OT Too many guards..

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
MickZagger said:
He can even play help defense on Jokic? Well any player can leave their man and swipe at Jokic while he’s guarded by his own man. Kinda odd to say he can even leave his man open to help. Well obviously. Any player can do that. Help defense is a schematic thing.
Click to expand...
GP2 blocked Jokic as his main defender above. How many 6'3" guys are doing that? He also came off-ball and blocked him. His stats on defense are awesome.
 
e_blazer said:
I don’t get why you keep saying this. Sure, a trade that sends out a bunch of guards for one more expensive forward or center is a problem because of the hard cap and minimum roster requirements, but trading a guard for a forward or center who makes similar money isn’t a problem.
Click to expand...
Because….. it’s unlikely because of the hard cap
 
e_blazer said:
Oh, now you’re just being fussy. The point is that there are likely a lot of one-for-one deals that could be made under the hard cap for guys with similar salaries.
Click to expand...

I never said it was impossible. I said it was unlikely, because it needs to be:

A) A player that helps us.

B) Perfect matching salary or less salary.

I really hope we don't trade Hart for a downgrade in talent. We need someone of equal or better value, but at the same price, and Hart is arguably underpaid.
 
Word is we were almost as high on Daniels as we were Sharpe. Would the roster have looked better if we got a 6'8 point forward instead?

Dame / GP2
Ant / Hart
Nas / Daniels
Grant / Winslow
Nurk / Watford / Eubanks

Fit is definitely less clunky.

But I'm good with the high upside swing on Sharpe regardless of positional redundancy now.
 
We arguably have 2 (legitimate) rotational forwards in Grant and Nas, kinda depends on how you feel about Nas/Winslow. Given Nas injury history and I think Winslow is meh, you could argue we have 1 legitimate rotational forward in Grant.
Don't come at me with Josh Hart. He's a SG, who is going to be forced to play out of position.

We have about 4(ish) rotational guards.
Dame
Ant
Hart
GP2

Sharpe is a question mark.

We have 1 decent center.

So the spot with the most rotational depth also has:
Didi
Keon
Bledsoe (as of now)

For a total of 8 (over half the roster) spots, while we are sorely lacking in wing (starting and bench) and backup PF/C talent.

Removing GP2 for Otto Porter Jr, TJ Warren or even Jalen Smith would've been a much more sensible play.
 
illmatic99 said:
Word is we were almost as high on Daniels as we were Sharpe. Would the roster have looked better if we got a 6'8 point forward instead?

Dame / GP2
Ant / Hart
Nas / Daniels
Grant / Winslow
Nurk / Watford / Eubanks

Fit is definitely less clunky.

But I'm good with the high upside swing on Sharpe regardless of positional redundancy now.
Click to expand...

The roster this next year might look better, but it's Sharpe's potential to be a superstar that could have a short term and long term impact on the roster. Daniels has a lower ceiling I think. If Sharpe pops like we all hope he will, he could change the course of the franchise.
 
e_blazer said:
Oh, now you’re just being fussy. The point is that there are likely a lot of one-for-one deals that could be made under the hard cap for guys with similar salaries.
Click to expand...

Someone here made a good post about it. It removes half of the trade options available.

But it could be argued that for the Blazers position and goals its actually more trade options than that will be unavailable.

Typically if a team is trying to make a win now move, such as acquiring a good starter or acquiring an allstar, they take on salary in the trade. Without that option the Blazers either flat couldn't trade for some stars, such as Durant being basically impossible to acquire right now, or they'd have to give up a draft pick(s) to move off a player whom they might prefer to keep.
 
Predator said:
We arguably have 2 (legitimate) rotational forwards in Grant and Nas, kinda depends on how you feel about Nas/Winslow. Given Nas injury history and I think Winslow is meh, you could argue we have 1 legitimate rotational forward in Grant.
Don't come at me with Josh Hart. He's a SG, who is going to be forced to play out of position.

We have about 4(ish) rotational guards.
Dame
Ant
Hart
GP2

Sharpe is a question mark.

We have 1 decent center.

So the spot with the most rotational depth also has:
Didi
Keon
Bledsoe (as of now)

For a total of 8 (over half the roster) spots, while we are sorely lacking in wing (starting and bench) and backup PF/C talent.

Removing GP2 for Otto Porter Jr, TJ Warren or even Jalen Smith would've been a much more sensible play.
Click to expand...

Nas or Winslow aren't legitimate rotational forwards.
 
Predator said:
Removing GP2 for Otto Porter Jr, TJ Warren or even Jalen Smith would've been a much more sensible play.
Click to expand...

Especially as Smith signed for less than the tax MLE; so we wouldn't be hard capped.

Although I could see Blazers ownership actually happy to be hard capped; as it gives them an excuse to duck the tax.
 
Natebishop3 said:
I never said it was impossible. I said it was unlikely, because it needs to be:

A) A player that helps us.

B) Perfect matching salary or less salary.

I really hope we don't trade Hart for a downgrade in talent. We need someone of equal or better value, but at the same price, and Hart is arguably underpaid.
Click to expand...

I would like to keep Hart around too, but remember he’s on a one year deal and, if he works out, is going to want to be paid next year. How is that going to work out if Sharpe needs PT?

Anyway, that was an off the top of my head idea. I wouldn’t do it unless a pick was added. I think the more likely type of deal is at the margins. One or two of our low-priced guards for one or two low-priced bigs just to round out the roster.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Well sure, we can still make bad trades.
Click to expand...
I don't know that that would be a bad trade. It would give us a legit backup center who can shoot, as well as clear up some of our wing logjam and open up more time for Sharpe. But even if it is a talent downgrade, if a deal like that were something Detroit would see as advantageous to them, perhaps that would be the cost of getting them to take Beldsoe in the Grant deal. :dunno:

Unless you see Hart as a long-term piece, I think that's a deal you have to consider.
 
WesleyMatthews said:
Someone here made a good post about it. It removes half of the trade options available.

But it could be argued that for the Blazers position and goals its actually more trade options than that will be unavailable.

Typically if a team is trying to make a win now move, such as acquiring a good starter or acquiring an allstar, they take on salary in the trade. Without that option the Blazers either flat couldn't trade for some stars, such as Durant being basically impossible to acquire right now, or they'd have to give up a draft pick(s) to move off a player whom they might prefer to keep.
Click to expand...

I never said it was good to be hard capped. I only said that there are still deals that can be made to balance the roster…which is the point of this thread.
 
e_blazer said:
I would like to keep Hart around too, but remember he’s on a one year deal and, if he works out, is going to want to be paid next year.
Click to expand...

No Hart is not on a one year deal, and no he will not be a free agent next summer.

Hart is starting the second year of a three year contract.
 
WesleyMatthews said:
No Hart is not on a one year deal, and no he will not be a free agent next summer.

Hart is starting the second year of a three year contract.
Click to expand...
I thought the year after next season, was a player option

double checked it is a PLAYER option so he could opt out if he wants after this next season
 
MickZagger said:
There must be a trade brewing right?

You guys just need to relax. Joe has a trade waiting to consolidate this roster bring in size and versatility.

Eubanks will fill in nicely when Nurk get his annual injury.

You guys just need to be patient and see the bigger picture. A trade is obviously in the works!
Click to expand...

SMH.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
Click to expand...

Too many Daves.
maxresdefault.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top