Curious how this is already deviating from the plan that is within the control of the team/player? We were supposed to suck this year. We are seeing gradual improvements from players. You can't have your plan fully realized when you only have had 1/4th of it done (and this is a multi year plan so even less than that).
Overall it seems we are probably much more close to being in agreement than disagreement. If we voted on accepting hypothetical trades we might even have many matching votes. The main thing we seem to disagree on is replacing Grant or Malcolm veteran influence. I believe it can be replaced good enough by other veterans Joe could easily acquire and by additional contributions of guys already on the roster (ie a healthy Ant, more touches for Ayton, etc). The specifics of how those contributions happen could be very different. It wouldn't be the same way as Malcolm or Grant contribute. But the main purpose of those vet contributions is to give Scoot/Sharpe/others a proper environment to grow as players. I believe Cronin and Billups can do the moves to make those happen this year and in future years. So I'd suspect I may be more willing to trade away Malcolm or Grant than you are. But who knows.
The Blazers could (I'm not saying they are for sure) right now be as good as last year's Orlando Magic team that finished with a 34-48 record. The Magic didn't follow up that season by trading away their vet that was in the rotation, 29-year-old Gary Harris, for draft assets to get more playing time for younger players. What they did was the opposite, adding another, even older, vet to the rotation, 36 year old Joe Ingles. Paolo Banchero just turned 21 years old on the 12th of November, and Franz Wagner is 22. Are the Magic doing the wrong thing by adding a much older player to the roster that won't be around for Banchero and Wagner's "Prime" ? Don't they see the Big Picture? (By the way, I'm not advocating adding another old player to the Blazer roster.)
I wonder if the Pelicans might be interested in Brogdon? They have some nice young talent and draft picks.
Brogdon shouldn’t be the end all, be all, ‘vet’ to have on this squad. So many factors change what could be the best path. Keeping Brogdon now, when there hasn’t been any reports of a big offer yet, benefits the team a lot more. We still need more clarity on 1) the NBA landscape. 6ers will surely be trading for a star. Raptors will have to make a decision on whether or not to trade Siakam or OG at the deadline. Is Mitchell going to be traded east or west, and when? If teams are putting all their assets into trying to land one of those guys and Brogdon doesn’t fetch what we want, keep him the rest of the season. 2) the wing talent in the draft. There’s going to be good guards, but we have enough guards. There’s going to be plenty of good bigs, that more than one should slip to the 2nd round. Unless there is a wing worth tanking for, there’s no need to tank. Trying to make the playoffs (and failing, likely) just means our pick might be #10/11 instead of #1-6, not a big deal this year imo. Us pushing for the playoffs means possibly pushing GSW out, so making the playoffs isn’t the worst thing in the world. 3) how desperate are teams to add Brogdon. There’s going to be winners and losers among the contenders at the deadline. There’s going to be winners and losers in the playoffs. A team has to want to part with significant parts if they want Brogdon. He is a valuable contributor on a playoff team, no a trade throw-in. Until a team offers a package of significance or Brogdon wants to play for a contender, he’ll continue to be here. I’m completely fine with that, even as someone who is rooting for asset accumulation.
I actually think Orlando would be the team in prime position to pursue a vet like Brogdon. They have Franz and Banchero as their pillars for the future, and Brogdon would be a perfect vet for Suggs who they see as a piece of their future as well. Brogdon and Suggs are going to be stout defensively, and they have a good mix if vets and productive players in Ingles, Carter, and Harris. The young pieces available aren’t that interesting to me. Drafting Jett that high was a mistake imo, and I don’t see Black as a prize in a Brogdon deal. They do have Mortiz, who I’d be interested in as a backup C. The pieces that I would be interested in are the 1st rounders. Aside from all of their own, they have the ‘25 DEN top 5 protected 1st. I’d be interested in that 1st, and a ‘26 ORL lotto-protected 1st. So the deal would be Brogdon for Mortiz Wagner (absorbed into TPE), the expiring of Fultz (unless Harris can pull a 2nd from a team or would be a good vet piece to this team), and 2 1sts. This is in the realm of a realistic deal I can see going down at the deadline.
Wait, Brogdon brings in Mo Wagner AND two firsts? I can't see that ever going down. Wagner has been fantastic.
Yeah, it sounds like a lot, but it really depends on where they are and the rest of the landscape in February. These are the things we know about Orlando's roster/recent play: - They are playing well, and can continue to play well into the deadline - They have their two pillars, as well as the recent lotto selections of Suggs, Howard, and Black - Without Wagner, they still have solid vets in WCJ, Ingles, and Harris. Anthony is also the prototypical scoring guard 6th man that fits with a Brogdon/Suggs backcourt - The DEN '25 1st will be a bad 1st, and ORL will be good enough in '26 for that 1st to be early-mid 20's, which won't be a good 1st - Brogdon would be the undisputed best PG free agent this summer if he was one. Harden is the biggest name, Lowry/DLo/Conley/Dinwiddie are the other notable names. Unless the Magic love one of those guys, Brogdon's bird rights alone are worth a 1st round pick The Magic are going to be stuck. Their team looks like they're ready to take the next step into completing at the top of the conference. But unless they decide to enter the Mitchell sweepstakes, who are the guard that is going to put them over the top? They would certainly have the picks to be competitive in a sweepstakes, but Howard/Black both look like they would be poor consolation prizes, which means trading Suggs. They are very solid in the front court, poor in backcourt depth. This trade would definitely be a 'leap-of-faith' kind of trade. When the Bucks traded pick #24 + 2 more 1sts + 2 pick swaps for Holiday before any Giannis extension, I thought it was kind of crazy at the time. That was the trade that pushed them over the top though. Whatever Brogdon is doing for us here, he would be doing for Orlando there, except he is guaranteed a starting spot even with a healthy roster, he'll for sure be competing in the playoffs, and he won't have to pay state income tax. The more I think about it, the more I think this is a likely destination for him by the deadline.
Also keep in mind that the two 1sts, nor losing Mo, should be as big of a hit as the benefit that Brogdon could do to Suggs (already great defensively, just needs to be more refined offensively). The '25 DEN 1st is coming in a year where they still already have their own 1st to take a crack at a talent in the draft, and they'll have their 1st this year to find a big man in an big-abundant draft. I can assure you that they have a less than 1/4 shot to find a guard in the mid 20's this year that will be as good as Brogdon in the next four years. There is almost certain to be big man in the mid 20's who can be a valuable bench big on a good team.
If you've felt like my reasons for why Orlando would do this deal, this is the kind of trade I would like to see for Brogdon. This is not "bottoming out". This is not "trading Brogdon for whatever". This is simply continuing the mission of acquiring assets, while still improving as a team. If we still draft a big man with that high 2nd from the Hornets, our C rotation will be DA/Wagner/Williams/rookie going into next season. That is not "bottoming out", that is building literally the best big man rotation we've seen in Portland ever. This is adding 2 more 1st to an improving war chest of future assets. Wagner is also a backup C that we can bring back for multiple years if he is a good fit here. Maybe we can trade Fultz to a team for a flyer at a taller position, is there a 'Nikeil Alexander Walker' of forwards that might be available this year?
For those of you who keep on talking about the detriment of tanking and the supposed "losing culture" that we don't want our young players to learn... let me point out Orlando who definitely have been tanking for three straight seasons and somehow (talent) they're now able to put things together and play winning basketball. If we want more talent, this isn't the year to try and eke our way into the play-ins or some bullshit like that. Let's get the most talent we can out of this draft. Let's trade guys who are more valuable to teams that are really trying to win now than they are to us. Let's have some patience and maybe not as long as Philly did but still "trust the process".
big difference though, is that Orlando's young talent is mostly in the front court: 6'10 Banchero; 6'10 Wagner; 6'10 Carter. Those 3 starters are averaging 50 points, 21 rebounds, and 10 assists. And they all fit into the definition of 2-way players. Yeah, they have 22 year old Suggs and 23 year old Anthony in the back court, but Orlando built quality length. They used 4 lottery picks on 3 guys 6'10 and one guy 6'5. And that doesn't include 6'6 Anthony Black Orlando is 14-5 and they are winning because they are 2nd in the NBA in defense. Length matters and I'm not sure that Portland has received that memo I do agree that it would theoretically be a much better outcome to get a high draft pick than maybe have a shot of the 10th seed and play-in
Well, each of those last three years the Magic have had multiple players with six or more years of NBA experience, including at least one guy who was an NBA all-star. And they aren't even 20 games into this season, so it's hard to say they're the real-deal example you want them to be just yet.
This wasn't an argument I was making saying that we shouldn't have any vets on this team, we definitely should. It's the people saying that our young players need to win now in order to be prepared to win when they are more developed and ready to lead teams to wins. That's just not true. We can definitely afford to have a terrible record this season and in fact I don't think we have the talent yet that allows us not to try and get the best pick possible.
Except, nobody is "saying that our young players need to win now in order to be prepared to win when they are more developed and ready to lead teams to wins." You're arguing against a position nobody has taken (the definition of a strawman). What people are saying is that our young players likely learn/develop more playing in competitive games than in blowout losses. That is a completely different statement.
I don’t think this is an issue. Even close to the deadline, we should be able to close the gap and get among the five best odds at #1. That’s assuming we are even close to the play-in, there’s still a chance we are nowhere near it at the deadline. The best outcome would obviously to get one of the top 3 picks (this year, getting the NUMBER 1 PICK probably means squat, top 3 would be good enough for me) and have a GSW lotto pick as well. The second best outcome would be to maybe be around that 9-11 range and missing the play-in, but also have a GSW likely also in that range, so we get two cracks in the late lotto in a weaker draft. The second worst outcome would be for us to make the playoffs and lose our pick, and GSW is in the 9-10ish range. Second worst outcome, but not a terrible outcome. The young guys get a sample size of the effort it takes to make the playoffs, we still have a mid-late lotto pick, and the Hornets’ 2nd is still basically an early 2nd (we can trade up with additional 2nds to trade up into the 1st, if anything). The worst outcome would have a pretty slim chance. We make the playoffs and lose our 1st, and GSW gets into the top 4 with the 9-10th best odds at #1. Having only the Hornets’ 2nd and the Hawks’ 2nd would hurt, but we would have gotten rid of our pick obligation to the Bulls in a weak draft, and the Warriors are still a year older next season. Their pick is #1 protected next year, so it would be Flagg or bust for them. (I ignored the possibility of having 2 high lottos because I just don’t see the Warriors slipping that low) Even the worst outcome isn’t a terrible outcome. This is a season to just be happy with whatever the direction is. I think most of us think Cronin has learned from observing the Process and other all-in moves like the Gobert and Mitchell trade. Cronin is also showing he isn’t getting rid of pieces for nothing. So it’s best to be happy with whatever decision is made.
This doesn’t make sense at all. Not that your statement is wrong, but that you are assuming our young players can’t learn/develop in blowout losses, or that vets can’t even be a reason to blowout losses? Teams get blown out sometimes, it just happens. Even the good teams get blown out. In the last game, it was the vets who put us in that hole, and it was the young guys who brought us back. Sure, the vets closed the deal. But that doesn’t point to the fact that having vets causes less blowout losses. Consistent effort is what prevents blowout losses. Yes, you still need guys who can run the coach’s schemes, and even young guys who play hard are going to get blown out without anyone teaching them the game. But that’s why a vet is still a vet, even if they can’t play anymore. Lowry is still pumping out solid production at 37, just not good enough to be an asset on a contending team. He’s still a guy that can play 30mpg so he can be on the court with the young guys and obviously the accolades speak for themselves, so he’s a great mentor for the guards. We aren’t worse off long term with Lowry than Brogdon. And Lowry is just an example.
