Most likely the #2 will be a team like OKC or Houston. 1. I don't think they would want him. 2. That would be really cruel to do to Dame.
I love this kinda stuff. Kevin Pelton at ESPN became who he is now because he did the same sorta analysis on his website. But this work does not include drafts from 09-21. Cronin said in his interview that he's going to do a deep dive into game film of guys in the lottery and place a value on each of the picks to determine how they match with players currently available in the trade market. While this analysis is terrific, it really differs for every draft class.
yeah great idea....go out and trade a dollar for a quarter, dime, and 3 nickels you guys keeps saying "trade Dame for a great package" like it's a guaranteed for-certain return. But it's not anything close to that. How much did the Blazers get for Powell? how much for CJ? How much for Nance? It's funny how many of the same people going batshit about the poor return the Blazers got for their deadline trades are the loudest ones advocating trading Dame. Why would trading Dame in 2 months yield a better relative result than the pair of trades 2 months ago? personally, I think it's loopy to actually believe trading Dame creates more "hope" than keeping him
100% agree. It's possible the 59th and 60th pick will produce MVPs this year, but the probability of it is low and therefore the picks should be valued as such. No different than using the past data to project the value of a specific pick. I had a problem with Olshey going with a strategy of trying to win a title with only one below average height all-star, because the data says that's just now how championship teams were built. Could it happen in the future? For sure. Having said that, I prefer the strategy with the highest probability of success, not one that requires us to defy all the odds and break the mold. It appears NateBishop has a theory in his head that ditching out on a Dame is likely to increase our odds of landing multiple susperstars because a couple teams have done it successfully, but it appears the data suggests trading your star for a pick in hopes to draft another star is a net negative overall.
well...right there you've inadvertently arrived at the only logical path the Blazers should do if they trade Dame. That being to suck for a few years; really suck, and hope for lottery luck I can actually respect that perspective just as long as all you honyaks who are screaming about how hopeless the situation is with Dame, so let's trade him, actually carry the thinking the direction it needs to go: and that's to trade Dame AND trade Simons AND trade Nurkic. Get rid of the players that generate pointless wins and keep Portland sucking hind tit in the lottery
I don't know why you would need to trade Simons. OKC has SGA and they still suck. But, yes. Dame and Nurk could go.
SGA is currently better than Simons, so I think we will be ok. Even if Simons edges him out next year.
Oh dear God...Just the thought of that.. Talk about 'pointless'.. Lets keep sucking to put our keys in a string of 20 year olds instead of a HOF Top 10 Top 75 All-Time player...Just those words... And then, the rookie needs knee surgery...out for the year....Then the other rookie from the previous year gets hurt, and on we go... But hey..at least we're sucking and getting those lotto picks guaranteed to be available and productive in Dames still-peak time frame. No, thank you.
Yeah, no thanks - I'd rather watch the next few years with a bonafide superstar leading us to whatever end then go through more of the shit we just did for two months.
Considering the assets this team has, there's no reason you can't acquire a bit of both. If they throw most of the resources into getting a Jerami Grant, this organization should be laughed out of North America and sued for malpractice. There's enough to add at least three solid pieces to the roster, maybe four, and the only way you don't do that is if you're getting a legit star. Jerami Grant is not a legit star.
Would Grant want to go back to his Nuggets' role, though? Seems to me the guy thinks he was bigger than that.
This year it's absolutely impossible that the 59th and 60th picks will become MVPs, all-stars, rotation players or even make it into pro ball anywhere.
Well Chauncey and everyone else seem pretty fucking jazzed about Ant, like they should be. I don't think anyone is trying to take touches away from Nurk. Then there's Dame. I do think if he was traded for, that Grant would expect to be second in that pecking order but I think Chauncey would be selling the idea that when Dame is running the offense he is 1 and everyone else is 2a, 2b, 2c and 2d. He wants the ball moving. When Ant is running the offense I would think he is the first option. I don't think Grant will be running the offense but I'm sure some plays will go through him. I just think that if we acquire him, he'll understand that his role will not be what it was in Detroit and that Chauncey's offense will set him up to score the way he was in Denver as apposed to the way he's been scoring in Detroit but maybe that's naive. The dude was taking 9 shots per game in Denver and 15 a game this season that just ended. I don't think it would be a bad idea to have him shooting it 13 or 14 times a game. He has been a ball stopper but I don't think he's been a chucker at any point in his career. I don't think the team will let him be a ball stopper here. Again, maybe I'm being naive.
What you write makes sense but I think all that gets thrown out the window because what we want and what makes sense probably have no impact on Grant's approach. Grant's expecting to be paid like a star. To me, that indicates he thinks he's a star and that he should probably be the No. 2 shooting option to Dame, and I just don't see that being the case. If the rumors of the Blazers' infatuation with Grant is true, we'd be moving a lot of assets for him, like he's a star, then paying him, like he's a star ... then he gets here and finds out he's probably your No. 4 option. I don't think that would fly well and it seems like a situation that very easily could lead to toxicity in the locker room. Really, that probably would be a fitting way to conclude the Dame era -- after doing nothing for years to suddenly start gambling away good assets for solid supporting players and then have it all blow up.
It's loopy, IF your timeline is the next couple of seasons and IF you define hope as competing for a play-in slot. Now, if your argument is that the Blazer front office can't be trusted with a rebuild - I agree. With the current FO/ownership "hope" is not in the vocabulary regardless of the approach. That is very different than saying a rebuild is a bad idea.
