The Official CJ McCollum Thread

[BonesJones]

Here's a hypothetical.

Right now, we have Dame averaging around 27 ppg, CJ at 21, and Nurk at 14.5.

Let's say a change in the offense got Nurk's average to up around 20 ppg, and you had a chance to trade CJ for a wing who would only average 14-15, but would be an asset on *both* ends. Would you do that - or would you want to keep CJ because of the "he could go off for 30!" factor?

This will probably piss some people off, but I would do it simply because I don't think Nurk can reach his full potential playing with CJ - and if he did, CJ would become a problem child.

I'd take Nurk averaging 20. He'd do it more efficiency itd he ever got to that level.

 

[illmatic99]

Here's a hypothetical.

Right now, we have Dame averaging around 27 ppg, CJ at 21, and Nurk at 14.5.

Let's say a change in the offense got Nurk's average to up around 20 ppg, and you had a chance to trade CJ for a wing who would only average 14-15, but would be an asset on *both* ends. Would you do that - or would you want to keep CJ because of the "he could go off for 30!" factor?

This will probably piss some people off, but I would do it simply because I don't think Nurk can reach his full potential playing with CJ - and if he did, CJ would become a problem child.

I don't agree with your premise that CJ is hindering Nurk. I think it's more the system and his own development more than anything. He might get there in a year or so.

But yes in your scenario, I would make that move. Not sure a 3 & D wing like that is on the market unfortunately.

My only fear with trading CJ is losing a one on one guy who can create in the playoffs. We've only ever seen this Dame/CJ thing with Terry. Would another coach better design the offense? Don't we need to see that? I think CJ is gonna blow up into an all star (esp in the east) if he ever gets on the right team

 

[Scalma]

Here's a hypothetical.

Right now, we have Dame averaging around 27 ppg, CJ at 21, and Nurk at 14.5.

Let's say a change in the offense got Nurk's average to up around 20 ppg, and you had a chance to trade CJ for a wing who would only average 14-15, but would be an asset on *both* ends. Would you do that - or would you want to keep CJ because of the "he could go off for 30!" factor?

This will probably piss some people off, but I would do it simply because I don't think Nurk can reach his full potential playing with CJ - and if he did, CJ would become a problem child.

So, trade CJ for someone like Robert Covington? Yes, of course. I would trade CJ just to get rid of his contract. Even when he’s on I wonder how much he’s actually helping the team, considering what he gives up on the other end. I’m not even hating, just pay attention to the guy CJ is guarding. Actually, you don’t even have to pay attention. It’s almost always the guy doing the most damage.

 

[Scalma]

I’m just going to pretend Nurkic has Mccollums contract and vice versa. There...much better.

 

[hoopsjock]

So, trade CJ for someone like Robert Covington? Yes, of course. I would trade CJ just to get rid of his contract. Even when he’s on I wonder how much he’s actually helping the team, considering what he gives up on the other end. I’m not even hating, just pay attention to the guy CJ is guarding. Actually, you don’t even have to pay attention. It’s almost always the guy doing the most damage.

In 10 days would the Wolves do this? (Edit: The 10 days is when Covington can be combined in trades)

Covington and Dieng to the Blazers

Turner and Aminu to the Wolves

Then we could trade CJ for the best offer and not really have to worry about getting a replacement wing back.

 

[hoopsjock]

I’m just going to pretend Nurkic has Mccollums contract and vice versa. There...much better.

Or

CJ, Leonard, Aminu, and Swanigan for Covington, Gibson, Dieng, and Tolliver (Maybe throw in a pick)?

 

[Scalma]

In 10 days would the Wolves do this?

Covington and Dieng to the Blazers

Turner and Aminu to the Wolves

Maybe if we added our pick. But Covington is such a Thibs player. I think Saric would be easier to get.

 

[hoopsjock]

Maybe if we added our pick.

I don't know, that is a lot of future salary they get rid of.

 

[Scalma]

Saric and Dieng for Turner and Trent.

 

[Jade Falcon]

I just saw this in an article about last night's game:

The Blazers needed just about every number Nurkic could find. Lillard and McCollum went a combined 1-14 from three-point range and were outscored by 20 in the fastbreak category

That's beyond pathetic. Dame has an excuse with his cold, but it seems to me like McCollum has been bad in these two categories for a while now.

We need a trade. He needs to go to the right team, because this team isn't it for him if he's putting up those kinds of stats.

 

[illmatic99]

Has everyone given up on CJ working here? He's got so much skill, but I feel like he's used wrong. I don't see the point of some of these trade proposals where people are just dumping him. He's not that bad.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Has everyone given up on CJ working here? He's got so much skill, but I feel like he's used wrong. I don't see the point of some of these trade proposals where people are just dumping him. He's not that bad.

We have 2 guards who struggle on defense and who need the ball in their hands to be effective. I think people are begining to question whether Dame and CJ actually compliment each other that well on the court. If CJ could play defense, or was a better playmaker, or if he was effective playing off the ball, it would make a world of difference. As is, I'm not sure you can say Stotts is using him wrong, as there is no *right* way to use him alongside Dame. He is what he is - a ball dominant scorer of so-so efficiency.

 

[Scalma]

We have 2 guards who struggle on defense and who need the ball in their hands to be effective. I think people are begining to question whether Dame and CJ actually compliment each other that well on the court. If CJ could play defense, or was a better playmaker, or if he was effective playing off the ball, it would make a world of difference. As is, I'm not sure you can say Stotts is using him wrong, as there is no *right* way to use him alongside Dame. He is what he is - a ball dominant scorer of so-so efficiency.

If McCollum wasn’t making the money he’s making, he would be an amazing sixth man. But since he’s getting paid more than Anthony Davis, he should be making a bigger impact than the occasional outburst, and the consistent inconsistency.

 

[oldmangrouch]

If McCollum wasn’t making the money he’s making, he would be an amazing sixth man. But since he’s getting paid more than Anthony Davis, he should be making a bigger impact than the occasional outburst, and the consistent inconsistency.

Amen! Find a more versatile player to start alongside Dame, and minimize the time CJ and Dame are on the court together. Olshey wouldn't do it in a million years, but the Blazers would be a stronger *team*.

 

[Scalma]

Amen! Find a more versatile player to start alongside Dame, and minimize the time CJ and Dame are on the court together. Olshey wouldn't do it in a million years, but the Blazers would be a stronger *team*.

Easy fix, fire Neil.

 

[tlongII]

It's ridiculous that people in here shit on CJ all the time. The problem with our team is at FORWARD! It's so obvious that it boggles my mind to think people believe the answer to our problems is getting rid of CJ. What is wrong with you people???

 

[PtldPlatypus]

It's ridiculous that people in here shit on CJ all the time. The problem with our team is at FORWARD! It's so obvious that it boggles my mind to think people believe the answer to our problems is getting rid of CJ. What is wrong with you people???

If getting rid of CJ could garner an upgrade at forward, doesn't that address both concerns?

 

[tlongII]

If getting rid of CJ could garner an upgrade at forward, doesn't that address both concerns?

No it does not. Who on this team plays 2 guard as effectively as CJ?

 

[PtldPlatypus]

No it does not. Who on this team plays 2 guard as effectively as CJ?

Good question, although the way Curry has been playing lately, an argument can be made for him. Regardless, this question is why the ideas that have been bandied about lately have included both an upgrade at forward AND an able replacement at SG, usually someone bigger than CJ who is better defensively and more apt to play off the ball rather than seek to create for himself.

 

[hoopsjock]

No it does not. Who on this team plays 2 guard as effectively as CJ?

Well there is the problem. CJ is shooting inefficiently, is not a good passer/rebounder/defender, and has a huge contract.

So I ask you what of that is not replaceable? He can create his own offense, sure. Does that outweigh all the negative stuff though?

 

[hoopsjock]

It's ridiculous that people in here shit on CJ all the time. The problem with our team is at FORWARD! It's so obvious that it boggles my mind to think people believe the answer to our problems is getting rid of CJ. What is wrong with you people???

The other problem is that it is very difficult to upgrade the forward problem and keep CJ. Of course if there is a move available to do so then you try that first, it's just been 3 seasons without that so for it to happen now is unlikely.

 

[Scalma]

I would take a downgrade at shooting guard if it meant upgrading somewhere else, specifically forward. His inefficient 18 shots a game, no other consistent contribution, and huge contract would not be missed.

 

[dviss1]

Who do you think should be the focus of our ire for the team's struggles?

I've found that emitting negative energy is detrimental.

But the answer to this isn't CJ or Stotts.

It's Olshey.

 

[illmatic99]

It's ridiculous that people in here shit on CJ all the time. The problem with our team is at FORWARD! It's so obvious that it boggles my mind to think people believe the answer to our problems is getting rid of CJ. What is wrong with you people???

Ya I don't see the reasoning behind plugging up one hole while creating another.

 

[hoopsjock]

Ya I don't see the reasoning behind plugging up one whole while creating another.

I'm all for plugging all the holes. What out there could accomplish that?

 

[illmatic99]

I'm all for plugging all the holes. What out there could accomplish that?

Certainly not with salary dumps or Otto Porter. I down for trading CJ. Nothing proposed seems all that enticing to me.

If we can get something like a trade I proposed earlier in the forum (CJ + Salary fillers for Aaron Gordon and Fournier), it would be ideal. unfortunately, such a deal is not really plausible.

 

[BonesJones]

We are a season and a half away from Harkless, Turner and Leonard expiring and next year it might be easier to move one or all and if not they then come off the books. The contracts were definitely a mistake, but I don't want it to be magnified by having to lose other assets just to move a contract. We need all the assets we can accumulate for when we are in position to do something. I am 64 and still have patience while it appears we have a lot of trigger happy fans that just want change for changes sake. Too many grass is always greener on the other side fans for my taste. I would much rather be a fan of the Blazers than the majority of the teams in the NBA.

Would you trade a 1st Round Pick in the 20s to open up the Full MLE, BAE, and Sign-&-Trade possibilities next year?

 

[BonesJones]

I've found that emitting negative energy is detrimental.

But the answer to this isn't CJ or Stotts.

It's Olshey.

So its not either of those guys fault at all?

 

[illmatic99]

Would you trade a 1st Round Pick in the 20s to open up the Full MLE, BAE, and Sign-&-Trade possibilities next year?

You know Neil's track record with the draft.

You know Neil's track record with FAs.

Neither is all that great, but one of them is clearly worse.

 

[hoopsjock]

Certainly not with salary dumps or Otto Porter. I down for trading CJ. Nothing proposed seems all that enticing to me.

If we can get something like a trade I proposed earlier in the forum (CJ + Salary fillers for Aaron Gordon and Fournier), it would be ideal. unfortunately, such a deal is not really plausible.

So we shouldn't make any changes then since the perfect trade isn't plausible?