Official Around the NBA April 2019 Playoff Edition

[Wizard Mentor]

It may be rude, but it's funny.

 

[blue9]

I love Nurk so dont get take this wrong, but is he trending towards being injury prone too?

I have kind of wondered about it. 2 of 3 post seasons here he’s been hurt.

This season is a fluke injury for Nurk, IMO. I'm not a doctor, but I think a broken bone is a freak injury and the timing is coincidental. Whereas Blake's injuries (and Nurk's previous injuries) are more likely to be tied to fatigue over the course of a season.
Now, I believe at least one of Blake's injuries was a result of him punching somebody, rather than a fatigue-related injury. But I think he's had way more fatigue-related injuries than non-fatigue. Could be wrong, but don't care enough to look it up.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

This season is a fluke injury for Nurk, IMO. I'm not a doctor, but I think a broken bone is a freak injury and the timing is coincidental. Whereas Blake's injuries (and Nurk's previous injuries) are more likely to be tied to fatigue over the course of a season.
Now, I believe at least one of Blake's injuries was a result of him punching somebody, rather than a fatigue-related injury. But I think he's had way more fatigue-related injuries than non-fatigue. Could be wrong, but don't care enough to look it up.

I agree with the injury this year was a freak injury, but Nurk has already had lower body leg injuries twice now. Usually for bigs (especially REALLY big) like Nurk that can be a scary path. I don't think it's time to say he is "injury prone" now, but I am a little more worried about it now then I was a couple of months ago.

 

[blue9]

I agree with the injury this year was a freak injury, but Nurk has already had lower body leg injuries twice now. Usually for bigs (especially REALLY big) like Nurk that can be a scary path. I don't think it's time to say he is "injury prone" now, but I am a little more worried about it now then I was a couple of months ago.

For sure. And we should definitely factor this into how we play him over the course of a season. Which means it should be a rather large factor in how the roster is built. Which means, not only is Kanter a significantly better player than Curry, he's also significantly more important to the team and keeping our second best player as healthy as possible.

 

[dviss1]

I love Nurk so dont get take this wrong, but is he trending towards being injury prone too?

I have kind of wondered about it. 2 of 3 post seasons here he’s been hurt.

Here's the thing, and I'm not accusing you kid it but I want to bring this to a complete stop:

People keep bringing up players other than the one we're talking about.

I'm kinda done with that.

That said, even though I think this is a freak type of injury, time will tell. The jury is still out on Nurkić.

 

[wizenheimer]

This is where I'm at, too. But I wouldn't even include Harkless. ET, Meyers, Gary and our pick. For me it's that SALARY coupled with his injuries/age that make me balk.

here's the issue I have with that idea:

BG - 36.5M/ year
Dame - 30.5M year
CJ - 28.5M
Nurk - 13M

that's 108.5M/year for just 4 players. That's right at the projected salary cap next season and only 24M below the tax line

unless Jody Allen wants to be paying 80M in luxury tax the next 2 seasons and putting the Blazers at risk of the repeater tax, that is not an affordable option. The only way to make it realistic (IMO) is to trade CJ. That way, at least the Blazers might still have a sufficient margin to put a good team around Dame-BG-Nurk

This season is a fluke injury for Nurk, IMO. I'm not a doctor, but I think a broken bone is a freak injury and the timing is coincidental. Whereas Blake's injuries (and Nurk's previous injuries) are more likely to be tied to fatigue over the course of a season.
Now, I believe at least one of Blake's injuries was a result of him punching somebody, rather than a fatigue-related injury. But I think he's had way more fatigue-related injuries than non-fatigue. Could be wrong, but don't care enough to look it up.

you may be right...

but I was around for the Walton era when he had several 'fluke' injuries (IIRC he even injured himself getting a drink of water from a fountain). People kept saying after each injury it was unlikely to be repeated, but he kept finding ways to put himself in crutches and slings

 

[dviss1]

Maybe if we just don't play Blake for the first 30-40 games he will be able to finish the season /playoffs

He'd still get hurt.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Here's the thing, and I'm not accusing you kid it but I want to bring this to a complete stop:

People keep bringing up players other than the one we're talking about.

I'm kinda done with that.

That said, even though I think this is a freak type of injury, time will tell. The jury is still out on Nurkić.

My question on Nurk was not intended to be relevant towards the BG injury conversation. Just a continuation and turn to more local things.

 

[dviss1]

My question on Nurk was not intended to be relevant towards the BG injury conversation. Just a continuation and turn to more local things.

Here's the thing, and I'm not accusing you of it

Is what it should've said. Damn autocorrect.

 

[tlongII]

Fuck Blake Griffin. I'm with @dviss1 on this one.

 

[Natebishop3]

I would trade Zach in a heartbeat for the right star. Not a fan of Blake though.

I'm not sold on Zach. I don't think he's going to be the star player we had hoped.

 

[blue9]

here's the issue I have with that idea:

BG - 36.5M/ year
Dame - 30.5M year
CJ - 28.5M
Nurk - 13M

that's 108.5M/year for just 4 players. That's right at the projected salary cap next season and only 24M below the tax line

unless Jody Allen wants to be paying 80M in luxury tax the next 2 seasons and putting the Blazers at risk of the repeater tax, that is not an affordable option. The only way to make it realistic (IMO) is to trade CJ. That way, at least the Blazers might still have a sufficient margin to put a good team around Dame-BG-Nurk

Yeah, even if we COULD get him for a package of peanuts I'd still pause - those dollars could be spent much more wisely.

Yup, we agree. Honestly, if we didn't have Turner I wouldn't even consider it. But Turner is such a steaming turd burger that getting rid of him - even at the cost of Blake's contract - is very enticing. But even then I'm still not sure it's worth it.

 

[blue9]

I would trade Zach in a heartbeat for the right star. Not a fan of Blake though.

I'm not sold on Zach. I don't think he's going to be the star player we had hoped.

I just want him to be a better defensive version of Udonis Haslem. Anything beyond that would exceed my expectations.

 

[dviss1]

but I was around for the Walton era

Modern medicine is MF. One day ACL and Achilles injuries will be like a month recovery.

 

[hoopsjock]

here's the issue I have with that idea:

BG - 36.5M/ year
Dame - 30.5M year
CJ - 28.5M
Nurk - 13M

that's 108.5M/year for just 4 players. That's right at the projected salary cap next season and only 24M below the tax line

unless Jody Allen wants to be paying 80M in luxury tax the next 2 seasons and putting the Blazers at risk of the repeater tax, that is not an affordable option. The only way to make it realistic (IMO) is to trade CJ. That way, at least the Blazers might still have a sufficient margin to put a good team around Dame-BG-Nurk

It's not as bad as your claiming. If we trade even salary for Blake (or anyone making a big salary) the finances don't change a whole lot next season. The following season the cap is supposed to jump to about $118 million.

Sure, it would make it difficult to add pieces around them as we'd have to bargain shop and have young guys fill out the roster. However that isn't any more difficult than making the team this summer better with limited options. Our top-4 would be better though so I'll take that route.

 

[crandc]

When @Spud147 and I are done with our takeover, Becky Hammon will be head coach, Gillian Murphy trainer, Cyndi Lauper will sing during halftime, and every Blazers fan in the arena gets a free chocolate.

 

[Natebishop3]

I just want him to be a better defensive version of Udonis Haslem. Anything beyond that would exceed my expectations.

It just sucks that we wasted such a high pick on him. He should have been a late first rounder.

 

[RSC60]

I would trade Zach in a heartbeat for the right star. Not a fan of Blake though.

I'm not sold on Zach. I don't think he's going to be the star player we had hoped.

Zach Collins is weak as fuck. I can’t believe he was the 10th pick. John Collins would have been perfect

 

[dviss1]

Zach Collins is weak as fuck. I can’t believe he was the 10th pick. John Collins would have been perfect

The team we smash every season partly because their starting PF its weak AF on D.

 

[dviss1]

CJ was a high pick too. Didn't flourish until his 3rd season.

Zach has showed flashes of greatness.

Cats acting like he should be producing now as a 20 year old big are asking too much IMO.

He only needs to get stronger physically. That's his issue.

 

[theprunetang]

When @Spud147 and I are done with our takeover, Becky Hammon will be head coach, Gillian Murphy trainer, Cyndi Lauper will sing during halftime, and every Blazers fan in the arena gets a free chocolate.

I hope you are making the chocolate treats.

Ps. Not a gross "women in the kitchen joke. I just know you make excellent desserts. If you remember, you sent me some brownies quite a few years back for winning gramp's prediction contest!

 

[Natebishop3]

CJ was a high pick too. Didn't flourish until his 3rd season.

Zach has showed flashes of greatness.

Cats acting like he should be producing now as a 20 year old big are asking too much IMO.

He only needs to get stronger physically. That's his issue.

No. I have been saying since day one..... DAY ONE...... that we didn't need another project big. I was not happy when we drafted him. I don't care if he has shown flashes. I don't care if he's 20 years old. Dame is getting older and we NEEDED guys that could produce NOW. We could have used those three draft picks to get someone that would be a part of our rotation now, not five years from now.

 

[wizenheimer]

It's not as bad as your claiming. If we trade even salary for Blake (or anyone making a big salary) the finances don't change a whole lot next season. The following season the cap is supposed to jump to about $118 million. Sure, it would make it difficult to add pieces around them as we'd have to bargain shop and have young guys fill out the roster.

just a FYI, that 118M projection has dropped to 116M

as far as me "claiming" it's bad, I really didn't...it was just the math of average salaries over the next 2 years for Dame-CJ-Nurk and 4 for BG. The margin in Portland's favor will be a little larger next season because of the first year rather then the average, but the raise in both salaries and the cap makes the overall connection consistent over the next 2 seasons. Granted, my "80M luxury tax" was pretty heavy hyperbole, but I had high-octane coffee this morning; don't blame me, blame coffee-bean direct

now, the trading "even salary" stuff....hmmm. ET + Meyers is 5M short. ET + Mo is about the same. And who really thinks that Detroit would be willing to trade Griffin for ET + Meyers + a couple of late future 1sts? Yeah, I know...expiring contracts, but if it comes to that, plenty of teams would have better expiring contract offers IMO, and several would have cap-space which trumps expirings

finally, let's assume somehow, the Piston GM lost his mind and traded Griffin for ET + Meyers, Then we're dealing with your "it would make it difficult to add pieces around them"....add Harkless and Portland is at 116M next year for 5 players. With Meyers gone, add Kanter for 8M. Add Zach, Simons, Skal, and Trent for a little over 10M. Portland is now 2M over the tax line...and they only have 10 players. Resign Hood for 4M. Add a couple of vet exceptions for 4-5M. Or resign Layman for 3-4M instead of one of the vets. Buy a 2nd round pick and add another million and you've got a team that's in the range of 11-14M over the tax line. I really wonder how good that team would be without Aminu and Curry, especially is what Dviss is worried about, a BG injury occurs

but this is how it always seems to go around here. Whether it's trade ideas for PG13, or Kawhi or Butler or Griffin, there are always a bunch of people (and apparently Olshey is one of them) believing that somehow Portland can offer their crap contracts and a couple of non-lottery picks and come away with a high tier player, a multi-time all-star. And the luxury tax be damned.

yeah, it would be great if Detroit would cooperate with this pipe-dream trade but I just think the Blazers are going to have to give-to-get in a trade unless they just confine themselves to trades like Biggie for Skal

 

[Orion Bailey]

No. I have been saying since day one..... DAY ONE...... that we didn't need another project big. I was not happy when we drafted him. I don't care if he has shown flashes. I don't care if he's 20 years old. Dame is getting older and we NEEDED guys that could produce NOW. We could have used those three draft picks to get someone that would be a part of our rotation now, not five years from now.

I get what you are saying but 5 years from now is hyperbole. There is a only one Meyers on this planet.

 

[B-Roy]

I've not given up on Collins but outside of some pretty nice defensive potential I don't think he's shown a lot to really be excited about. His offense doesn't come and go, it's basically nonexistent. He's not improved as a shooter and his finishing inside is spotty at best. Some of that may be remedied by him building some strength, but he's got a long way to go.

John Collins is absolutely the better play right now. Yes his defense is not as good as Zach's but he's also got a ton of legit NBA skills that are already highly developed. Aside from being a better rebounder, passer and finisher than Zach he's EVEN better in his three point shooting. Not to mention he's an excellent pick and roll big and we have THE BEST pick and roll point guard in the league.

So yeah, anyone taking Zach over John right now is crazy.

 

[crandc]

I hope you are making the chocolate treats.

Ps. Not a gross "women in the kitchen joke. I just know you make excellent desserts. If you remember, you sent me some brownies quite a few years back for winning gramp's prediction contest!

I do remember but not sure about brownies for 20,000 people

 

[hoopsjock]

just a FYI, that 118M projection has dropped to 116M

as far as me "claiming" it's bad, I really didn't...it was just the math of average salaries over the next 2 years for Dame-CJ-Nurk and 4 for BG. The margin in Portland's favor will be a little larger next season because of the first year rather then the average, but the raise in both salaries and the cap makes the overall connection consistent over the next 2 seasons. Granted, my "80M luxury tax" was pretty heavy hyperbole, but I had high-octane coffee this morning; don't blame me, blame coffee-bean direct

now, the trading "even salary" stuff....hmmm. ET + Meyers is 5M short. ET + Mo is about the same. And who really thinks that Detroit would be willing to trade Griffin for ET + Meyers + a couple of late future 1sts? Yeah, I know...expiring contracts, but if it comes to that, plenty of teams would have better expiring contract offers IMO, and several would have cap-space which trumps expirings

finally, let's assume somehow, the Piston GM lost his mind and traded Griffin for ET + Meyers, Then we're dealing with your "it would make it difficult to add pieces around them"....add Harkless and Portland is at 116M next year for 5 players. With Meyers gone, add Kanter for 8M. Add Zach, Simons, Skal, and Trent for a little over 10M. Portland is now 2M over the tax line...and they only have 10 players. Resign Hood for 4M. Add a couple of vet exceptions for 4-5M. Or resign Layman for 3-4M instead of one of the vets. Buy a 2nd round pick and add another million and you've got a team that's in the range of 11-14M over the tax line. I really wonder how good that team would be without Aminu and Curry, especially is what Dviss is worried about, a BG injury occurs

but this is how it always seems to go around here. Whether it's trade ideas for PG13, or Kawhi or Butler or Griffin, there are always a bunch of people (and apparently Olshey is one of them) believing that somehow Portland can offer their crap contracts and a couple of non-lottery picks and come away with a high tier player, a multi-time all-star. And the luxury tax be damned.

yeah, it would be great if Detroit would cooperate with this pipe-dream trade but I just think the Blazers are going to have to give-to-get in a trade unless they just confine themselves to trades like Biggie for Skal

There you go, moving the goalposts. I never said that a Detroit trade would happen, just disputing your belief that it is too much money if it did happen.

 

[Pinwheel1]

Who are you guys rooting for in the SA-Denver series in the case that the Blazers advance? Common sense says we want HCA, but damn the Spurs are looking like the tougher team right now. I still think I want the Spurs though

 

[Orion Bailey]

Who are you guys rooting for in the SA-Denver series in the case that the Blazers advance? Common sense says we want HCA, but damn the Spurs are looking like the tougher team right now. I still think I want the Spurs though

I want the Spurs too. If anything so When we kick thier ass, LMA wants to be back with us more than ever and demand a trade to us. Turner and a pick for LMA.

 

[Natebishop3]

I get what you are saying but 5 years from now is hyperbole. There is a only one Meyers on this planet.

That's not even remotely true. Name one big man that we have developed under Stotts?

Nurk came in and almost immediately started beasting, so he doesn't count.