The off-season begins. Discuss.

[tykendo]

I don't understand how attacking other posters over our hypothetical reaction to an undefined move is at all reasonable.

I didn't call for a trade of CJ, nor of Nance, nor anyone that we sent to the Clippers... I wasn't pleased with the returns of those trades because I thought it was treading water in the near term without adding any substantial assets in the long run. I wasn't a fan of trading for Grant because he hasn't been on very good teams, he doesn't rebound, and he's a pending free agent. I was critical of these moves because I didn't clamor for them and I didn't see them as net positives.

The Payton trade? Heck, yes, i liked it. I'm glad that dude is gone and I'm glad that we got some draft capital for what I thought was a terrible free agent signing... in retrospect, given we got value AND that no free agent we could have signed would have salvaged this season, I was wrong about the initial signing.

For me, personally, as good as Dame has been on the court and in the community, I won't criticize Cronin for whatever he gets. It's definitely not addition by subtraction, but the Dame era has run its course and we need to move in another direction. Maybe other people calling for Dame to be traded will be different, but not me.

"Dame Era has run it's course". Uh NO! That's ridiculous. The only teams that get the Blazers a so called HAUL, are the worst teams in the NBA. And they are all rebuilding with youth. Top team's assets for trade, that they would consider trading, are older players with large contracts as well. And their draft capital is end of round 1 fodder. I know you're not the biggest Dame fan, and want to move on. That's alright. But the Tom Foolery of thinking you can get a haul is silly, at best. At 59, I'm enjoying watching the greatest player in franchise history , and look forward to many more euphoric moments going forward. You don't trade generational players , unless that said player demands out like Durant.

 

[Predator]

Correct. He said a lot more in the 18 minute press conference.

Any time you trade away a young player for a player ready to win, then yes, there is a trade-off for now/ready vs potential. He also pointed out that last summer and at the deadline there were deals they weren't comfortable moving forward with and that could happen again this summer. So he went out of his way to point out that they will turn down moves if they don't make sense.

To me it sounded like he was saying that they might have to push forward on one of those deals they “turned down” and “live with the results” because that’s the cost of “trying to win now”.

 

[Predator]

Say no stars become available or asking costs are ridiculous, what's the prudent path? Say we had the type of offseason listed below, is that a good team? I tend to think so (with improvement from Shaedon, but what do I know).

draft Taylor Hendricks, re-sign Thybulle, pick up option on Knox, sign Kevin Love with an exception, sign Mason Plumlee and Cory Joseph with exceptions, trade NYN pick to Bulls to get our picks back?

Lillard/Joseph/Mays
Simons/Thybulle/Johnson
Sharpe/Nas/Hendricks/Knox
Grant/Love/Walker
Nurkic/Watford/Plumlee

I think that team is better than last year's team from a depth, size, and development perspective (for Sharpe, Watford), but I doubt it's a top 4 seed. I suppose the powder would be kept dry once we could consolidate all of the signings for a mid-season trade, not sure how long you can keep kicking the can down the road though.

The roster would still be lacking a point of attack defender and rim protector, and I don't see great free agents out there. Maybe you could move Nas for Davion Mitchell or something like that. Not sure who would be a good young rim protector that we could target.

teams have no reason not to milk us for all they can, so I’m sure Cronin is going to find out quickly that asking costs are gonna be sky high.

“we know you need to do this or Dame is gonna ask out…”

And that team still isnt good enough. Treadmill team. Really poor defensively and our GM just said Sharpe and Simons are both 2 guards.

 

[tykendo]

Say no stars become available or asking costs are ridiculous, what's the prudent path? Say we had the type of offseason listed below, is that a good team? I tend to think so (with improvement from Shaedon, but what do I know).

draft Taylor Hendricks, re-sign Thybulle, pick up option on Knox, sign Kevin Love with an exception, sign Mason Plumlee and Cory Joseph with exceptions, trade NYN pick to Bulls to get our picks back?

Lillard/Joseph/Mays
Simons/Thybulle/Johnson
Sharpe/Nas/Hendricks/Knox
Grant/Love/Walker
Nurkic/Watford/Plumlee

I think that team is better than last year's team from a depth, size, and development perspective (for Sharpe, Watford), but I doubt it's a top 4 seed. I suppose the powder would be kept dry once we could consolidate all of the signings for a mid-season trade, not sure how long you can keep kicking the can down the road though.

The roster would still be lacking a point of attack defender and rim protector, and I don't see great free agents out there. Maybe you could move Nas for Davion Mitchell or something like that. Not sure who would be a good young rim protector that we could target.

I'd find it hard to believe that's the best Joe could do. Danny Ainge, individually, helped the Lakers back to contention. Even if the Blazers don't get Wemby, or the #2 pick to deal for Bridges, i could see lesser deals for OG or Collins available on the lower side. Those players can help the Blazers. I think depth can be had as well with not being a repeater tax team team. Because the Blazers have been bad for multiple years, their future draft capital has a higher value now.

 

[wizenheimer]

I don't understand how attacking other posters over our hypothetical reaction to an undefined move is at all reasonable.

I didn't call for a trade of CJ, nor of Nance, nor anyone that we sent to the Clippers... I wasn't pleased with the returns of those trades because I thought it was treading water in the near term without adding any substantial assets in the long run. I wasn't a fan of trading for Grant because he hasn't been on very good teams, he doesn't rebound, and he's a pending free agent. I was critical of these moves because I didn't clamor for them and I didn't see them as net positives.

The Payton trade? Heck, yes, i liked it. I'm glad that dude is gone and I'm glad that we got some draft capital for what I thought was a terrible free agent signing... in retrospect, given we got value AND that no free agent we could have signed would have salvaged this season, I was wrong about the initial signing.

For me, personally, as good as Dame has been on the court and in the community, I won't criticize Cronin for whatever he gets. It's definitely not addition by subtraction, but the Dame era has run its course and we need to move in another direction. Maybe other people calling for Dame to be traded will be different, but not me.

I didn't attack other posters. What I implied was it's illogical to think Cronin is a bad GM who loses on trades, but should be the one to trade Dame.

and LOL at the "Dame era has run it's course"

 

[Samuel]

Trading Dame for pennies on the dollar would be unwise.

I'm not suggesting Portland 'dump Dame' (and you don't think I think that—you're just making stuff up).

I'm not really here for the fan concern over Dame's patience level. It is what it is at this point. He signed a supermax extension with Jody/Bert/Cronin/Chauncey all aboard—eyes wide open. I think we all want the team to accelerate its timeline. But in my opinion the easiest path to contention (actual contention, mind you) for this team is by nailing high draft picks. Period.

They have less chips than most of the other players at the table; going 'all-in'—based on a clear-eyed look at the marketplace—is a quick trip back to the 4 seed.

 

[tykendo]

I'm not suggesting Portland 'dump Dame' (and you don't think I think that—you're just making stuff up).

I'm not really here for the fan concern over Dame's patience level. It is what it is at this point. He signed a supermax extension with Jody/Bert/Cronin/Chauncey all aboard—eyes wide open. I think we all want the team to accelerate its timeline. But in my opinion the easiest path to contention (actual contention, mind you) for this team is by nailing high draft picks. Period.

They have less chips than most of the other players at the table; going 'all-in'—based on a clear-eyed look at the marketplace—is a quick trip back to the 4 seed.

The Blazers have "less chips". I don't think so, due to the fact , their draft capital will have higher value than current contending teams , because of record alone. I think lots of teams will be moving good player this offseason searching for better fits. Joe & Staff have done a nice job of getting the Blazers in a place to make quality, season changing moves. I'm gonna stay positive. Being negative is too hard on the heart and soul.

 

[Strenuus]

People said that last year. He’s not asking for a trade this year, next year, or the year after that. He’s made that so clear.

But it wasn't until yesterday where his verbage has changed. It's all I'm saying. I feel it's ultimatum time with dame even if he has said he's loyal. It's a really weird time and it's been about 5 years in the making.

 

[Strenuus]

It’s just December.

Lmao. You win!

 

[Strenuus]

Disagree. Ant is younger and has already done more than CJ has done at a younger age. His value is higher than when we sold CJ.

You know, perhaps. But he's still a CJ type player so it's not going to be enough IMO. He's not a "get a 2nd star player" type asset in conjunction with the other pieces. He's good, not great.

 

[KingSpeed]

That trade doesn't even get close to getting brown. Lol.

Al Jefferson = KG
3rd pick (Jeff Green)= Ray Allen

Those trades actually happened and Boston won the title that season. So why not Ant/pick5/Nas for Jaylen Brown?

 

[Strenuus]

It depends what Jaylen wants, and where Jaylen indicates he'd be willing to re-sign. If he was already on a 3-4 year deal, I would agree.

Because of the extension rules, anyone trading for Jaylen NEEDS to know he's willing to re-sign, because he's going to hit UFA no matter what.

That's fair from both you and @AmirIcon . I get it.

 

[Strenuus]

Al Jefferson = KG
3rd pick (Jeff Green)= Ray Allen

Those trades actually happened and Boston won the title that season. So why not Ant/pick5/Nas for Jaylen Brown?

Because it takes a really stupid GM to say yes to it? Lol.

 

[AngryFan]

Al Jefferson = KG
3rd pick (Jeff Green)= Ray Allen

Those trades actually happened and Boston won the title that season. So why not Ant/pick5/Nas for Jaylen Brown?

I think their teams were trying to do both those guys a solid by sending them to a team with a chance to contend. I also think values of proven players have changed since then. Gobert, etc go for a kings ransom these days.

 

[Natebishop3]

If I have a choice on being Utah in the Gobert trade or Minnesota, I would rather be Utah this summer. I don’t want to see our team pay through the nose for a guy that might not even move the needle for us.

Is Joe capable of getting a Gobert haul for Dame? I have my doubts. I think it’s more likely that he’s the dude who sells the farm to get a marginal upgrade like Gobert.

 

[TBpup]

Okay, I'll play along. I don't think the "Dame era" has run it's course, but what about it has been that great of an "era" from a team standpoint? Great individual numbers, but from a team standpoint, it has been almost entirely mediocrity. One Western Conference Finals appearance with 0 game wins, and we got there because Ant usurped Stotts intentions and we ended up beating the dysfunctional Thunder and the baby Nuggets. On the other side, we were swept as a #3 seed, and swept out of the majority of Playoff appearances we were in. We are sub .500 3 of the last 4 years. That is not to say it is Dame's fault, but if it is his era, than that is the history of it. He has had some miraculous, thrilling individual moments, but in terms of team results during that era, what exactly are we holding on to if that "era" happens to be finished?

We have averaged a #7 finish in 11 seasons. We have an average of 2 Playoff wins per season during that time. What is there to cling to so tightly? We all have a different view of what we want for the Blazers. Some are content with it just being entertainment regardless of outcome. Some people are happy with a contender once or twice in their lifetime as a memory. Some people want a contender much more often. I am somewhere in the middle. I enjoy the entertainment, but at some point after seeing the basically the same thing over and over again, would like something new and preferably better if it hasn't been great.

It's been since 2000 since this franchise has a Conference Finals win, so it doesn't seem like I'm pressing too hard to look to the next generation or "era" as it's been since when Watford and Little were born that we were a contender. This is not placing blame on any one player, coach, or front office person. Just ready for something different and hoping for something better. Given out #8, #6, #13, #13 finishes in the last 4 seasons, that doesn't seem to be going too far out on a limb.

 

[HailBlazers]

What do we have to cling to? The clutchest player in Blazer history. Surely that deserves a proper roster.

 

[Natebishop3]

Okay, I'll play along. I don't think the "Dame era" has run it's course, but what about it has been that great of an "era" from a team standpoint? Great individual numbers, but from a team standpoint, it has been almost entirely mediocrity. One Western Conference Finals appearance with 0 game wins, and we got there because Ant usurped Stotts intentions and we ended up beating the dysfunctional Thunder and the baby Nuggets. On the other side, we were swept as a #3 seed, and swept out of the majority of Playoff appearances we were in. We are sub .500 3 of the last 4 years. That is not to say it is Dame's fault, but if it is his era, than that is the history of it. He has had some miraculous, thrilling individual moments, but in terms of team results during that era, what exactly are we holding on to if that "era" happens to be finished?

We have averaged a #7 finish in 11 seasons. We have an average of 2 Playoff wins per season during that time. What is there to cling to so tightly? We all have a different view of what we want for the Blazers. Some are content with it just being entertainment regardless of outcome. Some people are happy with a contender once or twice in their lifetime as a memory. Some people want a contender much more often. I am somewhere in the middle. I enjoy the entertainment, but at some point after seeing the basically the same thing over and over again, would like something new and preferably better if it hasn't been great.

It's been since 2000 since this franchise has a Conference Finals win, so it doesn't seem like I'm pressing too hard to look to the next generation or "era" as it's been since when Watford and Little were born that we were a contender. This is not placing blame on any one player, coach, or front office person. Just ready for something different and hoping for something better. Given out #8, #6, #13, #13 finishes in the last 4 seasons, that doesn't seem to be going too far out on a limb.

Also add that I disagree that with some people saying that Dame presents our best chance at winning a ring.

Dame by himself will never be enough to win a ring. We know this because we have seen it time and time again. Dame isn't good enough to will us to a series victory. He needs help. Is there a path to put enough talent around Dame to win a ring before he's past his prime? It is seeming very unlikely.

What teams have won a ring after quickly putting together a roster of superstars in recent memory? Here are the champs from the past 20 years:

Warriors - drafted Curry, Klay, Draymond
Bucks - drafted Giannis and developed Middleton after trading for him at 22 years old.
Lakers - signed LeBron and traded for AD.
Raptors - traded for Kawhi with an already complete team.
Warriors - drafted Curry, Klay, Draymond and signed Durant
Warriors - drafted Curry, Klay, Draymond and signed Durant
Cavs - signed LeBron, drafted Kyrie, traded for Love
Warriors - drafted Curry, Klay, Draymond
Spurs - drafted Duncan, Parker, Manu, and traded for rookie Kawhi.
Heat - drafted Wade, signed LeBron and Bosh
Heat - drafted Wade, signed LeBron and Bosh
Mavs - drafted Dirk, traded for Kidd
Lakers - drafted Kobe, traded for Pau
Lakers - drafted Kobe, traded for Pau
Celtics - drafted Pierce, traded for Garnett and Allen.
Spurs - drafted Duncan, Parker, Manu
Heat - drafted Wade, traded for Shaq
Spurs - drafted Duncan, Parker, Manu
Pistons - acquired Billups, Sheed, Ben, Hamilton
Spurs - drafted Duncan, Parker, Manu

So which scenario from the past 20 years would fit our current situation?

The Raptors? Who is our Siakim? Who are we going to get on Kawhi's level?
The Bucks? Okay, let's so we're able to go get an equivalent to Jrue, who is our Middleton? is it Grant or Simons?
The Mavs? Are they a good comparison to our current situation? An aging superstar player who still has something left in the tank. Okay, let's go with the Mavs. What did their roster look like the year that they won?

Dirk
Kidd
Jason Terry
Caron Butler
Shawn Marion
Tyson Chandler
JJ Barea
Peja Stojakovic
Brendan Haywood

Can we build a team of veteran players who can defend in a matter of a couple years? Probably not. So maybe the Celtics with Pierce are a better comparison? Who is going to be our Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen?

Most of the teams who have won in the past 20 years either drafted their superstars (Warriors, Bucks, Lakers, Spurs) or they had LeBron decide to go there and they added pieces. The chances of us pulling off what the Mavs or Celtics did is very very slim. Yes, Dame is the best Blazer of all time, but do we have better odds of putting a championship team around him or do we have better odds building around Sharpe and our lottery pick? Get the huge contractors off our team and try to make a run. I'd love to get Vegas' odds on either direction.

 

[Natebishop3]

What do we have to cling to? The clutchest player in Blazer history. Surely that deserves a proper roster.

How do you get one of those in short order?

 

[AngryFan]

Also add that I disagree that with some people saying that Dame presents our best chance at winning a ring.

Dame by himself will never be enough to win a ring. We know this because we have seen it time and time again. Dame isn't good enough to will us to a series victory. He needs help. Is there a path to put enough talent around Dame to win a ring before he's past his prime? It is seeming very unlikely.

What teams have won a ring after quickly putting together a roster of superstars in recent memory? Here are the champs from the past 20 years:

Warriors - drafted Curry, Klay, Draymond
Bucks - drafted Giannis and developed Middleton after trading for him at 22 years old.
Lakers - signed LeBron and traded for AD.
Raptors - traded for Kawhi with an already complete team.
Warriors - drafted Curry, Klay, Draymond and signed Durant
Warriors - drafted Curry, Klay, Draymond and signed Durant
Cavs - signed LeBron, drafted Kyrie, traded for Love
Warriors - drafted Curry, Klay, Draymond
Spurs - drafted Duncan, Parker, Manu, and traded for rookie Kawhi.
Heat - drafted Wade, signed LeBron and Bosh
Heat - drafted Wade, signed LeBron and Bosh
Mavs - drafted Dirk, traded for Kidd
Lakers - drafted Kobe, traded for Pau
Lakers - drafted Kobe, traded for Pau
Celtics - drafted Pierce, traded for Garnett and Allen.
Spurs - drafted Duncan, Parker, Manu
Heat - drafted Wade, traded for Shaq
Spurs - drafted Duncan, Parker, Manu
Pistons - acquired Billups, Sheed, Ben, Hamilton
Spurs - drafted Duncan, Parker, Manu

So which scenario from the past 20 years would fit our current situation?

The Raptors? Who is our Siakim? Who are we going to get on Kawhi's level?
The Bucks? Okay, let's so we're able to go get an equivalent to Jrue, who is our Middleton? is it Grant or Simons?
The Mavs? Are they a good comparison to our current situation? An aging superstar player who still has something left in the tank. Okay, let's go with the Mavs. What did their roster look like the year that they won?

Dirk
Kidd
Jason Terry
Caron Butler
Shawn Marion
Tyson Chandler
JJ Barea
Peja Stojakovic
Brendan Haywood

Can we build a team of veteran players who can defend in a matter of a couple years? Probably not. So maybe the Celtics with Pierce are a better comparison? Who is going to be our Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen?

Most of the teams who have won in the past 20 years either drafted their superstars (Warriors, Bucks, Lakers, Spurs) or they had LeBron decide to go there and they added pieces. The chances of us pulling off what the Mavs or Celtics did is very very slim. Yes, Dame is the best Blazer of all time, but do we have better odds of putting a championship team around him or do we have better odds building around Sharpe and our lottery pick? Get the huge contractors off our team and try to make a run. I'd love to get Vegas' odds on either direction.

What that list really shows is that the Blazers need a top 5 player. It sucks but I think it is going to take going all in and having it blow up in our face for fans to realize that Dame isn't on the level of the guys that lead their teams to championships.

 

[Natebishop3]

What's our best chance of pulling off a Celtics renovation?

Dame is our pierce. Who is KG and Ray Allen?

Embiid and Brown?

If we were to renounce all our cap holds and we win a top 3 pick, can we move enough assets to acquire both of those players? And then who do we go get to fill out the roster?

Simons/Nurk/Little/pick for Embiid.

Sharpe/NYK pick/future first for Brown? Can we absorb his contract if we renounce all cap holds?

Dame/Brown/Embiid is the kind of core that you need to win a ring, but we'd have to blow up the team to get it and I'm not sure if we'd have enough to get Brown if we went after Embiid. And then how do you get enough talent on your bench to back them up?

 

[Natebishop3]

What that list really shows is that the Blazers need a top 5 player. It sucks but I think it is going to take going all in and having it blow up in our face for fans to realize that Dame isn't on the level of the guys that lead their teams to championships.

Yup. Dame is top 10, and on some nights he is a top 5 talent, but he's not a guy that can just completely dominate a series on both ends like a LeBron or a Giannis. He needs a team around him like Curry has with the Warriors.

 

[BankTeller]

What's our best chance of pulling off a Celtics renovation?

Dame is our pierce. Who is KG and Ray Allen?

Embiid and Brown?

If we were to renounce all our cap holds and we win a top 3 pick, can we move enough assets to acquire both of those players? And then who do we go get to fill out the roster?

Simons/Nurk/Little/pick for Embiid.

Sharpe/NYK pick/future first for Brown? Can we absorb his contract if we renounce all cap holds?

Dame/Brown/Embiid is the kind of core that you need to win a ring, but we'd have to blow up the team to get it and I'm not sure if we'd have enough to get Brown if we went after Embiid. And then how do you get enough talent on your bench to back them up?

Nothing is bringing BOTH Embiid and Brown here. There’s a chance neither guy is actually available.

 

[Tince]

I'm not suggesting Portland 'dump Dame' (and you don't think I think that—you're just making stuff up).

I'm not really here for the fan concern over Dame's patience level. It is what it is at this point. He signed a supermax extension with Jody/Bert/Cronin/Chauncey all aboard—eyes wide open. I think we all want the team to accelerate its timeline. But in my opinion the easiest path to contention (actual contention, mind you) for this team is by nailing high draft picks. Period.

They have less chips than most of the other players at the table; going 'all-in'—based on a clear-eyed look at the marketplace—is a quick trip back to the 4 seed.

I don't think you think that nor am I making stuff up.

I don't want to trade Dame at a major discount for the sake of getting rid of him. That's my stance. I don't know or have your stance memorized, but I take you at your word that you don't want to dump him either. I don't know what the minimum you're willing to take in return for trading him either.

 

[HailBlazers]

How do you get one of those in short order?

By getting just enough to give Dame hope.

 

[Samuel]

I don't think you think that nor am I making stuff up.

I don't want to trade Dame at a major discount for the sake of getting rid of him. That's my stance. I don't know or have your stance memorized, but I take you at your word that you don't want to dump him either. I don't know what the minimum you're willing to take in return for trading him either.

I think what any GM wants; a boat of firsts—the more the better, 1 young player, and short term salary filler. If you trade Dame you'd also have to slickly maneuver a S&T with Jerami Grant too, for someone younger. No idea who that would be.

I'm not saying we 'have' to trade Dame, but I wouldn't make a 'gun to my head lotto overpay for a meh piece' trade either. GMs always look silly doing that.

 

[BankTeller]

I think what any GM wants; a boat of firsts—the more the better, 1 young player, and short term salary filler. If you trade Dame you'd also have to slickly maneuver a S&T with Jerami Grant too, for someone younger. No idea who that would be.

I'm not saying we 'have' to trade Dame, but I wouldn't make a 'gun to my head lotto overpay for a meh piece' trade either. GMs always look silly doing that.

There’s a high likelihood that Grant will just go to a non contender for the most money offered so he can get his numbers again. In that case, a S&T is moot.

 

[wizenheimer]

Also add that I disagree that with some people saying that Dame presents our best chance at winning a ring.

Dame by himself will never be enough to win a ring. We know this because we have seen it time and time again. Dame isn't good enough to will us to a series victory. He needs help. Is there a path to put enough talent around Dame to win a ring before he's past his prime? It is seeming very unlikely.

What teams have won a ring after quickly putting together a roster of superstars in recent memory? Here are the champs from the past 20 years:

Warriors - drafted Curry, Klay, Draymond
Bucks - drafted Giannis and developed Middleton after trading for him at 22 years old.
Lakers - signed LeBron and traded for AD.
Raptors - traded for Kawhi with an already complete team.
Warriors - drafted Curry, Klay, Draymond and signed Durant
Warriors - drafted Curry, Klay, Draymond and signed Durant
Cavs - signed LeBron, drafted Kyrie, traded for Love
Warriors - drafted Curry, Klay, Draymond
Spurs - drafted Duncan, Parker, Manu, and traded for rookie Kawhi.
Heat - drafted Wade, signed LeBron and Bosh
Heat - drafted Wade, signed LeBron and Bosh
Mavs - drafted Dirk, traded for Kidd
Lakers - drafted Kobe, traded for Pau
Lakers - drafted Kobe, traded for Pau
Celtics - drafted Pierce, traded for Garnett and Allen.
Spurs - drafted Duncan, Parker, Manu
Heat - drafted Wade, traded for Shaq
Spurs - drafted Duncan, Parker, Manu
Pistons - acquired Billups, Sheed, Ben, Hamilton
Spurs - drafted Duncan, Parker, Manu

So which scenario from the past 20 years would fit our current situation?

The Raptors? Who is our Siakim? Who are we going to get on Kawhi's level?
The Bucks? Okay, let's so we're able to go get an equivalent to Jrue, who is our Middleton? is it Grant or Simons?
The Mavs? Are they a good comparison to our current situation? An aging superstar player who still has something left in the tank. Okay, let's go with the Mavs. What did their roster look like the year that they won?

Dirk
Kidd
Jason Terry
Caron Butler
Shawn Marion
Tyson Chandler
JJ Barea
Peja Stojakovic
Brendan Haywood

Can we build a team of veteran players who can defend in a matter of a couple years? Probably not. So maybe the Celtics with Pierce are a better comparison? Who is going to be our Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen?

Most of the teams who have won in the past 20 years either drafted their superstars (Warriors, Bucks, Lakers, Spurs) or they had LeBron decide to go there and they added pieces. The chances of us pulling off what the Mavs or Celtics did is very very slim. Yes, Dame is the best Blazer of all time, but do we have better odds of putting a championship team around him or do we have better odds building around Sharpe and our lottery pick? Get the huge contractors off our team and try to make a run. I'd love to get Vegas' odds on either direction.

you've gone thru a lot of work to list 2 options for Portland...it seems

and what's clear, or at least seems to be clear, from your list is that the Blazers need a player as good as Dame, and maybe a player better. But there is not player anywhere close to as hood as Dame on the roster. Ant-Grant-Nurkic are at a level about 3 tiers below Dame. So they aren't part of the equation or formula

so the issue is that Portland needs to land a player as good as, or better than Dame, and who is almost certainly a wing. But I have yet to see one of you guys who are incessantly saying to trade Dame explain how trading away a top 10 player directly leads to landing two top-10 players; or a top-5 player and a top-20 player. There's no formula for that in trading Dame that is demonstrably better than the one in keeping Dame. In fact, any honest application of logic would say that if a championship depends on having an A+B, it's better to have the B and be looking for the A, than to have a couple of D's and a couple of F's, and a bunch of K's and praying to land both that A+B. Keeping Dame at least keeps Portland around 45-50% there while trading him leaves the Blazer 0% there

in other words, what is the actual benefit of trading Dame if a championship in the next 3-4 years is the goal? What is the championship payoff?

what team actually traded away their only elite player leaving them with no all-stars, and won a championship in the next 5 years?

 

[e_blazer]

This kind of feels like it sums up the Blazers’ season:

 

[e_blazer]

There’s a high likelihood that Grant will just go to a non contender for the most money offered so he can get his numbers again. In that case, a S&T is moot.

I don’t think there’s a high likelihood of that happening at all.