Which option? Which direction?

[42N8Bounce]

It’s why the team never has to try to make deep playoff runs. The fans are fine with purgatory. I’m old enough, and blessed enough to have been in the MC for the championship finals during the Walton years. Then for the Drexler teams, and finally for the Sheed teams. Winning a few games during the season means nothing to me

I too am (barely) old enough to have been in the MC for the championship finals during the Walton years. Then for the Drexler teams, and finally for the Sheed teams. And along those ways, my family has been season ticket holders every single year. I enjoy this team through and through.

Winning a few games during the season means something to me. I'm enjoying this win steak very much. My son has come home from Oregon State to catch most of these games, and I tell you there's no better feeling than being with my son high-fiving during these games and listening to the roar of the crowd.

I don't see this as an either-or. I'm not giving up hope of another championship during my lifetime. As a matter of fact, seeing the 3rd youngest team in the league play like this has given me even more hope. The rest of the league better take notice.

 

[1 Eye Jack]

And then what? We don't make the playoffs. We have a mediocre pick. Simons and Grant aren't worth anything more during the summer than they are right now. How do we improve the team next summer?

the unfortunately that’s probably the case and unfortunately I can’t change that. What I can do is just enjoy the basketball I’m seeing. Really enjoying this team

 

[Mediocre Man]

I too am (barely) old enough to have been in the MC for the championship finals during the Walton years. Then for the Drexler teams, and finally for the Sheed teams. And along those ways, my family has been season ticket holders every single year. I enjoy this team through and through.

Winning a few games during the season means something to me. I'm enjoying this win steak very much. My son has come home from Oregon State to catch most of these games, and I tell you there's no better feeling than being with my son high-fiving during these games and listening to the roar of the crowd.

I don't see this as an either-or. I'm not giving up hope of another championship during my lifetime. As a matter of fact, seeing the 3rd youngest team in the league play like this has given me even more hope. The rest of the league better take note.

View attachment 71037

I think the way this team is constructed, it is an either or right now.

 

[BIG Q]

Grant is awful to you due to the role he plays on OUR team and his contract. On another team as lesssr option he will be good. So just wording it was Grant is awful just shows how bias your thought process is.

never said I was happy with meaningless wins, but you don’t seem to understand we haven’t won a ring since 1971 and the last few years have been a nightmare for the franchise and empty seats.

You really don’t think taking a tank route for many more years to come to try and get a top 3 pick AND strike gold, (Scoot was #3 but it’s not enough apparently), which might not happen in ur lifetime, could potentially cause more fans to tune out and maybe cause the franchise to relocate at some point? Or maybe cause players we have right now, Sharpe and Scoot to want to leave for a better situation down the road? There is a double edged sword to any route we take, but you guys just complain about the same things on here 24/7 and even still when we are actually playing good now.

I also said I’m open to trading those guys, but you guys want to trade these guys at all costs and that’s just silly, grant I could understand more because of his years on his contract but Ayton and Ant will have one more year left after this, and don’t forget how valuable just letting their contracts off the books too can be if we want to resign Sharpe and Scoot to long term contracts one day.

Just things that pique my interest in this post;

1971 is really 1977 (I'm sure you were typing fast)
Scoot not being enough apparently. No, he's coming off the fucking bench and watching an inferior player during crunch time.
Valuable expiring contracts reminds me of the Blazermania favorite, RLEC! They better let them walk.

 

[Phatguysrule]

I can’t change anything, no one from the Blazers organization is going to read my post or anyone else’s and make changes, so I’m going to just enjoy the ride.

This is the funnest Blazers team I’ve seen in several years including going back to last year or two with Dame. This TEAM is playing hard, playing great defense, distributing the ball with different leading scorers every game, pushing the ball for fast breaks, throwing lobs, diving for loose balls and for the most part playing as a team. For the first time in years I’m watching every game!

I’ve accepted we don’t have much chance for the playoffs and don’t have much chance for top 3 pick and I’m ok with it. Go Blazers!!!!

Yep. Just enjoy the ride now.

 

[e_blazer]

It’s why the team never has to try to make deep playoff runs. The fans are fine with purgatory. I’m old enough, and blessed enough to have been in the MC for the championship finals during the Walton years. Then for the Drexler teams, and finally for the Sheed teams. Winning a few games during the season means nothing to me

What’s interesting is that none of those teams moved into contention by drafting the final pieces. Walton, of course, was a draft home run, but it took the ABA dispersal to build the team to a contender. Drexler, Porter and Kersey were all draft picks, but late ones. The team didn’t move into contention until Buck and Duck were added via trades. Rasheed was a trade, as were most of the players added around him.

I don’t think anyone here believes the current roster is a finished product, but it does have several star prospects and quite a few young players and vets with trade value. Instead of tanking for years to come, I’m looking for some good trades to improve this team. That doesn’t mean I wouldn’t be excited if the Blazers luck into a top-four pick this year, but I’m not getting bummed out if that doesn’t happen.

 

[Natebishop3]

You make it sound like no NBA teams in history has ever improved without a top5 pick.

There's far more players that have led teams to titles after picks 10 than players drafted as a result of a team losing in the top5.

Please provide examples of small market teams winning championships in the past 30 years with picks outside the top 10 leading them.

Milwaukee comes to mind, right?

Look at the last 30 years. Look how many teams won titles with guys they drafted in the top 10. Or guys they signed/traded for who were taken in the top 10.

2024 Celtics - Jaylen Brown #3 and Jason Tatum #3 (drafted)
2023 Nuggets - Jokic #41 (drafted)
2022 Warriors - Curry #7 (drafted)
2021 Bucks - Giannis #15 (drafted)
2020 Lakers - LeBron #1 (didn't draft)
2019 Raptors - Kawhi #15 (didn't draft)
2018 Warriors - Curry #7 (drafted)
2017 Warriors - Curry #7 (drafted)
2016 Cavs - LeBron #1 (technically drafted)
2015 Warriors - Curry #7 (drafted)
2014 Spurs - Duncan #1 and Kawhi #15 (drafted)
2013 Heat - LeBron #1 (didn't draft)
2012 Heat - LeBron #1 (didn't draft)
2011 Mavs - Dirk #9 (traded for on draft night)
2010 Lakers - Kobe #13 (traded for on draft night)
2009 Lakers - Kobe #13 (traded for on draft night)
2008 Celtics - Garnett #5 (didn't draft)
2007 Spurs - Duncan #1 (drafted)
2006 Heat - Wade #5 (drafted)
2005 Spurs - Duncan #1 (drafted)
2004 Pistons - Billups #3 (didn't draft)
2003 Spurs - Duncan #1 (drafted)
2002 Lakers - Shaq #1 and Kobe #13
2001 Lakers - Shaq #1 and Kobe #13
2000 Lakers - Shaq #1 and Kobe #13
1999 Spurs - Robinson #1 and Duncan #1
1998 Bulls - Jordan #3 and Pippen #5
1997 Bulls - Jordan #3 and Pippen #5
1996 Bulls - Jordan #3 and Pippen #5
1995 Rockets - Hakeem #1
1994 Rockets - Hakeem #1

So in the past 30 years you have the Nuggets, Bucks, Raptors and Lakers who won rings with guys who were drafted out of the top 10.

But the Nuggets also had Jamal Murray #7 and Aaron Gordon #4 on that team.

The Lakers had Gasol #3 and Odom #4.

This article breaks down the odds of becoming an All-Star based on pick. There's a REASON why you want a lottery pick, and more specifically you want a HIGH lottery pick.

 

[1 Eye Jack]

I still believe if we can build a good playoff team maybe even contender. We’ll be able to add another player by way of trade or luck into a good player through draft. We have good draft capital between picks and swaps. This team keeps playing like this they’re going to start getting respect around the league.

Potential….

stars/ maybe even superstars
Sharpe
Scoot

borderline all stars
Deni
Toumani
Ayton (potential is still there as he matures)

all defensive teams
Toumani
Deni
Clingan
RW
Ant (ok just kidding wanted to see if you we’re paying attention)

draft picks

https://fanspo.com/nba/teams/portland-trail-blazers/25/draft-picks

 

[Natebishop3]

Key leaders on champs the last 10 years;

#15 Giannis
#15 Kawhi
#17 Jrue Holiday
#27 Pascal Siakam
#28 Tony Parker
#29 Derrick White
#35 Draymond Green
#39 Khris Middleton
#41 Jokic
#57 Ginobili

Key leaders?

Only Giannis, Kawhi, and Jokic are/were the best players on their teams. The rest are either second best or role players. The Spurs don't win a chip without Duncan. Period. Parker and Ginobili would have been irrelevant. Same with Siakam. Same with Jrue. Same with White. Same with Middleton.

The Bucks and Raptors are the exception, not the rule. None of their best players were top 10 picks. That's pretty rare.

Spurs - Duncan #1 pick with Parker and Ginobili.

Celtics - Tatum #3 and Brown #3 with Derrick White.

Warriors - Curry #7 and Durant #2 with Draymond.

Nuggets - Jamal Murray #7 and Aaron Gordon #4 with Jokic.

I posted every team from the past 30 years in my post above.

 

[Natebishop3]

Right now the Blazers have

Ayton #1
Scoot #3
Sharpe #7
Deni #9
Clingan #7

So just based on the math above:

Ayton #1 - 63.3% chance
Scoot #3 - 56.6% chance
Sharpe #7 - 10% chance
Deni #9 - 33.3% chance
Clingan #7 - 10% chance

I would be shocked if Ayton ever becomes an All-Star, so really Scoot is mathematically our best chance.

 

[Mediocre Man]

What’s interesting is that none of those teams moved into contention by drafting the final pieces. Walton, of course, was a draft home run, but it took the ABA dispersal to build the team to a contender. Drexler, Porter and Kersey were all draft picks, but late ones. The team didn’t move into contention until Buck and Duck were added via trades. Rasheed was a trade, as were most of the players added around him.

I don’t think anyone here believes the current roster is a finished product, but it does have several star prospects and quite a few young players and vets with trade value. Instead of tanking for years to come, I’m looking for some good trades to improve this team. That doesn’t mean I wouldn’t be excited if the Blazers luck into a top-four pick this year, but I’m not getting bummed out if that doesn’t happen.

The difference is the CBA. Trader Bob could trade a ham Sandwich for Sheed. A team like Portland HAS to hit its draft picks, and HAS to trade for the right pieces. My frustration is that the draft picks we have need to play and develop in a year where we won’t contend, while guys like Ant, Grant, TL, Ayton need to be moved and not dominating the ball or minutes. Cronin and or Schmitz had an eye. Camara, Avdija, Scoot, Sharpe even the plodder were all good additions. So play them and add pieces to them

 

[blazerfan11]

The difference is the CBA. Trader Bob could trade a ham Sandwich for Sheed. A team like Portland HAS to hit its draft picks, and HAS to trade for the right pieces. My frustration is that the draft picks we have need to play and develop in a year where we won’t contend, while guys like Ant, Grant, TL, Ayton need to be moved and not dominating the ball or minutes. Cronin and or Schmitz had an eye. Camara, Avdija, Scoot, Sharpe even the plodder were all good additions. So play them and add pieces to them

Why is San Antonio starting 39-year-old Chris Paul and 32-year-0ld Harrison Barnes?

They're both on the court right now and the Spurs are behind in Charlotte 22 - 10.

 

[RR7]

Prime Pippen seems to be the easy choice, but really I don't know--I've never really been good at the player-comp game.

That can't be, Cooper's white!

 

[PtldPlatypus]

That can't be, Cooper's white!

See... told you I'm not good at player comps!

 

[RR7]

Did you even read what was posted? it says it right there, with all teams legally obligated under the CBA to spend at least 90 percent of their caps on player salaries, that meant everyone had to have at least a payroll of at least $84.69 million — a huge leap from the 2015-16 cap figure of $70 million.

Who is actually factually wrong here? LMAO

We didnt need to resign Crabbe to that big contract either, but we would have lost him for nothing. In the end, the next season we traded him anyways to Brooklyn.

We'd have been far better off losing him for nothing. Instead we paid Andrew Nicholson 2.8 a year since LAST SEASON!

And Sharpe's is correct. The penalty previously for not meeting the minimum was that the players on the team got the money. And, under the previous CBA, it wasn't calculated until the end of the season. So we could start well below and have people pay us to take on their salary. The new CBA, it's at the beginning of the season to prevent teams from doing that

 

[e_blazer]

The difference is the CBA. Trader Bob could trade a ham Sandwich for Sheed. A team like Portland HAS to hit its draft picks, and HAS to trade for the right pieces. My frustration is that the draft picks we have need to play and develop in a year where we won’t contend, while guys like Ant, Grant, TL, Ayton need to be moved and not dominating the ball or minutes. Cronin and or Schmitz had an eye. Camara, Avdija, Scoot, Sharpe even the plodder were all good additions. So play them and add pieces to them

The CBA didn’t stop 26 out of 30 teams from making trades at the deadline, some of them for major stars. The guys you mentioned, or at least some of them, should be moved. The question is when they will net the best return. Obviously, the Blazers didn’t like any of the deals other teams offered at the deadline. Try again in the summer. Sure, the Blazers need more draft talent but looking at where they sit in the standings, they aren’t likely to be getting a great pick this year. You can’t tank faster than the teams below you. At 9th in the standings, the odds are about 20% to get a top 4 pick. They are likely going to need luck and great scouting to get a difference maker.

 

[STOMP]

"We," lol...

I have to say it, you were the true difference maker vs the Suns and really over the recent winning streak. Thank you for all that you do for "us"!

STOMP

 

[Natebishop3]

Why is San Antonio starting 39-year-old Chris Paul and 32-year-0ld Harrison Barnes?

They're both on the court right now and the Spurs are behind in Charlotte 22 - 10.

Because the Spurs have their mega superstar and they got Paul to get him the ball. They had no point guard last year and they were horrible at getting him the ball.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Why is San Antonio starting 39-year-old Chris Paul and 32-year-0ld Harrison Barnes?

They're both on the court right now and the Spurs are behind in Charlotte 22 - 10.

What about Wemby?

 

[sheed30]

We'd have been far better off losing him for nothing. Instead we paid Andrew Nicholson 2.8 a year since LAST SEASON!

And Sharpe's is correct. The penalty previously for not meeting the minimum was that the players on the team got the money. And, under the previous CBA, it wasn't calculated until the end of the season. So we could start well below and have people pay us to take on their salary. The new CBA, it's at the beginning of the season to prevent teams from doing that

You gu

We'd have been far better off losing him for nothing. Instead we paid Andrew Nicholson 2.8 a year since LAST SEASON!

And Sharpe's is correct. The penalty previously for not meeting the minimum was that the players on the team got the money. And, under the previous CBA, it wasn't calculated until the end of the season. So we could start well below and have people pay us to take on their salary. The new CBA, it's at the beginning of the season to prevent teams from doing that

You guys are talking about something different now, I'm saying that due to the large rise in salary cap that offseason and the rules in the CBA, requiring teams to spend at least 90% of their salary cap each season, we had to spend money that off season, there was no other option.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

Camara is probably our leader. Who on our team is as good as the best player on those title teams?

You talked yourself into the point of my post. We don't have a player like that on the Blazers today. All of those players are available later in the draft and don't require us to tank for a top5 pick.

In fact Kyrie is the only player to have won a title for the team that got him in the top5 in that span vs the 10 players I listed. So 10x as likely to get that stud after pick 10 as in the top5.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

Key leaders?

Only Giannis, Kawhi, and Jokic are/were the best players on their teams. The rest are either second best or role players. The Spurs don't win a chip without Duncan. Period. Parker and Ginobili would have been irrelevant. Same with Siakam. Same with Jrue. Same with White. Same with Middleton.

The Bucks and Raptors are the exception, not the rule. None of their best players were top 10 picks. That's pretty rare.

Spurs - Duncan #1 pick with Parker and Ginobili.

Celtics - Tatum #3 and Brown #3 with Derrick White.

Warriors - Curry #7 and Durant #2 with Draymond.

Nuggets - Jamal Murray #7 and Aaron Gordon #4 with Jokic.

I posted every team from the past 30 years in my post above.

Which small market team tanked to get a star in the top5 and led a team to a title from your list?

Tatum and Brown were trades.

Aaron Gordon was a trade

You've literally backed up my point that teams haven't build a title contender by tanking for stars. Thanks.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

You gu


You guys are talking about something different now, I'm saying that due to the large rise in salary cap that offseason and the rules in the CBA, requiring teams to spend at least 90% of their salary cap each season, we had to spend money that off season, there was no other option.

That's the thing, you fail to understand there was no firm requirement to spend 90%. If you read an article saying such it was wrong. Go read Larry coons old CBA FAQ or even the CBA itself. I've started threads on this board posting the actual CBA.

If a team spent less than 90% the difference went to the players on the roster at the end of the season.

 

[Mediocre Man]

You talked yourself into the point of my post. We don't have a player like that on the Blazers today. All of those players are available later in the draft and don't require us to tank for a top5 pick.

In fact Kyrie is the only player to have won a title for the team that got him in the top5 in that span vs the 10 players I listed. So 10x as likely to get that stud after pick 10 as in the top5.

Again, it’s about opportunity

 

[wizenheimer]

You gu


You guys are talking about something different now, I'm saying that due to the large rise in salary cap that offseason and the rules in the CBA, requiring teams to spend at least 90% of their salary cap each season, we had to spend money that off season, there was no other option.

and you're wrong, and have been told so several times. No team, including the Blazers, was "required" to be at the floor. Teams could be under the floor if they wanted during the season. They just needed to be at the floor by the last game of the regular season, otherwise they would need to distribute the difference between their payroll and the floor to their players. But during the season, teams could use that space for trades or signings. So your statement that there was "no other option" is not correct

I forget which team it was but one was about 15M under the floor when the season started. At the trade deadline they used the space to trade for an expiring contract player that just barely, put them over the floor. They traded a top-55 protected 2nd round pick and got back two 2nds for their trouble while helping the other team get under the tax line. And since the trade deadline was about 63% thru the season, they got full credit for a 15M contract, but only had to pay a bit less than 40% of his salary. The other team had already paid the rest

that option is no longer available because, as already mentioned, Teams need to be at the floor by the beginning of the season, otherwise they are ineligible for tax disbursements and their cap is adjusted up to the floor. In the new CBA the most cap-space any team can carry into the season is 10% of the cap

 

[MickZagger]

Suns helping our play-in aspirations by losing to the lowly Jazz at home.

 

[Natebishop3]

Which small market team tanked to get a star in the top5 and led a team to a title from your list?

Tatum and Brown were trades.

Aaron Gordon was a trade

You've literally backed up my point that teams haven't build a title contender by tanking for stars. Thanks.

This seems like a pretty clear cut case of moving the goal posts.

Your first post said -

You make it sound like no NBA teams in history has ever improved without a top5 pick.

There's far more players that have led teams to titles after picks 10 than players drafted as a result of a team losing in the top5.

So first of all, you didn't say anything about tanking. You just said losing in the top 5.

But to go back and answer your question of teams that have won championships with their best player being taken in the top 5:

Bulls in 1991, 1992, 1993, 1996, 1997, 1998 with Jordan and Pippen. Bulls finished 27-55 that season (3rd worst) when they drafted Jordan.

Rockets in 1994 and 1995 with Hakeem. Rockets finished 29-53 (4th worst) when they drafted Hakeem.

Cavs in 2016 with LeBron. Cavs finished 16-65 and tied for the worst record when they drafted him. They were CLEARLY tanking to get LeBron.

Spurs in 1999, 2003, 2005, 2007, and 2014 with Duncan. They were 20-62 and had the 3rd worst record when they drafted Duncan. Also CLEARLY tanking to get Duncan and now Wemby.

That's 14 championships in the last 34 years from teams that were in the bottom 5 in terms of record when they selected their star. But my main point wasn't about finishing bottom 5. It was that you NEED as many top 5 picks as you can get on your team because it drastically increases your chances of getting a superstar. You can either draft them, which most teams did, you can trade for them, or you can sign them. The Blazers aren't signing one and it's extremely difficult to trade for them (unless you're the Lakers.) So we need to draft them. With the exception of a handful of teams in the past 30+ years, most titles are won by guys taken in the top 10.

 

[Natebishop3]

Again, it’s about opportunity

Yup. You either have to draft, sign, or trade for a superstar. We damn sure ain't signing one, and it's hard to trade for one, so we really can only draft one.

 

[inconceivable]

Thought-provoking article from Blazers Edge

https://www.blazersedge.com/2025/2/...blazers-nba-draft-lottery-odds-tank-fix-ideas

 

[sheed30]

That's the thing, you fail to understand there was no firm requirement to spend 90%. If you read an article saying such it was wrong. Go read Larry coons old CBA FAQ or even the CBA itself. I've started threads on this board posting the actual CBA.

If a team spent less than 90% the difference went to the players on the roster at the end of the season.

The article was wrong, but you're not? lol. There was a requirement man, it was in CBA contract lol.

and you're wrong, and have been told so several times. No team, including the Blazers, was "required" to be at the floor. Teams could be under the floor if they wanted during the season. They just needed to be at the floor by the last game of the regular season, otherwise they would need to distribute the difference between their payroll and the floor to their players. But during the season, teams could use that space for trades or signings. So your statement that there was "no other option" is not correct

I forget which team it was but one was about 15M under the floor when the season started. At the trade deadline they used the space to trade for an expiring contract player that just barely, put them over the floor. They traded a top-55 protected 2nd round pick and got back two 2nds for their trouble while helping the other team get under the tax line. And since the trade deadline was about 63% thru the season, they got full credit for a 15M contract, but only had to pay a bit less than 40% of his salary. The other team had already paid the rest

that option is no longer available because, as already mentioned, Teams need to be at the floor by the beginning of the season, otherwise they are ineligible for tax disbursements and their cap is adjusted up to the floor. In the new CBA the most cap-space any team can carry into the season is 10% of the cap

"There was a new TV contract that brought a massive amount more of extra money. The owners wanted to layer the extra money into the cap over a couple of years. They still would have received the same amount of money by the time the layering was complete. For whatever reason the players wouldn't agree and wanted all the money all at once. The thing that really messed things up is the league also has a salary floor that FORCED teams to spend all the extra money all in that one year. So not only were teams FORCED to spend money but since just about all teams had money it created a lot of competition and gave the leverage to mediocre players"

Once again another article stating the such, I made the FORCED party bold for you so you could understand....lol