What if we trade nobody? (1 Viewer)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Look. Some of us clearly disagree with some others regarding the projected valuation of Brogdon and his current value to the team. Its okay. Each side has made points I would consider valid. I happen to lean on one side with some people, and others like yourself tend to lean the other way. Why not let it play out and see where it lands vs going round and round and round on it? Agree to disagree? It really isn't a big deal. Some people have said they will be pissed over and over though if their wants don't come to fruition, making it a big deal. That's where they don't understand that negative vibe and continual bitching gets to some others who then start pushing back. Okay. Express your unhappiness and move on. No need to post in every thread every day about the angst. I don't want to ignore some of those people, becuase4 they tend to bring alot of other things to the table. Just move on. Its not the end of the world. :)

Supposed to be a decent day today. Here is hoping we play a good game tonight!
 
BigGameDamian said:
You would be ok with the idea of trading Sharp? He probably has the most value on the team. Speed up the rebuilding process and balance out the roster.
Click to expand...
If we got more value in retrun, I wouldn't think twice about trading Sharpe. I still think there's a real chance he's never an all-star, so he would not even be close to untradable for me.
 
Rastapopoulos said:
If we don't trade anybody I'll assume it's because Sharpe's injury is season-ending, because that's the only way it vaguely makes sense.
Click to expand...

I would hope that's not the main reason a trade isn't made. In my opinion, no significant moves made this year should be made with regard to balancing out this roster in the short term.
 
Here's a game in which all the guards played in a win over Brooklyn.

This was an overtime game. 134 - 127.

upload_2024-2-4_8-59-24.png
 
Last edited:
SharpeScooterShooter said:
Who said he would gain value? Why you twisting things up? You said he would massively diminish his value. Then you said he was worth a first round pick as 6th man and worth the same now. I said he will be worth about the same 6months from now and disagree of your opinion about massively diminishing. None of that means I said he would increase value.
Click to expand...

Man, if you're going to quote me, at least get it right. Don't put words in my mouth. I said if we let them basically depreciate down to nothing, that massively diminishes the return we got for Dame.

I said he was worth a first last summer, he is presumably worth a first right now, but we have no idea what his value will be in six months. He could suffer a massive injury. But value doesn't tend to go up as players age and he's in his early 30s.

So what's the point of waiting if his value is arguably as high as it's ever going to be? I don't think mentoring is enough of a counter to potentially losing out on assets.
 
It seems there are a few groups forming:
- those that think Portland should keep brogdon through the deadline because he’s good for the team and for the young guys.
- those that think Portland should keep Brogdon through the deadline if commensurate value isn’t available for Brogdon at the deadline, despite there being an opportunity cost in terms of scoot’s development.
- those that think Portland should trade brogdon now, no matter what, even if it means only getting back seconds and filler, or a late 2024 first—which is only so useful, because scoot needs to play 8-10m more minutes per game for the rest of the season, and that can’t happen with Brogdon here.

I’m almost positive the first two groups aren’t the same, yet it seems folks are lumping them together.
 
Samuel said:
It seems there are a few groups forming:
- those that think Portland should keep brogdon through the deadline because he’s good for the team and for the young guys.
- those that think Portland should keep Brogdon through the deadline if commensurate value isn’t available for Brogdon at the deadline, despite there being an opportunity cost in terms of scoot’s development.
- those that think Portland should trade brogdon now, no matter what, even if it means only getting back seconds and filler, or a late 2024 first—which is only so useful, because scoot needs to play 8-10m more minutes per game for the rest of the season, and that can’t happen with Brogdon here.

I’m almost positive the first two groups aren’t the same, yet it seems folks are lumping them together.
Click to expand...

Who has said "no matter what?"
 
Samuel said:
It seems there are a few groups forming:
- those that think Portland should keep brogdon through the deadline because he’s good for the team and for the young guys.
- those that think Portland should keep Brogdon through the deadline if commensurate value isn’t available for Brogdon at the deadline, despite there being an opportunity cost in terms of scoot’s development.
- those that think Portland should trade brogdon now, no matter what, even if it means only getting back seconds and filler, or a late 2024 first—which is only so useful, because scoot needs to play 8-10m more minutes per game for the rest of the season, and that can’t happen with Brogdon here.

I’m almost positive the first two groups aren’t the same, yet it seems folks are lumping them together.
Click to expand...
Agreed. But Im not sure Ive seen anyone advocating and being in Group 1

Also, for me - the value if any '24 pick has to be severely discounted because 1) Portland already has 4 picks in this draft, and 2) this draft is weak in talent
 
Samuel said:
It seems there are a few groups forming:
- those that think Portland should keep brogdon through the deadline because he’s good for the team and for the young guys.
- those that think Portland should keep Brogdon through the deadline if commensurate value isn’t available for Brogdon at the deadline, despite there being an opportunity cost in terms of scoot’s development.
- those that think Portland should trade brogdon now, no matter what, even if it means only getting back seconds and filler, or a late 2024 first—which is only so useful, because scoot needs to play 8-10m more minutes per game for the rest of the season, and that can’t happen with Brogdon here.

I’m almost positive the first two groups aren’t the same, yet it seems folks are lumping them together.
Click to expand...
Who is crazy enough to be in the group in bold?

I have said I'm going to be pissed if we still have Malcolm or Jerami after this deadline because I just don't think they make sense for our team and I'm almost positive there are teams out there who would give up fair market value for them. If there wasn't a fair deal we don't have to trade either of them, I just think there will be fair deals out there. I do think that Malcolm creates less playing time for Scoot and Shaedon (once healthy), I also think Jerami creates less usage for these developing players. The other thing I think these two guys do is win some games and at this point we just don't need wins, we actually need losses. We definitely don't need to be blown out and we definitely want our young guys grinding but wins are counterproductive.
 
Samuel said:
It seems there are a few groups forming:
- those that think Portland should keep brogdon through the deadline because he’s good for the team and for the young guys.
- those that think Portland should keep Brogdon through the deadline if commensurate value isn’t available for Brogdon at the deadline, despite there being an opportunity cost in terms of scoot’s development.
- those that think Portland should trade brogdon now, no matter what, even if it means only getting back seconds and filler, or a late 2024 first—which is only so useful, because scoot needs to play 8-10m more minutes per game for the rest of the season, and that can’t happen with Brogdon here.

I’m almost positive the first two groups aren’t the same, yet it seems folks are lumping them together.
Click to expand...

I am closer to group 2, but it still does not describe my view exactly. Yes, I think Malcolm should be moved now if we get a 1st or a young player. For example, I would take Precious instead of a 1st from NY (16 rebounds and 4 steals the other night against the Pacers)

However, if there were no 1st round offers, then yeah I would keep him. No reason to dump him if the offers are not there. But I don't think it would cut into Scoot's minutes as much as it would cut into Malcolm and Thybulle's minutes. Scoot will get his 30 minutes as long as he keeps playing well.
 
CJ_is_Gone said:
Agreed. But Im not sure Ive seen anyone advocating and being in Group 1

Also, for me - the value if any '24 pick has to be severely discounted because 1) Portland already has 4 picks in this draft, and 2) this draft is weak in talent
Click to expand...

Wait.... isn't that what multiple people have been trying to debate me over?

That his value to the team is worth more than his current value of a first round pick?
 
Samuel said:
Great, tell that to the people arguing that this group exists.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Some THINK this group exists.

Natebishop3 said:
Why does it have to be a '24 pick?
Click to expand...
No one said it had to be '24. Im guessing that is what is being offered.

All Im saying is that all things being equal, that a 24 pick has significantly less value than a future pick.

blazerkor said:
Who is crazy enough to be in the group in bold?

I have said I'm going to be pissed if we still have Malcolm or Jerami after this deadline because I just don't think they make sense for our team and I'm almost positive there are teams out there who would give up fair market value for them. If there wasn't a fair deal we don't have to trade either of them, I just think there will be fair deals out there. I do think that Malcolm creates less playing time for Scoot and Shaedon (once healthy), I also think Jerami creates less usage for these developing players. The other thing I think these two guys do is win some games and at this point we just don't need wins, we actually need losses. We definitely don't need to be blown out and we definitely want our young guys grinding but wins are counterproductive.
Click to expand...
So here's your chance. What is a fair deal?
 
There's only two groups from what I have seen.

People who think his value is worth more than a first round pick in this draft.

People who think we should take the first round pick but not if there's nothing out there that's fair value.

I haven't seen anyone say we should dump him for nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RR7
Isn’t implying “if we do nothing”, one will be pissed the same as “if we don’t trade him no matter what”, one will be pissed???

people backtracking around here….
 
CJ_is_Gone said:
Agreed. Some THINK this group exists.


No one said it had to be '24. Im guessing that is what is being offered.

All Im saying is that all things being equal, that a 24 pick has significantly less value than a future pick.


So here's your chance. What is a fair deal?
Click to expand...

I'd take the first rounder. Even if it's in this draft. Maybe there's someone we really like and we want to move up. Or someone we can stash. Like Rupert.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RR7
SharpeScooterShooter said:
Isn’t implying “if we do nothing”, one will be pissed the same as “if we don’t trade him no matter what”, one will be pissed???

people backtracking around here….
Click to expand...

Bullshit. Who has said we should trade him for literally anything?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RR7
Natebishop3 said:
Man, if you're going to quote me, at least get it right. Don't put words in my mouth. I said if we let them basically depreciate down to nothing, that massively diminishes the return we got for Dame.

I said he was worth a first last summer, he is presumably worth a first right now, but we have no idea what his value will be in six months. He could suffer a massive injury. But value doesn't tend to go up as players age and he's in his early 30s.

So what's the point of waiting if his value is arguably as high as it's ever going to be? I don't think mentoring is enough of a counter to potentially losing out on assets.
Click to expand...

Did you not imply we need to trade him now and I’ve countered we don’t and we can trade him in the off season or next season?

so then wouldn’t it be fair to assume you think by next season he will have potentially massively diminished in value? So you saying my opinion we can keep him until next season with little risk, is saying my opinion will potentially massively diminish his value by next season?
If so, then I disagree and don’t really quote you incorrectly.

please correct me if I’m wrong. That’s how I read it.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Bullshit. Who has said we should trade him for literally anything?
Click to expand...

That is not what I said. I asked a question.

SharpeScooterShooter said:
Isn’t implying “if we do nothing”, one will be pissed the same as “if we don’t trade him no matter what”, one will be pissed???

people backtracking around here….
Click to expand...

what is the difference between saying if we do nothing this offseason one will be pissed(when speaking of Brogdon, because he has been the center of the debate)
And saying we need to trade him period, or I will be pissed. One is doing nothing and the other is avoiding doing something.

Many people have said if we don’t do anything this trade deadline, they will be pissed.
 
Natebishop3 said:
If the trade offer is a couple send rounders, keep him. I wouldn't dump him for garbage. But if the offers are on par with what he was worth last summer, I'd probably take it.
Click to expand...

okay. Now we are getting somewhere. I agree with this. Except I would want more than just. Middle to late first is all. So we are closer to agreeing than it has seemed.

seems the cut off line of acceptable return is slightly different is all.
 
CJ_is_Gone said:
Agreed. Some THINK this group exists.


No one said it had to be '24. Im guessing that is what is being offered.

All Im saying is that all things being equal, that a 24 pick has significantly less value than a future pick.


So here's your chance. What is a fair deal?
Click to expand...
For Malcolm I think it's a future first rounder with little to no protection and expirings, more if we take on bad contracts. For Jerami I'd expect twice as much. Obviously if it's young prospects instead or in combination with that level of draft compensation that would work too.
 
SharpeScooterShooter said:
That is not what I said. I asked a question.
Click to expand...

I was responding to your comment "people backtracking around here.

what is the difference between saying if we do nothing this offseason one will be pissed(when speaking of Brogdon, because he has been the center of the debate)
And saying we need to trade him period, or I will be pissed. One is doing nothing and the other is avoiding doing something.

Many people have said if we don’t do anything this trade deadline, they will be pissed.
Click to expand...

Because if the offers are total shit, then you have to wait until the summer to see what you can get. I have been saying in our debate that if the value is the same as it was last summer for him, that's a pretty established baseline, but if the offers are not even a first rounder, you should hold onto him.
 
blazerkor said:
For Malcolm I think it's a future first rounder with little to no protection and expirings, more if we take on bad contracts. For Jerami I'd expect twice as much. Obviously if it's young prospects instead or in combination with that level of draft compensation that would work too.
Click to expand...

Blazers aren't letting Grant go for 2 first rounders.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top