This whole statement is ridiculous. Where did I say any that? What assumptions? You're really struggling to read what I'm saying... There's a difference between coming up with a trade idea that's reasonably fair and has a chance at being accepted by both parties, and suggesting a "high draft pick" as a choosable option. Not saying TBPup was doing ecactly that, just seen so much discussion about that as if it's reasonable, and not. And it's not in the frame of "What would it like like with such-and-such prospect", it's in the frame of "We should tank to get such-and-such prospect".
Im saying you dont know what a reasonable offer is to a particular GM. Saying well you think its reasonable doesnt make it so to the GM’s involved thats all. Of course saying lets tank for Zion is a bit silly, who knows if he tears up his knee, or if you lose 82 games and dont win the lottery. The assumptions are that a trade is reasonable. When literally to my knowledge none of us have the GM’s phone number to know what they want or not...
Yeah, you can't know for certain, but many (including me) have a pretty good grasp as to the likelihood a GM would find it reasonable. You say assumption as if it can't be educated conjecture or reasonable. Also, those aren't the main reasons why its "silly".
Well I guess my response is just that while theres a certain level of silliness in the idea of tanking. Theres a certain level of silliness in many of the trades that are proposed. Im not single-ing out your ideas. I mean jeeze, Ive liked a few of your ideas. I just recognize that the probability is pretty low in both tanking and a meaningful trade happening.
One of my issues with tanking is that people just throw that word around like a team can just decide they want to do it and they automatically get a high pick if they take that route. I love Primetime but Ropp still occasionally mentions that the Blazers should've tanked two years ago when they were only a few games out of 4th worst record (he says from the worst record but that is incorrect). Then he always adds "imagine the Blazers with Tatum right now!" I did the math on Blazersedge at the time. It would've been almost mathematically impossible to get a top 5 pick let alone get up high enough to get Tatum. With how much Olshey loved Collins, he probably would've picked him at 7 or 8 anyway. Last year there were like 10 teams tanking and it would've been difficult to be bad enough to compete with those teams. If people want to tank, present a plan where the team could actually do that without pissing off their franchise player and somehow be bad enough to get a top pick. Then explain what would happen if we get screwed in the lottery and end up with pick 8 or something. I'm going to question anyone who just says that we should blindly tank. It's not some magical dreamland where we just stop trying for the rest of the season and everything falls perfectly into place.
Ropps insights on the Blazers about as valuable as my 4 year olds... The guy literally has no idea what hes talking about most of the time when he talks about the Blazers. Two draft picks in a row now NO has drafted a guy and the narrative has been itll be years before they’re ready. Yet their Star is in his prime. So they arent infusing the roster with young guys trying to help win in the next couple years. They dont have any cap room to do anything for a couple more years now Dame will be 30 by the time they can try much in FA again. Basically all the trades since 2016 have been cap related, even trading for Nurkic was a salary move. I agree the lets just tank and assume we’ll win the lottery or end up being able to tank as bad as Phoenix is not great plan, but the Blazers franchise is in a weird place. we had a 5 year plan, to be good then moved two picks to get a guy we’re hoping can be good in a couple years. Is it appeasing your star player now when you let his guys go like Ed, or Vonleh? They are not contenders this year. They just arent. Will they be next year? Salary cap wise they wont have a lot going on again, and they’re looking at a mid to late 1st, again... So sure tanking might not be the answer to get this team to compete anytime soon, but there doesnt seem to be an answer. Its just a moderately competitive team, thats hamstring with bad contracts, and few assets teams seem to be interested in. I still say they should try a new coach, but even that they seem determined to run the same things and basically the same rosters out there year after year.
Once again, you are just saying the word tank without any sort of details on how to go about doing that. You could try a covert tank and trade Aminu for Fultz or something like that which would hurt our starting lineup and our front court depth but that probably doesn't make us bad enough to finish in the bottom 10. You could trade CJ (and maybe include a bad contract) for expirings and a pick. That would probably get us a little higher up the board but still not bad enough. Seriously though, if you have a 1st round pick do you pick whoever the best player is at the time or the player you project to be the best? I would take whoever I project to be the best every time. Now if you want to question the projections, fine, it's hard to tell something that hasn't happened yet. I would never take a player who had a lower ceiling just because I thought he'd be ready to play faster. My problem with your line of questioning is that you seemingly come to the conclusion that this team needs more talent yet the coach is the one who needs to be switched. I agree that a coaching move is looking like it might be nice to see what someone else does.
I dont get why you're stuck on the word tanking and acting like I need to bring forth a plan of how they do it. When I'm not at all saying the should tank. We all know what the general form of tanking is, you suck on purpose to lose games to get ping pong balls. The onus isn't on me to figure out how they do it if they decided to go that route, especially since I haven't even implied they should go that route. In terms of 1st round picks, this year Olshey over sold us what his TPE was worth, which showed that he probably didn't know it wasn't worth anything... In my little perfect world they package the TPE and their 1st and get someone who could actually contribute in this decade... The reason I think they should explore the coaching change is two fold yes I think their coaching has been lacking, but I also think if they got a new coach in and run into the same exact problems that's a very clear indicator that the roster is the problem. Also coaches are a LOT easier to find and get rid of then players are. I really question the coaching and the roster, the coaching in that I think they could get more with the talent they have, but I also don't think a new coach would jump in and make them a contender. A new coach could definitely do better at making adjustments, calling good time outs, not running the same 2-3 plays with a new "wrinkle" here or there. They have a forward problem, basically all of their forwards are role players, Turner's the only one even sort of capable of creating his own shot and his shot is terribly unreliable. Their Best two players are 6'3, and while both are good especially on offense they both are really sub-par defenders, that don't even offer length as a way to at least sway guys a little bit from pulling up and putting shots down in their face. Thinking they need a new coach and needing some roster changes don't have to be exclusive. Honestly if I decided to go full on Tank mode, I'd have a serious conversation with Dame about it and see if he wants to stick through the process or be dealt that'd have to be the 1st part of the plan and the other pieces would kind of fall from that conversation. - AGAIN I'm not saying they should tank. - They're chances of finding a "great" player at 12th is about the same as at 20th most years so unless you can be really, really bad and guarantee 5th-ish or higher it's really not worth it.
No one was more pissed off about not using the Crabbe-TPE than I was but here is what happened: Olshey probably passed up on using it for Mirotic last year, hoping something else better would come along. He admitted being too cautious with it and I'm assuming that is what he meant is that Mirotic could've been a Blazer. Ironically Mirotic had a part in kicking the Blazers' ass in the playoffs to make things worse. Admittedly, I also was hesitant to use the TPE on Mirotic because of his previous year shooting struggles and because I was holding out hope that the TPE would lead to taking on a bad contract for a 1st round pick instead of going to waste. After the season ended with such a thud, instead of Allen giving his blessing to use the TPE to go deep in the luxury tax there seemed to be a more conservative approach to not just adding money unless it was for something really good. They probably overvalued what they could have gotten for the pick and the TPE. After the draft it is pretty obvious they weren't going to add major salary. Now this could be because Allen was worse off than he was letting on, that probably had a little bit to do with it, and he didn't want to commit to something he might not be around to pay for.
...Zioff is going to need a lot more than dunks and a few easy blocks to become NBA All-star though @HCP he looks very slow and lumbering before he springs...will be very interesting to see which way his quickness can progress at the next level
This is a pretty long thread about a player the Blazers will NEVER even have the slightest chance of getting.
...of course! Most (as in 65% +) of his points come from dunks/layups. Sure he's made a few jumpers, but he is shooting 20% from 3PT and 66% FT so yeah he doesn't "just" dunk...but primarily that's what he does and why his FG% is so efficient. Like I said, it's going to be interesting to see how he progresses at the next level and what happens to his body as he gets older. Already pushing 300lbs does not bode well for his future, just sayin