Trade Ideas

Discussion in 'Portland Trail Blazers' started by blazerkor, Jan 17, 2023.

  1. Tince

    Tince Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Messages:
    10,378
    Likes Received:
    8,629
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As with most trades, it depends what we're giving up for him.

    Hart and a 2nd round? Love it.
     
  2. Cugel

    Cugel Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2019
    Messages:
    3,655
    Likes Received:
    3,414
    Trophy Points:
    113
    more like a couple frps...supposedly that is his going rate??? steep for sure
     
  3. RR7

    RR7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    16,418
    Likes Received:
    9,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No chance I pay 2 1sts for him. He's an expiring, looking for 20 a year. Is he an upgrade over Nurk? Probably. Do we need to spend that steep of an asset price to upgrade Nurk ever so slightly for 40 games?
     
    UKRAINEFAN, blazerkor and Tince like this.
  4. Tince

    Tince Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Messages:
    10,378
    Likes Received:
    8,629
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No thank you.

    40m/year locked up at center between Nurk/Poeltl would be brutal. Then the trade we'd have to make to unload on Nurk when the entire league konws we have to, it would be two steps forward, three steps back!
     
    blazerkor likes this.
  5. BigGameDamian

    BigGameDamian Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2012
    Messages:
    27,301
    Likes Received:
    9,946
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Then Nurk and Ant for Siakam?
     
  6. blazerkor

    blazerkor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2014
    Messages:
    9,688
    Likes Received:
    10,197
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That would be a better team but even though Poetle is a tad better fit for Chauncey's system he's still not what we need. I think Mo Bamba is more mobile than Poetle... in fact any of the bigs from Orlando would make a helluva lot more sense and I don't think Bamba would set us back a pick. I think we could get him with Keon and Nas or some shit like that. Two fucking picks?!? I mean him and Josh aren't too far apart in value in my estimation, let alone two first rounders.
     
  7. wizenheimer

    wizenheimer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    15,593
    Likes Received:
    24,437
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Portland might be interested in Peoltl. He might not be better than beast-mode Nurkic but that Nurk only shows up 2 or 3 times a month. From what I've seen Poeltl is pretty consistent and consistency might appeal to Portland a lot at the C position after the Nurkic era

    upload_2023-1-23_21-34-56.png

    I just don't see enough of an upgrade there to pay much for it in the form of assets

    and if the Blazers are fucking dumb enough to spend another 1st round pick on a role player they will have proven they've learned nothing from the idiocy lesson plans Olshey left behind
     
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2023 at 9:43 PM
    blazerkor likes this.
  8. HomerLovesKoolAid

    HomerLovesKoolAid I have a well-known member.

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    6,591
    Likes Received:
    6,166
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not that Nurk's benefit is the focus here, but playing for Pop might be the only thing that could save that mush brain.
     
  9. blazerkor

    blazerkor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2014
    Messages:
    9,688
    Likes Received:
    10,197
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If we are sending picks out that means we better be guaranteeing that we make the playoffs because we will be guaranteeing Chicago our pick in June, just to be able to trade future firsts.

    Poeltl is not the dude that makes us getting into the playoffs a guarantee. So for me there is no way there are first rounders involved in a Poeltl deal. I'll be livid if we do.
     
  10. blazerkor

    blazerkor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2014
    Messages:
    9,688
    Likes Received:
    10,197
    Trophy Points:
    113
    By the way... whoever was saying that Nurk has negative trade value and Ant doesn't have much. Come on! Nurk is a monster with a lot of skills. He's still having a pretty good season even in a system that doesn't come close to maximizing what he can bring. Ant is playing as good right now as CJ was when he was starting next to Dame but Ant is only 23. That guy has a lot of trade value.
     
    RR7 likes this.
  11. beast crnjo

    beast crnjo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2018
    Messages:
    2,287
    Likes Received:
    1,726
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Blazers either need to deal dame or ant for a significant difference.
     
  12. blazerkor

    blazerkor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2014
    Messages:
    9,688
    Likes Received:
    10,197
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well since Dame can't be traded until July, I guess it's going to have to be Ant but I'm with you. Just like Dame and CJ, Dame and Ant are less than the sum of their parts.
     
  13. wizenheimer

    wizenheimer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    15,593
    Likes Received:
    24,437
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nurkic has skills but he also has some major flaws; and he's 28 in his 9th season so it's really doubtful that he'll correct any of those flaws. More than that though is his massive inconsistency. It's certain the 29 other front offices have noted that inconsistency. That doesn't mean he has negative value, but it also doesn't mean he has significant positive value either. Nurk is a traditional C in a time when there is diminished value for traditional C's unless they have elite talent like Jokic or Embiid. Speaking of those two C's, I doubt that Nurk's most recent performances against them is enhancing his value

    as far as Ant's trade value, the comparison to CJ is interesting because a lot of people here, including yourself, spent a lot of time trashing the initial return Portland received from trading CJ. Simons is a good shooter but hardly elite at shooting. And he's got good handles for creating his own offense. Other than that though, what has Ant actually established as his game? He hasn't demonstrated anywhere near the court vision to be a PG. He's a slightly undersized SG so he's not really a wing; he doesn't have wing length. He's not a 2-way player and is in fact a poor defender. Like CJ he's pretty clearly not a #2 option. He's a supporting player, at least he is at this point, and he hasn't demonstrated any ability to put a team on his shoulder and carry them to wins like Dame has

    all that's not to say he doesn't have value. But maybe I don't know what you really mean when you say Ant has "a lot of trade value". And all that's not to say Portland should definitely trade either Ant or Nurkic. I don't share the urgency some of you have. But I also don't share your seeming high estimation of their value elsewhere
     
  14. Mr. Robot

    Mr. Robot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2017
    Messages:
    4,013
    Likes Received:
    3,729
    Trophy Points:
    113
    if were still gonna be bad defensive team, at least get offensive players, add as much scoring as possible

    if we cant defend them, lets outscore them
     
  15. WesleyMatthews

    WesleyMatthews Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2018
    Messages:
    3,772
    Likes Received:
    3,797
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't see the point; even with a healthy AD this team isn't a contender, and thats a big if. I also don't think the Lakers do that deal.

    I'd rather the Blazers trade veterans for youth. Davis is starting the downside of his career, so doesn't make sense for the Blazers to acquire those types of players.

    Flip Grant and Hart for value, eat Nurks contract, and build for years from now.

    Blazers will probably instead do another Roco type trade where we ship off picks for an insignificant veteran.
     
  16. WesleyMatthews

    WesleyMatthews Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2018
    Messages:
    3,772
    Likes Received:
    3,797
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ant yes; Nurk no.
     
  17. WesleyMatthews

    WesleyMatthews Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2018
    Messages:
    3,772
    Likes Received:
    3,797
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Blazers way overpaying for Nurk then months later shipping out valuable picks for an insignificant upgrade in Poeltl would be beyond frustrating. But it sadly seem like a very Blazers thing to do.

    Sort of reminds me of signing DJJ/GP2 that doesn't make any sense but the team goes ahead and does. Then we'll have a bunch of fans flip their opinion 3 days later and justify how smart the team was to do it.
     
  18. Freshtown

    Freshtown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2008
    Messages:
    882
    Likes Received:
    1,094
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Here is a thread where raptors fans say 3 first round picks is not enough for OG, lol

    https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=2259472

    also:

    “If we want picks, it needs to come from a team that has no idea what they're doing, like Washington or Portland. Or a team that's on its way downhill like Phoenix. New Orleans is the rare case of outsourcing its tank via Lakers goldmine of a pick (they wont trade it)”

    :sad:
     
  19. wizenheimer

    wizenheimer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    15,593
    Likes Received:
    24,437
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have spent a lot of time on RealGM over the years and from my experience, Raps fans there assign perhaps the most inflated value on their players as any fan-base on that forum
     
    RR7 likes this.
  20. RR7

    RR7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    16,418
    Likes Received:
    9,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A fan there wanted Simons, Grant and 3 first round picks unprotected for Siakim. Agreed on their fanbase generally having an overly inflated value. I mean, we all often do, but they're a whole other level. Dating all the way back to Bargnani over Roy arguments.
     

Share This Page