When have you been less excited for the start of a Blazers season?

[Phatguysrule]

History from who? I am sure you can find a couple of teams where that time frame worked, but I am guessing there are several others where it did not. At least for teams who can't augment the process by being an FA destination.

There are no guarantees. But you need All Stars to win championships.

When I was digging into it I learned you have a roughly 14% chance of drafting an (I believe) first team All NBA player in the top half of the lotto. About a 25% chance of drafting an all star in the lottery.

If you tank hard (trade all of your vets who don't have much All NBA potential for draft capital) and can draft top half of the lotto for 5 or 6 years you will almost certainly come out with an all NBA player as well as an All-Star.

If you draft well you will also have a lot of other talented guys around them. If you traded well you will have extra opportunities to add quality young players to this mix.

You will now have one of the most talented young teams in the league.

Now you just need quality ownership and management to nurture and trade that into a championship/dynasty.

But you can't do any of that if you lack talent. We still lack enough talent.

 

[Phatguysrule]

This is most likely the last year of the Tank Blazers. They are probably good enough this year to compete for a play in….if everything fell right for them. The team won’t allow that to happen though.

That is, unfortunately, a mistake. It's going to suck to be a play-in, first round and out team for another decade and then be right back here having the same conversation...

Hope I'm wrong about that and we get incredibly lucky, but... That is certainly not likely.

 

[HailBlazers]

That is, unfortunately, a mistake. It's going to suck to be a play-in, first round and out team for another decade and then be right back here having the same conversation...

Once you start stacking good players how do you tank though? Easier said than done.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Once you start stacking good players how do you tank though? Easier said than done.

If your young players win too many games to tank that's a good problem.

Our problem is that we have vets who aren't championship caliber players that are winning us meaningless games, possibly costing us draft position as well as costing our younger players time on the court.

At no point and under no circumstances am I ever suggesting that the players should try to lose or the coaches should try to lose.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

If your young players win too many games to tank that's a good problem.

Our problem is that we have vets who aren't championship caliber players that are winning us meaningless games, possibly costing us draft position as well as costing our younger players time on the court.

The real problem here is that two of our three main "vets" are only 25 and 26...still young enough to be considered "young players" by many (including likely our front office).

If Grant were traded for youth, and the rest of our roster was good enough to "win too many games to tank", would you be pleased with this season? Or do you think of Ant and Ayton as too old to be "young"?

 

[Phatguysrule]

The real problem here is that two of our three main "vets" are only 25 and 26...still young enough to be considered "young players" by many (including likely our front office).

If Grant were traded for youth, and the rest of our roster was good enough to "win too many games to tank", would you be pleased with this season? Or do you think of Ant and Ayton as too old to be "young"?

But they don't have All NBA potential. I think Ayton has a slight possibility to be All NBA, But probably not a 15% chance. Probably not a 25% chance to be an All-Star.

So if we can trade him for the opportunity to get into the lottery that's a good trade IMO.

I don't think Simons has a prayer to ever be that caliber.

I would not be pleased because I don't think the guys that we have who are young vets are quality playoff caliber starters.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

But they don't have All NBA potential. I think Ayton has a slight possibility to be All NBA, But probably not a 15% chance. Probably not a 25% chance to be an All-Star.

So if we can trade him for the opportunity to get into the lottery that's a good trade IMO.

I don't think Simons has a prayer to ever be that caliber.

Scoot and Sharpe are the only players on the roster with all-NBA potential. And Deni, maybe. Does that mean you want to get rid of all the other young players on the roster who might help win games, or just Ant/Ayton?

I would not be pleased because I don't think the guys that we have who are young vets are quality playoff caliber starters.

So from what I'm reading, we don't have young vets that are quality playoff caliber starters (Ayton previously starting on a finals team notwithstanding), but if the non-playoff-caliber-starter young players we have turned out to be too good to tank, that would not be a good thing. Pardon my ignorance, but that seems to contradict your earlier post. Can you help clarify my confusion?

 

[wizenheimer]

The real problem here is that two of our three main "vets" are only 25 and 26...still young enough to be considered "young players" by many (including likely our front office).

If Grant were traded for youth, and the rest of our roster was good enough to "win too many games to tank", would you be pleased with this season? Or do you think of Ant and Ayton as too old to be "young"?

the average age of NBA players is 26.03 years. So, Ayton and Simons aren't young at all, by NBA standards. Middle age

what they are: two players who have combined for 12 seasons, 0 all-star games (and likely still be 0 all-star games when their careers are over), and are currently paid over 60M. This isn't a 'dump them for whatever' situation. But there sure shouldn't be as much resistance to the idea of trading them as there is around here. Their presence won't alter the team's trajectory, but there absence might

 

[Phatguysrule]

Scoot and Sharpe are the only players on the roster with all-NBA potential. And Deni, maybe. Does that mean you want to get rid of all the other young players on the roster who might help win games, or just Ant/Ayton?


So from what I'm reading, we don't have young vets that are quality playoff caliber starters (Ayton previously starting on a finals team notwithstanding), but if the non-playoff-caliber-starter young players we have turned out to be too good to tank, that would not be a good thing. Pardon my ignorance, but that seems to contradict your earlier post. Can you help clarify my confusion?

I don't necessarily want to get rid of Ayton (I don't want to "get rid" of any players on our roster). I think he can help us moving forward if his mind is right. And if we have the right roster around him.

We don't have any other guys who make us too good to tank besides Simon's, Grant, and possibly Ayton.

I don't see the contradiction.

We need to trade those guys (again, aside from Ayton, who I think has far more potential) for the best possible draft capital. I think we have probably held them too long and we're going to start getting diminishing returns.

 

[kjironman1]

But they don't have All NBA potential. I think Ayton has a slight possibility to be All NBA, But probably not a 15% chance. Probably not a 25% chance to be an All-Star.

So if we can trade him for the opportunity to get into the lottery that's a good trade IMO.

I don't think Simons has a prayer to ever be that caliber.

I would not be pleased because I don't think the guys that we have who are young vets are quality playoff caliber starters.

What you are honestly looking for here is for the team to "Tank". As I said a long time ago in this thread. Grant and Simons are not enough to keep the team out of the lottery. Your response is "High Lottery". Well the way to get a top three pick is to lose about 65 games. The only way you do that is to sell the team on losing again. The talent they have even without Grant and Simons who they will have to shut down again and most likely Ayton as well can win more than 17-18 games.

What you are saying in this post is that those players don't have much upside (All NBA or All Star) so trade them. It puts you in the same old conversation. If we don't think they have much upside then why would anyone else? What team that is looking to be in the Lottery is going to give you that pick for Grant or Simons who you don't think will ever be All NBA or All Star.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

you do know that the CBA rules were different 25 years ago...right? Executing unbalanced trades and signing free agents was much easier back then. It was especially easier because PA didn't give a shit about paying tax in that era. JA and the current Vulcans are allergic to tax.

just look at the Pippen trade....it was a 6 for 1 deal less than a month before the season started. Almost no chance a 6 for 1 trade could happen a month before a season under the current CBA. By the way, Stacy Augmon was traded for Pippen. Two weeks later he was waived and re-signed by Portland; and it was part of the agreement with Houston. That's an illegal transaction today

besides all that...LOL at any suggestion that the 'risk-be-damned' management urgency of Bob Whitsitt, operating under the open checkbook of Paul Allen, could be matched by the 'take-no-risks' management of Cronin operating under the 'mediocrity doesn't matter-cash-flow-is-king' ownership of Jody & the Vulcans.

that team had Pippen, Rasheed, Steve Smith, Sabonis, Stoudamire, Bonzi Wells, and Jermaine O'Neal. Any of those 7 guys would be the best player on the current Blazer team....meaning it's a hell of a lot easier to trade for talent when you have talent to trade

Stoudamire no.... but Brian Grant yes so there were 7. Detleft Schrempf shot 42% 40% 3pt the two years prior and was an allstar the year before those but lost his starting spot after the Pippen trade. He might have had a much better year if he had been starting in place of Pippen. Still shot 40% 3pt and contributed to that elite bench unit. Might argue he was on the level of Jerami Grant though because the talent was so stacked on those Blazers rosters and so decimated on the current squads.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

If we don't think they have much upside then why would anyone else? What team that is looking to be in the Lottery is going to give you that pick for Grant or Simons who you don't think will ever be All NBA or All Star.

What we would seek is a team that already had the requisite All-star/All-NBA (caliber) player that would trade youth for vets, aiding our tank while supplementing their contention.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

The point isn't that they need to keep tanking or not. Everyone on this board pretty much agrees they do need to lose a bunch of games this year and will lose a bunch next year. The question remains how many years you gonna tank?
If your answer is "As long as it takes" then there is another question that will be asked.

The problem with the Blazers doing the two timeline rebuild they've done since Olshey was the GM is it delays the rebuild. If the Blazers had been aggressive in flipping every vet for an asset and using cap space on acquiring assets, and only played their youth so they had improved to more valuable assets they'd be in a much better position today. Unfortunately we didn't make those good decisions before, so now the Blazers are in a spot they can't quickly exit this rebuild successfully.

The Thunder aggressively rebuilt with urgency and committed to it 100%. They had two seasons with a ton of losses. The Rockets did a similar approach - and had 3 bad years of losses.

The Blazers will be 4 years in of heavy losses after this season with no end in sight. That's the problem with not committing to rebuild 100% - it turns into MANY MORE LOSING seasons.

What do the Blazers do going forward? Unfortunately just trying to win with more mediocre veterans will only continue to make it worse.

 

[Phatguysrule]

What you are honestly looking for here is for the team to "Tank". As I said a long time ago in this thread. Grant and Simons are not enough to keep the team out of the lottery. Your response is "High Lottery". Well the way to get a top three pick is to lose about 65 games. The only way you do that is to sell the team on losing again. The talent they have even without Grant and Simons who they will have to shut down again and most likely Ayton as well can win more than 17-18 games.

What you are saying in this post is that those players don't have much upside (All NBA or All Star) so trade them. It puts you in the same old conversation. If we don't think they have much upside then why would anyone else? What team that is looking to be in the Lottery is going to give you that pick for Grant or Simons who you don't think will ever be All NBA or All Star.

I'm not saying you trade them all for lottery picks. I'm saying trade them for the best draft capital possible.

I'm not going to be disappointed by whatever draft capital we get as long as it seems somewhat reasonable (except possibly with Ayton).

Why would a team who is already on the cusp of contending want a player like Grant or Simon's? Maybe they need added depth off the bench. Maybe they need somebody who has their talents.

Doesn't matter. They aren't going to help us get where we need to get. Whatever the max value we can get out of them we need to get that.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

That is, unfortunately, a mistake. It's going to suck to be a play-in, first round and out team for another decade and then be right back here having the same conversation...

Hope I'm wrong about that and we get incredibly lucky, but... That is certainly not likely.

If we are a playin this year, you dont think the players will gain more experience and be better next year? We have a very young team i expect to continue to grow and get better over the next three years.
you seem to think that they will be a playin and then Plateau without any more growth or improvement?

That seems highly unlikely to me.

 

[Phatguysrule]

If we are a playin this year, you dont think the players will gain more experience and be better next year? We have a very young team i expect to continue to grow and get better over the next three years.
you seem to think that they will be a playin and then Plateau without any more growth or improvement?

That seems highly unlikely to me.

We don't have enough talent to be much better than that. If both Scoot and Sharpe become high level All-Star/all NBA players then we'll be fine.

I think that is incredibly unlikely.

It's more likely that neither is ever as good as Dame and we never get as far with them as we got with Dame.

 

[sheed30]

We don't have enough talent to be much better than that. If both Scoot and Sharpe become high level All-Star/all NBA players then we'll be fine.

I think that is incredibly unlikely.

It's more likely that neither is ever as good as Dame and we never get as far with them as we got with Dame.

You’re already throwing out that “incredibly unlikely” argument on 20 year old Scoot who just played 1 season and 21 year old Sharpe who only played 32 games last season?

That is quite ridiculous to say “incredibly unlikely”

 

[Phatguysrule]

You’re already throwing out that “incredibly unlikely” argument on 20 year old Scoot who just played 1 season and 21 year old Sharpe who only played 32 games last season?

That is quite ridiculous to say “incredibly unlikely”

I sincerely hope he does. But the odds are against him.

I'm a fan of Scoot. That doesn't impact what The numbers tell us we need to do to help him be on the best team possible.

It's important not to be emotional at this point in time.

 

[sheed30]

I sincerely hope he does. But the odds are against him.

I'm a fan of Scoot. That doesn't impact what The numbers tell us we need to do to help him be on the best team possible.

It's important not to be emotional at this point in time.

Emotional is you saying that already just because you want to trade Ant and Grant and throwing that comment out to support your argument.

It's way to early to say that. You got to give them more time.

Imagine saying that after Kobe's first season. Or Steve Nash few couple seasons. Or Jimmy Butlers first couple seasons. or many more example.

It's also incredibly unlikely tanking will get us a All NBA player at some point. Getting a high pick or top 3 is no so easy. But guess what, we just got the #3 the year before and got Scoot. But now Scoot won't be ALL NBA according to you.

Even getting a top 3 pick, there is room for players drafted in the top 3 to turn out not to be ALL NBA players or even worse a bust, as I can list way more top 3 picks that didn't turn into All NBA players than did. We got one on our team right now who you say you don't think will be ALL NBA either in Ayton who was a #1 pick lol

 

[Pinwheel1]

We don't have enough talent to be much better than that. If both Scoot and Sharpe become high level All-Star/all NBA players then we'll be fine.

I think that is incredibly unlikely.

It's more likely that neither is ever as good as Dame and we never get as far with them as we got with Dame.

I wonder what a Dame, Shae, Grant, Deni, and Ayton starting lineup would do. I am not saying it would ever have been possible, but I do think it would have been the best lineup Dame would have had since the Wes, LMA, Batum days.

 

[Phatguysrule]

I wonder what a Dame, Shae, Grant, Deni, and Ayton starting lineup would do. I am not saying it would ever have been possible, but I do think it would have been the best lineup Dame would have had since the Wes, LMA, Batum days.

Yeah, if we had Dame we would be in a much better place.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Emotional is you saying that already just because you want to trade Ant and Grant and throwing that comment out to support your argument.

It's way to early to say that. You got to give them more time.

Imagine saying that after Kobe's first season. Or Steve Nash few couple seasons. Or Jimmy Butlers first couple seasons. or many more example.

It's also incredibly unlikely tanking will get us a All NBA player at some point. Getting a high pick or top 3 is no so easy. But guess what, we just got the #3 the year before and got Scoot. But now Scoot won't be ALL NBA according to you.

Even getting a top 3 pick, there is room for players drafted in the top 3 to turn out not to be ALL NBA players or even worse a bust, as I can list way more top 3 picks that didn't turn into All NBA players than did. We got one on our team right now who you say you don't think will be ALL NBA either in Ayton who was a #1 pick lol

I really don't know what you're trying to say in all of this. You are clearly not listening to what I am saying.

I'm talking about percentages and odds and how to maximize our odds and you're talking about random what-ifs.

It's very clear we disagree on strategy.

I 100% hope that Scoot is the best point guard that has ever walked the face of the earth.

The odds are against that. I do not believe that we should plan for that right now. I think that would be a mistake. The statistics tell us that would be a mistake.

I don't believe in fairy tales. I believe the team that has the most talent usually wins. Especially if they can get that team a good coach and get them to play well together.

We don't have as much talent as most teams in the NBA. We need to keep doing the best we can to bring in the most talent.

It is well understood that the best way for a non-destination city to do that is by drafting as high as possible in the draft.

 

[sheed30]

I really don't know what you're trying to say in all of this. You are clearly not listening to what I am saying.

I'm talking about percentages and odds and how to maximize our odds and you're talking about random what-ifs.

It's very clear we disagree on strategy.

I 100% hope that Scoot is the best point guard that has ever walked the face of the earth.

The odds are against that. I do not believe that we should plan for that right now. I think that would be a mistake. The statistics tell us that would be a mistake.

I don't believe in fairy tales. I believe the team that has the most talent usually wins. Especially if they can get that team a good coach and get them to play well together.

We don't have as much talent as most teams in the NBA. We need to keep doing the best we can to bring in the most talent.

It is well understood that the best way for a non-destination city to do that is by drafting as high as possible in the draft.

Your last sentence, drafting as high as possible is false, as I just said I show you many more top 3 picks that didn’t pan out to All NBA that did.

btw what pick was Dame? CJ? L.A?


We got a # 3 pick on our team and two #7’s and a #1 pick from 2018 in Ayton.

Giving Sharpe and Scoot more time to see what they can turn into is the better step, if they can take a leap they will naturally supplant guys like Ant and Grant on our team, and then you have talent with more talent around them.

Tanking and hoping we get a superstar is not guaranteed, and if we get a top pick and they don’t pan out, we keep trying for years and years to yank until we get it right? That silly imo.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Your last sentence, drafting as high as possible is false, as I just said I show you many more top 3 picks that didn’t pan out to All NBA that did.

btw what pick was Dame? CJ? L.A?


We got a # 3 pick on our team and two #7’s and a #1 pick from 2018 in Ayton.

Giving Sharpe and Scoot more time to see what they can turn into is the better step, if they can take a leap they will naturally supplant guys like Ant and Grant on our team, and then you have talent with more talent around them.

Tanking and hoping we get a superstar is not guaranteed, and if we get a top pick and they don’t pan out, we keep trying for years and years to yank until we get it right? That silly imo.

I don't think that we can have this conversation until you understand the content of this video. I'm not even sure if that will be enough. But it would be a start.



But in summary, the higher you draft the better your odds of getting more talent are. If you consistently draft higher in the draft you will consistently get more talent than teams who draft lower in the draft.

We don't have as much talent as the top teams in the league. We cannot hope to compete with them until we do.

The best way for a bad team in a non-destination market to add talent is in the draft. The higher you draft the more likely you are to get better talent.

If you have great talent evaluators this increases your odds even more.

 

[wizenheimer]

I wonder what a Dame, Shae, Grant, Deni, and Ayton starting lineup would do. I am not saying it would ever have been possible, but I do think it would have been the best lineup Dame would have had since the Wes, LMA, Batum days.

Deni + Grant (you mean Jerami, right, not Brian?) = Aldridge + Batum..? Maybe not, but a lot depends on how Avdija develops. He might be pretty good. I have no interest at all in Ayton. He's pretty much the opposite of what I'd like a C to be

I guess the big question: will Sharpe surpass Matthews, and will he do it soon? Wesley was pretty good

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

We don't have enough talent to be much better than that. If both Scoot and Sharpe become high level All-Star/all NBA players then we'll be fine.

I think that is incredibly unlikely.

It's more likely that neither is ever as good as Dame and we never get as far with them as we got with Dame.

I'm not sure how you can come to that conclusion with so many young and improving players with potential to be better than they currently are.

 

[sheed30]

I don't think that we can have this conversation until you understand the content of this video. I'm not even sure if that will be enough. But it would be a start.



But in summary, the higher you draft the better your odds of getting more talent are. If you consistently draft higher in the draft you will consistently get more talent than teams who draft lower in the draft.

We don't have as much talent as the top teams in the league. We cannot hope to compete with them until we do.

The best way for a bad team in a non-destination market to add talent is in the draft. The higher you draft the more likely you are to get better talent.

If you have great talent evaluators this increases your odds even more.

If you would stop rambling and think to answer some questions for a second, but I forgot how far you have your head up your ass.

Countless people including myself have made very good and valid counter points to you and all you do is repeat the same things while thinking you’re smarter that others.

Im sorry I wasted my time.

the season can’t start soon enough.

 

[Phatguysrule]

If you would stop rambling and think to answer some questions for a second, but I forgot how far you have your head up your ass.

Countless people including myself have made very good and valid counter points to you and all you do is repeat the same things while thinking you’re smarter that others.

Im sorry I wasted my time.

the season can’t start soon enough.

The points I am not answering are the ones which are made irrelevant because they have already been considered by looking at draft history in the context of probabilities.

I'm not sure why you take all of this so personally, but if you don't at least try to understand probabilities then we can make no progress in this discussion.

 

[sheed30]

I'm not sure how you can come to that conclusion with so many young and improving players with potential to be better than they currently are.

It's one of the most ridiculous conclusions to come to so quickly...baffles me anyone can say something so silly with such small sample size.

 

[THE HCP]

Where are all the #FireStotts guy at? Remember how miserable we were making the playoffs every year? Sigh….. I miss the playoffs.
But ,”Anyone is better than Stotts!” right?