Should the Blazers re-sign Jusuf Nurkic this summer?

If we don't resign Nurk, who is going to replicate what he does on defense for us? No one on the current roster, that's for sure. If the Blazers find this miracle center people are fantasizing about, either trade Nurk or bring him off the bench. Same if Collins becomes that guy in the next year or two. In the meantime, unless someone makes Nurk a stupid ridiculous offer, we have to resign him.

 

I'm not talking about next year. Portland is nowhere near a contending team IMO

 

So Durant and Green can run circles around them?

 

Agreed. But that has nothing to do with Nurk.
I can't tell if you're against re-signing Nurk. Either way we're not contending. But we can't get better by not signing him...unless you're advocating tanking for a better pick?

 

Don't Durant and Green run circles around pretty much the entire league? Will they be the only team we ever meet in the playoffs?

I know the sample size is small, but when has GSW ever run circles around POR with Jusuf Nurkic on the court? Nurk has only played in 3 games against GSW since he joined the Blazers. In those three games he is +8, +5 and -2. Again, I get that the sample size is small, but how will you know if it will extrapolate to a larger sample size unless you try?

Again, small sample size, but in 3 career games against GSW, Zach Collins is +1, +2, +13.

In the two games against GSW that both Nurk and Collins played in (2/14 and 3/9) POR is 2-0.

That's 2-0 even though Durant put up 50 and 40 in those two games. I'm fine with Durant running circles around us, as long as we win the game.

Again, I acknowledge the small sample size, but I'd like to actually see a larger sample size before I declare the Nurk/Collins front court a failure.

BNM

 

Wilt, Robinson, and Hakeem were generational level talents that could succeed in any era because of how great they were. It’s the same reason I don’t consider Embiid a traditional center, he has the potential and shown flashes of the ability to be on a level near those other greats. When you’re that great I don’t think there’s anything “traditional” about it. It’s just a difference in how people define a traditional center.

I’ve posted this before but the reason people don’t have success staying big against smaller lineups is because it doesn’t have the same cumulative affect that a good small ball lineup has (imo). Unless you have a guy like Cousins, maybe. If it did people would have countered that by now and been successful, it’s not like it’s some revolutionary way of thinking to stay big.

Small ball lineups create a lot more action and space if they are on a level near that Hampton 5 lineup. Just dumping it in to Nurkic against a smaller defender, forcing him to be efficient inside or make smart decisions as a 7’0 275 lb center, doesn’t have the level of positive affect on an offense that small ball lineups have. Can you imagine the opposing coaches thinking when we opt to take the ball out of Dame and CJ’s hands to run the offense through Nurkic in the post? They would gladly oblige.

Add onto that the ability of that small ball lineup to switch everything defensively vs how you have to defend when staying big, and I get why no ones had succes with it. Just my two cents.

 

I see no way where Nurk isn't back. No matter what the cost. It would be a traveshamockery to not match whatever he is offered.

 

Define "no one has had success with it"? Are you only referring to the last two years? 17 of the last 19 NBA champions played a "traditional center" (unless you consider 6'11" Chris Bosh a small ball center).

In 2016, GSW was up 3-1 until Andrew Bogut (a "traditional center" if there ever was one) got injured. When forced to play too much small ball, GSW lost the series to CLE who was playing "traditional center" Tristan Thompson. Over the last 3 games of that series, CLE out scored GSW by an average of 17 ppg on points in the paint as GSW went small and had no rim protection resulting in a lay up drill for LeBron and company.

I think GSW's success has at least as much to do with a talent disparity as it does a style of play. They have two former MVPs, who have both won multiple NBA scoring titles, on their roster, along with another guy who holds NBA records for most points in a quarter (37) and most points in under 30 minutes (60 points in 29 minutes). I think that's just too much fire power for anyone to deal with, regardless of size or style of play.

Still, in the very limited sample size where Nurk has played against GSW, POR has had success.

I think Nurk is a valuable asset that is vital to the future success of this team. He's still only 23, and should be considerably better by the time he is 27. I just hop the rest of the league has swallowed the small ball Kool-Aid and no one offers him a ridiculous contract so we can retain him at a reasonable price.

BNM

 

You think the reason Cleveland was able to beat GSW was because Andrew Bogut got injured? I think it had a lot more to do with Draymond being suspended a game and Lebron + Kyrie being great in that series.

And it sounds funny but yes I’m referring to the last 2-3 years since it wasn’t until then did we see what a dominant small ball lineup could do. There were other variations of it previously but Draymond playing point forward/center surrounded by a team built to be able to play small while remaining a top tier defensive team was pretty revolutionary. There may not be another lineup as great at playing that style of ball as this GSW team but we have already seen some pretty damn good copy cats of it.

Where I think we agree is that I think there is a talent disparity at the 5 right now. But unless you have one of the few in the league that are talented enough to be a a suitable counter (we don’t) then it doesn’t make sense to stay big. It was one of the reasons I was really interested to see that Boogie+AD lineup in the playoffs this year. I think that’s about as good of a “big lineup” you can construct in today’s NBA and we could have really seen how they matched up against GSW.

I say all of this but I think it would be a huge mistake to let Nurk walk. He has a place in today’s game and pretty much single handedly transformed our defense but it just rarely pans out when you decide to build against the trends of innovation in the NBA.

 

Bogut was the missing piece when they won their first Chip for sure.

 

Yeah, I do believe Bogut's injury was the turning point of that series. GSW was dominating up until that point. After the injury, CLE killed GSW in the paint and on the boards. Remember this was before GSW added the 7' scoring machine and mismatch nightmare to their small ball lineup. Their small ball line up pre-Durant was very effective for stretches, but after the Bogut injury they were forced to play small for the entire game and couldn't keep Tristan Thompson off the offensive glass and couldn't keep LeBron from scoring at will at the rim. Green's suspension didn't help, but he was only suspended for one of those three games.

I think GSW, especially with the addition of Durant, is more of an anomaly than a long term trend. They added a 7' scoring machine to one of the most potent lineups in league history. You're not going to beat them at their own game. So, I think it's foolish and short sighted to try.

BNM

 

We can get better eventually. With some creative GMing, we could start to shed salary, and retool

 

I get it, and I don't think it is a fair. I think the playoffs are different, and running 2, 7 footers out there in today's game isn't a great recipe for success. It's just what I think.

 

Agree to disagree. We may not see another lineup like this GSW team but I think there’s a lot of GM’s out there that are going to use them as a mold when building their teams. I don’t think it’s just a flash in a pan trend that’s going to go away within the next 5 years and I think we have a guy on the roster in Collins that can be a serious weapon should we chose to follow the trend. Good discussion.

 

Hasn't the "no matter what the cost" mantra already put this team in a cap stranglehold with limited flexibility?

 

Nope. We're fine. Just gotta get lucky in the draft.

 

Wait & see mode is what the Blazers do best. Not long after often comes the shoulda, coulda, woulda sayings.

 

I liked it for the blending of words. True talent.

 

To play devils advocate... If the trades for the sake of trading happen and we still fail... The shoulda coulda wouldas would happen all the same.

 

So don't sign Nurk so that we can maybe have financial flexibility 3 years from now? Somehow I think a re-signed Nurk will put us on a better path to become better in 3-4 years, even if only as a trade chip - salary cap will never (yes, that's bolded, underlined, AND italicised) be the road we should take to improve. The only argument for improvement sans-Nurk that makes any sense is the "tank" argument. I'm not entirely against that, but it's a DAMNED bold (some might say stupid) move to make when you have a potential legacy player on your roster who is entering his prime.
For what it's worth, I don't think Dame will ever lead us to a championship - so if that's all you care about, then don't re-sign Nurk. And trade CJ for a draft pick while you're at it. Also, don't bother bringing back Ed for anything more than MLE, Pat for the vet min, and forget Bazz altogether (which I'm totally fine with that last one).