Cronin deserves to be fired for not taking the New Orleans pick. (5 Viewers)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
JfizzleBlazer said:
Because they took Coward. Which was also a good decision we could have made.
Click to expand...

Coward is not a future Unrestricted First-Round pick (or two 2nd round picks) that can be used in a trade.

That could also be a good or better decision.

The #11 pick was traded to Memphis for the pick that became Yang (#16) AND A 2028 UNRESTRICTED FIRST-ROUND DRAFT PICK.
Plus two 2nd round picks.

Why can't anyone get this into their heads? WTF.

In a 2025 NBA Draft-night trade, the Memphis Grizzlies acquired the 11th overall pick (Cedric Coward) from the Portland Trail Blazers. Memphis sent the 16th overall pick, an unrestricted 2028 first-round pick (via Orlando), and two 2nd round picks (2027 and 2028) to Portland.
 
blazerfan11 said:
Coward is not a future Unrestricted First-Round pick (or two 2nd round picks) that can be used in a trade.

That could also be a good or better decision.

The #11 pick was traded to Memphis for the pick that became Yang (#16) AND A 2028 UNRESTRICTED FIRST-ROUND DRAFT PICK.
Plus two 2nd round picks.

Why can't anyone get this into their heads? WTF.

In a 2025 NBA Draft-night trade, the Memphis Grizzlies acquired the 11th overall pick (Cedric Coward) from the Portland Trail Blazers. Memphis sent the 16th overall pick, an unrestricted 2028 first-round pick (via Orlando), and two 2nd round picks (2027 and 2028) to Portland.
Click to expand...
Why don't you go back through my posts over the last week where I have often mentioned the Magic pick.

Yes, we have the Magic pick, which could end up being something and gives us another chance at righting the Yang wrong.

But having a for sure prospect that is playing well is ALSO very valuable and doesn't leave another 1st to chance that could bust.

We can use the 1st in a trade, and if we took Coward, we could have used him in a trade or moved someone like Sharpe as a young player on the rise while keeping Coward.
 
JfizzleBlazer said:
Why don't you go back through my posts over the last week where I have often mentioned the Magic pick.

Yes, we have the Magic pick, which could end up being something and gives us another chance at righting the Yang wrong.

But having a for sure prospect that is playing well is ALSO very valuable and doesn't leave another 1st to chance that could bust.

We can use the 1st in a trade, and if we took Coward, we could have used him in a trade or moved someone like Sharpe as a young player on the rise while keeping Coward.
Click to expand...

Coward may turn out to be a good player, but I would take an Unrestricted First-Round Draft Pick from a mediocre team (.500 last season) over Coward or any #11 pick in the 2025 draft.

Yang hasn't had enough time to show anything. In any case, he was the 16th pick.
 
blazerfan11 said:
Coward may turn out to be a good player, but I would take an Unrestricted First-Round Draft Pick from a mediocre team (.500 last season) over Coward or any #11 pick in the 2025 draft.

Yang hasn't had enough time to show anything. In any case, he was the 16th pick.
Click to expand...
Coward already is a good player.

It is hard to say if the Magic pick will end up better or not. Too many variables. It also is hard to say if a gm would prefer the Magic pick or Coward. They should prefer Coward because gms rarely have a long enough runway to end up having future picks pay off.

Giving Yang leeway as the 16th pick, but acting like the Magic pick is gold (which if they are a .500 team will be around the 16th pick) is awkward.
 
The point is they could have had the ORL pick and gone with another prospect. There was no reason to pick Yang. I don’t care about hypotheticals. They traded down: great you net a nice pick. Then they pick Yang for reasons that aren’t clear. They could have traded down again and got Kalkbrenner who is an actual NBA player on a winning team. Or Hugo Gonzalez who is another solid rookie.
 
Cugel said:
The point is they could have had the ORL pick and gone with another prospect. There was no reason to pick Yang. I don’t care about hypotheticals. They traded down: great you net a nice pick. Then they pick Yang for reasons that aren’t clear. They could have traded down again and got Kalkbrenner who is an actual NBA player on a winning team. Or Hugo Gonzalez who is another solid rookie.
Click to expand...
I agree with this but when this was brought up around the draft people in this forum banged the drum that Minnesota was sure to take him at 17.
 
Cugel said:
The point is they could have had the ORL pick and gone with another prospect. There was no reason to pick Yang. I don’t care about hypotheticals. They traded down: great you net a nice pick. Then they pick Yang for reasons that aren’t clear. They could have traded down again and got Kalkbrenner who is an actual NBA player on a winning team. Or Hugo Gonzalez who is another solid rookie.
Click to expand...
I don't think we know for sure but it looks like Yang is going to have a hard time justifying where he was drafted. That said, GMs miss in the mid first round all of the time. The only truly fireable misses are in the top 3 and even then a front office usually gets more than one season before ownership gives up on the prospect and fires them.

I wouldn't mind getting a new front office either but it doesn't look like Dundon is headed that way just yet... I think he wants to see if his direction makes a difference as opposed to Kolde's.

I think the consecutive years out of the playoffs, the lack of direction, the lack of shooting on the roster and a few other things would be the reason to let Joe go before we got to the decision to trade back, get a future first and draft Yang.
 
I just remember last year, around this time, people saying we wasted our pick on Clingan. Too slow, no conditioning, mistake to draft him.

I think we should give Yang as much time to develop as we did with Meyers Leonard.

...

Also, I highly doubt Cronin drafted Yang "to get the Chinese audience." GMs don't keep their jobs because they sell more t-shirts in China. They keep it by either putting talent on the floor or acquiring draft picks to get talent.

And team presidents don't tell GMs to draft a player just so they can sell t-shirts in China.

...

I would say that the G League is a more talented league than the Chinese League.

In less than a season, Yang raised his game to be highly successful in the G League. That pick was hardly a mistake, IMO.
 
BBert said:
I hope not. What's he going to do, coach our big men on shooting long two-pointers? How to not fight for position under the basket? Hard pass.
Click to expand...
Hopefully he'll teach them how to become a 7 time all star and 5 time all nba team member.
 
JfizzleBlazer said:
Hopefully he'll teach them how to become a 7 time all star and 5 time all nba team member.
Click to expand...
If that were simply teachable, everyone would be doing it. LaMarcus had a particular set of skills. If the vast majority of big guys tried to emulate his game, they'd fall flat on their faces. Also, doing isn't teaching. I get tired of so many people thinking just because someone was a great athlete they'd be a great teacher. Doesn't usually work out that way. Look at Magic and Clyde, for example. I wouldn't give either one of them a spot on our bench. Or Damon.
 
BBert said:
If that were simply teachable, everyone would be doing it. LaMarcus had a particular set of skills. If the vast majority of big guys tried to emulate his game, they'd fall flat on their faces. Also, doing isn't teaching. I get tired of so many people thinking just because someone was a great athlete they'd be a great teacher. Doesn't usually work out that way. Look at Magic and Clyde, for example. I wouldn't give either one of them a spot on our bench. Or Damon.
Click to expand...
Having a top 10 Blazer of all time around the team is a good thing. Relax.
 
BBert said:
Maybe LaMarcus can teach our players how to quit on their team. The guy straight checked out in his final playoff game with us. Wouldn't even fly with the team. Left us flat with zero compensation. Good riddance.
Click to expand...
Time can heal wounds. Or everyone can remain angry and cranky. Live the world you want.
 
Freshtown said:
Sorry but this is cope. If Yang is a star you’d see more this year. Maybe at some point he can be a rotation level player.
Click to expand...
Or maybe you don't know what you're talking about? There are tons of examples of guys who did little to nothing their first year(s) in the league and went on to be much more then rotation level players. Heck, Deni came into the league the same age as Hansen, did jack his rookie year and was a scrub the next two.

Going into the season it was expected that this would be a developmental year for Yang for all the obvious reasons. He may or may not turn into a player, but history tells us it's too early to make a bust call.

STOMP
 
I think we also need to put ceiling into the equation.

I.e , what's Cowards ceiling and potential?
 
julius said:
Can I be mad at made up hypothetical trades that we have no proof were even offered to the team?

Damnit, why didn't the blazers make that trade that did that thing that clearly they should have done despite no proof it was on the table!!!?
Click to expand...
1775832759916.png
 
riverman said:
Yang is going to surprise people who look at him as a bust. He's just getting started. Clingan didn't light up the world rookie season, nor did Jokic. This is pretty much a fantasy draft thread projecting the next Scoot Henderson will be better than Yang. Yang comes with a billion fans as it is. Scoot has some in Atlanta. I remember how Zion was supposed to become the dominant player of his generation as well. You win some, you lose some but we didn't lose picking Yang from what I've seen. He's a hard working, smart 7 footer with a decent shot. I don't get the Yang hate. I hope it's not politically motivated but sometimes I think that's part of it. Yang is not a reason to fire Cronin. Not saying Cronin's job is safe but I don't think this is the issue. Yang's a great passer but what works in the G league will get picked off in the NBA. He needs more zip on his pass. A lot of Blazers need more zip on their passes.
Click to expand...
The year that Zion was projected as the number 1 pick was crazy. Literally every tank fan was calling him generational and the core piece of a dynasty. Now Wemby has shown he is indeed that player but even he is only one serious injury away from changing that narrative.

However... Jokic was third in ROY voting and played 80 games (Started 55). He did light up the league his first year and it was obvious he was better than Nurkic. Certainly for a 41st pick. You get a second rounder in ROY conversation you have lit up the league.
 
julius said:
No, I'm saying math is a made up construct, created only to torment high school kids
Click to expand...
I'm saying the draft analysis is a made up, created only to torment Blazer fans.
Over the years this has been proven to be correct. Need I start with Bowie vs Jordan?
 
kjironman1 said:
I'm saying the draft analysis is a made up, created only to torment Blazer fans.
Over the years this has been proven to be correct. Need I start with Bowie vs Jordan?
Click to expand...
It really was Barkley vs. Bowie. The Blazers would have picked Sir Charles after Bowie and Olajuwon. Who knows, might have been just as big of a mistake.
Drexler and Barkley might have been a better fit.
 
STOMP said:
but history tells us it's too early to make a bust call.

STOMP
Click to expand...
that's not really what 'history tells us'

history tells us that a lot of players that look like busts as rookies actually were busts. The rookie seasons were predictive

history also tells us that some players that looked like busts as rookies developed into decent players. The rookie season was not predictive. I don't know what the percentage of the total is rookie-bust=career-bust, but I'd imagine it's quite a bit a l higher than 50-50. In other words, I'd estimate if you're calling Yang a bust at this point, history is on your side, not against it. Also have to factor draft slot

rookie seasons:

Robin Lopez (15th pick; 20 years old): PER 11.6.....TS% .566....reb rate 11.2%....winshares/48> .083....BPM -3.6
Dereck Lively (12th pick; 19 years old): PER 18.6.....TS% .728....reb rate 16.0%....winshares/48> .183....BPM +0.5
Meyers Leonard (11th pick; 20 years old): PER 12.1.....TS% .596....reb rate 12.3%....winshares/48> .097....BPM -3.3
Joel Freeland (30th pick; 25 years old): PER 9.3.....TS% .435....reb rate 16.0%....winshares/48> .022....BPM -5.4
Jusuf Nurkic (16th pick; 20 years old): PER 14.8.....TS% .483....reb rate 18.7%....winshares/48> ..069....BPM -2.8
Mason Plumlee (22nd pick; 23 years old): PER 19.0.....TS% ..670...reb rate 14.5%....winshares/48> .176....BPM +1.0
Clint Capela (25th pick; 20 years old): PER 12.1.....TS% .409....reb rate 22.1%....winshares/48> .019....BPM -5.4
Rudy Gobert (27th pick; 21 years old): PER 12.9.....TS% .507....reb rate 20.6%....winshares/48> .045....BPM -2.7
Nikola Vucevic (16th pick; 21 years old): PER 14.3.....TS% .462....reb rate 16.8%....winshares/48> .109....BPM -2.2
Deandre Jordan (35th pick; 20 years old): PER 14.1....TS% .585....reb rate 17.8%....winshares/48> .079....BPM -3.3

Yang Hansen (11th-->16th pick; 20 years old): PER 3.7....TS% .413....reb rate 11.9%....winshares/48> -0.078....BPM -9.6

I was just looking at C's taken after the 10th pick in the first round. There were some actual busts taken over the last 15 years or so, but I didn't see adding them as very useful

to find C's who performed as poorly as Yang as rookies I would have had to consistently reach into the 2nd round and also look at undrafted bigs. Doing that would yield a bunch of guys with short and uneventful NBA careers. Of course, investing a 48th pick or a 2-way contract on a big is not the same as investing a lottery pick.

I'm not really sure what a "project big man" means
 
wizenheimer said:
that's not really what 'history tells us'

history tells us that a lot of players that look like busts as rookies actually were busts. The rookie seasons were predictive

history also tells us that some players that looked like busts as rookies developed into decent players. The rookie season was not predictive. I don't know what the percentage of the total is rookie-bust=career-bust, but I'd imagine it's quite a bit a l higher than 50-50. In other words, I'd estimate if you're calling Yang a bust at this point, history is on your side, not against it. Also have to factor draft slot

rookie seasons:

Robin Lopez (15th pick; 20 years old): PER 11.6.....TS% .566....reb rate 11.2%....winshares/48> .083....BPM -3.6
Dereck Lively (12th pick; 19 years old): PER 18.6.....TS% .728....reb rate 16.0%....winshares/48> .183....BPM +0.5
Meyers Leonard (11th pick; 20 years old): PER 12.1.....TS% .596....reb rate 12.3%....winshares/48> .097....BPM -3.3
Joel Freeland (30th pick; 25 years old): PER 9.3.....TS% .435....reb rate 16.0%....winshares/48> .022....BPM -5.4
Jusuf Nurkic (16th pick; 20 years old): PER 14.8.....TS% .483....reb rate 18.7%....winshares/48> ..069....BPM -2.8
Mason Plumlee (22nd pick; 23 years old): PER 19.0.....TS% ..670...reb rate 14.5%....winshares/48> .176....BPM +1.0
Clint Capela (25th pick; 20 years old): PER 12.1.....TS% .409....reb rate 22.1%....winshares/48> .019....BPM -5.4
Rudy Gobert (27th pick; 21 years old): PER 12.9.....TS% .507....reb rate 20.6%....winshares/48> .045....BPM -2.7
Nikola Vucevic (16th pick; 21 years old): PER 14.3.....TS% .462....reb rate 16.8%....winshares/48> .109....BPM -2.2
Deandre Jordan (35th pick; 20 years old): PER 14.1....TS% .585....reb rate 17.8%....winshares/48> .079....BPM -3.3

Yang Hansen (11th-->16th pick; 20 years old): PER 3.7....TS% .413....reb rate 11.9%....winshares/48> -0.078....BPM -9.6

I was just looking at C's taken after the 10th pick in the first round. There were some actual busts taken over the last 15 years or so, but I didn't see adding them as very useful

to find C's who performed as poorly as Yang as rookies I would have had to consistently reach into the 2nd round and also look at undrafted bigs. Doing that would yield a bunch of guys with short and uneventful NBA careers. Of course, investing a 48th pick or a 2-way contract on a big is not the same as investing a lottery pick.

I'm not really sure what a "project big man" means
Click to expand...
curious how many of those centers you compare Yang to had to rely on a translator to understand the coach their rookie season and how many put up big G league numbers their rookie season as they had two vet centers ahead of them in the rotation? Yang hasn't broken a sweat in the NBA yet. Chauncey deemed Yang a plug and play center, Tiago did not. Tiago realized the G league would speed up his development more than waiving a towel on the bench.
 
RR7 said:
I would think very very little. A month and a half or so after drafting him is very unlikely to increase the value of the team. If he was a #1 pick, Yao type of Chinese C? Sure, maybe. The one we got? Maybe Dundon paid an extra hundred dollars.
Click to expand...
Like him or not, he joined the team and nearly a million people followed the Blazers on Chinese social media sites within the first month or two. Eyes = Potential revenue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

wizenheimer
The CJ Trade; Jalen Duren; & the Pick
Replies
21
Views
741
wizenheimer
wizenheimer
kjironman1
  • Poll Poll
The Early "Tank" Thread
2 3
Replies
76
Views
2K
kjironman1
kjironman1
Chris Craig
Game Thread 2025-26 GAME #60 - BLAZERS @ BULLS - FEBRUARY 26, 2026 - THURSDAY - 5:00 PM - KUNP - BLAZERVISION
2 3
Replies
76
Views
2K
kjironman1
kjironman1
SlyPokerDog
Wweek.com - Portland Must Confront the Real Danger of Losing the Blazers
5 6 7
Replies
187
Views
9K
AldoTrapani
AldoTrapani
Natebishop3
Trying to rationalize what's going on
3 4 5
Replies
131
Views
7K
Everything Beagle
Everything Beagle

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 2 more.
    • Total: 6 (members: 4, guests: 2)
    Back
    Top