Magliore? ... To Portland (merged)

Just a rumor, but apparently some fan with connections in Millwaukee claims Magloire is being traded to portland for Blake, Skinner and Ha seung-jin. I read it on realgm's message board. Take it for what it's worth.

Same info showed up today on Hoopsworld.com. Mags is not for the Kings. I think it is Foster or no one. Could be an agonizingly quiet Jul-Aug

Ding Ding dude, duh..... RealGM has it as a done deal and Bucks and Blazers reaching verbal agreement today.

http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/41708/20060729/bucks_and_blazers_reach_agreement/
 
Last edited:
Same info showed up today on Hoopsworld.com. Mags is not for the Kings. I think it is Foster or no one. Could be an agonizingly quiet Jul-Aug

Ding Ding dude, duh..... RealGM has it as a done deal and Bucks and Blazers reaching verbal agreement today.

http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/41708/20060729/bucks_and_blazers_reach_agreement/

Verbal agreement isn't a done deal. Ask Toronto.

;)

Regardless of the nitpicking, it seems Magloire is most likely off the market...

Tick tock tick tock...
 
Magloire has been traded to Portland...

Just read on realgm.com that the Portland Trailblazers have verbally agreed with Milwakee on a deal for what appears to be some scrubs. You would have thought the kings could have offered them something better in a package.

http://www.realgm.com/
 
Blake's not a scrub, he's a decent back-up PG that they wanted for depth. Magloire gone in and Skinner in allows for more focus and time for Bogut.

Skinner/Blake are expring contracts, I think.

We did try to get Magloire, as reported, but didn't come to anything.
 
tru blake is a decent pg his numbers last year were not that bad...

but that was on a terrible blazers side...

the only scrub i see in that deal is that korean dude...
 
I wonder how the Bucks will do with Mo Williams and Blake as their 2 PG's this year? Williams was ok, I guess, we'll have to see how he does as an everyday starter.
 
Forgetting the underrated Charlie Bell. Came back in late January and steadily played well, especially when Ford and/or Mo Williams were injured. Quite a defender, strong, quick, good scorer, fine playmaker, can rebound well for a PG as well at 6'3".

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/gamelog?statsId=3570http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3570

Williams/Bell/Blake is a nice PG-spot, all can start on that team. But Mo Williams will be, as he was the back-up to Ford. He's more than okay too, can do many things well, just an average to below average man-defender though. I think he has the ability to be a decent defender with his length, size, and quickness. Stotts isn't the right coach for that though.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand with the amount of baggage we have riding the pine, that we cannot get something together to get someone we really need. We have 11.5M in expiring deals and this so be enough in part or total to package up with KT and get us some utility at 4/5. I love Garcia, but now that we paid Salmons 5M/yr I think Garcia might be a trade piece.
 
Because we couldn't get him, despite attempting to. Skinner/Blake expirings > Corliss or Pota/Hart expirings. No doubt.

Ha is just a throw in and makes 740K.
 
I wouldn't dismiss Ha too quickly. Have you seen the dedicated comedy threads to "Ha" the Blazer's fans have on their realgm board? That is got to be worth at least his salary









;)
 
Because we couldn't get him, despite attempting to. Skinner/Blake expirings > Corliss or Pota/Hart expirings. No doubt.

Ha is just a throw in and makes 740K.

That Skinner move ain't looking too hot right about now. We lost the guy who would have been the target (Monia) and gave the Blazers the material they needed to grab a player we in fact could have used. Now all we've got left is Potqatohead.
 
Well, that's history of course, and Skinner/Blake still is better Skinner/Hart. Blake's better than Hart; Steady play-maker, can shoot the ball, quick defender. Just smaller than Hart.
 
I didn't like that Skinner deal back then and I especially don't like it now. I think that Muss would have used Skinner had he not been traded.
 
Muss definitely would of. But Rick didn't use him much, and Skinner asked to be traded. Obviously no one saw this kinda deal coming for Magloire.
 
Pretty sure I remember reading that in the news around the time of the trade.

Can't blame the guy though, Rick just wasn't utilizing him much at all, and, players need to play.
 
That Skinner move ain't looking too hot right about now. We lost the guy who would have been the target (Monia) and gave the Blazers the material they needed to grab a player we in fact could have used. Now all we've got left is Potqatohead.

I'm not so sure about that. Blake was the main target. Skinner is an expiring contract, so the Blazers probably would have still made the same deal with Potapenko involved. Skinner was more of a salary cap consideration than a target.
 
I'm not so sure about that. Blake was the main target. Skinner is an expiring contract, so the Blazers probably would have still made the same deal with Potapenko involved. Skinner was more of a salary cap consideration than a target.

BTW, on a somewhat unrelated note, while Skinner wasn't the target of the trade, you still shouldn't use this as anti-Petrie ammo Brick. The Maloofs wanted to avoid paying the LT and the Skinner trade is what put us under the LT threshold. So even if it did matter in the Magloire trade, which is most likely did not, this was a Maloof based move, not Petrie.
 
I'm not so sure about that. Blake was the main target. Skinner is an expiring contract, so the Blazers probably would have still made the same deal with Potapenko involved. Skinner was more of a salary cap consideration than a target.

There I think you are a little confused -- Skinner had his best season in Milwaulkee. Started at center for them a few years back and put up decent numbers. They know and like him. He may not have been the centerpice, but he's a definite "+" to that deal happening. No Skinner, no deal I would bet.

As for Geoff -- it all goes in the tally. None of this Enron accounting we've got around here where only the good things count, and all the bad ones have excuse after excuse. Just one of those that don't look so hot anymore. Actually never really looked so hot, but I wasn't 100% anti the trade when it happened because of the theoretical potential of Monia. When that guy comes and can't play and then breaks his contract to take off for Europe a few months later, its a lost deal. Not sure to what degree Petrie could or should have been able to predict things, but as the GM he is pretty much the only one who had a chance. And if everytime someone plays unexpectedly well for us or shows a new attitude for us goes in Geoff's "+" column because obviously he's all knowing and all seeing, then when a guy doesn't live up to expectations or flakes on us that's the corresponding "-" column -- when you're omniscient responsibility cuts both ways.
 
There I think you are a little confused -- Skinner had his best season in Milwaulkee. Started at center for them a few years back and put up decent numbers. They know and like him. He may not have been the centerpice, but he's a definite "+" to that deal happening. No Skinner, no deal I would bet.

As for Geoff -- it all goes in the tally. None of this Enron accounting we've got around here where only the good things count, and all the bad ones have excuse after excuse. Just one of those that don't look so hot anymore. Actually never really looked so hot, but I wasn't 100% anti the trade when it happened because of the theoretical potential of Monia. When that guy comes and can't play and then breaks his contract to take off for Europe a few months later, its a lost deal. Not sure to what degree Petrie could or should have been able to predict things, but as the GM he is pretty much the only one who had a chance. And if everytime someone plays unexpectedly well for us or shows a new attitude for us goes in Geoff's "+" column because obviously he's all knowing and all seeing, then when a guy doesn't live up to expectations or flakes on us that's the corresponding "-" column -- when you're omniscient responsibility cuts both ways.


Isn't this a bit hypocritical. You're the one who doesn't give Petrie credit for the Artest deal. How can you accuse some of us of Enron accounting when you are trying to discredit some of Petrie's moves that the Maloofs MIGHT have influenced and then make him take credit for a move the Maloofs wanted to get under the LT threshold?

All in all, Petrie had a good year last year then:

Garcia: +
Tag and Bobby for Bonzi: +
Mobley walking: -/+ (he got way overpaid)
Shareef: +
Hart for a 2nd round pick: -
Peja for Artest: +
Skinner for Potap and Monia: -

So if we really want to do the accounting of last years moves, overall they were very strong, especially considering that both of the negatives were minor at worst.
 
Isn't this a bit hypocritical. You're the one who doesn't give Petrie credit for the Artest deal.

For damn good reason -- my eyes and ears aren't jammed up where the sun doesn't shine on Geoff. Makes it much easier to see the completely obvious. I could go through the overwhelming evidence once again, but its a bit like trying to convince a Flat Earth theorist that the Earth is in fact round. Simply won't accept it under any circumstance because it threatens their sad little world view and attacks the pillar of their faith.

As for bias -- get over it. I also do not blame/credit Geoff in the least for the Adelman firing, which I think was stupid. Why? Because that too was pure 100% obvious Maloofism -- whatever Geoff's feelings on the matter one way or the other, he was not a significant part of the decisionmaking process there. And the Webber deal is up in the air -- possibly Geoff's worst, or possibly heavily pressured by the Maloofs, or possibly a combination of the two.

So in the end its pretty simple -- I don't give Petrie credit for anything that he didn't in fact do. Good or bad. Imagine that. Incompatible with the proselytizing house of worship approach, but ask me if I care. Save the worship for Sundays. Or at least guys who have ever won a ring.

As an aside, your accounting is a little off. I, on the other hand, picked up a cheesy high school award for Accounting student of the year circa 1988. ;)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top