Trade Idea Vote After #3 Pick - Blazers first off season priority

Thanks for the comments, makes sense.

I prefer polls with 2 or 3 choices. It forces people to take a side, and illustrated what people most importantly rate of the various options. If you have 4/5/etc choices then none of those become relevant.

 

Well yes of course I'd expect Ayton is in play; his $133 million contract looks closer to Allen Crabbe's then being a good value. Blazers can't match it with Nurk, so we may have to include Ant in that trade as well.

I wouldn't consider any trade of the #3 pick where Ayton was the best player coming back, even if it was just moving down a few spots. However in this case Phoenix first pick is #52, and their other future picks are owned by the Nets.

 

Good points on Ayton. I’m really not a fan of that idea; I had just heard the Blazers mentioned in ideas involving him. I’m not privy to whom the Blazers intend to target. My main point was to respond to the litany of comments that “player X doesn’t make us a contender.” I see this as being a multiple player summer. I’m also not certain that “contending” as used by Dame and Cronin means “favored to win a title” as some around here seem to presume. I think it means being in the mix for a top-6 seed and having a shot if things break your way.

 

If the Suns can't win with fucking Kevin Durant, who the fuck are we supposed to get to "push us over the hump"? This is so fucking stupid it hurts. (To be clear - I'm not talking about YOU, you're just the messenger of what does appear to be the FO thinking.)

 

Who are these imaginary "vets" that will help us "win now" and that are available for the #3 pick? I feel like the same people voting for the first option are the people who believe we go to heaven when we die.

 

I don't really think Dame is holding us hostage, but I agree we need to do what is best for the team. And yes all of what you listed is too much for a mediocre player that we could get close to similar value with the MLE. It would need to be for a player like Bridges who is locked into a contract. Siakam fits as well but his contract does not. (same with Brown)

But I feel there is a middle ground. Yes, we absolutely do not want to mortgage the future on a risky player, but #23 and one other future 1st plus Ant can get us some value. We keep #3, we sign Grant, and we use the MLE for a center. Maybe not the return we all want but it keeps a good mixture of youth and Vets without mortgaging the future.

 

If the goal is to contend we need a player better than Damian coming back... because we won't have any quality depth to speak of. 2 players in the 10-20 range isn't close to getting it done.

 

Thoughts on this 3 team trade:
Blazers get mikel bridges
Houston gets the 3rd pick, nurk and keon.
Brooklyn gets the 4 pick, and the 2024 pick back from the houston.

 

That goes both ways. Who are these imaginary assets that we will get for Dame? If #3 can't get us value then how good would those picks help us in a rebuild after trading Dame? Picks that will not be nearly as good as #3. Our fans could barely handle the last two years, let alone another 5 years.

 

I thought you wanted to trade Dame. It sounds like you are making an argument not to.....because there is no way in hell we are getting back a player that is better than Dame.

 

There is as much risk or more by drafting a young player versus an already made all star type. That player doesn't need to be 34 year sold like Jimmy Butler.

 

you're not supposed to turn their logic back on them...the trade Dame crowd is on a roll this morning, carpet bombing the forum with their certainty

I've actually seen some of them say these would be good trades:

* Dame for Ben Simmons, Nic Claxton, and 2 or 3 first round picks in 2027-2029

* Dame for Tobias Harris, Tyrese Maxey, and a 2030 first

I'm about 89% convinced that if Portland, at this point in time, starts shopping Dame, the rest of the NBA will know he's asked to be traded and those two trades are examples of what Portland will be offered

 

I do want to trade dame... because there is no way in hell we are getting back a player better than Dame.

 

I think the Kevin Durant thinking is part of the problem around here and, to some extent, the NBA in general. Teams and fans have gotten so wrapped up in the All-Star part of roster building that they forget about the team aspect. The Suns gutted their roster to get Durant and then the totally predictable injury to CP3 derailed them entirely. The Lakers couldn’t do jack with Davis and LeBron until the in-season trade allowed them to fill out their roster. With apologies to Murray, the Nuggets only have one superstar. They have other very good players and a ton of depth. I’ll take that model of team building over three egos and a bunch of mismatched parts any day.

 

I see. You were referring to the return on a trade that did not include Dame. I thought you were referring to a trade that included Dame.

 

Then just keep Dame and wait. The Nets waited on Durant trades and eventually got Bridges plus 4 firsts. The Jazz were patient with Gobert and Mitchell trades getting a boatload for each.

Makes sense to consider Dame trades if the team can get a huge haul and is committed to rebuilding. If those offers are nowhere close to reasonable offers then there are no serious discussions to be had and no rumors to worry about.

Blazers shouldn't make an ultimatum to do any move no matter the cost; acquire vet, trade #3, trade Dame, trade Ant, add OG, etc. It all depends on the assets going out or coming back, which is the job of all GM's.

If the Blazers have trade discussions that makes them a contender then yes explore it. If the Blazers are offered a massive Dame haul that may get them close to contend many years from now after a rebuild then yes explore it. If none of those happen, then just bring the band back together and wait for other situations to change in the league. Superstars become available every season, and teams get tempted to overpay to acquire a superstar every season. Smart GM's get the most value on one side or the other of such a trade.

 

Also heard a good comment from @BonesJones that the changes to the take foul rule have made that depth even more valuable. Now a team with only 5 quality rotation players will get exhausted by the 4th, whereas in prior playoffs the pace was lower, the game slowed down, and stars could rest.

So we might see a trend of teams with 8-9 quality players beating thinner rosters even if their superstars are a tad inferior.

 

Most assume Dame will ask to be traded if we don't trade the pick.

If Scoot is who's available, then yeah Dame won't be cool with us drafting him for sure

If Miller, maybe a slight chance Dame is ok with it?

 

Scoot or miller will be better than any player we trade for. We will definitely regret it later.

 

I think one of the only deals that makes sense is getting back Bridges, Claxton, and Finney-Smith.

While I think Siakam is the best player out of who is likely, his age, fit next to Grant, and impending free agency make me shy away from getting him.