Event With the 16th pick, Blazers have selected Hansen Yang

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
SharpesTriumph said:
Damn really? I was super looking forward to watching him one last time.

Perhaps it was a handshake agreement with the scrubs that they could showcase the final consolidation game.
Click to expand...

...and the fact that, there is zero incentive to play him more minutes in SL -- he's shown enough!!
 
SharpeScooterShooter said:
Was that the difference in the lotto balls? I think i recall someone saying we were like right next to them as far as odds or something?
Click to expand...
The Spurs got the second pick. Blazers ended up with a 36-46 record. Spurs ended up 34-48. If they lose that the teams are tied at the end of the season. The needless win vs the Lakers was obviously a bad move as well.
The other side of that argument is the Spurs beat the Warriors after that because the warriors were resting players and they also beat the Raptors while the Blazers were busy beating the Lakers.
I guess my point is if you have no reason to win and the Draft has players available like this one did why mess around and win needless games. It's not like it was hurting attendance at that point.
 
kjironman1 said:
The Spurs got the second pick. Blazers ended up with a 36-46 record. Spurs ended up 34-48. If they lose that the teams are tied at the end of the season. The needless win vs the Lakers was obviously a bad move as well.
The other side of that argument is the Spurs beat the Warriors after that because the warriors were resting players and they also beat the Raptors while the Blazers were busy beating the Lakers.
I guess my point is if you have no reason to win and the Draft has players available like this one did why mess around and win needless games. It's not like it was hurting attendance at that point.
Click to expand...
I seem to recall months of g league scrubs starting. Remember CJ Elleby? He started 28 games for us. We closed games with some John Paul Jones 7' two way guy playing PG and have benched Sharpe over multiple seasons.

I was all for rebuilding - but by dumping vets and playing youth. Not some g league scrub farce.

Lack of tanking is just not a Blazers problem the last half decade.
 
SharpesTriumph said:
I seem to recall months of g league scrubs starting. Remember CJ Elleby? He started 28 games for us. We closed games with some John Paul Jones 7' two way guy playing PG and have benched Sharpe over multiple seasons.

I was all for rebuilding - but by dumping vets and playing youth. Not some g league scrub farce.

Lack of tanking is just not a Blazers problem the last half decade.
Click to expand...
We don't have enough talent on the roster to realistically build a championship team.

That means we didn't draft enough talent yet. Thereby, we didn't tank enough.

I hope the front office can hit some home runs to get us there, but that's almost certainly not going to happen.
 
Phatguysrule said:
We don't have enough talent on the roster to realistically build a championship team.

That means we didn't draft enough talent yet. Thereby, we didn't tank enough.

I hope the front office can hit some home runs to get us there, but that's almost certainly not going to happen.
Click to expand...
Yang has been pretty impressive.

Blazers have nice role players and good pile of assets to trade for a star if they flip to that strategy. Or just swing with the picks to draft a star.

Yang/Scoot/Sharpe/Deni while individually aren't likely to be an all-star probably have a real chance collectively one of the four is.

I would have preferred we didn't ever have that AytonSimonsGrant big3 era and prioritized picks/youth more. I hated the g league scrub tanking even more. But at this point it's done and the Blazers are beyond that phase of building.

97% of the league fails every year. Blazers are in a much better long term position than a lot of the league.
 
I would have liked to see Yang play one more game, but, without that, here's my take.

I see why the Blazers love him and picked him, and, if they already knew he probably was there guy midway through the season but that they probably were going to finish around six or seven in standings at best and wouldn't have a good chance at Flagg, then winning a few more games really didn't matter, because they felt Yang was being overlooked and they could get him midway through the first round while still developing a winning culture.

I think there's less than a 50% chance, maybe less than a 33% chance he gets close to his potential. That said, his upside is as good as anyone that came out of this draft class. The comparisons with Jokic in skill and style are credible. Yang's taller, a better rim protector, he's got the potential to be in the same neighborhood as a 3-point shooter and passer. I think he's going to be a more agile player. He shows flashes of some great dribbling at his size.

I don't think he'll come close to Jokic in the mid-range or as a rebounder, even if he comes close to being what he can be. As I mentioned earlier, I'm not sure he has the killer/dawg in his personality that one needs to be elite.

That said, the gamble was worth it. Any of the other guys they'd have picked even if they were picking third or fourth would have been gambles but without the upside. Yang has all the tools. Even if he fails, I think this was a good pick. It was a worthwhile pick. It'll be fun to see what he can do and every time he does something that makes us feel he's taking that leap to the next level, even if it doesn't happen.
 
Fez Hammersticks said:


“court mapper” :cheers:
Click to expand...

Honestly he's blown away my expectations. I expected a nice highlight here or there, some flashes. But he legit had an impact on both ends for extended stretches.

His footwork, coordination, shooting has been way better than I thought.

Has very high upside in this class and I've quickly flopped to being totally on board with the pick. At some point I might flip from optimistic to confident with him as an NBA player. Not there yet but we might see it early on his rookie season.

Kind of shows how stupid it is for us fans to try and judge prospects prior to the draft. Especially international ones.

I think we'll have some impressive stretches from him as a rookie. He might struggle a lot over his rookie year though which is fine. Very glad we drafted him. Cutting Ayton was great at the time and even better today. That Orlando unprotected picks we got is very nice too.
 
FWIW, Zach Lowe mentioned on his most recent pod that he talked to enough people to know that Yang was gonna go somewhere in the 1st round, either by someone with a pick, or a team trying to trade into the first round.
 
B-Roy said:
FWIW, Zach Lowe mentioned on his most recent pod that he talked to enough people to know that Yang was gonna go somewhere in the 1st round, either by someone with a pick, or a team trying to trade into the first round.
Click to expand...

His Chinese team is quoted in saying he had a promise at 19 from Brooklyn.
 
Yang has one thing I never see in rookie 7 ft players very often...he has thick legs and not Chris Boucher stick legs ....a lot of 7 ft players don't have that going for their lower core development..at 20 Han Sen can really develop into a solid big man.
 
I think this is my final take after SL:

If the Pels never offered us the deal that Atlanta took, I'm fine with what we did. It was probably the best option. And there were reports that initially they were offering the pick for protections. I think Atlanta just happened to be the team that they were talking to when Dumars got desperate and removed the protections like a moron.

If we turned down the offer for the Pelicans pick, I still think it was the wrong decision. I see what they see in Yang. I think he's a very intriguing prospect, but the Pels pick could be top 5 in a VERY good draft. I guess we shall see. Overall Joe made a solid move. I just wish we could have gotten our hands on that unprotected 2026 NOP pick.
 
Natebishop3 said:
I think this is my final take after SL:

If the Pels never offered us the deal that Atlanta took, I'm fine with what we did. It was probably the best option. And there were reports that initially they were offering the pick for protections. I think Atlanta just happened to be the team that they were talking to when Dumars got desperate and removed the protections like a moron.

If we turned down the offer for the Pelicans pick, I still think it was the wrong decision. I see what they see in Yang. I think he's a very intriguing prospect, but the Pels pick could be top 5 in a VERY good draft. I guess we shall see. Overall Joe made a solid move. I just wish we could have gotten our hands on that unprotected 2026 NOP pick.
Click to expand...
I mean I think you might be correct with your conclusion.

Maybe the Pelicans were trying to give a protected pick, we had that backfire in the CJ deal.

But also it's a bit of a scramble at the draft to evaluate all these decisions in a rush. It sounds like the Hawks had to have multiple people call the Pelicans and confirm it was an unprotected picks. Hawks thought it was to good to be true.

Maybe the Blazers were locked in on Yang and not interested in Pelicans pick as theyd drop below #16. Maybe the Grizz deal was a done deal or contingent on one specific outcome not happening which didn't who knows.

Maybe the Blazers thought the Pelicans were just screwing with them to try and tip their hand on their direction.

Don't think we'll ever know for certain exactly what the options were at draft night.

We will be able to judge Yang, Coward, and next year Pelican pick.
 
Last edited:
Yang finished summer league shooting 7-8 at the free-throw line. 87.5 %

This is an area where a lot of big men struggle. Hopefully Yang can keep it up somewhere around 80% or better.

Last season Deandre Ayton was 40-60 on free throws, 66.7 % , and Donovan Clingan was 62-104, 59.6 % .

Perhaps we'll see at times near the end of games where Billups switches between Clingan and Yang for defense / offense.
 
SharpesTriumph said:
Yang has been pretty impressive.

Blazers have nice role players and good pile of assets to trade for a star if they flip to that strategy. Or just swing with the picks to draft a star.

Yang/Scoot/Sharpe/Deni while individually aren't likely to be an all-star probably have a real chance collectively one of the four is.

I would have preferred we didn't ever have that AytonSimonsGrant big3 era and prioritized picks/youth more. I hated the g league scrub tanking even more. But at this point it's done and the Blazers are beyond that phase of building.

97% of the league fails every year. Blazers are in a much better long term position than a lot of the league.
Click to expand...
The Blazers are not in better talent situation than at least five or six other teams (maybe more), IMO. And we aren't a destination market.

If we trade away enough to get a star we won't have anything left around them.
 
Phatguysrule said:
The Blazers are not in better talent situation than at least five or six other teams (maybe more), IMO. And we aren't a destination market.

If we trade away enough to get a star we won't have anything left around them.
Click to expand...
Suns
Nets
Jazz
Pelicans
Hornets
Kings
Bulls
Raptors
6ers
Wizards

Which 5 of those teams rosters+picks would you take over the Blazers?

If you can't name 5 than your statement is false.
 
Last edited:
SharpesTriumph said:
Suns
Nets
Jazz
Pelicans
Hornets
Kings
Bulls
Raptors
6ers
Wizards

Which 5 of those teams rosters+picks would you take over the Blazers?

If you can't name 5 than your statement is false.
Click to expand...
My statement was about every team in the league. Not just 10 teams that you pulled out of your ass.

There are at least five or six teams with better talent situations than we currently have.

Those five or six teams are going to be ahead of us, no matter what we do, unless we get incredibly, outlandishly lucky.

That could happen. It almost certainly won't happen. But it could...
 
Phatguysrule said:
My statement was about every team in the league. Not just 10 teams that you pulled out of your ass.

There are at least five or six teams with better talent situations than we currently have.

Those five or six teams are going to be ahead of us, no matter what we do, unless we get incredibly, outlandishly lucky.

That could happen. It almost certainly won't happen. But it could...
Click to expand...
Oh you meant only 5 teams better? I thought you were saying Blazers were worse than all but 5-6 teams in the league.

Well no shit we're not a top 5 NBA team... If that's your barometer your just about never going to be happy with any strategy.

How many years have the Blazers had a top5 roster since Walton injury in 78?

Probably 3 years with Clyde
1 or 2 with Sheed in the SPAM era

That just seems like an arbitrary pointless goalpost.
 
SharpesTriumph said:
Oh you meant only 5 teams better? I thought you were saying Blazers were worse than all but 5-6 teams in the league.

Well no shit we're not a top 5 NBA team... If that's your barometer your just about never going to be happy with any strategy.

How many years have the Blazers had a top5 roster since Walton injury in 78?

Probably 3 years with Clyde
1 or 2 with Sheed in the SPAM era

That just seems like an arbitrary pointless goalpost.
Click to expand...
I didn't say better. I said a better talent situation. Meaning we have no hope at competing.

We're literally hoping to make the play-in so we can maybe get out of the first round.

Basically, almost maybe some day close to where we were in Dame's prime. Maybe.

That's probably our ceiling.

I'll be ecstatic if we can do better than that, though.
 
Just as an aside, I don't know if the 77-78 Blazers had a top five roster; I'd say they probably weren't. The 76-77 team didn't. But that Blazer team that was running away with things before the Walton injury in 77-78 still was, in terms of pure talent, behind:

-- the 76ers (Dr. J, McGinnis, Doug Collins, Bibby, World Free, Darryl Dawkins) ... hard to argue the best compilation of talent.
-- the Bullets (Hayes, Unseld, Bing, Chenier, Dandridge and several good young role players)
-- the Nuggets (David Thompson, Dan Issel, Bobby Jones, Darnell Hillman)
-- the Knicks (Earl the Pearl, Bob McAdoo, Lonnie Shelton, Spencer Haywood)
-- the Spurs (George Gervin, James Silas, Larry Kenon, Louie Dampier
-- the Bucks (Marques Johnson, Junior Bridgeman, Kent Benson, Brian Winters, David Meyers, Quinn Buckner and a very young Alex English)
-- the Bulls (Norm Van Lier, Artis Gilmore, Scott May, Cazzie Russell)
-- the Suns (Paul Westphal, Alvan Adams, Walter Davis, Gar Heard)
-- the Lakers (Kareem, Jamaal Wilkes, Norm Nixon, Adrian Dantley, Charlie Scott, Lou Hudson, Kenny Carr ... how this team only won 45 games is criminal)
-- the Jazz (Pistol Pete, Truck Robinson, Gail Goodrich, Slick Watts)
 
PCmor7 said:
Just as an aside, I don't know if the 77-78 Blazers had a top five roster; I'd say they probably weren't. The 76-77 team didn't. But that Blazer team that was running away with things before the Walton injury in 77-78 still was, in terms of pure talent, behind:

-- the 76ers (Dr. J, McGinnis, Doug Collins, Bibby, World Free, Darryl Dawkins) ... hard to argue the best compilation of talent.
-- the Bullets (Hayes, Unseld, Bing, Chenier, Dandridge and several good young role players)
-- the Nuggets (David Thompson, Dan Issel, Bobby Jones, Darnell Hillman)
-- the Knicks (Earl the Pearl, Bob McAdoo, Lonnie Shelton, Spencer Haywood)
-- the Spurs (George Gervin, James Silas, Larry Kenon, Louie Dampier
-- the Bucks (Marques Johnson, Junior Bridgeman, Kent Benson, Brian Winters, David Meyers, Quinn Buckner and a very young Alex English)
-- the Bulls (Norm Van Lier, Artis Gilmore, Scott May, Cazzie Russell)
-- the Suns (Paul Westphal, Alvan Adams, Walter Davis, Gar Heard)
-- the Lakers (Kareem, Jamaal Wilkes, Norm Nixon, Adrian Dantley, Charlie Scott, Lou Hudson, Kenny Carr ... how this team only won 45 games is criminal)
-- the Jazz (Pistol Pete, Truck Robinson, Gail Goodrich, Slick Watts)
Click to expand...
Great research and details.

But the way Walton was playing he was the dominant best player in the league. Think of Jokic the last few years. Or a peak LeBron/MJ. A healthy Walton alone basically made that a top5 roster. They ran away with the best record at 50-10. Still had two other all-stars in Lucas, Hollins.

I mean I think the defending champs, unless they have injury or Kawhi leaving or such, are basically always a top5 roster. Or close enough to top5 to be a contender where it doesn't matter.
 
Phatguysrule said:
I didn't say better. I said a better talent situation. Meaning we have no hope at competing.

We're literally hoping to make the play-in so we can maybe get out of the first round.

Basically, almost maybe some day close to where we were in Dame's prime. Maybe.

That's probably our ceiling.

I'll be ecstatic if we can do better than that, though.
Click to expand...
I don't see how you can claim a team is outside the top5 today - they then have no hope of competing soon.

Thunder had a losing record two years ago.

Suns missed the playoffs and the next year made the finals.

Heat made the finals as the 5th and 7th seed recently.

Pacers last month got to game7 of the finals only winning 50 games in the weak East.

We've seen a lot of parity and teams quickly flipping from average to dominant to average like never before in NBA history. Plenty of small market success too.

Will the Blazers do the same and contend soon? Odds are probably no - it's still a 30 team league. But we're not in some era where it's required to tank beyond 3-4 years as the Blazers have done to rebuild.
 
SharpesTriumph said:
Great research and details.

But the way Walton was playing he was the dominant best player in the league. Think of Jokic the last few years. Or a peak LeBron/MJ. A healthy Walton alone basically made that a top5 roster. They ran away with the best record at 50-10. Still had two other all-stars in Lucas, Hollins.

I mean I think the defending champs, unless they have injury or Kawhi leaving or such, are basically always a top5 roster. Or close enough to top5 to be a contender where it doesn't matter.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I actually had been watching and playing the game for a few years by the time this season happened. It wasn't so much having to research it as having lived through it.
 
PCmor7 said:
Thanks. I actually had been watching and playing the game for a few years by the time this season happened. It wasn't so much having to research it as having lived through it.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I wasn't born. First Blazers I followed was Detroit finals in 3rd grade.
 
SharpesTriumph said:
I don't see how you can claim a team is outside the top5 today - they then have no hope of competing soon.

Thunder had a losing record two years ago.

Suns missed the playoffs and the next year made the finals.

Heat made the finals as the 5th and 7th seed recently.

Pacers last month got to game7 of the finals only winning 50 games in the weak East.

We've seen a lot of parity and teams quickly flipping from average to dominant to average like never before in NBA history. Plenty of small market success too.

Will the Blazers do the same and contend soon? Odds are probably no - it's still a 30 team league. But we're not in some era where it's required to tank beyond 3-4 years as the Blazers have done to rebuild.
Click to expand...
All of those teams had better talent than we do.

Yes, if you don't get extremely lucky or have any other assets you need to tank longer than 3 or 4 years to give yourself a legit shot at contending.

Of course, if you have the best front office in the league you could probably make enough great trades or find enough diamonds in the rough (including a genius coach) to overcome it.

I'm not convinced we have one of the best front offices in the league. I would love it if they would prove they are though.
 
PCmor7 said:
Just as an aside, I don't know if the 77-78 Blazers had a top five roster; I'd say they probably weren't. The 76-77 team didn't. But that Blazer team that was running away with things before the Walton injury in 77-78 still was, in terms of pure talent, behind:

-- the 76ers (Dr. J, McGinnis, Doug Collins, Bibby, World Free, Darryl Dawkins) ... hard to argue the best compilation of talent.
-- the Bullets (Hayes, Unseld, Bing, Chenier, Dandridge and several good young role players)
-- the Nuggets (David Thompson, Dan Issel, Bobby Jones, Darnell Hillman)
-- the Knicks (Earl the Pearl, Bob McAdoo, Lonnie Shelton, Spencer Haywood)
-- the Spurs (George Gervin, James Silas, Larry Kenon, Louie Dampier
-- the Bucks (Marques Johnson, Junior Bridgeman, Kent Benson, Brian Winters, David Meyers, Quinn Buckner and a very young Alex English)
-- the Bulls (Norm Van Lier, Artis Gilmore, Scott May, Cazzie Russell)
-- the Suns (Paul Westphal, Alvan Adams, Walter Davis, Gar Heard)
-- the Lakers (Kareem, Jamaal Wilkes, Norm Nixon, Adrian Dantley, Charlie Scott, Lou Hudson, Kenny Carr ... how this team only won 45 games is criminal)
-- the Jazz (Pistol Pete, Truck Robinson, Gail Goodrich, Slick Watts)
Click to expand...
That Blazers team had the best player in the world in his prime before Walton went down. As well as one of the toughest players ever in his prime who was also a 4 time All Star (Mo Lucas). And an incredible coach.

If we had two All Star bigs in their prime and a genius coach I would be a lot more optimistic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top