Case Against Trading CJ

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Scalma said:
Ok let me sum up the reasons to keep CJ according to that wonderful piece.

- Great scorer (really bad on defense)
- Good in community (that's great...I'll be nice in the community, try not getting blown out by the Nuggets)
- No need for a panic trade (over a 1/3 of the way through the season and 1.4 of the 20 point losses in the league belong to the Blazers)

Really convinced me.
Click to expand...
Yeah, me too. :cheers:
 
It makes more sense to trade Lillard IMO. He has a lot more trade value and CJ is a lot more efficient.

I'm not for trading either though.
 
BonesJones said:
It makes more sense to trade Lillard IMO. He has a lot more trade value and CJ is a lot more efficient.

I'm not for trading either though.
Click to expand...

Their on court value MIGHT be debatable, but their value to the team and the city cannot. There is no way to get equal value in return for Dame. CJ is a different story imo
 
Scalma said:
Their on court value MIGHT be debatable, but their value to the team and the city cannot. There is no way to get equal value in return for Dame. CJ is a different story imo
Click to expand...

Dame is our Curry, CJ is our Ellis... it's clear that if either of the two are traded, it needs to be CJ.

I'm okay with trading CJ IF we get a huge need met.
 
I mean...if someone made a gigantic offer for Lillard, at least on paper it makes a lot of sense.

We should make clear, though, that McCollum simply isn't as good. He's actually a bit less efficient than Lillard, though both are hyper-efficient (Lillard has a .607 TS%--which accounts for threes and free throws--while McCollum has a .592 TS%), they have similar Turnover Rate (despite Lillard having a larger Usage Rate) and McCollum isn't in Lillard's neighborhood for Assist Rate. Beyond all of that, Lillard is the closest thing to Steph Curry in terms of having unlimited, scheme-busting range. McCollum is a great shooter, Lillard can hit shots that can't be credibly defended.

That said, there's reason to believe that McCollum could grow into more if given the lead role. He'll never be Lillard as a shooter, most likely, but he can probably up his play-making for others if he was the main initiator. He could probably provide 80-90% of Lillard, which is really good.

But since Lillard provides the type of unguardable long-range scoring that only Curry and perhaps Durant can offer, a team might be willing to pay a premium for Lillard that McCollum would never generate. Portland can better absorb the loss of Lillard with McCollum there as a replacement and if you get a Godfather return...

The problem is what that might do in the locker room unless you're getting back a top-five superstar, which you wouldn't be. Maybe you deal with that blowback. It would certainly create shockwaves in Portland. I don't know what kind of offer makes sense, but I am pretty sure that--at least on paper--there could be a circumstance where you keep McCollum and trade Lillard. Keep the almost-Lillard and get a Lillard-premium return.
 
Strenuus said:
Dame is our Curry, CJ is our Ellis... it's clear that if either of the two are traded, it needs to be CJ.

I'm okay with trading CJ IF we get a huge need met.
Click to expand...

Minstrel said:
I mean...if someone made a gigantic offer for Lillard, at least on paper it makes a lot of sense.

We should make clear, though, that McCollum simply isn't as good. He's actually a bit less efficient than Lillard, though both are hyper-efficient (Lillard has a .607 TS%--which accounts for threes and free throws--while McCollum has a .592 TS%), they have similar Turnover Rate (despite Lillard having a larger Usage Rate) and McCollum isn't in Lillard's neighborhood for Assist Rate. Beyond all of that, Lillard is the closest thing to Steph Curry in terms of having unlimited, scheme-busting range. McCollum is a great shooter, Lillard can hit shots that can't be credibly defended.

That said, there's reason to believe that McCollum could grow into more if given the lead role. He'll never be Lillard as a shooter, most likely, but he can probably up his play-making for others if he was the main initiator. He could probably provide 80-90% of Lillard, which is really good.

But since Lillard provides the type of unguardable long-range scoring that only Curry and perhaps Durant can offer, a team might be willing to pay a premium for Lillard that McCollum would never generate. Portland can better absorb the loss of Lillard with McCollum there as a replacement and if you get a Godfather return...

The problem is what that might do in the locker room unless you're getting back a top-five superstar, which you wouldn't be. Maybe you deal with that blowback. It would certainly create shockwaves in Portland. I don't know what kind of offer makes sense, but I am pretty sure that--at least on paper--there could be a circumstance where you keep McCollum and trade Lillard. Keep the almost-Lillard and get a Lillard-premium return.
Click to expand...
I just don't see how you can trade either right now. First, Stotts needs to change his scheme and hire a defensive expert as assistant coach. If that doesn't work, you fire the head coach and hire a defensive minded guy. If that doesn't work, you do everything to get a premier rim-protector. If that's not enough, you get rid of more of the other guys and find better defensive players to surround them.
 
Teams would die for an elite scorer like CJ, we wouldn't even need to entertain the idea of dealing dame. For example, if we actually put McCollum on the block, teams like Orlando would pretty much hand Olshey their roster sheet and say here, choose whoever you want.
 
BonesJones said:
I just don't see how you can trade either right now. First, Stotts needs to change his scheme and hire a defensive expert as assistant coach. If that doesn't work, you fire the head coach and hire a defensive minded guy. If that doesn't work, you do everything to get a premier rim-protector. If that's not enough, you get rid of more of the other guys and find better defensive players to surround them.
Click to expand...
There's nothing inherently wrong with the scheme, it's a fairly conservative approach that values taking away high value shots and tries to limit opponents to long two-pointers (the least valuable shot in basketball). The same personnel (more or less) executed this very same scheme a year ago to "average" results. The bottom line is that even if they adopted your approach, how are they supposed to get these supposedly superior defensive players (who can also shoot) without giving up anything of value? The Blazers roster isn't exactly inspiring other GMs to sell the farm to get ahold of our underachieving, one-trick pony players like Crabbe, Leonard, etc.

If the goal is a more balanced roster then CJ and Damian are probably always going to be a problem that no amount of coaching, scheming, or ancillary trades are ever going to remedy -- A team's two best players can't be this shit at defense and ever expect to do a damn thing.
 
BonesJones said:
It makes more sense to trade Lillard IMO. He has a lot more trade value and CJ is a lot more efficient.

I'm not for trading either though.
Click to expand...
You really think the Blazers can Win a championship with Lillard and CJ up top?
 
Nikolokolus said:
There's nothing inherently wrong with the scheme, it's a fairly conservative approach that values taking away high value shots and tries to limit opponents to long two-pointers (the least valuable shot in basketball). The same personnel (more or less) executed this very same scheme a year ago to "average" results. The bottom line is that even if they adopted your approach, how are they supposed to get these supposedly superior defensive players (who can also shoot) without giving up anything of value? The Blazers roster isn't exactly inspiring other GMs to sell the farm to get ahold of our underachieving, one-trick pony players like Crabbe, Leonard, etc.

If the goal is a more balanced roster then CJ and Damian are probably always going to be a problem that no amount of coaching, scheming, or ancillary trades are ever going to remedy -- A team's two best players can't be this shit at defense and ever expect to do a damn thing.
Click to expand...

This. I can't see the Blazers trading CJ anytime soon in that the team is very young and he just signed a large contract. But at some point they are going to get desperate and drastically alter the makeup on the team. There are only five guys on the floor at any given time. Two of them can't be such huge defensive liabilities.
 
BigGameDamian said:
You really think the Blazers can Win a championship with Lillard and CJ up top?
Click to expand...

I do, but it would require an anchor down low and above average defenders on the wing. We have the second part of that.

As for the scheme, I actually like it when Aminu is out there, and I would LOVE it if we also had Noel. Noel is so tailor made for the current scheme that it would be irresponsible of Neil to not aggressively pursue him.

That said, Stotts has had success with different schemes before (rolo) so I don't think this is a coaching issue.
 
Strenuus said:
Dame is our Curry, CJ is our Ellis... it's clear that if either of the two are traded, it needs to be CJ.

I'm okay with trading CJ IF we get a huge need met.
Click to expand...

CJ is way better than Ellis was and is. Send CJ to Orlando or Brooklyn and he's an All Star. Ellis has been a journeyman since GS traded him.
 
Also, Curry/Ellis never worked. They didn't even make playoffs. Dame/CJ has been to the second round.
 
KingSpeed said:
CJ is way better than Ellis was and is. Send CJ to Orlando or Brooklyn and he's an All Star. Ellis has been a journeyman since GS traded him.
Click to expand...

He is, I'm not denying that. I'm strictly speaking in terms of their situation, my friend.
 
KingSpeed said:
CJ is way better than Ellis was and is. Send CJ to Orlando or Brooklyn and he's an All Star. Ellis has been a journeyman since GS traded him.
Click to expand...

which is why the return for CJ would be big.

We're having the same defensive problems with dame and CJ as golden state did with Ellis and curry. It's debatable whether the offense CJ provides makes up for what he gives up defensively.

If we're going to keep both, which I'd be ok with, we need an elite defensive big. What we have right now isn't going to take us anywhere.
 
KingSpeed said:
Their situation is entirely different. They also had Klay Thompson. We do not. And we've been to playoffs. They had not.
Click to expand...

Still not what I'm talking about, my man. I'm just looking at how the situation looks. Not playoffs/no playoffs... just the situation.
 
BigGameDamian said:
You really think the Blazers can Win a championship with Lillard and CJ up top?
Click to expand...
A top 3 backcourt in the league? Most definitely. They just need the right pieces around them and a better scheme.
 
Blazinaway said:
and is perhaps CJ's "efficiency" related to the fact that Lillard commands so much attention?
Click to expand...
Make no mistake, CJ is a very gifted offensive player in his own right; he'd "get his" on most teams and in most situations. The trouble is that he and Lillard are both ball-dominant guards that prefer to shoot off the dribble. This tends to make the offense look a lot more one-dimensional than it should and it's the kind of offense that good defensive teams (ergo playoff teams) tend to be able to mute or take away with enough time to scheme and gameplan (like in the playoffs). If CJ and Damian, or just one of them, was a plus defender then it might be salvageable . . . but it is a problem. A big problem that isn't going to magically get better with a new coach or a few new faces thrown in around them.
 
Back in the olden days, the Pittsburgh Pirates had two phenomenal second basemen. Dave Cash was the established starter, but they had Rennie Stennett, an up and coming youngster with star written all over him.

The Pirates traded Cash to the Phillies (for Ken Brett) so Stennett could be the full time second baseman. Their reasoning was that Cash brought more back in trade because he was the better, more established, player. Brett was an all-star his first season with the Pirates.

The World Series champion (with Cash the year before) Pirates won the NL East in Stennett's first season, and again in his second. The Pirates won the East for several more seasons with Stennett.

Cash went on to make the all-star team 3 times, his first three seasons with the Phillies. The Phillies went from 3rd in the East to 2nd to 1st in those three seasons. That was a great Phillies team.

The moral of that story is on the sport alone, you'd trade the better of the two because you get more in return.

But I go with Dame being the heart and soul of this team, no matter who his teammates might be. He's important to the fans and the city as well.

If, and only if, one of the two is to be dealt, I'd have to be overwhelmed to deal Dame, but would be somewhat willing to trade CJ if the deal makes sense.
 
Denny Crane said:
Back in the olden days, the Pittsburgh Pirates had two phenomenal second basemen. Dave Cash was the established starter, but they had Rennie Stennett, an up and coming youngster with star written all over him.

The Pirates traded Cash to the Phillies (for Ken Brett) so Stennett could be the full time second baseman. Their reasoning was that Cash brought more back in trade because he was the better, more established, player. Brett was an all-star his first season with the Pirates.

The World Series champion (with Cash the year before) Pirates won the NL East in Stennett's first season, and again in his second. The Pirates won the East for several more seasons with Stennett.

Cash went on to make the all-star team 3 times, his first three seasons with the Phillies. The Phillies went from 3rd in the East to 2nd to 1st in those three seasons. That was a great Phillies team.

The moral of that story is on the sport alone, you'd trade the better of the two because you get more in return.

But I go with Dame being the heart and soul of this team, no matter who his teammates might be. He's important to the fans and the city as well.

If, and only if, one of the two is to be dealt, I'd have to be overwhelmed to deal Dame, but would be somewhat willing to trade CJ if the deal makes sense.
Click to expand...
In this analogy, seems like CJ is Cash and Stennett is Crabbe. Question is, who is the Ken Brett in this scenario?
 
PtldPlatypus said:
Are they really, though, when defense is considered?

Not arguing one way or the other, just asking.
Click to expand...
Yes. One player has more if an impact on offense than defense, especially as a guard. If you put Avery Bradley and Tony Allen in the backcourt they'd still suck.
 
I still believe we need a coach to hold Lillard and McCollum accountable on defense. They also get no help because we have no rim protector, and our guys suck at team defense (They don't play on a string). Again, I think that's a coaching issue

This discussion is actually ridiculous. The only way you trade CJ is if we get someone better (Cousins or George). We need 3 stars to contend and we have 2. Trading CJ for a star still keeps us at 2 with no flexibility. We need to think more creatively, and trading CJ is an easy "solution" that won't get us any closer to fixing the problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Draco
CJ to get CT scan and Xray tommorrow
3 4 5
Replies
132
Views
8K
Draco
Draco
ABM
Portland Trail Blazers have 3 players crack SI’s top 100 player ranking
Replies
7
Views
391
Natebishop3
Natebishop3
BlazerCaravan
Nice CJ article
Replies
3
Views
441
e_blazer
e_blazer
worldbarrow
Game Thread @OKC 12/16 ... CJ, etc
Replies
7
Views
905
handiman
handiman
Chris Craig
CJ Recruiting?
Replies
14
Views
1K
handiman
handiman

Users who are viewing this thread

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