Blazers trade the #7 pick for.....?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

The Blazers trade #7 for?

  • Multiple picks - keep one, trade one for Grant

  • Multiple picks - keep one, trade one for Collins

  • Down to #11 and get Randle

  • Down to #17 and get Wood

  • Include #7 with Nurk (S&T) for Ayton

  • OG Anunoby

  • Plus other assets to move up

  • Other - please specify

Results are only viewable after voting.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
WesleyMatthews said:
Is Ayton on a huge max contract worth Hart, the Bucks pick and Nurk walking? I'd say heck no.

But who knows with Cronin, maybe its something the Blazers would do.
Click to expand...

I would say absolutely, the kid is great when he is part of the game plan. Look at him in the playoffs last year. They knew to feed him early and it paid off. This year I think egos got in the way and he is done.
 
Last edited:
I can't decide how to feel on the Randles and Woods of the league as fits with Dame and Chauncey...

One part of me feels like their attitudes and general lack of effort on the defensive end would be horrendous fits. The other part of me wonders if Dame and Chauncey would be enough to get them to give effort on that side and bring their typical offense... I guess, if the cost is cheap enough, those would be the kinds of big swings we'd need to hit on???
 
And I would say any Ayton deal would have to be a 3 team deal if trying to include Nurk as a S&T in it.
 
I’m going full on Labinot or whatever the fuck that kids name is we trade for Ayton.
 
Fez Forthright said:
Randle >>>>>> Grant

Like Wood this season, Julius was toxic with his attitude - not worth a top-10 pick. They both tanked their value.

Trading up for Keegan is the answer, not these bunt-single moves
Click to expand...
I would take on Randle if the Knicks part with 11 in the process. He was an All NBA player just a year ago.

But we'd also need need to forget about Grant and aim to get a knockdown shooter at the 3 either via trade (ahem... Cam Johnson) or with the #11 pick. I don't like the spacing with Grant/Randle/Nurk.
 
Predator said:
Paying a center 30 million+ is not a recipe for “championship” success.

Jokic?
Embiid?
Gobert?

How is that working out for those teams? And I’d argue that they’re all much, much better players than Ayton.

Now let’s look at this:
Mavs - Luka
Warriors - Steph, Klay, Dray, Wiggins
Celtics - Jaylen, Tatum
Heat - Jimmy

Not a 30 million dollar big traditional center in sight. Seems like star wings are more important.
Click to expand...
Jokic has been to WCF and will be back at that level with Murray and MPJ..
Embiid can definitely get to ECF with better teammates.
Are you really saying it's impossible to build a contender around those two guys??

Now let's look at this:
Luka & Tatum & Butler- no championship success yet
 
illmatic99 said:
I would take on Randle if the Knicks part with 11 in the process. He was an All NBA player just a year ago.

But we'd also need need to forget about Grant and aim to get a knockdown shooter at the 3 either via trade (ahem... Cam Johnson) or with the #11 pick. I don't like the spacing with Grant/Randle/Nurk.
Click to expand...
Can Randle defend. Defense should be #1 priority.
 
KSF-ERIC said:
Jokic has been to WCF and will be back at that level with Murray and MPJ..
Embiid can definitely get to ECF with better teammates.
Are you really saying it's impossible to build a contender around those two guys??

Now let's look at this:
Luka & Tatum & Butler- no championship success yet
Click to expand...

Now let’s look at this: The last NBA champion with a traditional big was the Spurs nearly 10 years ago — in a much different “NBA” landscape.

Hmm. Jokic needs Murray AND MPJ. Wonder why that is.

Hmm. Embiid has played with MULTIPLE all stars and still needs better teammates? Interesting.

Meanwhile, the Heat (with a worse supporting cast) beat the 76ers and were in the finals 2 years ago.

You’re essentially making points as to why the “C” is a stupid investment.
 
illmatic99 said:
if a deal for Ayton is available in a S&T, I don't think it should cost us more than just Nurk or Hart.
Click to expand...
I'm good with trading Nurk for Ayton...

Dame
Hart
Grant (via #11 and contract/TEP)
Randle ( with 11 for #7 and contract/TPE)
Ayton (via Nurk, but I don't know if we can do this while pulling off the other moves... Could this work financially?)
 
Here’s what our new assistant GM thinks of Daniels. This was written in February btw, when no one had him projected so high

6DCEE814-1638-4317-8FEB-80BEFF60693A.jpeg
 
Phatguysrule said:
I'm good with trading Nurk for Ayton...

Dame
Hart
Grant (via #11 and contract/TEP)
Randle ( with 11 for #7 and contract/TPE)
Ayton (via Nurk, but I don't know if we can do this while pulling off the other moves... Could this work financially?)
Click to expand...
Ayton and nurk would need other pieces, but I think it could be done. However, I'd have to check on total salary. S&T hard caps us, and bringing in randle and Grant is going to increase salary quickly
 
Last edited:
RR7 said:
Ayton and nurk would need other pieces, but I think it could be done. However, I'd have to check on total salary. S&T hard caps us, and bringing in randle and Grant is going to increase salary quickly
Click to expand...
I'm good with salary if we can add 3 players like that...
 
geeeeezuz....reading this thread and realizing the draft is a month away......

starting right now...nobody can post about the draft unless it's an original thought

upload_2022-5-26_18-9-16.png

damn

upload_2022-5-26_18-10-44.png

double damn
 
Ed O said:
The thing is that it's a lost art because it's not smart basketball in the NBA.

Why feed your big guy so he can shoot 60% when you have guys who can shoot 35% from three pointers? Why clog the paint with a big guy when you could have the floor stretched and layups be easier?

Jokic and Embiid are amazing players that pass and can shoot from deep... and it's still questionable if they're as valuable (dollar for dollar) as top-tier smaller guys. It might just be coincidence that they are at home right now, but it also might speak to the way the teams are constructed.

Also, about Golden State: pointing that they drafted Wiseman isn't really relevant. The team is winning in spite of getting NOTHING from him, which just reinforces that top-flight centers aren't needed to succeed.

About Ayton: giving up value for him and then paying him like a top-flight center would be a disaster IMO.
Click to expand...

You do realize that 60% on 2-pointers is worth more than 35% on 3-pointers? So the idea that feeding a post player who shoots 60% isn't smart and just clogs the lane so they can't get layups...just isn't smart. Never seen an NBA team have 5 guys stand around the 3 pt line as an offense.
I'll go one step further and say feeding a good post up scorer is actually smart basketball for a few reasons. 1) defenders aren't used to defending it. 2) it causes defenses to sink inside to help which opens perimeter shots. 3) it creates fouls/foul trouble/free throws. 4) the league is about the next new thing, even if it's an old thing.
If a team were to mimic the 80's & 90's Blazers where they started every game by force feeding Duck the ball on the low block for the first several possessions (until he ran out of gas), I think it would be very successful. I get that the league is guard/wing dominated but I think having an inside option would only open things up more.
 
Phatguysrule said:
I'm good with salary if we can add 3 players like that...
Click to expand...
No, the hard cap that we would incur by receiving a signed and traded player would make things tight. I didn't see Ant in your starting lineup but I would assume you wouldn't want to let him walk for nothing. Without Ant or Ayton we're at just over 118M for 10 players. If Ant and Ayton make a conservative combined 45M and we sign two rookie min players, we're at the estimated hard cap of 155M. I don't think we could get those two guys to agree to a combined 45M so I don't think this works. You can say that you're good with the salary if you're adding it in a way that doesn't incur a hard cap but not if you're using the full MLE or taking on a player through sign and trade.
 
RR7 said:
If we're trading the pick, I hope it's initially with many trade downs to gather extra assets. 7 for 9 and 20. 9 for 12 and 30 or a future first. 12 and 20 for 13 and 15. 15 for 22 and 29. Etc.
Click to expand...
I like the way you think! Especially in this draft. Lots of guys 10-20 that look like they might be really solid players some have very high upsides as well.
 
blazerkor said:
No, the hard cap that we would incur by receiving a signed and traded player would make things tight. I didn't see Ant in your starting lineup but I would assume you wouldn't want to let him walk for nothing. Without Ant or Ayton we're at just over 118M for 10 players. If Ant and Ayton make a conservative combined 45M and we sign two rookie min players, we're at the estimated hard cap of 155M. I don't think we could get those two guys to agree to a combined 45M so I don't think this works. You can say that you're good with the salary if you're adding it in a way that doesn't incur a hard cap but not if you're using the full MLE or taking on a player through sign and trade.
Click to expand...
Makes sense. Then I think I'd pass on Ayton and stick with upgrading the forward spots.
 
Really hope the Blazers don't trade the pick of Keegan Murray is available. He's pretty well rounded and can contribute on day one.
 
Freshtown said:
13, 15, and PJ would be good though.
Click to expand...

so then, the 'best case' scenario from that:

* #7 + the 6.5M TPE for PJ + #13 + #15

Bledsoe + #15 for Grant

(maybe it would be better to use the big TPE for Washington leaving Blazers with TPE's of 16.6M, 6.5M, 3,3M)

that would be settling though because a forward tandem of Grant + Washington has a definite ceiling. And one component of the ceiling would be having a weak rebounding pair of forwards (a combined rebounding rate of 17% is not good)

that return, in and of itself would be the epitome of meh. A lot would hinge on how well the Blazers did with #13. And all that is assuming that Portland didn't spend both of their TPE in the trades or give up the 13 + Milwaukee pick for Grant

I'd really hope for better and the only reason I'd lean toward 'liking' that trade is because of the lurking 'inevitability' of giving the 7 & the TPE for Grant,,,,geeeezuz
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top