There are guys who can fit a similar role that you're talking about who don't have the same value as Malcolm. Also, in theory, Simons will be back in mid December and we really shouldn't have any minutes left once he's in the rotation. We should be giving Simons/Sharpe/Scoot 30+ minutes each. There are a grand total of 96 minutes between the two guard spots. Simons 36 Sharpe 36 Scoot 36 That's 108 minutes right there. I really don't like playing Sharpe at small forward. I think Mays has proven to be a completely adequate backup point guard. We can move Brogdon, get some value for him, and we should be okay because we are SUPPOSED to have Oops All Guards.
Where do people get these ideas? I assure you, playing competitive basketball is how you build a winning team. This is a better assembled team than Portland has had in years with young talent on the rise. What more could you people want? Brogden/Scoot, Ant/Sharp, Camara/Thybulle, Grant/Walker, Ayton....This is a competitive team that is only going to get better and winning is how it's done. But let's just go for five years of prospects and finger crossing.
He fits perfectly fine. He has 4-5 years of high-level play left. He's helping the team play competitive.
I don't know, man, it's nice to watch competitive basketball, and Brogden makes almost every game competitive. Sure, we could wring some value out of him, but there's value in being in games and value in learning from a professional like him.
This was the logic used for keeping Robert Williams. We need to not make the mistake and peak too early.
He is extremely injury prone. He already has an old man game. I don’t see him lasting 4-5 years at a high level. Rob has the same problem but he’s quite a bit younger.
You guys are funny, but i get it. It’s just not all about maximizing our assets for me, nor is it championship or bust. Fun basketball has real value.
You really think we are one young piece away? Well, that’s crazy talk, and I don’t really care to argue that point, so we’ll agree to disagree. Even if we are one piece, or ‘young’ piece, if that qualifier matters, it’s going to take a couple of years for that rookie to learn the ins-and-outs of the NBA to even prepare for any future competitive basketball. Let’s just assume we hit the lotto and drafted Sarr, and he takes 3 years to get to any semblance of Mobley or Holmgren right now. By then, Brogdon is already 2 years into a new deal. It’s going to be his last big deal, so should we really consider paying Brogdon big money when we will also have to pay Scoot, Shae, possibly even DA if he proves worthy of a new deal? Brogdon is also turning 31 in mid-December, meaning he might be around 34-35 by the time we’re actually competing. I’m pretty sure that at some point by the deadline, Brogdon’s agent is going to find him a few situations that he wants to be in, and Cronin is going to milk that team for as much as he can. It’s going to be an amicable ordeal from all sides.
Disagree. The window thing is overblown and overused. No championship team has all guys within a couple of years of each other. You need a mix. Give me a great center who's 4-5 years older than my core stars instead of a playable center who is the same age as the core -- the former is the better team. And players are different, just like people in general; the shelf life varies and it's not always based on a birth certificate. You win with good players with good chemistry, not jut because a bunch of guys came into the league within 3 years of each other.
‘Astonishingly dehumanizing’…what an over-the-top reaction LOL. You knew damn well what he meant by “‘fun basketball’ can’t come at the expense of team building and asset acquisition”, and yet you choose to take the victimizing stance. By “astonishingly dehumanizing”, I assume you are implying to suggest some BS stance like “basketball players are humans too, blah blah blah, they’re not slaves, blah blah blah, how dare you talk about humans as assets”, which would be astonishingly weird that it’s the first conclusion you came to reading that one a basketball forum. I am human. I am also an asset to the company I work for. Like…don’t read into it anymore than that, dude. Let’s not get political, I think it’s safe to assume he didn’t mean for it to sound dehumanizing, cause I certainly didn’t take it that way. Fun basketball is different for everyone. To me, fun basketball just means to actually compete hard on a nightly basis. That also would mean having the right players who can actually do the things you want. To me, the Blazers were just as fun with Mays in the game. Mays, obviously, is just not as good of a player as Brogdon right now. Mays is pretty decent at getting to the hoop and is a great distributor who plays both positions like Brogdon. If he can learn to shoot the ball consistently in the next couple seasons, why can’t he be the next ‘Brogdon’ guy for this team? You can still put together a good team and capitalize on assets.
While we got more out of Mays than I ever thought we would and I admire your enthusiasm for him, there are a couple of reasons why Mays can't be the next Brogdon. First, Brogdon has always been a better talent than Mays and by quite a distance. To mention them in the same sentence almost requires one to insult Brogdon. Brogdon was an all-American and conference MVP on a great college team. He's been NBA rookie of the year and NBA sixth man of the year. Mays isn't close to that, and he's also 26, making him one of the elder statesmen on the Blazers and only four years younger than Brogdon. Brogdon's resume' when he was 26 already was well beyond anything Mays has achieved or ever is likely to achieve. Brogdon has the cache to be able to lead these younger players. Mays does not. Finally, Mays can't even crack the lineup when it's even mostly healthy. That's probably the biggest reason you shouldn't buy Mays. The odds of him being anywhere close to Malcolm Brogdon or what Brogdon can do in even a year in this organization is less than 1%. My best advice would be enjoy him for what he is and root for him. The easiest way to get disappointed in him is imagining him as something he's not.
how do we even know what that true timeline is though? and then what championship team has all players in a same age group? Pretty sure most champ teams have a variety of veteran play and cheap young up and comers coming into their own. I dont see any need to trade him until we are a playin team without him. We are not a playin team without him unless the trade brings current equal talent back. but trade for draft picks 5 years from now? no thanks. We have picks down the road already.
Agreed. I look forward to seeing Mays again with the Remix. Until Scoot is ready to take over and Simons is healthy, I do not see a reason to trade a veteran that provides stability. I do not think it is good for development of Sharpe, Ayton, or the rest of our young roster.
I think Brogdon is worth keeping a while as he's the key leader on this team, Id rather trade Simons.
