Trade Idea Realistic trade options for summer of 2023

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
RR7 said:
Because his defense is beyond awful. Big no to Wood. He doesn't make us better
Click to expand...

I think that Grant is a little better than Wood, but overall they have a lot of similarities in their game. (both good and bad) One of them is fine, but not both.
 
What is Toronto going to do. Poetl and Trent will be free agents. Probably Van Vleet also. All of them and Siakam talk like they want to return. But they got knocked out in the playin! Wouldn't Toronto do best to just let the free agents go and trade Siakam, keep Barnes and Anunoby?
 
RR7 said:
Because his defense is beyond awful. Big no to Wood. He doesn't make us better
Click to expand...
I just know he's played well against the Blazers , and had plenty of points & blocks in the games i've watched. He's a way better defender than Dwight "punchable face " Powell, and Maxi "Pad" Kleber.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
I think that Grant is a little better than Wood, but overall they have a lot of similarities in their game. (both good and bad) One of them is fine, but not both.
Click to expand...
Wood is bigger . Can shoot as good. And can play center.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Sharpe is 19. Barnes is 21. Bam is 25. Grant is 29. That would be the best starting lineup we have had in over a decade.
Click to expand...

that team could not beat the 2014-15 Blazer team...which is less than a decade ago. In fact, I don't think that team could beat the 2018-19 Blazers. So yeah, you exaggerate. Could that team grow? sure. Could Adebayo leave in 3 years? yes.

is that team a contender? fuck no. And that's the standard so many of you trade-Dame-now people have been using to justify trading Dame. If it's not a contender next season, why bother, right? Could they grow into a contender with good luck and the right series of moves over the next 3-4 years? Maybe. But that could have been said for most teams and very few ever do. And many of those that do end up being imposters. Remember when Miami was supposedly a contender when the season started?

I'm also inclined to challenge people who have called Grant 'overrated-and-soon-to-be-an-albatross-contract' for Portland, turn around and use re-signing him as a reason some version of a post-Dame Blazer team is desirable. Besides that, I think the Blazers would have lots of difficulty re-signing Grant if they trade Dame

but the main reason I oppose that team, other than Sharpe and maybe Barnes (I don't see the all-star potential of Barnes, at all) is that it just look like a treadmill team to me. And the treadmill they would be on is first round exits and poor draft picks...we've seen that movie a lot. Again, I say if Portland trades Dame their best route is to get bad and load up on more top-6 picks over the following 2-3 seasons
 
tykendo said:
Wood is bigger . Can shoot as good. And can play center.
Click to expand...

He can play center, but he is still only 214 lbs with a 7'3 wing
Grant is 210 with a 7'3" wing

Not a big difference. I see them both as stretch 4's
 
Natebishop3 said:
Sharpe/Barnes/Grant/Bam is a nice mix of age. Only thing missing is a true leader. So maybe getting Lowry would fill that hole.
Click to expand...

A 30ish year all-NBA level PG with amazing range, leadership, etc. would be the perfect fit! Getting a guy that good in Portland seems near impossible though.
 
TBpup said:
Sadly, that list is a 'two of these things aren't like the others.' 8 of those players are MVPs (Joel could get his this year), multiple time MVPs, or finals/multiple time MVPs. Dame and Doncic are the odd ones out. And out of the 10, only Dame and Curry are under 6'7". Only 3 of them are poor defenders. Sadly, Dame qualifies in each of those 'not like the others' groups.

Then there is trading Sharpe + ??? for any of those. Most of them would be available for what Portland would be willing to offer, so we are either gutting the team to put one of them, or a not even as good as those type of player with perhaps the player on that list that is the least likely to lead a team to a championship. Sadly, I just don't see how it is going to work. Dame might be the leader, but he is going to have to likely be the 2nd best overall player on a team for it to win a title. So we have to get someone that can score 25 ppg, is taller and can play defense to cover for our current lack of D backcourt.

I'm just not show who gets that close to done for Portland with what they have, even with a high lottery pick to throw in. Joel might be one, but you would have to gut the team of all it's future for a guy who has averaged 44 games a season for his career. Giannis isn't available, neither is Tatum, no to Kawhi, Brown won't do it, no to KAT, Zion, Ingram nor Bam would do it, which leaves Siakam who can't shoot from '3', but is good at everything else.

There just are very few players available who would be able to do what is needed and cover for what is missing for what would be left.
Click to expand...

I was asked to produce a top 10 list, so I did. If I was asked to produce a tiered list, I would have.

Agreed that neither path (Staying with Dame or building around Sharpe) seem likely to product a contender with out a lot of other very good moves.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
I think that Grant is a little better than Wood, but overall they have a lot of similarities in their game. (both good and bad) One of them is fine, but not both.
Click to expand...
Agreed here.
Grant at $30M/yr or Wood at $12M/yr... I think Wood is much better value.
 
wizenheimer said:
that team could not beat the 2014-15 Blazer team...which is less than a decade ago. In fact, I don't think that team could beat the 2018-19 Blazers.
Click to expand...

Disagree. At least about 2018-2019. That team was insanely overrated.

2014-2015 was on the edge of that 10 years, but that was the last actually decent starting lineup that we had. But I think Sharpe/Barnes/Grant/Bam could be much much much better defensively than 2018-2019 and could hold its own against 2014-2015.
 
wizenheimer said:
is that team a contender? fuck no. And that's the standard so many of you trade-Dame-now people have been using to justify trading Dame. If it's not a contender next season, why bother, right?
Click to expand...
WTF.... who the hell is saying that trading Dame is going to make us a contender next season? That makes absolutely zero sense. Show me one person on this forum who thinks that trading Dame is the key to becoming an instant contender next season. You're just creating a strawman.
 
Natebishop3 said:
WTF.... who the hell is saying that trading Dame is going to make us a contender next season? .
Click to expand...

sorry...I wasn't clear

what I was getting at is that whenever anybody suggests keeping Dame and making a trade or transaction to upgrade the roster, somebody is absolutely guaranteed to dismiss the move because it wont make Portland an immediate contender. Ergo, they say trade Dame instead

in other words, if the resulting team after a Dame trade is several moves and some good fortune away from being a contender, it isn't really the significantly better option than keeping Dame
 
Pinwheel1 said:
He can play center, but he is still only 214 lbs with a 7'3 wing
Grant is 210 with a 7'3" wing

Not a big difference. I see them both as stretch 4's
Click to expand...

Another example of judging how good a player is by only looking at the box score. He's a hard pass.
 
wizenheimer said:
sorry...I wasn't clear

what I was getting at is that whenever anybody suggests keeping Dame and making a trade or transaction to upgrade the roster, somebody is absolutely guaranteed to dismiss the move because it wont make Portland an immediate contender. Ergo, they say trade Dame instead

in other words, if the resulting team after a Dame trade is several moves and some good fortune away from being a contender, it isn't really the significantly better option than keeping Dame
Click to expand...

That's because realistically there isn't a move that can be made which can turn us into a contender. Probably not this summer. Probably not next summer. It's highly unlikely that we can put a team around Dame that can contend while he's still this good. That's why some of us lean towards trading him. Because we can get quality assets for him that will hopefully help us build a contender down the road.

If we get the #1 pick, I'm going to change my tune. I think adding Wemby would drastically change our projections.
 
Natebishop3 said:
That's because realistically there isn't a move that can be made which can turn us into a contender. Probably not this summer. Probably not next summer. It's highly unlikely that we can put a team around Dame that can contend while he's still this good. That's why some of us lean towards trading him. Because we can get quality assets for him that will hopefully help us build a contender down the road.

If we get the #1 pick, I'm going to change my tune. I think adding Wemby would drastically change our projections.
Click to expand...

ok...but that's essentially saying that keeping Dame or trading Dame won't make a difference for Portland over the next 4-5 years. That's why a lot of us are saying we'd rather watch the Blazers with Dame and having a remote chance of being a contender, than watch the Blazers, without Dame, but still having a remote chance of being a contender.
 
wizenheimer said:
sorry...I wasn't clear

what I was getting at is that whenever anybody suggests keeping Dame and making a trade or transaction to upgrade the roster, somebody is absolutely guaranteed to dismiss the move because it wont make Portland an immediate contender. Ergo, they say trade Dame instead

in other words, if the resulting team after a Dame trade is several moves and some good fortune away from being a contender, it isn't really the significantly better option than keeping Dame
Click to expand...

I get your point. The only guarantee in either scenario is most of us enjoy watching Dame play. So I tend to prefer keeping Dame if the change is not to our clear benefit. Sure if there is a deal for Dame that we can't refuse then that changes things, but it needs to include a really good young player, not just a bunch of protected draft picks and filler from a contending team. I can think of a couple of scenarios where I would trade Dame, but I doubt the other team would go for it. Essentially we would need to trade Dame to a team with a surplus of talent, yet that needs a scoring PG...or it doesn't work for anyone.
 
wizenheimer said:
ok...but that's essentially saying that keeping Dame or trading Dame won't make a difference for Portland over the next 4-5 years. That's why a lot of us are saying we'd rather watch the Blazers with Dame and having a remote chance of being a contender, than watch the Blazers, without Dame, but still having a remote chance of being a contender.
Click to expand...
I cant like this post enough. Id say lock the thread but… its mine so…

but really this sums up the trade Dame argument better than i have seen as of yet.
Either way, we don't contend for a few years. Watch dame during that time or watch dame on another team during that time.

To me its a no brainer.
 
wizenheimer said:
trading Dame won't make a difference for Portland over the next 4-5 years.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say that. We should have a pretty good idea how good Sharpe will be in the next couple years. If we keep this pick and maybe add some other young talent from trades of Dame/Simons/Nurk, I would think we would be well on our way to being back in the playoffs in the next 4-5 years. Maybe even contending depending on how good our young guys end up being.

The difference is that trading Dame will add some pieces to potentially go out and try to get other guys who fit Sharpe's window. See if Billups can actually coach. See if Cronin can actually GM. If we keep Dame, we will just continue to treadmill OR Dame will get pissed and demand a trade and we will lose leverage.
 
wizenheimer said:
ok...but that's essentially saying that keeping Dame or trading Dame won't make a difference for Portland over the next 4-5 years. That's why a lot of us are saying we'd rather watch the Blazers with Dame and having a remote chance of being a contender, than watch the Blazers, without Dame, but still having a remote chance of being a contender.
Click to expand...

I am fine with keeping Dame, Grant and our picks. We've tanked two years in a row. Best way to get cheap talent and control it, draft it. I'm fine with moving Simons, Nurk and other filler. I'm also fine with trading Dame. Point being, Portland tried giving up picks, landed us Nance and Covington. Would rather have those picks back.
 
BlazerBender said:
Either way, we don't contend for a few years.
Click to expand...
Sure, but the difference is that we don't contend for a few years and then Dame is in the twilight of his career and we're back to square one.

Let's say we go all-in and trade our picks and maybe even trade Sharpe to try to put a team around Dame, but that team still isn't truly a contender and we're essentially back to square one in 3-4 years. OR we trade Dame, build around Sharpe and pick and other young players and we essentially reset the window by building around a much younger player. Maybe we can't build a contender around Sharpe in 4-5 years, but Sharpe will only be 25 instead of Dame being 37.
 
Natebishop3 said:
I wouldn't say that. We should have a pretty good idea how good Sharpe will be in the next couple years. If we keep this pick and maybe add some other young talent from trades of Dame/Simons/Nurk, I would think we would be well on our way to being back in the playoffs in the next 4-5 years. Maybe even contending depending on how good our young guys end up being.

The difference is that trading Dame will add some pieces to potentially go out and try to get other guys who fit Sharpe's window. See if Billups can actually coach. See if Cronin can actually GM. If we keep Dame, we will just continue to treadmill OR Dame will get pissed and demand a trade and we will lose leverage.
Click to expand...
Trading a top 10 player to move the window onto a guy who we dont even know can be a top 50 player all in the name of being better than before instead of "being on a treadmill"...

The difference in mindsets between "there's absolutely nothing we can do with Dame" to "without him we could potentially make a bunch of good moves for guys that fit Sharpe!" is strange to me.
 
BonesJones said:
Trading a top 10 player to move the window onto a guy who we dont even know can be a top 50 player all in the name of being better than before instead of "being on a treadmill"...

The difference in mindsets between "there's absolutely nothing we can do with Dame" to "without him we could potentially make a bunch of good moves for guys that fit Sharpe!" is strange to me.
Click to expand...

I respect the hell out of you man, but what path is there to put a contender around Dame while he's still a top 10 player?
 
Natebishop3 said:
Sure, but the difference is that we don't contend for a few years and then Dame is in the twilight of his career and we're back to square one.

Let's say we go all-in and trade our picks and maybe even trade Sharpe to try to put a team around Dame, but that team still isn't truly a contender and we're essentially back to square one in 3-4 years. OR we trade Dame, build around Sharpe and pick and other young players and we essentially reset the window by building around a much younger player. Maybe we can't build a contender around Sharpe in 4-5 years, but Sharpe will only be 25 instead of Dame being 37.
Click to expand...

Key point left out of your post:

if we trade dame for picks, those picks will be late first rounders, not lottery picks.

To me, trading Dame has less of a chance of making is a contender in five or les years than keeping him and continuing to try to find the right pcs to out around him.

Now i will toss this out there because i think its plausible even though i bet most do not.
If we do what we can to win with Dame but it doesn't work before his extension is over, i bet he signs cheap to allow us to have more financial flexibility to win with him as a role player/mentor to the up and comers like Sharpe.
If we swing and miss but he sees the effort, i think he stays loyal.
Im not trading him for those two reasons alone.
Late first round picks for a return and his potential loyalty to retiring in Portland tells me not to trade him. Ride it out.

One last thing, we will NOT see anyone like Dame anytime soon no matter which path is taken. Im not giving that up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top