The Blazers Player with the Most Trade Value is Lillard

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Natebishop3 said:
So is the exercise in this thread to get people to defend LA? Is that what you're going for? I have a hard time believing that you just spent the last two or three weeks railing about anyone who would trade Aldridge to now suddenly say that Dame is so much more valuable. If he is so much more valuable to the rest of the league than Aldridge, then he is also that much more valuable to us than Aldridge, so you're just killing your previous arguments about how important Aldirdge is to this team.
Click to expand...

I took time, read a bunch of homer and non-homer threads, and formed my own opinion based on what I think a GM would think. Lillard, in terms of getting an Exum or Wiggins, would be much more attractive to the team drafting one of them than LMA. That's just my opinion, of course, but to me it makes a lot of sense, objectively.
 
PapaG said:
I took time, read a bunch of homer and non-homer threads, and formed my own opinion based on what I think a GM would think. Lillard, in terms of getting an Exum or Wiggins, would be much more attractive to the team drafting one of them than LMA. That's just my opinion, of course, but to me it makes a lot of sense, objectively.
Click to expand...

But what's the point? Why trade one young star for another young star? You're essentially taking two steps back because the team is just going to have to go through the same growing pains of starting a rookie and letting him develop, except this time the pressure will be much higher because this team went to the second round. Lillard had almost no pressure coming into Portland. Wiggins might end up being a superstar, but that's yet to be seen. The whole point of trading Aldridge, if that were the route that Neil decided to go, would be to acquire another young star to play WITH Lillard. Plus, trading Lillard would probably anger Aldridge and he would just want out in a year anyway.
 
Natebishop3 said:
But what's the point? Why trade one young star for another young star? You're essentially taking two steps back because the team is just going to have to go through the same growing pains of starting a rookie and letting him develop, except this time the pressure will be much higher because this team went to the second round. Lillard had almost no pressure coming into Portland. Wiggins might end up being a superstar, but that's yet to be seen. The whole point of trading Aldridge, if that were the route that Neil decided to go, would be to acquire another young star to play WITH Lillard. Plus, trading Lillard would probably anger Aldridge and he would just want out in a year anyway.
Click to expand...

Why trade Tyrus Thomas for LMA? Why trade Randy Foye for Brandon Roy? Why make any trades at all, other than for obvious salary cap dumps?

Are you being obtuse?
 
PapaG said:
Why trade Tyrus Thomas for LMA? Why trade Randy Foye for Brandon Roy? Why make any trades at all, other than for obvious salary cap dumps?

Are you being obtuse?
Click to expand...

What does trading a rookie for a rookie have to do with this conversation? You're talking about trading a sophomore All-Star for a rookie. A known for an unknown.

But to humor this argument, let's take a look at the top four picks.

Cleveland - they have Irving, why would they want Lillard?

Milwaukee - sure they might trade the #2 for Dame.

Philly - they have MCW, and are rumored to want Exum so bad that they are considering a trade of Carter-Williams. They probably wouldn't want Lillard.

Orlando - if Exum is so good, why would they want Lillard over Exum? He might not even be there at #4.

So out of the top four teams, only Milwaukee might consider a trade for Lillard. That's one out of four teams that would value Lillard more than Aldridge.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Cleveland - they have Irving, why would they want Lillard?
Click to expand...

Because rumors are Irving wants out of Cleveland. Getting Lillard would make a trade for a veteran more attractive.

Milwaukee - sure they might trade the #2 for Dame.
Click to expand...

Along with other teams...

Philly - they have MCW, and are rumored to want Exum so bad that they are considering a trade of Carter-Williams. They probably wouldn't want Lillard.
Click to expand...

Michael Carter-Williams is in no way, form, or shape close to being an elite player, let alone earning a "MCW" nickname. If Exum is that great, the team drafting Exum would laugh in the face of Philly for offering Carter-Williams.

Orlando - if Exum is so good, why would they want Lillard over Exum? He might not even be there at #4.
Click to expand...

If Tyrus Thomas was so good, why wouldn't the Bulls draft him at #2?

So out of the top four teams, only Milwaukee might consider a trade for Lillard. That's one out of four teams that would value Lillard more than Aldridge.
Click to expand...

I disagree with your premise.
 
Y'all don't get the point of PapaG's thread.

Yallz is ruh-tards.

Just sayin'.

Nothing to debate here. He's just keeping it real for those that think we can (or need to) move up for some sure-fire stars, what we would have to give up to move up, and how realistic it is.
 
BLAZINGGIANTS said:
Nothing to debate here. He's just keeping it real for those that think we can (or need to) move up for some sure-fire stars, what we would have to give up to move up, and how realistic it is.
Click to expand...

That, in a nutshell, is it. Any trade for a "franchise" player in this draft, at least if Olshey sees it that way, and another GM doesn't, is going to cost a Lillard, and not a LMA.
 
BLAZINGGIANTS said:
Y'all don't get the point of PapaG's thread.

Yallz is ruh-tards.

Just sayin'.

Nothing to debate here. He's just keeping it real for those that think we can (or need to) move up for some sure-fire stars, what we would have to give up to move up, and how realistic it is.
Click to expand...

I get the point of it. I know exactly what he's trying to do, but sometimes it's just fun to argue :devilwink:
 
Natebishop3 said:
I get the point of it. I know exactly what he's trying to do, but sometimes it's just fun to argue :devilwink:
Click to expand...

Inject some realism into the Trade for So and So Draft Pick onslaught of trade ideas that will never, ever happen?
 
PapaG said:
Inject some realism into the Trade for So and So Draft Pick onslaught of trade ideas that will never, ever happen?
Click to expand...

This board typically come correct on stupidity and ridiculousness.

That's all PapaG is doing here. Arguing it "for fun" only makes it worse. Makes those look like lunatics, and I'm not talking about the rap group.
 
Last edited:
PapaG said:
Because rumors are Irving wants out of Cleveland. Getting Lillard would make a trade for a veteran more attractive.
Click to expand...

So you think that Dame has more appeal to veterans than Irving? That's debatable.

Along with other teams...
Click to expand...

Other teams don't have a top four pick, so if we're talking about trading him for an Exum or a Wiggins, this argument is narrowed down to three or four teams.


Michael Carter-Williams is in no way, form, or shape close to being an elite player, let alone earning a "MCW" nickname. If Exum is that great, the team drafting Exum would laugh in the face of Philly for offering Carter-Williams.
Click to expand...

That's not the point. The rumor is that they want to draft Exum and then trade MCW. If they think that highly of Exum, why would they trade their pick for Lillard?

If Tyrus Thomas was so good, why wouldn't the Bulls draft him at #2?
Click to expand...

You keep comparing apples to apples. That argument has no bearing whatsoever on this debate. We're not talking about trading one rookie for another rookie. We're talking about trading an All-Star for a rookie. The Bulls traded the #2 for the #4 in a weak draft. They thought highly of Thomas and Aldridge wasn't considered any kind of budding superstar coming out of college.

I disagree with your premise.
Click to expand...

I know you do.
 
Yeah, we're not at all on the same page, NB3. You can't even grasp that the point of this thread is being validated by your posts in it.
 
PapaG said:
Yeah, we're not at all on the same page, NB3. You can't even grasp that the point of this thread is being validated by your posts in it.
Click to expand...

:MARIS61:

Cue the "Super Stoopers" clip: "Oh, the humanity."
 
PapaG said:
Yeah, we're not at all on the same page, NB3. You can't even grasp that the point of this thread is being validated by your posts in it.
Click to expand...

I get the point of your thread G. I told you I get it. It's just another in a long line of threads where you sarcastically make one point to make fun of people who make another point.

But if you're going to make the point, I'm going to go ahead and debate it because that's the point of a forum.
 
e8Aw6h6.gif
 
Natebishop3 said:
I get the point of your thread G. I told you I get it. It's just another in a long line of threads where you sarcastically make one point to make fun of people who make another point.

But if you're going to make the point, I'm going to go ahead and debate it because that's the point of a forum.
Click to expand...

I 100% believe that Lillard is of more value around that league for a team drafting high than LMA is right now. If you're offended by what you interpret as me "making fun" of posters, that's on you. I made the thread, I offered what I consider to be a valid argument backed with contract status and other variables, and instead we yet again get you making a legitimate thread all about about you.
 
PapaG said:
I 100% believe that Lillard is of more value around that league for a team drafting high than LMA is right now. If you're offended by what you interpret as me "making fun" of posters, that's on you. I made the thread, I offered what I consider to be a valid argument backed with contract status and other variables, and instead we yet again get you making a legitimate thread all about about you.
Click to expand...

It's my world baby and you're just living in it.
 
I remember nothing from Round One except Lillard's come-from-behind bomb to bring the Blazers back from the brink of a 7-game series loss to a 6-game victory.

Just sayin'.
 
I say everyone in this thread is wrong. Whaddya think of that, all you fucks?
 
Hey I got as much as anyone else in the class of '44.
 
PapaG said:
If Exum really is going to be a superstar PG, or Wiggins a superstar SF, then Lillard is the one that would have the most trade value in getting either of them. The team getting Dame owns his rights for at least three more season (assuming Q. O. is offered), and gets a young All-Star PG. LMA isn't at all a realistic option for a rebuilding team, since he makes too much money, and is no guarantee to be with that team for more than one season. I suppose LMA could be traded at the deadline in 2015, but that's usually for cap space and draft picks, and would leave that team w/out either LMA or Lillard.

So, for those wanting to swing for the fences, Lillard is the player that will be the easiest to move for one of the drafted players. I don't think any other trade scenario is at all possible, nor do I think Lillard should be traded.
Click to expand...

You are all but correct. I think there are still a couple of scenarios where Aldridge would be more desirable. There are a couple of playoff teams that may be looking for A player to get them over the hump. Charlotte, Denver. A couple of established teams like LAL that has the ego to think they could build a title with Kobe and LMA

I also agree I wouldn't trade Lillard for anyone except Lebron or Durant as someone else said.
 
^Agreed. But if we were trading one of Dame and LA to one of those teams that'd likely prefer LA over Dame, we're probably not getting a high-enough pick to select the top-tier prospects with high ceiling that PapaG is even referring to.

So.... Yeah.
 
BLAZINGGIANTS said:
^Agreed. But if we were trading one of Dame and LA to one of those teams that'd likely prefer LA over Dame, we're probably not getting a high-enough pick to select the top-tier prospects with high ceiling that PapaG is even referring to.

So.... Yeah.
Click to expand...

Ya. I guess I was thinking using the pick with something else to move up.
 
Mediocre Man said:
Ya. I guess I was thinking using the pick with something else to move up.
Click to expand...

Crazy talk. That'd be a lot to give up to get in the top fee picks. LA and more assets? I suppose if there's someone you really feel good about that you have no doubts about.
 
Anyone considering trying to improve OUR team will not consider trading Lillard or Aldridge, and nobody from this year's draft even approaches their value.

Free agents and swaps involving our bench are the best sources for what we need now to go all the way.
 
BLAZINGGIANTS said:
Crazy talk. That'd be a lot to give up to get in the top fee picks. LA and more assets? I suppose if there's someone you really feel good about that you have no doubts about.
Click to expand...

Would it?

I look at things differently than most, so when I say that, I am taking into account the money we'd have in free agency, so I minus players like Aldridge and Matthews (for example) and see 20 million in cap room, plus Andrew Wiggins.


Just thinking out loud
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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