Plausible destinations for our vets? (1 Viewer)

[Phatguysrule]

I agree, he does have skills that can help a winning team. He just turned 25 and has yet to enter his prime, so why not keep players who are young enough to help us win in the future? The league already knows what Ant can and can not do. His value will not diminish because the rest of the league becomes more familiar with him.

Trading him for someone worse (for matching salary purposes) just so we can get a future non-lottery pick, is not worth the daily posts on the subject. It won't get us a star.

Labeling him as an ISO player because he is one of the few players on this team who can create his own shot is what makes no sense to me, nor does tanking for multiple years after this next one. At some point, you will have lost most of the fan base.

I think another year after this one could be enough for tanking, if we get good draft picks out of Grant and Ant.

If Ant and/or Grant is on this team playing big minutes the ball will not move. The offense will not flow the way it needs to.

Ant will not likely help this team develop into a winner. He will more likely prevent that development by being the wrong kind of player for this team at the wrong time.

I haven't posted about Ant in well over a week. Maybe two. That doesn't change the fact that he kills the offensive flow and flat out kills any chance of us playing good defense.

The fan base is already gone. They left with Dame. They'll come back when we're in the path to championships.

 

[Pinwheel1]

If Ant and/or Grant is on this team playing big minutes the ball will not move. The offense will not flow the way it needs to.

If that were the case, then that is a coaching problem, not a player's problem.

 

[Phatguysrule]

If that were the case, then that is a coaching problem, not a player's problem.

We're not going to get a good coach until we have a great young team.

We're not going to have a great young team if 2 of the top players are Ant and Grant.

Is the solution just changing coaches every season until we luck into a good one so that we can hang on to two flawed players with significant problems in rebounding and defense?

I think that's a great way to suck for a very long.

*Edit* And what is the coach going to do? Bench Ant and Grant while playing less capable players ahead of them?

That ought to tank their value pretty good...

The smart thing to do is get the best value possible this season for both Ant and Grant. The sooner the better.

 

[Pinwheel1]

We're not going to get a good coach until we have a great young team.

We're not going to have a great young team if 2 of the top players are Ant and Grant.

Is the solution just changing coaches every season until we luck into a good one so that we can hang on to two flawed players with significant problems in rebounding and defense?

I think that's a great way to suck for a very long.

You keep grouping them together. Grant and Ant are two different scenarios. 5 years is not a huge difference but in this case, it makes sense to trade Grant's contract.

I don't think Ant is thee top player on the team, he is just one of the good young players 26 and under (Ayton turned 26 yesterday) that I would keep unless a good deal came along. That can be said about all of them.

I also was not advocating to fire Chauncey. I was just saying if the ball movement really was an issue then it is his responsibility to fix it. But I also think the more quality players you have on the court the better shot distribution will be. We saw that with Dame as well. When he was surrounded by Aminu, Harkless, and Plumlee, he needed to shoot.....a lot!

 

[Hoopguru]

I think if Ant is still here? He will/can play off the ball more as we also have Deny. Imo, the way the game is reliant on the three, you can never have too many gun slingers, just ask Dallas & Boston.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Does anyone here honestly believe Scoot will be a top 3 point guard in the league within the next five years? From what I’ve seen, while the sampling is small, I doubt he would ever crack the top ten. Move on.

None of our players will be top 3 at their position within the next five years, so should we just get rid of everyone?

 

[Boomchakalaka2]

None of our players will be top 3 at their position within the next five years, so should we just get rid of everyone?

YES! Simple answer. I think our best hope might be Sharpe, but he’s got to play for this to have a chance at happening within the next five years. But I said that I don’t think Scoot will ever crack the top ten point guards. In five years Clingan might be a top ten center.

 

[Boomchakalaka2]

He could. I'm certainly not sure he won't. But I'm not sure he will either.

I definitely wouldn't count on it either way.

LOL

 

[sheed30]

The mistake would be keeping Simons until Scoot proves he's our PG of the future or takes the spot from Simons.

If Scoot doesn't prove he's the PG of the future that doesn't mean Simons is.

Need to move Simons for the best draft capital possible as soon as possible.

Simons value isn't likely to improve beyond this season. In fact, we may already be seeing diminishing returns as the rest of the league becomes more familiar with him.

Needing to move Simmons for the best draft capital around is dumb as hell. You keep pushing this narrative over and over and repeating yourself over and over lol.

 

[sheed30]

I agree, he does have skills that can help a winning team. He just turned 25 and has yet to enter his prime, so why not keep players who are young enough to help us win in the future? The league already knows what Ant can and can not do. His value will not diminish because the rest of the league becomes more familiar with him.

Trading him for someone worse (for matching salary purposes) just so we can get a future non-lottery pick, is not worth the daily posts on the subject. It won't get us a star.

Labeling him as an ISO player because he is one of the few players on this team who can create his own shot is what makes no sense to me, nor does tanking for multiple years after this next one. At some point, you will have lost most of the fan base.

Preach bro, these guys are big time Ant haters and try to push a narrative on this board. Basically him and one other guy lol

 

[sheed30]

If that were the case, then that is a coaching problem, not a player's problem.

Not only that, but maybe it’s there were forced into that kinda basketball because of the poor talent we have surrounding them. Grant wasn’t like that in his first season with us when we had Dame. It’s more of product of what little talent is around them. People are weird in here lol.

maybe, just maybe if Scoot and Sharpe improve, they can take the load off those two. But no one is saying that lol

 

[BIG Q]

Not only that, but maybe it’s there were forced into that kinda basketball because of the poor talent we have surrounding them. Grant wasn’t like that in his first season with us when we had Dame. It’s more of product of what little talent is around them. People are weird in here lol.

maybe, just maybe if Scoot and Sharpe improve, they can take the load off those two. But no one is saying that lol

So basically let Ant run like Dame 2.0? Everybody stand around and watch him do his thing? Portland has the wrong personnel for that. They need knock down shooters that can also defend to make up for the lead offensive player being the worst defender.

 

[sheed30]

So basically let Ant run like Dame 2.0? Everybody stand around and watch him do his thing? Portland has the wrong personnel for that. They need knock down shooters that can also defend to make up for the lead offensive player being the worst defender.

You completely missed the point. Grant and Ant had better usage in less shot attempts in the season they had with Dame.

Basically, if Sharpe and Scoot improve, we can depend less on Ant and Grant, and it opens things up for everyone. Part of the problem last year was not Grant and Ant, is was the poor players around him forcing them to do more than they should.

 

[Cugel]

So Grant and Ant dont want to be the number 1/2 options? Goes against everything I know about human nature. They want to defer to younger players and have their numbers go down? Not buying it. They are very ball dominant players on offense. That is their game.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

 

[Samuel]

View attachment 65378

Can we hear your rationale?

 

[RR7]

Can we hear your rationale?

I'm not OP, but sheds a ton of long term salary, and Cam is likely flippable for a few more small assets. Shaves 46 million off of the payroll next year. A lot of rebuilding teams have been able to use cap space to take on salary and assets to help in a rebuild. We're near the tax and have been so far unable to do so. This would provide that opportunity for us as soon as next offseason.

 

[Hoopguru]

If Ant is not traded by season start I could see Chauncy starting him at the two with Scoot running the offense. Shae would Start at three, and also back up Simons. He can play off the ball and giving Scoot the pg reins keeps Ant form controlling the ball as a pg. His natural position imo, is off guard anyway.

 

[Pinwheel1]

If Ant is not traded by season start I could see Chauncy starting him at the two with Scoot running the offense. Shae would Start at three, and also back up Simons. He can play off the ball and giving Scoot the pg reins keeps Ant form controlling the ball as a pg. His natural position imo, is off guard anyway.

I think we will see a Scoot, Ant, Shae, Deni, and Ayton lineup at times, but I would not start the games with it.

 

[Pinwheel1]

I'm not OP, but sheds a ton of long term salary, and Cam is likely flippable for a few more small assets. Shaves 46 million off of the payroll next year. A lot of rebuilding teams have been able to use cap space to take on salary and assets to help in a rebuild. We're near the tax and have been so far unable to do so. This would provide that opportunity for us as soon as next offseason.

I guess for those who don't like Ayton it would be a good move. I am not one of those. I think dumping Grant and Thybulle's 40 million this year would make more sense. Although I would imagine Thybille will opt out in 11 months, so I guess he won't make much of a difference for next summer.

 

[wizenheimer]

If Ant is not traded by season start I could see Chauncy starting him at the two with Scoot running the offense. Shae would Start at three, and also back up Simons. He can play off the ball and giving Scoot the pg reins keeps Ant form controlling the ball as a pg. His natural position imo, is off guard anyway.

I don't like any scenario that has Sharpe starting, out of position, at SF just to accommodate Ant starting at SG

beside that, if Grant isn't traded, and I don't believe he will be (yes, I might be wrong), it will be Avdija and Grant starting at forwards

by the way, last season, in the 20 most used 2-man lineups, Ant/Scoot were by far the worst (points = per 100-possessions):

Rk Lineup PTS
▼
18 D. Ayton | J. Walker -17.0
19 J. Grant | S. Henderson -17.2
20 S. Henderson | A. Simons -20.4

and the last season, 2022-23, with Dame:

Rk Lineup PTS
▼
1 D. Eubanks | J. Hart +5.8
2 D. Lillard | S. Sharpe +5.7
3 J. Hart | D. Lillard +5.0
4 D. Eubanks | D. Lillard +4.2
17 S. Sharpe | A. Simons -7.9
18 S. Sharpe | T. Watford -9.1
19 J. Grant | S. Sharpe -9.3
20 N. Little | S. Sharpe -10.7

it's a bit amazing, but not surprising I guess, that Dame/Sharpe were 13.6 points/100-possessions better than Ant/Sharpe. So, if you're using those lineup numbers as a gauge for starting all 3 of Scoot-Ant-Sharpe, I guess the tank will be safe

more than all that though: after all of the chatter about the Blazers, finally, at long last, building a taller-longer roster, with Sharpe at SF, the Blazers would be starting their 3 shortest players. Scoot is about average height for PG's; maybe a bit taller. But Ant and Sharpe, at SG and SF, would both be about 2.0-2.5 inches shorter than average. When will it end

 

[Natebishop3]

View attachment 65378

Why would Brooklyn do this? They're tanking. They got their picks back.

 

[Mediocre Man]

YES! Simple answer. I think our best hope might be Sharpe, but he’s got to play for this to have a chance at happening within the next five years. But I said that I don’t think Scoot will ever crack the top ten point guards. In five years Clingan might be a top ten center.

So the only way you will be satisfied is if ALL of our players are top 3 at their position

 

[Foxx]

If Ant is not traded by season start I could see Chauncy starting him at the two with Scoot running the offense. Shae would Start at three, and also back up Simons. He can play off the ball and giving Scoot the pg reins keeps Ant form controlling the ball as a pg. His natural position imo, is off guard anyway.

Idk if I see starting Shae as some major deal. We’re better off with one of the three guards embracing super 6th/7th man, he’s still gonna get his minutes. Seems like the most quiet and humble dude in the world, probably doesn’t care right now if he gets his PT still.

All three guards starting means someone is out of position, not a good idea while we actually have a deep squad at each position.

Scoot/Dalano / Ant
Ant / Shae / Rupert
Deni/ Shae/ Toumani / Murray
JG / Toumani / Jabari/ DA
DA / DC / Reath or Jabari

at the end of the day, it’s gonna be a lot of shuffling anyway but I think day one rotation shakes out something like this. Didn’t even bother with Matisse cause I can’t stand his game even if he did survive the offseason sry. Timelord tbd..

if and when we trade Jerami, I’m expecting toumani starts at 4. Splits position with Jabari primarily. Everything else applies. I think we keep Ant since his value is by far higher to us than anyone else and I don’t see that changing anytime soon.

 

[Hoopguru]

I don't like any scenario that has Sharpe starting, out of position, at SF just to accommodate Ant starting at SG

beside that, if Grant isn't traded, and I don't believe he will be (yes, I might be wrong), it will be Avdija and Grant starting at forwards

by the way, last season, in the 20 most used 2-man lineups, Ant/Scoot were by far the worst (points = per 100-possessions):

Rk Lineup PTS
▼
18 D. Ayton | J. Walker -17.0
19 J. Grant | S. Henderson -17.2
20 S. Henderson | A. Simons -20.4

and the last season, 2022-23, with Dame:

Rk Lineup PTS
▼
1 D. Eubanks | J. Hart +5.8
2 D. Lillard | S. Sharpe +5.7
3 J. Hart | D. Lillard +5.0
4 D. Eubanks | D. Lillard +4.2
17 S. Sharpe | A. Simons -7.9
18 S. Sharpe | T. Watford -9.1
19 J. Grant | S. Sharpe -9.3
20 N. Little | S. Sharpe -10.7

it's a bit amazing, but not surprising I guess, that Dame/Sharpe were 13.6 points/100-possessions better than Ant/Sharpe. So, if you're using those lineup numbers as a gauge for starting all 3 of Scoot-Ant-Sharpe, I guess the tank will be safe

more than all that though: after all of the chatter about the Blazers, finally, at long last, building a taller-longer roster, with Sharpe at SF, the Blazers would be starting their 3 shortest players. Scoot is about average height for PG's; maybe a bit taller. But Ant and Sharpe, at SG and SF, would both be about 2.0-2.5 inches shorter than average. When will it end

Get that, but next year is a fuck it year, and IF Ant is still on the team, to play around with Shae at 3 at different times, isn't going to hurt him. His primary position is a 2. Look at how the Knicks use three small guards from time to time. The ideas is not allowing Ant as a natural 2 guard dominate the ball as a pg and give Scoot the pg minutes. Ant is still probably the best on the team and creating his own shot, just have him do it off ball. Ive been all for trading Ant but not for a pick in 2030 or later. Either Joe doesn't want to take a low ball offer and doesn't feel an urgency, or, he is simply incompetent in the trade market? This was either worse or second worse, shooting team last year. And right now Shae is probably the next best shooter to Ant, on the team. Within 3 three years there may be only 1/2 players left from this current team. As Curry just commented "he doesn't want to be part of a cellar dweller team"for the end of his career. Well, if we hit the lotto and get a Flag we best have more than role playing youngins as his support, we will need a few solid vets to help his game develop. This is our 4th tanking season and we acquired a young #1 draft pick, and drafted 3 and 7 at some point you must grow as a team for wins. Or our reputation as a small market team will get even worse.

 

[Cugel]

Most plausible is the mf'ing moda center.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Can we hear your rationale?

I really like Cam Johnson! He gives us shooting, defense and rebounding at a younger age than Grant. Also I don't think there's actually much market for our guys, so I think we'll be mildly disappointed in the return we get for them, and will probably have to take back a bad contract, so it might as well be a short-term one. (In fact, I think if Blazers FO proposed this it would be the Nets who would say no.)

 

[Rastapopoulos]

I'm not OP, but sheds a ton of long term salary, and Cam is likely flippable for a few more small assets. Shaves 46 million off of the payroll next year. A lot of rebuilding teams have been able to use cap space to take on salary and assets to help in a rebuild. We're near the tax and have been so far unable to do so. This would provide that opportunity for us as soon as next offseason.

Yeah - that too!

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Why would Brooklyn do this? They're tanking. They got their picks back.

They probably don't. But a man can dream.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

If Ant is not traded by season start I could see Chauncy starting him at the two with Scoot running the offense. Shae would Start at three, and also back up Simons. He can play off the ball and giving Scoot the pg reins keeps Ant form controlling the ball as a pg. His natural position imo, is off guard anyway.

I hate this lineup but we would certainly lose a lot of games with it, which I guess is this year's goal. But it seems unlikely given that it requires one of Jerami, Avdija or Ayton sitting.