The off-season begins. Discuss.

[AngryFan]

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?

I don't think anyone that supports trading Dame thinks they can win a championship in the next 3-4 years from either path. That is just something you made up so you could knock down.

 

[Natebishop3]

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?

My goal is to win a championship in my lifetime. 3-4 years is not realistic unless someone gifts us a few top 5 players, or we win the lottery and Wemby ends up being a top 5 caliber player.

Dame presents a few challenges by simply being on the roster:

1. His contract - dude is making an insane amount of money and that makes it difficult to add talent around him.
2. His talents are enough to keep us in the hunt. We basically had to shut everyone down to get into the bottom 5. He's not going to want to do that again.

Our best bet to land top 5 players is by getting into the lottery. That's the reality of being in Portland. Is Shae a top 5 caliber guy? Hard to say at this point. He has a ton of talent but I'd say he's maybe a top 10 or top 15 caliber guy if he puts it all together.

So if we really want a ring we need a top 5 guy. Those are basically impossible to get unless you draft them or unless you're LA. So the draft is our best bet. That's not going to make Dame happy. So I'm sorry but destroying our future so we can go out and get some middling talents like Grant is simply not worth keeping Dame happy. I love the guy. He's my favorite player of all time.... but we have been on this treadmill for seven years. It's time to get off.

 

[Strenuus]

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.

I'm gonna be obtuse but he lead us directly to two series victories.

 

[Samuel]

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.

the Blazers can give him a 5th year and more money than anyone else. There’s a path—not a great one, but a path.

 

[Ed O]

"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.

Did you read my post? I don't think we can get a haul. We can get assets, though.

And that's better than being a mediocre team again where we don't even let our best players finish the season.

 

[wizenheimer]

I don't think anyone that supports trading Dame thinks they can win a championship in the next 3-4 years from either path. That is just something you made up so you could knock down.

no, it's not something I made up; it's something I reasoned

and LOL at what you just said....which is essentially that there's no way to win a championship in the next 4 years if Dame is traded. That almost certainly means not in the next 4-5 years, probably not the next 5-6 years, maybe not 7 years? 9 years?

Lebron didn't win a championship till his 9th season, and he did it in Miami, not Cleveland. Giannis didn't till his 8th season. Kawhi was in his 8th season when he led Toronto to the rings. Dirk didn't win a title till his 13th season. It took Durant till his 10th season to win a championship and he didn't do it on the team that drafted him

trading Dame is not anymore of a path to a championship than not trading him

 

[Ed O]

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
...
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?

I agree that there is no way for this team to get another player (or two) at Dame's level, which is what we need to compete for a title with Dame.

I don't think that winning a title in the next five years is reasonable no matter WHAT we do, but if we trade Dame soon, I think the next five years will be more interesting as fans. We will have hope for a bright future. We will look forward to draft night and to young players developing. Philadelphia made bad trades, missed on a bunch of picks, and STILL have had one of the best teams in the NBA (for six years in a row now) after four bad, BAD years. Should Philly have kept Holiday and Turner and Hawes and Young in order to keep building on those ~34-win seasons?

I'll take hope for the future and in our young guys any day compared to... last year (ended on a 2-22 or so streak) and this year (ended on a 3-18 or so streak, including losing by 56 points at home to end the year). We have an upside of mediocrity but are smart enough to be dreadful to end years. We only have one player of consequence on a rookie deal. We have lots of players that can't stay healthy. We have a dramatic lack of size across the roster.

There's no guarantee of a title after we trade Dame, but there's a guarantee of hope for a title that just doesn't exist right now.

 

[wizenheimer]

My goal is to win a championship in my lifetime.

I'm 71...I'm pretty sure you're a lot younger. Chances are my lifetime will be shorter than your lifetime. Way of the world. You should be more patient than me...your window is open a lot wider

Dame presents a few challenges by simply being on the roster:

1. His contract - dude is making an insane amount of money and that makes it difficult to add talent around him.

ok...I'll say it..I don't believe that...at all. Dame is making 34% of the cap. 10 NBA players make the same or more. Dame makes 42.4M. 20 NBA players make more than 37M. And Embiid & Jokic, who both make 33M will make more than Dame next season. 43 players make over 30M, and 6 more players will join that club next season

it IS NOT Dame's salary over the last 4 years or the next 4 years that is preventing roster upgrades; it's management. If Dame was making 10M less he'd be paid less than Middleton, Tobias Harris, Klay, Gobert, Trae Young, Siakam, LaVine, Ben Simmons, Myles Turner, KAT, Porzingis, Holiday, Wiggins, AND CJ. Are you really going to try and justify paying him less than any of those guys?

if Dame was paid 10M less the Blazers would have still been 13M OVER the salary cap. Which doesn't fucking matter anyway because when was the last time the Blazers signed an all-star free agent?

Our best bet to land top 5 players is by getting into the lottery. That's the reality of being in Portland. Is Shae a top 5 caliber guy? Hard to say at this point. He has a ton of talent but I'd say he's maybe a top 10 or top 15 caliber guy if he puts it all together.

So if we really want a ring we need a top 5 guy. Those are basically impossible to get unless you draft them or unless you're LA. So the draft is our best bet. That's not going to make Dame happy. So I'm sorry but destroying our future so we can go out and get some middling talents like Grant is simply not worth keeping Dame happy. I love the guy. He's my favorite player of all time.... but we have been on this treadmill for seven years. It's time to get off.

I don't know if you've advocated for Portland to trade Dame even if he doesn't want to be traded. I think that's the Rubicon for most of us.

I've said many times before that if Dame does ask out, Portland should launch a full scale rebuild. Trade Ant, Nurkic, Grant, and any other player of that level for all the draft capital they can land. Get deliberately bad and try to load up on draft picks. Trading Dame probably won't even net a single lottery pick, let alone a top-5 pick. Being a trash team for a few years is the only way to do that. So, in a way we agree.

 

[wizenheimer]

There's no guarantee of a title after we trade Dame, but there's a guarantee of hope for a title that just doesn't exist right now.

lol...c'mon man. There may be nothing more subjective than hope. I think a hell of a lot more hope will be killed by trading dame than keeping him

 

[julius]

The Blazers should trade Simons for Lauri Markkanen, who is a major PF talent who shoots and plays defense for a much lower salary cost than Siakim or other alternatives. Ask the Jazz. They may do it with Lauri off to Finland to fulfill his military obligation.

If Joe can't get a deal with the Jazz, explore what it would take to get Giannis on this team with Dame. With either Lauri or Giannis on the team, the Blazers are set to be contenders for the NBA Championship next year!

I can't tell if this was a joke post, of if the post had recently fell and hit its head and is now in concussion protocol. Because that is such an unrealistic and never going to happen trade scenario, that its almost difficult to read it and keep a straight face.

 

[julius]

I think Dame would be fine with Victor, especially if he's as good as they say he is.

 

[42N8Bounce]

I agree that there is no way for this team to get another player (or two) at Dame's level, which is what we need to compete for a title with Dame.

I don't think that winning a title in the next five years is reasonable no matter WHAT we do, but if we trade Dame soon, I think the next five years will be more interesting as fans. We will have hope for a bright future. We will look forward to draft night and to young players developing. Philadelphia made bad trades, missed on a bunch of picks, and STILL have had one of the best teams in the NBA (for six years in a row now) after four bad, BAD years. Should Philly have kept Holiday and Turner and Hawes and Young in order to keep building on those ~34-win seasons?

I'll take hope for the future and in our young guys any day compared to... last year (ended on a 2-22 or so streak) and this year (ended on a 3-18 or so streak, including losing by 56 points at home to end the year). We have an upside of mediocrity but are smart enough to be dreadful to end years. We only have one player of consequence on a rookie deal. We have lots of players that can't stay healthy. We have a dramatic lack of size across the roster.

There's no guarantee of a title after we trade Dame, but there's a guarantee of hope for a title that just doesn't exist right now.

I can't disagree with anything you said. Except, I don't ever want to see Dame were another team's jersey. The best Blazer ever should retire a Blazer.

 

[Ed O]

I can't disagree with anything you said. Except, I don't ever want to see Dame were another team's jersey. The best Blazer ever should retire a Blazer.

That's fair... I can't tell anyone else what to value from the Blazers. We just don't want the same things here.

 

[inconceivable]

Draymon Green. Yes or No?

 

[CJ_is_Gone]

No

 

[SharpesTriumph]

I'm 71...I'm pretty sure you're a lot younger. Chances are my lifetime will be shorter than your lifetime. Way of the world. You should be more patient than me...your window is open a lot wider

This is actually a very good point I never considered. A part of the appeal of a long rebuild to me is a young player that we would draft in the next 5+ years, that would have their peak 5-10 years later, and a contending window for the team of possibly 10+ years from now. It's not the sole hope or sole potential benefit of a rebuild, but yes it's a positive piece of it. If I was looking at being in my mid 80s at that time it might steer me to want a shorter horizon.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

I can't disagree with anything you said. Except, I don't ever want to see Dame were another team's jersey. The best Blazer ever should retire a Blazer.

I'm fine with the Blazers keeping Lillard until he retires. But they shouldn't trade away youth or picks unless the result is an immediate roster that's a contender.

I don't believe those moves are possible with where the current roster talent is at; but would love to be proven wrong on this last point. I'm fearful I'll instead be wrong on the first.

 

[THE HCP]

Including the people who have been saying to trade Dame.

Kinda like fire Stotts anybody would be better.

 

[Strenuus]

Kinda like fire Stotts anybody would be better.

That was a true statement though. Stotts was always awful. One of the best decisions ever made!

 

[SharpesTriumph]

That was a true statement though. Stotts was always awful. One of the best decisions ever made!

Disagree, Stotts had his flaws but he accomplished a lot with many shit rosters. He coached every Blazers playoff series win since Mike Dunleavey 23 years ago. Great guy and happy to have him associated with the franchise.

 

[Strenuus]

Disagree, Stotts had his flaws but he accomplished a lot with many shit rosters. He coached every Blazers playoff series win since Mike Dunleavey 23 years ago. Great guy and happy to have him associated with the franchise.

Great guy, yes.

One of the worst coaches to ever coach. But that's just common sense.

 

[perkinsfor3]

The Reggie Miller approach with Dame would be fine. Just dont throw a melee in his last season. Or do.

 

[UncleCliffy'sDaddy]

Great guy, yes.

One of the worst coaches to ever coach. But that's just common sense.

Somewhere along the line Terry Stotts must have pissed long and hard into your Cheerios......or refused your offer of a reach around? I'd suggest counseling, but then Terry has been out of the picture for two years now.......

 

[Chris Craig]

Great guy, yes.

One of the worst coaches to ever coach. But that's just common sense.

Better than Chauncey.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

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”.

I hope not....

 

[Tince]

That was a true statement though. Stotts was always awful. One of the best decisions ever made!

...for tanking.

 

[Strenuus]

Somewhere along the line Terry Stotts must have pissed long and hard into your Cheerios......or refused your offer of a reach around? I'd suggest counseling, but then Terry has been out of the picture for two years now.......

I'm just doing hyperbole for fun. He really wasn't a bad coach but I gotta keep up appearances.

 

[Predator]

I hope not....

Same, but to me it certainly seemed like he was laying the groundwork for it. Watch his exit interview and come up with your own conclusion. I pray I’m wrong!

 

[Natebishop3]

I'm just doing hyperbole for fun. He really wasn't a bad coach but I gotta keep up appearances.

You're a bad couch!

 

[RR7]

I think it's pretty obvious we need a big upgrade on the wing, and an upgrade at C, as well as an actual bench.
Started trying to find realistic targets at C. It's kind of rough. There's a handful of upgrades where, there's just very little shot to no shot in hell their team trades them here. Jokic, Jaren Jackson, Sabonis, Kessler, Bam, Jarret Allen.
There's the really really unlikely, but he's gonna get all of the attention, because what if Harden leaves in Embiid. I think the tough part with an Embiid trade is it likely takes every asset you have, with no other real avenue for improvement.
I suppose at this point, you start asking what sort of a C fits best with our scheme, or in general? There's the lateral moves, argue in either direction who is better, in Valanciunas, Steven Adams(How is this guy not even 30 yet?!), Vucevic, Wendell Carter Jr., Ayton, maybe a few others in that group.

I doubt many are available, but leaves guys like Mitchell Robinson, myles Turner, Nic Claxton, Clint Capela, Nick Richards. I prefer someone in this category, paid less, and having C by committee, but that doesn't really inspire "going for it", and doesn't give a sense of improvement, at least on paper.

I suppose if the Lakers flame out of the play in, you can try to make a big play for Davis. Simons, Nurk and the lotto pick. KAT's defense would keep us right where we currently are, needing to score 140 to win games on most nights.
I dunno, rambling on I suppose. Was trying to dive in to C upgrades and got depressed looking at the options.