Can't trade them big 3... Or the blazers send their pick to da bulls

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
If we make the playoffs with this roster in a loaded West and all our youth it will be a good thing. Just to win that much our young talent would be fulfilling a lot of their potential.

Also if we send our 2025 pick to Chicago than we would no longer owe Chicago a pick, so our 2028 swap with Milwaukee becomes guaranteed and is unprotected. Who knows, that might end up ad the #1 overall pick, and in a year were a top playoff seed. Win/win
 
PtldPlatypus said:
I would rather win without Ant/Ayton than lose with them.
Click to expand...
I think Jerami is still the first that needs to go because he just doesn't fit our timeline. So unless the dude has negative trade value ship his ass off first. I do agree that the way that Ant and Deandre play with this roster is painful to watch and they've got to go as well.
 
blazerkor said:
I think Jerami is still the first that needs to go because he just doesn't fit our timeline. So unless the dude has negative trade value ship his ass off first. I do agree that the way that Ant and Deandre play with this roster is painful to watch and they've got to go as well.
Click to expand...

Jerami is the least harmful of our vets. He's also the most attractive to any team looking to get better.
 
AmirIcon said:
Jerami is the least harmful of our vets. He's also the most attractive to any team looking to get better.
Click to expand...
I get it that since Ant hasn't been in the lineup Jerami has done a much better job playing within the offense and whenever he wants to he can be a very good defender. So I agree that he is both the least harmful and should be the most attractive veteran trade asset that we have, he's also the oldest.

So while if we sat Ant and Deandre (25 and 26 years old) after the trade deadline to tank it would make me mad that we just hadn't traded them, if we did the same with Jerami (30 years old) I would be irate because a year older for Ant and Deandre wouldn't mean much in terms of their trade value but you can't say the same for Jerami.
 
More and more I'm wondering if Grant just has so little trade value that Joe is in a tough spot. If he trades him away for a couple 2nd rounders, the fans are going to kill him because they think he's worth at least 1 1st and many think he's worth 2 1sts. Ant is probably in much of the same boat and Ayton they might have to attach picks to get someone to take at this point.
 
blazerkor said:
I think Jerami is still the first that needs to go because he just doesn't fit our timeline. So unless the dude has negative trade value ship his ass off first. I do agree that the way that Ant and Deandre play with this roster is painful to watch and they've got to go as well.
Click to expand...
I would try to trade Grant first because he is on that huge 5 year contract, if he gets hurt or play declines we could be stuck with that until 2028.

Ant/Ayton I'd try to trade as well but worst case scenario they are an expiring contract next season.
 
bigbailes said:
More and more I'm wondering if Grant just has so little trade value that Joe is in a tough spot. If he trades him away for a couple 2nd rounders, the fans are going to kill him because they think he's worth at least 1 1st and many think he's worth 2 1sts. Ant is probably in much of the same boat and Ayton they might have to attach picks to get someone to take at this point.
Click to expand...
Would be horrible management if Cronin isn't doing a beneficial move because of some perception of fans short term reaction. Cronin needs to do the best actions for the team.

The other players contracts, primarily Ayton and Ant, end after next season or small dollars. Sharpe extension will kick in right after that, and with how young unproven guys get bank he has a strong chance of a max $200-300 million contract. We need to get rid of the Grant contract so we can build around our core years from now. 2016 overpaid contracts prevented us from building around Dame. Lets not make the same mistake with Sharpe, Klingan, next years rookie, etc.
 
SharpesTriumph said:
Would be horrible management if Cronin isn't doing a beneficial move because of some perception of fans short term reaction. Cronin needs to do the best actions for the team.

The other players contracts, primarily Ayton and Ant, end after next season or small dollars. Sharpe extension will kick in right after that, and with how young unproven guys get bank he has a strong chance of a max $200-300 million contract. We need to get rid of the Grant contract so we can build around our core years from now. 2016 overpaid contracts prevented us from building around Dame. Lets not make the same mistake with Sharpe, Klingan, next years rookie, etc.
Click to expand...
Yup if I’ve learned anything, the majority of Blazers fans are idiots with no concept of professional team management in this world - let alone any positivity to begin with.

After Joe’s handling of the Damedrama show, and the assets we pulled off - we have to trust that he will do what’s right with these guys if we can just stfu and wait a lil bit.
 
I fail to see why there’s any big rush to make a trade this early in the season. The Blazers aren’t winning at a high enough pace to endanger their draft lottery status. Joe has lots of pieces he can use when a good trade opportunity comes along. A good trade opportunity is more likely to come along near the deadline. It’s also easier to offload extra players that might be involved in the trade at the end of the season than it is earlier.
 
e_blazer said:
I fail to see why there’s any big rush to make a trade this early in the season. The Blazers aren’t winning at a high enough pace to endanger their draft lottery status. Joe has lots of pieces he can use when a good trade opportunity comes along. A good trade opportunity is more likely to come along near the deadline. It’s also easier to offload extra players that might be involved in the trade at the end of the season than it is earlier.
Click to expand...

Then why the fuck has Joe collected this group of vets over the last couple years when were clearly rebuilding?

If you didn't see the benefit to having Ant&Ayton off the team in the last two games - I'm not sure what to tell you.
 
e_blazer said:
I fail to see why there’s any big rush to make a trade this early in the season. The Blazers aren’t winning at a high enough pace to endanger their draft lottery status. Joe has lots of pieces he can use when a good trade opportunity comes along. A good trade opportunity is more likely to come along near the deadline. It’s also easier to offload extra players that might be involved in the trade at the end of the season than it is earlier.
Click to expand...

it's just fan chatter. In this case, generated by dissatisfaction with the fence-straddling and the contrasts of personnel over the last two games vs how the team played. I doubt that anybody expects a trade is pending

historically, very few NBA trades are made between the start of the season and Dec. 15 when several players become trade eligible.. IIRC a few more players normally become available in mid-January. So at this point it's hope & anticipation. Probably a solid chance by the trade deadline that hope will turn to rage
 
SharpesTriumph said:
Then why the fuck has Joe collected this group of vets over the last couple years when were clearly rebuilding?

If you didn't see the benefit to having Ant&Ayton off the team in the last two games - I'm not sure what to tell you.
Click to expand...

I’m talking about timing of a trade, not if one is needed. It’s obvious that the Blazers have too many comparable pieces and need to make a trade or two. That said, I think the return on our outgoing players will increase closer to the deadline. My comment about offloading extra players relates to the probable need to include in the deal(s) players coming to the Blazers for salary matching purposes that we won’t want long term. Those guys can often be offloaded in side deals or simply waived at the deadline without as big of a financial hit.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand the thread title, unless you mean that it would be addition by subtraction and if we traded them we'd be as good as we have been the last two games and roar into the playoffs?
 
bigbailes said:
More and more I'm wondering if Grant just has so little trade value that Joe is in a tough spot. If he trades him away for a couple 2nd rounders, the fans are going to kill him because they think he's worth at least 1 1st and many think he's worth 2 1sts. Ant is probably in much of the same boat and Ayton they might have to attach picks to get someone to take at this point.
Click to expand...
As long as Grant is playing good defense, helping space the floor, and not jacking up a ton of ISO shots I'm not necessarily opposed to keeping him.

But if we can get a first round pick or young player with potential we should jump on it.
 
We need to start discussing trading fans that don't fit our timeline.

I am so tired of hearing the timeline nonsense. Put together a good roster than fits together.

I swear, some of you guys don't understand that good is better than potentially good. I figure you are the ones that would have turned down 40-year-old Raquel Welch because you were looking forward to the random college senior to notice you.
 
PCmor7 said:
We need to start discussing trading fans that don't fit our timeline.

I am so tired of hearing the timeline nonsense. Put together a good roster than fits together.

I swear, some of you guys don't understand that good is better than potentially good. I figure you are the ones that would have turned down 40-year-old Raquel Welch because you were looking forward to the random college senior to notice you.
Click to expand...
I think it's a great idea to have some young, some mid, and some aging players.
 
Phatguysrule said:
I think it's a great idea to have some young, some mid, and some aging players.
Click to expand...

It's just like anything in real life. When you put too many trivial conditions on stuff, you usually end up with nothing.

I want a good team. I don't care if a 30-year-old is on the roster playing better than most or all of the 22-year-olds if it wins.
 
PCmor7 said:
We need to start discussing trading fans that don't fit our timeline.

I am so tired of hearing the timeline nonsense. Put together a good roster than fits together.

I swear, some of you guys don't understand that good is better than potentially good. I figure you are the ones that would have turned down 40-year-old Raquel Welch because you were looking forward to the random college senior to notice you.
Click to expand...
I'm all for having vets on the roster. You don't want a team of only super young guys. The Wolves made the WCF having nice blend of youth, middle age, and over the hill vets.

The problem with the Blazers is having an overload of 5 vets in Grant, Ant, Ayton, Timelord, Thybulle that take up too big of a slice of the salary cap, too big of a slice of the shot attempts, and too big of a slice of the minutes. We could have Timelord/Thybulle and one of the others to give our team a nice balance. Also ideally we'd get compensate for a draft pick by a team that could more urgently benefit from production today than our rebuilding squad.

Yes we need to assemble the best team. The issue is in the NBA unlike MLB/NFL/etc is that is a longer term process that needs a few years to build out. To get the talent to that spot we need to correctly plan for it all to come together and win in a few years. A season like this is all about getting the chess board setup with the right pieces. We don't need to have a half dozen bishops out there on the board. Yes they're better than pawns, but they'll get overwhelmed by rooks and queens.
 
PCmor7 said:
It's just like anything in real life. When you put too many trivial conditions on stuff, you usually end up with nothing.

I want a good team. I don't care if a 30-year-old is on the roster playing better than most or all of the 22-year-olds if it wins.
Click to expand...

Ever fan here wants a good Blazers team. Some just want that done immediately regardless of any long term cost. Others want the best long term outcome regardless of any short term cost. Most fans are probably somewhere in the middle.
 
SharpesTriumph said:
Ever fan here wants a good Blazers team. Some just want that done immediately regardless of any long term cost. Others want the best long term outcome regardless of any short term cost.
Click to expand...

No. Some of us just want it done in a reasonable, normal way that's not bogged down in a million qualifiers, while others think the qualifiers come first. At least that's my observation.

Dynasties happen because teams get the best players and best fits and recycle.

There are several problems that people just overlook when you hope to hit lightning in the bottle by being bad long enough that you just draft a lot of talented prospects. The Durant-Westbrook-Harden Thunder are one example. The Process 76ers are another.

It's doubling your efforts and losing sight of your goals. There are several posters here that have become more dedicated to accumulating prospects than accumulating talent.
 
SharpesTriumph said:
I'm all for having vets on the roster. You don't want a team of only super young guys. The Wolves made the WCF having nice blend of youth, middle age, and over the hill vets.

The problem with the Blazers is having an overload of 5 vets in Grant, Ant, Ayton, Timelord, Thybulle that take up too big of a slice of the salary cap, too big of a slice of the shot attempts, and too big of a slice of the minutes. We could have Timelord/Thybulle and one of the others to give our team a nice balance. Also ideally we'd get compensate for a draft pick by a team that could more urgently benefit from production today than our rebuilding squad.

Yes we need to assemble the best team. The issue is in the NBA unlike MLB/NFL/etc is that is a longer term process that needs a few years to build out. To get the talent to that spot we need to correctly plan for it all to come together and win in a few years. A season like this is all about getting the chess board setup with the right pieces. We don't need to have a half dozen bishops out there on the board. Yes they're better than pawns, but they'll get overwhelmed by rooks and queens.
Click to expand...

Only a Sith deals in absolutes.
 
Rastapopoulos said:
I don't understand the thread title, unless you mean that it would be addition by subtraction and if we traded them we'd be as good as we have been the last two games and roar into the playoffs?
Click to expand...

Yup. Being a sarcastic smart-ass about the "big 3" nonsense flown around.
 
PCmor7 said:
No. Some of us just want it done in a reasonable, normal way that's not bogged down in a million qualifiers, while others think the qualifiers come first. At least that's my observation.

Dynasties happen because teams get the best players and best fits and recycle.

There are several problems that people just overlook when you hope to hit lightning in the bottle by being bad long enough that you just draft a lot of talented prospects. The Durant-Westbrook-Harden Thunder are one example. The Process 76ers are another.

It's doubling your efforts and losing sight of your goals. There are several posters here that have become more dedicated to accumulating prospects than accumulating talent.
Click to expand...
The situation we have been in is that we don't have enough talent. Flat out.

The only way for us to accumulate more is via the draft or fleecing other teams via lopsided trades.
 
Ideally I would want a team with all guys under 24 some who have already shown that they are going to be big time contributors to future playoff wins and others who still have a ton of upside. Maybe a high character has been or two at the end of the bench but I don't think the Thunder are sitting around like "damn I wish some of these guys who are playing so great were on the back side of their careers."
 
blazerkor said:
I get it that since Ant hasn't been in the lineup Jerami has done a much better job playing within the offense and whenever he wants to he can be a very good defender. So I agree that he is both the least harmful and should be the most attractive veteran trade asset that we have, he's also the oldest.

So while if we sat Ant and Deandre (25 and 26 years old) after the trade deadline to tank it would make me mad that we just hadn't traded them, if we did the same with Jerami (30 years old) I would be irate because a year older for Ant and Deandre wouldn't mean much in terms of their trade value but you can't say the same for Jerami.
Click to expand...

A year less on Grant's contract maybe more attractive. He's a good player who can be a plug and play. I don't think his value is getting significantly worse even if we held onto him. Though, that's not my preference. I'm way more interested in moving those other guys.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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