All of your last three posts, especially this one show that you just aren't paying attention. No one is calling Gary Trent Jr. a basketball god. This post of yours that I'm quoting shows that you're really not paying attention to Trent's game. Trent isn't doing things that like Simons did in one game or Jeremy Lin did in 2011 and 2012 can be adjusted to. You can't game plan for a lockdown defender, which is what Trent is headed towards (he's already damn good), you can't game plan for someone who knows their role in a good offense, hits his open jumpers from anywhere and can put the ball on the floor and get to the basket when the lane is open. Trent isn't going to put this team or any team on his back and just win games by himself but he plays a more complementary game to Dame than CJ does on offense and the defense isn't even close. CJ is really great at being a lead guard on offense, teams will want his scoring, ball handling and savvy, so we shouldn't sell him for pennies but with Dame, Nurk and even Zach and Gary we won't need anyone close to as dynamic as CJ is on offense. We need a defensive guy who can get buckets when needed and definitely hit an open shot. Dame's usage rate will go up but if the guy we get for CJ can hit open jumpers then teams won't be able to trap Dame without getting hurt from three or leaving someone open inside or from the backdoor. If we made a trade that sent CJ out and got back a 3 and D guy big enough and athletic enough to play both the fast and the big small forwards then we would need to use our full MLE to get a true backup PG for Dame. The offense will have more continuity with Dame bringing the ball up almost all of the time and either initiating the offense himself or getting the ball to Nurk at the top of the key so Nurk could initiate the offense. That second string PG would be able to do well running the offense against second units. We would no longer run 30-40% of our plays as CJ isos and we wouldn't have our number two guy passing up wide open threes to get his dribble on. We would be a great defensive team too instead of a sieve. If we got the right guy for CJ, we would be much better.
Love seeing GTJ out there, but CJ is a big time player - and he is one of these guys that does not shy from the moment. I would rather play GTJ out of position at the 3 next to CJ than trade CJ to have GTJ at the 2 with some SF that might or might not pan out.
Fair point about the defense - most "flash in the pan" players don't have that. I think Wes Matthews is a very fair comparison at the moment: a bit undersized and not a great athlete, but a bulldog, with fearless three point shooting. But we forget that Wes drove us berzerk sometimes when he tried to do too much. So yes, if we're thinking of Trent as a complementary piece, then he's shown us a great deal to be excited about. But slow the "trade CJ" talk. CJ takes a fuck of a lot of pressure off Dame that Trent couldn't. I disagree that we wouldn't need "someone as dynamic" as CJ on offense: you ABSOLUTELY need that in the playoffs. If you just have one guy who can create, you are so much easier to game for.
Layman played good for about a month and a half. Then the league took away his back door lob and he disappeared the rest of the season. I think the only thing Jake had that was better then trent was his hops.
Also, I always thought they traded Nixon to make way for MAGIC - wasn't Nixon their PG? When they drafted Magic they didn't think of him as a PG because there just weren't any 6'9" PGs. So it was a bold move to put him there in the lineup and shed an established PG. They've kind of gone in the other direction in Philly with putting Simmons at PF in the Bubble.
Sure have liked Gary's play and hope he continues to make a big impact - but any suggestion to trade CJ is nuts - he's been great here in the bubble!
Hyper bole. Yes everyone thought he might be the next JJ Reddick, but we also knew he was no two way player like Trent. There was no love all season for Jake. He petered out quick and the forum knew it. Go read the threads .
Not everyone There were some well known posters on here who thought the Blazers should offer him 3/30 contract. Glad they are not our GM and that Jake is not a Blazer. As for Trent Jr, I hope he keeps it up. Going to be interesting as he starts showing up on the other teams scouting report more and more how he responds.
I don't think that is entirely true. I remember Olshey hyping both after the draft. They viewed GTJ as someone with first-round talent and was surprised he was still around in the 2nd. He said they both graded out about the same. Granted they took Simons before Trent based on "potential", but wasn't it the fans that hyped him more? And even the Blazer players? I mean many on this board just trashed Trent.......similar to how you trash Simons, both of which is a little premature. No surprise though because we do it every year with someone. But I agree that Trent is damn good. His confidence is at a higher level than most young players. His dad's influence made a huge difference, both in the weight room and on the court. Simons on the other hand suffered from no college ball and less time in the weight room. With no off-season this year, I think his development will be delayed an extra year. But I would not write him off just yet.
See I think Nurk is extremely dynamic both inside and initiating offense outside, we use him that way a lot now and could do that even more to alleviate that pressure on Dame. I also think getting a real PG to backup Dame would be very important but as far as the starting lineup is concerned I think having Dame or Nurk initiating our set offense on almost every play would be diverse enough. There is also this thing called transition offense, I know we aren't that familiar with it and may have forgotten about it over what seems like the last 15 seasons but if we got another perimeter defensive specialist it would open our offense up to a lot more fast break points which would again take pressure off of Dame. CJ doesn't really create a lot of transition opportunities with his D.
Yeah, I've certainly imagined a bazillion "Trade CJ" scenarios over the years. But again, teams that rely on transition offense can get bogged down in the playoffs. Even THE BEST EVER (The Drexler Blazers) ran into problems (like Magic Johnson in 1991). I just worry that CJ's flaws would prevent him netting us enough in return to replace his genuine merits (that are particularly evident in the playoffs).
I worry about getting good enough trade value back for CJ as well. I don't think we need to trade him for pennies on the dollar but with that contract we may need to take a less flashy wing who just provides us grit, ball hawking, defensive fundamentals, athleticism, length and can drain the open three. We would be giving up ball handling, court awareness, mid range game, floaters, getting to the hole at will, breaking down defenders to get jumpers off, making contested threes and all of the rest of the things that make CJ one of the best backcourt offensive threats in the game (the guy can pass pretty well too but he chooses not to in the role he plays on this team).
Always gonna be some outliers or alternative options, thinkers, but he said everyone here was thrilled for over a season, which I find to be hyperbole.
We've come a long way from 10 months ago, when 90% of posts involving Trent thought he should be traded for a stack of towels.
Pretty sure I'm the only one who predicted drafting him, been quietly rooting and the crow feast is enjoyable.
I just tried it and had to scroll through pages and pages of Jr before I got any Sr. Still, Sr. will always have the coolest nickname: The Shaq of the MAC:
Here's highlights of GT, Sr.'s second game as a Blazer. Man, talk about a trip down Blazer Memory Lane. Eddie Doucette and the Snapper with the call. Strickland at PG and Sabonis at C.
