Exclusive 2022-23 Portland Trail Blazers Roster

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Hoopguru said:
I think Paul thought he and NO could get it done, no sweat and he was wrong.
Ive always thought he played the game so he could sign with the spurs rather than be traded elsewhere. He wanted to end up with his son and mother in SA.
Click to expand...

I'm sure Paul was part of the problem as well, however it's Neil's job to accurately assess the situation. If regular Joe Schmoe's on here could accurately predict what he would do years in advance, I don't know why Neil couldn't see the writing on the wall.
 
Natebishop3 said:
I'm sure Paul was part of the problem as well, however it's Neil's job to accurately assess the situation. If regular Joe Schmoe's on here could accurately predict what he would do years in advance, I don't know why Neil couldn't see the writing on the wall.
Click to expand...
Neil could have wanted to trade him and Paul vetoed, wanted the two to fly down and wrap t up and felt good about it. Didn't work.
 
Hoopguru said:
Neil could have wanted to trade him and Paul vetoed, wanted the two to fly down and wrap t up and felt good about it. Didn't work.
Click to expand...

The year he would have brought the most return was the summer before he left. He was a really good player and I know there was a lot of debate on who we could have gotten for him. In hindsight there was probably some draft pick that would have been beneficial, but not the names we were throwing around at the time. I also don't remember that particular draft being all that good. Regardless I don't really blame Neil for holding out hope that they could re-sign him. He was that much better than who we would have gotten in return at the time, especially when other teams were not sure if they could re-sign him either.
 
Hoopguru said:
Neil could have wanted to trade him and Paul vetoed, wanted the two to fly down and wrap t up and felt good about it. Didn't work.
Click to expand...

I personally don't buy it. There were reports that Aldridge basically asked for a trade a couple years prior and Neil supposedly convinced him to wait. He should have been traded right then. There was just too many red flags. He missed his family. He wanted to be closer to his family.

If Neil went to Paul and said, "I think he's gone. I think we're going to lose him for nothing." I can't see Paul just completely ignoring him.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
The year he would have brought the most return was the summer before he left. He was a really good player and I know there was a lot of debate on who we could have gotten for him. In hindsight there was probably some draft pick that would have been beneficial, but not the names we were throwing around at the time. I also don't remember that particular draft being all that good. Regardless I don't really blame Neil for holding out hope that they could re-sign him. He was that much better than who we would have gotten in return at the time, especially when other teams were not sure if they could re-sign him either.
Click to expand...

I really wanted to trade him to OKC for Harden. In hindsight, I'm not sure Dame and Harden could have co-existed.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
"Eventually" being the key word. I am liking our depth for a change. It will be interesting to see how some of our younger players develop throughout the season.
Click to expand...
After Nurk gets hurt (He undoubtedly will) we may see Watford leapfrog Eubanks to start. Drew will do well against second units so i would assume you may see Billups do the same thing Stotts did and made changes only in the position of need.
 
Fairly-Hard said:
After Nurk gets hurt (He undoubtedly will) we may see Watford leapfrog Eubanks to start. Drew will do well against second units so i would assume you may see Billups do the same thing Stotts did and made changes only in the position of need.
Click to expand...

Without Nurk what is our center rotation? I don't see Eubanks as a realistic every game option, he is more of a 3rd string 15th man option IMO.

You might be right that Watford starts, or Grant slides over. Would Winslow play there? He measured 6'4"; hardly seems like a center. This roster is so damn undersized, AGAIN. We went from a 3 guard lineup with Norm, who yes is on the short side but has great winspan to slide up to SF.... but now we got an entire roster of damn guards.

I'd think Hart is the favorite to start at SF. Without Nurk would we start GP2 and slide everyone up?

Dame
Simons
GP2
Hart
Grant

This team will be freaking tiny without Nurk, who will likely play ~28mpg or less and has extensive games missed to injury history, now on a fat contract.

The game has moved to wings being critical, we seemed to have missed the memo and only can acquire guards. Well at least we have a bunch of "flexibility" to improve the roster this year....
 
WesleyMatthews said:
Without Nurk what is our center rotation? I don't see Eubanks as a realistic every game option, he is more of a 3rd string 15th man option IMO.

You might be right that Watford starts, or Grant slides over. Would Winslow play there? He measured 6'4"; hardly seems like a center. This roster is so damn undersized, AGAIN. We went from a 3 guard lineup with Norm, who yes is on the short side but has great winspan to slide up to SF.... but now we got an entire roster of damn guards.

I'd think Hart is the favorite to start at SF. Without Nurk would we start GP2 and slide everyone up?

Dame
Simons
GP2
Hart
Grant

This team will be freaking tiny without Nurk, who will likely play ~28mpg or less and has extensive games missed to injury history, now on a fat contract.

The game has moved to wings being critical, we seemed to have missed the memo and only can acquire guards. Well at least we have a bunch of "flexibility" to improve the roster this year....
Click to expand...
Eubanks 15th man? C'mon. He's way more talented than that.
 
Fairly-Hard said:
After Nurk gets hurt (He undoubtedly will) we may see Watford leapfrog Eubanks to start. Drew will do well against second units so i would assume you may see Billups do the same thing Stotts did and made changes only in the position of need.
Click to expand...
Hey can i get the lotto picks. I need cash inflo. You're saying you can foresee the future.
 
WesleyMatthews said:
....but now we got an entire roster of damn guards.
Click to expand...

Yes, we still need another center, regardless of what everyone's take is on Eubanks. We need 3 bigs

I doubt Hart's size will be an issue at SF, but if he turns out to be, we still have options. We are not that small defensively at forward.

PF: Grant, Watford, Walker (Eubanks can be included in this group against the bigger/slower PFs)
SF: Little, Winslow, Brown
 
Pinwheel1 said:
Yes, we still need another center, regardless of what everyone's take is on Eubanks. We need 3 bigs

I doubt Hart's size will be an issue at SF, but if he turns out to be, we still have options. We are not that small defensively at forward.

PF: Grant, Watford, Walker (Eubanks can be included in this group against the bigger/slower PFs)
SF: Little, Winslow, Brown
Click to expand...

Sure a good backup center would be nice, too bad we don't have any luxury tax room to sign even a minimum salary guy.

Little and Winslow at SF yes are sized fine, but if Hart gets all his minutes at SF, and Payton is playing, with Ant playing ~35mpg, I think a couple of these guys you list will slide up to a bigger position.

I loved the idea of Hart as the 3rd guard with Dame and Ant, brings size and a defensive balance to the backcourt. But adding Payton with him seemingly getting a significant role changes that. Plus you hope Sharpe is able to get at least 10-15mpg, but now he likely also has to slide up to a forward position.

I wouldn't list Brown, not sure he would make the team if he didn't have a guaranteed contract. Walker and Winslow might play, but they might have games they are completely out of the rotation.

So yes we have forward option with required size for their positions, but are they playing all the minutes at those positions? I'd say that appears very unlikely. How do all these guards fit in a 9 man rotation? I suspect we'll see a ton of 3 guard lineups and with something such as a Nurk or Grant injury possibly 4 guard lineups.
 
WesleyMatthews said:
Without Nurk what is our center rotation? I don't see Eubanks as a realistic every game option, he is more of a 3rd string 15th man option IMO.

You might be right that Watford starts, or Grant slides over. Would Winslow play there? He measured 6'4"; hardly seems like a center. This roster is so damn undersized, AGAIN. We went from a 3 guard lineup with Norm, who yes is on the short side but has great winspan to slide up to SF.... but now we got an entire roster of damn guards.

I'd think Hart is the favorite to start at SF. Without Nurk would we start GP2 and slide everyone up?

Dame
Simons
GP2
Hart
Grant

This team will be freaking tiny without Nurk, who will likely play ~28mpg or less and has extensive games missed to injury history, now on a fat contract.

The game has moved to wings being critical, we seemed to have missed the memo and only can acquire guards. Well at least we have a bunch of "flexibility" to improve the roster this year....
Click to expand...

Don’t fall in love & get too attached. A mid season trade is coming and nobody’s off the table but Dame.
 
WesleyMatthews said:
Without Nurk what is our center rotation? I don't see Eubanks as a realistic every game option, he is more of a 3rd string 15th man option IMO.

You might be right that Watford starts, or Grant slides over. Would Winslow play there? He measured 6'4"; hardly seems like a center. This roster is so damn undersized, AGAIN. We went from a 3 guard lineup with Norm, who yes is on the short side but has great winspan to slide up to SF.... but now we got an entire roster of damn guards.

I'd think Hart is the favorite to start at SF. Without Nurk would we start GP2 and slide everyone up?

Dame
Simons
GP2
Hart
Grant

This team will be freaking tiny without Nurk, who will likely play ~28mpg or less and has extensive games missed to injury history, now on a fat contract.

The game has moved to wings being critical, we seemed to have missed the memo and only can acquire guards. Well at least we have a bunch of "flexibility" to improve the roster this year....
Click to expand...
Eubanks is already second off the bench and maybe first if Nurk gets in foul trouble.
 
tykendo said:
Hey can i get the lotto picks. I need cash inflo. You're saying you can foresee the future.
Click to expand...
Play the odds.
What season has Nurk not got hurt?
How many has he?
The big payoff would be betting he didn’t and he actually stayed healthy for a season.
 
Fairly-Hard said:
Play the odds.
What season has Nurk not got hurt?
How many has he?
The big payoff would be betting he didn’t and he actually stayed healthy for a season.
Click to expand...

Hedge your bets?
 
If you are thinking Nurk doesn’t miss 20+ games this year I have plenty of property for sale.
 
Fairly-Hard said:
If you are thinking Nurk doesn’t miss 20+ games this year I have plenty of property for sale.
Click to expand...

He will miss games. The question is how many? I think he's due for a year where he plays most of the season.
 
Nurk Games Played With Portland

2016-17 20 (65) Games Played (Played 45 DEN)
2017-18. 79 Games Played
2018-19 72 Games Played
2019-20 8 Games Played
2020-21 37 Games Played
2021-22 56 Games Played *

* Would have likely played more had Portland not been tanking.

Average of about 53 games played a season.

Missed an average of about 29 games per season.
 
I'm not worried about Nurk, Eubanks or Watford.....Eubanks is way better than some are crediting him for. Watford is a good banger...we can sign a lumbering big to a two way contract if we need to....Cousins, Whiteside, Aldridge, Rolo, Kanter, Meyers Leonard and I believe even Drummond are unsigned big lumbering bigs...most teams signed quicker,, younger backup centers which we already have.....Wenyen Gabriels and Moses Brown got signed as backups before any of the vets I mentioned.....we'll be fine. Eubanks is going to play a lot of minutes...book it. He's also real comfortable playing with Gary Payton II.....they both said they can't wait to throw lobs to each other again......having Payton and Eubanks come off the bench they'll be a quick study since they already have chemistry from playing together as Beavers.
 
riverman said:
I'm not worried about Nurk, Eubanks or Watford.....Eubanks is way better than some are crediting him for. Watford is a good banger...we can sign a lumbering big to a two way contract if we need to....Cousins, Whiteside, Aldridge, Rolo, Kanter, Meyers Leonard and I believe even Drummond are unsigned big lumbering bigs...most teams signed quicker,, younger backup centers which we already have.....Wenyen Gabriels and Moses Brown got signed as backups before any of the vets I mentioned.....we'll be fine.
Click to expand...

Can't sign a vet to a two way.
 
Chris Craig said:
Can't sign a vet to a two way.
Click to expand...
didn't say you sign a vet...said we can sign a center to a two way and pointed out that the vets aren't getting jobs. We could sign one if we traded Didi and another guy like Brown for a future pick probably opening up a roster spot..there's a way to get it done but I'd go with a G league big at this point on a two way deal.
 
riverman said:
didn't say you sign a vet...said we can sign a center to a two way and pointed out that the vets aren't getting jobs.
Click to expand...
I think he was pointing out that since you said:

riverman said:
we can sign a lumbering big to a two way contract if we need to....Cousins, Whiteside, Aldridge, Rolo, Kanter, Meyers Leonard and I believe even Drummond are unsigned big lumbering bigs
Click to expand...

...it appeared as though you were suggesting that those lumbering bigs you listed would be examples of players that we might consider signing to a 2-way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top