Trade Potential Damian Lillard Trade

[Samuel]

The Blazers haven't been relevant since around 2000 regardless of who we have put on the floor. Injuries to Oden and Roy, and getting nothing back for Aldridge, Matthews, Lopez, Batum, Afflalo, etc haven't exactly helped.

I’ve tried saying this to people but the Blazers ‘mid-ness’ really can be defined by like 3 critical events over the last 20 years

More secondarily I’d add Olshey ultimately getting nothing out of that loaded draft—with Zach Collins heading off to San Antonio—was a big one as well.

 

[TBpup]

I’ve tried saying this to people but the Blazers ‘mid-ness’ really can be defined by like 3 critical events over the last 20 years

More secondarily I’d add Olshey ultimately getting nothing out of that loaded draft—with Zach Collins heading off to San Antonio—was a big one as well.

BRUTAL draft. 3 1st round picks and absolutely nothing to show for it.

 

[HoopsFanAZ]

BRUTAL draft. 3 1st round picks and absolutely nothing to show for it.

I will counter that draft with the 2004 draft:
Sebastian Telfair at 13
Viktor Khryapa at 22 via the Nets
Sergei Monia at 23

… which was followed by 2005 …

Trading Utah the 3rd pick — who took Deron Williams but we could’ve had Chris Paul! But passed on both because we had Telfair! — for the 6th, Martell Webster, and the 27th which was traded and getting Jarrett Jack (a nice back-up) plus the Detroit pick in 2006, Joel Freeland (who I liked as a back-up).

Bad memories.

 

[Predator]

How often does trading a star for a bunch of picks work?

 

[TBpup]

How often does trading a star for a bunch of picks work?

What is the measurable? If it is Playoff success, we haven't exactly been swimming in that.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

I'm sure the 6ers would do Maxey.

I don't know any of these other players would be available for Dame.

 

[BankTeller]

How often does trading a star for a bunch of picks work?

More often than not imo. Give me examples of when it hasn’t so I know where your bar for success is before I give some counter-examples.

 

[Ripcity4life77]

Let's be honest IF and when Dame gets traded outside of a few players the Blazers will not get what Dame is worth and that is a fact. However the basic framework of any deal would have to be 2 - Top 10 picks and 2 pick swaps and at least one vet coming back who most would consider a top 50 ish player and that is the minimum in my opinion.

 

[wizenheimer]

More often than not imo. Give me examples of when it hasn’t so I know where your bar for success is before I give some counter-examples.

I think it's clearly the opposite...it rarely works

there are exceptions certainly....the Celtics for instance. But it didn't work for Denver when they traded Melo; it didn't work for Utah when they traded Deron Williams. Minny got Al Jefferson for KD and spent 2 decades in the lottery. It hasn't worked for either Indiana or OKC after trading PG13. It hasn't worked for the Pelicans after trading AD.

when small market teams are 'forced' into trading their franchise player they generally get fucked

 

[Blazinaway]

I think it's clearly the opposite...it rarely works

there are exceptions certainly....the Celtics for instance. But it didn't work for Denver when they traded Melo; it didn't work for Utah when they traded Deron Williams. Minny got Al Jefferson for KD and spent 2 decades in the lottery. It hasn't worked for either Indiana or OKC after trading PG13. It hasn't worked for the Pelicans after trading AD.

when small market teams are 'forced' into trading their franchise player they generally get fucked

well since we have been "getting fucked" for years as far as playoff performance goes (when we even get there) and our franchise player is getting older - 33 next season and is owed a huge amount (215 Mil) the next 4 years, trading him may not be a bad idea as it appears the chances of building a "contender" around him appear very low IMO. If we could get a good player and a few picks I'd rather roll the dice that way. I understand both sides of keeping him or trading him, my preference is trading him and get what we can and get out of that huge contract

 

[BankTeller]

I think it's clearly the opposite...it rarely works

there are exceptions certainly....the Celtics for instance. But it didn't work for Denver when they traded Melo; it didn't work for Utah when they traded Deron Williams. Minny got Al Jefferson for KD and spent 2 decades in the lottery. It hasn't worked for either Indiana or OKC after trading PG13. It hasn't worked for the Pelicans after trading AD.

when small market teams are 'forced' into trading their franchise player they generally get fucked

What I would say to that is:

1) Denver netted a total of one 1st rounder for Melo. Outside of that, they got a total of four mediocre or above average players and two second rounders. Had Denver gotten 3-4 1sts like what we see today, the way we look back at that trade could be completely different. So to say “multiple picks” is a stretch when 2/3 picks were 2nds.

2) The Deron Williams haul was actually a huge haul at that time. The Jazz got back the 3rd overall pick in that draft, the #3 pick the following year, another 1st, and a young guy who had been an All Star. What the team does with those picks matters too, but the trade itself was a great return. Kanter was obviously the wrong choice.

3) The KG deal got them two 1sts, one of which was used on Jonny Flynn. Had the Wolves drafted Curry, would you still say they got fucked? Getting the package is one thing, having the foresight to actually draft the right players is another.

Now, you’re also looking at trades from over 10 years ago. If you look at recent trades,

1) Jazz got a haul of picks from the Gobert trade.

2) Hawks are going to be regretting the Murray trade for years to come.

3) Nets had to undo their mistake of trading multiple 1sts for Harden by recouping some of them and trading Harden, then got another haul back for KD.

 

[BigGameDamian]

Bam Adebayo & Tylor Hero would be intriguing

 

[BankTeller]

Bam Adebayo & Tylor Hero would be intriguing

I don’t think they would trade Bam for Dame. But if they were willing to, I’d definitely consider it.

 

[wizenheimer]

What I would say to that is:

1) Denver netted a total of one 1st rounder for Melo. Outside of that, they got a total of four mediocre or above average players and two second rounders. Had Denver gotten 3-4 1sts like what we see today, the way we look back at that trade could be completely different. So to say “multiple picks” is a stretch when 2/3 picks were 2nds.

2) The Deron Williams haul was actually a huge haul at that time. The Jazz got back the 3rd overall pick in that draft, the #3 pick the following year, another 1st, and a young guy who had been an All Star. What the team does with those picks matters too, but the trade itself was a great return. Kanter was obviously the wrong choice.

3) The KG deal got them two 1sts, one of which was used on Jonny Flynn. Had the Wolves drafted Curry, would you still say they got fucked? Getting the package is one thing, having the foresight to actually draft the right players is another.

Now, you’re also looking at trades from over 10 years ago. If you look at recent trades,

1) Jazz got a haul of picks from the Gobert trade.

2) Hawks are going to be regretting the Murray trade for years to come.

3) Nets had to undo their mistake of trading multiple 1sts for Harden by recouping some of them and trading Harden, then got another haul back for KD.

so what you're saying is it almost never pays off for the team trading the franchise player...which is what I said

Gobert and Murray aren't franchise players by the way; not even close

 

[BankTeller]

so what you're saying is it almost never pays off for the team trading the franchise player...which is what I said

Gobert and Murray aren't franchise players by the way; not even close

No, what I’m saying is it pays off when you make the right draft choices once you get those picks from trading your stars. The Celtics did.

I agree with you that Murray and Gobert aren’t franchise players. I hope Dame brings in way more picks in a deal if he wants a trade then, since he’s a franchise player ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[wizenheimer]

No, what I’m saying is it pays off when you make the right draft choices once you get those picks from trading your stars. The Celtics did.

I agree with you that Murray and Gobert aren’t franchise players. I hope Dame brings in way more picks in a deal if he wants a trade then, since he’s a franchise player ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

let me ask you a question: should Portland trade Dame if he doesn't ask to be traded?

 

[Tince]

Giannis or Luka.

 

[BankTeller]

let me ask you a question: should Portland trade Dame if he doesn't ask to be traded?

No. You obviously keep Dame if he wants to be here and you make an upgrade by trading Ant.

I said “if he wants a trade” in the comment you replied to.

 

[robe]

Is there any potential scenario, that can put Dame and Luka at the same team? They got the same story behind them.

 

[Predator]

well since we have been "getting fucked" for years as far as playoff performance goes (when we even get there) and our franchise player is getting older - 33 next season and is owed a huge amount (215 Mil) the next 4 years, trading him may not be a bad idea as it appears the chances of building a "contender" around him appear very low IMO. If we could get a good player and a few picks I'd rather roll the dice that way. I understand both sides of keeping him or trading him, my preference is trading him and get what we can and get out of that huge contract

I didn’t say trading Dame was a bad idea, I said trading him for a bunch of picks is a bad idea.

We need a Scottie Pippen like haul of players. Or someone like Jaylen Brown.

 

[Predator]

What I would say to that is:

1) Denver netted a total of one 1st rounder for Melo. Outside of that, they got a total of four mediocre or above average players and two second rounders. Had Denver gotten 3-4 1sts like what we see today, the way we look back at that trade could be completely different. So to say “multiple picks” is a stretch when 2/3 picks were 2nds.

2) The Deron Williams haul was actually a huge haul at that time. The Jazz got back the 3rd overall pick in that draft, the #3 pick the following year, another 1st, and a young guy who had been an All Star. What the team does with those picks matters too, but the trade itself was a great return. Kanter was obviously the wrong choice.

3) The KG deal got them two 1sts, one of which was used on Jonny Flynn. Had the Wolves drafted Curry, would you still say they got fucked? Getting the package is one thing, having the foresight to actually draft the right players is another.

Now, you’re also looking at trades from over 10 years ago. If you look at recent trades,

1) Jazz got a haul of picks from the Gobert trade.

2) Hawks are going to be regretting the Murray trade for years to come.

3) Nets had to undo their mistake of trading multiple 1sts for Harden by recouping some of them and trading Harden, then got another haul back for KD.

The “haul” of picks isn’t what we are talking about.
We are talking the actual results.
Not potential results.
But actual results.

It is “very” rare for the draft to end up “chalk” where the best players are picked in the correct order.

Which is why trading for a bunch of picks rarely works.

Because getting those picks right is HARD.

Of course with hindsight it’s easy to say “Oh yeah they shouldn’t have drafted that guy, they should’ve drafted that guy instead”…

 

[Predator]

What is the measurable? If it is Playoff success, we haven't exactly been swimming in that.

I would say the measurable is this:

Is your franchise in a better place than it was 2-3 years following the trade? How much longer does it take for a team to reach a “new” level of potential on average? 5 years? 10 years?

That’s another thing with having a billion picks as a return.

My kid’s kids will be finishing college by the team all the picks convey (obvious hyperbole) but you’re often looking at a pretty long time horizon.

 

[TBpup]

The “haul” of picks isn’t what we are talking about.
We are talking the actual results.
Not potential results.
But actual results.

Sadly, the actual results on the court have taken us to the place where we finished as a sub .500 team 3 of the last 4 years, and are now inline for our second lottery pick in a row.

 

[Predator]

Also, you have to look at which of those picks actually convert to worthwhile players. Is it the pick they received in the trade? Or is it the pick they received for sucking?

 

[Predator]

Sadly, the actual results on the court have taken us to the place where we finished as a sub .500 team 3 of the last 4 years, and are now inline for our second lottery pick in a row.

Ok, that has literally nothing to do with what I originally stated.

I never said don’t trade Dame. I said don’t trade Dame for picks because it hardly ever works out.

 

[TBpup]

Ok, that has literally nothing to do with what I originally stated.

I never said don’t trade Dame. I said don’t trade Dame for picks because it hardly ever works out.

And I was just commenting on actual on-court results and where it has led this team.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

In a draft like this would you trade Lillard for a #1 pick? Straight swap. Lets take the Magic for instance? They obviously have Banchero or even the Thunder with Chet? If either of those teams were to get lucky and get the number one pick? Now i understand the Thunder might make the playoffs. But would they be interested in Lillard with their roster as opposed to adding Wemby? If they ended up in the Lottery it could happen? I would assume the Rockets and Spurs would not do that deal. I don't think the Pistons would either?
Who would be willing to make that phone call depending on who gets that pick to see if they would take Lillard for what a bunch of people are calling a "Generational Talent"?

Now if it's me i would not be willing to trade Lillard. My reasoning is way too many #1 picks don't work out. I have always been in the "You don't trade proven for unproven" class but this year might make a few of those people question their stance?

 

[Samuel]

Because getting those picks right is HARD.

Picks are also something you can repackage and trade. Their fungibility is sort of the point—their value isn’t just in the ability to draft a player.

 

[Predator]

Picks are also something you can repackage and trade. Their fungibility is sort of the point—their value isn’t just in the ability to draft a player.

The issue with this is, if you’re a tanking team, you’re not going to trade those picks for mediocre upgrades - which is what those picks would fetch.

And an elite player isn’t going to request a trade to a rebuilding team.

So if you trade Dame for picks, pretty much the only value they have is for drafting players.

Especially considering most of those picks are likely to be mid-late first rounders, especially in the beginning stages of conveying.

Like I said in the beginning, trading a star for a bunch of picks almost never works out. I’m not even sure it ever has.

Now if it becomes a 3 way type trade where Portland redirects those picks for players, fine. But not interested in picks.

 

[blazerkor]

The issue with this is, if you’re a tanking team, you’re not going to trade those picks for mediocre upgrades - which is what those picks would fetch.

And an elite player isn’t going to request a trade to a rebuilding team.

So if you trade Dame for picks, pretty much the only value they have is for drafting players.

Especially considering most of those picks are likely to be mid-late first rounders, especially in the beginning stages of conveying.

Like I said in the beginning, trading a star for a bunch of picks almost never works out. I’m not even sure it ever has.

Now if it becomes a 3 way type trade where Portland redirects those picks for players, fine. But not interested in picks.

Yeah, I'm not interested in trading Dame regardless of the return. If it was a great return like a young all star, a couple future firsts that wouldn't be very early picks and let's say expiring contracts or role players with reasonable contracts it would still be painful.

I think that those fans of our team who don't think we can make moves that give us a reasonable shot at winning a title with Dame have limited imaginations and I'm not talking about the fantastic part of their imagination, I'm talking about the realistic part. If someone doesn't think there are scenarios where we can win big with Dame, I actually think they are being unrealistic.