Trade Idea Realistic trade options for summer of 2023

[blazerkor]

Paul Allens ownership of the Blazers earned him probably close to $2 billion in unrealized gains. But it is much less than the equivalent investment in the stock market.

So yeah the owners make money; but owning any $100 million+ business does and should make money.

How many players have ever lost money in a season?

Is that last question a joke? Players spend way more money than they make and do it quite frequently. Is it because they use bad judgment? Yeah it is. The last time a team in this league lost money, it was due to bad judgment as well... oh and that loss was easily offset by the increase in team value. Also when people talk about the increase in valuation not beating the stock market they aren't figuring in team profits which due to teams not being publicly traded are not published.

On another note plenty of billion dollar companies have gone under in the last 30 years but no NBA team has. In that time no NBA team has been sold at a loss. In the last 30 years very few teams have taken a shortfall in any fiscal year... they do seem to publicize those. The reason why there is a bidding war every time an NBA franchise goes up for sale is because it is a guaranteed money maker in huge proportions... it's a safe, profitable and fun investment.

I also don't know what it means when people say that the stock market has done better. Boom companies coming and then being acquired by bigger companies really drives that number. Since 2001 the S&P 500 has had a little under a 10% profit year over year... that would put an investment into that at around a 220% return. Since 2001 no NBA team has increased in value by less than %1000. You can't just invest in "the stock market" meaning it's overall value increase. It doesn't work that way... the closest thing you can do to that are funds like the S&P 500. Otherwise you've got to play that stock market and by no means is that a sure fire way to make a profit. I just don't think looking at the overall growth of the worth of all publicly traded companies versus the worth of these teams is in any way an apples to apples comparison.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

Virtually every superstar does, as they are paid under what they are really worth. But I understand you're overall point, just making the observation that superstars are not paid what they probably should be if there weren't arbitrary salary caps like there are.

Then why don't superstars form their own team or join a different league?

Superstars don't have to pay money to play. They always get checks. Sometimes owners have more bills than revenue. Owners have to pay players, arenas, TV production, staff, regardless of the revenue.

Yeah owners make a lot, but they put up hundred of millions or billions that's others don't have to and hold all the risk.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

Is that last question a joke? Players spend way more money than they make and do it quite frequently. Is it because they use bad judgment? Yeah it is. The last time a team in this league lost money, it was due to bad judgment as well... oh and that loss was easily offset by the increase in team value. Also when people talk about the increase in valuation not beating the stock market they aren't figuring in team profits which due to teams not being publicly traded are not published.

On another note plenty of billion dollar companies have gone under in the last 30 years but no NBA team has. In that time no NBA team has been sold at a loss. In the last 30 years very few teams have taken a shortfall in any fiscal year... they do seem to publicize those. The reason why there is a bidding war every time an NBA franchise goes up for sale is because it is a guaranteed money maker in huge proportions... it's a safe, profitable and fun investment.

I also don't know what it means when people say that the stock market has done better. Boom companies coming and then being acquired by bigger companies really drives that number. Since 2001 the S&P 500 has had a little under a 10% profit year over year... that would put an investment into that at around a 220% return. Since 2001 no NBA team has increased in value by less than %1000. You can't just invest in "the stock market" meaning it's overall value increase. It doesn't work that way... the closest thing you can do to that are funds like the S&P 500. Otherwise you've got to play that stock market and by no means is that a sure fire way to make a profit. I just don't think looking at the overall growth of the worth of all publicly traded companies versus the worth of these teams is in any way an apples to apples comparison.

What players pay money to their teams? I've never heard of one. They play and get checks. Owners have to pay for everyone else.

I'm not talking about money they blow on houses and cars, I'm talking about money they spend on the team.

Owners sometimes make money and sometimes lose money. Players have zero risk, they only get money.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

Is that last question a joke? Players spend way more money than they make and do it quite frequently. Is it because they use bad judgment? Yeah it is. The last time a team in this league lost money, it was due to bad judgment as well... oh and that loss was easily offset by the increase in team value. Also when people talk about the increase in valuation not beating the stock market they aren't figuring in team profits which due to teams not being publicly traded are not published.

On another note plenty of billion dollar companies have gone under in the last 30 years but no NBA team has. In that time no NBA team has been sold at a loss. In the last 30 years very few teams have taken a shortfall in any fiscal year... they do seem to publicize those. The reason why there is a bidding war every time an NBA franchise goes up for sale is because it is a guaranteed money maker in huge proportions... it's a safe, profitable and fun investment.

I also don't know what it means when people say that the stock market has done better. Boom companies coming and then being acquired by bigger companies really drives that number. Since 2001 the S&P 500 has had a little under a 10% profit year over year... that would put an investment into that at around a 220% return. Since 2001 no NBA team has increased in value by less than %1000. You can't just invest in "the stock market" meaning it's overall value increase. It doesn't work that way... the closest thing you can do to that are funds like the S&P 500. Otherwise you've got to play that stock market and by no means is that a sure fire way to make a profit. I just don't think looking at the overall growth of the worth of all publicly traded companies versus the worth of these teams is in any way an apples to apples comparison.

If you look at $1000 invested in the stock market when Paul Allen bought the team compared to $1000 he invested in the Blazers the stock market had a much higher return. I ran the numbers a couple years ago. I don't care to prove it again, just saying that the increase from a hundred million to billions over decades is not as atypical as you'd imagine it would be when looking at the large franchise valuations. Many investments have similar or larger returns.

No I don't feel sorry for owners, they have plenty of benefits they get. But they certainly deserve to make much more than the players, IMO.

 

[RR7]

If you look at $1000 invested in the stock market when Paul Allen bought the team compared to $1000 he invested in the Blazers the stock market had a much higher return. I ran the numbers a couple years ago. I don't care to prove it again, just saying that the increase from a hundred million to billions over decades is not as atypical as you'd imagine it would be when looking at the large franchise valuations. Many investments have similar or larger returns.

No I don't feel sorry for owners, they have plenty of benefits they get. But they certainly deserve to make much more than the players, IMO.

Paul Allen bought the team in May of 88 for 70 million. From this: https://www.noelwhittaker.com.au/resources/calculators/stock-market-calculator/ random stock calculator, that would be worth a little under 1.4 billion today. They were recently offered over 2 billion, and turned it down. Likely to be worth even more than that. But say they sold for 2 even, after owning the team for 35 years, they would have had to an operate at a loss every year to an average of over 17 million per year for him to have made more money in the stock market.
Sarver profited about 2 billion more owning the Suns than if he just invested in the stock market.
I guess owners are "taking risks", but they're playing around with "Fuck you" money. It's not like some joe schmo taking out a second mortgage on their house to start a small business.

 

[tykendo]

Holy Smokes! I came in here to see the latest trade possibilities, and instead, I got, Business 101.

 

[tykendo]

I agree that Cronin should have had Nurk , and Ant , go get some offers, then match or move on.

 

[RR7]

I agree that Cronin should have had Nurk , and Ant , go get some offers, then match or move on.

Nurk yes, Ant I disagree on.

 

[damianlillard]

Nurk yes, Ant I disagree on.

You can with ant since he was a restricted free agent

 

[tykendo]

You can with ant since he was a restricted free agent

They would have had to call Nurk's bluff on a contract offer. I just don't see where other teams would have valued his current oft injured seasons, and desire to play , the way the Blazers do. I've often said i think if Nurk played with the desire he did in the Euros, he'd be the Nurk in "Beast" mode. Then his contract would be a bargain. But he spends entirely too much time looking cool in suits on the bench.

 

[tykendo]

You can with ant since he was a restricted free agent

Then again, the Pacers were willing to sign the Ayton for a ridiculous overpay, and the Suns had to match ,or lose him. Not sure Ant would have got that huge of an overpay, but maybe Cronin played his cards safe.

 

[Kell]

Realistic trade offers to put Pdx into a contender around Dame…. Sadly I don’t see the assets that would be needed to make enough moves that would put contention into the possibility.

The only chips at play are the 2 tradeable 1st rounders, a lot of 2nds and Simons. I don’t see how that equals a starting SF and solid bench pieces to support the starters.

Nurk is what and who he always was a decent center who is a bit of a reach to be a starter on a deep playoff team. Grant isn’t enough from my view as a second option should be at least from a consistency and rebounding perspective. Sure there are a few decent bench pieces if they stay on the roster in Thybulle and maybe Little if he can find some consistency in his own right.

I fear that the best and smartest option is to sell as high as possible with Lillard as much as I don’t want to.

But hey maybe Cronin has more ability at making trades than he has shown so far? Although if I look at the total package he was able to do with after dealing for Grant and then getting a 1st for the one foot out the door but oh so fun to root for Hart. He might surprise?

fingers crossed for the 1 or 2 pick and then maybe things change a little bit.

Rant over thanks for reading.

 

[Sheldon Shape]

I think people are getting this all wrong.

It's totally unrealistic to expect them to put a championship run together next year. Almost no newly assembled team does that. Not LeBron in Miami and not Durant with Harden and Irvin in Brooklyn.

What they can do is get within earshot. That would be a vast improvement and something to build on.

Can we acquire Siakam or J. Brown for Ant + a myriad of picks? I think so. Yes. Do I expect them to win next year with either? No, but that isn't the point. It's something to build upon with expected growth from Shaedon and increased team chemistry.

Dame
Sharpe
Grant
Siakam
?

Could be good enough to get to the WC Semifinals. Depends on who you get at starting center. Depends who you get with the MLE. Depends on how Sharpe and perhaps Little look next season.

The point is, that is something to build on.

Understand?

 

[tykendo]

Realistic trade offers to put Pdx into a contender around Dame…. Sadly I don’t see the assets that would be needed to make enough moves that would put contention into the possibility.

The only chips at play are the 2 tradeable 1st rounders, a lot of 2nds and Simons. I don’t see how that equals a starting SF and solid bench pieces to support the starters.

Nurk is what and who he always was a decent center who is a bit of a reach to be a starter on a deep playoff team. Grant isn’t enough from my view as a second option should be at least from a consistency and rebounding perspective. Sure there are a few decent bench pieces if they stay on the roster in Thybulle and maybe Little if he can find some consistency in his own right.

I fear that the best and smartest option is to sell as high as possible with Lillard as much as I don’t want to.

But hey maybe Cronin has more ability at making trades than he has shown so far? Although if I look at the total package he was able to do with after dealing for Grant and then getting a 1st for the one foot out the door but oh so fun to root for Hart. He might surprise?

fingers crossed for the 1 or 2 pick and then maybe things change a little bit.

Rant over thanks for reading.

Actually the Blazers have their Lottery Pick this year ( Wemby protected), the 1st (via Knicks), and an ability to unlock their future 1st to the max allowed. Plus Ant is a nice asset. Fodder can be added to make deals work. The potential is there to become relevant quickly. Add a Mikal Bridges, or Pascal Siakam , plus enhance the bench with a true knockdown shooter like Seth Curry, the Blazers can be in business in this NBA.

 

[Natebishop3]

Actually the Blazers have their Lottery Pick this year ( Wemby protected), the 1st (via Knicks), and an ability to unlock their future 1st to the max allowed. Plus Ant is a nice asset. Fodder can be added to make deals work. The potential is there to become relevant quickly. Add a Mikal Bridges, or Pascal Siakam , plus enhance the bench with a true knockdown shooter like Seth Curry, the Blazers can be in business in this NBA.

We just need to get Wemby. That solves A LOT of issues

But yeah, draft Wemby and then trade Ant/Nurk and future picks for Siakam. Maybe get Chicago to take the NYK pick and unlock our future picks.

Dame
Sharpe
Grant
Siakam
Wemby

Infinitely more length.

 

[tykendo]

The thing too i like, is Joe and Mike have a nose for developmental talent. They're not bringing in dead weight dudes like Neil did.

 

[tykendo]

We just need to get Wemby. That solves A LOT of issues

But yeah, draft Wemby and then trade Ant/Nurk and future picks for Siakam. Maybe get Chicago to take the NYK pick and unlock our future picks.

Dame
Sharpe
Grant
Siakam
Wemby

Infinitely more length.

You actually need Nurk, or another quality center because Victor plans to play more of a Kevin Durant type role.

 

[tykendo]

Nurk or other, Victor, Jeremi , Shaedon, and Dame is pretty awesome. Then you can go all out to add quality to the bench. Wemby does , potentially , fix a lot of warts.

 

[tykendo]

True

I think people are getting this all wrong.

It's totally unrealistic to expect them to put a championship run together next year. Almost no newly assembled team does that. Not LeBron in Miami and not Durant with Harden and Irvin in Brooklyn.

What they can do is get within earshot. That would be a vast improvement and something to build on.

Can we acquire Siakam or J. Brown for Ant + a myriad of picks? I think so. Yes. Do I expect them to win next year with either? No, but that isn't the point. It's something to build upon with expected growth from Shaedon and increased team chemistry.

Dame
Sharpe
Grant
Siakam
?

Could be good enough to get to the WC Semifinals. Depends on who you get at starting center. Depends who you get with the MLE. Depends on how Sharpe and perhaps Little look next season.

The point is, that is something to build on.

Understand?

True, but you never know when you grab lightning in a bottle.

 

[tykendo]

I think people are getting this all wrong.

It's totally unrealistic to expect them to put a championship run together next year. Almost no newly assembled team does that. Not LeBron in Miami and not Durant with Harden and Irvin in Brooklyn.

What they can do is get within earshot. That would be a vast improvement and something to build on.

Can we acquire Siakam or J. Brown for Ant + a myriad of picks? I think so. Yes. Do I expect them to win next year with either? No, but that isn't the point. It's something to build upon with expected growth from Shaedon and increased team chemistry.

Dame
Sharpe
Grant
Siakam
?

Could be good enough to get to the WC Semifinals. Depends on who you get at starting center. Depends who you get with the MLE. Depends on how Sharpe and perhaps Little look next season.

The point is, that is something to build on.

Understand?

? Is that Nurk's new identity. The Question Mark

 

[BigGameDamian]

I just have a feeling that Joe’s going to make a move that pisses a lot of fans off.

 

[Pinwheel1]

Nurk is what and who he always was a decent center who is a bit of a reach to be a starter on a deep playoff team. Grant isn’t enough from my view as a second option should be at least from a consistency and rebounding perspective.

I don't disagree with your post, but I do think that Nurk has the skill level to be a starting center on a deep playoff team, as long as he is the 4th or 5th option on offense. I still want to trade him but keeping him is not horrible. However, we still need another center that is more athletic against small-ball teams.

I agree that Grant needs to be our #3 option on offense, however, there is an outside chance that we don't have to add a player for that to happen. Realistically he is probably one more year away, but Sharpe could get there. I know that is a stretch for a 20-year-old, but it is possible if he has a great summer.

That still leaves one more starter and of course, how to get him is the quandary. I hate to think it but we probably won't get Siakam or Brown or Victor or the #2 pick. So what is the biggest need? I would think a forward (SF or PF) that can rebound, defend multiple positions, and hit an open 3. That does not describe a star player, but maybe we bite the bullet and overpay for OG? Who else?

 

[tykendo]

I don't disagree with your post, but I do think that Nurk has the skill level to be a starting center on a deep playoff team, as long as he is the 4th or 5th option on offense. I still want to trade him but keeping him is not horrible. However, we still need another center that is more athletic against small-ball teams.

I agree that Grant needs to be our #3 option on offense, however, there is an outside chance that we don't have to add a player for that to happen. Realistically he is probably one more year away, but Sharpe could get there. I know that is a stretch for a 20-year-old, but it is possible if he has a great summer.

That still leaves one more starter and of course, how to get him is the quandary. I hate to think it but we probably won't get Siakam or Brown or Victor or the #2 pick. So what is the biggest need? I would think a forward (SF or PF) that can rebound, defend multiple positions, and hit an open 3. That does not describe a star player, but maybe we bite the bullet and overpay for OG? Who else?

An overpay for Siakam, or Bridges sure. But for OG. No way.

 

[Pinwheel1]

An overpay for Siakam, or Bridges sure. But for OG. No way.

I was assuming that we don't have the assets for either Siakam or Bridges unless we get #2.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I just have a feeling that Joe’s going to make a move that pisses a lot of fans off.

This

 

[Pinwheel1]

This

You guys are going out on a limb there. We could land the #1 pick, draft Victor and there will still be pissed-off fans.

 

[Sheldon Shape]

True

True, but you never know when you grab lightning in a bottle.

Of course, but it's not the only measure of success next season. What would be success is being within striking distance. Getting Siakam/Brown + bench pieces can do that.

It took one Buck Williams to change the trajectory of the team. Working with Toronto or Brooklyn or Boston, we would almost certainly be acquiring an additional bench piece or two as well.

 

[tykendo]

Of course, but it's not the only measure of success next season. What would be success is being within striking distance. Getting Siakam/Brown + bench pieces can do that.

It took one Buck Williams to change the trajectory of the team. Working with Toronto or Brooklyn or Boston, we would almost certainly be acquiring an additional bench piece or two as well.

Buck Williams is probably , the greatest acquisition through trade , other than involving the draft ( Dame, Roy, Aldridge) , in Blazers History.

 

[CJ_is_Gone]

I just have a feeling that Joe’s going to make a move that pisses a lot of fans off.

That's not really going out on a limb.
I guarantee whatever move he does make will be sure to piss off >50% of the fans. Some people gotta complain no matter what!

 

[CJ_is_Gone]

That still leaves one more starter and of course, how to get him is the quandary. I hate to think it but we probably won't get Siakam or Brown or Victor or the #2 pick. So what is the biggest need? I would think a forward (SF or PF) that can rebound, defend multiple positions, and hit an open 3. That does not describe a star player, but maybe we bite the bullet and overpay for OG? Who else?

Budget player would be Vanderbilt.