SharpesTriumph
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2018
- Messages
- 12,694
- Likes
- 11,417
- Points
- 113
Fair enough. But I think it’s unusual for a team to trade a quality player for a draft pick three years down the road. Most teams will want a return on their money sooner than that.
Its a benefit to have the picks many years out - not a cost.
Miami will be good next year. We don't want a pick from them soon. We want it way out in 2028 or 2030 when Pat Riley is in his mid 80's, Dame is 40, and that franchise has had multiple years of no young talent being added to the roster.
That pick can be traded in months, traded in years, or just help in order for the Blazers to add talent at a low cost if they can build a winner around Scoot and Sharpe with other tools. I wish we had got future assets like that back in a LaMarcus or Rasheed/etc trade. Even if it was 7 years out - that may have given us tools to build a winner around Dame. The franchise was shortsighted then. Lets hope they don't make the same mistake now with Scoot/Sharpe.
Saying you aren't interested in a draft pick 7 years from now is like saying you don't want Apple stock because it will not be liquidated for cash soon. You can trade it whenever you want, or just hold it for that time when a move makes sense. Having draft assets is always a good thing. Players eventually become free agents, leave, or stay and retire, or just decline and become overpaid/worthless. Draft picks will always have value, and if the Blazers get a lucky break with Miami future record or the lottery they could become a goldmine just as Boston got from the Nets in the Tatum/Brown duo.
Last edited: