That looks like a pretty fair assessment of our chances with that kind of "reload" ... and frankly those are the most realistic kinds of moves that will be available to the Blazers in trades and free agency -- true superstar players are mostly a pipe-dream, so you get to pick over the "has warts, but doesn't suck" kind of players and try to cobble something together that resembles a playoff team, but probably won't have the mix right to do much more than get out of the first round once it gets there. Frankly, there are some pretty slim chances we get anything close to a star with the 11th and 6th picks in this year's draft, but they'll be cheap and you aren't hamstrung for the future like you could be paying Iggy and Dragic a combined 22+ million a year -- especially when you could draft a couple of guys and pay them around 6 million a year combined and get production at roughly the same level (maybe). In all honesty, the team probably needs another season bad enough to put them back in the lottery if they really want to refresh the talent pool without breaking the bank and locking themselves into players that they won't hate having, but ultimately won't really move the needle. I don't get the feeling Paul Allen and the rest of the people who might have some say in matters feels that way, but I guess we'll see what happens.
Based on correlation, I say we try to get a #2 or a #3 ranked player with our highest available pick. Maybe they don't have that ego like the #1 or that stress of "I have to prove I'm number 1" or they have the drive to prove they should have been a number 1. (without doing any research) There have been more busts recently at the #1 then at the number 2 or 3 in early age rankings.
Good read: Better than KG? Davis draws raves as headliner of deep 2012 draft Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/sam_amick/05/01/nba.draft/index.html#ixzz1tjBUUwBj
From Chad Ford Chat: I agree, I'm just not sure who is worth moving up for. Likely it would be Drummond or Beal. I would be happy with making 6 and 11 turn into 3 or 4, and the seeing if you can buy a pick in the late first round to pick up some of the depth there. Some real potential in the end of the first round this year.
If we turn both picks into Beal i'm gonna be pissed. Turn both our picks into Monte Ellis great then were screwed defensively at that position. Can anyone point out a superstar short SG who can actually play D?
Wade That said, Bradley Beal is no Wade when it comes to athleticism. I pass on Beal. Undersized without great athleticism.
all the players mentioned save West are taller then Beal. I should have said in the last 15 years too because the game relies so much more on defense and athleticism then in any other time. If Beal has a great wingspan then its a different story but right now im seeing Bayless 2.0 in him. Much rather have ewill then him, he might change with combine reports but I doubt it.
Via his ESPN draft profile: Height: 6'5" Weight: 195 lbs. Reach: 8'3" Wingspan: 6'8" The size of Ray Allen -- who measured 6'3.5" (w/o shoes) during his stint in the Olympics.
