If you could only chose one to keep; Dame or Ant

[RR7]

Like others have said, if simons is good enough to build around, then he should be a good enough asset to bring in that 2nd star to put alongside dame. And star in simons trade plus dame seems like a clearer path to contention than the alternative. We've said all along its a star league, but ant plus stuff is diminishing your #1 to improve #s 2-4. Unless one of the late 1sts you get for dame hits it big. Huge if.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Like others have said, if simons is good enough to build around, then he should be a good enough asset to bring in that 2nd star to put alongside dame. And star in simons trade plus dame seems like a clearer path to contention than the alternative. We've said all along its a star league, but ant plus stuff is diminishing your #1 to improve #s 2-4. Unless one of the late 1sts you get for dame hits it big. Huge if.

to me, this is the key. Unless the team already has a couple of high lotto picks in their pocket, Dame isn't netting any future lotto picks. The team he would be traded to would be too good. So i don't see a way to swap Dame for a couple of assets and lotto picks. They would be late picks at best.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Like others have said, if simons is good enough to build around, then he should be a good enough asset to bring in that 2nd star to put alongside dame. And star in simons trade plus dame seems like a clearer path to contention than the alternative.

Or Simons is good enough to build around but doesn't have the requisite trade value to bring in a second star because he hasn't demonstrated it long enough to build that value around the league.

 

[RR7]

Or Simons is good enough to build around but doesn't have the requisite trade value to bring in a second star because he hasn't demonstrated it long enough to build that value around the league.

Surely if we see it, some other GMs can as well

 

[TBpup]

so you want to dump dame. got it.

Keep making up whatever....since apparently that is going to happen no matter how many times I post that I want to see Dame win a title here. Over and over, I've said that everything should be under consideration given where the franchise is and has been for that last 5-6 years.

Now feel free to throw whatever spin on that you would like. #Meaningless

 

[calvin natt]

to me, this is the key. Unless the team already has a couple of high lotto picks in their pocket, Dame isn't netting any future lotto picks. The team he would be traded to would be too good. So i don't see a way to swap Dame for a couple of assets and lotto picks. They would be late picks at best.

Although some teams own other teams draft picks that might be much better.

 

[Hoopguru]

Keep making up whatever....since apparently that is going to happen no matter how many times I post that I want to see Dame win a title here. Over and over, I've said that everything should be under consideration given where the franchise is and has been for that last 5-6 years.

Now feel free to throw whatever spin on that you would like. #Meaningless

You are correct, Im sure every scenario has been considered. We shouldn't forget the team is owned by Paul Allen's Estate and I would assume Jody has attorneys looking at all options.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Although some teams own other teams draft picks that might be much better.

yeah thats the only way i see it happening is if the team already has picks stockpiled from other teams.

 

[Tince]

I’ve said repeatedly that I do not see a path to the finals with this roster and keeping Dame. Not enough capital in the other 13 or whatever guys to be able to obtain talent to overtake the teams ahead of them. Let’s say they get Simmons for CJ etc. They would have Dame and Ben and whoever is left. Not enough. And not enough leftovers to go get another guys. I just don’t see it. What I can see is getting enough assets back from Lillard and CJ etc to have a really nice start to a rebuild. Rebuild while the Warriors age.

Can you give me an idea of what assests you see coming back for Lillard and CJ?

 

[Tince]

If you could event get 3 quality players into those slots of the 2 salary amounts totaling $70,000,000, and then add in Ant's $20,000,000, it would seem like we would have a much more balance roster without so much duplicity. It's not that CJ (or certainly Dame) are bad players. But they eat up so much of the cap, it limits what other moves can be made. And for the types of players they are, you can't have multiples of those on your roster. (Neil...talking to you)

John Collins - $25M
Mikal Bridges - $22M
Jeremi Grant - $20M
OG Anunoby - $18M
Jonathan Isaac - $17.4 (if he can ever stay healthy)
Christian Wood - $13.6M
Jae Crowder - $9.7M

Those are all types of players on non-rookie contracts that I'd like to slot into $70,000,000 worth of cap space. And every player (just like those on our roster) can be nit picked. But they would give us more size, length, defense and non are nearly as ball dominant as Dame/CJ. More ball movement, more spread out shot dispersal.....equals a happier team.

I appreciate all your repsonses and the effort beind them. I'm genuinely wanting to hear your take.

You picked out some decent contracts/talent in your list, but how obtainable are players of that level for that amount in Portland? We rarely can sign guys with solid value. Nurk might be a rare exception of a mid-tier contract with solid value. Also, the second we trade Dame, Ant and his agency will know we can't lose him, and force us to pay even more.

I'm not saying your strategy is impossible, I'm just saying I believe it is filled with many low percentage variables, including Ant being an elite talent. I think finding another superstar to put next to Dame and fill out the roster with vets who are willing to play for less is a strategy that is more doable and also has a much smaller downside.

Building a roster with a bunch of role players with zero superstars, and zero previous all-star appearance has never happened to my knowledge. I'd bet against the Blazers being the first.

 

[Strenuus]

Or Simons is good enough to build around but doesn't have the requisite trade value to bring in a second star because he hasn't demonstrated it long enough to build that value around the league.

Exactly. Ant had a good month. Prove it for a season. Until then it's just meh. Consistency. That's it.

 

[TBpup]

I appreciate all your repsonses and the effort beind them. I'm genuinely wanting to hear your take.

You picked out some decent contracts/talent in your list, but how obtainable are players of that level for that amount in Portland? We rarely can sign guys with solid value. Nurk might be a rare exception of a mid-tier contract with solid value. Also, the second we trade Dame, Ant and his agency will know we can't lose him, and force us to pay even more.

I'm not saying your strategy is impossible, I'm just saying I believe it is filled with many low percentage variables, including Ant being an elite talent. I think finding another superstar to put next to Dame and fill out the roster with vets who are willing to play for less is a strategy that is more doable and also has a much smaller downside.

Building a roster with a bunch of role players with zero superstars, and zero previous all-star appearance has never happened to my knowledge. I'd bet against the Blazers being the first.

Absolutely agree on the "low percentage variable". Sadly, that is the position the franchise is left with after Neil's years of myopia and egotism. That said, there are things that can be done, but they involve risk and don't have the highest probability of success. But sometimes to achieve the pinnicle, it takes risk. (See Toronto, San Antonio tanking, Bucks leveraging to get Holiday, etc) If they can do it around Dame in a year or two, great, but that is going to take diligence, luck, and a break or two.....and they have to hit every note along the way. Otherwise, the window will close. Dame is not the type of PG like CP3 who can age and still control a game from a playmaker standpoint. His shooting will age well, but the athleticism, quick step to create separation, will not age well, and he doesn't have the physical stature like a LeBron to age well due to just being bigger with skills than everyone else.

There are moves to be made. But other teams are in on some of these as well, so it's not done in a vaccuum. It will also take the stones to do it. Joe has to have that....and then the permission to carry through.

 

[Tince]

Absolutely agree on the "low percentage variable". Sadly, that is the position the franchise is left with after Neil's years of myopia and egotism. That said, there are things that can be done, but they involve risk and don't have the highest probability of success. But sometimes to achieve the pinnicle, it takes risk. (See Toronto, San Antonio tanking, Bucks leveraging to get Holiday, etc) If they can do it around Dame in a year or two, great, but that is going to take diligence, luck, and a break or two.....and they have to hit every note along the way. Otherwise, the window will close. Dame is not the type of PG like CP3 who can age and still control a game from a playmaker standpoint. His shooting will age well, but the athleticism, quick step to create separation, will not age well, and he doesn't have the physical stature like a LeBron to age well due to just being bigger with skills than everyone else.

There are moves to be made. But other teams are in on some of these as well, so it's not done in a vaccuum. It will also take the stones to do it. Joe has to have that....and then the permission to carry through.

All good stuff once again.

Interesting that you point to the Spurs who tanked one year, but kept David Robinson (didn't trade him). Toronto, who traded their best player for a better player they couldn't resign in 4 months. Bucks, who added additional #3-#5 talent around their top 2 guys. None of those teams got rid of a Top 75 player for picks/role players in order to get better.

So I'm with you that if there is a Dame trade where we get the better player, that would be a risk you consider. Making a move using our other assets to significantly upgrade our starting lineup is a move I'd really love to consider. Tanking one year in hopes you can add another star to add to your current star, is an idea I love. Trading the best player the Blazers has ever had, still in his prime, to build around a guy likely to be a solid starter + other role players... I still can't sign off on that.

 

[TBpup]

All good stuff once again.

Interesting that you point to the Spurs who tanked one year, but kept David Robinson (didn't trade him). Toronto, who traded their best player for a better player they couldn't resign in 4 months. Bucks, who added additional #3-#5 talent around their top 2 guys. None of those teams got rid of a Top 75 player for picks/role players in order to get better.

So I'm with you that if there is a Dame trade where we get the better player, that would be a risk you consider. Making a move using our other assets to significantly upgrade our starting lineup is a move I'd really love to consider. Tanking one year in hopes you can add another star to add to your current star, is an idea I love. Trading the best player the Blazers has ever had, still in his prime, to build around a guy likely to be a solid starter + other role players... I still can't sign off on that.

The 'biggest' difference with those examples, is the Spurs best player (injured) was 7'1". Toronto's best remaining player was 6'8" Siakam, and of course the Bucks was 6'11" Giannis. Dame is dwarfed by those players, and not on the same planet from a defensive standpoint with any of them. My heart wants to build around Dame and get a ring. But my head tells me that just isn't very likely.

 

[Tince]

The 'biggest' difference with those examples, is the Spurs best player (injured) was 7'1". Toronto's best remaining player was 6'8" Siakam, and of course the Bucks was 6'11" Giannis. Dame is dwarfed by those players, and not on the same planet from a defensive standpoint with any of them. My heart wants to build around Dame and get a ring. But my head tells me that just isn't very likely.

Agreed about us needing an above average height all-star level player. Dame will never be that. Nor will Ant. And it's highly unlikely if will be a FA signing based off decades of history.

Dame + tall all-star = enough to contend.

Ant + tall all-star = unlikely enough to contend.

 

[TBpup]

Agreed about us needing an above average height all-star level player. Dame will never be that. Nor will Ant. And it's highly unlikely if will be a FA signing based off decades of history.

Dame + tall all-star = enough to contend.

Ant + tall all-star = unlikely enough to contend.

I would tend to agree with that....although to be fair, Ant is doing things in the last month that maybe even Dame didn't do at the same age.

Here is the variable. Dame + tall all-star = enough to contend?
While And + tall all-star = unlikely to contend....but at in what you might be able to do with the ~$22 million dollar difference in salary between the two to make it an apple-to-apples comparison, and maybe Ant + tall + wing might contend with Dame + tall.

Who knows.....hope we find out soon.

 

[Tince]

I would tend to agree with that....although to be fair, Ant is doing things in the last month that maybe even Dame didn't do at the same age.

I guess I'm siding with the guy who's averages over the last many years are as good as better as one guys best month, which also happens to be significantly better than any other month of his career. Maybe I'm just not the river-boat gambler type.

 

[swish3]

Dame may have 13 more years if he makes it to the age that Brady just showed us is possible, and a lot of winning is in the works in the next 6 years. To counter the pessimists who are speculating only 3 more years and that he may have reached a peak, I think that Dame will be back for 7-13 more years and with the surgical repair and intelligent training, better than ever. I imagine at least 1 Blazer NBA Championship in the coming years!

 

[GDiama]

Dame may have 13 more years if he makes it to the age that Brady just showed us is possible, and a lot of winning is in the works in the next 6 years. To counter the pessimists who are speculating only 3 more years and that he may have reached a peak, I think that Dame will be back for 7-13 more years and with the surgical repair and intelligent training, better than ever. I imagine at least 1 Blazer NBA Championship in the coming years!

Brady is playing like 20 games per year and the most he has run should be like 3 seconds. I don't think being an NBA point guard is the same.

 

[TBpup]

I guess I'm siding with the guy who's averages over the last many years are as good as better as one guys best month, which also happens to be significantly better than any other month of his career. Maybe I'm just not the river-boat gambler type.

I don't think anyone is comparing Dame to Ant. But I believe there is discussion that can be had to one being 9 years older than the other, costing twice as much, and what their production was at similar places in their careers. Dame is an all-time Blazer great, but to be fair, that has not translated into significant on-court team success. Perhaps Ant + what you could do with the cap savings + what you would get back as assets wouldn't do any better.

Who knows. What we do know is Dame is probably done improving and much closer to the start of the inevitable decline everyone experiences. Ant is still growing and improving and just came off a month that only Dame and Clyde have ever achieved.....and did it at age 22.

I'm up for discussion either way. Some cancel culture type won't even have the discussion. That's fine, but kind of defeats the purpose of a discussion board.

 

[wizenheimer]

I would tend to agree with that....although to be fair, Ant is doing things in the last month that maybe even Dame didn't do at the same age.

Here is the variable. Dame + tall all-star = enough to contend?
While And + tall all-star = unlikely to contend....but at in what you might be able to do with the ~$22 million dollar difference in salary between the two to make it an apple-to-apples comparison, and maybe Ant + tall + wing might contend with Dame + tall.

Who knows.....hope we find out soon.

comparing ages lacks some important context, IMO. When Dame was the same age as Ant, he had 0 games played in the NBA. Ant has 215. Dame had has one training camp, Ant has had 4. Those are as big, if not bigger factors than age, especially for guards

as for the 22M difference, it doesn't quite work that way because Dame wouldn't be traded for half his salary, and Portland is over the tax. So, almost all of that 22M would be eaten by the margin between the tax/apron and the salary cap. Blazers wouldn't have 22M in cap-space, nor would they have a 22M player to trade...unless it was Ant. Likely, all they would have would be a full-MLE; but they could have that already with some wise moves by Cronin right now. Also, it's unlikely but it's worth noting that Ant's max at a 112M cap would be over 30M/year

finally, I remember all the over-blown hype around here about the hot 12 game stretch CJ had at the start of last season. Any realistic appraisal of that streak said it was unsustainable. Well, Ant's 'streak' has lasted just 15 games, and he's had 3 or 4 clunkers in that stretch. In fact, over the last 6 games Ant has scored 115 points on 101 shots while shooting 40.6% on FG's. He's averaged 5.5 assists vs 3.7 turnovers; that's a 1.5 assist/turnover mark.

In other words, he had a great 9 game stretch; but has followed that with a 6 game stretch where he has averaged 19.2 points, 5.5 assists, 3.7 turnovers while shooting 40.6% on FG's. Those are not good numbers for a #1 option, yet people want to build a team around that? The question is which player is he? The 9 game Ant or the 6 game Ant? And is either worth trading away Dame?

 

[Lanny]

At the least, 18 members of this forum disagree with you.

Not the first time 18 members have been wrong. Remember Oden? How about Aldridge?

 

[Tince]

I don't think anyone is comparing Dame to Ant. But I believe there is discussion that can be had to one being 9 years older than the other, costing twice as much, and what their production was at similar places in their careers. Dame is an all-time Blazer great, but to be fair, that has not translated into significant on-court team success. Perhaps Ant + what you could do with the cap savings + what you would get back as assets wouldn't do any better.

Who knows. What we do know is Dame is probably done improving and much closer to the start of the inevitable decline everyone experiences. Ant is still growing and improving and just came off a month that only Dame and Clyde have ever achieved.....and did it at age 22.

I'm up for discussion either way. Some cancel culture type won't even have the discussion. That's fine, but kind of defeats the purpose of a discussion board.

I've certainly enjoyed hearing you out and you've made some good points.

I agree Ant + Salary Relief could be better the Dame, I just think it's the highly risky path with a far more downside and very little upside.

 

[TBpup]

I've certainly enjoyed hearing you out and you've made some good points.

I agree Ant + Salary Relief could be better the Dame, I just think it's the highly risky path with a far more downside and very little upside.

Absolutely there is risk. Sadly, Cowardly Leo Neil would never take any and it cost Dame his best years. Outside of somehow adding Simmons, I don't see a path to be able to add enough talent around Dame to get him to where we all hope he can go. I expect Lillard will come back very strong next year, but unless there are some dramatic changes, not sure that will make a difference in terms of being a contender. And not sure at this point if we have the assets to be able to make those significant changes.

 

[blazerkor]

Absolutely there is risk. Sadly, Cowardly Leo Neil would never take any and it cost Dame his best years. Outside of somehow adding Simmons, I don't see a path to be able to add enough talent around Dame to get him to where we all hope he can go. I expect Lillard will come back very strong next year, but unless there are some dramatic changes, not sure that will make a difference in terms of being a contender. And not sure at this point if we have the assets to be able to make those significant changes.

I think with the fact that Dame's best years were the last two and he was dealing with the injury he just had surgically corrected, it's actually pretty safe to say that Dame's best years are likely going to be the next two that are ahead of him.

 

[damianlillard]

I think anybody that’s saying we should pick ant are not necessarily saying to build around him. Instead build around the guy that we trade dame for. Like Jaylen brown for example. Ant would be a solid #2 option. We still have other players that we can trade for young players for. Plus our very own lottery pick for this year. It would be awesome to really tank for Jabari smith. Have a big 3 of brown, smith, and ant.

 

[Strenuus]

I think anybody that’s saying we should pick ant are not necessarily saying to build around him. Instead build around the guy that we trade dame for. Like Jaylen brown for example. Ant would be a solid #2 option. We still have other players that we can trade for young players for. Plus our very own lottery pick for this year. It would be awesome to really tank for Jabari smith. Have a big 3 of brown, smith, and ant.

This was really odd to read given the name of who posted this lmao.

 

[wizenheimer]

I think anybody that’s saying we should pick ant are not necessarily saying to build around him. Instead build around the guy that we trade dame for. Like Jaylen brown for example. Ant would be a solid #2 option. We still have other players that we can trade for young players for. Plus our very own lottery pick for this year. It would be awesome to really tank for Jabari smith. Have a big 3 of brown, smith, and ant.

I don't see any reason for Boston to trade Brown for Dame. Boston is essentially a .500 team right now. Subtracting Brown, Robert Williams, and Josh Richardson, for example....a trade that makes it legal in terms of salary does not make Boston a better team. And it leaves them with little flexibility. And that's the minimum type of return Portland should accept and it's really not enough

seems like people expect teams to be lining up to trade for Dame and his contract; and trade a lot. The only teams that would have an interest are teams that would be convinced Dame would put them over the top. Boston doesn't fit.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

Not the first time 18 members have been wrong. Remember Oden? How about Aldridge?

So your right, others are wrong, and no discussion is warranted on a discussion board?

 

[SharpesTriumph]

Absolutely there is risk. Sadly, Cowardly Leo Neil would never take any and it cost Dame his best years. Outside of somehow adding Simmons, I don't see a path to be able to add enough talent around Dame to get him to where we all hope he can go. I expect Lillard will come back very strong next year, but unless there are some dramatic changes, not sure that will make a difference in terms of being a contender. And not sure at this point if we have the assets to be able to make those significant changes.

Don't necessarily disagree with this.

But no matter the action with Dame or Ant or trades or not trades, I find it extremely unlikely the Blazers will be a contender.