The Blazers Player with the Most Trade Value is Lillard

If Exum or Wiggins will truly be superstars, then the Blazers aren't the only ones who feel that way and there's no way a team is going to trade their pick for Dame.

By what metric are you using to say that Lillard has more trade value? (I get that this thread is just you being sarcastic, but I'm going to pretend that it's real for a minute).

 

This thread is literal. Dame is worth more to a team with that pick than LMA. I don't think it's even up for debate, but I'm sure you'll try.

Age 23 vs. 28
Contract Dollars ~$10m versus God Knows What for LMA
Contract guarantee to team At least 3 years for Lilllard vs. one for LMA
Bigger position of need - You've always valued PGs more than PFs. Are you saying that NBA GMs think the opposite?

How many more do you need? Which metric would you use to say LMA is more valuable to other teams than Lillard?

 

No, I don't think either player is worth more to a team with the pick in the top four.

The ONLY argument that can be made is that Cleveland wants to win now to appease Irving and possibly entice LeBron to sign there, so they trade the #1 for a proven All-Star. That would be Aldridge.

Why would Milwaukee, Philly, or Orlando want either of those players? The Bucks are a shit franchise. LA is too old and he wouldn't re-sign there. Dame is great, but they would probably rather stick with one of the top three or four talents in the draft.

Philly is said to be favoring Exum over MCW, so I doubt they would trade for Dame. Again, they wouldn't want Aldridge because he doesn't fit their window and he probably wouldn't re-sign there.

Orlando is a possibility if Exum is off the board, but at that point I imagine Wiggins would be as well, so there's really no point for the Blazers to trade either of their stars to the Magic.

 

So your reply is "they won't trade for LMA" vs. "I don't think they'd trade for Dame."

Um, OK. I think you just gave my point validation.

 

Your statement is a flat "Dame has more trade value than LA" and that's not necessarily true. My point is that trade value is different to every team in the league. If you polled 29 teams, I'm sure LA would probably come out ahead of Lillard in trade value, but there would probably be one or two teams that would rather have a young star point guard.

 

Why, given his age and contract status? You're fucking with me, right?

 

Well, the Houston series is probably still on some minds...

 

So is the exercise in this thread to get people to defend LA? Is that what you're going for? I have a hard time believing that you just spent the last two or three weeks railing about anyone who would trade Aldridge to now suddenly say that Dame is so much more valuable. If he is so much more valuable to the rest of the league than Aldridge, then he is also that much more valuable to us than Aldridge, so you're just killing your previous arguments about how important Aldirdge is to this team.

 

I suppose, but that doesn't change LMA's age, UFA, or contract status. I'm guessing NB3 is looking at this from a straight on-court perspective?

 

I took time, read a bunch of homer and non-homer threads, and formed my own opinion based on what I think a GM would think. Lillard, in terms of getting an Exum or Wiggins, would be much more attractive to the team drafting one of them than LMA. That's just my opinion, of course, but to me it makes a lot of sense, objectively.

 

But what's the point? Why trade one young star for another young star? You're essentially taking two steps back because the team is just going to have to go through the same growing pains of starting a rookie and letting him develop, except this time the pressure will be much higher because this team went to the second round. Lillard had almost no pressure coming into Portland. Wiggins might end up being a superstar, but that's yet to be seen. The whole point of trading Aldridge, if that were the route that Neil decided to go, would be to acquire another young star to play WITH Lillard. Plus, trading Lillard would probably anger Aldridge and he would just want out in a year anyway.

 

Why trade Tyrus Thomas for LMA? Why trade Randy Foye for Brandon Roy? Why make any trades at all, other than for obvious salary cap dumps?

Are you being obtuse?

 

What does trading a rookie for a rookie have to do with this conversation? You're talking about trading a sophomore All-Star for a rookie. A known for an unknown.

But to humor this argument, let's take a look at the top four picks.

Cleveland - they have Irving, why would they want Lillard?

Milwaukee - sure they might trade the #2 for Dame.

Philly - they have MCW, and are rumored to want Exum so bad that they are considering a trade of Carter-Williams. They probably wouldn't want Lillard.

Orlando - if Exum is so good, why would they want Lillard over Exum? He might not even be there at #4.

So out of the top four teams, only Milwaukee might consider a trade for Lillard. That's one out of four teams that would value Lillard more than Aldridge.

 

Because rumors are Irving wants out of Cleveland. Getting Lillard would make a trade for a veteran more attractive.

Along with other teams...

Michael Carter-Williams is in no way, form, or shape close to being an elite player, let alone earning a "MCW" nickname. If Exum is that great, the team drafting Exum would laugh in the face of Philly for offering Carter-Williams.

If Tyrus Thomas was so good, why wouldn't the Bulls draft him at #2?

I disagree with your premise.

 

Y'all don't get the point of PapaG's thread.

Yallz is ruh-tards.

Just sayin'.

Nothing to debate here. He's just keeping it real for those that think we can (or need to) move up for some sure-fire stars, what we would have to give up to move up, and how realistic it is.

 

That, in a nutshell, is it. Any trade for a "franchise" player in this draft, at least if Olshey sees it that way, and another GM doesn't, is going to cost a Lillard, and not a LMA.

 

I get the point of it. I know exactly what he's trying to do, but sometimes it's just fun to argue

 

Inject some realism into the Trade for So and So Draft Pick onslaught of trade ideas that will never, ever happen?

 

This board typically come correct on stupidity and ridiculousness.

That's all PapaG is doing here. Arguing it "for fun" only makes it worse. Makes those look like lunatics, and I'm not talking about the rap group.