A top 3 backcourt in the league? Most definitely. They just need the right pieces around them and a better scheme.
Make no mistake, CJ is a very gifted offensive player in his own right; he'd "get his" on most teams and in most situations. The trouble is that he and Lillard are both ball-dominant guards that prefer to shoot off the dribble. This tends to make the offense look a lot more one-dimensional than it should and it's the kind of offense that good defensive teams (ergo playoff teams) tend to be able to mute or take away with enough time to scheme and gameplan (like in the playoffs). If CJ and Damian, or just one of them, was a plus defender then it might be salvageable . . . but it is a problem. A big problem that isn't going to magically get better with a new coach or a few new faces thrown in around them.
Back in the olden days, the Pittsburgh Pirates had two phenomenal second basemen. Dave Cash was the established starter, but they had Rennie Stennett, an up and coming youngster with star written all over him. The Pirates traded Cash to the Phillies (for Ken Brett) so Stennett could be the full time second baseman. Their reasoning was that Cash brought more back in trade because he was the better, more established, player. Brett was an all-star his first season with the Pirates. The World Series champion (with Cash the year before) Pirates won the NL East in Stennett's first season, and again in his second. The Pirates won the East for several more seasons with Stennett. Cash went on to make the all-star team 3 times, his first three seasons with the Phillies. The Phillies went from 3rd in the East to 2nd to 1st in those three seasons. That was a great Phillies team. The moral of that story is on the sport alone, you'd trade the better of the two because you get more in return. But I go with Dame being the heart and soul of this team, no matter who his teammates might be. He's important to the fans and the city as well. If, and only if, one of the two is to be dealt, I'd have to be overwhelmed to deal Dame, but would be somewhat willing to trade CJ if the deal makes sense.
In this analogy, seems like CJ is Cash and Stennett is Crabbe. Question is, who is the Ken Brett in this scenario?
Yes. One player has more if an impact on offense than defense, especially as a guard. If you put Avery Bradley and Tony Allen in the backcourt they'd still suck.
I still believe we need a coach to hold Lillard and McCollum accountable on defense. They also get no help because we have no rim protector, and our guys suck at team defense (They don't play on a string). Again, I think that's a coaching issue This discussion is actually ridiculous. The only way you trade CJ is if we get someone better (Cousins or George). We need 3 stars to contend and we have 2. Trading CJ for a star still keeps us at 2 with no flexibility. We need to think more creatively, and trading CJ is an easy "solution" that won't get us any closer to fixing the problem.
Against the Portland Trail Blazers with their non-defensive coaching staff, their busted scheme, and the rest of the team that sucks at team defense? Still, no.
You act like I (or anyone else) am suggesting trading Lillard or (more likely) McCollum for nothing. There's no reason to spend years trying everything to make a Lillard/McCollum pairing work and plenty of reason to split them up and get back a similar asset in a different form. McCollum is a fine player, but he's not some generational talent that you simply never ever trade. Even Lillard, for all his historically great shooting, is not that kind of player. You don't trade away either guy just to do it, but there's plenty of reason to think that you can build a stronger overall team with a good trade of one of them.
You don't need 3 stars, you don't need any specific number of stats (though not having even one probably won't work). You need a team that actually functions well together, in addition to a star or two. I'd take two stars and a cohesive team around them than 3 stars that simply can't form a coherent whole. Stars that can't form a cohesive while is, in my opinion, where the Blazers are right now and it's not the fault of either Lillard or McCollum (unless you want to hold their defensive deficiencies against them). They simply double-down on each other's strengths and weaknesses. Duplicating strengths isn't insurmountable, but duplicating weaknesses, the defense, probably is. Trading McCollum isn't an "easy" solution. It's simply a (likely) necessary step towards the solution. The team will also need to be creative--it's not either/or. Even nailing a McCollum deal won't be easy--you need to target the right guy, or guys. Trading McCollum won't instantly turn the Blazers into a championship contender but I think trading McCollum smartly does get them closer.
Years? One bad third of a season and we got the majority of the board clamoring to trade CJ. It's ridiculous. McCollum is averaging over 22ppg on almost 50-50-90 percentages. That's pretty damn good. He doesn't get enough spot up looks in Stotts offense and needs to be ran around screens that actually have a purpose. The dude is a top 10 scorer in the league because of his volume+efficiency.
In a sense, it is. Since both are at their best as ball-dominant scorers/play-makers, playing either off the ball wastes their talent. While they trade off doing it a bit (which doesn't change that talent is being wasted), McCollum is generally the one off the ball. Turning McCollum into a JJ Redick a lot of the time is inefficient, since McCollum could do more. Trading him to a team where he could be a slightly-worse Lillard and getting back someone who's talents are maximized alongside Lillard would be a more efficient use of talent. That's why doubling down on strengths isn't ideal (and doubling down on their weaknesses is crippling).
The "years" comment was in reference to you saying we first need to get a better defensive coach and see and then if that doesn't work, fire Stotts and get a better defensive head coach and see and then if that doesn't work, get a rim-protector and see and then if that doesn't work, rebuild the entire team around Lillard and McCollum. That's basically saying "We need to spend 5+ years trying everything possible to make this combination work," and I don't see why. If it were a question of losing McCollum for nothing or else trying everything to make it work, yes, I'd agree. But that's not what's being suggested. What's being suggested is trading McCollum for similar talent that fits better alongside Lillard. Why spend years trying to make a bad fit work? You seem to be taking these "trade McCollum" discussions as "McCollum is terrible and we need to dump him," which is weird. Everyone agrees McCollum is pretty damn good. That's why the team could trade him for something else pretty damn good, hopefully someone else who fits better with Lillard.
not really what's going on here Bones....it's a possibility that's explored...nobody is clamoring about anything really but defensive improvement and team identity...CJ for Paul George...CJ for Klay Thompson...CJ for Jimmy Butler...you have to consider those and actually....I think you've proposed more trades than any forum member....
