I might be missing something, would it be all of the unguaranteed contracts Houston would trade for Shumpert? If so, I don't see how that generates a TPE.
I think Drummond is the more athletic of the two, a better shot blocker, has little injury history, and has improved his offensive game in the last two years. Just my opinion but I would prefer the 3rd and 4th scoring threats to come from the forward positions and would rather have our center be an elite rebounder and defensive force. I think Drummond fills more of our team needs and has proven he can stay healthy. Adding him along side Harris and Jackson seems like a better team than keeping our role players and Nurk both for the long and short term. Unpopular opinion now but If Nurk goes down again for an extended period of time I think more people would agree.
I understand your perspective, but I think that emphasizing the "safe floor" of Drummond is the wrong approach for this team, because they're in trail position for the championship. The Warriors going for safer options around their core would make sense, because it's currently their title to lose, so they don't want anything derailing that. Portland needs to win some bets, and Nurkic is a major one. Yes, there are risks regarding his health and small sample size of elite production but if he pans out as a consistent force, that could be the break Portland needs. In general, when you're "losing," you should want to increase volatility and up the risk/reward. When you're "winning," you should want to decrease volatility. The Warriors, in the title race, are winning and we're currently behind.
Great points. I guess my thinking is that adding Drummond, Harris, Jackson instead of keeping Nurk and what I believe to be low ceiling players isn't the "safe move". I see that as trying something different that I believe has a better chance of paying off big. To me that move WOULD be "upping the risk/reward" and consolidates some mediocre assets for some players that I believe could shine in Portland. I also think that if you propose that trade idea to anyone outside the Blazers fan base they would say Portland would come away the winners in that deal.
No, they wouldn't, and if they did, it's because they overrate Drummond. How is the Detroit package high upside? Drummond has 0 offensive upside, and his defense and rebounding is about as good as it'll get. Drummond will never learn how to shoot outside of 4 feet, and his not going to develop into Hakeem in the low post. Nurkic has so much more room to grow and he has immense offensive upside. Athleticism doesn't equal upside. Nurkic has more upside because he's never been in great shape, while Drummond doesn't have much room to improve his body. Reggie Jackson is 27, and has been declining the past couple years. He's not big enough to play SG, and he's a horrible defender who'd be an awful fit with Dame and C.J. He's a selfish player who shoots a below average efficiency. He is what he is, and that's a player that doesn't bring anything positive to an NBA team. Harris is the only one with upside, but he has about as much as Crabbe does since they're the same age. Nurkic's upside outweighs all three of those guys upside by far. But then you want to give up two first round picks, Harkless, and Vonleh? C'mon now.
I think this is fair for all teams involved but what the hell do I know? This was pretty hard for me to figure out. I welcome feedback on why or why not this sucks http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=y7tktjqt Rotation: Dame/Augustin/Hunter(?) CJ/Crabbe Harkless/Barbosa/Layman Collins/Aminu/Swanigan Nurk/Chandler/Meyers
His defense and rebounding is as good as it's going to get because it's already pretty damn good. Like top 3 rebounder in the NBA good. If you think Reggie Jackson "doesn't bring anything positive to an NBA team" and Harris "has as much upside as Crabbe" then we obviously have strongly different opinions of those players. And that's ok. I'm not trying to be the guy that shits on all the Nurk hype because I like his game too, I just think we all probably over value him at this point because of what he did at the end of the season, ignoring his downsides and prone to injuries.
How will he become a better rebounder if he goes hard after every board? What will he improve that will make him noticeably better at defense?? And please tell me what good Reggie Jackson brings an NBA team. He had an ORTG of 93 per 100 FGAs. So don't say scoring because he makes scores less per attempt than the rest of his team.
I didn't say that he needed to improve at rebounding, I said he his already one of the best rebounders in the NBA. Almost everyone in Detroit had a down year. They made the mistake of using Reggie Jackson as their starting point guard and play initiator. They pulled the McMillan and Crawford. He would be a great spark off the bench, as he was in OKC. Saying he brings absolutely nothing to an NBA team is a silly statement that only sounds good in the era of hot takes. And you've made it evident you're a big Crabbe fan so I have a feeling convincing you that Tobias Harris and Allen Crabbe have two very different ceilings is an impossible task and so I won't try.
Sabonis to Indy should make Thad Young more available. Having trouble finding a deal that makes sense for both sides though. I don't think they'd take on Meyers even w/ our 18' first attached and I'd be reluctant to do that same deal w/ Crabbe for a guy we'd only have for a year most likely.
