Grade the Blazers' roster changes

Good point.

 

True, but you can say that about any player/coach combination. It's not like he went to Miami and turned into this talent under Spo that Portland never saw. I'm open to evidence that the Portland coaching staff developes players better/worse than most NBA coaching staffs.

 

I look at players in and outside Stotts teams.

Ed Davis, Plumlee, Harkless, Amimu, Crabbe, Nurk had much better success here than other teams.

Will Barton and ??? were much better away from Stotts.

 

They all played with Dame and not someone of his talent since. My guess is that being on the court with Dame did more for their production than Terry having them run around handing the ball off to a guard in the world's most expensive version of the weave.

 

I'm not convinced that's accurate

Portland traded:

• Trevor Ariza
• rights to Isaiah Stewart
• draft pick (first round pick protected top 14 in 2021-27, else 2027 second round pick)

the time limit for trading future 1st's is 7 years. Which is how far out that pick is traded. There is no guarantee that the 1st will ever convey. Portland could end up in the lottery for 7 straight drafts

I'm not sure if there is a legal "condition" in this case. Maybe Portland could trade a 1st under the condition that it conveys as soon as is legal after the 2021-2027 pick conveys to Houston. But since it might not ever convey and the 2nd traded pick could simply expire against the time limit, it would have almost no value

I'd appreciate you showing me a link proving what you're saying is a legal trade. I can't recall any other trades where a single
pick is conditionally protected for 7 straight years

again, "2 years after" could be 2029 and teams can only trade picks 7 drafts in advance which is the protection time-frame of that draft pick

 

Its true Portland cannot 100% trade a pick.

Portland can trade a pick now that transfers 2 years after the Hou pick. In theory it could never be given if as you said Portland was in the lottery the next 6 years straight. The trading partner would have to accept that chance. So you can say Portland could 99.5% trade a pick or whatever the odds Portland trades for another star and ends up in the lottery for 6 straight years.

In practice Portland can trade first round picks that have basically the same value as a year ago, when were talking about trades for a star.

They can also give a trading partner swaps instead of picks.

 

An example with some similarities is the Lakers trading away picks in the Nash trade and then Dwight Howard trade. Lakers kept keeping their pick since they were so shitty and eventually Orlando didn't get a pick they thought they would get.

 

You're correct, I was just talking about if they wanted to trade a solid first, not a contigent one.

 

the issue I'm having with it is that pick's protection limits would have to extend 9 years into the future, but the cap is at 7 years. I'm still not convinced the league office would say it meets CBA requirements.

now maybe, the life of contingent conditions would only extend 7 years then expire. Maybe that could meet CBA requirements. Practically speaking, another team could expect that the Blazers would be in the playoffs at least once in the next 4 seasons, so there would be a good chance that 2nd pick would convey

but, Portland would be stupid to trade that 2nd pick without protections. Dame and CJ will be over 35 at the outer edge of the protections of the Houston pick. And that loops right back around to what I was initially saying: an encumbered, contingent, protected draft pick, with a chance not to convey, would have very little trade value. Not much more value, if any, than a 2nd round pick. That, coupled with the Blazers being hard-capped and seemingly determined to stay under the tax threshold, means Portland's trade leverage, this season, is significantly limited compared to other teams. At least it is when a star is on the market (assuming Olshey still refuses to trade CJ, or Zach and Simons)

 

It can't go to 9 years. It would say in that case at 7 years it becomes a protected second round pick or such. Trading partner would have to accept such pick. In practice that would have almost zero change in picks value because if Portland acquires a star it would seem extremely unlikely Blazers don't convey the pick in 2021 to Houston let alone multiple years later.

The wording on the protection and year of the pick would be very convulted and confusing. But it would have almost no change in value of pick traded now. That was my whole point of initial reply, the limit on trading a pick has almost zero impact on Portland ability to put draft equity into a trade now to acquire another star.

Yes technically there is a bunch of fine print but Blazers still have tons of draft equity to trade, as opposed to teams like the Lakers, Clippers, Bucks, etc that are without 4-6 years of picks. The Blazers have only traded away one.

Blazers obviously wouldn't want pick to be unprotected, but if they could get a real star like Beal maybe they say fuck it and take the risk. They have these options.

 

Wiz,

Neil could make this argument you are making as a negotiation in trades. "I can't trade the pick we already did. It needs all sorts of confusing protections. Will you take Nassir Little instead? "

I still believe there is tons of draft equity the Blazers can throw into a trade but if you think Neil is really playing 4d chess maybe he insisted on the 7 year protection to give him a fake limit in future trade talks.

 

Leadership!

https://hoopshype.com/2020/11/26/nba-blazers-enes-kanter-damian-lillard/

 

Bump.

 

In retrospect... anyone want to change their grade?

For me, although I love RoCo dearly, even that trade gets worse as time goes by. We were mad at Ariza, but he was useful for Miami, and we could've got Saddiq Bey AND whomever is available this year...

 

I was too generous with a B-

 

I've thought about that as well, and I think one of the biggest things we should be trying to do now is to get him to sign an extension. Something between 2/24 - 2/30. Even with one year left on his deal, he would easily recoup a late first or more from a championship contender. Also just based on his role and his play style, I'm not super worried about him declining. He will be basically the same player until he decides to retire. Getting him to sign an extension can make him even more of an asset in case we decide to blow it up. We may be able to recoup both firsts when he gets moved.

Also I don't think Saddiq Bey, Isiah Stewart, or whoever that pick ended up being would have made much of a difference. Nice players, but not ones that change the course of your franchise, and not as good as RoCo in the short term.

 

wait a second. @Fez Forthright voted A+ in this poll and constantly trashes Neil at every chance he gets?

And @wizenheimer gave Olshey a B- while his posts indicate that should have been an F?

@SlyPokerDog gave an A? what?

man I wish i had you guys giving out grades in college.

 

In hindsight, I can't believe no one gave lower than a B-. Yikes.

 

I DO give out grades in college. And I voted B-.

 

This was the most spot on evaluation. Only miss was re-signing Hood, but that turned out fine since he became filler in a deal for a better player.

Tillman would have been great instead of Kanter. Millsap would have been good since he would have replaced DJJ's minutes and also wouldn't have been on the other side killing us in the playoffs. Think you should have gave lower than a B-!