Rumor Beal?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Guys what makes Ant different then Beal ?

Just cause he is home grown he still is only 6'2 /3 and while he might be better on D he still is only 6'2

I want you all to think about that -- I am not saying I am against Ant resigning just a little wary of going down the same road we were just on with CJ just a little cheaper.
 
Ripcity4life77 said:
Guys what makes Ant different then Beal ?

Just cause he is home grown he still is only 6'2 /3 and while he might be better on D he still is only 6'2

I want you all to think about that -- I am not saying I am against Ant resigning just a little wary of going down the same road we were just on with CJ just a little cheaper.
Click to expand...
I agree that we shouldn't go all in on a Dame/ Ant backcourt. I'm just saying it's unfortunately likely that we do, and that it's a lot pricier than you were suggesting.
 
Hello, Please no.

We do not need upgrades at guard.
Dame
Ant
Hart
?????????????
Meanwhile in the PF position:
Watford
Winslow

Especially ones thst arent plus defenders.
Why would this even be a thought??
Disappointed in the front office/Cronin if this is legit…


What am i missing here?
 
Honestly the number for money i put in was a placeholder cause I have no idea what it will take and i do agree it's prolly like 15 to 22 but still -- the point was not Just the money it was the fit and what we just went through with CJ -- money is maybe the smallest issue.
 
Ripcity4life77 said:
Guys what makes Ant different then Beal ?

Just cause he is home grown he still is only 6'2 /3 and while he might be better on D he still is only 6'2

I want you all to think about that -- I am not saying I am against Ant resigning just a little wary of going down the same road we were just on with CJ just a little cheaper.
Click to expand...

Here are 4 things that are different.

Age - Biggest difference, Ant is young enough to build around if the team pivots and trades Dame in the next year or so.

Contract - Ant will make much less than Beal even on a max. If Ant contract ends up at a lower amount, it will be even more feasible to build a roster with both him and Dame.

Potential - Ant has a chance to improve overall to a level above CJ or even Beal. Especially the potential to be better on defense.

Cost to Sign - Beal would need to be acquired either in sign and trade (sending out assets) or with renouncing other players and exceptions. Resigning Ant doesn't cost any of that.
 
Ripcity4life77 said:
Honestly the number for money i put in was a placeholder cause I have no idea what it will take and i do agree it's prolly like 15 to 22 but still -- the point was not Just the money it was the fit and what we just went through with CJ -- money is maybe the smallest issue.
Click to expand...
The money is a major aspect of it though. If we could somehow keep him for 12-15M, there could maybe be an argument for keeping him as a super-sub. At 24M... not so much.
 
Tince said:
Was CJ the #1 option in NOP? In the playoffs it's appeared Ingram was #1. With a healthy Zion, he might be the #3 option.

I think we missed out on the NOP lottery pick because the Lakers melted down the last month of the season and NOP barely held off a Covidless PG13 (also missing Kawhi) Clippers team. CJ obviously made them more talented, but those other factors were critical in them being an 8th seed despite being 36-46.
Click to expand...

I admittedly did not watch much CJ in NO, but I only watched regular season games. I don't think I watched more than two NBA playoff games, and one was Game One of the Finals. The couple of regular season games I did watch, CJ dominated the ball and the Hornets offense actually looked decent. My overall point was not to debate CJ v. Beal, though (I thought that was pretty clear). I just don't see a big difference between Dame and CJ v. Dame and Beal. We could have simply stayed the course with what we had, which was not working. I like Beal would love to have him on the Blazers, but for those that complained about CJ, I don't see how Beal changes things without us improving the front court (which is the same issue we've all been talking about for years).
 
BBert said:
Why on God's gray earth would the Blazers want Beal. He does nothing to address a single roster need, and his contract is out of the question under our current circumstances and need to acquire players at other positions.
Click to expand...
no shit, makes no sense,
 
BLAZINGGIANTS said:
I admittedly did not watch much CJ in NO, but I only watched regular season games. I don't think I watched more than two NBA playoff games, and one was Game One of the Finals. The couple of regular season games I did watch, CJ dominated the ball and the Hornets offense actually looked decent. My overall point was not to debate CJ v. Beal, though (I thought that was pretty clear). I just don't see a big difference between Dame and CJ v. Dame and Beal. We could have simply stayed the course with what we had, which was not working. I like Beal would love to have him on the Blazers, but for those that complained about CJ, I don't see how Beal changes things without us improving the front court (which is the same issue we've all been talking about for years).
Click to expand...

I see it different, but you may be right. We'll probably never get a chance to find out anyway!
 
WesleyMatthews said:
As my post you quoted said, I like Powell on his contract more on a Blazers team with Dame. I'm not talking about Beal's value as a #1 option to a third team, and that was not what this thread or this message board is about.

For the sake of your argument; lets say the Blazers try to pursue acquiring Beal. They would have to give up assets in a trade or renounce players such as Nurk/Simons/Hart to sign Beal. Instead the Blazers could have had a monkey sitting at Cronin's desk last February doing nothing, and now would have Norm on the roster instead of a few scrubs. Norm could make sense in a backcourt with Dame, either starting or as the 3rd guard off the bench. Dame and Beal taking up much more of the cap than DameCJ makes no sense.

If the Blazers did get Beal, could they then flip Beal for a piece that fits better with Dame, and recoups some of the value of Nurk/Simons/Hart/etc in 6 months when trade restrictions end? Sure that is possible, but your basically throwing away most of the 2022-23 season to chase that unknown upgrade in assets. What if Beal isn't healthy at the trade deadline? Then the Blazers may have to throw away the season. Plus, do we really trust Cronin to buy low and sell high with players when his track record for the franchise is the opposite?

I'm not sure Cronin could flip Beal for more value than Powell would have provided on the roster. For all we know other GM's would hold salary savings of Beal's max against Cronin in negotiations and we end up hearing how Cronin had to give away multiple picks so other GM's would stop trying to negotiate with him.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty much always for increasing the value of your roster, regardless of position, but these scenarios are certainly speculative on our part. I'm super confident Beal would return far greater value than a Powell level player, but that scenario is highly unlikely to happen, so we'll never know.
 
Tince said:
I see it different, but you may be right. We'll probably never get a chance to find out anyway!
Click to expand...

How many players are we going to see that the Blazers are "targeting"? I've already seen that we're targeting 7-8 players. Hoping this means we'll be active and aggressive, but as they say, fool me once....
 
BLAZINGGIANTS said:
How many players are we going to see that the Blazers are "targeting"? I've already seen that we're targeting 7-8 players. Hoping this means we'll be active and aggressive, but as they say, fool me once....
Click to expand...
Kyle Anderson, Jerami Grant. Wait for it and accept it
 
BLAZINGGIANTS said:
How many players are we going to see that the Blazers are "targeting"? I've already seen that we're targeting 7-8 players. Hoping this means we'll be active and aggressive, but as they say, fool me once....
Click to expand...
It's called "being a team with cap space and roster spots"
 
BLAZINGGIANTS said:
How many players are we going to see that the Blazers are "targeting"? I've already seen that we're targeting 7-8 players. Hoping this means we'll be active and aggressive, but as they say, fool me once....
Click to expand...

LOL... I'm with you. This appears to be more like favors to agents than anything. Feels like LaVine or Beal have near 0% of going to Portland this summer. Even Ayton seems highly unlikely.
 
Cronin has said all along he's targeting forwards to pair with Dame....Beal doesn't seem to be anywhere near the type player Chauncey or Joe are targeting. Beal is an alpha...he's not playing Scottie Pippen to Dame ...his agent knows this too. If they did pick him up it'd be to trade him down the road but I don't see that pairing doing anything for our core moving forward
 
BlazerBender said:
I wish this thread had a poll to determine how unified everyone is that Beal is not the player or position we should be targeting. :)
Click to expand...

I feel like we're still about two steps away from worrying about having the right players at the right position. Until it's time to contend, I think the #1 focus should be on building your assets.

If we could trade our starting lineup (minus Dame) for the 4 best PGs in the league, I would do it in two seconds. You could easily flip 4 of the top 5 PGs in the league for a contending roster.
 
A lot of you are seriously underrating Beal. This is a guy who averaged 31 ppg just two seasons ago. He also won the first three first round series of his career going 12-3 in those series. If it wasn't for Kelly Olynyk going off, he would've reached the ECF in 2017. Dame wants to play with a star. Beal qualifies as a star. And a lot of you act like if we get Beal, we can't also get good players at other positions of need. Why not go after both? Remember when Boston traded for KG and Ray Allen without losing Pierce. That's the kind of splash we should be looking to make.
 
KSF-ERIC said:
A lot of you are seriously underrating Beal. This is a guy who averaged 31 ppg just two seasons ago. He also won the first three first round series of his career going 12-3 in those series. If it wasn't for Kelly Olynyk going off, he would've reached the ECF in 2017. Dame wants to play with a star. Beal qualifies as a star. And a lot of you act like if we get Beal, we can't also get good players at other positions of need. Why not go after both? Remember when Boston traded for KG and Ray Allen without losing Pierce. That's the kind of splash we should be looking to make.
Click to expand...
Youre right that the board is seriously underrating Beal.

but no way it happens so it’s moot
 
Tince said:
I feel like we're still about two steps away from worrying about having the right players at the right position. Until it's time to contend, I think the #1 focus should be on building your assets.

If we could trade our starting lineup (minus Dame) for the 4 best PGs in the league, I would do it in two seconds. You could easily flip 4 of the top 5 PGs in the league for a contending roster.
Click to expand...

How does that math work though? I suppose salary differentials can play a large part, but by and large, if our current starters, minus Dame, have the value to trade for the best PGs in the league, then would not those same four starters be able to net the right guys in the right positions from the get go?
To me that seems like kicking the can down the road? The only way I would see that as a goal is if there is clear end game and player that is coveted that we already know we can get, through discussions, that Beal would net? And if that is the case, why not just have a three team trade?
I am sorry, but I am just not seeing the upside from targeting high priced guards when we have a very solid trio currently.
 
KSF-ERIC said:
A lot of you are seriously underrating Beal. This is a guy who averaged 31 ppg just two seasons ago. He also won the first three first round series of his career going 12-3 in those series. If it wasn't for Kelly Olynyk going off, he would've reached the ECF in 2017. Dame wants to play with a star. Beal qualifies as a star. And a lot of you act like if we get Beal, we can't also get good players at other positions of need. Why not go after both? Remember when Boston traded for KG and Ray Allen without losing Pierce. That's the kind of splash we should be looking to make.
Click to expand...
I'm not underestimating him...I'm calling it a redundant signing because he's a franchise pt guard and we have that already..Beal won't want that situation...he needs Dame's position on a team to do what you like seeing him do....Jimmy Butler sure...but we need Jimmy Butler...we don't need Beal for what he brings to the Dame era..my view. Pierce and Ray Allen weren't playing the same position
 
BlazerBender said:
How does that math work though? I suppose salary differentials can play a large part, but by and large, if our current starters, minus Dame, have the value to trade for the best PGs in the league, then would not those same four starters be able to net the right guys in the right positions from the get go?
To me that seems like kicking the can down the road? The only way I would see that as a goal is if there is clear end game and player that is coveted that we already know we can get, through discussions, that Beal would net? And if that is the case, why not just have a three team trade?
I am sorry, but I am just not seeing the upside from targeting high priced guards when we have a very solid trio currently.
Click to expand...
We had Drexler, so why draft Jordan?
 
BlazerBender said:
How does that math work though? I suppose salary differentials can play a large part, but by and large, if our current starters minus Dame have the value to trade for the best PGs in the league, then would not those same four starters be able to net the right guys in the right positions from the get go?
To me that seems like kicking the can down the road? The only way I would see that as a goal is if there is clear end game and player that is covered that we already know through discussions Beal would net? And if that is the case why not just have s three team trade?
I am sorry, but I am just not seeing the upside from targeting high priced guards when we have a very solid trio currently.
Click to expand...

Lots of questions to unpack here!

1) The math doesn't work in my hypotheical situation. It was to simply make a point that there is value in obtaining the best players, regardless of position.
2) The opposing teams would not trade their best PGs for our starters because our talent level it too low. Which is the point, we need more talent, regardless of position.
3) I wouldn't call it "kicking the can down the road", I'd call it a plan to actually be a contender vs praying we can flip our current roster into a contending one by being super picky about only taking on a couple players that fit todays needed.
4) Three team trades are MUCH harder to facilitate. Flipping players allows you to mix and match assets from other moves.

What do you see the path being of turning Dame, the hope of Ant, and some role players into a contender?
 
riverman said:
I'm not underestimating him...I'm calling it a redundant signing because he's a franchise pt guard and we have that already..Beal won't want that situation...he needs Dame's position on a team to do what you like seeing him do....Jimmy Butler sure...but we need Jimmy Butler...we don't need Beal for what he brings to the Dame era..my view. Pierce and Ray Allen weren't playing the same position
Click to expand...
Beal and Dame don't play the same position. Beal is not a PG. He's a SG. He scored 31 ppg while sharing the ball with Russell Westbrook. Yes, the Westbrook who always wants the ball in his hands and took 19 shots per game that season. It's safe to say he'd be very effective sharing the ball with Dame.
 
KSF-ERIC said:
Beal is not a PG. He's a SG. He scored 31 ppg while sharing the ball with Russell Westbrook. Yes, the Westbrook who always wants the ball in his hands and took 19 shots per game that season.
Click to expand...
Josh Hart is a two guard at a fraction of the price....I don't see Beal not wanting his own team..to captain a team and run the offense. Maybe I'm wrong...I just don't see this as a fit at all....Josh Hart scored 44 this season too. Also playing with Westbrook you're going to get a lot of long rebounds....he's a clanger. CJ was called a two guard too but CJ is also a pt guard really.
 
riverman said:
I'm not underestimating him...I'm calling it a redundant signing because he's a franchise pt guard and we have that already..Beal won't want that situation...he needs Dame's position on a team to do what you like seeing him do....Jimmy Butler sure...but we need Jimmy Butler...we don't need Beal for what he brings to the Dame era..my view. Pierce and Ray Allen weren't playing the same position
Click to expand...

If given the choice, would you rather:

1) Obtain a redundant star
2) Obtain an average player in a position of need

Obviously we want the star in a position of need, so I left that option out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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