I am feeling quite optimistic at the moment. End of season and draft thoughts.

[BonesJones]

Because the money left wont allow us to find a quality starter. Meaning if they both arent starters but are both getting starter money. Our starting unit would suffer in some way because of it.

Think about it. So we have basically $50 mill in Dame and CJ. Then another $35 mill in Turner and Crabbe, both off the bench. That leaves $20 mill to fill three starting positions and the rest of the bench.
Too much money paid to both of them, unless one of them is a starter, because then the bench player isn't making as much.

So the solution is to start a bench level player as a starter? We need to get rid of one because of it, not start one.

 

[Denny Crane]

Because the money left wont allow us to find a quality starter. Meaning if they both arent starters but are both getting starter money. Our starting unit would suffer in some way because of it.

Think about it. So we have basically $50 mill in Dame and CJ. Then another $35 mill in Turner and Crabbe, both off the bench. That leaves $20 mill to fill three starting positions and the rest of the bench.
Too much money paid to both of them, unless one of them is a starter, because then the bench player isn't making as much.

LT will be $122M, so ~$40M to fill out the roster.

 

[STOMP]

What about the Brooks kid at Oregon? Where is he projected to land in the draft? Is he a pro prospect?

2nd round by both draftexpress and nbadraft... I'd guess he goes in the 20's

STOMP

 

[BonesJones]

Y'all are too obsessed with drafting Ducks.

 

[Strenuus]

Y'all are too obsessed with drafting Ducks.

It's because they think their knees won't quack.......

 

[Schilly]

I think we need a real PF, Aminu helps us now, but he isn't a long term solution. Vonleh shows flashes that I like, but seems more like a backup to me.

 

[Orion Bailey]

So the solution is to start a bench level player as a starter? We need to get rid of one because of it, not start one.

Well duh. But you asked why they couldn't both be on the bench. Same answer applies.

 

[BonesJones]

Well duh. But you asked why they couldn't both be on the bench. Same answer applies.

Either way, of you start one or neither, you still have a bench level player to compliment, regardless of Turner or Crabbe starting or not.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Either way, of you start one or neither, you still have a bench level player to compliment, regardless of Turner or Crabbe starting or not.

That's where we disagree. I think Turner is a capable starter when with the other right starters. CJ/Dame/Turner is a decent start.

 

[Minstrel]

That's where we disagree. I think Turner is a capable starter when with the other right starters. CJ/Dame/Turner is a decent start.

Turner could be an okay starter if you have a few stars around him and shooting from every other position. If you envision Nurk as the long-term center, then that route is already closed off. These days, it's hard to field starting units (or units, in general, that play a ton of minutes) with more than one non-shooter.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Turner could be an okay starter if you have a few stars around him and shooting from every other position. If you envision Nurk as the long-term center, then that route is already closed off. These days, it's hard to field starting units (or units, in general, that play a ton of minutes) with more than one non-shooter.

IF, and this is a HUGe IF. Meyers were shooting to potential, I think a Dame/CJ/Turner/Leonard/Nurkic looks pretty good. Turner hits the mid range jumper and can create. Dish it back to Leonard at the 3 or inside to Nurk, with Dame and CJ slashing/spotting up. I see potential here... again that IF though.....

 

[dviss1]

IF, and this is a HUGe IF. Meyers were shooting to potential, I think a Dame/CJ/Turner/Leonard/Nurkic looks pretty good. Turner hits the mid range jumper and can create. Dish it back to Leonard at the 3 or inside to Nurk, with Dame and CJ slashing/spotting up. I see potential here... again that IF though.....

Whenever I see someone post something about Meyer's "potential" the Kill Bill sirens go off...

And @Orion Bailey... Give up the ghost... What you gonna do with that Meyers#11 jersey after the season? It's prolly time to change that avi too... I still have my TT#12. We could burn them together after the season. It'll be a cleansing. We could burn some sage afterward.

 

[Mediocre Man]

IF, and this is a HUGe IF. Meyers were shooting to potential, I think a Dame/CJ/Turner/Leonard/Nurkic looks pretty good. Turner hits the mid range jumper and can create. Dish it back to Leonard at the 3 or inside to Nurk, with Dame and CJ slashing/spotting up. I see potential here... again that IF though.....

IF my aunt had a penis, she'd be my uncle.

It's 2 things that will never happen

 

[H.C.]

Turner could be an okay starter if you have a few stars around him and shooting from every other position. If you envision Nurk as the long-term center, then that route is already closed off. These days, it's hard to field starting units (or units, in general, that play a ton of minutes) with more than one non-shooter.

While I agree with your premise that you need shooting to win in the NBA.(one of my main reasons why I said Chicago was going to suck this year)
I'm not entirely sure Nurk is a non-shooter. In his limited attempts that he's took so far in a Blazer uniform he's shot surprisingly well for a big of his size in 15-20ft range.
I'd also say that between Lillard/CJ/Turner there is a lot of basketball IQ on the court, as well as playmaking/ability to get your own shot.
Frankly I believe the chemistry between Nurk/Turner is going to be better than with either of Portland's star guards.

But I'm extremely high on Turner, unlike most on this board.

 

[Pinwheel1]

While I agree with your premise that you need shooting to win in the NBA.(one of my main reasons why I said Chicago was going to suck this year)
I'm not entirely sure Nurk is a non-shooter. In his limited attempts that he's took so far in a Blazer uniform he's shot surprisingly well for a big of his size in 15-20ft range.
I'd also say that between Lillard/CJ/Turner there is a lot of basketball IQ on the court, as well as playmaking/ability to get your own shot.
Frankly I believe the chemistry between Nurk/Turner is going to be better than with either of Portland's star guards.

But I'm extremely high on Turner, unlike most on this board.

We seem to have decent options at SF between ET and Harkless, if we can find the right PF to complement them and Nurk. Getting a Draymond Green type would be optimal, (and unlikely) but regardless the PF we find, needs to be a very good shooter. (and play D)

In terms of the draft, as always we need to take the best player available. Those players will be at least 2 years (Probably 3) away from winning the starting positions and a lot can happen in those years, so we should not worry about what position they play. (Not that anyone is)

 

[Trackjack]

We should only take players that are 2 way players that include in the draft.

 

[H.C.]

We seem to have decent options at SF between ET and Harkless, if we can find the right PF to complement them and Nurk. Getting a Draymond Green type would be optimal, (and unlikely) but regardless the PF we find. needs to be able to spread the floor and be a very good shooter. (and play D)

In terms of the draft, as always we need to take the best player available. Those players will be at least 2 years (Probably 3) from away winning the starting positions and a lot can happen in those years, so we should not worry about what position they play. (Not that anyone is)

Personally I'd like to see someone at the four who creates mismatches for Portland who can move down to the three if needed.
Although I've never been a huge fan of his, Gallo I think would fit perfectly with the 4 of Nurk/Lillard/CJ/Turner.
However with his PO, and the size of the contract he'll demand if he ops out. I don't think that's really an option.
More realistic are players like Amir Johnson, Quincy Acy, Trevor Booker, Thaddeus Young, DMo, Patterson.
Couple of those players would need to be traded for, but I don't think any of them are all that unattainable(with 3 first round picks). OFC I'd prefer Patterson/Young to all of them. But beggars can't be choosers.

 

[Pinwheel1]

Personally I'd like to see someone at the four who creates mismatches for Portland who can move down to the three if needed.
Although I've never been a huge fan of his, Gallo I think would fit perfectly with the 4 of Nurk/Lillard/CJ/Turner.
However with his PO, and the size of the contract he'll demand if he ops out. I don't think that's really an option.
More realistic are players like Amir Johnson, Quincy Acy, Trevor Booker, Thaddeus Young, DMo, Patterson.
Couple of those players would need to be traded for, but I don't think any of them are all that unattainable. OFC I'd prefer Patterson/Young to all of them. But beggars can't be choosers.

I agree that Patterson and Young are two pretty good options. Gallo worries me because of the injury history, but if healthy he would have been ideal.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

Bump.

Right now, it's looking like #17, #20, and #26.

At these position draftexpress has
Justin Patton
Rodions Kurucs
(passing Bam)

At these position nbadraft.net has
Luke Kennard
Harry Giles
Jonathon Motley
(passing on Justin Jackson who fall to 28)

note: neither is doing much of a job taking team needs into consideration.

 

[tester551]

Bump.

Right now, it's looking like #17, #20, and #26.

At these position draftexpress has
Justin Patton
Rodions Kurucs
(passing Bam)

At these position nbadraft.net has
Luke Kennard
Harry Giles
Jonathon Motley
(passing on Justin Jackson who fall to 28)

note: neither is doing much of a job taking team needs into consideration.

They both specifically state that they don't take need into consideration. At this point in the process, things are still too fluid. It's a waste of time & effort to attempt to do so.

 

[Nate]

I think we're gonna see a draft day trade.

 

[ripcityboy]

I think we're gonna see a draft day trade.

Just don't pick up the phone from Danny Ainge and we should do okay.