Porzingas is the one that really burns you? I am virtually certain Porzingas has more trade value than Lillard around the NBA. Porzingas is one of the most coveted young players in the league, up there with players like Towns and Antetokounmpo. I'd trade Lillard for Porzingas with no doubts in my mind at all.
It's not just "Lillard for Mudiay/Jokic" (for example), so much as it's Lillard/CJ/Harkless/Aminu/Plumlee + Turner/Crabbe/Vonleh/Leonard for CJ/Crabbe/Aminu/Plumlee/Jokic + Mudiay/Turner/Harkless/Leonard. It's certainly arguable that the latter is a better, more balanced squad, and certainly better defensively.
anyone notice they are resting lillard in preparation to trade him? or is it to showcase CJ's ability to run a team so they can trade him? :MARIS61::MARIS61::MARIS61::MARIS61::MARIS61:
EVERYBODY loves the 7 footer that can shoot. Guessing you love Meyers too? granted, porzingis is way better than leonard just saying. No way in hell though Lillard=Porzingis. That is insane
Everybody loves the new Dirk Nowitzki who also provides rim protection? Yes, basically. I don't love Meyers Leonard because he neither has the Nowitzkian ability to hit contested jumpers nor does he have any defensive value at all, let alone great rim protection. We'll have to agree to disagree on his relative value versus Lillard, but as far as I'm concerned, he's likely to end up having similar offensive impact with far, far greater defensive impact. I still don't think there's any NBA GM that would prefer to have Lillard over Porzingas in a one-for-one comparison. Especially considering Porzingas is five years younger, so nowhere close to his peak.
FFS it's a loose estimate of his abilities on both sides of the ball. OK then, tell me, what are your estimates of his abilities - I'll go back and correct mine so you can wipe away your tears.
So what you're saying is, based upon your personal assessment, we're supposed to use your opinion? Um no. Hell, I'd take 2K attributes before yours.
No. What I'm saying is I believe they are reasonable, and being used to make a point - not the point itself. Look man, I've read and agreed with a lot of your posts, I just don't know why they bothered you so much. All they are saying is Lillard is a good offensive player, and not very good on defense.
That's bullshit. Put Michael Jordan on a team with a bunch of non-scorers and he'll be shut down. The other players have to be able at least to be a threat to make you pay for crowding the star player. It's no accident that it was often one of Jordan's "supporting cast" who hit the championship shots. Not to mention that the rest of the players have to "run the offense" by setting screens etc. even if the star player does shoot more. It's like saying that the quarterback does it all and the offensive line contributes nothing.
Just to be clear: I think Lillard is a very, very good player, with a lot of qualities that you would kill for your star player to have. He oozes class. It's just that we have a very unbalanced roster and we can probably get best value for him. If we'd've taken Giannis instead of CJ I wouldn't even be talking about this. (And if we could've somehow got Rudy Gobert AND Giannis, then we'd be a powerhouse already!)
Yeah, I'm passing on all of those deals and doing so pretty quickly. The only one I'd pause for a second would be The Unicorn but Dame's way too valuable.
So you've agreed with some of my posts. I disagree with yours. Saying Lillard is a 20/100 on D is borderline trolling.
I personally wouldn't trade Dame. He is the heart and soul of the team and I sincerely wish he finishes his playing career as a Blazer.
