Meeting between Dame and Cronin today

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
RonBrewer said:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...rossroads-portland-trail-blazers/70359577007/
Click to expand...

The worst thing about the slow roll this whole “will he, won’t he” thing is playing out it’s that it’s giving every nitwit with a keyboard a chance to pontificate about the situation without actually having any real information to base their gas-filled click bait pieces on. Some of the delay is inevitable because of dates baked into the off-season process, but it’s time for Dame to step up and say clearly what he means.
 
Mediocre Man said:
More to it. Blazers trying to appease Dame
Click to expand...

that's your narrow Dame-is-bad-influence interpretation that's you're locked into

it could also be that Portland was trying to construct a better team because better teams generate more revenue
 
Graduate32 said:
Honestly, a pretty well-written article, and it's hard not to agree regardless of what side the debate you're on.
Click to expand...

If you take Haynes out of the article, it does not look as bad. The two most annoying quotes came from him.
 
Mediocre Man said:
Depends on how far they go

COMPLETELY hypothetically….To appease Dame Draymond sign and trade but it costs us Sharpe. Are you on board?
Click to expand...

I'm on board with them keeping their word to him and putting an effort forth to do what's best for the Dame and the future.
 
wizenheimer said:
that's your narrow Dame-is-bad-influence interpretation that's you're locked into

it could also be that Portland was trying to construct a better team because better teams generate more revenue
Click to expand...
They did that by drafting Scoot. There was talks, serious ones, around that pick, Ant, Sharpe for veterans around 30 years old. All because Dame wants vets. AND GIID FIR HIM. I certainly don’t blame Dame for wanting better players around him, but when we landed Scoot, the players available to us weren’t worth that
 
Mediocre Man said:
Depends on how far they go

COMPLETELY hypothetically….To appease Dame Draymond sign and trade but it costs us Sharpe. Are you on board?
Click to expand...
Fuck no. I'd tell Dame to pound sand before trading away Sharpe.

I'd imagine some Dame fans would do that though.

Simons and filler is more than enough on their own. I'm still not certain Id do that though. If Dame is good with Cam Johnson I'd probably try that first. Or I might consider doing neither and just tell Dame sorry - decide for yourself if you want to play with young guys or request a trade - we'll help either way.

Problem too is matching salary - Sharpe isn't enough so we'd have to likely lose Ant as well. Ant and Sharpe for the right to pay Green $40 million per year and the team still losses? Fuck no.
 
Summary of the meeting is simple:

Dame has given the Blazers a couple weeks or so to show him that means actions NOT we tried BS that Cronin is king of -- again Time is ticking Cronin --- tick tock tick tock

I will say Sharpe and prolly Scoot off limits unless it means bringing in a Top 20 ish type player
 
Mediocre Man said:
They did that by drafting Scoot. There was talks, serious ones, around that pick, Ant, Sharpe for veterans around 30 years old. All because Dame wants vets. AND GIID FIR HIM. I certainly don’t blame Dame for wanting better players around him, but when we landed Scoot, the players available to us weren’t worth that
Click to expand...

but you have said, for weeks and weeks, that the Blazers were going to make bad trades to appease Dame. You just said it again. You practically guaranteed that the Blazers would trade the 3rd pick. You said they would quite possibly trade Sharpe AND #3 for a bad return. You said that several times

you have been constant in your predictions that Portland was going to make bad decisions. And your conviction that would happen has infused almost all of your posts here with extreme pessimism. That whichever direction the Blazers would go would be the worst of all possible directions, and whatever transactions Portland would make would be the worst of all possible transactions.

sure, there could be bad moves ahead. But what you predicted for Portland's pre-draft period, draft, and now, post draft period, did not happen. Maybe wait for something bad to actually happen before predicting more doom and gloom?
 
Natebishop3 said:
I don’t get a used car salesman vibe. If anything he’s just in over his head. He has the personality of an un-buttered dinner roll. I think he’s doing his best but I also think he has Bert and Jody watching his every move. I don’t envy the guy. They gave him the job because they most likely wanted someone they could control. He didn’t have to interview for the job.
Click to expand...

The man was in the building for 14 or 15 years, no? How do you know he did not interview? I am certain they have tons of knowledge of how he works and what he can bring to the job. He was basically promoted from within. It's absurd to assume there was no knowledge of his strengths and weaknesses.

Point by point:

"Over his head" - he seems like he knows what he wants and is diligently working to get there, started with tearing down a bad roster, signed assets he had to retain because he did not want to lose them for nothing, nailed 2 drafts in a row, created the framework to get Grant last year, tried to address a POA defender last year, once this backfired because of injury / whatever - quickly recovered by trading that asset and got a replacement in MT. I would argue that he seems like he is very well versed in understanding the complex job of rebuilding a roster on the fly trying to appease both a money situation, a need to win soon and prepare for the future.

"Has the owner / management watching his every move" - that's par for the course for every new leader in a specific role. Would seem like mismanagement if it did not happen.

"Gave him the job because he could be controlled" - well, duh, owners / management always want to ensure the success of the business and will not bring someone that opposes their goals. Can't really understand this qualm at all.

"He didn’t have to interview for the job" - As mentioned above, I doubt it very much, they had him in the building for a long time - even if there was no direct interview right now - he has been vetted for a long while and fits what management wants.

Frankly, sometimes I do not understand the arguments. If he makes a bad call, it's fair to criticize him. He made one in the GP2 signing, not necessarily knowing how the injury issue will unravel, but he clearly fixed it quickly and decisively.

The Dude clearly knows what he is doing. We agree he seems to try and do his best, but we disagree that he has no idea what is doing. It is very clear that he has a very clear idea of what he wants to do and he works diligently with what he has to work with to achieve it.

Does not ensure he will make it, because it is not all in his control, but every move seems measured, calculated and when it goes wrong, rectified when possible. Can't really ask for more than this, imho.
 
Last edited:
twobullz said:
What if Dame is not asking for a super star, but some veteran bench help?
Click to expand...

People keep saying this, but Dames frustrations all started after we lost to Denver and we had a veteran team. He has said he wants to compete. He has said he wants a punchers chance. Adding a couple veterans isn’t going to do that.
 
andalusian said:
The man was in the building for 14 or 15 years, no? How do you know he did not interview? I am certain they have tons of knowledge of how he works and what he can bring to the job. He was basically promoted from within. It's absurd to assume there was no knowledge of his strengths and weaknesses.

Point by point:

"Over his head" - he seems like he knows what he wants and is diligently working to get there, started with tearing down a bad roster, signed assets he had to retain because he did not want to lose them for nothing, nailed 2 drafts in a raw, created the framework to get Grant last year, tried to address a POA defender last year, once this backfired because of injury / whatever - quickly recovered by trading that asset and got a replacement in MT. I would argue that he seems like he is very well versed in understanding the complex job of rebuilding a roster on the fly trying to appease both a money situation, a need to win soon and prepare for the future.

"Has the owner / management watching his every move" - that's par for the course for every new leader in a specific role. Would seem like mismanagement if it did not happen.

"Gave him the job because he could be controlled" - well, duh, owners / management always want to ensure the success of the business and will not bring someone that opposes their goals. Can't really understand this qualm at all.

"He didn’t have to interview for the job" - As mentioned above, I doubt it very much, they had him in the building for a long time - even if there was no direct interview right now - he has been vetted for a long while and fits what management wants.

Frankly, sometimes I do not understand the arguments. If he makes a bad call, it's fair to criticize him. He made one in the GP2 signing, not necessarily knowing how the injury issue will unravel, but he clearly fixed it quickly and decisively.

The Dude clearly knows what he is doing. We agree he seems to try and do his best, but we disagree that he has no idea what is doing. It is very clear that he has a very clear idea of what he wants to do and he works diligently with what he has to work with to achieve it.

Does not ensure he will make it, because it is not all in his control, but every move seems measured, calculated and when it goes wrong, rectified when possible. Can't really ask for more than this, imho.
Click to expand...
Because teams usually make it public when they go through an interview process. They bring in other candidates. Did that happen?
 
Natebishop3 said:
People keep saying this, but Dames frustrations all started after we lost to Denver and we had a veteran team. He has said he wants to compete. He has said he wants a punchers chance. Adding a couple veterans isn’t going to do that.
Click to expand...
How many games did the second unit get abused last year. How many times did they put up less then 20 points. It was a lot. The starters could only do so much then the bench would get destroyed.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Because teams usually make it public when they go through an interview process. They bring in other candidates. Did that happen?
Click to expand...

When they promote from within? Absolutely not. They had to fire NeO (or were looking for an excuse, whatever) - and they had someone from within they know and trust. There is no requirement to interview if you believe you already have the right person on the payroll.

For example, imagine that Dame requests a trade next year - will the Blazers have to go look in the trade market for a replacement PG if they believe at this point they have the replacement already on the roster in Scoot? Same could happen here. They had him around for a long time to know what they wanted to know. His long employment time is basically his very long interview.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top