It's true they probably don't want to trade him. I've just checked and they don't own their 2024, 2025, 2026, 2027 FRPs, so tanking definitely not on their agenda. Perhaps there's a chance Bridges forces their hand? Arn't Lillard and Bridges close? If not, you move down the list I guess. I'd go for Adebayo after Mikel.
It's been a long time since I saw Rahim, so I'm not necessarily saying that their games are the same, it just seems like they're both borderline All-Star forwards who aren't good enough to be their teams number one option. But is Siakam a good enough #2 to make this team a contender? I really don't think so. It feels like a massive overpay for a guy who is good, but not THAT good. Paying through the nose for a Durant or an Embiid is one thing, but sending out a bunch of assets for Siakam seems like the kind of move that we're going to really regret in 4-5 years.
But in no way do i give a top 4 pick up for OG. Obviously you have to match the cap hit. Ant plus the NY pick. I think that trade helps both teams.
He's very similar to Grant in skill set, but just a lot better player. In an ideal world - we can use Grant in a S&T (or a standard trade in December/January) for Siakam.
Agreed, especially given Anunoby's contract is up next summer. If it goes tits up and we miss the playoffs, then our top 4 pick has evaporated for a year of OG not getting us into the playoffs lol. The NY pick + Anfernee, we bite their hand off. They probably arn't doing it though unfortunately, would be a huge climb down from their trade deadline position on his value.
Who knows. Ujiri could just stand pat, and go with his draft pick. But it sure seems like they have a log jam at SF.
That NY pick needs to go to Chicago(if they accept it) so that we can free up future picks. Other option is trading a younger player like Little to get the rights back to our pick (obviously they would have to send back player in deal). We have to get out from under that horrendous draft pick that is tying our hands on making any trades. Single dumbest trade we’ve made in last 10 years and I liked Nance
Now you’re talking. We don’t just need a star. We need depart. Like what the Lakers did this season. They acquired a lot of “good” players and it’s paying off so far.
incomplete history....Blazers have had several top-5 picks, and four #1 picks 1971 2 Sidney Wicks 1972 1 LaRue Martin 1974 1 Bill Walton 1976 5 Wally Walker 1978 1 Mychal Thompson 1984 2 Sam Bowie 2006 4 Tyrus Thomas (↳CHI---> 2 LMA) 2007 1 Greg Oden Walton got Portland it's only title. Mychal Thompson was a pretty good player....he actually averaged 21-12-4 one season; but he was never an all-star LaRue Martin was a total bust and Portland's 1st big draft fuck-up: 1 LaRue Martin 2 Bob McAdoo 10 Paul Westphal 12 Julius Erving Wally Walker at 5 was a big miss too: 5 POR Wally Walker 6 BUF Adrian Dantley 8 GSW Robert Parish 20 POR Major Jones 23 MIL Alex English 29 SEA Dennis Johnson
It would obviously depend on our bench depth and role players, but I would ride with that starting squad for sure.
well, he was a good enough #2 with Kawhi to not only make Toronto a contender but a champion. He's a lot better now and I disagree with the gauge, if you meant it that way, of dismissing a trade for Siakam because he doesn't immediately make Portland a contender. No single realistic move will do that. It would have to be a series of moves; a process. But because a single step doesn't get you all the way across the room doesn't mean you shouldn't take that step I do agree that Portland has to avoid paying too much for Siakam; mainly because matching salary is going to see major assets added to the pick. Also, if what we heard about Toronto's asking price of OG is true, they will be expecting the stars and moon for Siakam. If they are, fuckem
Now hold on. I was a season ticket holder in 2018-19 and even though we got swept in WCF, that season was a blast- Dame’s wave, the 4OT playoff win, Layman’s 24 point quarter, the 8 point possession vs, Game 82 comeback. Our enjoyment can’t just be about winning titles. 29 teams fail every year but not every fan base has as much fun as we did that year. As for building through the draft, it’s important but not a guaranteed success. Sixers tanked for Star talent and have this year’s MVP and yet they still haven’t reached the conference finals since 2001. Don’t take 2018-19 for granted because we got swept.
contending teams draft well. they nail draft picks. the draft is a game of chance, but also, they have control of their deep dive research, their interviews, their advanced statistics, etc. I’m fine with Portland taking a risk in the draft vs a spending most of their limited team assets and future flexibility on a moderate upgrade. I can already see the first round exit as the 6 seed, while we watch whoever we would have selected tears it up for their team on both ends of the court. now we’re staring down the barrel of unrestricted free agency with a massive payroll, deteriorating value players except for Sharpe and not a lot of flexibility to keep upgrading.
You and every other person on this board should look up what it's taken in the past to take conditions off of picks. I've never seen anything more than conditional second round picks to guarantee the pick and oftentimes it's just cash (that's because you are literally guaranteeing a pick to a team with no guarantee of ever receiving it and making it a solid asset they can trade)... now that would be us sending a conditional second rounder so that the Bulls would be guaranteed to get our first rounder in the 2024 draft regardless of where it lands next season. Joe was asked if he had a deal in place to fulfill our obligation to Chicago and he said that they have been in contact multiple times and that they have a good relationship, so that would't be a problem if they needed to free up future picks for a bigger deal. I do agree that the Knicks pick could do it but there's a rumor out there that it might just be the 5 second rounders that we picked up at the trade deadline to fulfill the entire obligation. The fact is that what we owe the Bulls won't get in the way of us having up to 5 first round picks to deal if we need to and three swaps... four swaps if it only took the second rounders to fulfill that Bulls obligation. I didn't like the trade but if there has always been a mechanism in place to guarantee the pick, the deal got us Shaedon and the pick we end up with in this draft. So it wasn't necessarily all that dumb to make the pick conditional in the way they did. The dumb part about it is that we basically just had Nance as a throw in on one trade and RoCo as a throw in on another when the two of them cost us 3 FRPs and two guys who played serious bench minutes for the teams we traded them to.
I’ll put it to you this way: I’m more excited for the draft then I was for the playoffs with Stottsy.
It's not about one move making us a contender. It's about whether a core of Dame/Siakam/Grant is enough to win a ring. I just don't think it is. I agree that it's going to take other moves, but the most important thing is the core foundation of the team. Steph/Klay/Draymond LeBron/Kyrie/Love Pierce/KG/Allen Durant/Booker/Paul Just throwing out some examples. Obviously it's just as important to add good pieces surrounding those cores, BUT the core itself is the most important piece. I'm not sure if Sharpe is ready to be part of the core. I think Ant/Nurk need to go. So it would in theory be Dame/Siakam/Grant. I don't think that's a contending core.
Making the playoffs isn’t the same every year or for every team. Squeaking into the playoffs for OKC, for instance, was probably a good thing because they’re on the rise. We, CLEARLY, are not a team on the rise. So it’s about the trajectory of the team. If we back ass first into the playoffs when our trajectory could clearly be changed by missing the playoffs… Also, when it’s clear a team has peaked and is in the process of regressing, making the playoffs isn’t a whole helluva lot of fun in my eyes.
You're overrating their impact, IMO. If you use winshares as a gauge and look at what RoCo and Nance have given the Clippers and Pelicans: RoCo + Nance = 9.3 winshares for 27M Watford + Eubanks = 10.7 winshares for 4.3M RoCo + Nance = 2.9M/winshare Watford + Eubanks = 0.4M/winshare and added context is that the Clippers/Pelicans have averaged several more wins over that time frame so there were more winshares to go around. The issue isn't what Portland received for RoCo/Nance, but what Olshey paid for them. The cost was the fucked up part of the equation
