PDA

View Full Version : Portland wants Curry



OakMoses
06-04-2009, 10:39 AM
Blazers Covet Stephen Curry

The Blazers are "nosing around" to see if they can trade up from their 24th pick and choose Davidson's Stephen Curry.

Curry is a point guard whose main weapon is his jumper. Therefore the thinking is that he would be a good fit next to a ball-handling wing such as Brandon Roy.

http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/59552/20090602/blazers_covet_stephen_curry/

I think Curry would actually be a great fit as a long-term solution at PG for the Blazers. He's not as good defensively as they'd probably like, but he's good enough to help Roy out with the ball-handling and PG duties while not needing the ball in his hands to be at his best.

The question then becomes how do they get him. I figure they need to get up to at least #8. Assuming they won't give up Roy, Fernandez, Aldridge, or Oden, how are they going to get there?

Washington is looking to trade, but I don't think Portland's excess talent is a fit for their roster. Minnesota and Golden State are in similar situations.

I think the best fit is New York.

Here's the trade I think would fit for both teams:

Portland trades Jerryd Bayless, Travis Outlaw, and #24
New York trades #8 and Jared Jeffries.

Why for Portland?

You add the piece that quite possibly completes a contender-level starting lineup for years to come: Curry, Roy, Batum, Aldridge, Oden. You jettison two talented players, but they're players who don't really fit with your future plans.

Why for New York?

You get two young players who are seemingly good fits for D'Antoni's system and that represent a huge net talent increase over Jared Jefferies. You also get another $3.5 million in 2010 cap space.

Thoughts?

p.s. I'm sure this should be in the trade forum, but I was hoping this would generate a bit more discussion than posts there traditionally do.

Slick Pinkham
06-04-2009, 10:52 AM
Wasn't Bayless supposed to be the great fit as a long-term solution at PG for the Blazers? Or at least lots of people thought he was "all that" in his few seconds as a Pacer.

I agree that Curry would be a good fit, actually. I think the Knicks want him too, though, which would make sense in D'Antoni's system.

Kegboy
06-04-2009, 11:05 AM
I never felt Bayless was a good fit for Portland, they should have kept Rush and Jack.

I like Curry for them, but as a third guard. I just don't see him being a full-time point.

idioteque
06-04-2009, 11:09 AM
The Blazers need a PG that is more proven and has a little more experience than Curry. Outlaw and Bayless could be an attractive package that would net someone much better for them. They have enough youth as it is.

duke dynamite
06-04-2009, 11:24 AM
Give these to Shade STAT!!!

http://images.teamsugar.com/files/users/0/3987/47_2007/Picture%201.png

Jonathan
06-04-2009, 11:27 AM
Portland needs Tinsley :)

I really hope Donnie Walsh is using Curry as a smoke screen and will draft another player over him. Portland and Minnesota have the ingredients (draft picks) to make a move with any team in the league.

Major Cold
06-04-2009, 11:33 AM
I think for Outlaw and Bayless and exchange of picks, the Portland can land the 3 pick.

Trader Joe
06-04-2009, 11:51 AM
LOL if Jerryd Bayless gets traded in this draft for any PG. I will die. Talk about a vote of no confidence.

PacerDude
06-04-2009, 12:58 PM
How many college shooting guards have successfully made the transition to NBA PG ??

I just don't see Curry doing it either.

MrSparko
06-04-2009, 01:05 PM
They already have Bayless. If anything they should be trading Roy.

CableKC
06-04-2009, 01:10 PM
Wasn't Bayless supposed to be the great fit as a long-term solution at PG for the Blazers? Or at least lots of people thought he was "all that" in his few seconds as a Pacer.

I agree that Curry would be a good fit, actually. I think the Knicks want him too, though, which would make sense in D'Antoni's system.
It's a huge smokescreen by DW. With so much "apparent" interest in Curry, you can bet that if he falls to the Knicks that DW will be doing some wheeling and dealing to get some other player while moving Eddy Curry or Jared Jeffries while moving down in the draft.

beast23
06-04-2009, 01:22 PM
You guys are talking about Bayless, but jeez what about Blake?

If I've got Blake, who is a very good distributor and a good defender, and have Bayless as a PG in training, what the hell do I need with Curry.

I think the rumor is a bunch of BS.

If not, then send Blake to the Pacers. We'll take him.

Spirit
06-04-2009, 01:33 PM
They already have Bayless. If anything they should be trading Roy.
WTF? :rolleyes:

That's like saying we should trade Granger.

count55
06-04-2009, 01:35 PM
WTF? :rolleyes:

That's like saying we should trade Granger.

Good catch.

d_c
06-04-2009, 01:45 PM
You guys are talking about Bayless, but jeez what about Blake?

If I've got Blake, who is a very good distributor and a good defender, and have Bayless as a PG in training, what the hell do I need with Curry.

I think the rumor is a bunch of BS.

If not, then send Blake to the Pacers. We'll take him.

Portland is a team with a lot of talent and assets. They have the ability and the means to get the things they want.

They might really like his shooting and are looking into acquiring him, who knows? Or maybe it's just a passing interest and all they're just offering up crap and seeing if someone will bite to move up.

Regardless, Portland is in a situation where they have a lot of flexibility and maneuverability to do what they want.

MrSparko
06-04-2009, 02:20 PM
WTF? :rolleyes:

That's like saying we should trade Granger.

Kudos. ;)

grace
06-04-2009, 02:27 PM
Portland needs Tinsley :)


Unfortunately for the Pacers no one needs Tinsley.

Anthem
06-04-2009, 02:55 PM
They already have Bayless. If anything they should be trading Roy.
Yes please! Preferably to the Pacers!

I'd give a TON to get Roy here.

OakMoses
06-04-2009, 02:57 PM
Yes please! Preferably to the Pacers!

I'd give a TON to get Roy here.

We missed that boat. We probably had a chance to get him on draft day, but he's been unavailable since he played his first NBA game.

Anthem
06-04-2009, 03:07 PM
We missed that boat. We probably had a chance to get him on draft day, but he's been unavailable since he played his first NBA game.
I know. I just found the "Portland should trade Roy" line too good to pass up.

Justin Tyme
06-04-2009, 04:05 PM
You guys are talking about Bayless, but jeez what about Blake?

If I've got Blake, who is a very good distributor and a good defender, and have Bayless as a PG in training, what the hell do I need with Curry.

I think the rumor is a bunch of BS.

If not, then send Blake to the Pacers. We'll take him.



I like Blake, but the problem is he's not flashly. He's a pass 1st PG that gets other players involved. What a novel idea. Many people think he's a nothing, but Jack, Sergio, Bayless, etc still aren't starting over him.

I'd trade Ford for him in a heart beat. He's a lunch pail blue collar player who gets the job done but has no flash or sizzle. Too many want flash and sizzle instead of getting the job done.

beast23
06-04-2009, 04:37 PM
I like Blake, but the problem is he's not flashly. He's a pass 1st PG that gets other players involved. What a novel idea. Many people think he's a nothing, but Jack, Sergio, Bayless, etc still aren't starting over him.

I'd trade Ford for him in a heart beat. He's a lunch pail blue collar player who gets the job done but has no flash or sizzle. Too many want flash and sizzle instead of getting the job done.ep. What I like is that, in addition to being a very good passer, he can hit the open 3, while also being an absolute pest on defense.

If Portland does land Curry... then great. In that event, if I were the Pacers, I would start scheming to get Blake.

CableKC
06-04-2009, 05:33 PM
He's a lunch pail blue collar player who gets the job done but has no flash or sizzle. Too many want flash and sizzle instead of getting the job done.
Players like that last a long time in the league. If anything, we need more guys that can execute the right way and consistently then being flashy. Blake is a Backup PG.....but he's a solid backup PG at that.

Wage
06-04-2009, 06:06 PM
Players like that last a long time in the league. If anything, we need more guys that can execute the right way and consistently then being flashy. Blake is a Backup PG.....but he's a solid backup PG at that.

Not that I really disagree, but if Blake is a backup point, what does that make Jack? A solid backup to a solid backup?

Trophy
06-04-2009, 06:46 PM
If this were to be made. I would see New York starting Bayless at PG and also with Outlaw at SF.

The Knicks are that kind of team that leaves people thinking. Are Nate Robinson and/or David Lee returning?

Granger-Rush09
06-04-2009, 06:55 PM
How many college shooting guards have successfully made the transition to NBA PG ??

I just don't see Curry doing it either.

The list isnt very long BUT Derron Williams(Utah) comes to mind.
He wasnt a traditional SG or PG but was in a three guard set at Illinois along side Luther Head, and Dee Brown with Brown being the primary ball handler.

I do see Curry becoming a great PG, ala Steve Nash. Hopefully in A Pacers Uni!!!


And the Pacers Select.... STEPHEN CURRY!!!(Crowd Goes Wild):boomer:

OakMoses
06-05-2009, 11:23 AM
How many college shooting guards have successfully made the transition to NBA PG ??

I just don't see Curry doing it either.

If Curry goes to Portland, he doesn't ever have to become a true NBA PG because he'll be playing next to Brandon Roy. It's very similar to Derek Fisher playing next to Kobe. When Fisher was not in LA, he was not very effective as a PG. In Utah he started next to Deron Williams and was pretty much a SG.

Brandon Roy plays a very similar style to Kobe or LeBron. He is the primary creator in Portland's offense. The ball is going to be in his hands on probably 75% of their possessions. He doesn't need a PG who wants the ball. He needs a PG who can share ball-handling responsibilities, is comfortable playing off the ball, and who can defend the position reasonably well. Curry can do all those things. His defense is a bit of a question mark, but he is an elite shooter, which will help space the floor for Roy. Also, with guys like Pryzbilla, Oden, and Aldridge protecting the rim, his occasional defensive lapses are not going to be too damaging.

CableKC
06-05-2009, 01:44 PM
If Curry goes to Portland, he doesn't ever have to become a true NBA PG because he'll be playing next to Brandon Roy. It's very similar to Derek Fisher playing next to Kobe. When Fisher was not in LA, he was not very effective as a PG. In Utah he started next to Deron Williams and was pretty much a SG.

Brandon Roy plays a very similar style to Kobe or LeBron. He is the primary creator in Portland's offense. The ball is going to be in his hands on probably 75% of their possessions. He doesn't need a PG who wants the ball. He needs a PG who can share ball-handling responsibilities, is comfortable playing off the ball, and who can defend the position reasonably well. Curry can do all those things. His defense is a bit of a question mark, but he is an elite shooter, which will help space the floor for Roy. Also, with guys like Pryzbilla, Oden, and Aldridge protecting the rim, his occasional defensive lapses are not going to be too damaging.
+1

I totally agree.......optimally, they would get a player like Hinrich...one who is a decent shooter while being a decent Ball handler/passer and can ( most importantly ) provide some solid defense at the PG/SG spot. But at a minimum.....getting another Fisher ( Curry ) to the Blazers' Kobe ( Roy ) that has the ball in his hands for the majority of the game makes sense.

CableKC
06-05-2009, 01:48 PM
Isn't that the Reason Why WE Should Draft CURRY!
I would agree that having a shooter like Curry would be good for a Player like Granger and Murphy who space the floor.....but I don't get the sense the Granger is as good of a ball-handler as Kobe is where he could dominate the ball like they do.

Granger-Rush09
06-05-2009, 01:49 PM
+1

But at a minimum.....getting another Fisher ( Curry ) to the Blazers' Kobe ( Roy ) that has the ball in his hands for the majority of the game makes sense.

http://www.rotoevil.com/images/granger_think.jpg

Isn't that Why WE Should Draft Curry?

count55
06-05-2009, 01:55 PM
I would agree that having a shooter like Curry would be good for a Player like Granger and Murphy who space the floor.....but I don't get the sense the Granger is as good of a ball-handler as Kobe is where he could dominate the ball like they do.

I agree. He got better, but he still only generates half the assist numbers that a Brandon Roy or Kobe Bryant does.

At this point, Danny's a scorer, not a facilitator.

Granger-Rush09
06-05-2009, 01:57 PM
I don't get the sense the Granger is as good of a ball-handler as Kobe is where he could dominate the ball like they do.


Without Including LeBron/Wade...What DOMINATE Scorer Truly is?

Granger is Good Enough to draw a Double Team While Driving the lane which would give him the opportunity to distribe the ball to shooters like Rush, and Murphy.
Having Curry would give the Pacers and immediate boost.

Granger-Rush09
06-05-2009, 02:03 PM
I agree. He got better, but he still only generates half the assist numbers that a Brandon Roy or Kobe Bryant does.

At this point, Danny's a scorer, not a facilitator.

I Agree that he got better and that he is a scorer which makes it that much easier to generate assists Especially if u have someone to pass the ball to. And Please Dont Say Murphy.

Anthem
06-05-2009, 02:08 PM
Without Including LeBron/Wade...What DOMINATE Scorer Truly is?
First, "dominate" is a verb. The word you're looking for is "dominant." Don't worry, you're not the only one who gets that wrong.

:teach:

Second, that's kinda the point. That's why there isn't a ton of interest in PGs who can shoot but can't run a team. If they can only play next to a major scorer, then it limits who you can pair them with.

Granger-Rush09
06-05-2009, 02:30 PM
First, "dominate" is a verb. The word you're looking for is "dominant." Don't worry, you're not the only one who gets that wrong.

:teach:

Second, that's kinda the point. That's why there isn't a ton of interest in PGs who can shoot but can't run a team. If they can only play next to a major scorer, then it limits who you can pair them with.

Thank you for the Grammar/Usage Lesson, Really needed that.:laugh:

Also Curry IS a Major Scorer with or without the ball in his hands, Im not completely sold on any Incoming Rookie PG to RUN the Pacers at this point, Which gives Curry the edge by default IMO.

Trader Joe
06-05-2009, 03:39 PM
The list isnt very long BUT Derron Williams(Utah) comes to mind.
He wasnt a traditional SG or PG but was in a three guard set at Illinois along side Luther Head, and Dee Brown with Brown being the primary ball handler.

I do see Curry becoming a great PG, ala Steve Nash. Hopefully in A Pacers Uni!!!


And the Pacers Select.... STEPHEN CURRY!!!(Crowd Goes Wild):boomer:

Incorrect. In Deron's senior year at Illinois he was the primary facilitator on offense. They took the ball out of Brown's hands in the half court set and put it into Deron's. This made them a much better basketball team. About the only time you saw Brown being the primary ball handler with Deron also on the court was in a one on one fastbreak situation where Brown could by just about anyone in the open court. Deron ran that offense. He was the point guard. Brown's role on that team would be more comparable to what Barbosa does for the Suns.

So I don't think Deron is a valid example of a shooting guard who becomes a good/great PG in the NBA.

As far as Curry goes, I think he'll be a solid player, but he ain't a PG. Even if he is a PG, he has no where near the skills that make Nash the PG he is.