Trading our entire roster wouldn’t get us the draft capital that Dame would, so from 12 to 0. Easier to get lucky picking top 10 than top 30
Claxton, not Clayton. I’d like Ant traded for more as well, but what value does he hold? IF they rebuild and move on from Young, then maybe Ant makes sense
It doesn't matter, IMO (based on the history of teams trading their best players) because in trading Dame we aren't likely to get better than we can get with him. We're going to have to get lucky regardless. By keeping Dame we are closer to competing than we could realistically hope to be even years after trading him. If we have to use all of that draft capital in the mere HOPES of getting a star like Dame then we wind up in the same place that we are now, likely at best. I'd much prefer taking a swing with Dame and maybe only getting to the second round than giving up now and spending the next decade trying to get back into the playoffs.
I would look at it this way (assuming he asks out; I don’t think he will): it’s less about getting equal value and more about maximizing the value you can get for him.
The Blazers were a contender because they drafted Clyde, Porter, Kersey, and Cliff. Yeah they added a few vets at the end of the rotation, AFTER they built a great young core in the draft. Thats totally different than the Blazers now having one young 19 year old piece of a core and trying to cram mediocre vets on his team. Teams that do that stay somewhere between mediocrity and purgatory. Your example actually clearly illustrates that the Blazers need to keep their lottery pick and use it to build a great young core. If the Blazers traded Clyde and Porter for Buck Williams a couple years earlier they wouldn't have won shit.
So now its Ant & Dame as the two highest paid Blazers - how is that different? I see all the same problems of the Olshey era but with less talent and less playoff success. The one bright spot is Sharpe - but he's probably 4 years away from developing, at which point Dame will be far from his peak.
I never look at discussions as needing one of those two outcomes. If I can factually state why the position I'm arguing for is superior in a way that most independent 3rd parties would agree, well thats what matters. A single persons firm or even irrational opinion doesn't matter. I'm open to modifying my outlook if others bring up a good reason or good logic to support it.
If so then keep him. But if the team can't contend in the next 5 years as I suspect - its worth keeping an ear on the phone to hear all the ideas of others teams. It only takes one team to get the itch for 1 day to get a deal done for the Blazers to get massive value. Look at what the Jazz got for a clearly inferior Gobert. Or the haul the Thunder got for Paul George; arguably receiving a superior player in SGA - along with 4 future unprotected firsts and unprotected pick swaps. Maybe a deal like that isn't available, but maybe it will be at some point.
minor quibble: since Dame can't be traded till, IIRC, July 8, there won't be any 2023 picks coming in....unless it's a player drafted in 2023 and he remains unsigned till a Dame trade
I think thats really the key - is there a path to the Blazers contending in the next 3-5 years? If so then it makes sense to keep Dame. If not then the rebuild yes will be better off for those 7-10+ years from now with assets from a Dame trade.
I consider this irrelevant - as a trade could be agreed to at the draft and made official in early July as happen all the time.
yes....if Cronin holds onto Ant for 8 years, and holds him untouchable in trade discussions for guys like Mikal Bridges, Jalen Brown, & Siakam, it will be the same fucking idiocy as Olshey/CJ
So trade away youth/picks for a team of more older veterans that can't contend. Sounds like an Olshey plan.
The advantage of acquiring a new star like Dame is that they would be in their 20's, ideally low 20's, not their 30s. Nobody would advocate trading Dame for a different star in their 30s. If Dame was 24 years old; then contending now or doing a long rebuild would all be fine with him.
Thing is, we aren't likely to acquire a player of that caliber at that age. In fact, judging by our history and the history of other teams who have traded their best player we are more likely NOT to get a player of Dame's caliber. I'm all for investing in drafting quality players, but not at the expense of the best player we've ever had.
There is nobody the Blazers can add that is good enough to contend now - unless we had another Grant situation but with a superior allstar such as Jaylen Brown forcing his way here. Outside a player forcing their way to Portland- there just aren't enough assets for the Blazers to trade for that star and still contend now with Dame. That's why the Blazers should keep their picks and draft the best player available to build for a future when maybe the can contend. Blame Olshey or whoever if you want - but all those prior bad moves are sunk costs. The Blazers shouldn't compound that by throwing away future assets.
You forgot Dame & Grant and if Sharpe pops it's not so much different than that team. You add a season vet like Buck was to this group, filling a big time need, and add in a few more role players they certainly could contend.
