Trade Avdija to Blazers

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Good trade?

  • Yes

    Votes: 92 86.0%
  • No

    Votes: 4 3.7%
  • Maybe

    Votes: 14 13.1%

  • Total voters
    107
Nobody brings irony better than NB.

You acted like my original post was directed at you. I forgot you were head of the drama club in HS. For that, I genuinely apologize. I'm recognizing your game (skill). Let's move on.
I have been dealing with a screaming 4 month old for the past hour so frankly I don’t give a shit.
 
While I don't enjoy losing on the first round, I still like that better than being one of the worst teams in the league.
There are too many "say whaaa?" moments within Portland's media. Bad takes after rough nights is normal procedure in modern NBA. The Blazers local media has become so intertwined with ownership, they tell us how difficult it is to manage an NBA team...... it's not our problem.

Most of us are simply fans that root for the players on this NBA team. Not the characteristics of a profitable business model. A team that can cash out while only providing a fraction of success in this professional sport... that stuff is beyond what we can root for. It's a big ask. The team makes the owner lots of money, so cheer up Portland ?
 
I have been dealing with a screaming 4 month old for the past hour so frankly I don’t give a shit.

Karenbishop, your responses and posts clearly say otherwise. We all see it. I wasn't even talking to you in my post intended as a general post that you made about you.

On the other side of things, congrats on the new child. I'd likely have more sympathy to direct your way but both of my daughters were amazing sleepers (and when they weren't, which was rare, I admittedly and regretfully missed it, so I cannot relate). That being said, good luck and get off S2 this late, brah!
 
Given what I’ve read and seen since the trade for Avdija, Good Or Bad trade doesn’t cover it. Excellent is more in line.
Washington prioritized and did what they wanted, so I’m glad they traded with Portland. Trading an expiring contract of a veteran 6th man who needed trading and a draftee and the 2nd best of three picks 5 years from now that may work out well for the Wizards? Good for them if they do. Glad they were up for it.

Avdija doesn’t have the desired plus-wingspan, but a 6’9 forward who guards 1-4 with some playmaking and 3-level skills that have improved? That’s a serious win. His descending 4-year deal is just so nice. This Fall will prove out. For now, I’ll go with excellent.
 
In 4 years I suspect Rupert will ready to dominate the league, Scoot and Shaedon already will be dominating the league, Toumani will be 2 time defending DPOY, Clingan will be an all star and the Blazers will need some cap space to re-sign Damian Lillard on his swan song as they march their way to the title.

Deni will gladly come back if he wants to win a title!



(did I do that right?)
 
While I don't enjoy losing on the first round, I still like that better than being one of the worst teams in the league.
I disagree. We are losing for a purpose to try to accumulate as much talent as possible.

A treadmill team continuing to lose in the 1st round with zero chance of winning a title without many assets to trade is the worst position to be in for a small market team.
 
yeah, that's the risk

I suppose that means there can always be a downside to signing young guys to budget contracts
Or a reason to consider having contracts progressively increase instead of decreasing.

Never really thought of this dynamic before. It's a legit item to consider. Still makes signing guys to reasonable contracts a great value overall though so I don't think it should ever prevent a team from locking up a player on a team friendly deal.
 
making it to the playoffs is neat and all, but if you never *really* progress past just making the playoffs, it's not that much fun.
That's the direction I prefer as well. We had basically all of Dame tenure as a 1st round and out level of team. Was tired of that limited upside team.

But it's really a personal preference. I can see some fans preferring to be a playoff team every year and that's fine if they instead prefer that direction. Neither preference is right or wrong.

I will say winning the 0.9 playoff series Dame second season was awesome, something we hadn't done in 15 years. So maybe if we get a number of years with no success I'll crave a first round win with zero contending chance much more. But for right now I'm happy to have a couple more years of losing if it is more likely we can then build for better long term success.
 
Playoff experience is the best way to learn to win in the playoffs for coaches and players...with a young squad that might mean losing early but as a team...you need to jump into that fire to make the next leap...3 year playoff drought is not a great development plan in my view
 
I just got back from a long vacation, so maybe this has been covered. But why does Washington do this? At first the narrative was that they wanted to lose over the next two years to get better draft picks and Deni would want to win. But then they sign Jonas Valanciunas??? Deni seems close to a good timeline for them. But why bother to sign Jonas? It's not like he is remotely the kind of player that could teach Sarr anything. I'm confused.
 
I just got back from a long vacation, so maybe this has been covered. But why does Washington do this? At first the narrative was that they wanted to lose over the next two years to get better draft picks and Deni would want to win. But then they sign Jonas Valanciunas??? Deni seems close to a good timeline for them. But why bother to sign Jonas? It's not like he is remotely the kind of player that could teach Sarr anything. I'm confused.
There is a theory that they had money to spend, while contenders didn't, so they trade him at the deadline for a draft pick and development player.
 
There is a theory that they had money to spend, while contenders didn't, so they trade him at the deadline for a draft pick and development player.

The only way it makes sense to me is they brought in Jonas to protect Sarr, and/or they want Sarr at the 4, and plan to get a younger big to go at the 5 down the road.
 
I just got back from a long vacation, so maybe this has been covered. But why does Washington do this? At first the narrative was that they wanted to lose over the next two years to get better draft picks and Deni would want to win. But then they sign Jonas Valanciunas??? Deni seems close to a good timeline for them. But why bother to sign Jonas? It's not like he is remotely the kind of player that could teach Sarr anything. I'm confused.
Not only can I not figure out why Washington made the trade, I can't figure out why Jonas signed there. Surely, he could get more $$$ elsewhere....
 
I just got back from a long vacation, so maybe this has been covered. But why does Washington do this? At first the narrative was that they wanted to lose over the next two years to get better draft picks and Deni would want to win. But then they sign Jonas Valanciunas??? Deni seems close to a good timeline for them. But why bother to sign Jonas? It's not like he is remotely the kind of player that could teach Sarr anything. I'm confused.
Different regime wanted to tear it down to the sticks.
 
I just got back from a long vacation, so maybe this has been covered. But why does Washington do this? At first the narrative was that they wanted to lose over the next two years to get better draft picks and Deni would want to win. But then they sign Jonas Valanciunas??? Deni seems close to a good timeline for them. But why bother to sign Jonas? It's not like he is remotely the kind of player that could teach Sarr anything. I'm confused.
I'd expect the Wizards are going to try and flip Jonas at the deadline.
 
Not only can I not figure out why Washington made the trade, I can't figure out why Jonas signed there. Surely, he could get more $$$ elsewhere....
Can you please give one example where Jonas could sign for more $$$? I don't see a 32 year old lumbering center averaging 12/8 as being a big free agent draw for all the lottery teams that still had cap space.
 
The only way it makes sense to me is they brought in Jonas to protect Sarr, and/or they want Sarr at the 4, and plan to get a younger big to go at the 5 down the road.
I don't believe they care at all about Jonas long term fit next to Sarr - Jonas was a short term move to add an asset.

Sarr is pretty raw still, so like Scoot its unclear when he'll even be a useful starter. Like us probably doesn't matter since the Wizards aren't trying to win anytime soon.
 
Can you please give one example where Jonas could sign for more $$$? I don't see a 32 year old lumbering center averaging 12/8 as being a big free agent draw for all the lottery teams that still had cap space.
Laker fans were mad when JV didn't sign with Team LeBron for less money.
 
Not only can I not figure out why Washington made the trade, I can't figure out why Jonas signed there. Surely, he could get more $$$ elsewhere....

Wizards fans online (from what I’ve read and watched) are surprised by the trade and have attempted to understand it as “selling high” on a player who won’t be a star and taking swings at draft picks to go young. Tanking. Deni was well liked though not uniformly with some seeing him as overvalued as a “home grown” player from the draft.

Sarr is reported as not wanting to play center (at least at this point) and Valunciunas fills that stopgap role. His not going to the Lakers earns him more money (reportedly) AND when they don’t win it, who would get the blame? AD and LeBron get some blame, but there’s a perception that the surrounding cast and coach gets more than their share of blame.
 
I don't think there is much mystery about why Washington signed Valuciunas. He's signed to a quality contract and beween his signing and the Avdija for Brogdon trade, the Wizards climbed over the salary floor. Now they can tank and collect luxury tax payouts

and, Valunciunas with that budget contract might be a really attractive trade chip as the deadline approaches

tell me which player was better last season:

upload_2024-7-8_8-54-49.png

then tell me whether a team would rather have the 10M/year guy or the 35M/year guy

now, why Val signed in Washington, so early might be a mystery
 

Attachments

  • upload_2024-7-8_8-54-49.png
    upload_2024-7-8_8-54-49.png
    92.2 KB · Views: 114
I don't think there is much mystery about why Washington signed Valuciunas. He's signed to a quality contract and beween his signing and the Avdija for Brogdon trade, the Wizards climbed over the salary floor. Now they can tank and collect luxury tax payouts

and, Valunciunas with that budget contract might be a really attractive trade chip as the deadline approaches

tell me which player was better last season:

View attachment 65171

then tell me whether a team would rather have the 10M/year guy or the 35M/year guy

now, why Val signed in Washington, so early might be a mystery

25 years old vs 31, so going forward very likely ones numbers get better and the other worse. Id much prefer Ayton. Ayton contract is an expiring next season. Jonas 3rd year when he is 34 could guarantee him money when he shouldn't even be in an NBA rotation.

Ideally with the Blazers roster status I'd prefer neither and flip them for a long term piece. But if the Blazers were both trying to win and had an average quality NBA owner possibly paying tax then Ayton is the clear superior option IMO.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top