Jan 15th trade Nurk or Simons

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
SharpesTriumph

SharpesTriumph

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 4, 2018
Messages
13,525
Likes
12,252
Points
113
Will the Blazers explore trading Nurk or Simons on Jan 15th when their trade restrictions are lifted?
 
I love Nurk and he is my favorite current player. But with that being said, for the betterment of the team probably would not be a terrible idea to trade him or least put out some feelers to see what the market is for him.
 
All depends. What are the Blazers getting back?

Of course, this is "Cap-Relief" Cronin ....
 
I do not believe you give up the future of the team just to give Dame a chance at a ring. Maybe if Dame was KD, Jokic, or Luka caliber I would reconsider. But not aging Dame. I love him but he cannot stay healthy enough to be on the court and perform at superstar level.

Nurk, on the other hand, I would get rid of. He is not the future of the team. I think you would have to really sweeten the deal to get somebody to take Nurk.

Ant is part of the team's future. He is not perfect and not a PG. But he can score like crazy and that should improve. Put next to him a young long franchise-type PG than can really pass and defend.
 
I would only support trading Simons if it was to truly bottom out and most of the rest of the roster was going out too. No to trading him to chase a couple of more wins the next few years.

This team can't be turned into a contender any route outside of the draft, give it up.
 
AngryFan said:
I would only support trading Simons if it was to truly bottom out and most of the rest of the roster was going out too. No to trading him to chase a couple of more wins the next few years.

This team can't be turned into a contender any route outside of the draft, give it up.
Click to expand...

If you rebuild why would yo give up a 24ppg 23 years old
 
Explore? Sure. GMs talk all the time about potential deals.

Make a trade, and particularly on January 15th? Highly unlikely.
 
Teams always over value their players and put them on a pedestal. Thats cool if it helps sell tickets, but a star player is only worth what another team is willing trade for him, and if its clear it improves your team and meets your short term goals (that's what the Blazers have now) you roll the dice.
 
If Cronin now traded Simons...whom he traded away CJ and two other starters, in two controversial trades (well at least one) in order to keep, he would look very stupid.
 
Would you want us to trade Nurk if what we got back was, say, this:
upload_2023-1-6_11-50-32.png
 
Would you want us to trade Ant, if what we got back was, say, this:
upload_2023-1-6_11-52-12.png
 
If you can get Siakam and a mobile center back somehow, yes.
 
Or what if we combined them and got a first round pick, too?
upload_2023-1-6_11-53-59.png

HAPPY NOW???

Because I'm actually kind of intrigued
 
can anybody say with certainty that Simons will be significantly better than prime CJ? I think he probably will, if for no other reason than style. At the same time, I've seen him start to channel MeJ on some of his possessions and he's as inconsistent as CJ

the point being that CJ has never had the talent to be a 1st or 2nd option on a contender. He's a supporting level talent, nothing more. If Simons has a ceiling similar to CJ then he's not "the future" of the Blazers, except by default because they have nothing better. Seeing Grant and Simons on the same floor for more than 30 games has convinced me that not only is Grant a better player right now, he has the length to go along with talent that makes for a quality wing. And quality wings is what makes for contenders. Not undersized tweener guards

in other words, if people want the Blazers to make moves to escape the perceived purgatory of mediocrity, settling for Simons as the future of Portland is the opposite of what should be done

meaning that Cronin doesn't have to trade Simons at this point but he absolutely should perform his due diligence and explore trade options for Simons. Nurkic too. Nobody should be held untouchable, even Dame. That's especially true if the Blazers are still hovering around .500 five weeks from now
 
wizenheimer said:
can anybody say with certainty that Simons will be significantly better than prime CJ? I think he probably will, if for no other reason than style. At the same time, I've seen him start to channel MeJ on some of his possessions and he's as inconsistent as CJ

the point being that CJ has never had the talent to be a 1st or 2nd option on a contender. He's a supporting level talent, nothing more. If Simons has a ceiling similar to CJ then he's not "the future" of the Blazers, except by default because they have nothing better. Seeing Grant and Simons on the same floor for more than 30 games has convinced me that not only is Grant a better player right now, he has the length to go along with talent that makes for a quality wing. And quality wings is what makes for contenders. Not undersized tweener guards

in other words, if people want the Blazers to make moves to escape the perceived purgatory of mediocrity, settling for Simons as the future of Portland is the opposite of what should be done

meaning that Cronin doesn't have to trade Simons at this point but he absolutely should perform his due diligence and explore trade options for Simons. Nurkic too. Nobody should be held untouchable, even Dame. That's especially true if the Blazers are still hovering around .500 five weeks from now
Click to expand...

Why should he have to be good enough to be the 1st or 2nd option on a championship team? His new contract doesn't even put him in the top 50 highest paid players and some top players are on rookie deals still.
 
AngryFan said:
Why should he have to be good enough to be the 1st or 2nd option on a championship team? His new contract doesn't even put him in the top 50 highest paid players and some top players are on rookie deals still.
Click to expand...

what difference does that make?

if he's a supporting role level player, he shouldn't be untouchable in trade talks
 
wizenheimer said:
what difference does that make?

if he's a supporting role level player, he shouldn't be untouchable in trade talks
Click to expand...

I didn't say he was untouchable. I said I wouldn't trade him unless it is to rebuild. I like watching players develop or contend. This team has no route to contend so please don't trade our players that have a chance to develop.

The point is that letting him develop shouldn't be a problem because he isn't paid to be a 1st or 2nd option on a contender. CJ was.
 
AngryFan said:
I didn't say he was untouchable. I said I wouldn't trade him unless it is to rebuild. I like watching players develop or contend. This team has no route to contend so please don't trade our players that have a chance to develop.

The point is that letting him develop shouldn't be a problem because he isn't paid to be a 1st or 2nd option on a contender. CJ was.
Click to expand...

and....?

I never suggested you trade him for a bad return. I suggested he hasn't demonstrated enough talent, certainly not enough consistency, to be considered the "future" of the Blazers, especially when gauging him against Lillard. Dame as a rookie was pretty obviously the future of the Blazers. CJ was never the future of the Blazers, except as the object of the GM's ego-driven imagination

You say "don't trade players that have a chance to develop"....that's a really restrictive standard. Watford? Little? Keon?
 
Is a trade centered around ant and Anunoby at all realistic? Toronto has a pileup of good forwards (Barnes, Siakam, Boucher, Porter Jr, Achiuwa…). They’d have to move VanFleet somewhere…but we would be a more balanced, better defensive team with Dame, Hart, Anunoby, Grant, Nurk…
 
He is not a "face of the franchise" type talent, imho. He is part of the future.
 
wizenheimer said:
and....?

I never suggested you trade him for a bad return. I suggested he hasn't demonstrated enough talent, certainly not enough consistency, to be considered the "future" of the Blazers, especially when gauging him against Lillard. Dame as a rookie was pretty obviously the future of the Blazers. CJ was never the future of the Blazers, except as the object of the GM's ego-driven imagination

You say "don't trade players that have a chance to develop"....that's a really restrictive standard. Watford? Little? Keon?
Click to expand...

This is the problem with this board. You know damn well what I meant and you also know the obvious differences as prospects between Simons and Watford/Little/Keon and yet this is what you post. What is the point of responding to you when you're going to post troll semantic crap like this?
 
Ant like CJ is the perfect Jamal Crawford Jason Terry 6 man....score in bunches off the bench. If you don't use him that way, you have to hide two smallish guards on defense and you can only hide one of those guys. I slide Hart to the 2 guard with Payton to back him up and let Hart start shooting some 3s. I'd trade Ant for an impact player and move him to Florida or the east to be closer to his family. People act like Ant is a rookie but he's going into year 5 next season and he's a vet now. He's had 4 years to figure out how to play pt guard and he seems better at it when Dame is off the court. He also is probably our most tradeable asset and one that other teams could use. I'm hoping we can have a defense that keeps opposing teams under 100 pts a game.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Domihatin
Is Simons being hardcore disrespected?
2
Replies
55
Views
2K
Samuel
Samuel
wizenheimer
Is It Sink or Swim Time for Sharpe?
3 4 5
Replies
147
Views
7K
Foxx
Foxx
Denny Crane
Notice Major News about RC2
6 7 8
Replies
217
Views
6K
SlyPokerDog
SlyPokerDog
SharpesTriumph
Offer Jerami Grant a Buyout?
2
Replies
34
Views
1K
Natebishop3
Natebishop3
wizenheimer
Does Banton Have a Future With Portland?
Replies
22
Views
1K
Sheldon Shape
Sheldon Shape

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top