LA gone before or on draft day

[blue9]

Lets see, all star versus role player...what would you take? Trading LA and hoping that a guy like Omer Asik is enough to get us to that next level is completely backwards thinking.

Sorry, but I don't believe I've ever come out as a proponent for the LMA/Asik trade rumor - it's certainly not high on my list of potential LMA trades.
Also, I've never said that whoever we obtain in an LMA trade will "get us to that next level".
What I HAVE said is that LMA will never get us to that next level, and that we'd be better off two seasons from now by using LMA as a vehicle for asset acquisition. Certainly having Len, Thompson, and whoever is picked at #19 gives us far more talent and assets than we'd have with just LMA, giving us greater flexibility to adjust the roster until we find a competitive mix of players (especially if the super-dream scenario comes to pass which includes CLE including DAL's pick in the trade). And even if you just end the discussion at the conclusion of the trade and not take future flexibility into account, two years from now I think that team would see better results than what LMA-centric teams have produced the past two seasons.
No - trading LMA isn't going to vault us into title-contention. Why would it? LMA isn't good enough to bring back the sort of player that'd make us contenders. But he is good enough to bring back a variety of assets. If you're willingness to trade LMA hinges on bringing back a player that'll put us in contention you're never going to trade LMA, and you're never going to contend.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Sorry, but I don't believe I've ever come out as a proponent for the LMA/Asik trade rumor - it's certainly not high on my list of potential LMA trades.
Also, I've never said that whoever we obtain in an LMA trade will "get us to that next level".
What I HAVE said is that LMA will never get us to that next level, and that we'd be better off two seasons from now by using LMA as a vehicle for asset acquisition. Certainly having Len, Thompson, and whoever is picked at #19 gives us far more talent and assets than we'd have with just LMA, giving us greater flexibility to adjust the roster until we find a competitive mix of players (especially if the super-dream scenario comes to pass which includes CLE including DAL's pick in the trade). And even if you just end the discussion at the conclusion of the trade and not take future flexibility into account, two years from now I think that team would see better results than what LMA-centric teams have produced the past two seasons.
No - trading LMA isn't going to vault us into title-contention. Why would it? LMA isn't good enough to bring back the sort of player that'd make us contenders. But he is good enough to bring back a variety of assets. If you're willingness to trade LMA hinges on bringing back a player that'll put us in contention you're never going to trade LMA, and you're never going to contend.

Like I stated earlier, I think we're not that far off from the Golden States and Indianas...who were certainly in striking distance from an NBA championship. A few tweaks here and there, and we're in contention. Your plan sets us back 3-4 years at minimum until we get to the point we are at right now.

 

[BrianFromWA]

El Pres, let's assume for the sake of argument (it can't happen) but LMA signed an extension tomorrow for 3 additional years. He and Lillard are now both locked up until at least 2018.

We have ~11M in cap space this year. We have the #10 pick. We have the full MLE next year. If we make the playoffs, we lose our 2014 draft pick.

What moves that are even remotely available using the assets above do you see turning us into GSW or IND in the next 2 years? I'll grant that signing Bynum and having him stay healthy would do it, if you can add some bench firepower. But I don't see a whole lot else. Even just picking up Asik or Gortat for the bulk of our cap space and getting someone like Shabazz/McCollum doesn't get us there, IMO. What do you see differently?

 

[RR7]

El Pres, let's assume for the sake of argument (it can't happen) but LMA signed an extension tomorrow for 3 additional years. He and Lillard are now both locked up until at least 2018.

We have ~11M in cap space this year. We have the #10 pick. We have the full MLE next year. If we make the playoffs, we lose our 2014 draft pick.

What moves that are even remotely available using the assets above do you see turning us into GSW or IND in the next 2 years? I'll grant that signing Bynum and having him stay healthy would do it, if you can add some bench firepower. But I don't see a whole lot else. Even just picking up Asik or Gortat for the bulk of our cap space and getting someone like Shabazz/McCollum doesn't get us there, IMO. What do you see differently?

From GS? I'd say the only real difference between us and them this season was a bench. They had Jack and Landry, we had shit. With what you laid out, cap space, 10 and MLE get us those pieces they had that separated us and them.

 

[blazerboy30]

Wow.

I'll tell you what is flawed thinking:

Building an entire argument and trading strategy based on an assumption that LMA will leave in two years, without any real insight into what he will actually do.

Unless you have some insider, legit knowledge, this is the worst foundation and trade strategy on this thread.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

El Pres, let's assume for the sake of argument (it can't happen) but LMA signed an extension tomorrow for 3 additional years. He and Lillard are now both locked up until at least 2018.

We have ~11M in cap space this year. We have the #10 pick. We have the full MLE next year. If we make the playoffs, we lose our 2014 draft pick.

What moves that are even remotely available using the assets above do you see turning us into GSW or IND in the next 2 years? I'll grant that signing Bynum and having him stay healthy would do it, if you can add some bench firepower. But I don't see a whole lot else. Even just picking up Asik or Gortat for the bulk of our cap space and getting someone like Shabazz/McCollum doesn't get us there, IMO. What do you see differently?

We don't need to sign a Bynum, he'll cost too much. Just have to spend wisely on some veteran role players. Just having a real center will help our team tremendously. So if we get an Asik or Gortat or whomever we can get decently cheap, it should be an upgrade.

Not having Luke Babbit or Nolan Smith fumble the ball will help us out even further.

Just let Lillard improve his game and fill in the holes. With Lillard, Wes, Nic and LA as a base, we have enough talent to get to the playoffs and make a splash, we just need to up the rest of the team and we can do that with a draft pick and cap space.

Doesn't this board always tout "cap space" and "build through the draft"? Well, we're here right now...we have decent enough talent and need an injection of talent. We have a semi-ok draft pick AND cap space..what's the problem here?


On paper, the Pacers or Warriors shouldn't "be there" either, but they are.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Wow.

I'll tell you what is flawed thinking:

Building an entire argument and trading strategy based on an assumption that LMA will leave in two years, without any real insight into what he will actually do.

Unless you have some insider, legit knowledge, this is the worst foundation and trade strategy on this thread.

Like I said in the past, Blazers fans have always loved to chase the alpha dog out of town.

 

[BrianFromWA]

a bench and a center.

let's assume that Lillard~Curry, Thompson~Wes, Barnes~Batum, Lee~LMA. I don't think it's the case, but close enough to just set aside for now.

Yes, they had Jack and Landry. If we wanted them I believe it would take up just about all of our cap space. To approximate it would probably take more than our cap space (assuming people like Redick, Evans, Millsap, Jefferson, Splitter, Pekovic, etc). But you might be able to approximate it.

But you still aren't accounting for Bogut (or Bogut/Ezeli, if you want to go there). IMO, you can't get BOTH the defensive big man that LMA wants AND approximate Jack and Landry. Even assuming all of the comparisons are on par--which is generous to the Blazers.

they had Jack, Landry, and a Center rotation that is probably better than Asik or Gortat--who will use up our cap space to get.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

yeah, we might as well give up then and start over.

 

[blue9]

Building an entire argument and trading strategy based on an assumption that LMA will leave in two years, without any real insight into what he will actually do.

Just to be clear, Brian and I are coming from two very different places with regards to trading LMA. That's not to say I disagree with his theory of LMA leaving. I simply don't see LMA being a player who is going to matter in a Playoff/Championship push, while I DO see him as being the best vehicle for asset acquisition.

With that said, I DO think that we could keep LMA and make a few moves to put us into the Playoffs next season. But it's a team that won't get out of the first round. And then, as Brian points out, we're extremely limited in our ability to make additional improvements.

 

[RR7]

Bogut, as "healthy" as he was for them last season is not on par at all with Asik.

As for the comparisons of the other 4, I don't see why as a whole that's being too generous to Portland, but so be it.

 

[magnifier661]

El Pres, let's assume for the sake of argument (it can't happen) but LMA signed an extension tomorrow for 3 additional years. He and Lillard are now both locked up until at least 2018.

We have ~11M in cap space this year. We have the #10 pick. We have the full MLE next year. If we make the playoffs, we lose our 2014 draft pick.

What moves that are even remotely available using the assets above do you see turning us into GSW or IND in the next 2 years? I'll grant that signing Bynum and having him stay healthy would do it, if you can add some bench firepower. But I don't see a whole lot else. Even just picking up Asik or Gortat for the bulk of our cap space and getting someone like Shabazz/McCollum doesn't get us there, IMO. What do you see differently?

Easy, we have a lot of tradable assets. Batum, Matthews, Leonard, and Claver could be used to trade for a disgruntled all-star. Olshey could work the same magic he did in Clipperville when that time comes.

You are assuming that we would be like the old Blazers with bloated contracts. None of our contracts are bloated. They are actually extremely reasonable.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Wow.

I'll tell you what is flawed thinking:

Building an entire argument and trading strategy based on an assumption that LMA will leave in two years, without any real insight into what he will actually do.

Unless you have some insider, legit knowledge, this is the worst foundation and trade strategy on this thread.

See Post #63, and couple that with LMA's comments. Tell me what your foundation is that he's 100% staying here. What has your analysis of UFA All-Stars in the last half-decade led you to conclude about the chances of keeping LMA here?

 

[BrianFromWA]

Easy, we have a lot of tradable assets. Batum, Matthews, Leonard, and Claver could be used to trade for a disgruntled all-star. Olshey could work the same magic he did in Clipperville when that time comes.

I stand corrected. The old "Claver and Leonard for an All-Star" strategy slipped my mind.

 

[magnifier661]

I stand corrected. The old "Claver and Leonard for an All-Star" strategy slipped my mind.

That will never happen; but first rounder, Batum, and Matthews for a disgruntled all-star isn't hard to imagine. Fuck man, Clippers got Chris Paul for much less.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Just to be clear, Brian and I are coming from two very different places with regards to trading LMA. That's not to say I disagree with his theory of LMA leaving. I simply don't see LMA being a player who is going to matter in a Playoff/Championship push, while I DO see him as being the best vehicle for asset acquisition.

With that said, I DO think that we could keep LMA and make a few moves to put us into the Playoffs next season. But it's a team that won't get out of the first round. And then, as Brian points out, we're extremely limited in our ability to make additional improvements.

The way I see it, Lillard and LA are basically the Blazers only unique players. Everyone else is essentially replaceable pretty easily. I see them as a potentially great 1-2 punch....who..surrounded by good shooters and wing defenders, could be really good. Basically build it like the San Antonio Spurs model of things...Lillard can be our TP....LA can be our 37 year old Tim Duncan...and the rest we can just fill in. I mean how do the Spurs keep on adding these great players?

 

[RR7]

I stand corrected. The old "Claver and Leonard for an All-Star" strategy slipped my mind.

Way to leave Batum and Matthews out of your mention, to, like your LMA roster options, make things sound worse than presented.

 

[magnifier661]

Way to leave Batum and Matthews out of your mention, to, like your LMA roster options, make things sound worse than presented.

Right?!?! LMAO! I was thinking the very same thing.

 

[BrianFromWA]

We have no one on the roster, up to and including LMA, that is the same value as Eric Gordon at the trade time. Lillard's close. Pre-knee injury, 22ppg, 19 PER on a rookie contract. Add in MIN's unprotected first and a lotto pick also on his rookie contract. That's nowhere close to one of our 1sts after 2016 (the first one we can trade, assuming that 2014's goes to CHA), Wes and Batum.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Way to leave Batum and Matthews out of your mention, to, like your LMA roster options, make things sound worse than presented.

wait, you're staying all 4? You want to trade 2 of our core 4 starters and our first two off the bench for a "disgruntled all star"? As your big hope for keeping LMA and becoming a contender? Please, enlighten me. Assuming we trade those 4, name one person you're thinking of.

Edit: You too, Mags, since you want to pile on. Give me one name. It could even be historical. As in "Well, Melo got traded for X,Y,Z; and Wes/Batum/Leonard/Claver/post-2016 1st are similar to X,Y,Z, so we could get Granger" Or whatever. Right now I just see a lot of sniping in order to keep the pipe dream alive that a) LMA's staying, b) we're just a piece away from contention, and c) it'll happen in the next 2 years.

 

[magnifier661]

wait, you're staying all 4? You want to trade 2 of our core 4 starters and our first two off the bench for a "disgruntled all star"? As your big hope for keeping LMA and becoming a contender? Please, enlighten me. Assuming we trade those 4, name one person you're thinking of.

Edit: You too, Mags, since you want to pile on. Give me one name. It could even be historical. As in "Well, Melo got traded for X,Y,Z; and Wes/Batum/Leonard/Claver/post-2016 1st are similar to X,Y,Z, so we could get Granger" Or whatever. Right now I just see a lot of sniping in order to keep the pipe dream alive that a) LMA's staying, b) we're just a piece away from contention, and c) it'll happen in the next 2 years.

It's not all the players. They are just available assets. I can't give a scenario because I don't know who's available.

If there is a team with a disgruntled guard; than Matthews and batum is plenty.

 

[RR7]

not my hope at all. Just saying presenting it as Claver and Leonard for an all star is a bit disingenuous

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Wow, I guess it really is a slow news day.

 

[BrianFromWA]

It was also a lot sarcastic, but I meant what I said in post 80

 

[RR7]

It was also a lot sarcastic, but I meant what I said in post 80

Pau Gasol traded for expirings, 2 late firsts, and rights to a second rounder, to fit description. Could be disgruntled player, could be a team needing to rebuild and dump salary, especially under a new CBA.
You seem to want specifics of who we can fill in for LMA, give specifics of which contender LMA is going to sign with, and what free aents we're going to put around our core of
Lillard/Wes/Batum/Thompson/Len to make us a legit title contender.

 

[BoBoBREWSKI]

This reeks of a slow news day. When there's a draft as uninteresting as this year you get quite a few stories like this one. People just taking whatever uninteresting tidbits they can and try to stretch it into something suitable for consumption by the public. Sounds like he took the "Cavs interested in Aldridge" story from back in April and just expanded it to Deng and Granger.

I agree. No substance.

 

[RR7]

It was also a lot sarcastic, but I meant what I said in post 80

Also, the Carmelo deal can be similar. Gallinari as the centerpiece(Batum), expirings, Chandler is comparable to Wes, future pick, Mozgov, with Leonard as a younger/better prospect.

 

[OregonHuskerMan]

I'd trade LMA for Favors/Hayward/14 in a heartbeat.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I'd trade LMA for Favors/Hayward/14 in a heartbeat.

Was that bashed by someone? If so, they should have a 2 year ban

 

[OregonHuskerMan]

I said it earlier in the year, and plenty of people said that it wasn't "enough" and that Favors was nothing spectacular, if I recall correctly. (At the time, we didn't know the 14th pick would be Jazz, but thats obviously not the biggest part of the deal)