Exclusive Playoffs or Lottery? (5 Viewers)

[TBpup]

Blazers are now tied for the #8 pick in the Lottery. If Portland were to go on a 15 game winning streak and #7 Memphis were to maintain their current pace, Portland would still be a game back of the #7 seed.

A 15 game winning streak and still no higher than 8th. This season is all but over.

 

[riverman]

Blazers are now tied for the #8 pick in the Lottery. If Portland were to go on a 15 game winning streak and #7 Memphis were to maintain their current pace, Portland would still be a game back of the #7 seed.

A 15 game winning streak and still no higher than 8th. This season is all but over.

Olshey is facing his biggest challenge as a GM right about now.....it's like the worst teams will have to shuffle amongst themselves at the deadline to shed salary or try and shore up gaping holes

 

[tlongII]

We need to tank. We are horrible.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

Tank city!

This is a really strong draft.

 

[Gronk Brady]

I'm all in for tanking... more for having an asset to use in trade. It's not like our players don't have playoff experience. Blazers just need to balance the roster out. The better draft pick the better chance to acquire a game changing player to make this team a real contender.

 

[TBpup]

They certainly need something because for the most part, they aren't even competing against over .500 teams. The Toronto game was great but seem very much like an aberration and we caught them not expecting traps which we hadn't really done all year. Same with San Antonio in the 1st half but then Pops made an adjustment at halftime (note to Stotts), Stotts went small, and the defensive run was over.

At one point, Portland had a 40-26 lead. Later in the 4th quarter, SA was up 104-84. That is a 78-44 run in about 2 1/2 quarters of play.....without their best player. We were without our best scorer but if Dame/CJ are both playing, history tells us they would have scored even more.

 

[TBpup]

The Kings just lost to the Grizzlies so Portland is now 2 losses (1 game) out of the #8 Playoff spot but also 3 losses (4.5 games) out of the #1 Lottery pick.

Dilemma. Which gives you more hope? A meeting with the Warriors that if healthy, will likely result in a thrashing, or the chance to get a game changer like Jordan, Lebron etc?

 

[Orion Bailey]

The Kings just lost to the Grizzlies so Portland is now 2 losses (1 game) out of the #8 Playoff spot but also 3 losses (4.5 games) out of the #1 Lottery pick.

Dilemma. Which gives you more hope? A meeting with the Warriors that if healthy, will likely result in a thrashing, or the chance to get a game changer like Jordan, Lebron etc?

Wait now though. I think you are overstating the draft a bit. I have heard many times it is a very good draft, there is no doubt about it, but I have also heard nothing of the sort about the upside being a Lebron or MJ for anyone in this draft. Ive heard Kawhi Leonard of Josh Jackson and that's it. IF there are other players who have this noted upside, Id love to read a link or two and maybe my perspective of this draft will change and if there are several players of that caliber, then we SHOULD be going for the lottery.
I dont see it though. Most of the smalls are freshman and I haven't read anything showing those names you indicated as being a potential peak.

 

[blue9]

Dilemma. Which gives you more hope? A meeting with the Warriors that if healthy, will likely result in a thrashing, or the chance to get a game changer like Jordan, Lebron etc?

Lotto! Lotto! Lotto!
Don't tank, but don't run the players into the ground trying to get swept in the 1st round either. Develop Vonleh. Get Jake 10mpg. Trade Ed, Meyers and/or Aminu to a team vying for a 7th/8th seed spot for another pick (SAC? CHI? IND?).

 

[BlayZa]

we just gonna all act like he aint got links to hot women on his browser as a shortcut for common regular and consistent use?

 

[TBpup]

Wait now though. I think you are overstating the draft a bit. I have heard many times it is a very good draft, there is no doubt about it, but I have also heard nothing of the sort about the upside being a Lebron or MJ for anyone in this draft. Ive heard Kawhi Leonard of Josh Jackson and that's it. IF there are other players who have this noted upside, Id love to read a link or two and maybe my perspective of this draft will change and if there are several players of that caliber, then we SHOULD be going for the lottery.
I dont see it though. Most of the smalls are freshman and I haven't read anything showing those names you indicated as being a potential peak.

Not overstating. I said "the chance to get....". You never know how a player will turn out. Michael Jordan was drafted 3rd because people had no idea he would become as good as he did. Clyde Drexler was #14. But to your point, I would take a Kawhi Leonard type in a heartbeat.

 

[Minstrel]

The Kings just lost to the Grizzlies so Portland is now 2 losses (1 game) out of the #8 Playoff spot but also 3 losses (4.5 games) out of the #1 Lottery pick.

Dilemma. Which gives you more hope? A meeting with the Warriors that if healthy, will likely result in a thrashing, or the chance to get a game changer like Jordan, Lebron etc?

More like a chance to get a player like Andrew Wiggins. Which, right now, looks more like a nice player to have but not a franchise-changer.

It all depends on what you mean by "tank." Trade away Lillard? Trade McCollum just for draft picks, not a similar talent? Tell the players to play worse?

I've never been a big fan of the traditional concept of tanking--trading away any useful players for draft picks and/or expiring deals. I think you get closer to contention faster by building on what you have than by discarding it all for a "fresh start." If an amazing package of draft picks came along for McCollum, sure, do it. You should always be flexible enough to take advantage of a great opportunity when you can get it. But I wouldn't advocate trading McCollum for draft picks just to do it. I'd prefer to trade him for another young-prime player who may be a bit less good offensively but is much better defensively and work on upgrading the defensive infrastructure around Lillard/New Guy/Harkless.

Last year's second half was a glimpse of what the Blazers could be, in my opinion, with more good defenders. What that team fluked their way towards it's worth actually trying to build for real.

 

[ripcityboy]

Embrace mediocrity. Ride the rollercoaster of all the way to the quick pay off!

 

[TBpup]

I don't like the idea of abject tanking. However, if the starters are producing these results, play 'The Closers' a little more and see what you've got. You can't do much worse and it won't be an obvious tank....just spreading out the minutes. Besides, Dame doesn't need to be leading the league in mpg game especially when we aren't winning.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Not overstating. I said "the chance to get....". You never know how a player will turn out. Michael Jordan was drafted 3rd because people had no idea he would become as good as he did. Clyde Drexler was #14. But to your point, I would take a Kawhi Leonard type in a heartbeat.

Gotcha. I took the "chance to get" as in the chance to get one of the top three picks, not a chance they turn into. Got it.

 

[Orion Bailey]

More like a chance to get a player like Andrew Wiggins. Which, right now, looks more like a nice player to have but not a franchise-changer.

It all depends on what you mean by "tank." Trade away Lillard? Trade McCollum just for draft picks, not a similar talent? Tell the players to play worse?

I've never been a big fan of the traditional concept of tanking--trading away any useful players for draft picks and/or expiring deals. I think you get closer to contention faster by building on what you have than by discarding it all for a "fresh start." If an amazing package of draft picks came along for McCollum, sure, do it. You should always be flexible enough to take advantage of a great opportunity when you can get it. But I wouldn't advocate trading McCollum for draft picks just to do it. I'd prefer to trade him for another young-prime player who may be a bit less good offensively but is much better defensively and work on upgrading the defensive infrastructure around Lillard/New Guy/Harkless.

Last year's second half was a glimpse of what the Blazers could be, in my opinion, with more good defenders. What that team fluked their way towards it's worth actually trying to build for real.

Cant try to win every game and then trade up? Who has #3, Phi Right?

Our two 1sts and a filler like Ezeli for cap space or something?
Our two firsts and Crabbe?

What would it take to get the top 3 pick? If we can do that without giving up Dame & CJ, then CJ becomes our 6tgh man or you trade him for DMC or something.

The more I think about it and the more I watch the Blazers play, I cant stand it, but we must break Dame and CJ up.
I think this is the best way to to it. Put a rookie with incredible potential next to Dame and then use CJ to trade for an elite big. We will be in the mix again next year and the year after should be contending.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Assuming there isn't some roster saving consolidation trade on the horizon, if they're still mired in .300-.400 ball by the trade deadline, then I wouldn't be opposed to a "reset" of sorts. Not necessarily a "Trading CJ or Damian for prospects or picks" kind of reset, but dump other players for picks or prospects -- guys like Aminu, Harkless, Davis, Plumlee, Nards (whoever) and try to get out of Luxury Tax territory.

Some might balk at going young or the spectre of rebuilding and potentially getting stuck in multiple losing seasons, but we might already be staring into that abyss.

Whatever happens this team needs an infusion of talent and some kind of shakeup, even if Damian and CJ are the foundation moving forward. Hopefully it doesn't come to that and Neil can pull off (what is typically an unlikely) trade for a star on par with Boogie, Paul George, et al.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Assuming there isn't some roster saving consolidation trade on the horizon, if they're still mired in .300-.400 ball by the trade deadline, then I wouldn't be opposed to a "reset" of sorts. Not necessarily a "Trading CJ or Damian for prospects or picks" kind of reset, but dump other players for picks or prospects -- guys like Aminu, Harkless, Davis, Plumlee, Nards (whoever) and try to get out of Luxury Tax territory.

Some might balk at going young or the spectre of rebuilding and potentially getting stuck in multiple losing seasons, but we might already be staring into that abyss. Whatever happens this team needs an infusion of talent and some kind of shakeup, even if Damian and CJ are the foundation moving forward.

Hopefully it doesn't come to that and Neil can pull off (what is typically an unlikely) trade for a star on par with Boogie, Paul George, et al.

The one thing about trading some of our roster for picks and then potentially trading CJ(and one or two fillers) for DMC is it will do three things simultaneously.

Balance the roster

Something along the lines of:

Dame
#3 Draft Josh Jackson
Harkless or Turner(would need to keep one of the two
DMC
Plums

I think that's a much better balanced starting 5 and we just need fill the bench.

I do like the idea of packaging our picks/Crabbe/Davis/Aminu
For Noel and a #3 pick. Toss in a combo of Ezeli/Harkless/Plums to make it happen, but not all three(avoid giving up Hark if possible)
I think we have the chips enough to make a trade like that without involving CJ

Then use CJ and whatever else it might take to get DMC IF he agrees to resign.

That would be

Dame
Jackson
Harkless
DMC
Noel

Fill in the bench any way you can because that starting five will compete with almost any team in the league. But as long as DMC agrees to a resign, then we are mostly locked in.

Dame/$25 mil?
Jackson/Rookie Contract
Harkless/$10mil
DMC/$27-28mil?
Noel/resign at $12mil?

So that's about $85-$90 mill. That will leave $15-20 mill to fill in the bench.

IS this even remotely close to being able to happen?

 

[Nikolokolus]

The one thing about trading some of our roster for picks and then potentially trading CJ(and one or two fillers) for DMC is it will do three things simultaneously.

Balance the roster

Something along the lines of:

Dame
#3 Draft Josh Jackson
Harkless or Turner(would need to keep one of the two
DMC
Plums

I think that's a much better balanced starting 5 and we just need fill the bench.

I do like the idea of packaging our picks/Crabbe/Davis/Aminu
For Noel and a #3 pick. Toss in a combo of Ezeli/Harkless/Plums to make it happen, but not all three(avoid giving up Hark if possible)
I think we have the chips enough to make a trade like that without involving CJ

Then use CJ and whatever else it might take to get DMC IF he agrees to resign.

That would be

Dame
Jackson
Harkless
DMC
Noel

Fill in the bench any way you can because that starting five will compete with almost any team in the league. But as long as DMC agrees to a resign, then we are mostly locked in.

Dame/$25 mil?
Jackson/Rookie Contract
Harkless/$10mil
DMC/$27-28mil?
Noel/resign at $12mil?

So that's about $85-$90 mill. That will leave $15-20 mill to fill in the bench.

IS this even remotely close to being able to happen?

We're not getting Boogie without giving up at minimum CJ and even that is unlikely. He's better than Damian on the court. Sac isn't giving him up cheaply and certainly not when they are in the playoff hunt.

So no, not likely and probably impossible.

 

[Orion Bailey]

We're not getting Boogie without giving up at minimum CJ and even that is unlikely. He's better than Damian on the court. Sac isn't giving him up cheaply and certainly not when they are in the playoff hunt.

So no, not likely and probably impossible.

I gave up CJ and a filler or whatever else it would take for DMC. Did you not read my post?

Though I hit send without finishing.

So it balances the roster, It gets us back under the cap so we have money to play with and it keeps us a player in the west without bottom dwelling for a few years.


Basically I am saying we are giving up CJ and the bulk of our roster and our picks (we need to keep one of Hark or Turner, prefer Hark for more upside and less money) for DMC/Noel/#3 pick.


So...
Plumlee/Turner/Crabbe/Aminu/Davis/Ezeli/2-1st rd draft picks and CJ for DMC/Noel/#3pick.

Is that not even remotely possible?

 

[TBpup]

So...
Plumlee/Turner/Crabbe/Aminu/Davis/Ezeli/2-1st rd draft picks and CJ for DMC/Noel/#3pick.

Is that not even remotely possible?

A couple more losses and we won't have to give up anything for the #3 pick.

 

[Orion Bailey]

A couple more losses and we won't have to give up anything for the #3 pick.

As long as they aren't purposeful! lol
But yeah, see. I think our pick will be high enough so to figure out how to trade up to #3 should be somewhat feasible. Then we can use Crabbe and a filler or two to go get Noel and then CJ and a filler or two to go get DMC.

 

[Nikolokolus]

I gave up CJ and a filler or whatever else it would take for DMC. Did you not read my post?

I read it and I said it isn't enough. A) The Kings are on track for the playoffs. Why would they trade him at the deadline this year? B) Cousins is the superior talent to CJ. "Filler" isn't going to be much of a lure. C) Most GMs are still loathe to violate the "Don't trade big for small" maxim.

Though I hit send without finishing.

So it balances the roster, It gets us back under the cap so we have money to play with and it keeps us a player in the west without bottom dwelling for a few years.


Basically I am saying we are giving up CJ and the bulk of our roster and our picks (we need to keep one of Hark or Turner, prefer Hark for more upside and less money) for DMC/Noel/#3 pick.


So...
Plumlee/Turner/Crabbe/Aminu/Davis/Ezeli/2-1st rd draft picks and CJ for DMC/Noel/#3pick.

Is that not even remotely possible?

Assuming you could even get DMC above, Why would Philly give us both #3 and Noel for that? I guess it might depend on whether we can get a top 7 pick in the draft, but outside of that, there's little incentive for them to add two first round picks to an already insanely young roster AND take on a bunch of contract ballast and Turner who they already dumped.

 

[Orion Bailey]

I read it and I said it isn't enough. A) The Kings are on track for the playoffs. Why would they trade him at the deadline this year? B) Cousins is the superior talent to CJ. "Filler" isn't going to be much of a lure. C) Most GMs are still loathe to violate the "Don't trade big for small" maxim.


Assuming you could even get DMC above, Why would Philly give us both #3 and Noel for that? I guess it might depend on whether we can get a top 7 pick in the draft, but outside of that, there's little incentive for them to add two first round picks to an already insanely young roster AND take on a bunch of contract ballast and Turner who they already dumped.

Because they could then take a couple of those high picks and package for a vet star in a position of their need.
It will take more than one other team and wont be easy, but I think its feasible.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Because they could then take a couple of those high picks and package for a vet star in a position of their need.
It will take more than one other team and wont be easy, but I think its feasible.

A top 3 pick is more likely to get a veteran star than a late first rounder and a 7-11 ish pick. Why bother with us if some other team has the player they want?

 

[Nikolokolus]

@Orion Bailey I get what you're trying to do with your trade proposal. You're like a prisoner with a toothpick, a roll of packing tape, and a spoon and you're desperately trying to figure out some kind of MacGuyver-esque escape plan, when little do you know, you've actually been sent to Alcatraz and you haven't yet learned that you're also going to need a boat.

Tell me if I'm wrong, but it seems like you need to believe that there's going to be some way to salvage the situation this team is in and turn a majority of this under-performing roster into multiple near-miraculous trades that steer the season into a kick-finish, that ultimately gets us to the Western Conference finals. How close am I?

 

[TBpup]

^^^It all starts with a dream.

 

[BonesJones]

The one thing about trading some of our roster for picks and then potentially trading CJ(and one or two fillers) for DMC is it will do three things simultaneously.

Balance the roster

Something along the lines of:

Dame
#3 Draft Josh Jackson
Harkless or Turner(would need to keep one of the two
DMC
Plums

I think that's a much better balanced starting 5 and we just need fill the bench.

I do like the idea of packaging our picks/Crabbe/Davis/Aminu
For Noel and a #3 pick. Toss in a combo of Ezeli/Harkless/Plums to make it happen, but not all three(avoid giving up Hark if possible)
I think we have the chips enough to make a trade like that without involving CJ

Then use CJ and whatever else it might take to get DMC IF he agrees to resign.

That would be

Dame
Jackson
Harkless
DMC
Noel

Fill in the bench any way you can because that starting five will compete with almost any team in the league. But as long as DMC agrees to a resign, then we are mostly locked in.

Dame/$25 mil?
Jackson/Rookie Contract
Harkless/$10mil
DMC/$27-28mil?
Noel/resign at $12mil?

So that's about $85-$90 mill. That will leave $15-20 mill to fill in the bench.

IS this even remotely close to being able to happen?

There's no way we get the number 3 pick unless we trade CJ.

 

[Minstrel]

You're like a prisoner with a toothpick, a roll of packing tape, and a spoon and you're desperately trying to figure out some kind of MacGuyver-esque escape plan, when little do you know, you've actually been sent to Alcatraz and you haven't yet learned that you're also going to need a boat?

Tossed you a like purely for the Alcatraz line. Good work, keep it up.

 

[Minstrel]

Lillard for Cousins, McCollum for the #3 pick. Start a new life. This society was a grand experiment but it has run its course.

And finally, I'll note that Michael Jordan was a #3 pick. Think about it.