Blazers trade the #7 pick for.....? (1 Viewer)

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: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Natebishop3 said:
With Grant now in the fold...... is the 7th still in play?
Click to expand...
I could definitely see Collins and 16 if the Hawks are amenable. I mean especially with our guy Schmitz there to get us the big time upside guys. That being said, I think we'll wait and see who is there at 7 before we pull the trigger but at the same time it seems like Cronin's M.O. is to have things buttoned up early.
 
blazerkor said:
I could definitely see Collins and 16 if the Hawks are amenable. I mean especially with our guy Schmitz there to get us the big time upside guys. That being said, I think we'll wait and see who is there at 7 before we pull the trigger but at the same time it seems like Cronin's M.O. is to have things buttoned up early.
Click to expand...
The big upside guy is shaden sharp.
 
Mr. Robot said:
it seems like our fans like keegan murray & shaedon sharpe, imagine both of them gone at 5 & 6, which is more than likely

unless pistons & pacers really like guys like dyson daniels & bennedict mathurin, but thats about it i would think

if we keep the pick, please god, let it be the right one
Click to expand...

It sounds like Mathurin will go to Detroit or Indiana which would be great.
 
What if Murray fell to #7? Would fans just take him and be thrilled, or would they rather Collins (#16?).
 
TBpup said:
What if Murray fell to #7? Would fans just take him and be thrilled, or would they rather Collins (#16?).
Click to expand...
I would be thrilled and take him.

I don't like the Grant/Collins pairing at the forward positions.

I'd also look to swap Grant for Collins now... But I'm sure Dame would not be supportive of that.
 
TBpup said:
What if Murray fell to #7? Would fans just take him and be thrilled, or would they rather Collins (#16?).
Click to expand...

I really like Murray.... but I feel like Murray and Grant duplicate efforts. We need a good on ball/point of attack defender and Murray and Grant aren't that guy. I'm not sure what I would do.
 
I want Daniels or Sharpe, in that order. If we trade down I like Duren or Griffin.
 
Scalma said:
I want Daniels or Sharpe, in that order. If we trade down I like Duren or Griffin.
Click to expand...
Sochan seems like he would be able to start Day 1 next to Grant. He is super aggressive on defense without picking up a ton of fouls, he guards just about every position, I think he fills our needs better than anyone else. I know that people say take the BPA when you're this high in the draft and that's probably true, I would just like to find a way to get Sochan.
 
I think the only guy who can start day 1 for this roster is Murray... But that should not be a criteria for the selection
 
Nassir feels like the best fit next to Grant to shore up his rebounding deficiency.
 
illmatic99 said:
Theyre both 6'8 and mobile. Like between sf and pf is blurred nowadays anyway
Click to expand...

Both would get torched defensively, although I’m not as high on Keegan as you are. Keegan is below-average defensively IMO.

Particularly on-ball wise. It’s a less than ideal combination. We wouldn’t have a single above average (on ball) defender in our lineup.
 
glazeduck said:
That and Grant weighs all of like 210 lbs soaking wet.

I think the two could co-exist...
Click to expand...
Sure they could co-exist.
How do you feel about having 5 below average on ball defenders in a lineup?

Then Dame, Ant(most likely), Jerami and Keegan all getting blown by?

FWIW it’s also how I feel about John Collins. Can’t have both him and Grant.
 
Predator said:
Sure they could co-exist.
How do you feel about having 5 below average on ball defenders in a lineup?

Then Dame, Ant(most likely), Jerami and Keegan all getting blown by?

FWIW it’s also how I feel about John Collins. Can’t have both him and Grant.
Click to expand...

Indifferent and as though I would trust one of the NBA's all-time defensive greats to figure it out. That's what benches and rotations are for.

You're entitled to your opinions, but I've noticed that they all tend to be of the extreme variety, and frankly, I don't have a lot of interest in debating those.
 
glazeduck said:
Indifferent and as though I would trust one of the NBA's all-time defensive greats to figure it out. That's what benches and rotations are for.

You're entitled to your opinions, but I've noticed that they all tend to be of the extreme variety, and frankly, I don't have a lot of interest in debating those.
Click to expand...
Fair enough!
 
blazerkor said:
Sochan seems like he would be able to start Day 1 next to Grant. He is super aggressive on defense without picking up a ton of fouls, he guards just about every position, I think he fills our needs better than anyone else. I know that people say take the BPA when you're this high in the draft and that's probably true, I would just like to find a way to get Sochan.
Click to expand...
While I’m not against drafting and starting Sochan (eventually), I think we should start the season starting with Nas and Grant.

If you get Hayward, you trade whatever you need with #13 and the 2nd rounders up or stay put for Sochan. Then draft Sharpe/Mathurin/Daniels with #7. I’d be elated to possibly have Nas and Grant starting and having 6’6 Hart, 6’7 Daniels, 6’7 Hayward, 6’9 Sochan, and 6’8 Watford on the bench where Daniels is the immediate ball handler and decision maker behind Dame and Ant on the depth chart.

Chauncey can turn Daniels into something.
 
CJ_is_Gone said:
Can't score.
Click to expand...
Daniels scoring based on his usage was incredibly efficient actually.
But we don’t need scoring.
We need defense. And players that can stay healthy.
and both of those players are projected lotto picks because if they can make a stupid 3pt shot they have elite 2 way potential

OG personally imo doesn’t take us to contender status.

we have a *chance* if whoever we draft *booms*.

that’s the risk we need to take imo.
 
getting grant is huge, it puts us in a really good position, therefore, teams wont have leverage to use against us in a potential trade

if we cant add another established player on our terms, we just change the course and draft someone
 
Mr. Robot said:
getting grant is huge, it puts us in a really good position, therefore, teams wont have leverage to use against us in a potential trade

if we cant add another established player on our terms, we just change the course and draft someone
Click to expand...

We'll have the summer to barter as well. Other good players will be available for a much lesser price. Probably not quite as good as OG but still. We have other assets to get another wing.
 
AmirIcon said:
We'll have the summer to barter as well. Other good players will be available for a much lesser price. Probably not quite as good as OG but still. We have other assets to get another wing.
Click to expand...
Good point. The 7th pick is a very steep price to me. Haven't had a pick this high in 10 years.
Indiana hasn't had a top 10 pick since 1989. I don't hear about them shopping their pick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top