Exit Interviews

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Ed O said:
Without landing on Mars, he was not going to keep his job as GM.
Click to expand...

Mars lighter gravity would have saved Roy's and Oden's knees.

Since Mars has less mass than Earth, the surface gravity on Mars is less than the surface gravity on Earth. The surface gravity on Mars is only about 38% of the surface gravity on Earth, so if you weigh 100 pounds on Earth, you would weigh only 38 pounds on Mars.​
 
Natebishop3 said:
I think trading Roco was fine because he was a free agent. I think trading CJ and Norm was flat out stupid. Norm was a good player on a decent contract. Joe should have been fired for that deal. The CJ deal might end up being decent. I guess we will see.
Click to expand...

Trading CJ saved him from spending the last two months on the bench suffering from a mysterious injury.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Nah, I'd argue that we have a worse chance of winning a championship soon the longer we hold onto Dame. He keeps us just good enough to not get good picks, but we don't have the flexibility or assets to put the players around him that could win a ring.
Click to expand...

What gives you confidence we'll find someone as good or better than Dame to replace him?

Or do you believe in the theory that a bunch of good players are better than a team with two superstars and role players?
 
Tince said:
What gives you confidence we'll find someone as good or better than Dame to replace him?

Or do you believe in the theory that a bunch of good players are better than a team with two superstars and role players?
Click to expand...

It's not about confidence. It's about odds.

We have worse odds of building a championship caliber team around Dame while he's still one of the top 10 best players in the world than we do potentially hitting on a draft pick and resetting our window. But we can't even begin rolling those dice until we're bad enough to consistently get lottery picks.... but who knows... maybe we'll get a top 3 pick and draft a stud and we will be fine.

Were the Sonics/Thunder better off keeping Ray Allen or blowing it up and getting Durant/Westbrook/Harden?
 
Natebishop3 said:
It's not about confidence. It's about odds.

We have worse odds of building a championship caliber team around Dame while he's still one of the top 10 best players in the world than we do potentially hitting on a draft pick and resetting our window. But we can't even begin rolling those dice until we're bad enough to consistently get lottery picks.... but who knows... maybe we'll get a top 3 pick and draft a stud and we will be fine.

Were the Sonics/Thunder better off keeping Ray Allen or blowing it up and getting Durant/Westbrook/Harden?
Click to expand...

The Sonics only had Durant, for one.

I think the odds of us drafting a superstar this year with our pick to add to Dame is greater than our odds of trading Dame and drafting 2 superstars. I don't think either are over 50/50, but a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

In franchise history we haven't drafted many superstars, so the math would say drafting one is more likely than drafting two.
 
Tince said:
The Sonics only had Durant, for one.

I think the odds of us drafting a superstar this year with our pick to add to Dame is greater than our odds of trading Dame and drafting 2 superstars. I don't think either are over 50/50, but a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

In franchise history we haven't drafted many superstars, so the math would say drafting one is more likely than drafting two.
Click to expand...

How often have we really been this high in the lottery?
 
Natebishop3 said:
How often have we really been this high in the lottery?
Click to expand...

This question will be a lot easier to answer when we know our pick.

However, I think the is a lot of data about the odds of finding a superstar at 6 & 11.

According to this website, the 6th pick had a 25% chance of a being a star while the 11th has a 15% chance. So the odds of drafting two stars with those picks would be 3.8%. The odds of keeping Dame and drafting a star with the 6th pick is 25%.

Let's say we could trade Dame for the #2 pick. That would still put us around a 19% chance of drafting two superstars.

http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm
 
Wade Garrett said:
Cronin got rid of CJ, roco and Norm.
That alone makes him a great GM in my book.
But it really is not fair to judge the results yet.
People who say "we could have gotten back more...etc;" have NO FUCKING WAY of knowing this. Period.
Click to expand...
I much rather get Rubio, this year 1st, early second, and future second like what pacers got for LeVert.
 
Tince said:
This question will be a lot easier to answer when we know our pick.

However, I think the is a lot of data about the odds of finding a superstar at 6 & 11.

According to this website, the 6th pick had a 25% chance of a being a star while the 11th has a 15% chance. So the odds of drafting two stars with those picks would be 3.8%. The odds of keeping Dame and drafting a star with the 6th pick is 25%.

Let's say we could trade Dame for the #2 pick. That would still put us around a 19% chance of drafting two superstars.

http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm
Click to expand...

Most likely the #2 will be a team like OKC or Houston.

1. I don't think they would want him.

2. That would be really cruel to do to Dame.
 
Tince said:
This question will be a lot easier to answer when we know our pick.

However, I think the is a lot of data about the odds of finding a superstar at 6 & 11.

According to this website, the 6th pick had a 25% chance of a being a star while the 11th has a 15% chance. So the odds of drafting two stars with those picks would be 3.8%. The odds of keeping Dame and drafting a star with the 6th pick is 25%.

Let's say we could trade Dame for the #2 pick. That would still put us around a 19% chance of drafting two superstars.

http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm
Click to expand...
I love this kinda stuff. Kevin Pelton at ESPN became who he is now because he did the same sorta analysis on his website. But this work does not include drafts from 09-21.

Cronin said in his interview that he's going to do a deep dive into game film of guys in the lottery and place a value on each of the picks to determine how they match with players currently available in the trade market.

While this analysis is terrific, it really differs for every draft class.
 
Ed O said:
I agree. Dame is the best Blazer ever and I recognize how amazing Drexler and Walton were... he's been amazing. I love his loyalty to the team and the city.

BUT... we aren't in a position to have a good team around him any time soon. We should move him, get lots of good parts, and give us hope and excitement that the team can do more than tread water until Dame's career is over.
Click to expand...

yeah great idea....go out and trade a dollar for a quarter, dime, and 3 nickels

you guys keeps saying "trade Dame for a great package" like it's a guaranteed for-certain return. But it's not anything close to that. How much did the Blazers get for Powell? how much for CJ? How much for Nance? It's funny how many of the same people going batshit about the poor return the Blazers got for their deadline trades are the loudest ones advocating trading Dame. Why would trading Dame in 2 months yield a better relative result than the pair of trades 2 months ago?

personally, I think it's loopy to actually believe trading Dame creates more "hope" than keeping him
 
illmatic99 said:
I love this kinda stuff. Kevin Pelton at ESPN became who he is now because he did the same sorta analysis on his website. But this work does not include drafts from 09-21.

Cronin said in his interview that he's going to do a deep dive into game film of guys in the lottery and place a value on each of the picks to determine how they match with players currently available in the trade market.

While this analysis is terrific, it really differs for every draft class.
Click to expand...

100% agree. It's possible the 59th and 60th pick will produce MVPs this year, but the probability of it is low and therefore the picks should be valued as such. No different than using the past data to project the value of a specific pick.

I had a problem with Olshey going with a strategy of trying to win a title with only one below average height all-star, because the data says that's just now how championship teams were built. Could it happen in the future? For sure. Having said that, I prefer the strategy with the highest probability of success, not one that requires us to defy all the odds and break the mold. It appears NateBishop has a theory in his head that ditching out on a Dame is likely to increase our odds of landing multiple susperstars because a couple teams have done it successfully, but it appears the data suggests trading your star for a pick in hopes to draft another star is a net negative overall.
 
Natebishop3 said:
It's not about confidence. It's about odds.

We have worse odds of building a championship caliber team around Dame while he's still one of the top 10 best players in the world than we do potentially hitting on a draft pick and resetting our window. But we can't even begin rolling those dice until we're bad enough to consistently get lottery picks.
Click to expand...

well...right there you've inadvertently arrived at the only logical path the Blazers should do if they trade Dame. That being to suck for a few years; really suck, and hope for lottery luck

I can actually respect that perspective just as long as all you honyaks who are screaming about how hopeless the situation is with Dame, so let's trade him, actually carry the thinking the direction it needs to go: and that's to trade Dame AND trade Simons AND trade Nurkic. Get rid of the players that generate pointless wins and keep Portland sucking hind tit in the lottery
 
wizenheimer said:
well...right there you've inadvertently arrived at the only logical path the Blazers should do if they trade Dame. That being to suck for a few years; really suck, and hope for lottery luck

I can actually respect that perspective just as long as all you honyaks who are screaming about how hopeless the situation is with Dame, so let's trade him, actually carry the thinking the direction it needs to go: and that's to trade Dame AND trade Simons AND trade Nurkic. Get rid of the players that generate pointless wins and keep Portland sucking hind tit in the lottery
Click to expand...
I don't know why you would need to trade Simons. OKC has SGA and they still suck.

But, yes. Dame and Nurk could go.
 
wizenheimer said:
well...right there you've inadvertently arrived at the only logical path the Blazers should do if they trade Dame. That being to suck for a few years; really suck, and hope for lottery luck

I can actually respect that perspective just as long as all you honyaks who are screaming about how hopeless the situation is with Dame, so let's trade him, actually carry the thinking the direction it needs to go: and that's to trade Dame AND trade Simons AND trade Nurkic. Get rid of the players that generate pointless wins and keep Portland sucking hind tit in the lottery
Click to expand...
Oh dear God...Just the thought of that..
Talk about 'pointless'..
Lets keep sucking to put our keys in a string of 20 year olds instead of a HOF Top 10 Top 75 All-Time player...Just those words...
And then, the rookie needs knee surgery...out for the year....Then the other rookie from the previous year gets hurt, and on we go...
But hey..at least we're sucking and getting those lotto picks guaranteed to be available and productive in Dames still-peak time frame.
No, thank you.
 
illmatic99 said:
I love this kinda stuff. Kevin Pelton at ESPN became who he is now because he did the same sorta analysis on his website. But this work does not include drafts from 09-21.

Cronin said in his interview that he's going to do a deep dive into game film of guys in the lottery and place a value on each of the picks to determine how they match with players currently available in the trade market.

While this analysis is terrific, it really differs for every draft class.
Click to expand...

He should’ve been doing a deep dive as soon as we started the tankathon.
 
blazerfan11 said:
" you are more likely to win with vets than young players. that will definitely be part of our decision making process."

You are more likely to win with more-talented players, regardless of age.
Click to expand...

Considering the assets this team has, there's no reason you can't acquire a bit of both.

If they throw most of the resources into getting a Jerami Grant, this organization should be laughed out of North America and sued for malpractice. There's enough to add at least three solid pieces to the roster, maybe four, and the only way you don't do that is if you're getting a legit star. Jerami Grant is not a legit star.
 
blazerkor said:
Yeah I think all of us will be livid if we use our pick to get Grant but if we do use our pick to get a guy that is like Barnes or Mobley, I don't think using the Pelicans pick to get Grant would be a huge mistake. He definitely wouldn't be the first option like he was on the Pistons and with Dame, Ant and Nurk along with a rookie starter, Grant's offensive role would probably be just a little bit more than the one he flourished in with the Nuggets... which helped them win a lot and would definitely help us win now. Grant is a legit two way player who can score in a number of ways especially when he's not being asked to facilitate most of his own scoring opportunities.
Click to expand...

Would Grant want to go back to his Nuggets' role, though?

Seems to me the guy thinks he was bigger than that.
 
Tince said:
100% agree. It's possible the 59th and 60th pick will produce MVPs this year, but the probability of it is low and therefore the picks should be valued as such. No different than using the past data to project the value of a specific pick.

I had a problem with Olshey going with a strategy of trying to win a title with only one below average height all-star, because the data says that's just now how championship teams were built. Could it happen in the future? For sure. Having said that, I prefer the strategy with the highest probability of success, not one that requires us to defy all the odds and break the mold. It appears NateBishop has a theory in his head that ditching out on a Dame is likely to increase our odds of landing multiple susperstars because a couple teams have done it successfully, but it appears the data suggests trading your star for a pick in hopes to draft another star is a net negative overall.
Click to expand...

This year it's absolutely impossible that the 59th and 60th picks will become MVPs, all-stars, rotation players or even make it into pro ball anywhere.
 
PCmor7 said:
Would Grant want to go back to his Nuggets' role, though?

Seems to me the guy thinks he was bigger than that.
Click to expand...
Well Chauncey and everyone else seem pretty fucking jazzed about Ant, like they should be. I don't think anyone is trying to take touches away from Nurk. Then there's Dame. I do think if he was traded for, that Grant would expect to be second in that pecking order but I think Chauncey would be selling the idea that when Dame is running the offense he is 1 and everyone else is 2a, 2b, 2c and 2d. He wants the ball moving. When Ant is running the offense I would think he is the first option. I don't think Grant will be running the offense but I'm sure some plays will go through him. I just think that if we acquire him, he'll understand that his role will not be what it was in Detroit and that Chauncey's offense will set him up to score the way he was in Denver as apposed to the way he's been scoring in Detroit but maybe that's naive. The dude was taking 9 shots per game in Denver and 15 a game this season that just ended. I don't think it would be a bad idea to have him shooting it 13 or 14 times a game. He has been a ball stopper but I don't think he's been a chucker at any point in his career. I don't think the team will let him be a ball stopper here. Again, maybe I'm being naive.
 
blazerkor said:
Well Chauncey and everyone else seem pretty fucking jazzed about Ant, like they should be. I don't think anyone is trying to take touches away from Nurk. Then there's Dame. I do think if he was traded for, that Grant would expect to be second in that pecking order but I think Chauncey would be selling the idea that when Dame is running the offense he is 1 and everyone else is 2a, 2b, 2c and 2d. He wants the ball moving. When Ant is running the offense I would think he is the first option. I don't think Grant will be running the offense but I'm sure some plays will go through him. I just think that if we acquire him, he'll understand that his role will not be what it was in Detroit and that Chauncey's offense will set him up to score the way he was in Denver as apposed to the way he's been scoring in Detroit but maybe that's naive. The dude was taking 9 shots per game in Denver and 15 a game this season that just ended. I don't think it would be a bad idea to have him shooting it 13 or 14 times a game. He has been a ball stopper but I don't think he's been a chucker at any point in his career. I don't think the team will let him be a ball stopper here. Again, maybe I'm being naive.
Click to expand...

What you write makes sense but I think all that gets thrown out the window because what we want and what makes sense probably have no impact on Grant's approach. Grant's expecting to be paid like a star. To me, that indicates he thinks he's a star and that he should probably be the No. 2 shooting option to Dame, and I just don't see that being the case.

If the rumors of the Blazers' infatuation with Grant is true, we'd be moving a lot of assets for him, like he's a star, then paying him, like he's a star ... then he gets here and finds out he's probably your No. 4 option.

I don't think that would fly well and it seems like a situation that very easily could lead to toxicity in the locker room. Really, that probably would be a fitting way to conclude the Dame era -- after doing nothing for years to suddenly start gambling away good assets for solid supporting players and then have it all blow up.
 
wizenheimer said:
personally, I think it's loopy to actually believe trading Dame creates more "hope" than keeping him
Click to expand...

It's loopy, IF your timeline is the next couple of seasons and IF you define hope as competing for a play-in slot.

Now, if your argument is that the Blazer front office can't be trusted with a rebuild - I agree. With the current FO/ownership "hope" is not in the vocabulary regardless of the approach. That is very different than saying a rebuild is a bad idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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