We got the #3 pick. Discuss the possibilities.

Yes, that is correct.

The perfect, never injured, young, All-NBA player will not be available for #3 and Ant. There is going to be some sacrifice and risk involved if a move is made. Unless we want to kick the can down other five years and continue to draft/develop internally and sign role players.

 

Correct. Same thing happened with Jerami Grant. Common practice in the NBA.

 

I agree with his conclusion; I don't think they would move on from KAT unless they get some prime assets like pick #3. I don't think any other team is offering close to that value with KAT huge contract and uncertainty if he can win. So I agree they are extremely likely to run it back.

KAT missed a ton of games as well, and the team won more against Denver than the Lakers. I don't know KATs value has ever been lower. Minnesota had stretches where they looked pretty good, then disaster stretches such as losing to the G League Blazers. Edwards is still really young and they have time to evaluate who to pair with him long term. They see how the season goes and either do a move at the deadline or next offseason. Next offseason the cap projections may start going up thus their center contracts also will have a fewer years and start to look better.

 

No one move is going to take a lottery team and make them a contender. It's going to take a trade (or two), quality signing (or two), and proper use of later draft picks (or two) to fill out a roster.

Brown/Bridges + Grant is A LOT better than say Aminu & Harkless though. And it's harder to fill out the top of a roster than it is the bench.

 

Great post.

Yes many are saying a top 5 player has this huge risk, but a current allstar doesn't. Totally not true, even with a current allstars we aren't getting what they accomplished previously. We are getting a new player with new impacts in a new situation for new years ahead. They might not have the same role, the same health, the same team structure; so they might not have any of the similar accomplishments that they had in their younger years.

I also question if the league is changing from the prior decades of superstar duos claiming all the titles. We're seeing #1 seeds with 53 wins while the Blazers had 54 wins as a #5 seed. Were seeing multiple undrafted players starting on a roster up 3-0 in the conference finals. The league doesn't have take fouls that slow the game way down in the playoffs. The quality between an undrafted player and a lottery pick has never felt smaller. Talent still matters of course, but it might be better to load up a roster with 7 above average starters than 2 superstars up against the luxury tax with a bunch of scrubs.

 

Yes, agreed great point.

Also if the Blazers trade say Ant and #3 for an aging star they also have to take on additional salary plus pay the guy a $250 million plus extension.

So were giving up basically three huge assets; the #3 pick on a cheap contract, Ant under 25 who even his detractors would admit is at least an average stater to amazing 6th man, plus another huge salary slot that could potentially add a third starting level player.

What are the chance Ant, the #3 pick, and this extra starter are flops for the Blazers? Likely much less than the chance a vet has injuries/less impact/or is irrelevant since the team has other factors not allowing them to contend.

The more we explore ideas of trades, draft, rebuild, or contend I tend to think the least risk and most reward is to just keep pick #3 and draft BPA.

 

I agree that older vets that cost too much to get are way too risky. Young one-and-done players come with a risk as well albeit a lot cheaper.
So what is the solution? If the pick is a no-brainer you keep it. If not I still lean towards trading the pick for a young player, but one who we have seen enough of that we feel confident can be a piece of the puzzle immediately and in the future. Someone who won't deplete our depth to get. I think that someone like Wagner would be a wise move.

 

Agreed; even the Ant detractors have to admit he provided some key offense last year. So we'd be losing him, we'd be losing all his improvements, we'd be losing another salary slot between Ants contract and this new acquisition, we'd be losing all the future of the #3 pick.

Now if the Blazers were a second round team looking to take the last final step to contend yes that final trade for a two way all NBA level player might be worth it. But a lottery team with a historically laughable defense trying to acquire this veteran when it is likely to not lead to immediate contention? Sounds like a very shortsighted plan.

 

There is a player available at #3 in this draft who can contribute RIGHT NOW.

Dame will be more than happy if we get that guy.

 

Financial strain is less, and the loss is the pick you missed ... it's sunk cost, and that's it. It's not like trading for COVID Gobert and continuing to pay for your mistake over and over and over like some kind of Tim Burton sequel to "Groundhog Day."

 

Brandon Miller - he's born the year prior to Sharpe, can immediately do all 3 of defend, shoot and pass, plays a Blazer position of need, and has #1 overall pick level talent/upside.

Blazers still have #23 to add another player that can build out the bench long term, and the MLE to get Dame his win now friend.

If you said at the trade deadline the Blazers would be able to run back a team next season with all of these pieces and keep all their future picks for a final win now trade later - we'd have been ecstatic.

 

GREAT point!
Completely agree with this.

 

Jaylen browns “knee issues” are not affecting is trade value

 

We just have to get the Hornets to trade with us ... then get the NBA to forfeit the Spurs pick because of Becky Hammons.

 

This is the type of trade we need.

"The Washington Bullets acquired veteran point guard Rod Strickland and forward Harvey Grant Monday night from the Portland Trail Blazers in exchange for forward Rasheed Wallace and guard Mitchell Butler"

 

Grant is an average NBA talent, not a very good (Bridges & Brown) or elite talent.

One of the bigger issues is acquiring the players who truly have a bigger impact on winning (ie - Hart) over the players who LOOK like they should have an impact on winning.