Any time you have a top 3 pick, the implications if it is best utilized is going ot have long term ramifications. I'm not terrified in the least though.
Last season’s bench was pretty bad. It hinged on Justise Winslow remaining healthy, which he did not. Replace Winslow with a Bruce Brown-type and add some solid veterans and the Blazers would have easily made the playoffs last season.
The only thing that concerns me is the Blazers making a dumb trade. The actual draft pick is simple, take BPA of either Miller or Scoot. Maybe Amen ends up being MVP; whatever, the draft is an inexact science. The only veteran trade the team should do is if it makes the Blazers a contender. I'd trade Nurk and 3 for Bridges and Claxton. Or Ant and 3 for Jaylen Brown. Embiid for a package including #3. I wouldn't do Ant and 3 for Bridges but I don't hate it. There are no other veterans that make sense. Siakam, OG, Ayton, KAT, DeRozen, etc would all be very bad moves for #3. I doubt any of those trade options I mentioned will be available though, in which case the Blazers should take Scoot or Miller. If they do that I'll be happy. If they trade for mediocrity then yes it could be another very dark moment in this franchise's history.
I mostly agree with your assessment. GP2 was a misstep, but Cronin got out of it quickly, which I thought was a refreshing change.
Or if we turn down a high quality player for #3 and the #3 pick ends up being a bust, that could be a dark moment as well. Works both ways.
And as Captain Obvious, the Blazers need to be prepared for Nurkic’s next injury. The Bruce-Brown type could be a backup center/forward, or just a journeyman that’s better than Eubanks.
You would have to be specific about that high-quality player and the full cost. The #3 pick alone can’t get you a player with a salary.
Yeah the bench was so poorly constructed it has me question if the team wanted to stealth tank the entire season. We just needed a few vet minimum journeymen so we didn't have to play Grant at center or Keon at PG when we have a single starter out.
No, this is not teue. Who is the high quality player I didn't mention, Siakam is probably the best off my don't trade for list. The Blazers aren't winning a title with him, yes he has a higher floor than #3, but he doesn't have near as high of a ceiling. He also costs both the pick, Ant, and more salary space. We're basically following another Olshey treadmill of mediocrity for 3 years. So even if the #3 pick is a bust, Siakam in 3 years is an overpaid declining veteran. It won't matter that much if we do or don't have him. If #3 busts then maybe we're slight worse off but it's not significant difference to any year of Portland getting a championship. But if we do some Siakam type trade, pass on Scoot, and he's a superstar, it most certainly could be the difference in contending, for even longer than a decade. If Portland was one small piece away from a title then yes having the higher floor of Siakam could lead to a higher chance of a title. That would change this calculus. The lottery Blazers are not this close to contending, thus a higher floor Siakam player doesn't provide a benefit.
Nurk played 1391 minutes Eubanks played 1584 minutes sure, there was ~200m bonus tank run for Drew, but numbers cannot tell a lie. Eubanks and Nurkic split time 50/50 as starting Center for Portland. It's an incredible accomplishment for Eubanks. Succesfully utilizing a G-league PF/Center (aka bench grunt) as a full time starter for an NBA team is moneyball GM'ing at it's finest.
The issue isn't Eubanks having some backup minutes. Its without Nurk then Eubanks was the sole big so we had 25-30mpg that Eubanks sits with Grant or Watford at center.
Wouldn't you agree that contending teams have a smarter GM than Minnesota? I don't see a lot of teams in a position to trade for Dame, and the few that are probably are not dumb enough to give up four first-round picks, one first-round swap, and the draft rights to Rookie of the Year candidate plus 4 vets. That was a crazy dumb trade
It's funny, some posters talk about how the Blazers shouldn't trade Dame no matter what because he's so valuable. Then they simultaneously claim the Blazers could only get mediocre starters or mediocre picks for Dame. Meanwhile we see tons of players with similar or worse value than Dame traded for huge hauls. Makes no sense. Maybe they are trying to force this invalid "low return" argument to bolster their Dame is even more untradable mantra.
Cavs GM Nets GM Suns GM Mavs GM Gobert was not the only star traded for a haul in the last year. It happens all the time.
OK so give me a few examples where we could get 3 unprotected picks, 1 top 5 protected pick, and a solid rookie. (Pus players who are decent that will match Dame's salary)
I do, too. But as much as I love the Blazers, this shit does not impact that for me. Or at least it doesn’t take a bite outta my living, no disrespect intended.