Discussion in 'Portland Trail Blazers' started by kjironman1, Nov 12, 2017.
We've already gutted a playoff roster once.
Change for change's sake isn't the smartest thing to do.
From NO's recent interview, he was out there looking at getting a game changing player, but the price being asked was too high to pay. Plan B was to find a rental who'd greatly improve our chances, but those guys didn't get moved. Plan C was to get under the LT, which is a victory in its own right. Better than keeping Vonleh and paying the LT.
NO said he traded Vonleh to give him a chance to play elsewhere. He wasn't getting PT here and he's in a contract year and earn a better contract.
That kitten was the Jazz last night
48 wins people.... I called it at the beginning of the season and i'm fucking sticking with it!
Now you all can take that shit to you UNICORN thread and stroke the horn!
Oh boy..... That should get a few going.
I don't think it got them going, I think it got them off.
I hear what you're saying, but that doesn't change the fact that we dropped yet another game to one of the teams trying to take our playoff spot. We're now 0-2 against a mediocre Jazz team (which is what they are despite their current hot streak). We've punted so many home games (and the game in Utah) this season that we're running out of mulligans.
I agree. He can only do what is actually possible. Getting the team under the tax was the smart move. If you are gonna go over? Do it when you at least have a chance to make a run.
Think you will get a better look at this team when you see them play again after the break. At Utah with both teams rested. I'll call it right now. Blazers win that game +10.
Not sure how you added your comment to mine but i agree.
Or to keep a real key player, like Nurk (next season).
After next season, ET's deal turns into a huge asset - a $18.6M expiring contract.
It's being over continually. He avoided that this year. In the next 2-3 years they will have to make the decision to pay for a contender. Neil constantly says Paul is not afraid to pay for a winner. But being smart is still being smart. Why pay this year? They are not going to make it past the second round at the very best. Heck there is a chance they don't even make the playoffs.
Paying this year would have been a massive mistake. One that a lesser GM would make.
I'd pay it if we had to because Nurk needs to get paid. He's still got a lot of potential and is our 3rd best player. Our chances of becoming the winner worth paying for would drop drastically without him. IM
If i don't watch out here the "Meltdown Thread" might actually be about basketball?
Pretty sure Lillard was asking to become part of the Meltdown thread when he was negotiating with Paul Allen in his private meeting.
@SlyPokerDog have you received any new messages from Paul about this? Whatever it takes to keep our All-Star happy.
Now we got Dame endorsing the next ROY
not sure how that happened?
Here is an even better Meltdown topic.
I just got sent an add for the up coming GS game. Ticket prices start at $67. Also on the add they has the Sac game with ticket prices starting at $9 followed by Minny at $11. This seems to be the problem with the NBA. If they really wanted an even playing field they would not help super teams by allowing for higher prices to their games. I do understand the whole availability thing but go look for a 300 level seat and you will pay much more for GS than Sac. That my friends is why it's tough to knock off the best teams. They can afford to pay and stay over the cap.
Charging more for a Warriors game rather than a Kings game is more money that goes into the home team's coffers (Portland's, in this case). Golden State isn't enriched by that. The Blazers (and every other team) are making more money by charging more for the Warriors games.
Golden State is enriched by how much they can charge for their own home games.
Separate names with a comma.