For those who wanna tank...

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
BonesJones

BonesJones

https://www.youtube.com/c/blazersuprise
Joined
May 7, 2015
Messages
44,580
Likes
38,679
Points
113
Who do you want to tank for exactly? I see there's a few of you who want to tank, but you guys never mention who you want to draft with the higher pick the team would tank for. For the record, I'm not aboard the tank train.

I've come to realize that many people (not all) who support tanking don't seem to know more than 3 draft prospects, which makes me chuckle. What's is you're guys reasoning then, if it's not to nab a specific prospect we otherwise couldn't if we didn't tank?

I guess it could be the draft pick would have more trade value, and we could use it to trade for a good starter.

Or just to get a 5% chance at the top 10.

You tell me. Why should we tank? Who should we tank for?
 
BonesJones said:
Who do you want to tank for exactly? I see there's a few of you who want to tank, but you guys never mention who you want to draft with the higher pick the team would tank for. For the record, I'm not aboard the tank train.

I've come to realize that many people (not all) who support tanking don't seem to know more than 3 draft prospects, which makes me chuckle. What's is you're guys reasoning then, if it's not to nab a specific prospect we otherwise couldn't if we didn't tank?

I guess it could be the draft pick would have more trade value, and we could use it to trade for a good starter.

Or just to get a 5% chance at the top 10.

You tell me. Why should we tank? Who should we tank for?
Click to expand...

Some people just wanna watch the world burn.

Let them think whatever.

I'll be here appreciating what the team does have, and how they can make that next step. Another rookie isn't one of them. Just how I see it.
 
KingSpeed said:
As you said, we can trade the pick for a more seasoned player that can help us now.
Click to expand...
Exactly. We need more high end talent. It is not all about whoever we can draft. A high pick is an asset you can move in trades too.
 
I will say that this years class is very strong, so a first round pick (even a protected one) has a lot more value than in years past, especially when you also consider the new salary cap and the kind of value it places on acquiring cheap talent.
 
I kinda call BS on trading the pick.

Nothing wrong with adding good young talent.

The Spurs didn't trade away the pick for Duncan because he was younger than Robinson.

The Lakers didn't not trade for Kobe because he was younger than the rest of the team.

The Blazers didn't trade away the pick used to draft Lillard because the last thing our veteran team needed was a rookie point guard.

This team is sucking because of a lack of talent. If that talent is in the draft you take it.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
I kinda call BS on trading the pick.

Nothing wrong with adding good young talent.

The Spurs didn't trade away the pick for Duncan because he was younger than Robinson.

The Lakers didn't not trade for Kobe because he was younger than the rest of the team.

The Blazers didn't trade away the pick used to draft Lillard because the last thing our veteran team needed was a rookie point guard.

This team is sucking because of a lack of talent. If that talent is in the draft you take it.
Click to expand...
You can trade it or use it in the draft. Thats the beauty of it. The higher you are as long as your scouts are good is better.

But it would be tempting to package the pick with some players for a guy like paul george
 
Trading our pick has got us in this mess. The only time you get superstars is through the draft or in free agency, and we're not getting any star free agents.

List your top ten all-time Blazers and tell me how many we drafted. Exactly.
 
This team doesn't need superstars, this team needs a front court.
 
As a few of you have pointed out this is a point guard heavy draft in a strong draft year.

That leads to the assumption that this is a bad draft year for us.

What it really means is that there will be at least one point guard who is as good if not better than Lillard.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
I kinda call BS on trading the pick.

Nothing wrong with adding good young talent.

The Spurs didn't trade away the pick for Duncan because he was younger than Robinson.

The Lakers didn't not trade for Kobe because he was younger than the rest of the team.

The Blazers didn't trade away the pick used to draft Lillard because the last thing our veteran team needed was a rookie point guard.

This team is sucking because of a lack of talent. If that talent is in the draft you take it.
Click to expand...

Totally.

We also have one of the youngest rosters in the league right now, so it's not like the prime window is closing quickly for the few guys on our team who you might want to actually keep.

Trading the pick is generally a dumb idea unless it somehow guarantees you something like George and Cousins (combined).
 
Five Second Violation said:
I could see Lonzo Ball being better than Lillard. He seems like a winner.
Click to expand...
I see him as Adam Morrison lite personally.....he's going to get crushed in the paint against NBA players...don't see it at all..at the college level, he's a great shooter but doesn't look to have an NBA body at all...he might surprise me...I've seen two of his games and against smaller guys he was knocked down quite a bit. Seemed to always be on the floor...both games he shot well from outside but couldn't buy a free throw...maybe just a slump or maybe not able to shoot well after a hard foul which would be my guess
 
I vote for whatever gives us the best chance at sustained contention for years to come. If that's finishing middle to low playoffs and hopefully someday taking the next step....awesome.

If it's missing out on the playoffs and gaining better assets through the draft or trades then taking the next step....awesome.

All I know is that our franchises best players were mostly acquired on draft day via the draft or trades for draft picks. The one anomaly is the super team that PA paid for, and can't any longer
 
Five Second Violation said:
I could see Lonzo Ball being better than Lillard. He seems like a winner.
Click to expand...
People seem to think of him as Jason Kidd with a shot. I see the Jason Kidd comparisons (although can he defend like Kidd?) but he has a very funky-looking shot. We're talking Joakim Noah here.
 
I don't believe in intentionally tanking but do see us as a lottery team unless there's a huge leap around the corner..this is actually a really bad season to get a low seed in the playoffs...the top of the west is brutal against us
 
We still got 50 games left.

Just fyi .

If we're gonna tank, I want my money back for league pass.

And I'm sure PA would feel the same way about the 100 mil he's shelled out for this season.
 
Five Second Violation said:
Totally.

We also have one of the youngest rosters in the league right now, so it's not like the prime window is closing quickly for the few guys on our team who you might want to actually keep.

Trading the pick is generally a dumb idea unless it somehow guarantees you something like George and Cousins (combined).
Click to expand...
Our best players are 4 year college players so they're going to be older than many up and coming players around the league that were drafted younger....the Wolves and Lakers are really young for the most part...
 
couple 20 game win streaks and we'll be right on target for my 54 prediction.....after we sign Lebron we won't lose many more
 
No need to intentionally tank. With Lillard and McCollum, the team has a couple of prime pieces and isn't necessarily a full rebuild away from contention. Instead of looking at what we saw in the second half last year as a complete mirage, look at it as a glimpse of what this team could be with a few more good defenders (who aren't totally useless on offense). That was a good team, in the second half.

As things are going this year, the team is already likely to get a top-ten pick and it could get close to the top-five. The team shouldn't feel forced to limit deals only to "makes this team better immediately" or to "improves the team's future." The team can hunt the best deal possible (ideally for McCollum, in my opinion, but widening the deal-making to guys like Plumlee, Vonleh, Davis would be fine) and reconfigure its window based on what they get back. Lillard is still young enough to grow with a pre-prime stud but experienced enough to lead a reloaded veteran team.
 
To the original question: Personally, I think the potential of a high lotto pick is far more valuable than a first-round trouncing. I don't have to follow NCAA to have this opinion. A high draft pick is a valuable asset - especially for a team like the Blazers who can't meaningfully improve through Free Agency. Losing in the first round no longer holds any value to this team.

With that said, I'm not in favor of tanking. I would like to fire Tater Totts and trade away any combo (or all) of Aminu, Davis, Meyers, Crabbe, Turner, Vonleh, and Plumlee. I am in favor of trading CJ but we must win that trade by a landslide - so not straight-up for DMC or any other such bullshit.
 
blue9 said:
I am in favor of trading CJ but we must win that trade by a landslide
Click to expand...

That's extremely unlikely. If that's the requirement, we'll be waiting a long time, probably forever.

I want a fair value trade, simply moving McCollum's value into that of a similarly-talented player that isn't a defensively-challenged guard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Natebishop3
Who is tanking?
Replies
9
Views
564
donkiez
donkiez
SlyPokerDog
The tank trade value list
2
Replies
49
Views
3K
stampedehero
stampedehero
THE HCP
Thomas the tank engine
2
Replies
39
Views
7K
Fez Hammersticks
Fez Hammersticks
Orion Bailey
  • Poll Poll
For Those That Think We Should Tank...
Replies
25
Views
4K
Minstrel
Minstrel
Labinot41
Tankathon watch
Replies
6
Views
291
AldoTrapani
AldoTrapani

Users who are viewing this thread

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