I've saying for months (and getting some abuse) that we need quantity of talent rather than trading the team for one hugely talented player. Nice to see people jumping on board finally (that's why I'm Blazer Prophet). But with the #6 pick, trading the #11, FA... we can possibly add 3-5 players with sufficient talent. If we do, at least we can make our way back into the playoffs.
I would assume, and hope, Olshey sold PA on 2013-2014 being the season we would be in the conversation of contender
also drafting and adding talent and keeping at least half of our capspace or more will IMO allow us to use that capspace more efficiently over the next 1-3 years when the new Lux tax kicks in and more teams are concerned about going over the cap and having that extra leverage could bring you a very good player
I don't worry about being a contender. I worry about having the right talent level. I like to take the horse before the cart.
NY may be down on Carmelo, but mgmt may not and even if they were they are not going to rip up thier big 3, 2 years after the fact...that is a pipedream....they had coaching change, injuries, emergence of Lin etc.....They are not going to trade Carmelo for a bunch of subpar pieces..... and Deron Williams is a UFA, meaning POR doesn't have to trade ANYTHING for him....what they need to do, is have a good draft and then send Olshey out at the start of FA to sell his vision to Deron,,just like he did to Lebron, Paul and Billups....and realize that it is a longshot, but it is certainly worth a try.
I keep forgetting that Portland could trade a player to the Nets (+ a pick/compensation) for a sign and trade. I think Portland would be a hard sell, despite what positives they have going for them. Strong fanbase (although I'm not sure thats a big sell to players, to the degree people say), good facilities (although the RG needs some tweaking) and an owner who is rich. The negatives are that Portland is a once horse town (Timbers aside, although this year isn't as big of a deal as last year was with the Timbers), Portland is "lilly white", it "rains all the time" (although during the rainy season the guys are playing games, traveling or practicing, so it shouldn't matter) and Portland is not a "glamor" team (both in the sense of current makeup of players, how the league perceives them AND the league sells them). I think the only selling point there might be is LaMarcus and Derons supposed friendship.
Actually you have that backwards. You would get the cart first, then the horse. Getting the horse would be going big. You want a plan of being conservative, build over time...which does not work. So yes, it seems you do not want a contender....ever with your philosophy...just young guys you can hope one day develop. {Poasted via palm pilot}
no more imaginary cap space. Use it when you get it.otherwise we will be frozen to make necessary moves to preserve the cap space {Poasted via palm pilot}
Chris Paul. That was a stupid move by the Blazers. But the two situations are not similar. JJ was the 22nd pick, not a lottery pick. And the 2005 nba draft in gerneral was horrible. http://www.nba.com/draft2005/board.html Overall I agree though, I would never trade down in a draft. But this one is unusually balanced. Time will tell of course. But I would have hated to trade up to # 2 in the 2005 draft.
balanced, sure is great...but we need the stars here first if we want to aim for role players {Poasted via palm pilot}
Yes I agreed with him too. The issue here is whether or not there is a difference in quality between the players you are moving up to get. In 2005 the #2 pick was Marvin Williams. I am just not convinced that Thomas Robinson is a star.
and in most drafts you would be right, but the different between #2 and #6 this season isn't there. most years there is a clear divide after the top three and that isn't the case this year. all the guys in that range are considered good but not great picks. so why waste assets to get roughly the same player?
I'm going to have to disagree with you. There is a dropoff between Robinson/Beal/MKG and who is likely to be there at #6 -- Lillard, Drummond.
But Fez don't you think there is a strong possibilty that Drummond goes in the top 5 leaving us with a MKG or a Beal? I bet right now it is 50/50 that Drummond does go earlier. To me the question is Barnes? How good is he? Because he may be the one to drop. If he isn't then I bet we can get Beal at #6. Drummond will really have to suck in the next two weeks in his workouts and interviews to drop out of the top 5 IMO.
The whole draft/fa/trade debate is stupid. A GMs role is to put together the best roster possible using all 3 of those tools.
The Clippers' "rebuild" consisted of David Stern vetoing the Laker trade for Chris Paul. Put Chris Paul with LMA and Batum, and the Blazers are a top 4 team in the West. I didn't think it was possible, but Paul Allen managed to find a GM more full of himself than KP. I don't mind that at all, but it's not like Olshey built the Clippers to some great team via the draft.
Miami Has yet to sign an extension with LAC and would be a free agent after next season, Billups is over the hill. Had the Chris Paul trade not gone through, would the Billups signing even matter? He'd been out of the league for a year.
Billups was signed to put pressure on new orleans to trade cp3 to the clippers instead of using leverage. Also good backup plan if cp3 didn't go through. Getting nick young was a good move too {Poasted via palm pilot}
Olshey got Billups for the vet minimum and had to have said he was close to getting CP3 after the Laker deal was Sterned. Billups is an afterthought at this point of his career and had a 16 PER on 23.4 Usage before blowing out his Achilles. Nick Young had a 9.9 PER with a 20.9 Usage for the Clippers this season in 23 mpg. How is that a great move for a $3.7 million back-up? Without the Clippers lucking into CP3, Olshey would have been fired. I'm not saying I'm anti-Olshey at all, and I like his smack talk, but to hear him tell it, he's King Shit of building through the draft. Prove It.
