Exclusive 2019 Trade Deadline Thread (1 Viewer)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Let’s play a game. I’ll put it here instead of starting a new thread.

Call your shot.

1. Will Portland make a trade?

2. If the answer is yes; what, and who?
 
Scalma said:
Let’s play a game. I’ll put it here instead of starting a new thread.

Call your shot.

1. Will Portland make a trade?

2. If the answer is yes; what, and who?
Click to expand...
I think the odds are that the Blazers do not make a deal.
 
Scalma said:
That was two years ago. And it was financially motivated.

Seriously when was the last time Olshey made a significant move with purely upgrading the team in mind?
Click to expand...

CupWizier said:
How do you know it was just financially motivated? .
Click to expand...

oh for chrissakes...he probably knows it was financially motivated because Olshey himself said it was:

Olshey: "Well, you know, look Mason's impending free agency was certainly a factor. We love Mason. We're going to miss him around here. We wouldn't have been in the second round of the playoffs last year without him. But there's certain realities to managing our (salary) cap."

https://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/...zers_neil_olshey_were_probably_a_6_point.html

it was Olshey's own words and the financial side was the first thing he mentioned. I think we can piece together the circumstances pretty well, even though I know you will deny and dispute it all

Olshey knew Portland could not afford to pay Plumlee the following summer (2017) because that would put them over the tax line and that was almost certainly an unacceptable outcome for a team like Portland that was 8 games under .500 at the time of the trade. So, Olshey was looking around for C's who had 1 or 2 years left on their rookie deals and who were available. It was a short list: Nurkic and Jahlil Okafor. I imagine Portland had extended discussions with both front officies

and David Aldridge reported that Philly actually held Okafor out of a couple of games because they believed they had a done deal with Portland. But it sure looks like at the last minute, Denver added the 1st to Nurkic and of course, the Blazer pivoted to that deal

is all of this 100% guaranteed certain? nope....but the circumstantial evidence and Olshey's own words make a compelling case
 
Blazers on the Front Page on NBA Germany (happens very rarely)

"Blazers want another star - Davis a candidate?
One team that has not been featured too often in Davis poker is the Portland Trail Blazers. That changes Steve Kyler of Basketball Insiders now but. According to its sources, the Blazers are described as "aggressive" in the effort to bring another star to Oregon before the deadline. According to Kyler, Portland could be an interesting trade partner for the Pelicans."

"Lillard & McCollum probably not on the trade block
It is also interesting that the additional star mentioned by Kyler, alongside Damian Lillard and C.J. McCollum should be installed. So obviously the Trail Blazers do not want to break their backcourt duo against long speculation."

Screenshot_20190130-195826_SPOX.jpg
 
Scalma said:
Let’s play a game. I’ll put it here instead of starting a new thread.

Call your shot.

1. Will Portland make a trade?

2. If the answer is yes; what, and who?
Click to expand...

1. Yes

2. It will be a salary dump that brings us back an older decent bench peice(s) for the remainder of this year. I recently saw this one and could see something like it happening.....

432DE477-59E5-41E4-BFF4-A28E66CE514F.jpeg
Plus a 1st to Sac obviously.
 
Last edited:
LayneStaley said:
1. Yes

2. It will be a salary dump that brings us back an older decent bench peice(s) for the remainder of this year. I recently saw this one and could see something like it happening.....

View attachment 24564
Plus a 1st to Sac obviously.
Click to expand...
That would be a pretty freaking brilliant trade, actually.
 
wizenheimer said:
oh for chrissakes...he probably knows it was financially motivated because Olshey himself said it was:

Olshey: "Well, you know, look Mason's impending free agency was certainly a factor. We love Mason. We're going to miss him around here. We wouldn't have been in the second round of the playoffs last year without him. But there's certain realities to managing our (salary) cap."

https://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/...zers_neil_olshey_were_probably_a_6_point.html

it was Olshey's own words and the financial side was the first thing he mentioned. I think we can piece together the circumstances pretty well, even though I know you will deny and dispute it all

Olshey knew Portland could not afford to pay Plumlee the following summer (2017) because that would put them over the tax line and that was almost certainly an unacceptable outcome for a team like Portland that was 8 games under .500 at the time of the trade. So, Olshey was looking around for C's who had 1 or 2 years left on their rookie deals and who were available. It was a short list: Nurkic and Jahlil Okafor. I imagine Portland had extended discussions with both front officies

and David Aldridge reported that Philly actually held Okafor out of a couple of games because they believed they had a done deal with Portland. But it sure looks like at the last minute, Denver added the 1st to Nurkic and of course, the Blazer pivoted to that deal

is all of this 100% guaranteed certain? nope....but the circumstantial evidence and Olshey's own words make a compelling case
Click to expand...

You forgot this part of the quote:

"We felt like we needed to get younger at the center position. We wanted more of a low post player, someone that could defend size, strength"

Sounds to me like he was targeting a certain type of player. :breakdance:

Oh, and I forgot to put in the obligatory, forchrissakes" :biglaugh:
 
Labinot41 said:
Blazers on the Front Page on NBA Germany (happens very rarely)

"Blazers want another star - Davis a candidate?
One team that has not been featured too often in Davis poker is the Portland Trail Blazers. That changes Steve Kyler of Basketball Insiders now but. According to its sources, the Blazers are described as "aggressive" in the effort to bring another star to Oregon before the deadline. According to Kyler, Portland could be an interesting trade partner for the Pelicans."

"Lillard & McCollum probably not on the trade block
It is also interesting that the additional star mentioned by Kyler, alongside Damian Lillard and C.J. McCollum should be installed. So obviously the Trail Blazers do not want to break their backcourt duo against long speculation."

View attachment 24565
Click to expand...
Edit: "What could the Blazers offer?
"If you look at the young players, the expiring contracts and the future picks that the Blazers can offer, then they might be an interesting option," Kyler writes of a Davis trade. A potential deal would probably have to include Jusuf Nurkic, who plays under a relatively team-friendly contract (4 years / 48 million dollars). Also important: Portland has all its own first-round picks for the next few years."
 
Scalma said:
Let’s play a game. I’ll put it here instead of starting a new thread.

Call your shot.

1. Will Portland make a trade?

2. If the answer is yes; what, and who?
Click to expand...
1. Yes.
2. Davis. Fall-back, SAC.
 
CupWizier said:
You forgot this part of the quote:

"We felt like we needed to get younger at the center position. We wanted more of a low post player, someone that could defend size, strength"

Sounds to me like he was targeting a certain type of player. :breakdance:
Click to expand...

if he was, why go after Okafor? He's the opposite of an inside defender.

I think Scalma was exactly correct, the primary motivation in the Plumlee/Nurkic trade was financial.
 
wizenheimer said:
if he was, why go after Okafor? He's the opposite of an inside defender.

I think Scalma was exactly correct, the primary motivation in the Plumlee/Nurkic trade was financial.
Click to expand...

Did we trade for Okafor? Do you believe every rumor out there? Interest means possibly just an inquiry. You are free to think what you want as nobody is disputing that there was some financial benefits, but there was also roster benefits as Olshey clearly said in your article you quoted. very obvious that some of you refuse to give Olshey credit for anything and that is why it's hard to have much respect for your opinions when they are clearly biased in nature. Might be why you quoted the part you did and ignored the part that I quoted.
 
Scalma said:
Let’s play a game. I’ll put it here instead of starting a new thread.

Call your shot.

1. Will Portland make a trade?

2. If the answer is yes; what, and who?
Click to expand...
I'm sticking to this, even though it's not what I want.

1. Yes

2. Love
 
Wizard Mentor said:
Answer the same for all of the other GMs in the league. Then, we can compare and have an intelligent conversation. Otherwise, just go ahead and bitch. It's what people here like to do, after all.
Click to expand...

Since Olshey has no power to do anything and no responsibility when things go wrong - why is he making the big bucks?
 
Scalma said:
Let’s play a game. I’ll put it here instead of starting a new thread.

Call your shot.

1. Will Portland make a trade?

2. If the answer is yes; what, and who?
Click to expand...
1. Yes.

2. Moe/Leonard and pick for Prince and Lin
 
CupWizier said:
Might be why you quoted the part you did and ignored the part that I quoted.
Click to expand...

let's review this, it won't be hard:

Scalma said:
That was two years ago. And it was financially motivated.
Click to expand...

CupWizier said:
How do you know it was just financially motivated? .
Click to expand...

the quote of Olshey I used went directly to what you and Scalma were 'disputing'. It was specific and since neither one of you mentioned any possible ancillary motivations, I didn't either. So, go pound sand with your forehead for saying I was cherry-picking what Olshey said

besides all that, I'm pretty skeptical about those offered ancillary reasons. Why would Olshey want to get a younger C rather then just getting a better C? Plumlee is the same age as Dame. And if Denver hadn't added the 1st round pick and the Okafor trade would have went thru, I have no doubt Olshey would have tailored his ancillary reasons for Okafor..."look, we had an opportunity to get a player who was a 3rd pick in a recent draft and who shown some amazing offensive potential, and skillsets that match Terry's offense as well as Dame's"
 
Casey has a tweet today on the team's homesite about Nurk being questionable for tonight against the Jazz....that should fuel the trade mill
 
wizenheimer said:
let's review this, it won't be hard:





the quote of Olshey I used went directly to what you and Scalma were 'disputing'. It was specific and since neither one of you mentioned any possible ancillary motivations, I didn't either. So, go pound sand with your forehead for saying I was cherry-picking what Olshey said

besides all that, I'm pretty skeptical about those offered ancillary reasons. Why would Olshey want to get a younger C rather then just getting a better C? Plumlee is the same age as Dame. And if Denver hadn't added the 1st round pick and the Okafor trade would have went thru, I have no doubt Olshey would have tailored his ancillary reasons for Okafor..."look, we had an opportunity to get a player who was a 3rd pick in a recent draft and who shown some amazing offensive potential, and skillsets that match Terry's offense as well as Dame's"
Click to expand...
wizenheimer said:
let's review this, it won't be hard:





the quote of Olshey I used went directly to what you and Scalma were 'disputing'. It was specific and since neither one of you mentioned any possible ancillary motivations, I didn't either. So, go pound sand with your forehead for saying I was cherry-picking what Olshey said

besides all that, I'm pretty skeptical about those offered ancillary reasons. Why would Olshey want to get a younger C rather then just getting a better C? Plumlee is the same age as Dame. And if Denver hadn't added the 1st round pick and the Okafor trade would have went thru, I have no doubt Olshey would have tailored his ancillary reasons for Okafor..."look, we had an opportunity to get a player who was a 3rd pick in a recent draft and who shown some amazing offensive potential, and skillsets that match Terry's offense as well as Dame's"
Click to expand...

Yawn! You go right ahead and review to your heaarts content.Scalma said it was only for financial reasons and the quote by Olshey showed that not be true. We will just have to agree to disagree.
 
Scalma said:
They were all basketball moves. Everything you just typed here is irrelevant to the discussion.
Click to expand...
OK, then NO is great because he, too, made "basketball moves" - apparently, that's all that matters....
 
PtldPlatypus said:
Well, no, he didn't. He simply said, "it was financially motivated". You're the one who added the "just" and "only" qualifiers. This would be the very definition of a strawman argument.
Click to expand...

And in his link it clearly said Olshey was targetting a young defensive center. Wouldn't scalma and heimer's be a strawman argument then? They both conveniently left out the quote i linked to as it didn't fit their argument. I at least in a prior post acknowledged the financial benefits as well.
 
wizenheimer said:
let's review this, it won't be hard:





the quote of Olshey I used went directly to what you and Scalma were 'disputing'. It was specific and since neither one of you mentioned any possible ancillary motivations, I didn't either. So, go pound sand with your forehead for saying I was cherry-picking what Olshey said

besides all that, I'm pretty skeptical about those offered ancillary reasons. Why would Olshey want to get a younger C rather then just getting a better C? Plumlee is the same age as Dame. And if Denver hadn't added the 1st round pick and the Okafor trade would have went thru, I have no doubt Olshey would have tailored his ancillary reasons for Okafor..."look, we had an opportunity to get a player who was a 3rd pick in a recent draft and who shown some amazing offensive potential, and skillsets that match Terry's offense as well as Dame's"
Click to expand...

My favorite part of all this is I have whoever I’m “disputing” with on mute so I cant read any of the non sense nor do I care to at alllll lolol.
 
CupWizier said:
Wouldn't scalma and heimer's be a strawman argument then? They both conveniently left out the quote i linked to as it didn't fit their argument.
Click to expand...

now, you're just grasping at straws, to sick with the metaphor

I've already explained the reason for the quote I posted and it was based upon the specific discussion here, not the made-up bullshit you tried to twist out of what was actually said

Scalma said:
My favorite part of all this is I have whoever I’m “disputing” with on mute so I cant read any of the non sense nor do I care to at alllll lolol.
Click to expand...

yeah, I think you're on the right track because there's just no upside in discussing anything with him
 
CupWizier said:
And in his link it clearly said Olshey was targetting a young defensive center. Wouldn't scalma and heimer's be a strawman argument then?
Click to expand...
If you know what a strawman argument is, you would know that that is not the case. If you'd like me to define it for you, I'm willing.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
If you know what a strawman argument is, you would know that that is not the case. If you'd like me to define it for you, I'm willing.
Click to expand...
No thanks as mine was never a strawman argument anyway thus my comment as it wasn't meant to be taken seriously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top