UKRAINEFAN
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2008
- Messages
- 14,914
- Likes
- 12,080
- Points
- 113
7' 1" wingspanWell... he is 6'7"... And that's his LISTED height:
View attachment 40405
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
7' 1" wingspanWell... he is 6'7"... And that's his LISTED height:
View attachment 40405
Yeah, I don't think this move actually changes the starting lineup, but it gives the Blazers a lot more options and frankly I wouldn't be surprised to see an ultra small closing lineup with Dame-CJ-Norm-RoCo-Nance. It's small, but if Chauncey can get them to fly around and at least give effort, I think it could be very effective.I think there is a good argument for starting both Nance and RoCo.View attachment 40407
Whether Nance starts in place of CJ, Norm or Nurk is to be debated...
I don't think he will start but who knows what the roster looks like at the end of the season.
A deadline move of Powell for Jerami Grant would be absolutely perfect.
There is no hope if we get Simmons lmao.Agree that it's not the home run we wanted but under a different coach, I can see how it MIGHT work with Dame/CJ/Powell. Philly hasn't moved Simmons and Toronto hasn't moved Siakam so there's still hope.
incrementally, this makes us a better team and we turned a guy who wasn't in the rotation for someone who will, while being more versatile and on a terrific contract. Given the pieces we had to trade, this was a good move.At the end of the day, we have to ask, "is this enough to make Dame happy?"
If the answer is no, and I think that the answer is still no, then I'm not going to be jumping up and down with joy. But apparently that's me needing self-affirmation.
I think Mark Few would have loved him.Nance has always been underwhelming to me. But I guess a decent guy to have on the bench
I didn't either. Just trying to bring levity. We can't all be @SlyPokerDogi saw nothing wrong with what @Natebishop3 said?
incrementally, this makes us a better team and we turned a guy who wasn't in the rotation for someone who will, while being more versatile and on a terrific contract. Given the pieces we had to trade, this was a good move.
But if we're judging Olshey's offseason on his ability to turn CJ into a star forward, I think we're gonna be sorely disappointed despite whatever else he does along the margins.
I'm guessing with this Nance signing the chances of seeing LMA in a Blazer uniform again are next to none. I think I'm ok with that. I'd rather see a solid backup PG signed before another 4 right now anyway.
well if you take Dame at his word, there is no finite timeline. This move in a vacuum won't make the difference in potentially placating Dame, but it can't hurt. Roster is still quite imbalanced and Olshey still has work to do.The problem is that we don't know how much time we have to prove to Dame we're a contender. Is it the trade deadline? Is it until next offseason? Is it longer? Shorter? We don't know.
So incremental trades, while making the team better, might not move the needle enough to make Dame happy, and if we don't have a lot of time, it would appear that Neil is putting all his eggs in the Dame/CJ/Norm basket.
There's a lot of unknowns going into this next season. How good will Billups be? How much of a jump will Ant and Simons make? Will CJ play defense? What will Nurk look like under a new coach?
Chauncey benching CJ would be a baller power move.
![]()
I think we all discussed it when you brought up the idea last month, so now it's just a rehash of what we already concluded.Surprised there isn't more discussion here. This is the biggest move we've made all summer.
Sure, but does anyone really see that happening?Olshey trading him would even be better.
I think we all discussed it when you brought up the idea last month, so now it's just a rehash of what we already concluded.
well if you take Dame at his word, there is no finite timeline. This move in a vacuum won't make the difference in potentially placating Dame, but it can't hurt. Roster is still quite imbalanced and Olshey still has work to do.
The Powell at SF thing is still really bugging me. We just witnessed him get torched by Porter Jr in the playoffs-- why would anyone think he is a viable long term solution there? I absolutely get the asset play and retaining him, but surely we can't be done here. Either a CJ or Powell move need to be on the horizon come deadline for someone taller.
I would have expected more excitement at least. I mean, we actually made a move for once instead of just talking about it.
10 pages in a few hours... I'd say that's relative excitement here. Twitter has been abuzz even more-so. When other NBA analysts are applauding this move it tells me we did very well here... it might not be a blockbuster but it's a shrewd move and a great net positive gain in my book.I would have expected more excitement at least. I mean, we actually made a move for once instead of just talking about it.
I think we're all so caught up in the "CJ needs to be traded for a forward" mindset, that this just doesn't quite get motors revving.I would have expected more excitement at least. I mean, we actually made a move for once instead of just talking about it.
well if you take Dame at his word, there is no finite timeline. This move in a vacuum won't make the difference in potentially placating Dame, but it can't hurt. Roster is still quite imbalanced and Olshey still has work to do.
The Powell at SF thing is still really bugging me. We just witnessed him get torched by Porter Jr in the playoffs-- why would anyone think he is a viable long term solution there? I absolutely get the asset play and retaining him, but surely we can't be done here. Either a CJ or Powell move need to be on the horizon come deadline for someone taller.
I think we're all so caught up in the "CJ needs to be traded for a forward" mindset, that this just doesn't quite get motors revving.
Well he is still required to add one more player to meet the 14 requirement, so that's still there, but trade wise, he's done until the deadline. We don't really have moveable contracts at the moment, nor do we have control of draft picks in the coming year. And our young guys are probably of more value to us than other teams right now.I think Neil is done. He seems sold on this starting lineup. Nance just solidifies the bench. I'm just having a really hard time seeing him trade CJ.
Well he is still required to add one more player to meet the 14 requirement, so that's still there, but trade wise, he's done until the deadline. We don't really have moveable contracts at the moment, nor do we have control of draft picks in the coming year. And our young guys are probably of more value to us than other teams right now.
I'm gonna hold judgement until the deadline. I would like to turn Powell into something, ideally.
I think Neil is done. He seems sold on this starting lineup. Nance just solidifies the bench. I'm just having a really hard time seeing him trade CJ.
I believe that per the regulation the team must have 13 players on the roster, but they are getting surcharged if they do not have the average of 14 players on the roster that is guaranteed league wide per the CBA. This means that there will be someone else added to the roster at some point. When tho, is a good question.