So who goes?

[Bingo Bango]

Nobody, because we don't have the assets to get anybody worth getting.

But players will go anyway, because the team has to look like it’s doing something. What comes back will be no better than what goes out, however: Aminu, Harkless, Powell, Blake, Hood, Jones, Covington, Payton, Hart, Zeller, Nance, Elleby, and on and on. They’re all just interchangeable parts. None of them change anything.

 

[PCmor7]

I’ll tell you right now though if we win the lottery and had 19 year olds sharpe/Wemby to build around I might do Dame a solid and ship him to a contender for 5 1s and a young potential star to team with Sharpe/Wemby.

Is it doing him a solid if that's not what Dame wants, though?

I keep wanting to grab and shake people who think everyone's motivations are exactly the same. Like winning a ring is the be-all, end-all for everyone. How you win or chase the ring might be the important thing to some people. Building a legacy in one place might be the important thing to some people. Not moving around might be important to some people. Winning the ring might be important, but it might not be at the top of the pyramid of importance for Dame or someone else.

If you want to say trade Dame for five 1s because that's best for the Blazers, I could get on board with it. But can we stop talking like we'd be doing it primarily because of how much we care for Damian Lillard? Because that's a lie. Because everything he's ever said is that's not what he wants.

 

[Cugel]

If we get our lotto pick and Chicago takes the Knicks pick we would have 4FRPs and 3 swaps and that's if we keep our lotto pick we could pick for another team and that would mean being able to send out 5FRPs and 3 swaps.

I was wondering about the CHI pick. How does that work?

 

[PCmor7]

I was wondering about the CHI pick. How does that work?

The only way Chicago gets our pick is if it's outside the lottery.

Conceivably, I think we could trade them the Knicks pick this year in place of that pick, but I don't know why the Blazers would do that. If the Blazers remain in the lottery long enough, that pick they owe the Bulls is downgraded to a second rounder, IIRC. If you're worried about not being able to trade our pick because the Bulls might have first claim on it, the smarter thing would just be to use the Knicks pick in a trade instead of the Blazers' non-lottery pick owed to the Bulls (they'd realistically be around the same spot in the draft ... late teens to early 20s).

There's no benefit in trading away a 1 that might end up being a 2 in a couple of years when you have a spare 1 already in your pocket.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

The only player any other team is going to want is Sharpe.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

The only player any other team is going to want is Sharpe.

Sharpe has been our worst rotational player all year. Yes he's a rookie, yes he seems to have all the tools to be really good, but he has been objectively bad. Is it just youth; is it coaching; is it confidence; is it motor; is it BBIQ? I don't know, but I'm souring on him. All these comparisons everyone's making between him and the all-star wings people think he reminds them of... have any been as ineffective overall as rookies as he has been?

If Sharpe is the piece that will get us a legit star to pair with Dame, I'd certainly listen.

 

[wizenheimer]

Do people think:

1) The Blazers are going to let Grant walk for nothing?
2) Letting Grant walk for nothing sets the team up for success?

This seems like another one of those talking points that is gaining traction despite having a very very very low probability of happening (for good reason).

part of the reason people are talking like that could be Portland's recent history of significantly overpaying the existing market for role players. Bidding against themselves. They did it with Turner, Crabbe, and Meyers. With CJ and Harkless. All got a lot more money than the market was at the time. And last summer the same thing happened with Ant, Nurk, and Payton.

I don't think there was a single chance that any team was going to swoop in and offer Nurkic more than what his current-st-the-time salary of 12M was. But Portland paid him 5.5M more a year than 12M. And there were only about 3 teams that could have offered Simons even 20M/year. But I don't believe any of those teams would have had interest in Simons. For instance, one of the teams was Indiana and they already had Haliburton, Hield, Duarte, Nembhard, TJ McConnell, and had just drafted Mathurin. Detroit was stocked at guard as well and had just drafted Jaden Ivey

that's why I was saying Portland overpaid. Not because of some comparison of league-wide salaries but because the market last summer for Ant + Nurk was nowhere near 43M/year. I'd say closer to 30M/year

so that leads to Grant and his impending free agency vs the worry about Cronin & Blazer management's history with free agents. Right now Grant represents Cronin's biggest success. He essentially, at this point, traded CJ for Grant, Thybulle, Reddish & a 1st round pick. Knowing CJ's flaws and fit with Dame, that's a good trade for the Blazers. But taking Grant out of the equation seriously degrades the value. Cronin may be over-motivated to re-sign Grant and his recent history with Ant & Nurk make that a legitimate worry

which leads to the market. If you assume there will be a 130M cap, then these are the teams that 'could' have that much cap-space:

Orlando Magic $99,825,364
Oklahoma City Thunder $97,104,155
Detroit Pistons $95,492,991
Indiana Pacers $95,452,116
Utah Jazz $91,116,018
Charlotte Hornets $86,528,072
San Antonio Spurs $84,157,979
Houston Rockets $68,984,207

(that's from BBREF so there will be lots of flux in those numbers)

there's no reason to go thru the teams. I've glanced at their rosters and cap situation and I have a really hard time seeing any of those teams setting their sights on Grant as a free agent prize. None would offer 30M and I'd really be amazed if any would even consider 20M

the market for Grant is not 30M...not even close. That's not saying that the Blazers won't pay him that much if they are fearing he might walk. But for once I'd like to see the Blazers hardball their way into a decent contract. Grant at 20-23M year is a positive tradable contract. At 30-35M/year, he's an albatross contract

 

[MickZagger]

Is it doing him a solid if that's not what Dame wants, though?

I keep wanting to grab and shake people who think everyone's motivations are exactly the same. Like winning a ring is the be-all, end-all for everyone. How you win or chase the ring might be the important thing to some people. Building a legacy in one place might be the important thing to some people. Not moving around might be important to some people. Winning the ring might be important, but it might not be at the top of the pyramid of importance for Dame or someone else.

If you want to say trade Dame for five 1s because that's best for the Blazers, I could get on board with it. But can we stop talking like we'd be doing it primarily because of how much we care for Damian Lillard? Because that's a lie. Because everything he's ever said is that's not what he wants.

It’s not as much winning a ring as it is being able to compete for one.

 

[PCmor7]

It’s not as much winning a ring as it is being able to compete for one.

Which doesn't have anything to do with "doing him a solid" when he's said he wants to remain in Portland.

Again, Lillard's said time and time again what he wants. He hasn't acted in any way that we know of that would contradict that and he's consistently shown to be a person whose actions have aligned with his words, so, if we're talking about trading him, let's stop hiding behind the idea that we're doing it for him. We don't have to save Dame Lillard from himself. He's a grown-@$$ man. Maybe he doesn't think like Kevin Durant. Maybe he likes the challenge. Let's take him at his word and be honest that if we want to trade him it's not because we're altruistic but because we think it's better for the Blazers franchise. That's all I am saying. We need to stop being mealy-mouthed.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Which doesn't have anything to do with "doing him a solid" when he's said he wants to remain in Portland.

Again, Lillard's said time and time again what he wants. He hasn't acted in any way that we know of that would contradict that and he's consistently shown to be a person whose actions have aligned with his words, so, if we're talking about trading him, let's stop hiding behind the idea that we're doing it for him. We don't have to save Dame Lillard from himself. He's a grown-@$$ man. Maybe he doesn't think like Kevin Durant. Maybe he likes the challenge. Let's take him at his word and be honest that if we want to trade him it's not because we're altruistic but because we think it's better for the Blazers franchise. That's all I am saying. We need to stop being mealy-mouthed.

Maybe the real question is….

Can we seriously compete for a ring with a non defense playing shoot first pg making 34% of the salary cap?

 

[TBpup]

Maybe the real question is….

Can we seriously compete for a ring with a non defense playing shoot first pg making 34% of the salary cap?

As much as we love Dame, it is a legitimate question. You have to build so much around him, but are limited in the amount you can pay. It can work if you build through the Draft and then pay over the Cap/Lux for your own player. Otherwise, it will be very difficult.

 

[Whyachi]

If Grant walks, Dame will ask for a trade. Cronin has to resign Grant no matter the price. I'm fine with that, Grant is a big helper on this team. Blazers just need bigger stronger players so the shooters can shoot, and more reliable ball handlers so the shooters can shoot, and better defensive players so the shooters can shoot.

 

[PCmor7]

Maybe the real question is….

Can we seriously compete for a ring with a non defense playing shoot first pg making 34% of the salary cap?

That's a fair question to make and a conversation to have.

Another one is "If you think that's unlikely to happen, is it more of a priority to remain loyal to one of the best players and leaders in NBA history who has stayed loyal to you, even if it meant probably not competing for a ring in his career?"

And one other question: "Are the odds of seriously competing with 5 1st round picks instead of Damian Lillard significantly better than seriously competing with him?"

I think those are the real knotty questions the Blazers have to make and Blazer fans need to consider.

 

[MickZagger]

As much as we love Dame, it is a legitimate question. You have to build so much around him, but are limited in the amount you can pay. It can work if you build through the Draft and then pay over the Cap/Lux for your own player. Otherwise, it will be very difficult.

True. Lillard has generational wealth accumulated through not only contracts but endorsements. If he invested properly he should be closing in on billionaire status.

Which is why I kind of scoff at the extension for $225mil at 32 years of age. Is winning truly the most important?

 

[PCmor7]

If we're getting into the thing about Dame's wealth, you have to account for a couple of other things.

1. How is Dame trying to set up his family's future?

2. How committed is Dame to his philanthropy?

Like Mick mentioned above, winning might be important to Dame, but things like this might be more important. Dame might be content trying to make himself the best player he can be and in the chase itself, against the best Dame Lillard he can be, against the superteams banding together, etc., especially when measured against what else he can achieve outside the sport with the resources to which his hard work and personal success has entitled him.

He doesn't owe the Blazers or anyone a hometown discount if a larger issue for him is giving his son the best life and funding children's developmental programs across the country.

 

[MickZagger]

If we're getting into the thing about Dame's wealth, you have to account for a couple of other things.

1. How is Dame trying to set up his family's future?

2. How committed is Dame to his philanthropy?

Like Mick mentioned above, winning might be important to Dame, but things like this might be more important. Dame might be content trying to make himself the best player he can be and in the chase itself, against the best Dame Lillard he can be, against the superteams banding together, etc., especially when measured against what else he can achieve outside the sport with the resources to which his hard work and personal success has entitled him.

He doesn't owe the Blazers or anyone a hometown discount if a larger issue for him is giving his son the best life and funding children's developmental programs across the country.

Meh. Then let’s start over and try and find a young star through the draft that does have a hunger to win.

I’ve been a fan of the Blazers FAR before Lillard, I’ll be a fan long after.

My allegiance to the Blazers exceeds any player we’ve ever had.

 

[PCmor7]

Meh. Then let’s start over and try and find a young star through the draft that does have a hunger to win.

I’ve been a fan of the Blazers FAR before Lillard, I’ll be a fan long after.

My allegiance to the Blazers exceeds any player we’ve ever had.

That's fine. I'm just laying out the things that should be considered. Your opinion certainly is valid.

 

[LayneStaley]

If Grant walks, Dame will ask for a trade. Cronin has to resign Grant no matter the price. I'm fine with that, Grant is a big helper on this team. Blazers just need bigger stronger players so the shooters can shoot, and more reliable ball handlers so the shooters can shoot, and better defensive players so the shooters can shoot.

I don’t really see what Grant offers other than scoring(when he’s making shots), his rebounding and defense are subpar. Definitely not a 2nd or 3rd option on a contender. If Grant and Thybulle were our 4th and 5th best starters sure that would be great but 2nd and 3rd best isn’t gonna be enough. He’s a 20 mil per year player, unfortunately we will pay him more than anyone else will offer.

I wonder if there is another 6’8 player in the league who averages 36 min per game that actually gets less rebounds.

 

[TBpup]

That's a fair question to make and a conversation to have.

Another one is "If you think that's unlikely to happen, is it more of a priority to remain loyal to one of the best players and leaders in NBA history who has stayed loyal to you, even if it meant probably not competing for a ring in his career?"

And one other question: "Are the odds of seriously competing with 5 1st round picks instead of Damian Lillard significantly better than seriously competing with him?"

I think those are the real knotty questions the Blazers have to make and Blazer fans need to consider.

Part of the issue is, we haven't been competing with Dame. Endless sweeps out of the Playoffs isn't exactly competing. I admire the loyalty, but that is all it is. It hasn't translated into wins. Who knows what the 1st round picks would get us. Likely, not a singular player as good of a scorer as Dame, but would the results be that much worse in terms of being a contender? I love Dame, but I'm a Blazer fan first before any single player. I want the team to contend. Not every year, but it's been over 20 years. Not exactly in the ballpark of having a chance at real success.

 

[AngryFan]

I’m not saying I blame Dame for taking every dollar he can but I think it should be noted that even previous franchise greats like Dirk and Duncan took significant pay cuts in their later years to try to allow rosters to be built around them.

Both those other players had already delivered championships at that point and both were 7 footers that are easier/cheaper to build a contender around.

 

[wizenheimer]

Maybe the real question is….

Can we seriously compete for a ring with a non defense playing shoot first pg making 34% of the salary cap?

Warriors won 4 with the same template

 

[AngryFan]

Warriors won 4 with the same template

That is part of why we never had a chance. They are the same template with superior pieces.

 

[wizenheimer]

I’m not saying I blame Dame for taking every dollar he can but I think it should be noted that even previous franchise greats like Dirk and Duncan took significant pay cuts in their later years to try to allow rosters to be built around them.

Both those other players had already delivered championships at that point and both were 7 footers that are easier/cheaper to build a contender around.

poor comparison....both Dirk and Duncan had max salaries until they were 36. Dame's 32 and signed his extension when he was 31. He could still, just like those two guys, agree to a reduced salary at 36

Dame did accept less than the max when he signed his 2nd contract in his mid-twenties which is something neither Dirk or Duncan did, Dirk also got a max salary for one year at 38. And the Spurs had to waive and stretch Duncan's final season salary. He was still on their cap when he was 43

That is part of why we never had a chance. They are the same template with superior pieces.

so, it's not Dame then, it's the shit decisions of management and the penny-pinching Vulcan mindset out of Seattle that's been the problem

why would anything change if the same management and ownership was still in place after trading Dame?

 

[Natebishop3]

Warriors won 4 with the same template

Actually they did not. Curry was massively underpaid for most of that time.

 

[Natebishop3]

The Warriors got Curry for a song for his second contract.

 

[wizenheimer]

Actually they did not. Curry was massively underpaid for most of that time.

yeah, his rookie extension was a bargain because of major concerns about his health. Still doesn't change the reality of comparative rosters and style of play. Both player are PG's who play poor defense. Curry is obviously better, but he's also obviously had better talent around him and ownership willing to spend big time luxury tax. Dame is paid 34% of the cap; Curry is being paid 39% of the cap

my point is that the 34% of the cap number is NOT the reason Portland hasn't been able, and can't seem to be able, to build a contender

 

[Natebishop3]

yeah, his rookie extension was a bargain because of major concerns about his health. Still doesn't change the reality of comparative rosters and style of play. Both player are PG's who play poor defense. Curry is obviously better, but he's also obviously had better talent around him and ownership willing to spend big time luxury tax. Dame is paid 34% of the cap; Curry is being paid 39% of the cap

Yeah, but we're not trying to replicate their template now. They wouldn't have been able to build those championship teams if Curry was making 39% of their cap. Maybe their first one, but definitely not with Durant.

 

[e_blazer]

On the basic question of the thread title, I suppose we all have our favorite and least favorite players on the current team. I think it’s always more important to think about who you’re going to get. That impacts what players you have to give up to make the deal happen, which in turn influences who you need in order to fill the holes created in your roster.

 

[riverman]

The biggest difference with Dame's wealth is where he invests it....he invests it in Oregon. That's a franchise player.

 

[Tince]

part of the reason people are talking like that could be Portland's recent history of significantly overpaying the existing market for role players. Bidding against themselves. They did it with Turner, Crabbe, and Meyers. With CJ and Harkless. All got a lot more money than the market was at the time. And last summer the same thing happened with Ant, Nurk, and Payton.

I don't think there was a single chance that any team was going to swoop in and offer Nurkic more than what his current-st-the-time salary of 12M was. But Portland paid him 5.5M more a year than 12M. And there were only about 3 teams that could have offered Simons even 20M/year. But I don't believe any of those teams would have had interest in Simons. For instance, one of the teams was Indiana and they already had Haliburton, Hield, Duarte, Nembhard, TJ McConnell, and had just drafted Mathurin. Detroit was stocked at guard as well and had just drafted Jaden Ivey

that's why I was saying Portland overpaid. Not because of some comparison of league-wide salaries but because the market last summer for Ant + Nurk was nowhere near 43M/year. I'd say closer to 30M/year

so that leads to Grant and his impending free agency vs the worry about Cronin & Blazer management's history with free agents. Right now Grant represents Cronin's biggest success. He essentially, at this point, traded CJ for Grant, Thybulle, Reddish & a 1st round pick. Knowing CJ's flaws and fit with Dame, that's a good trade for the Blazers. But taking Grant out of the equation seriously degrades the value. Cronin may be over-motivated to re-sign Grant and his recent history with Ant & Nurk make that a legitimate worry

which leads to the market. If you assume there will be a 130M cap, then these are the teams that 'could' have that much cap-space:

Orlando Magic $99,825,364
Oklahoma City Thunder $97,104,155
Detroit Pistons $95,492,991
Indiana Pacers $95,452,116
Utah Jazz $91,116,018
Charlotte Hornets $86,528,072
San Antonio Spurs $84,157,979
Houston Rockets $68,984,207

(that's from BBREF so there will be lots of flux in those numbers)

there's no reason to go thru the teams. I've glanced at their rosters and cap situation and I have a really hard time seeing any of those teams setting their sights on Grant as a free agent prize. None would offer 30M and I'd really be amazed if any would even consider 20M

the market for Grant is not 30M...not even close. That's not saying that the Blazers won't pay him that much if they are fearing he might walk. But for once I'd like to see the Blazers hardball their way into a decent contract. Grant at 20-23M year is a positive tradable contract. At 30-35M/year, he's an albatross contract

I agree Portland has overpaid on FA and will likely do so again winth Grant this summer. Grant and his agent knows Portland losing him for nothing would be a massive setback and that's where their leverage comes from. Portland could play a game of chicken with Grant and his agency, but it would certainly come at a cost. Not to mention, this deal was almost certainly agreed to months ago.