By that logic its hard to compare anything with anything. Every team has different dynamics, cap, roster, every draft has different talent, and every player has different attributes.
No they can't. I don't care how good of a year Dame has, he can't do it alone. If we just use the #7 pick on someone, even if they make the all rookie team, we can not compete with a team like the Warriors. Not even a little bit.
To some degree, yes. You use expected value for the #7 pick (there have been posts that provide that) and mix it with tiers and concenus draft strength. You can find trades made by teams who were in a favorable salary position, with minimal roster talent, but a HOF player in win-now mode. Comparing a move OKC makes on draft night with a move, say Boston/Golden State makes, probably wouldn't be appropriate given they have much different timelines, salary situation, etc. I don't see how Portland' situation today is close to Phoenix's in 2019.
Saric is the most recent player traded for a top10 pick, and was also on an expiring contract. Now I agree the comparison isn't perfect. I was only saying Saric had value on an expiring contract, to argue the notion Grant has little value since he's expiring. Can you please give an example more similar to Portland that meets your criteria?
You're also leaving out a significant part of that trade. Suns also got back the #11 pick (Cam Johnson) in that trade. Saric + 11 <-> #6 I'd also argue that the #11 pick (Johnson) is the most valuable piece of that entire trade.
Saric also had a bit of hype around him at the time as well. Young prospect with untapped potential with the #11 pick.
I don't think there is a great comparison, which is why I was opposed to making one in the first place. In my brain I'd look at these sites and see what type of value you should expect to get with the 7th pick and weigh that, what appears to be the desire to win now, and likely taking on additional salary to get a vet to do my best to gauge what a good deal for Portland is. https://thedatajocks.com/nba-draft-pick-values/ https://www.theringer.com/2021/7/28/22597310/nba-draft-expectations If The Ringer's article is true and the mean player teams have got from the 7th pick is Corey Brewer/Randy Foye, I think I'll likely be real happy with whatever trade we make Thursday. I'm not a huge John Collins guy, but I think I'd do jumping jacks to trade Randy Foye's career for John Collins and the 16th pick.
The problem I have with looking at it this way is the risk of a deviation from the average. Often risk is bad. In the Blazers case a variance with risk of more or less than a Corey Brewer career is very good! The Blazers need to either get an all star or get a scrub. They don't want a mediocre player like Corey Brewer. The draft is one of the riskiest player acquisition routes. Now if the Blazers we're already close to contending having risk might be bad, you might prefer the certainly of an average vet to give a cost controlled contribution of a solid bench player. But the Blazers need a star level player to contend with Lillard. Yes most likely they won't get that with the 7th pick. But drafting BPA with the 7th pick is the highest chance they do have to get that star type player. Trading it for the mediocre vets you mention, while clearly better than Brewer, doesn't get the Blazers closer to the star needed to contend.
There is really only one star level player on the roster (I don't think Ant will be an all-NBA player). Sounds like you'd be open to trading all players not named Dame for a bunch of draft picks in the hope you get a 2nd star? If you really want to increase the odds Portland gets a star, you need to add Ant into a trade with #7 and other assets to move into the top 3. I'm not sure that's wise though.
I'd be open to trading all players for picks including Ant and Lillard. However it appears the Blazers won't consider trading Lillard now. Ant while I agree is unlikely to be AllNBA, might have a better chance of doing it than most draft picks so I'm fine keeping him until that's determined. If later his ceiling solidifies at a tier below that level, as Grant and OG have, then trade him.
In your eyes, how many first round picks would we need to get for Lillard in order for us to be more likely than not to draft someone who ends up better than him? I'd think mathmatically, that number would need to be high. And your goal is to increase the number of stars, so in reality, we would want Lillard to net us 2 stars, so that number would need to be even higher. The third risky part about that strategy is once we get lucky and draft the 2 stars, we have to figure out a way to keep them in Portland for 3 contracts. Top players staying in one place used to be far more common. I'm not saying someone can't get rich dumping all their retirement savings into Powerball tickets, but I'm also not advising it as a great strategy. Trading Lillard for picks, hoping he nets you two star players kinda feels like that.
The reason to trade Lillard isn't to get more than the one star level player he is, I'd be very happy to get one guaranteed young star for him. The reason to trade him is because he is old. If Lillard was 24 right now I wouldn't trade him. If the Blazers had more talent on the roster, thus only being one or two key pieces away from contending I wouldn't trade him. But Lillard will be 32 in a few days. Peak NBA performance age is usually in the 26-28 age range. Many more stars decline or have injury problems in their 30's. I don't think its a coincidence Dame missed his first year+ with an injury now when he is over the age of 30. Maybe he will be healthy going forward, maybe not. Yes Steph is aging well, CP3 is still super good, and LeBron has played at a high level in his late 30's, although LeBron is nowhere near his GOAT level peak. However those age 30+ high level stars are the exceptions, not the general rule. Those players have declined significantly in their 30's' and currently have multiple All-NBA teammates around them when they do succeed in the playoffs. The Blazers have no such All-NBA teammates for Dame, the Blazers have the third worst future franchise rankings per ESPN ahead of only the Wizards and Kings; which is shocking when you consider that is with Lillard. Remove Lillard and this is arguably the worst roster in the NBA. The chance of being able to build a contender in Portland before Dame physically declines from his star level play is an extremely unlikely long shot at best. That is the reason I would be open to trading Lillard for picks. The picks would have a chance to contribute in 5-10+ years from now either directly as a player drafted that develop; or indirectly in a trade for a needed starter.
Though it was years back when I was told this probably by Shonz during broadcasts, the mythical NBA players prime years if they'd avoided joint injuries was ages 28-32. Nutrition and medical advances may have expanded that window, but since we're talking Dame I'll relay he turns 32 in less then a month. STOMP
That is not what research has shown; "However, researchers who looked at the lifetime careers of several NBA players and studied when each player was in their prime have determined that the time of prime NBA player performance is when they’re 27 years old." https://www.sportscasting.com/the-exact-age-that-nba-players-are-in-their-prime/
