With the #7 pick, the Portland Trail Blazers select....

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Scalma said:
One guy i’d like to target in the second is Kenny lofton jr. That dude is gonna fall cuz he’s fat but he can move (unlike a Swanigan for example) and is super skilled. Also, coached by Edniesha Curry at the combine.
Click to expand...

Wait.... Kenny Lofton has a fat son who plays basketball?
 
Scalma said:
One guy i’d like to target in the second is Kenny lofton jr. That dude is gonna fall cuz he’s fat but he can move (unlike a Swanigan for example) and is super skilled. Also, coached by Edniesha Curry at the combine.
Click to expand...
Fuck this imposter. His dad wasn't snatching home runs away from MLB players and stealing bases for 16 years in MLB. What a misleading no good...

He was just defending our country and delivering our mail??? Oops.
 
Just curious, as Ive seen trading down for 2 picks a lot, but one proposition has us using one pick for Sochan and trading the other for Grant. Another variant is trading a pick for Eason and the extra pick for Grant. They are all power forwards? If we draft a power forward, he needs to play.
 
BIG Q said:
Just curious, as Ive seen trading down for 2 picks a lot, but one proposition has us using one pick for Sochan and trading the other for Grant. Another variant is trading a pick for Eason and the extra pick for Grant. They are all power forwards? If we draft a power forward, he needs to play.
Click to expand...
Grant can/should play SF
 
BIG Q said:
Just curious, as Ive seen trading down for 2 picks a lot, but one proposition has us using one pick for Sochan and trading the other for Grant. Another variant is trading a pick for Eason and the extra pick for Grant. They are all power forwards? If we draft a power forward, he needs to play.
Click to expand...

It would be nice if he played but he doesn't necessarily "need" to. Not if someone else is better. IMO, we need to draft for the future, and trade for next year.....if possible.

Plus it is a long season with plenty of potential injuries. Both those guys you mentioned (Grant and Sochan) can guard multiple positions. But you can't rely on rookies to start off playing like seasoned vets. So if you can get someone like Grant for a decent price, take them for the next year or two. If the rook develops quickly then you play him too. But the goal is to win now and if someone like Winslow or Watford beats out a 19-year-old...so be it.
 
I will probably sound argumentative, but I am not. It just seems crazy to have a multi page thread asking if the Blazers can be contenders in 3 years, and have this thread where a large majority wants to draft and trade for the same position. The crazy in me says draft at 7, then go trade for a 4 if it didn't come via draft. Several players I am interested as 3's in this draft. Three of the top four 4's will be gone in first four picks. This team will be nothing next season. Draft BPA and if we don't have the assets to trade for Grant, whom I am not impressed with, just sign him as a free agent or s&t next season so he and Dame can get their admiration on. Grant's numbers are not inspiring in my opinion. This is all just my opinion.
 
BIG Q said:
I will probably sound argumentative, but I am not. It just seems crazy to have a multi page thread asking if the Blazers can be contenders in 3 years, and have this thread where a large majority wants to draft and trade for the same position. The crazy in me says draft at 7, then go trade for a 4 if it didn't come via draft. Several players I am interested as 3's in this draft. Three of the top four 4's will be gone in first four picks. This team will be nothing next season. Draft BPA and if we don't have the assets to trade for Grant, whom I am not impressed with, just sign him as a free agent or s&t next season so he and Dame can get their admiration on. Grant's numbers are not inspiring in my opinion. This is all just my opinion.
Click to expand...
It's all just our opinions.

I don't think people see it as talking about drafting and trading for two guys who play the same position, won't be able to both play at the same time and make this team better than they've been since Dame has been here. I think we can draft a forward and get Grant (if that's the best guy to get) and then the two can be synergetic. I think Murray fits that bill, I think Sochan fits that bill, I think there's a chance that Jovic fits that bill. If we went out and got Wood instead of Grant, then we'd probably want to draft a guy that's either a SG/SF to play the three like a better version of Hart (Mathurin or Agbaji) or a Jerami Grant type of forward that can guard and play either the 3 or 4 (the guys I mentioned at first or Eason). I think Wood is athletic enough to play with Nurk, I worry that if we acquired Randle we might have a problem with combined footspeed between our 4 and 5.

So if you trade for Grant you have to get someone who is going to be a more dedicated rebounder and weak side shotblocker, if you trade for Wood you need to get someone who can better switch onto guards and probably someone who can create off the dribble. I really wouldn't want to trade for Randle because I don't think he's a fit. Those are the three guys I've seen people saying that we could realistically get and our team seems to be fixated on one of them but that could be a smoke screen... Oh god wouldn't it be great if it turns out that Cronin is capable of some nuance or subterfuge or anything other than broadcasting to the league what he thinks he needs to do and therefore crippling himself in negotiations.

I think the fact is that we need to add a PF and SF who are as good or preferably better than Ant and Nurk if we're going to contend with Dame, Ant and Nurk starting with Hart, Nas and Justise as the core of the bench. We probably also need a legit backup big and for some real growth from one or more of our young players who haven't shown at this point in their careers that they're capable of meaningfully contributing to wins.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
It would be nice if he played but he doesn't necessarily "need" to. Not if someone else is better. IMO, we need to draft for the future, and trade for next year.....if possible.

Plus it is a long season with plenty of potential injuries. Both those guys you mentioned (Grant and Sochan) can guard multiple positions. But you can't rely on rookies to start off playing like seasoned vets. So if you can get someone like Grant for a decent price, take them for the next year or two. If the rook develops quickly then you play him too. But the goal is to win now and if someone like Winslow or Watford beats out a 19-year-old...so be it.
Click to expand...

Was Tolliver better than Little? How about Hezonja? Because Jackass Stotts were mortgaging our future for those guys.

Thankfully, Grant is way better than those guys and Billups is way better than Stotts. Our lottery pick will play, perhaps not start. I wouldn't be too concerned. Grant can play multiple positions.
 
An exec person I know once told me his philosophy on building a team. He was in a small market as well. His strategy is to try and take the player with the highest ceiling in the draft. He told me once that “you win with stars in this league.” Since free agents aren’t banging the door down to come play in Portland, or where he was, filling gaps with “fit” players is how he attacked free agency. Then finally trading for both fit and potential based on age and record. He also said high basketball IQ will beat high athleticism every time

So with that in the back of my mind, the only thing I would trade the pick for is up or down depending on who The team liked in the draft that they felt had star potential, or trading it for an actual star.
 
BIG Q said:
Just curious, as Ive seen trading down for 2 picks a lot, but one proposition has us using one pick for Sochan and trading the other for Grant. Another variant is trading a pick for Eason and the extra pick for Grant. They are all power forwards? If we draft a power forward, he needs to play.
Click to expand...

Grant could most likely play the 3.

And the crazy(!) thing about Sochan is he could play the 3, 4 or small ball 5(!) and he’s a better ball handler and passer than Nas already. Grant’s shooting would make up for Sochan’s underwhelming shot (as of now).

You’d have essentially a positionless 3/4 with Grant and Sochan that you could manipulate based on matchups but neither would be undersized. So we would be long and athletic.

And as I’ve harped on many times, Eason and Grant is a terrible fit if you’re playing them together. Essentially two hall stopping 3/4 hybrids that don’t create for others.

For me it’s Eason OR Grant

Or

Grant AND Sochan
 
Jabari
Chet
Banchero
Murray
Ivey
Sharpe
Daniels

I would prefer Sochan but I think Daniels potential is going to be hard to pass on.
 
Phatguysrule said:
Do they want to move him? Grant and Randle are both "on the outs" with their current teams (to varying degrees), so they could be available at a lower price point.
Click to expand...
I have no idea. But it seems we really have to go after a difference maker.
 
Daniels compares himself to: Tyrese Haliburton on offense, Lonzo Ball or Caruso on defense.

Says it’s a tough comparison because he has a unique game. Wants to develop into a “Luka Doncic” type role. (Doubtful, but like the confidence).

Tari Eason:
Herb Jones, Saddiq Bey, Jerami Grant. Says Kawhi is his ceiling.

Beauchamp:
Bridges/Thybulle defensively, Paul George “potential” offensively.
 
I've firmed up my opinion on trading the 7th pick. I kind of liked Wood but concerned he cannot play as a PF and is not tough enough. I would only trade the pick for a guy like Siakam or Collins. Warming up on Collins. He is even better offensively than Wood, who I have shown is much better than Grant or Randle. His rebounding not as good as Randle's and Wood's in the last three years but if you look at his first three years it was, so this may depend on the scheme McMillan uses and who is playing along side him. His defense on advanced stats is negative but his DBpm has improved the last few years and is now neutral.
I guess I would trade it for Anunoby also; he is a two way player with length and really good offense until last year. If we can't get somebody like one of those three (Siakam, Collins, Anunoby) then I would use it if somebody we really like is there at 7 or trade downs and still draft. Only interested in a guy like Grant if we can use future picks.
 
UKRAINEFAN said:
I've firmed up my opinion on trading the 7th pick. I kind of liked Wood but concerned he cannot play as a PF and is not tough enough. I would only trade the pick for a guy like Siakam or Collins. Warming up on Collins. He is even better offensively than Wood, who I have shown is much better than Grant or Randle. His rebounding not as good as Randle's and Wood's in the last three years but if you look at his first three years it was, so this may depend on the scheme McMillan uses and who is playing along side him. His defense on advanced stats is negative but his DBpm has improved the last few years and is now neutral.
I guess I would trade it for Anunoby also; he is a two way player with length and really good offense until last year. If we can't get somebody like one of those three (Siakam, Collins, Anunoby) then I would use it if somebody we really like is there at 7 or trade downs and still draft. Only interested in a guy like Grant if we can use future picks.
Click to expand...
Love the ideas.
Problem with Wood is he is duplication with Nurk. I don't think we can get a Siakam or Collins (though that would be awesome, please share if you have seen anything that would suggest they are available for what we could offer).

Randle's offense would mesh perfect with Dame, and his rebounding would be incredible. He's also shown that he can be a VERY good defender. I don't like the idea of trading the 7 for Grant. But if we could get Grant and Randle out of the 7 (which seems agreeable to all sides)...

I just don't know if we can get a better influx of talent and fit any other way.
 
Scalma said:
This is Billups’ guy lol







Click to expand...

he also has insane advanced numbers, especially defensively. And he's been coached by BRoy in HS. And his improvement after transferring from Cincy has been insane. it's why i had been pimping him up for the last month.

but the mocks don't like him for some reason, which is why i would like to maximize the value of #7 to trade down for him AND another asset.
 
illmatic99 said:
he also has insane advanced numbers, especially defensively. And he's been coached by BRoy in HS. And his improvement after transferring from Cincy has been insane. it's why i had been pimping him up for the last month.

but the mocks don't like him for some reason, which is why i would like to maximize the value of #7 to trade down for him AND another asset.
Click to expand...
Yep--and it makes sense for Cronin to keep waiting and reading the tea leaves over the next few weeks before making a move.

Assuming that the top 5 are stone (Smith, Chet, Paolo, Ivey, Sharpe) with Murray/Daniels now in the mix, who are the other guys almost guaranteed to go ahead of him? Duren, Griffin, Mathurin, Davis? That's 11 so far. Feels like if the 7 for 13/15 deal that many have suggested were to occur, we'd be almost guaranteed to get at least one of Eason/Sochan/Williams, if not two of them.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
Yep--and it makes sense for Cronin to keep waiting and reading the tea leaves over the next few weeks before making a move.

Assuming that the top 5 are stone (Smith, Chet, Paolo, Ivey, Sharpe) with Murray/Daniels now in the mix, who are the other guys almost guaranteed to go ahead of him? Duren, Griffin, Mathurin, Davis? That's 11 so far. Feels like if the 7 for 13/15 deal that many have suggested were to occur, we'd be almost guaranteed to get at least one of Eason/Sochan/Williams, if not two of them.
Click to expand...
if you believe the discourse on this forum as a guide, add sochan to that list to go before 12. #13 might be a reasonable estimate for Eason.

My worry is San Antonio at 9. I said about two months ago I got Kawhi vibes from Eason because of his hand size and the way he pounds the ball to the floor on every dribble (as well as the right hand dominance). Ain't no way they don't get the same vibes when they bring him in in-house.

I've also referenced this echo chamber of sorts among some teams and strict adherence to mock drafts. It's why guys like Jimmer get drafted 5 spots ahead of Kawhi. I really hope Cronin is not that kinda guy. I also hope he does his due diligence to get a clear idea of how other teams are tiering these guys so he can predict the draft order. For all the criticism they got, this skill was among Olshey's/KP's best. They could figure out exactly how to land their guys and correctly predicted when they needed to trade up or stand pat to get them.
 
illmatic99 said:
he also has insane advanced numbers, especially defensively. And he's been coached by BRoy in HS. And his improvement after transferring from Cincy has been insane. it's why i had been pimping him up for the last month.

but the mocks don't like him for some reason, which is why i would like to maximize the value of #7 to trade down for him AND another asset.
Click to expand...
The reason mocks don’t like Eason:

Low BBIQ.
Can’t do anything going left.
Insane foul rate, mostly due to his low BBIQ.
Poor decision making (once again due to BBIQ).
Horrible passer.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
Yep--and it makes sense for Cronin to keep waiting and reading the tea leaves over the next few weeks before making a move.

Assuming that the top 5 are stone (Smith, Chet, Paolo, Ivey, Sharpe) with Murray/Daniels now in the mix, who are the other guys almost guaranteed to go ahead of him? Duren, Griffin, Mathurin, Davis? That's 11 so far. Feels like if the 7 for 13/15 deal that many have suggested were to occur, we'd be almost guaranteed to get at least one of Eason/Sochan/Williams, if not two of them.
Click to expand...
https://www.espn.com/nba/draft/bestavailable

Although there is no way this is how it shakes out, you most likely could grab Mark Williams + Eason.
 
Predator said:
https://www.espn.com/nba/draft/bestavailable

Although there is no way this is how it shakes out, you most likely could grab Mark Williams + Eason.
Click to expand...
And honestly, if a Williams/Eason draft day then leads to a Dame trade for more picks/prospects, I'd feel pretty good about the beginnings of the rebuild. I could see dealing Dame to Washington to play with Beal/Porzingis in exchange for Avdija/Hachimura/Kuzma and whoever they draft at 10. Could make for a pretty strong rebuild core.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
And honestly, if a Williams/Eason draft day then leads to a Dame trade for more picks/prospects, I'd feel pretty good about the beginnings of the rebuild. I could see dealing Dame to Washington to play with Beal/Porzingis in exchange for Avdija/Hachimura/Kuzma and whoever they draft at 10. Could make for a pretty strong rebuild core.
Click to expand...

Ugh... that seems like such a weak haul for Dame.
 
Trade up (Kings?) for Keegan

Stay at 7: Sharpe if he falls - if not, Sochan
 
Predator said:
Daniels compares himself to: Tyrese Haliburton on offense, Lonzo Ball or Caruso on defense.

Says it’s a tough comparison because he has a unique game. Wants to develop into a “Luka Doncic” type role. (Doubtful, but like the confidence).

Tari Eason:
Herb Jones, Saddiq Bey, Jerami Grant. Says Kawhi is his ceiling.

Beauchamp:
Bridges/Thybulle defensively, Paul George “potential” offensively.
Click to expand...
What the hell. Dyson Daniels compares himself to Tyrese Haliburton on offense?

Haliburton shot 41% on three-pointers in 2020-2021 and 41% again in 2021-22. 5 attempts per game in both seasons. He's an 85% free-throw shooter.

Dyson Daniels shot 25.5 % on three-pointers in 14 games averaging 3.6 attempts per game. He was a 74% free-throw shooter in those games.

It's a tough comparison because he doesn't want to compare himself to anyone with his shooting numbers.
 
Predator said:
https://www.espn.com/nba/insider/story/_/id/33980075/the-four-players-break-2022-nba-draft-big-three

Portland listed as one of Daniels “best fits”.
Click to expand...
How is Daniels a good fit for Portland? A 6'8" guard who can't shoot.
The Blazers need someone who is 6'6"-6'10" who CAN shoot and wants to play small forward or power forward.
Besides, the Blazers already have Justise Winslow and Trendon Watford on the roster, two forward-sized players who like to dribble and pass the ball, but aren't good shooters.
I say Daniels a horrible fit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top