Don't trade the pick

[wizenheimer]

Why would you think it applies to you? I said "a lot of fans." I did not say "all fans."

If you think it applies to you, then maybe it does, but there are a lot of fans (there's that phrase again) who want to keep Dame because they think he still provides us with the best shot at a ring. I can understand that logic. I'm not talking about fans who are thinking logically. I'm talking about the fans who don't want to trade Dame because of the warm and fuzzies.

If you think Dame still gives us the best shot at a ring, that's fine. I can see the reasoning behind that thought. I'm not sure if I agree with it, but I can still understand it. I don't agree with fans who think we should keep Dame simply because he wants to be here, or because Dame is a superstar and you don't trade superstars. The goal is to win a championship. I'm always trying to think about the long game. As much fun as it is to see Dame drop 71, I would much rather see a championship parade in my lifetime.

I was just looking for an excuse to rant...thanks for stepping up!

 

[BassPlaya]

Dame is a unicorn. We aren't getting one in return. Don't do it.

 

[Natebishop3]

Dame is a unicorn. We aren't getting one in return. Don't do it.

Dame is almost 33. He's a unicorn with an expiration date.

 

[wizenheimer]

Lovely veiled misogyny in your post about being insulted by the insinuation that emotions might possibly inform your rationale.

I don't think it was veiled...kind of blatant

now, I might go to work on your polysyllabic tendencies....

 

[SharpesTriumph]

Why would you think it applies to you? I said "a lot of fans." I did not say "all fans."

If you think it applies to you, then maybe it does, but there are a lot of fans (there's that phrase again) who want to keep Dame because they think he still provides us with the best shot at a ring. I can understand that logic. I'm not talking about fans who are thinking logically. I'm talking about the fans who don't want to trade Dame because of the warm and fuzzies.

If you think Dame still gives us the best shot at a ring, that's fine. I can see the reasoning behind that thought. I'm not sure if I agree with it, but I can still understand it. I don't agree with fans who think we should keep Dame simply because he wants to be here, or because Dame is a superstar and you don't trade superstars. The goal is to win a championship. I'm always trying to think about the long game. As much fun as it is to see Dame drop 71, I would much rather see a championship parade in my lifetime.

Mostly agree with your message and thoughts on this. However I disagree that the Blazers must trade Dame - even if they aren't contending, and even if Dame would fetch some nice trade assets.

Counter point I'd make is the long term value to the franchise of taking care of a player like Dame can have real value. Think of what NBA players think of the Lakers franchise who took care of Kobe - vs the Bulls who ran Jordan/Phil Jackson out of town. Yes this is a more abstract benefit than young player x or draft pick y - but it could have a longer payoff over many decades. It could help when retaining Sharpe eventually if he saw Dame was taken care of. There are a lot of young players now and more that will enter the NBA who are big Dame fans.

Also if the Blazers do well building talent the next 3-5 years - its possible Dame could contend here in a Jason Kidd Dallas role toward the end of his career. No I wouldn't expect that or bet on it, but its has a nonzero chance of happening.

However what I will say - is the Blazers must make sound decisions on their assets, young players, future picks, and most critically goldmine of a top3 pick regardless of the Dame dynamics. The Blazers can't send out those assets in a doomed to fail attempts with mediocre win now veterans. That would be beyond stupid, and basically follow the Olshey team building blueprint.

 

[Natebishop3]

Counter point I'd make is the long term value to the franchise of taking care of a player like Dame can have real value.

I don't think this is true. I don't think it matters at all. I think players go where the money is. They understand it's a business. If the Blazers trade Dame, most players are going to say "that makes sense because they've been one of the worst teams in the league the past couple years."

I chalk this line of thinking up with "players want to come here because of Dame's leadership." We have never seen any real evidence that Dame has been able to recruit. Maybe Jerami Grant, but that's still undecided because he could walk in a month. We like to think that these things matter, but haven't seen any real tangible evidence to back it up.

It does seem that once players GET here, they usually love playing with Dame and want to stay, but that hasn't really translated into getting stars to demand a trade to Portland.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I don't think it was veiled...kind of blatant

now, I might go to work on your polysyllabic tendencies....

I was going to call it "thinly"-veiled...that'll teach me to soft-pedal.

 

[BassPlaya]

However what I will say - is the Blazers must make sound decisions on their assets, young players, future picks, and most critically goldmine of a top3 pick regardless of the Dame dynamics. The Blazers can't send out those assets in a doomed to fail attempts with mediocre win now veterans. That would be beyond stupid, and basically follow the Olshey team building blueprint.

 

[blazerkor]

Dame for Knicks unprotected 2024 2026 2028 2030 picks, unprotected swaps in 2025 2027 2029 and salary filler (Fournier etc) I've had Knick fans tell me they'd do it.

Dame for Ben Simmons(salary filler only) and every one of the Nets valuable picks unprotected, they have some great ones from Durant trade and have freed up their own 2028 2030 ones

Dame for #4 and salary filler and two future firsts. Houston wants to win now with Ime. Maybe they aim to sign Harden too.

These are just a few rough ideas, also see Paul George, Anthony Davis, Donovan Mitchell, Rudy Gobert, and Kevin Durant trades for examples of teams that got a nice haul.

I want to keep Dame. I want to take the assets we have and build a team around him that can contend next season. I think those of you who think that's impossible and in the same breath talk about how this third pick has once in a lifetime value for us but then say there is no path to contention with Dame are either being disingenuous or you have a severe lack of imagination.

That being said, if our front office decides to make a shrewd move and make moves for a future that is anything but guaranteed I think they should look to the Nets. I would take what the post I'm responding to is asking for but I'd also want the Nets to take Nurk in exchange for Claxton as well, even if that meant giving up a future pick or two. I like the idea that this gives us three picks in this draft two of which should be packaged together to move up several spots. I like the idea that we try and resurrect Ben Simmons' career but only have to try for two seasons before we can stop paying him. I like it for Dame too... the Nets are full of really good wings so Dame and Nurk along with what they would have would have a good chance to win a lot of games.

The Knicks trade sucks for us. The Rockets trade sucks for Dame and probably for us.

 

[TBpup]

Dame is almost 33. He's a unicorn with an expiration date.

Offensive unicorn pony. Once again, the NBA Finals MVP with most likely be a bigger player who is more well rounded. Either a 7' Jokic or a 6'7" Butler.....or 6'8" Tatum if the Celts make a miraculous comeback.

Dame is a very fun player to watch, but I want to see a legit contender in Portland. It's been over 20 years and Dame has been here for 11 of those years. I'm not convinced that suddenly as Dame is turning 33, it will suddenly be different.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

I don't think this is true. I don't think it matters at all. I think players go where the money is. They understand it's a business. If the Blazers trade Dame, most players are going to say "that makes sense because they've been one of the worst teams in the league the past couple years."

I chalk this line of thinking up with "players want to come here because of Dame's leadership." We have never seen any real evidence that Dame has been able to recruit. Maybe Jerami Grant, but that's still undecided because he could walk in a month. We like to think that these things matter, but haven't seen any real tangible evidence to back it up.

It does seem that once players GET here, they usually love playing with Dame and want to stay, but that hasn't really translated into getting stars to demand a trade to Portland.

Yeah fair enough - its hard to quantify - its an abstract benefit, I can totally see how many don't consider it real at all. Just seeing players attitudes to different franchises, and seeing how people react to organizations I've dealt with professionally - I do see the potential for the benefit of Dame's legacy and goodwill continuing with the Blazers franchise.

I think its normally not the case where this has such a significance - these are historically rare situations such as Dame with PDX, Reggie Miller in Indy, Stockton in Utah, etc. I think theres certain situation with certain franchises where this long term historic benefit does exist.

I'm not totally against a Dame trade, obviously the biggest benefit would be trade assets coming back, it might improve the Blazers own picks the next few years, we can avoid any age or injury declines that may hit him, there is salary cap savings, there might be more opportunities for sharing the ball or defensive focus. But there are very real downsides to trading Dame away too - most obviously his All-NBA play last season but I happen to believe losing out on additional goodwill for the best player in the history of your franchise is one additional significant cost the Blazers would lose.

 

[Natebishop3]

Yeah fair enough - its hard to quantify - its an abstract benefit, I can totally see how many don't consider it real at all. Just seeing players attitudes to different franchises, and seeing how people react to organizations I've dealt with professionally - I do see the potential for the benefit of Dame's legacy and goodwill continuing with the Blazers franchise.

I think its normally not the case where this has such a significance - these are historically rare situations such as Dame with PDX, Reggie Miller in Indy, Stockton in Utah, etc. I think theres certain situation with certain franchises where this long term historic benefit does exist.

I'm not totally against a Dame trade, obviously the biggest benefit would be trade assets coming back, it might improve the Blazers own picks the next few years, we can avoid any age or injury declines that may hit him, there is salary cap savings, there might be more opportunities for sharing the ball or defensive focus. But there are very real downsides to trading Dame away too - most obviously his All-NBA play last season but I happen to believe losing out on additional goodwill for the best player in the history of your franchise is one additional significant cost the Blazers would lose.

I just think it's interesting, because we did Drexler a solid by trading him to his favorite team for peanuts. Hell, he got a ring out of it. And that asshole does nothing but bash our team. Sometimes you can't win.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

I want to keep Dame. I want to take the assets we have and build a team around him that can contend next season. I think those of you who think that's impossible and in the same breath talk about how this third pick has once in a lifetime value for us but then say there is no path to contention with Dame are either being disingenuous or you have a severe lack of imagination.

That being said, if our front office decides to make a shrewd move and make moves for a future that is anything but guaranteed I think they should look to the Nets. I would take what the post I'm responding to is asking for but I'd also want the Nets to take Nurk in exchange for Claxton as well, even if that meant giving up a future pick or two. I like the idea that this gives us three picks in this draft two of which should be packaged together to move up several spots. I like the idea that we try and resurrect Ben Simmons' career but only have to try for two seasons before we can stop paying him. I like it for Dame too... the Nets are full of really good wings so Dame and Nurk along with what they would have would have a good chance to win a lot of games.

The Knicks trade sucks for us. The Rockets trade sucks for Dame and probably for us.

The more I've looked at this the more I don't think there is any chance the Blazers explore Dame trades on draft night. They will try to get Bridges/Brown/Siakam type of players. If that doesn't work then they will take BPA and look at trades in free agency - such as Embiid if Harden leaves. If all of those opportunities fail after free agency/trades start to wind down thats where I can see maybe a chance of a pivot to explore Dame trades in early to mid July. Technically Dame has a no trade clause until July 11th or something anyways.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

I just think it's interesting, because we did Drexler a solid by trading him to his favorite team for peanuts. Hell, he got a ring out of it. And that asshole does nothing but bash our team. Sometimes you can't win.

Yeah that was a bad move - I don't think the Blazers should have any concern of where we send Dame in a trade if eventually it comes to that. I meant purely the goodwill of keeping Dame on the Blazers roster. The dynamic that Dame and his new team have is the new teams responsibility - if they offer us the best trade assets we do it.

I don't think the diehard Dame supporters even need to worry about that aspect from Dame's end though - no trade partner is going to acquire Dame giving up a massive haul if its not a good situation for him. At worst it would be a Kawhi to Toronto situation where he isn't wild about the city long term but they have a chance to win.

Probably the only team I wouldn't want to see Dame on is the Lakers - I don't think I could handle him winning a title there.