Dame all but demanding vet roster

[TBpup]

A lot of different lines up during those 3 years. As you mentioned every team deals with injuries but not everyone
decides to tank on purpose. Two new players and another two who could be a lot better.......I would not base how far off we are
on our play last year. Just like I would not base it on our good start last year before the injuries. It all comes down to which player or two that we add IMO.

It's just tough to get by the fact that we were so bad that last 2 years, that we decided to tank. I think it was the correct decision, but it doesn't say much for the players they had, and that was after they went and got Dame's Olympic buddy Grant.

'They are who we thought they were.'

 

[BIG Q]

I just want to throw out that I think the ability to recognize it is time to tank is very important. Portland can not get a top tier free agent to even consider them. The best way for the to get a star is to draft him, like Walton, Clyde, Roy, Aldridge, Dame and now Sharpe. Hoping that number 3 brings in a talent to add to the group. Trading for a star always costs a premium. You do not get the luxury of 4 years of lower salary during rookie deal, then have to over pay in assets and salary to trade for the star. Tanking, for small market teams that are not destinations is one of the most important things they can do during a shit season.

 

[Predator]

Are we? 3 out of the last 4 years sub .500 and the last 2 years, we were so bad we chose to tank. Nurk/Grant/Hart/Ant/Dame was so bad they had to tank. Yes....injuries, traded Hart, things that happen to every team every year. That is a lineup you wouldn't expect to be that unproductive. If they were that bad, how much better are they going to be with adding a player or 2 while subtracting depth and potential generational talent?

You have at least 2 players playing out of position and I could be convinced either way that Grant is out of position given the rest of that lineup, so yeah, it’s a lineup I expected to be wildly unproductive.

Playing people at their actual positions does wonders

 

[TBpup]

You have at least 2 players playing out of position and I could be convinced either way that Grant is out of position given the rest of that lineup, so yeah, it’s a lineup I expected to be wildly unproductive.

Playing people at their actual positions does wonders

Completely agree......yet the Blazers continue to play people out of their best positions. Little gets hurt practically every time he has to play PF. He has no business being at that position. Hart wasn't a SF, neither was Shaedon, but they would run them out there at those positions. Ant isn't really a SG.....and on and on and on. Grant certainly isn't a 'power' forward, but can he really play SF?

 

[wizenheimer]

Josh Hart at SF isn't really playing out of position IMO. He's actually more productive at SF. Although I think you'd just call him a wing, and the best outcome would be sliding him between SG/SF based upon matchups; but that would require a couple of other wings on a roster. He's a rebounding machine when he's playing in the front court. You can't gauge just by height for every player or every position; mostly it applies but not always

Portland's 'problem' hasn't really been playing guys out of position as much as that has been a symptom of dumb roster construction. And that started when Olshey committed the Blazers to a 6'3 no defense SG in CJ and refused to consider the downside. Every decision Olshey made seemed to pivot off of his commitment to SG who couldn't play wing or switch onto SF's and other wings. What is mind-boggling is that the Blazer front office could have watched 6 years of Dame/CJ and then decide that 6'3 Norm Powell at starting SF was a great idea worthy of a new 5 year contract

and then, 5 months after shit-canning the Powell at SF experiment, deciding there was a need on the roster for 6'2 Payton. geeeeezuzz

 

[Natebishop3]

Josh Hart at SF isn't really playing out of position IMO. He's actually more productive at SF. Although I think you'd just call him a wing, and the best outcome would be sliding him between SG/SF based upon matchups; but that would require a couple of other wings on a roster. He's a rebounding machine when he's playing in the front court. You can't gauge just by height for every player or every position; mostly it applies but not always

Portland's 'problem' hasn't really been playing guys out of position as much as that has been a symptom of dumb roster construction. And that started when Olshey committed the Blazers to a 6'3 no defense SG in CJ and refused to consider the downside. Every decision Olshey made seemed to pivot off of his commitment to SG who couldn't play wing or switch onto SF's and other wings. What is mind-boggling is that the Blazer front office could have watched 6 years of Dame/CJ and then decide that 6'3 Norm Powell at starting SF was a great idea worthy of a new 5 year contract

and then, 5 months after shit-canning the Powell at SF experiment, deciding there was a need on the roster for 6'2 Payton. geeeeezuzz

I wish we had Norm's salary for trade purposes.

 

[TBpup]

Josh Hart at SF isn't really playing out of position IMO. He's actually more productive at SF. Although I think you'd just call him a wing, and the best outcome would be sliding him between SG/SF based upon matchups; but that would require a couple of other wings on a roster. He's a rebounding machine when he's playing in the front court. You can't gauge just by height for every player or every position; mostly it applies but not always

Fair enough.....not a starting SF on a contending team.

 

[Pinwheel1]

You have at least 2 players playing out of position and I could be convinced either way that Grant is out of position given the rest of that lineup, so yeah, it’s a lineup I expected to be wildly unproductive.

Playing people at their actual positions does wonders

Without taking into account our draft and/or trade we would be better this year simply by playing players in the right position. Not good enough but still much better...assuming that Sharpe and Watford make the normal improvements that young players do.

Starters: Dame, Sharpe, Grant, Watford, Nurk

Having said that, they need 2 more pieces at least. Reid would be a nice FA center pickup.
Then the key is who do we keep and who do we trade between #3, Nurk, Ant, and Little?
Ideally, we keep #3 (Scoot, Miller, Amen, or Cam) Either way we probably have to move Ant. (Maybe for DDR)

That still leaves Nurk, Little, #23, and our TPE to tinker with.

 

[Hoopguru]

Yes. We chose to tank because we weren't good enough to make a push for a title and needed an infusion of talent on our roster, and we had no roster flexibility.

So in tanking, Ant has far more value now than he did prior to tanking. We now have Sharpe and the #3 pick. That is talent that we COULD NOT have gotten with the roster Olshey had built. Tanking sucked, but it didn't cost us Dame, and now we have the opportunity to put a more talented, experienced, and balanced team around him than he has ever had.

There is simply not a more direct path to competing than this available by trading Dame.

Great Take!

 

[wizenheimer]

I wish we had Norm's salary for trade purposes.

pretty sure it was the Vulcans who had other ideas

 

[Natebishop3]

View attachment 56045 View attachment 56046 View attachment 56047

Does anyone want to revisit these posts from Dame?

This whole thread is basically ground zero for where things started to go wrong between Dame and the Blazers.

 

[Natebishop3]

I didn't notice this before.... Dame has a Panasonic? Really?

 

[Natebishop3]