The Commercial Appeal, Memphis, Tenn., Chris Herrington’s Pick-and-Pop column

Dec. 16--As if the Grizzlies didn't have enough problems right now, the past week witnessed a trade-rumor flare-up that provided some unwelcome distraction for the team but also now provides an instructive look at how next-to-nothing can snowball into something in the NBA's internet echo chamber.

The rumor itself popped up on Thursday, in a piece on the site Bleacher Report from writer Jared Zwerling, who wrote that "Several sources said the Grizzlies are currently shopping power forward Zach Randolph, and two of them are hearing there's a destination and main trade piece involved: New Orleans and stretch-4 Ryan Anderson, who's averaging a team-high 21.7 points per game on 47.7 percent shooting from three-point range.

" 'A trade centered around Randolph and Anderson should happen down the line this season,' one source said."

In a realm where no one is willing to speak on the record about much of anything, sourcing for stories about potential transactions is understandably vague. But even by the lax standards of trade rumor stories, this was particularly unconvincing, both because the blanket "sources" was entirely unmodified (not "sources within 'X' organization" or "sources with direct knowledge of the negotiations" or "NBA front-office sources," just "sources") and because, to be honest, the outlet and writer don't seem to have much of a history of reporting on either franchise.

Did that matter? Not really. More established national outlets trumpeted the rumor, burying any sourcing uncertainty. Sports Illustrated ran it under the matter-of-fact headline "Report: Grizzlies shopping Zach Randolph for Pelicans' Anderson"

CBS followed suit, though at least labeled the story a "rumor" in the headline.

In New Orleans the next day, NBA.com's Fran Blinebury asked Randolph about the report, and got a response that seemed to assume the veracity of the rumor:

"But yeah, it bothers me. It hurts a little bit. I can't deny that. But it goes to show you that there ain't no loyalty in this game."

And so the cycle continued, now with other outlets reporting that Randolph was 'hurt' because "trade rumors are swirling." Where did the plural come from? This is all built off only one rumor, right? And what if it isn't actually true? Does that even matter?

As it so happens, in the middle of all of this media architecture erected on the foundation of one barely sourced trade rumor, the rumor was actually disputed by a more convincing source, USA Today's Sam Amick, who does have a more established history of reporting on Grizzlies issues. Amick wrote:

"Speaking of Anderson, there were strong denials on all sides to a Bleacher Report article indicating a trade was in the works that could -- at some point before the deadline -- send Anderson to the Memphis Grizzlies for forward Zach Randolph. A person with knowledge of the Grizzlies' dealings said they haven't had any conversations with New Orleans about a Randolph-for-Anderson swap, and a person with knowledge of the Pelicans' dealings said the same."

For what it's worth, my own reaction to the idea of this trade -- before concluding there was nothing to it -- went along these lines.

If I were with the New Orleans Pelicans: "Umm ... no."

If I were with the Memphis Grizzlies: "Get everybody in. We need to have a meeting today."

As good as Randolph is and as well-loved as he is in Memphis, the trade suggested by this rumor would have been one the Grizzlies would have had to strongly consider. Anderson is seven years younger, is only half the cap hit, and is one of the game's most deadly shooters. The notion that the Grizzlies might consider trading Randolph for him would be no insult and no surprise. The problem is that the "rumor" seems very likely to be a false one.

If this rumor is fantastical, does that mean Randolph isn't going anywhere? Not necessarily. But with the in-season lid removed on this inevitable subject, it's probably worth unpacking some of the issues around the idea of trading Randolph.

This is not a Rudy Gay-type situation. While I could certainly see the dealing Randolph, I'm more skeptical of the idea that they'd be "shopping him," which implies an urge to deal him. I don't think that's the case. The Rudy Gay deal last season was driven by two factors: One, the team needed to shed future salary to avoid crashing through the luxury-tax threshold. Two, the new management team did not value Gay on the floor, at least not relative to his cost.

Neither of those factors is really in play here.

Financially, the numbers are still tight, but locking Quincy Pondexter up on a lower-than-expected salary for next season and league projections that have the luxury tax rising by $4 million make it manageable. Right now, a rough estimate -- with Randolph picking up his $16.5 million player option and slotting Ed Davis in at his $4.4 million qualifying offer -- puts the Grizzlies at around $67.6 million next season for 12 players, leaving as much as $8 million in room to add one or two rookies and still play around a little in the free agent market (or exceed the qualifying offer to re-sign Davis). There's not a ton of flexibility there, but the Grizzlies do not need to trade Randolph for cap reasons.

On the floor, one assumes the Grizzlies wouldn't value Randolph quite at the max-type level of his current contract, but they do value him. Much more than they did Gay. All-Star caliber power forwards who have established chemistry with cornerstone center Gasol aren't easy to replace.

Even if the future is no longer now, it's at least fast-approaching. Even struggling at 10-13, the Grizzlies still harbor hopes of pushing into the playoffs when Marc Gasol returns next month (?), and of making another upset run with a healthier team if they can get there. If they sneak into the playoffs with a healthy quartet of Mike Conley-Tony Allen-Randolph-Gasol, this would be a lower seed capable of advancing, in the mode of the team's two prior playoff runs.

And even if that scenario fades, this will not be a rebuilding situation. If the Grizzlies reach a point where they're no longer all-in for 2013-2014, they'll still be all-in for 2014-2015, the final season of Gasol's current contract. So any trade, involving Randolph or anyone else, is likely to have that near-term window in mind.

The issue the Grizzlies face right now, beyond their injury problems, is one of roster imbalance. The roster is heavy on frontcourt talent and light on dynamic perimeter players beyond Conley.

The team has -- or at least believes it has, and I would agree -- five quality frontcourt players in Gasol, Randolph, Kosta Koufos, Ed Davis, and a fast-emerging Jon Leuer. Once Gasol comes back, if everyone is healthy, they can only play four of them.

Meanwhile, on the perimeter, beyond Conley, the team is sorting through a grab bag of raw (Nick Calathes, Jamaal Franklin), the close-to-cooked (Tayshaun Prince, Mike Miller), and the limited (Tony Allen, Jerryd Bayless). With Quincy Pondexter shelved for the season, they're struggling to find 96 playable minutes each night on the wing.

Another factor here is the probable, looming expiration date on the current frontcourt collective.

This could sort itself out via attrition. The Grizzlies could keep Randolph going into next season and simply let Davis walk. (Or, if they were particularly lucky and/or skilled, sign-and-trade him for quality return without exceeding the luxury tax.) But heading off that problem next summer by moving one of these bigs for perimeter help this season is an option you can bet will be considered.

But if a big-for-small deal did happen this season, it wouldn't necessarily be for Randolph. You can rule out Gasol, a franchise talent the Grizzlies hope to retain beyond his current contract. And you can rule out Jonny "Badger" Leuer, the pleasant (not totally a) surprise (around these parts) of the season. Leuer has averaged 16 points and 8 rebounds off the bench over his past five games, shooting 53 percent from the floor and a highly encouraging 42 percent from three-point range. He looks legit and will be under team control for two more seasons beyond this one for something like a veteran's minimum salary. Leuer could realistically emerge as one of the best non-rookie/non-star contracts in the NBA over the next couple of years. If the rest of the league becomes as convinced as the Grizzlies are that Leuer is for real, then perhaps they could deal him for considerable return, but that's unlikely to happen this season.

Instead, if the Grizzlies pull the trigger on a big-for-wing trade, there will be three contenders:

Zach Randolph: If Randolph hasn't quite maintained his vintage 20-and-12 form, 16-and-9 is nothing to sneeze at. And Randolph can still be a classic go-to guy on the right night. But that doesn't mean every night, and the team understands that limitation even if a lot of fans don't. As Dave Joerger told Ron Tillery recently:

"Just dribbling it over to one side and pounding the ball into him is kind of like putting our head against a concrete wall. We're trying to put their (center) in pick-and-rolls, get him off Zach's body a little bit and then advance it and get it to him."

Still, could the Grizzlies really trade Randolph and upgrade their overall roster? The necessary calculus of any Randolph deal would likely be this: Would the downgrade of turning all of the power forward minutes over to Davis and Leuer be more than offset by an upgrade on the perimeter?

I'm skeptical. Given Randolph's age and contract, I tend to think he's got a lot more value on the floor than on the trade market. And I would have to imagine that any close call would go toward keeping Randolph. Is a projected five-percent on-court upgrade worth the ancillary costs of losing perhaps the most popular player in franchise history and further provoking an already testy fan base? The bet here is that any Randolph deal would have to bring back major return, and I just don't see that kind of deal being available.

Ed Davis: With Randolph and Leuer both on the books beyond this season and more than capable of combining for high-level contributions at the power forward slot, Ed Davis would seem like the most logical odd man out, except that his imbalance of (potential) on-court value versus suspected trade value would seem to be tipped even more in the former direction. After a rough start, Davis seemed to turn the corner in the days after Gasol's injury, but then he turned his ankle. With Leuer seizing his opportunity, consistent minutes for Davis could be hard to come by even with Gasol out. The best thing for the Grizzlies right now -- aside from, you know, winning some games -- would be for Davis to get on a roll, enhancing his visibility and rehabbing his trade value while giving the Grizzlies a better sense of what they might have in him.

Kosta Koufos: The seven-footer who's stepped in for Gasol would seem to be the least likely to be moved, but I'm not so sure. Koufos is great value on his current contract, but that also makes him great value on the trade market. It would be a gamble, but once Gasol returns, could the team commit to playing small (with some combo of Randolph, Davis, and Leuer) when Gasol's out of the game? (While adding a cheaper true center for situational minutes.) With Koufos overtaxed offensively and opponents presenting match-up problems in the form of stretch forwards (New Orleans' Anderson and Minnesota'sKevin Love), Koufos has yielded to Leuer in the past two games. Smaller, more mobile frontcourts are becoming more prevalent, so a Gasol-Randolph-Leuer-Davis rotation would be functional -- and maybe even preferable -- on most nights. And certainly the trajectory for Leuer and Davis is pointed up, where Koufos' game has likely plateaued. But that's with Gasol in the mix. Even after he returns, has Gasol's absence presented too much of a scare to risk parting with an insurance policy like Koufos? At the very least, the Grizzlies should be alert to any center-hungry teams willing to pay a premium.

My own guess -- and that's all it is -- as to how this plays out over the next two months? That a big-for-wing deal this season is slightly more likely than not, with the player moved slightly more likely to be Davis or Koufos than Randolph. Put those two things together and I think a Zach Randolph trade this season is possible, but far from likely.

Man of the Match(es): The Grizzlies had better hope the "thigh contusion" Mike Conley suffered on Sunday night doesn't limit him for long, because without Conley's it's hard to see where the points are going to come from. On the week, Conley averaged 20 points and 7 assists, shooting 46 percent from the floor and, notably, given his early season struggles, 42 percent from three-point range on six attempts a game.

The Week in Tweets:

How the Other Half Lives, Look-Ahead Edition: After losing consecutive games to New Orleans and Minnesota, two teams jockeying with the Grizzlies to stay in the Western Conference playoff race, the Grizzlies can't afford to make it three in a row against the Los Angeles Lakers on Tuesday night. The Lakers squeaked one out against the Bobcats on Saturday night after losing three of their previous four and will be coming in on Tuesday on the second night of a back-to-back after playing in Atlanta tonight. The Lakers have Kobe Bryant back, which should boost attendance, if nothing else.

Forum Foods: On Sunday I finally broke down and tried a burger at FedExForum, something I'd been avoiding. I had the "Char-broiled { pound cheeseburger" on the club level for $8.75. Or, I should say, I ordered it, as this is the first concession item this season I haven't finished.

I would like to say to the burger at FedExForum, 'It's not you, it's me." But that's only partially true. I'm reluctant to eat most fast-food burgers (I'll break down and get one from Wendy's on occasion, but I tend to stick to chicken when reduced to drive-thru consumption) and the beef quality here tasted sub-fast food to me. I could only do about three bites.

Now, plenty of visitors aren't quite as picky about their burgers as I am, but given the variety of better sandwich choices in the building -- po' boys from The Second Line, barbecue sandwiches from the Rendezvous, and a good fried chicken thigh sandwich also on the club level -- this doesn't seem to be a particularly appealing option.

___

(c)2013 The Commercial Appeal (Memphis, Tenn.)

Visit The Commercial Appeal (Memphis, Tenn.) at www.commercialappeal.com

Distributed by MCT Information Services