in return. IMO it would be pointless for us to trade away Fred for a future 2 because...ummm...isn't that what Fred is?

Did I miss a memo?

The last I checked, he was drafted to be a combo guard, and Pacers' management has said that 'Reggie's successor is not currently on the roster.'

At 6'2", its a bad idea to think that his 'best' position is SG. His althetic ability my help him overcome that for a couple more seasons, but when his quickness/ leaping slips by just a little bit, he might be done.

Right, cuz he's such a weak bone of man that quickness is all he has!!!!!!!! :rolleyes:

No, I'm saying that when his athleticism no longer gives him the ability to make up four-to-six inches in height, if he hasn't developed some PG skills he'll probably flame out quickly like similar sized and similar skilled players (Mateen Cleeves, Respert, Greg Graham, etc.)

Suaveness
06-10-2004, 09:52 PM
I can't believe you be dissin' Fred Jones! I'm gonna bust some caps and split some wigs around here! ;)

I think Fred should play PG...it would be interesting. But yes, he might be small for SG.

Snickers
06-10-2004, 10:25 PM
I don't think we should throw Fred Jones into any deal UNLESS we get a starting SG in return. IMO it would be pointless for us to trade away Fred for a future 2 because...ummm...isn't that what Fred is?

Did I miss a memo?

The last I checked, he was drafted to be a combo guard, and Pacers' management has said that 'Reggie's successor is not currently on the roster.'

At 6'2", its a bad idea to think that his 'best' position is SG. His althetic ability my help him overcome that for a couple more seasons, but when his quickness/ leaping slips by just a little bit, he might be done.

Fred is 6'4"... still a little short for a SG

He's strong as a bull and jumps like a kangaroo. He's NOT too small. :unimpressed:

I think what he's trying to say is that when he can't jump like a kangaroo or run like an antelope anymore, he won't be much of a player. Not many players, especially 2-guards, can make it on athleticism alone for their whole careers.

Just like any player, to be a consistent and valuable long-term player, he needs some bona fide skills. I think he has some good skills, and he's improving in all areas. He'll be the athletic sparkplug he is now for a while longer, but once he starts getting older, he'll need his point guard skills, shooting, defensive positioning, passing, ballhandling, etc. to remain a key player.

Pacer4fun
06-10-2004, 10:47 PM
Al for Murray and their first draft pick. That's 12 or 13 I think.

Do it!!!! I've followed Murray all season and at 6-4 he is tall enough to play SG, plus he can penatrate to the basket. He reminds me of Wade and who wouldn't want Wade. He is a terrific outside shooter, and handles the ball well. Every time Allen was injured, Murray took his place and would score big time. At the 12 spot we have some good choices to pick from. Yep, I would do it.

ChicagoJ
06-10-2004, 10:50 PM
I don't think we should throw Fred Jones into any deal UNLESS we get a starting SG in return. IMO it would be pointless for us to trade away Fred for a future 2 because...ummm...isn't that what Fred is?

Did I miss a memo?

The last I checked, he was drafted to be a combo guard, and Pacers' management has said that 'Reggie's successor is not currently on the roster.'

At 6'2", its a bad idea to think that his 'best' position is SG. His althetic ability my help him overcome that for a couple more seasons, but when his quickness/ leaping slips by just a little bit, he might be done.

Fred is 6'4"... still a little short for a SG

He's strong as a bull and jumps like a kangaroo. He's NOT too small. :unimpressed:

I think what he's trying to say is that when he can't jump like a kangaroo or run like an antelope anymore, he won't be much of a player. Not many players, especially 2-guards, can make it on athleticism alone for their whole careers.

Just like any player, to be a consistent and valuable long-term player, he needs some bona fide skills. I think he has some good skills, and he's improving in all areas. He'll be the athletic sparkplug he is now for a while longer, but once he starts getting older, he'll need his point guard skills, shooting, defensive positioning, passing, ballhandling, etc. to remain a key player.


Yes. Thanks.

indygeezer
06-11-2004, 12:26 AM
I'm with Jay on this. He may keep his hop[s forever, or he could twist a knee and never really regain his old self (see AH on defense). He MUST develope the skills of a PG because he'd be an undersized SG without the leapping ability.

Another note. I keep reading where Murray has "only had one good year" or Dampier has only had one good year. When has Al Harrington had two good years? Basically Al has only had one really good year and that was this one. (oh just forget about the PO disappearance). SO to disparage Murray, Dampier, or whoever because of "only one good year" is to paint Al with the same brush.

Arcadian
06-11-2004, 12:44 AM
Al had a good year before he got hurt two season ago.

I think a most is that whatever sg we gat is at least 6'5 or at least no Flip, Mobley or Crawford. Otherwise we will have a much too small backcourt.

Ultimate Frisbee
06-11-2004, 12:51 AM
I don't think we should throw Fred Jones into any deal UNLESS we get a starting SG in return. IMO it would be pointless for us to trade away Fred for a future 2 because...ummm...isn't that what Fred is?

Did I miss a memo?

The last I checked, he was drafted to be a combo guard, and Pacers' management has said that 'Reggie's successor is not currently on the roster.'

At 6'2", its a bad idea to think that his 'best' position is SG. His althetic ability my help him overcome that for a couple more seasons, but when his quickness/ leaping slips by just a little bit, he might be done.

Fred is 6'4"... still a little short for a SG

I don't mind admitting that I'm wrong, when I'm wrong.

But...

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/fred_jones/index.html?nav=page


... I'm right. :nunchuck:

I checked 2 sources before posting... ESPN.com
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3612

and hoopshype.com

http://www.hoopshype.com/players/fred_jones.htm

I think they just must have used different measuring sticks or something...

TheSauceMaster
06-11-2004, 01:02 AM
I would believe the Pacers number , alot of times they tend to add alittle height ;)

Snickers
06-11-2004, 01:22 AM
I think Freddie was listed as 6'4" as a rookie, and most sites haven't updated since then. He's really closer to 6'2" [I've seen him once in person, and I'm 6'1"-6'2" and about the same height.]

I like Freddie a lot; he's my favourite bench Pacer. He's become a great defender and surprisingly, a reliable shooter as well. If he can get comfortable enough playing the point to play as a true combo guard off the bench, he'll be a very valuable player for a long time.

:dance:

TheSauceMaster
06-11-2004, 01:27 AM
I thought Fred Played PG at Oregon or was I dreaming ?

indygeezer
06-11-2004, 07:14 AM
I'm with Jay on this. He may keep his hop[s forever, or he could twist a knee and never really regain his old self (see AH on defense). He MUST develope the skills of a PG because he'd be an undersized SG without the leapping ability.

Another note. I keep reading where Murray has "only had one good year" or Dampier has only had one good year. When has Al Harrington had two good years? Basically Al has only had one really good year and that was this one. (oh just forget about the PO disappearance). SO to disparage Murray, Dampier, or whoever because of "only one good year" is to paint Al with the same brush.

Name ONE guard that could blow a knee and never really regain his old self, and still be effective in this league.

???
???
???
That's what I thought. There ISN"T one.
C'mon, these moronic statements are getting out of control.


What we're saying is he has to develop the gaurd skills and not just rely on his athletic ability. Hops won't do it for you forever, and at 6'2' you'd best be able to make the play. He hasn't shown that ability yet. Until recently I was VERY down on Freddie, he hadn't shown me anything. Then in the last 1/4 of the season he started doing more as a SG and not just trying to dunk. Can he play the point? I dunno, he's from the NW I didn't see him in college, but the fact that they haven't used him in that position yet tells me a little.

As for Harrington, I'll give you that he was good BEFORE his injury, since then his defense has slipped and he's become more concerned with his offense. So, he had a good year, but that is one just like Murray and Dampier. Do I want a trade for either of them??? I trust DW/LB to answer that, they know best. Do I want AL traded?? Again LB/DW know best and they have indicated that they will try. My personal feeling is yes I do.

75Ranger
06-11-2004, 02:43 PM
Back to the orginal trade for a second

i don't think anybody is surprised that Murry available. Playing behind Allen who probably won't be traded and hes in a similar situation like Al is in. Realistcially this has a chance to actually happen. I think Murry is a good player and would seriously consider doing this deal but I wonder if he fits the team, Murry is a scorer/slasher but not necessarily a great long range shooter. He excels in the open court and can hit the mid range jumper but doesn't hit the long range shot with any consistency. He does fit the mold of players Walsh would like to have. Sombody who is young and has a chance to be a star in the league.

However tehy also said lewis is available and that intrigues me. I actually like Murry more then lewis but lewis actually gives us the outside shooter we actually need. He isn't a bonna fide star and I think Seattle realizes that which is why they would consider trading him. Trading him would still make Artest the second option, but most importantly balances our starting lineup where we have a nice mix of toughness, low post scoring and shooting. Since Lewis is strictly a smallforward we would move Artest to shooting guard. Many have questions if he can play that position because hes not an accurate shooter but we all know he can defend two guards so he won't be a liability there then you add Lewis who basically is a sg in a small forwards body and all of a sudden Artest is now a shooting guard for us.

I think Al for Rashard is a fair deal because Seattle like is very unbalanced there problem is there is nothing but shooters on there team. While Rashard puts up better offensive numbers but gives you litte else, Al is a better all around player, hes gives them toughness at the small forward spot, good rebounder and a low post scorer they obviously need. If he was traded to Seattle I think they would move him to three and then trade Murry to get a rebounder/defender for the 4 position and all of a sudden they have a nice mix of shooting, rebounding and defending.

The only reason not to trade for Rashard is other then being a great shooter hes not partically good defender/rebounder especially considering how long he is and how good an athlete he is. However as others have pointed out in other threads Carlisles defensive scheme and Artest playing with him should help hide his limitations. The more I think about this deal the more I like it.