Curry injury illustrates why you should never tank

[wizenheimer]

Oh, we can potentially get great value with both picks if the Pelicans' pick conveys. To me the question is are we going for immediate impact or are we trying to get the best value for the future further down the road. My preference is immediate impact to give Dame the best chance to win a championship ASAP.

To me the ideal situation if our pick won't get us Jabari or Paolo is that we can trade our pick, the Pelicans pick, Bledsoe and Hart to Toronto for Siakam. Then we pay the Bulls some money or give them the Grizz second rounder to take the conditions off the pick we owe them. Then we trade our 2025 and 2027 first rounders top 4 protected for Jerami Grant. I think Dame, Ant, Grant, Siakam, Nurk, Nas and whoever else we put with them would be an immediate contender.

I'm trying not to say this to aggravate you: is it possible you constantly overrate either the value of Portland's assets or the willingness of other teams to cooperate with Blazer needs?

I mean, for months you were pushing hard on the CJ for Simmons trade idea even though the evidence grew & grew that Philly simply didn't value CJ anywhere close to that level. I know a couple of other teams were rumored to have interest in CJ, and maybe you have used that to inform the value you assign CJ in an after-the-fact assessment of the Pels trade? But the way I look at it is those rumors could have been based upon other teams seeing if the Blazers were having a fire sale.

Cronin may have fucked up the Pels trade. I've said before I think he could have leveraged a Laker pick instead of the Bucks pick. But maybe he didn't fuck it up because CJ had value well below where you are thinking he had (and I'm still loopy enough to suspect there was some substantial push from Seattle on that Clippers trade)

in any event, if you believe that a couple of picks in a draft you don't see much value in outside of the top-4 would make for a good trade for Siakam, why would Toronto trade Siakam for a couple of picks with debatable value? In 27 games, Toronto has gone for a .500 record to 9 games over .500 and Siakam has led the way. The Raps might value Siakam pretty highly

I did say, if at the time of the draft some team was willing to trade an all-star level player for Portland's pick, great. I just don't think that's very realistic

and again, I don't think the optimal window on a top-8 pick this year paying off has to be as immediate as many do. I think that window isn't 6-9 months but rather 3-4 years

 

[blazerkor]

I'm trying not to say this to aggravate you: is it possible you constantly overrate either the value of Portland's assets or the willingness of other teams to cooperate with Blazer needs?

I mean, for months you were pushing hard on the CJ for Simmons trade idea even though the evidence grew & grew that Philly simply didn't value CJ anywhere close to that level. I know a couple of other teams were rumored to have interest in CJ, and maybe you have used that to inform the value you assign CJ in an after-the-fact assessment of the Pels trade? But the way I look at it is those rumors could have been based upon other teams seeing if the Blazers were having a fire sale.

Cronin may have fucked up the Pels trade. I've said before I think he could have leveraged a Lake pick instead of the Bucks pick. But maybe he didn't fuck it up because CJ had value well below where you are thinking he had (and I'm still loopy enough to suspect there was some substantial push from Seattle on that Clippers trade)

in any event, if you believe that a couple of picks in a draft you don't see much value in outside of the top-4 would make for a good trade for Siakam, why would Toronto trade Siakam for a couple of picks with debatable value? In 27 games, Toronto has gone for a .500 record to 9 games over .500 and Siakam has led the way. The Raps might value Siakam pretty highly

I did say, if at the time of the draft some team was willing to trade an all-star level player for Portland's pick, great. I just don't think that's very realistic

and again, I don't think the optimal window on a top-8 pick this year paying off has to be as immediate as many do. I think that window isn't 6-9 months but rather 3-4 years

I don't think this is a weak draft. I think we don't need rookies on this team right now unless they are the two out of the top three guys that fit our position of need and fit well with our personnel too. So I think those two lotto picks and Hart would be a fair exchange for Siakam. Two lottery picks and a 5th/6th man is pretty damn good value for an all star, especially if the Raptors like the guys available at those two spots. That being said, there's a great chance that Siakam just isn't for sale. There's also a really great chance that you're right and I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about and I'm saying that in all seriousness. I definitely thought due to rumors and just their ability to be productive players who can start and contribute to wins that we didn't get close to the value that we should have for CJ, Larry, Norm and RoCo but maybe I'm way off. Maybe despite the fact that lottery picks usually have a lot of value, I don't have a good beat on what the landscape is as far as draft pick value this year. I'm really never sure of anything, so I definitely get where you're coming from. I'm going to put a signature on my posts going forward.

 

[Hoopguru]

I'm trying not to say this to aggravate you: is it possible you constantly overrate either the value of Portland's assets or the willingness of other teams to cooperate with Blazer needs?

I mean, for months you were pushing hard on the CJ for Simmons trade idea even though the evidence grew & grew that Philly simply didn't value CJ anywhere close to that level. I know a couple of other teams were rumored to have interest in CJ, and maybe you have used that to inform the value you assign CJ in an after-the-fact assessment of the Pels trade? But the way I look at it is those rumors could have been based upon other teams seeing if the Blazers were having a fire sale.

Cronin may have fucked up the Pels trade. I've said before I think he could have leveraged a Lake pick instead of the Bucks pick. But maybe he didn't fuck it up because CJ had value well below where you are thinking he had (and I'm still loopy enough to suspect there was some substantial push from Seattle on that Clippers trade)

in any event, if you believe that a couple of picks in a draft you don't see much value in outside of the top-4 would make for a good trade for Siakam, why would Toronto trade Siakam for a couple of picks with debatable value? In 27 games, Toronto has gone for a .500 record to 9 games over .500 and Siakam has led the way. The Raps might value Siakam pretty highly

I did say, if at the time of the draft some team was willing to trade an all-star level player for Portland's pick, great. I just don't think that's very realistic

and again, I don't think the optimal window on a top-8 pick this year paying off has to be as immediate as many do. I think that window isn't 6-9 months but rather 3-4 years

I agree 3-4 year for a guard like Ivey or the kid form AZ. We are in good shape for guards and can wait while they mature.
I think the organization would like to get a solid veteran 4 that's in that 6'9-10" range that can score and play D, in order give immediate help where needed most. If a trade accomplishes that cool, if we somehow hit gold with a pick for the 4, super, if he can come in and contribute towards making us a contender in that 3-4 year window great. But we will have to again prove ourselves in the playoffs the next 3-5 years after this.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

None of these players will be in the rotation next season (MAYBE 1 or 2). They are playing for jobs elsewhere.

If any of them are solid rotational players I would be highly surprised.
Even worse if they are then Lillard will waste another year.

 

[wizenheimer]

I don't think this is a weak draft. I think we don't need rookies on this team right now unless they are the two out of the top three guys that fit our position of need and fit well with our personnel too. So I think those two lotto picks and Hart would be a fair exchange for Siakam. Two lottery picks and a 5th/6th man is pretty damn good value for an all star, especially if the Raptors like the guys available at those two spots. That being said, there's a great chance that Siakam just isn't for sale. There's also a really great chance that you're right and I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about and I'm saying that in all seriousness. I definitely thought due to rumors and just their ability to be productive players who can start and contribute to wins that we didn't get close to the value that we should have for CJ, Larry, Norm and RoCo but maybe I'm way off. Maybe despite the fact that lottery picks usually have a lot of value, I don't have a good beat on what the landscape is as far as draft pick value this year. I'm really never sure of anything, so I definitely get where you're coming from. I'm going to put a signature on my posts going forward.

I really have a hard time pegging the generic value of draft picks. Obviously, there are different tiers of value...1-5; 5-10; 11-20, etc.. And I can certainly give an IMO about the value of a 7th pick for somebody like Grant. But when the established talent is a tier or two above Grant, I have trouble. Obviously, the Pels thought that CJ was worth a maybe lottery pick + Hart; and they have been rolling the dice a little on not conveying that pick. I really doubt the Pels are going to be upset if they do give up an 11th or 12th pick for CJ. I've been pegging CJ's value around that high for a few years

 

[STOMP]

Who do you see in this year’s draft of that caliber that will be available at 14?

I'll get back to you after I've conducted private workouts with the foreign players and consult with the scouting department whose job it is to track all the possibilities. Good grief man, whats wrong with you?

STOMP

 

[Bingo Bango]

I'll get back to you after I've conducted private workouts with the foreign players and consult with the scouting department whose job it is to track all the possibilities. Good grief man, whats wrong with you?

Good grief, indeed. You seem as stupefied by a simple question about the draft as our SCOTUS nominee was when asked to give a definition of a woman.

 

[Bingo Bango]

Stop talking about the 14th pick. The fact is that you started this ridiculous thread with the notion that because Steph is hurt it was a bad idea to tank while we get closer and closer to better lottery odds and a better pick. I get it that not trying to win every game disgusts you but this is the NBA and sometimes the long play is better than the short. We weren't going to play the Warriors and we weren't going to win in the first round so trying to lose as many games as possible was not only smart but the right thing to do. I know others have said this to you but try to have an adult perspective about whats going on here.

You have a strange definition of “adult.” Adults are supposed to do the honorable thing, which in this case means taking the regular season seriously instead of handing a 30-point win to every team you play like a present wrapped in a bow. The “adult” thing is not removing players from your lineup based on some phony injury simply to get a higher draft pick and make a mockery out of the regular season.

 

[blazerkor]

You have a strange definition of “adult.” Adults are supposed to do the honorable thing, which in this case means taking the regular season seriously instead of handing a 30-point win to every team you play like a present wrapped in a bow. The “adult” thing is not removing players from your lineup based on some phony injury simply to get a higher draft pick and make a mockery out of the regular season.

That's a very idealistic view but you've shown in this thread that you're incapable of nuance so I'll just move on. Getting moralizing from some dude who posts some young woman in a denim thong is rich.

 

[Tince]

I say the Blazers win 7 of their next 11 games. Just a guess.

Going to need to rip off a 7 game win streak to make this happen now.

 

[KSF-ERIC]

Oh, we can potentially get great value with both picks if the Pelicans' pick conveys. To me the question is are we going for immediate impact or are we trying to get the best value for the future further down the road. My preference is immediate impact to give Dame the best chance to win a championship ASAP.

To me the ideal situation if our pick won't get us Jabari or Paolo is that we can trade our pick, the Pelicans pick, Bledsoe and Hart to Toronto for Siakam. Then we pay the Bulls some money or give them the Grizz second rounder to take the conditions off the pick we owe them. Then we trade our 2025 and 2027 first rounders top 4 protected for Jerami Grant. I think Dame, Ant, Grant, Siakam, Nurk, Nas and whoever else we put with them would be an immediate contender.

If you were a Raptors fan, would you be in favor of Siakam for the Pels pick, Bledsoe, and Hart? Just curious. You sound like the Talent Horton-Tucker and a pick for Dame Laker fans.

 

[blazerkor]

If you were a Raptors fan, would you be in favor of Siakam for the Pels pick, Bledsoe, and Hart? Just curious. You sound like the Talent Horton-Tucker and a pick for Dame Laker fans.

Don't be condescending when you're having reading comprehension problems. I almost don't want to explain this to you but here it is again "we can trade our pick, the Pelicans pick, Bledsoe and Hart to Toronto for Siakam". So that would be a pick that is in the top half of the lotto that can't get us Jabari or Paolo, a pick in the back end of the lotto and Josh Hart. I don't think that's even close to a bad deal especially for a team that has so much young talent but is probably going to struggle to get out of the first round this year so they might be incentivized to go even younger.

 

[Bingo Bango]

That's a very idealistic view but you've shown in this thread that you're incapable of nuance so I'll just move on. Getting moralizing from some dude who posts some young woman in a denim thong is rich.

Your argument is incredibly weak. The comment about my avatar just confirms that.

 

[Hoopguru]

Going to need to rip off a 7 game win streak to make this happen now.

If we had a third of our vets back we do it! lol

 

[STOMP]

Good grief, indeed. You seem as stupefied by a simple question about the draft as our SCOTUS nominee was when asked to give a definition of a woman.

Your stupid initial premise (that there just couldn't be anything of real value at #14 despite mountains of evidence to the contrary) isn't anyone else's fault. Instead of acknowledging you stepped in it, pivot to Republican talking points. Perfect!

STOMP

 

[Bingo Bango]

Your stupid initial premise (that there just couldn't be anything of real value at #14 despite mountains of evidence to the contrary) isn't anyone else's fault. Instead of acknowledging you stepped in it, pivot to Republican talking points. Perfect!

STOMP

Who’s pivoting now? You initially said you’d have to do a thorough scouting job to find out if a difference-maker would be available at #14, and now you’re saying there’s mountains of evidence that one is there. And you still haven’t named who that player might be. You seem confused by where you’ve been and where you’re going.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

Who’s pivoting now? You initially said you’d have to do a thorough scouting job to find out if a difference-maker would be available at #14, and now you’re saying there’s mountains of evidence that one is there. And you still haven’t named who that player might be. You seem confused by where you’ve been and where you’re going.

But he’s stomping wherever he’s going.

 

[STOMP]

Who’s pivoting now? You initially said you’d have to do a thorough scouting job to find out if a difference-maker would be available at #14, and now you’re saying there’s mountains of evidence that one is there. And you still haven’t named who that player might be. You seem confused by where you’ve been and where you’re going.

I'm not pivoting shit silly. You're making stupid statements & poster after poster is laughing at you. I'm right here laughing at you with them.

I was clearly mocking your nonsense previously but I'll restate & keep it really simple. Many all time great talents have been drafted at #14 and lower. With one and done college players and international players in the mix, having an eye for talent and projecting it is at a premium. Draft history suggests there is a strong likelihood of quality talent being available at #14. I make no claims at clairvoyance projecting which players will go 1-13 or of being a professional scout, but I can easily go over past drafts and see solid to great talents being available after pick 13 many more times then not. Like Clyde, Jokic and Giannis, it may take a year or two for a young player to develop into a star so it will likely require some patience to see who emerges in the 2022 draft.

STOMP

 

[Bingo Bango]

I'm not pivoting shit silly. You're making stupid statements & poster after poster is laughing at you. I'm right here laughing at you with them.

STOMP

“But spare a thought for Blazers fans, whose hopes will rest on Portland’s front office successfully doing what it has tried and failed to do for years, which is marshal the available resources and finally construct a true contender around the most beloved Blazer in generations. However much sense the team’s direction might make in the big picture, the chances of redemption are still remote, and the basketball in the meantime is breathtakingly, horrifyingly bad. If the play-in is good for throwing a lifeline to certain foundering outfits, it has failed to prevent one of the most brazen and gruesome short-term tanking projects the NBA has seen in years.”

https://defector.com/portlands-tanking-project-is-going-awfully-well/