Portland Trail Blazers rebuild, what do you think?!

[Dougnsalem]

That simply can't be true. The Rockets and Timberwolves got better, there is no way that the Blazers improved, at all.

Butters just got moved two seats closer to the end of the bench. That's an improvement.

 

[HailBlazers]

I think we should blow the team up, then immediately blow it up again.

Philly is doing it right, I agree. Who needs attendance.

 

[BlazerDuckSeahawkFan94]

I rather compete, we won't win a championship as long as the Warriors are a thing but dammit I do not want to want to be that 21-61 team looking to hit big in the lottery every season... aka Sacramento

 

[BonesJones]

Uhhhh no.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

That simply can't be true. The Rockets and Timberwolves got better, there is no way that the Blazers improved, at all.

The Rockets were already better than us.

Minny might be better, might not. Even if they are our improvement is still net +1.

 

[noknobs]

I think it would be a mistake for any team to base their decisions solely on Golden State. There are always going to be great teams, so deciding to rebuild because there's a great team right now is an exercise in futility.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

This is a good question. Homers will scoff, and "realists" will agree with you. I will try and look at both sides.

On one hand, Dame and CJ are entering their prime, but so are Curry, Thompson, Green and Durant.

Dame and CJ are amazing, but Thompson and Curry are better....if for no other reason, defense.

Nurk is a stud, but can he stay healthy?

We have no one who natches up with Green and Durant AND they play defense.

We are young, but a lot of our youth sucks.

So do we see what we have in Collins and Swanigan, then ship Dame and CJ off for multiple picks and hope to get lucky enough to find players who someday will be as good as them now?

Do we continue to add role playing pieces in hopes to get lucky with an injury?

The league is 3 point happy, but do we continue to add 3 point shooters, or change the game?

To me, Nurk and if Collins turns out better than I hope he does, that is our advantage. We aren't going to beat GS at their own game.

Shutting down their shooters...or slowing them down, and pounding the ball down low is how to beat them. It's exactly what the Cavs did to them last year with Lebron.

It seems to me our bench needs to be more specialized. Harkless, Aminu, etc do things well, but nothing very well. Add guys next to Dame and CJ who compliment them...ie play defense first, but can also hit open 3s

So in conclusion, instead of rebuilding and hoping, adding the right perimeter pieces might get us competitive. Guys that will frustrate and piss off other opponents.

This may be your best non-comedic post ever.

 

[Pinwheel1]

I rather compete, we won't win a championship as long as the Warriors are a thing but dammit I do not want to want to be that 21-61 team looking to hit big in the lottery every season... aka Sacramento

Not a huge Colin Cowherd fan but was listening this morning and he did make a comment that resembles my beliefs and that is teams are starting to realize that 19 year old draft picks do little to improve a team. They are either not mature mentally or physically to help out. ( maybe neither.)

It used to be you could tank for a year or two and bounce back. Now you have to tank for 5-6 years min. Look at the Lakers they had #7 and three straight #2's. If they are lucky half of those picks might end up starting for them.

I don't want to go back to 21-61 either

 

[riverman]

That simply can't be true. The Rockets and Timberwolves got better, there is no way that the Blazers improved, at all.

we got a 7 ft guy to replace Meyers minutes...how's that not getting better?

 

[Blazers Roy]

Forget everything, this is the guy we need to beat the warriors

Or would fucking ZAZA get him first????

We never seem to find that pivotal dirty player we so desperately need.

 

[BonesJones]

The key is adding two-way players. We drafted Zach Collins hoping he could give us that at PF, as Aminu and Vonleh are good defenders that hurt us offensively.

We need to find a two-way SF. Someone like Jae Crowder would be perfect.

 

[Mr. Robot]

Crowder could be available if they trade for Hayward

 

[RipCityDSCPL]

The rebuild is going well, without doing anything we've become better than the Clippers and Spurs.

I think you are selling Cash Considerations short there Sly. That guy is a rising superstar.

Olshey absolutely fleeced Houston in this trade!

We now have a Big 4. Golden State better watch out cause we are coming for them!

 

[OSUBlazerfan]

Crowder could be available if they trade for Hayward

Um, Hayward is a FA

 

[BonesJones]

I think we'll be top 4 next year with HOU, GSW, and SAS.

 

[Mediocre Man]

In conclusion..... we should all watch football instead.

Or the NHL

 

[Mr. Robot]

Um, Hayward is a FA

yeah I forget it, but nevertheless, if they bring Hayward, Crowder should be available and Olshey should snatch him right away

 

[BigGameDamian]

Crowder could be available if they trade for Hayward

Celtics don't want our junk.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Celtics don't want our junk.

But they might want our FEEC* to clear cap space to sign Hayward. FEEC for Crowder works straight up and saves frees up $6.8 million in cap space.

*Technically, that should be FENGC.

BNM

 

[Strenuus]

But they might want our FEEC* to clear cap space to sign Hayward. FEEC for Crowder works straight up and saves frees up $6.8 million in cap space.

*Technically, that should be FENGC.

BNM

You just exploded the computer that is BGD.

He doesn't understand anything beyond "lol untouchable, Drink like a fish, and the old nba is better."

 

[ripcityboy]

We are going to have to win a title at the end of another dynasty. Kind of like what Detroit did with Boston and LA. By the time GS has a down year Collins and Swanigan will hopefully be peaking. Dame will have to be in it for the long hall of he wants a window of opportunity. And that's not counting who arises in the East. Just the way it is unless we pull off some unforseen lopsided trade.

 

[noknobs]

Not a huge Colin Cowherd fan but was listening this morning and he did make a comment that resembles my beliefs and that is teams are starting to realize that 19 year old draft picks do little to improve a team. They are either not mature mentally or physically to help out. ( maybe neither.)

It used to be you could tank for a year or two and bounce back. Now you have to tank for 5-6 years min. Look at the Lakers they had #7 and three straight #2's. If they are lucky half of those picks might end up starting for them.

I don't want to go back to 21-61 either

You serious? Teams sure have a weird way of showing that. This years draft:

1. Freshman (age 19)
2. Freshman (age 19)
3. Freshman (age 19)
4. Freshman (age 20)
5. Freshman (age 19)
6. Freshman (age 19)
7. Freshman (age 20)
8. French professional basketball player (18)
9. Freshman (age 19)
10. Freshman (age 19)
11. Freshman (age 19)

The average age is exactly 19.

 

[Boob-No-More]

You serious? Teams sure have a weird way of showing that. This years draft:

1. Freshman (age 19)
2. Freshman (age 19)
3. Freshman (age 19)
4. Freshman (age 20)
5. Freshman (age 19)
6. Freshman (age 19)
7. Freshman (age 20)
8. French professional basketball player (18)
9. Freshman (age 19)
10. Freshman (age 19)
11. Freshman (age 19)

The average age is exactly 19.

Very true, but how many of those teams will realistically be playing for a title in the next 5 or 6 years. Most will be right back in the lottery. They aren't looking to compete now. They are hoping one of those teenagers becomes the next great superstar they can build a contender around. If not, they'll keep trying, over and over, and over...

BNM

 

[BlazerDuckSeahawkFan94]

But they might want our FEEC* to clear cap space to sign Hayward. FEEC for Crowder works straight up and saves frees up $6.8 million in cap space.

*Technically, that should be FENGC.

BNM

I think FENGC and our 2018 1st would be a fair deal for both teams in this scenario

 

[tester551]

Very true, but how many of those teams will realistically be playing for a title in the next 5 or 6 years. Most will be right back in the lottery. They aren't looking to compete now. They are hoping one of those teenagers becomes the next great superstar they can build a contender around. If not, they'll keep trying, over and over, and over...

BNM

Hopefully at least 1... preferably the team who picked at #10

 

[PDXFonz]

I didn't know this was a psychics forum, thought it was a basketball forum. Lots of palm readers the past few days.

 

[noknobs]

Very true, but how many of those teams will realistically be playing for a title in the next 5 or 6 years. Most will be right back in the lottery. They aren't looking to compete now. They are hoping one of those teenagers becomes the next great superstar they can build a contender around. If not, they'll keep trying, over and over, and over...

BNM

With the turnover of GM's in this league I doubt there are many teams who "aren't looking to compete now." I'm sure some teams are aware that given their current situation/roster/cap status which they inherited from last season, that a championship next year is unlikely, but 5 or 6 years? No GM on earth is planning to be a non-playoff team for half that long. You don't waste a top 10 pick on someone you believe will "do little to improve a team", or who is "either not mature mentally or physically to help out (maybe neither.).", because you'd be run out of town. Teams pick 19 year olds not because they aren't planning on competing but because they're gambling that they'll pick the 19 year old who will be a stud from the start. There are exceptions, so I'm sure you can find some.

 

[Pinwheel1]

You serious? Teams sure have a weird way of showing that. This years draft:

1. Freshman (age 19)
2. Freshman (age 19)
3. Freshman (age 19)
4. Freshman (age 20)
5. Freshman (age 19)
6. Freshman (age 19)
7. Freshman (age 20)
8. French professional basketball player (18)
9. Freshman (age 19)
10. Freshman (age 19)
11. Freshman (age 19)

The average age is exactly 19.

The fact that they are all 19 kind of proves the point. No one is saying they are not the best players in the draft, just that they just are not good enough to make a difference....not for a few years anyways. So if the plan is to tank and rebuild through the draft then the timeline needs to be adjusted. I still believe in building through the draft, but I view it more like MLB now.
Keep the pipeline filled with good young players, and hopefully develop them.

 

[noknobs]

The fact that they are all 19 kind of proves the point. No one is saying they are not the best players in the draft, just that they just are not good enough to make a difference....not for a few years anyways. So if the plan is to tank and rebuild through the draft then the timeline needs to be adjusted. I still believe in building through the draft, but I view it more like MLB now.
Keep the pipeline filled with good young players, and hopefully develop them.

I look at the last 10 rookies of the year and see that 6 of them had only a year of college, and another two had just two years of college. And many of the runner ups each year. The teams wanted them to be a big part of what they were doing, gave them the opportunity to make an impact, and they did.

Just because a team then goes on to suck for several more years doesn't mean it's because the team drafted for three years down the line. Sometimes teams suck just because they suck. It's because their plan failed, not because it's the plan. The exception might be late in the season when your already eliminated from the playoffs.

 

[HailBlazers]

This is a good question. Homers will scoff, and "realists" will agree with you. I will try and look at both sides.

On one hand, Dame and CJ are entering their prime, but so are Curry, Thompson, Green and Durant.

Dame and CJ are amazing, but Thompson and Curry are better....if for no other reason, defense.

Nurk is a stud, but can he stay healthy?

We have no one who natches up with Green and Durant AND they play defense.

We are young, but a lot of our youth sucks.

So do we see what we have in Collins and Swanigan, then ship Dame and CJ off for multiple picks and hope to get lucky enough to find players who someday will be as good as them now?

Do we continue to add role playing pieces in hopes to get lucky with an injury?

The league is 3 point happy, but do we continue to add 3 point shooters, or change the game?

To me, Nurk and if Collins turns out better than I hope he does, that is our advantage. We aren't going to beat GS at their own game.

Shutting down their shooters...or slowing them down, and pounding the ball down low is how to beat them. It's exactly what the Cavs did to them last year with Lebron.

It seems to me our bench needs to be more specialized. Harkless, Aminu, etc do things well, but nothing very well. Add guys next to Dame and CJ who compliment them...ie play defense first, but can also hit open 3s

So in conclusion, instead of rebuilding and hoping, adding the right perimeter pieces might get us competitive. Guys that will frustrate and piss off other opponents.

TLDR