Haynes identifies four prospects (2 Viewers)

[ironcrotch]

I love MKG but you guys have to remember he can't shoot a lick. That guy is hustle and gristle through and through. It will be a while before he figures out his shot. So don't be so quick to want to move Batum, I hope they add as many good players first then make adjustments when they know what they have.

On the other hand, conveniently, all these guys aren't named Thomas Robinson. IF we're talking to CHA about taking their #2, this might be some smoke to let them know, hey we're not too sold on that #2 we have other guys we'll target. Unless you give us the #2 for our price.

 

[Blaze01]

I just do not believe Chris Haynes....

or Maybe those were Buchanan's favorites, and may not be Olshey's....

I think both Leonard and Lillard will be busts in the NBA...certainly overeaching picks if POR takes them....

I don't mind Barnes, he could slide in at SF, can shoot, I think he is underated and will be a better pro than he showed in college....

Now, MKG, he does seem like an Olshey pick to me....Nice kid, hard as nails and want to win more than anything....I do think those types of players have great value...The hope is he ends up more along the lines of a better Jerome Kersey than a Gerald Wallace....

The only problem I have with him is that, once again this team will be lacking in outside shooting and a go to scorer.....

Leonard...ouch...please tell me that is a smoke screeen......

 

[Blazer Freak]

I don't think the Blazer would be thinking of taking Leonard at #6, he is rising...but not that high.

I agree with other posters about MKG though, while I love his heart and motor he is so offensively deficient at this point I just don't think he would mesh well with our current roster. We need scoring in the worst way.

I think the Blazers will stay at 6 and 11 and go with either Barnes or Lillard. If Barnes drops then I'm guessing he will be the one, and if he is taken by CLE then we'll go with Lillard. My guess is we are targeting Leonard more with 11 and potentially looking to move up a spot or two to grab him if need be.

I'd take a Lillard/Leonard draft personally. I think Olshey and Co then target a C and SG in Free Agency, and potentially a vet PG to help tutor Damian.

D. Lillard/??/Nolan
Free Agent/Matthews/Elliot
Batum/Babbitt
Aldridge/??
Free Agent (Kaman?) /M. Leonard

If you throw Lillard into the fire early and let Leonard develop over this first season, given that the FA signings are 1-2 year deals, the Blazers will retain flexibility in the future and should be rounding into form by the time LA turns 28/29.

 

[RoyToy]

I love MKG but you guys have to remember he can't shoot a lick. That guy is hustle and gristle through and through. It will be a while before he figures out his shot. So don't be so quick to want to move Batum, I hope they add as many good players first then make adjustments when they know what they have.

On the other hand, conveniently, all these guys aren't named Thomas Robinson. IF we're talking to CHA about taking their #2, this might be some smoke to let them know, hey we're not too sold on that #2 we have other guys we'll target. Unless you give us the #2 for our price.

Clyde Drexler didn't exactly have the prettiest jumper

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

I'm thinking that since it's mentioned the next two drafts won't be very strong; why tank for 2 or three years when we have a chance to have four or five first round picks in a good and deep draft in one year? Do all the rebuilding in one year; all these guys play together from the start. So, the more I think about it I think I would trade Batum for Golden State's 7 and 30.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

I love MKG but you guys have to remember he can't shoot a lick. That guy is hustle and gristle through and through. It will be a while before he figures out his shot. So don't be so quick to want to move Batum, I hope they add as many good players first then make adjustments when they know what they have.

On the other hand, conveniently, all these guys aren't named Thomas Robinson. IF we're talking to CHA about taking their #2, this might be some smoke to let them know, hey we're not too sold on that #2 we have other guys we'll target. Unless you give us the #2 for our price.

Good catch! I hope he's the target.

 

[RoyToy]

IMO there shouldn't be much debate about who should be picked 2nd

Clearly Thomas Robinson

 

[Blaze01]

I don't think the Blazer would be thinking of taking Leonard at #6, he is rising...but not that high.

I agree with other posters about MKG though, while I love his heart and motor he is so offensively deficient at this point I just don't think he would mesh well with our current roster. We need scoring in the worst way.

I think the Blazers will stay at 6 and 11 and go with either Barnes or Lillard. If Barnes drops then I'm guessing he will be the one, and if he is taken by CLE then we'll go with Lillard. My guess is we are targeting Leonard more with 11 and potentially looking to move up a spot or two to grab him if need be.

I'd take a Lillard/Leonard draft personally. I think Olshey and Co then target a C and SG in Free Agency, and potentially a vet PG to help tutor Damian.

D. Lillard/??/Nolan
Free Agent/Matthews/Elliot
Batum/Babbitt
Aldridge/??
Free Agent (Kaman?) /M. Leonard

If you throw Lillard into the fire early and let Leonard develop over this first season, given that the FA signings are 1-2 year deals, the Blazers will retain flexibility in the future and should be rounding into form by the time LA turns 28/29.

I doubt that team could even make the playoffs.....

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

I'm thinking that since it's mentioned the next two drafts won't be very strong; why tank for 2 or three years when we have a chance to have four or five first round picks in a good and deep draft in one year? Do all the rebuilding in one year; all these guys play together from the start. So, the more I think about it I think I would trade Batum for Golden State's 7 and 30.

I don't think that can happen, at least not on draft night.

 

[Blazer Freak]

I doubt that team could even make the playoffs.....

Obviously not next year. We are REBUILDING. Give Lillard 1-2 years as a starter and Leonard time to develop and in 2 years we should be primed for a nice playoff run with 4 core players having gotten a lot of PT together (Lillard, Batum, LA, Leonard).

It's not going to be very pretty this next year or two, people are going to have to accept that.

 

[Blaze01]

Obviously not next year. We are REBUILDING. Give Lillard 1-2 years as a starter and Leonard time to develop and in 2 years we should be primed for a nice playoff run with 4 core players having gotten a lot of PT together (Lillard, Batum, LA, Leonard).

It's not going to be very pretty this next year or two, people are going to have to accept that.

No, I meant 2-3 years from now....

You just spent 2 high lottery picks on guys you expect to turn into what exactly?

Do you really think Lillard is the next Westbrook\Rose\Parker? Or is he the next DJ Augustin\Mo Williams\Randy Foye?

and Leonard, wow, I am curious to what fans of his selection think he will turn out to be? Hawes? Mcgee? I see Kelvin Cato\Kwame Brown, athletic big with no real bball moves to go by....

2 mediocre players that aren't going to help your goal of winning an NBA title....

This team needs top tier players....go to scorers...a 2nd & 3rd guy to put around LA....I can't believe than anyone here actually thinks those 2 guys are goind to develop into POR version of Westbrook\Harden (in terms of impact).....Really? Heck, Ibaka and Perkins would destroy Leonard....

 

[Draco]

I don't think that can happen, at least not on draft night.

Yeah I have no idea why people bring up Batum name at all with draft day trades.... Its impossible to trade him then. And why wouldn't the team just sign him outright as a RFA? Are we talking about trading our #6 for Spencer Hawes? A trade needs to work both ways.

I'd love to tell Batum's agent "hey we agreed to sign and trade you for #7" and he says "no dice unless you pay Batum the max". Golden State of course laughs, then the agent says "Fine, I'm signing a big offer with Torono; the Blazers can either match or decline" then there is no possible way for us to get the #7...

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

Yeah I have no idea why people bring up Batum name at all with draft day trades.... Its impossible to trade him then. And why wouldn't the team just sign him outright as a RFA? Are we talking about trading our #6 for Spencer Hawes? A trade needs to work both ways.

I'd love to tell Batum's agent "hey we agreed to sign and trade you for #7" and he says "no dice unless you pay Batum the max". Golden State of course laughs, then the agent says "Fine, I'm signing a big offer with Torono; the Blazers can either match or decline" then there is no possible way for us to get the #7...

You make a good point; something that maybe I didn't give enough thought to. I guess it would only work if Batum's preferred destination was Golden State; then some kind of handshake deal could be made beforehand. Or the Blazers could match any offer and then in December trade him to any club for prospects. Or the Blazers could wait until a team offers and Batum accepts; if that team doesn't have the assets they want, try to add a third team into a sign and trade.. I'm sure it wouldn't be easy but I hope it would be possible. My basic premise is that Blazers should consider trying to rebuild fast with prospects from this draft and I would think there would be some ways to do this.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

That would be a mistake IMO.

It's no secret, at least to the scouts Bucher talked to, that the next two drafts are going to be weak.

Having two picks in a top-heavy draft is a nice tool to have and if you don't trade up for the better prospect, that's a mistake.

One of T-Rob or MKG is better than the combo you'd likely get at #6/#11.

I don't think this is very true. Adding two lottery talent players is better than adding one. There is no guarantee of Robinson or MKG being that much better than the two players we could pick, and IMO it's not very likely. Especially MKG. He's just not that great of a talent.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Myers Leonard?


Benefit of the doubt........must keep repeating

 

[DaLincolnJones]

Please not Barnes or Leonard at 6 ... ugh, talk about underwhelming. Lillard I can at least live with, but even then his small school, score-first resume' scares the hell out of me ... MKG might be really good, but I'm not sure I like how he fits in with Nic, LMA, etc.

I'm glad I'm not picking.

Man, I just had a flashback


"Naw, man, we dont need Jordan, we already have Clyde"

 

[ironcrotch]

Man, I just had a flashback


"Naw, man, we dont need Jordan, we already have Clyde"

Even more recently.. "We don't need Roy, that will hurt the development of Webster!"

 

[Mediocre Man]

Even more recently.. "We don't need Roy, that will hurt the development of Webster!"

No kidding. Had we listened, we wouldn't have had to use our amnesty yet

 

[Rastapopoulos]

MKG and Batum can play 2 and 3 together just fine.

Agreed, and would make a great defense. We'd be a bit Sixers-esque, though.

Of course, makes us extremely dependant on PG play. I hate building that way. But, BPA.

I don't see why, unless you're saying that both are sub-standard ball-handlers and passers for their respective positions. (But that was true of Wesley anyway.)

 

[RR7]

Agreed, and would make a great defense. We'd be a bit Sixers-esque, though.



I don't see why, unless you're saying that both are sub-standard ball-handlers and passers for their respective positions. (But that was true of Wesley anyway.)

Oh I agree it is also true of Wesley. I want to upgrade one of the spots with someone who can. And if we commit to Batum this offseason, and draft MKG, I imagine that's our wings going forward, and we depend heavily on PG, versus....I don't really know right now.

 

[ironcrotch]

No kidding. Had we listened, we wouldn't have had to use our amnesty yet

We wouldn't have you're right, we'd be talking about the Anaheim Blazers though.

 

[Mediocre Man]

We wouldn't have you're right, we'd be talking about the Anaheim Blazers though.

LOL, ok

 

[Nikolokolus]

Man, I just had a flashback


"Naw, man, we dont need Jordan, we already have Clyde"

I'd have no real objection to getting Kidd-Gilchrist, but to me he looks like a defensive specialist whose offense is going to be severely lagging behind the rest of his game for awhile. I'd be happy to have his defense, but for a team that is sorely lacking in offensive creators I'm just not sure how much impact he's going to have with this particular roster. Secondly, he's no Jordan; maybe Andre Iguodala if he completely meets his potential.

 

[Shooter]

Don't trust anything you read right now.The guy we pick never ends up being the guy we thought we'd pick.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Don't trust anything you read right now.The guy we pick never ends up being the guy we thought we'd pick.

Good point. None of ever thought in a million years they would draft Nolan Smith in the first round

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

Of all the players mentioned that the Blazers are high on don't include:

*Thomas Robinson
*Andre Drummond

/smokescreen

 

[magnifier661]

Of all the players mentioned that the Blazers are high on don't include:

*Thomas Robinson
*Andre Drummond

/smokescreen

That is a very good point. Cause when was the last time any GM or team publicly announced or talked about players they wanted, unless they had the #1 pick? Yeah never...

 

[Boise Blazer]

That is a very good point. Cause when was the last time any GM or team publicly announced or talked about players they wanted, unless they had the #1 pick? Yeah never...

Wait ... so does "no" really mean "yes" ???? Im liking where this is headed!

 

[magnifier661]

Wait ... so does "no" really mean "yes" ???? Im liking where this is headed!

Well, you could talk about a player you want; but smoke-screening the true player you hope to get. So they may like the player they say yes to, but they may love the player they aren't saying shit about. You know what I mean brah?

 

[Boise Blazer]

Well, you could talk about a player you want; but smoke-screening the true player you hope to get. So they may like the player they say yes to, but they may love the player they aren't saying shit about. You know what I mean brah?

Yes, I actually do. I was just being a smart ass and hoping to find an excuse to use that line of thinking in all parts of my life. FWIW If Drummond and/or Robinson are on the secret radar I wouldnt mind that at all. I think both players will be good.