Which one of you

[e_blazer]

Posted this on YouTube?



That's about 15 minutes longer than it needs to be to state the obvious, which reminds me of many posts on this board.

 

[Denny Crane]

Only watched a minute and a half.

It's a minute and a half I won't get back.

 

[e_blazer]

Only watched a minute and a half.

It's a minute and a half I won't get back.

Only a minute and a half? You obviously have a lower tolerance for blather than I do since I made it through 10 to 12 minutes. But then, I have built up endurance for that kind of thing over my career as a consultant who has to listen to hours of land use hearings.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Only a minute and a half? You obviously have a lower tolerance for blather than I do since I made it through 10 to 12 minutes. But then, I have built up endurance for that kind of thing over my career as a consultant who has to listen to hours of land use hearings.

OK--I now must take this as a personal challenge. Can I get through the whole video?

 

[3RA1N1AC]

guy lost me for good around the 7 minute mark talking about festus and his contract. dude dont know shit.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Brief rundown for those not interested in wasting their time:

• Dude thinks Blazers' 3 draft picks will be used to shed Leonard's and/or Crabbe's contracts
  • Crabbe because his contract is just so large
  • Meyers because he's no good
• Thinks Olshey has a penchant for using multiple assets to impose his will on other teams
  • Uses the Wallace to Brooklyn deal as an example (which of course was not a trade that Olshey made)
• Also mentions Turner as overpaid potential trade asset, as well as Ezeli's expiring contract
• Thinks trades will be centered on getting role players to strengthen/round out bench
• Thinks Olshey will seek a quality starter in free agency (though no explanation as to where the additional cap room would come from)
• Suggests that Olshey will likely keep just one of the picks (specifically the Cavs pick) to add a cheap guaranteed contract
• Spends a couple minutes extolling the virtue of having a low-post game to complement a perimeter game.
• Says the Blazers' main offseason focuses need to be:
  • First, consistency and defense, and particularly consistent defense
  • Second, add a couple vets (but not fossils) to provide that veteran presence that has been missing
  • After that, additional offensive firepower and improved rebounding would be good, but less important.
• Thinks the current core can be expected to improve by 10-12 wins, perhaps more if Olshey can make some of the deals mentioned above
• All of course is dependent on Nurkic's continued health.

 

[Minstrel]

Brief rundown for those not interested in wasting their time:

• Dude thinks Blazers' 3 draft picks will be used to shed Leonard's and/or Crabbe's contracts
  • Crabbe because his contract is just so large
  • Meyers because he's no good
• Thinks Olshey has a penchant for using multiple assets to impose his will on other teams
  • Uses the Wallace to Brooklyn deal as an example (which of course was not a trade that Olshey made)
• Also mentions Turner as overpaid potential trade asset, as well as Ezeli's expiring contract
• Thinks trades will be centered on getting role players to strengthen/round out bench
• Thinks Olshey will seek a quality starter in free agency (though no explanation as to where the additional cap room would come from)
• Suggests that Olshey will likely keep just one of the picks (specifically the Cavs pick) to add a cheap guaranteed contract
• Spends a couple minutes extolling the virtue of having a low-post game to complement a perimeter game.
• Says the Blazers' main offseason focuses need to be:
  • First, consistency and defense, and particularly consistent defense
  • Second, add a couple vets (but not fossils) to provide that veteran presence that has been missing
  • After that, additional offensive firepower and improved rebounding would be good, but less important.
• Thinks the current core can be expected to improve by 10-12 wins, perhaps more if Olshey can make some of the deals mentioned above
• All of course is dependent on Nurkic's continued health.

Sounds like this guy just gets it. Hope he's hired by Olshey as a consultant.

 

[Blazer4ever]

10 minutes for me as well, he's still talking in the background. I agree with some of what he says although I think he doesn't consider the salary cap change when criticizing Crabbe and Meyers contracts.
I actualy wouldn't mind the trade he suggests and I think Crabbe, Leonard, Turner, Ezeli and picks can get us a starter or even a under the weather star player, but need to choose carefully a player that would best fit the team

 

[HomerLovesKoolAid]

I could have summed our sitz up in one sentence:

Olshey fucked up and we're fucked with with some of the marginal fucking talent big fucking contracts we have unless we rehire Whitsitt so.....fuck!

 

[Blazer4ever]

I ould have summed our sitz up in one sentence:

Olshey fucked up and we're fucked with with some of the marginal fucking talent big fucking contracts we have unless we rehire Whitsitt so.....fuck!

I got the feeling he was a big fan of Olshey actually

 

[Blazer4ever]

Brief rundown for those not interested in wasting their time:

• Dude thinks Blazers' 3 draft picks will be used to shed Leonard's and/or Crabbe's contracts
  • Crabbe because his contract is just so large
  • Meyers because he's no good
• Thinks Olshey has a penchant for using multiple assets to impose his will on other teams
  • Uses the Wallace to Brooklyn deal as an example (which of course was not a trade that Olshey made)
• Also mentions Turner as overpaid potential trade asset, as well as Ezeli's expiring contract
• Thinks trades will be centered on getting role players to strengthen/round out bench
• Thinks Olshey will seek a quality starter in free agency (though no explanation as to where the additional cap room would come from)
• Suggests that Olshey will likely keep just one of the picks (specifically the Cavs pick) to add a cheap guaranteed contract
• Spends a couple minutes extolling the virtue of having a low-post game to complement a perimeter game.
• Says the Blazers' main offseason focuses need to be:
  • First, consistency and defense, and particularly consistent defense
  • Second, add a couple vets (but not fossils) to provide that veteran presence that has been missing
  • After that, additional offensive firepower and improved rebounding would be good, but less important.
• Thinks the current core can be expected to improve by 10-12 wins, perhaps more if Olshey can make some of the deals mentioned above
• All of course is dependent on Nurkic's continued health.

LOL

 

[Denny Crane]

It's rare that rookies join a team and make it a contender. Especially where we are picking.

Trading for established veterans that provide flexibility and depth for the roster is likely. Nothing wrong with keeping a pick or two as players to develop for the future, but I wouldn't count on them to start or sub and put us over the top.

I like ET and think he's perfectly fine as a starter or 6th man type for this team.

We're not going to improve much on defense as long as we start Dame and CJ. Weak D on the perimeter is the cost of starting the duo. You have to bank on the offense outweighing the lack of D. I have no problem with that.

I wouldn't be shocked to see CJ traded, especially if he brings us a similar talent who's bigger at SG or SF. I'm thinking a Jimmy Butler type, should the Bulls (unlikely, though) be willing to trade him. I'd give up all 3 1sts, along with CJ, too.

I've been posting about inside/outside game and easy post baskets all season. Nurk needs a backup, and preferably one who can step in and start a stretch of games, if needed.

I like Mo, but SF is a position we really need an upgrade, IMO.

If we traded CJ for Butler:

G: Dame/ET/Crabbe
F: Butler/Mo/ET
PF: Noah/Aminu
C: Nurk/?

Dame
ET
Butler
Vonleh
Nurk

 

[PtldPlatypus]

LOL

???

 

[Rhal]

I'm not getting the whole crabbe has negative value thing. The only contract on our books that I think has negative value is Turner, hell even with Meyers you can probably offload him pretty cheaply to a team because he is a stretch 5 who is still young and some team is going to take a flyer thinking they can mold him into something. Also Crabbe/Turners/Meyers contracts are all going to look even better after this years FA and mediocre players are getting paid even more.

 

[Blazer4ever]

???

I liked how you managed to make it sound even more confused than the original

 

[BBert]

Brief rundown for those not interested in wasting their time:

• Dude thinks Blazers' 3 draft picks will be used to shed Leonard's and/or Crabbe's contracts
  • Crabbe because his contract is just so large
  • Meyers because he's no good
• Thinks Olshey has a penchant for using multiple assets to impose his will on other teams
  • Uses the Wallace to Brooklyn deal as an example (which of course was not a trade that Olshey made)
• Also mentions Turner as overpaid potential trade asset, as well as Ezeli's expiring contract
• Thinks trades will be centered on getting role players to strengthen/round out bench
• Thinks Olshey will seek a quality starter in free agency (though no explanation as to where the additional cap room would come from)
• Suggests that Olshey will likely keep just one of the picks (specifically the Cavs pick) to add a cheap guaranteed contract
• Spends a couple minutes extolling the virtue of having a low-post game to complement a perimeter game.
• Says the Blazers' main offseason focuses need to be:
  • First, consistency and defense, and particularly consistent defense
  • Second, add a couple vets (but not fossils) to provide that veteran presence that has been missing
  • After that, additional offensive firepower and improved rebounding would be good, but less important.
• Thinks the current core can be expected to improve by 10-12 wins, perhaps more if Olshey can make some of the deals mentioned above
• All of course is dependent on Nurkic's continued health.

Thank you for taking one for the team.

 

[BonesJones]

It's rare that rookies join a team and make it a contender. Especially where we are picking.

Trading for established veterans that provide flexibility and depth for the roster is likely. Nothing wrong with keeping a pick or two as players to develop for the future, but I wouldn't count on them to start or sub and put us over the top.

I like ET and think he's perfectly fine as a starter or 6th man type for this team.

We're not going to improve much on defense as long as we start Dame and CJ. Weak D on the perimeter is the cost of starting the duo. You have to bank on the offense outweighing the lack of D. I have no problem with that.

I wouldn't be shocked to see CJ traded, especially if he brings us a similar talent who's bigger at SG or SF. I'm thinking a Jimmy Butler type, should the Bulls (unlikely, though) be willing to trade him. I'd give up all 3 1sts, along with CJ, too.

I've been posting about inside/outside game and easy post baskets all season. Nurk needs a backup, and preferably one who can step in and start a stretch of games, if needed.

I like Mo, but SF is a position we really need an upgrade, IMO.

If we traded CJ for Butler:

G: Dame/ET/Crabbe
F: Butler/Mo/ET
PF: Noah/Aminu
C: Nurk/?

Dame
ET
Butler
Vonleh
Nurk

CJ is far better offensively than Butler, and Butlers defense is overrated.

And you want to trade CJ and all 3 picks??? Cmon FAMS.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

It's rare that rookies join a team and make it a contender

 

[Denny Crane]

CJ is far better offensively than Butler, and Butlers defense is overrated.

And you want to trade CJ and all 3 picks??? Cmon FAMS.

Butler's defense is not overrated. 106 DRtg on a team that isn't defense oriented, 104 for his career.

Having a two way superstar player would be huge.

I'm pretty sure Butler's stats are superior to CJ's at everything but 3pt percentage and assists. The 6 point PER differential is pretty big.

 

[BonesJones]

Butler's defense is not overrated. 106 DRtg on a team that isn't defense oriented, 104 for his career.

Having a two way superstar player would be huge.

I'm pretty sure Butler's stats are superior to CJ's at everything but 3pt percentage and assists. The 6 point PER differential is pretty big.

Rondo, Lopez, and Wade are all positive defenders.

Anyone who uses PER as a way to measure a player loses credibility with me. That stat is crap.

McCollum is way more efficient than Butler. 48% FGs, 42% 3s. Rebounds from a 2-guard isn't a difference maker

Butler relies on FTs, and if he played in Portland he wouldn't get the same amount of calls he does in Chicago.

Plus, Jimmy Butler would likely leave after his contract is up. McCollum is a Portland dude. McCollums 2 years younger, and will continue to improve because of his work ethic. CJ has the potential to be a decent defender, and he's shown it.

Straight up, it would make sense to take Butler, but to toss in 3 draft picks is ludicrous. There's a 30% chance or so one of those picks becomes an all-star level player, and they're all cost-controlled. Those are great chances, and aren't with giving up just to swap CJ for Butler.

 

[Denny Crane]

Butler is a 3 time all star having his best season to date. The featured player on his team.

Sure, a draft pick has a chance to be an all star. Even a draft pick like a rookie LeBron didn't turn the Cavs (with Boozer and Ilgauskas) into even a .500 team. If we want to win later, that's the right play. If we're already championship contenders, it's how to infuse young talent a few years down the road to keep it going.

Butler may leave when his contract is up. If he indicates he doesn't want to be in Portland, I wouldn't make the trade. I'm guessing he'd like our upside better than the Lakers', which is the team he wanted to go to as a RFA.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Man, @HCP worked really hard on that podcast. You guys are mean.

 

[H.C.]

Denny is a Bulls fan. No doubt he'd want 3 first rounders + CJ to even talk about Butler being traded.
Surprised he didn't say CJ + Lillard + 3 first rounders for Butler & whoever is needed to make salaries match.

Portland isn't trading CJ for Butler as it's a lateral move and doesn't move Portland into contention. This is the classic example of making a move, just to make a move.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Denny is a Bulls fan.

Never forget!

 

[Scalma]

Boobs

 

[Denny Crane]

The rumored offer by the Celtics was Smart, Bradley, and Crowder.

The Bulls wanted the Nets' pick as well, the Celtics said no.

Gives you an idea of what the Bulls want.

Three picks out of the lotto won't do it. Not even close.

http://hardwoodhoudini.com/2017/01/21/61246/

 

[Denny Crane]

Denny is a Bulls fan. No doubt he'd want 3 first rounders + CJ to even talk about Butler being traded.
Surprised he didn't say CJ + Lillard + 3 first rounders for Butler & whoever is needed to make salaries match.

Portland isn't trading CJ for Butler as it's a lateral move and doesn't move Portland into contention. This is the classic example of making a move, just to make a move.

If you say so.