LA gone before or on draft day

Sorry, but I don't believe I've ever come out as a proponent for the LMA/Asik trade rumor - it's certainly not high on my list of potential LMA trades.
Also, I've never said that whoever we obtain in an LMA trade will "get us to that next level".
What I HAVE said is that LMA will never get us to that next level, and that we'd be better off two seasons from now by using LMA as a vehicle for asset acquisition. Certainly having Len, Thompson, and whoever is picked at #19 gives us far more talent and assets than we'd have with just LMA, giving us greater flexibility to adjust the roster until we find a competitive mix of players (especially if the super-dream scenario comes to pass which includes CLE including DAL's pick in the trade). And even if you just end the discussion at the conclusion of the trade and not take future flexibility into account, two years from now I think that team would see better results than what LMA-centric teams have produced the past two seasons.
No - trading LMA isn't going to vault us into title-contention. Why would it? LMA isn't good enough to bring back the sort of player that'd make us contenders. But he is good enough to bring back a variety of assets. If you're willingness to trade LMA hinges on bringing back a player that'll put us in contention you're never going to trade LMA, and you're never going to contend.

 

Like I stated earlier, I think we're not that far off from the Golden States and Indianas...who were certainly in striking distance from an NBA championship. A few tweaks here and there, and we're in contention. Your plan sets us back 3-4 years at minimum until we get to the point we are at right now.

 

From GS? I'd say the only real difference between us and them this season was a bench. They had Jack and Landry, we had shit. With what you laid out, cap space, 10 and MLE get us those pieces they had that separated us and them.

 

Wow.

I'll tell you what is flawed thinking:

Building an entire argument and trading strategy based on an assumption that LMA will leave in two years, without any real insight into what he will actually do.

Unless you have some insider, legit knowledge, this is the worst foundation and trade strategy on this thread.

 

We don't need to sign a Bynum, he'll cost too much. Just have to spend wisely on some veteran role players. Just having a real center will help our team tremendously. So if we get an Asik or Gortat or whomever we can get decently cheap, it should be an upgrade.

Not having Luke Babbit or Nolan Smith fumble the ball will help us out even further.

Just let Lillard improve his game and fill in the holes. With Lillard, Wes, Nic and LA as a base, we have enough talent to get to the playoffs and make a splash, we just need to up the rest of the team and we can do that with a draft pick and cap space.

Doesn't this board always tout "cap space" and "build through the draft"? Well, we're here right now...we have decent enough talent and need an injection of talent. We have a semi-ok draft pick AND cap space..what's the problem here?


On paper, the Pacers or Warriors shouldn't "be there" either, but they are.

 

Like I said in the past, Blazers fans have always loved to chase the alpha dog out of town.

 

yeah, we might as well give up then and start over.

 

Just to be clear, Brian and I are coming from two very different places with regards to trading LMA. That's not to say I disagree with his theory of LMA leaving. I simply don't see LMA being a player who is going to matter in a Playoff/Championship push, while I DO see him as being the best vehicle for asset acquisition.

With that said, I DO think that we could keep LMA and make a few moves to put us into the Playoffs next season. But it's a team that won't get out of the first round. And then, as Brian points out, we're extremely limited in our ability to make additional improvements.

 

Bogut, as "healthy" as he was for them last season is not on par at all with Asik.

As for the comparisons of the other 4, I don't see why as a whole that's being too generous to Portland, but so be it.

 

Easy, we have a lot of tradable assets. Batum, Matthews, Leonard, and Claver could be used to trade for a disgruntled all-star. Olshey could work the same magic he did in Clipperville when that time comes.

You are assuming that we would be like the old Blazers with bloated contracts. None of our contracts are bloated. They are actually extremely reasonable.

 

That will never happen; but first rounder, Batum, and Matthews for a disgruntled all-star isn't hard to imagine. Fuck man, Clippers got Chris Paul for much less.

 

The way I see it, Lillard and LA are basically the Blazers only unique players. Everyone else is essentially replaceable pretty easily. I see them as a potentially great 1-2 punch....who..surrounded by good shooters and wing defenders, could be really good. Basically build it like the San Antonio Spurs model of things...Lillard can be our TP....LA can be our 37 year old Tim Duncan...and the rest we can just fill in. I mean how do the Spurs keep on adding these great players?

 

Way to leave Batum and Matthews out of your mention, to, like your LMA roster options, make things sound worse than presented.

 

Right?!?! LMAO! I was thinking the very same thing.