Blazers lose tiebreaker, picking 10th

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
KingSpeed said:
The three best players in the NBA- SGA, Giannis and Jokic- were picked outside the top 10.
Click to expand...
Casinos have big winners all the time.

There is a reason just going to casinos isn't considered a smart financial plan.
 
Everything Beagle said:
You can rebuild without trying to lose on purpose. A bad team will be plenty bad without trying extra hard to lose.
Click to expand...
I don't think most wanted the players or coaches to actively try to lose. Certainly not extra hard.

I wanted scrubs playing the minutes Ant and Grant (and possiblity Ayton) played this season.

I think we could easily be looking at a top 4 pick right now if that were the case.

Trying to make the playoffs with this roster was just silly.
 
Everything Beagle said:
Could have fooled me.
Click to expand...
Players simply wouldn't have gone along with that. They aren't just going to go out and deliberately look bad. That just doesn't seem realistic.

No NBA team did that this year. Coach can develop the young guys. But they aren't telling guys to miss on purpose.
 
1. Lottery. Top 4 or at 10. Either way, the talent improves on the roster.
2. Trades of veteran players has to happen for the team salary in the near future. Running it back will be unacceptable to fans. It won’t help the growth curve. Cronin knows it. Letting guys walk is unlikely compared to getting some assets. Clean out the roster. Cronin cannot say it but has to do it. The direction is positive even though it’s early in the rebuild.
3. One thing I can say is that the Blazers already have an elite player in Toumani Camara on D. Soon to be 25 and headed into only his 3rd season after taking one leap — the next is predictably the 25-26 season. He’ll even get treated differently by the refs.

May 12.
 
Everything Beagle said:
You can rebuild without trying to lose on purpose. A bad team will be plenty bad without trying extra hard to lose.
Click to expand...
Rebuild towards what? We can’t sign a star. We probably can’t trade for one. Our best chance has always been to draft one.

Dame
LMA
Roy
Drexler
Etc

do we have a star on the team? Maybe. I don’t know the future for Sharpe, Scoot or Deni. But I wouldn’t say there’s a clear star on this team. You can’t contend without a star.

Championship or bust might not be the best approach, but trying to be in the mix is the goal. Be a contender. A team with a legit shot.
 
I don't like the guy but no question Draymond Green is impact player. Second round.

Recent article recalled his arrival in NBA, as second round pick not guaranteed a slot and only one year contract. Lived in cheap apartment, hauled his own belongings upstairs, shopped at SavMart.

Not doing that now
 
Natebishop3 said:
Rebuild towards what? We can’t sign a star. We probably can’t trade for one. Our best chance has always been to draft one.

Dame
LMA
Roy
Drexler
Etc

do we have a star on the team? Maybe. I don’t know the future for Sharpe, Scoot or Deni. But I wouldn’t say there’s a clear star on this team. You can’t contend without a star.

Championship or bust might not be the best approach, but trying to be in the mix is the goal. Be a contender. A team with a legit shot.
Click to expand...
Didn't the Bulls draft LMA?
 
I'm banking on Mike Schmidt's little wish list book on guys he's followed since they were in middle school to produce another Deni or Toumani taleent or overseas players our expanded overseas scouting team finds in Africa or Europe, etc. I think we'll see more G league players drafted as well. Teams no longer have to look primarily to college players to find impact players.
 
riverman said:
I'm banking on Mike Schmidt's little wish list book on guys he's followed since they were in middle school to produce another Deni or Toumani taleent or overseas players our expanded overseas scouting team finds in Africa or Europe, etc. I think we'll see more G league players drafted as well. Teams no longer have to look primarily to college players to find impact players.
Click to expand...
This reminds me of when we were all excited about Kevin Pritchard and Tom Penn...
 
Natebishop3 said:
Rebuild towards what? We can’t sign a star. We probably can’t trade for one. Our best chance has always been to draft one.

Dame
LMA
Roy
Drexler
Etc

do we have a star on the team? Maybe. I don’t know the future for Sharpe, Scoot or Deni. But I wouldn’t say there’s a clear star on this team. You can’t contend without a star.

Championship or bust might not be the best approach, but trying to be in the mix is the goal. Be a contender. A team with a legit shot.
Click to expand...

Buck, Duck, and pretty much the whole 2000 team were from trades. I would argue that all our best teams have been aided by trades. Even the championship team, we traded Petrie to get Lucas in the ABA dispersal draft.

Yes, it was easier back then, but we really only need one key piece now.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
Buck, Duck, and pretty much the whole 2000 team were from trades. I would argue that all our best teams have been aided by trades. Even the championship team, we traded Petrie to get Lucas in the ABA dispersal draft.

Yes, it was easier back then, but we really only need one key piece now.
Click to expand...
Has anybody suggested that trades wouldn't or shouldn't be a part of building process?
 
andalusian said:
As shown above by players not playing by salary (5th in the league) - the Blazers definitely tanked. They just didn't blatantly tank by playing scrubs instead of the young guys they build around.
Click to expand...
If they tanked they did a MISERABLE job of it.
 
Phatguysrule said:
I don't think most wanted the players or coaches to actively try to lose. Certainly not extra hard.

I wanted scrubs playing the minutes Ant and Grant (and possiblity Ayton) played this season.

I think we could easily be looking at a top 4 pick right now if that were the case.

Trying to make the playoffs with this roster was just silly.
Click to expand...

Didn't that get debunked? Win shares were less for those guys compared to others? Ayton less than Clingan for example? Meaning if ww had started Clingan from game 1, we would have won more, not less?
 
SharpeScooterShooter said:
Didn't that get debunked? Win shares were less for those guys compared to others? Ayton less than Clingan for example? Meaning if ww had started Clingan from game 1, we would have won more, not less?
Click to expand...
Maybe it lies in the third word of that second line "scrubs". The idea that the minutes Ayton was getting would've gone to Clingan and the minutes Clingan was getting would've gone to Reath, probably would have had us winning less early on. Same can be said for taking Ant and Jerami out of the rotation. I don't know if any of that is realistic. I also don't know if giving our young really good players that much more usage that early in the season would have translated to even more wins down the stretch and turned guys we currently see as scrubs into viable bench rotation players.

The fact is we are where we are, we can hope (with good cause) that our front office will make a trade or more and possibly a pick or even more that will make sense because they've been doing well with the actions they have taken.

The only worry I have is that they won't take enough action and we might still see anyone, two or all three of Ant, Jerami and Deandre starting at the beginning of next season, again. Fingers crossed that we get the moves that give our team the best shot to contend on the most expedient but realistic timeline.
 
SharpeScooterShooter said:
Didn't that get debunked? Win shares were less for those guys compared to others? Ayton less than Clingan for example? Meaning if ww had started Clingan from game 1, we would have won more, not less?
Click to expand...
And who would have been Clingan's backup if Ayton were out?

I don't think it's been debunked at all.
 
Phatguysrule said:
Has anybody suggested that trades wouldn't or shouldn't be a part of building process?
Click to expand...

I was responding to this:

"Rebuild towards what? We can’t sign a star. We probably can’t trade for one. Our best chance has always been to draft one."

The point was that the 2000 team, which IMO was the best team in the NBA team that year, was for the most part, included players we traded for. So I disagree that our best chance has always been to draft a star.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top