Greg Oden
- Thread starter Bricklayer
- Start date
This view is overly simplistic - giving up a lottery player and a lottery pick for a guy who may sit on your bench for most of his career does more than just "delay the rebuilding by a year or two." It squanders 2 years of lottery picks with no return on your investment, not to mention the effects on your team and the fans.
If you make a bad pick in the lottery and the guy keeps getting injured that is the luck of the draw. If you "spend" a decent lottery player and an upcoming lottery pick (probably top 5) on a player known to be frequently injured - well, that is just dumb.
Unless there is some indication (like Okafor or Big Z) that the injuries are behind them, that is. But with Oden we have no such indication right now. Too much to spend on a poor gamble.
rexb_kings
Bench
as much as i liked Oden's potential and all, his injuries are too big of a risk.
off topic..with all the pieces and capspace available now, can we however make a run for Stoudemire? (history of bad knees as well..i know but has fully recovered from it). I think an Evans to Stoudemire pick-and-roll would be more fun to watch.
off topic..with all the pieces and capspace available now, can we however make a run for Stoudemire? (history of bad knees as well..i know but has fully recovered from it). I think an Evans to Stoudemire pick-and-roll would be more fun to watch.
beb0p
Starter
I hate general statements with no explanation of how that conclusion was arrived at. How does giving away two years of lottery picks having a worse effect than just making two bad picks in consecutive years?? And why does it have worse effect on the team and the fans than making bad picks?? How does squandering 2 years of lottery picks delay the rebuilding by more than two years given the Kings' current situation?
I understand why people don't want to trade for Oden, but I don't understand the assumption that there is no chance he can be at least a 50+ games/season player.
.
Kings4life23
G-League
I would not do this at all. Hawes has been playing really good imo as of late defensively. He has been blocking shots and rebounding decently in the minutes he is giving. I really am not ready to give up on him, I think the toughness of the players around him is really starting to change him. I think Landry is really going to help to open Hawes as well as Thompson eyes on how to finish around the rim. Sprinkle some Brockman, Dorsey, and a weight training coach for Hawes and you might be looking at Oden with better offense and no injuries. Hawes has all the tools of Oden 7 footer with athletic ability just not the mind set between the ears of a bruiser. I think he could obtain this because I am a firm believer that your a product of your environment and Petrie has done a pretty good job of surrounding him with pretty tuff individuals as of late. So I would take the pick and draft a big for depth maybe a Whiteside who I love or Varnado, nice shot blocking bigs. Then maybe use that cap space to sign some players and we might with a little hard work and some luck we could sneak into that 8th spot next year.
Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
I agree. His potential now is Dikembe Mutumbo... when he was playing for the Rockets a few years ago.
I am very, very, very leery of bigs that have had their knees explode. Especially when it's happened multiple times in three years.
Vlade4GM
All-Star
That player doesn't exist anymore.
I hate general statements with no explanation of how that conclusion was arrived at. How does giving away two years of lottery picks having a worse effect than just making two bad picks in consecutive years?? And why does it have worse effect on the team and the fans than making bad picks?? How does squandering 2 years of lottery picks delay the rebuilding by more than two years given the Kings' current situation?
I understand why people don't want to trade for Oden, but I don't understand the assumption that there is no chance he can be at least a 50+ games/season player.
.
Because when has Petrie "squandered" lottery picks by choosing poorly? Late picks yes (Douby), but Petrie is generally good with higher picks. I would not expect a high pick to be wasted, much less two high picks in a row.
Have you seen what has been happening while we have had some good picks? Dropping salaries, stockpiling young talent, and pushing ahead the rebuild. How does blowing two years picks on a benched big (however high the talent level) help our rebuild at all? Why would you want to do that?
It isn't that there is no chance of him playing 50+ games, but A) why is 50 games OK with you (I would shoot for 65 or 70 as a bare minimum), and B) what has Oden shown so far that indicates he could be even a 50 game player? Why swap a decent big man who is progressing and a probable top 5 pick with a draft with a lot of good big men for a guy who is always injured?
Until he does show he can play a full season or two with no more than a few minor injuries, I wouldn't want to blow those kinds of resources on him on the outside "chance" that he could start performing all year. That is overspending on potential.
I hate general statements with no explanation of how that conclusion was arrived at. How does giving away two years of lottery picks having a worse effect than just making two bad picks in consecutive years?? And why does it have worse effect on the team and the fans than making bad picks?? How does squandering 2 years of lottery picks delay the rebuilding by more than two years given the Kings' current situation?
I understand why people don't want to trade for Oden, but I don't understand the assumption that there is no chance he can be at least a 50+ games/season player.
.
You're concluding somehow that the Kings would make two bad picks in a row. I don't know where that fits in.
And I think that hoping for 50 games out of Greg Oden is extremely optimistic, giving his history. In the three years since he was drafted, he's play in one year's worth of games. He just suffered a pretty serious knee injury a few months ago. The team trainer describe his knee as looking "irregular". We're not talking about someone who's struggling with tendinitis or something like that. He's had two major knee surgeries. It's possible that he can come back and perform at a high level; he's only 22. But I wouldn't bet the future of my team on his health. And that's what you would be doing in this deal.
By the way, 50 games is not acceptable for someone who you would be relying on. That's less than two thirds of the season.
I'm rooting for him, but are you willing to give up a first round pick on the chance that he'll be able to play effectively for several years?
kennadog
Dog On It!
I want to see his birth certificate. He looks more like 42.
Actually, I feel sort of bad for him. From all accounts he is a very nice young man. I might feel really bad for him, except he's gotten paid quite well in relation to what the Blazer's have gotten out of him so far.
Vlade4GM
All-Star
It has nothing to do with age and everything to do with how much he has physically declined since draft day. There is obviously structural problems with his body, and even if there isn't he's had major knee injuries to both knees. That is going to permanently affect him for the rest of his career, he wasn't the same player physically since coming back from micro, and now he's prime to decline even further. His athleticism is what primarily made him so special, not offensive skills. He has good size and length, but we're not talking Shaq here. You don't give up what will probably be a top 10 draft pick for a beaten down player, just because they once had franchise potential, and maybe now might have a shot in hell at coming back as a 10/10/2 guy. If I was forced to decide to give up that package for either him or Okafor, I'd take Okafor.
beb0p
Starter
It's WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY too early to say that. He's only 22 and suffered an injury that is 100% rebabilitatable.
.
Vlade4GM
All-Star
That player didn't exist even before his latest injury. The only hope before it was that it would just take more time before he gained his athleticism back, but now he'll set even further back by having to rehab the other knee. I don't care how young he is, his knees are much older.
No. That's why I had made the comment on leaving out the pick and possibly going with JT for Oden straight up. I think the Blazers might bite.
beb0p
Starter
No, no no. It was a respond to your suggestion that somehow trading for an injury prone player with a pick is worse than drafting an injury prone player with a pick. I never ever implied that Petrie squanders lottery pick.
So what is your explanation why you made the point that you made?
Didn't I already explained this? It's a gamble I'm willing to make because the upside is so tremendous. That's it, it's a gamble. It's fine if you want to play it safe, seriously it's fine; but you don't need to point out that it's a gamble, I know it is.
This is not realistic, if Oden comes back healthy, there is absolutely no chance he is traded. None whatsoever. Brick's proposal is a buy-low one. Will you or will you not buy when Oden's value is at an all-time low. That's it. That's the premise. Don't say, "Until he shows..." that's outside of the premise.
.
ParniValjak
All-Star
YES!
No doubt this is a high risk, high reward sort of a deal. This is one of those "going for the homerun" risks BUT if it pays off you are set for well over a decade here.
People hear about knee injuries and they all of a sudden get nervous because of past experiences. Sure its a risk but as Petrie said yesterday, 60% of the league would have had knee operations as some stage in their life and a good number of those would have been in highschool-college years.
Oden played 61 games last year after missing the rookie season because of microfracture. His injury this season was just a freak accident. People are writing off a 22 year old because he has had 2 knee surgeries. The medical technologies are MUCH MUCH more advanced than they were when Webber blew his knee. Amare came back to being a perennial All-star after having a micro-fracture surgery.
I am willing to take a risk here on a player who could potentially be a home run for us. A perennial all-star big man that gives us exactly what we are looking for in exchange for a draft pick who could well turn out to be a bust and a good young player who will always be a solid player in this league. You lose of the deal, bad luck, not a HUGE deal. With cap space you can always sign a player of JT calibre.
Being too cautious and not being prepared to take risks got us to being a crap team for a few years now. We were at our best precisely when Petrie was taking risks. Some risks paid off, the others didn't but if you are not going to take risks in life you can't win. You will constantly be mediocre.
I would do a deal of JT or Hawes plus our 1st round pick this year (which I don't think is going to be top 5). So say its JT or Hawes and pick say 8 for Oden, I would be all over that deal and the thing is, I very much doubt Portland would still do it.
beb0p
Starter
Now you're just being silly or maybe you don't watch Blazer games. But the Oden that played this season was a franchise player.
I watched him physically beat down Nene (who went 2-7 and fouled out of the game) and he did the same to Al Jefferson (4-11 and scored only 12 pts). And the topper is, I watched him completely shut down Tim Duncan. I don't mean just playing some tough D on Dunccan, I mean shut down, as in owned one of the greatest who has ever played. And Duncan was shut down in the fourth quarter, exactly the time when he should be dominating.
The Oden that I saw this season was the person in every GM's wet dream and every big man's nightmare. And that's despite his recovering knee and his inexperience. To say that "That player didn't exist even before his latest injury" is very ignorant.
.
Trading for an injury-prone player (in my mind) is much worse than drafting a player and then you find out he is injury prone. One is luck (draft), the other is just making very poor decisions (trade). Why would you knowingly trade for an injury-prone player that plays in what, 1/3 of the total number of games over his 3 years in the NBA? Why? This isn't a videogame, this is the NBA. You need players on the court to be productive. And he has shown nothing to indicate he will be able to play at a high level and be able to stay on the court.
Kobe and Dwight are great players, but how good would their teams be if they only played in 1/3 of the games? Would you really want to tie up serious salary in players that don't see the floor?
I can understand it is a gamble you would make. That decision just doesn't make any sense to me.
If he comes back healthy for a season then the trade is somewhat more reasonable in my mind; maybe we just have different expectations on what would be a "reasonable" trade for an injury-prone player. One season would calm some of the injury fears, but doesn't fully negate the past. I would still be pretty cautious about that trade after one healthy year. After two I would probably strongly reconsider. But that is just my nature I guess - I am not really a swing-for-the-fences kind of guy when it comes to players with a long history of health problems.
Vlade4GM
All-Star
I'm not saying he didn't play well or wasn't a good player, I'm saying he wasn't what he used to be athletically, which limits his potential as a "franchise player". However, then there was still hope that the microfracture was just an isolated incident and wasn't a sign of him just having structural problems that will lead to more injuries. He just had another major injury on his other knee that did not come out of trauma at all, just a normal jumping motion.
Vlade4GM
All-Star
Freak accident my ***.
You are making some pretty big assumptions there - that the pick would be lower than #5 and that the player would bust. The player could be another Kobe or Evans or Wade or Malone. And Oden could (and, given his medical history, probably would) have more medical problems.
There are risks and there are longshot gambles. You need to be able to tell which are which and only go for the ones that have a reasonable chance of playing out your way.
Based on that premise, the answer is no. That's why he said "until." Meaning "if that doesn't happen, then..."
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Question: why exactly?
If we can agree, and we should, that he was beginnign to look dominant just at the beginnign of this very season (his last game before getting injured he put up 13pts 20rebs and 4blks), then are you saying that oops, a broken kneecap is a career ender? If he was just emerging as a dominant force after all the other injuries, you're saying this one is the tipper? Because I would say as far as long term effects a broken kneecap is a lot LESS damaging than torn ligaments or something like that. A worrisome injury threat, but not something that should dramtically change your athleticism or way you play.
Insomniacal Fan
Starter
I'm leaning towards no, but the deal is cheap enough that it is tempting. In the best case you're looking at giving up two full-time rotation players for one part-time star. You're also going from young to slightly less young (in NBA years.)
I'll readily admit I don't watch Blazer games and it makes it hard to form a positive opinion of a player when in 3 seasons he's been in the league, he will have played the Kings 3 times (out of the 12 matchups he's being paid to play.) In fact when I look back at the schedule, I realize I've never actually seen him play!
If there weren't good bigs in the draft this year I would probably go the other way.
I'll readily admit I don't watch Blazer games and it makes it hard to form a positive opinion of a player when in 3 seasons he's been in the league, he will have played the Kings 3 times (out of the 12 matchups he's being paid to play.) In fact when I look back at the schedule, I realize I've never actually seen him play!
If there weren't good bigs in the draft this year I would probably go the other way.
Similar threads
