But that was a case of trading down because the GM insisted that we HAD a PG. Nobody thought Chris Paul was a project - he was generally considered the fave for ROY. So yeah, that was colossally dumb, but the dumbness was in overrating Telfair.
I'll be varying levels of happy with any of the top 6 players (Davis/Robinson/MKG/Beal/Barnes/Drummond). There are definitely risks with most of them, but I like them as prospects and it seems like there's a dropoff after 6. Ed O.
Yes, that would be great for us, but would Houston ever do that? It would be great to keep a decent pick and also have an established point guard.
Hollinger had this to say about Beal and Barnes: "Most players in their range turn out to be solid, but this part of the pool doesn't produce many stars. I'd be more comfortable taking these two in the later part of the lottery." The stat-heads don't like Barnes much, that's for sure. Hopefully he goes in the top 4 Ed O.
Here's my prediction: we could trade down and get Jared Sullinger and Will Barton and they'll be better than the players taken at the spots we trade down from.
Would you trade the #6 for Luol Deng? I would if (a) Robinson and MKG were already gone (b) We could get a lower first round draft pick (by buying it, say) (c) Chicago would take some salary back (perhaps Shawne Williams) I understand this would be unpopular because Deng is seen as old (he was born in April 1985, so he's actually only 3 months older than LaMarcus) and average (he was second team all-defense this season, and arguably the second-best player on the team with the best record) and just like Harrison Barnes (Deng is much better at, well, everything than Barnes). But mainly because everyone has convinced him or herself that draftee x (Lillard/Drummond/Barnes/Waiters/whomever) will be FUCKING AMAZING. One of them might actually be pretty good, but the odds of any of them being as good as Deng are probably lower than 10%. And the odds of them being much better than players available lower in the first round (like Will Barton) are also pretty low, this being a deep but shallow draft.
i would not be opposed to trading #6 for Deng but are you ok with him and #11 as the only meaningful additions to the team this offseason? Without looking the numbers I'd assume Deng eats up most of our cap room. So it's not just the pick we are giving up but any hope of signing FA's as well.
No, I wouldn't, which is why I want to give SOME salary back to Chicago. We would have enough to sign Freeland and Claver, and if the Knicks don't sign Prigioni, I bet we could afford him.
I've always liked Deng. Honestly unless there was a player at #6 I was absolutely in love with, I'd probably do this.
Why not? Batum plays 2G for France. (He really does, pretty much full-time.) Nate wanted to move him to 2G for this season and only didn't initially because of Aldridge's heart issue. When Batum DID play 2G his numbers were much better than SF. Wes to the bench, start Batum and Deng. (People said the same thing about Batum and Gerald Wallace, but they were dynamite playing together.)
yep that's what I was getting at. Isn't Deng getting 31m over the next two seasons? we could say screw it trade 6 for deng 11 for Gortat(or just resign hickson and move la to the C) sign Nash and go balls to the walls vy sacrificing our future for a 2 year window. Nash/Batum/Deng/LMA/Gortat would challenge for hc in the playoffs and might even have a shot at upsetting OKC in the WCF. would also be a starting lineup of around 60m lol Sent from my LS670 using Tapatalk 2
Every decision should come with this question: will it help us beat the Thunder and Heat? No mediocrity please.
IMO it's insane to think this year's moves are acceptable only if they result in the Blazers being a contender or winning a series vs the conference champs. Our cupboard is almost bare. The moves we make in the next few weeks must satisfy one goal: accumulate the right assets to become that team in 2-3 years.
Or... what about trading up? I believe this has been discussed before, but Chad Ford was on ESPN radio this morning saying that Charlotte continues to shop their #2 pick. He said it's because they don't see a superstar available there, but have so many needs in a deep draft, they'd rather fill multiple needs. Would they take #6 & #11 for #2? Would the Blazers do that? It'd give them their pick of MKG, T-Rob, etc. The question for me is: do I trust the Blazers to make two smart picks in the part of the draft where the talent starts getting watered-down and harder to judge? Or, do I trust the Blazers to pick the one best player in the draft other than Davis? Not sure. The other downside? Because the Blazers haven't had the #2 pick, none of the very best players have come to work out in Portland. Makes the evaluation less complete, and could make a mistake more likely.
They might do the 6, 11 and Freeland for the #2. I think I would if I were GM of that sorry-ass franchise.
