What if we trade nobody?

He’s too shifty.

 

You are the reason why we can’t have nice things.

 

There are people in the community who are upset that media and some in the fanbase are okay with the notion that brogdon might be on the team after the deadline. it’s weird, man.

 

Well it’s one of those things. There are people who don’t think Joe actually tried to trade Simons and the #3. How can we know the truth?

would I be annoyed if Joe didn’t even try to move Brogdon? Yes.

 

Not that I've seen.

 

I'm sorry, but you cant divorce and separate these two issues.

They are inseparable and interrelated.
I don't think anyone objected to trading Brogdon.

Trading him for Mikel Bridges or OG is a yes.

Trading him for Jordan Poole would be a no.

I think everyone that I agreed with was saying that if we can get a good 1st (without additional salary), you trade him.... however if that trade never materializes you keep him because then he has more value to the Blazers as a mentor & Portland can continue to look for a trade over the summer

 

There are people who think he has more value to us than a first round pick. So I dunno.

 

To quote you, that’s bullshit. There are 30 levels of a first. You are applying the counter argument to any first and that’s not what I, or what I’ve read anyone else, has said. I’d trade him now for a lottery pick. But people are saying trade him to a contender which means a low, possibly one of the last first round picks. If that is all we get, I don’t think it’s enough.

most people who want him traded now have said there are contending teams who need him. Those contending teams will have a low first round pick. I don’t think that alone is worth the value he brings to the team. So what you said here is false.

 

And a good first is not going to come from a contender. Most who want him traded now have said repeatedly, there are teams that can use him now for a push in the playoffs. Which means a middle 1st at best.
I’m fine trading him now for a lotto team as a top four protected. If the return is 5 thru 15, I’d do it. If it’s to a team like the knicks who project to be in the 20’s, I’d want more or no deal. Just saying people have said they won’t trade him for a first, is inaccurate.

 

I don’t understand why you guys need things explained out in detail. do I really need to add qualifiers to everything?

If I say first round pick, what is the chances that I’m talking about a lottery pick for MB?

Fine - there are people who think he has more value to us than a late protected first round pick in 2024.

Is that what you want?

 

Contending teams might not have good picks, but they might have a good young role player in the wings, like that spicy rookie on Denver or someone on OKC.

 

yes. Thank you. Details are essential. Specifics are essential. Being vague leaves room to backtrack, twist and shift goal posts, which is something I’ve read, over time, many people say about some of your posts. So it would behoove you to be specific. It will leave no doubt or room for confusion or others saying you are changing the goal posts down the road.

 

sure. I’m open to that. But the qualifier has predominately been a late first round pick. And some have added us taking on a bad contract or a salary dump on top of that. A good young role player and a middle to late first, I see as worthy. i do not see taking on a bad contract and a middle to late first as worthy.

 

It's called good communication.

I had this exact discussion with my teen this weekend. He got mad at me for asking him questions when he 'told' me what he was up to. What he 'told' me was only 1/3 of the full story that I needed to make sure I understood what was happening.

Good communication helps reduce misunderstandings (and in this case could have limited the amount of time everyone wasted in this thread).

And I would be one of those people. I would much rather hang onto Brogdon than trade him for Fournier + Knicks 1st (~#25) - without additional assets attached.

A late '24 1st does little to change the trajectory of this team. The Blazers are already very young & have 4 additional picks lined up in the '24 draft.
Blazers can always trade Brogdon later in the summer of next winter (with the understanding that there is risk associated with it).

To me, the value difference between trading Brogdon now for the Knicks pick (#25) vs trading him in July to a team for 2-seconds (ie - worst case scenario) is worth the risk. I would fully expect that Brogdon would still be worth that late lotto-protected first in July. The only difference is that 'dumping' a '24 pick on us is not an option.

Change that to a '25 or '26 pick, and I'm MUCH more interested in trading him right now.

 

I can't handle this much irony this early in the morning.

 

WTF? Yes opinions can change. Sure. But recalling what was said vs what people SAY they said, is the point of contention. Without details, it leave that room to say, “that isn’t what I said”, based on a vague statement.
I too have been guilty of this and am trying to be more specific and direct because of the confusion it creates.

So where’s the WTF in that?
You think it’s not good to be specific?
you think being vague doesn’t create confusion and added back and forth trying to deciminate the details? People debate details, or the minutias, on here more than probably anything else. So I don’t understand what your beef is with what I said.

 

If you guys could stop making sense maybe we could get somewhere.

 

Well, I get zero sense that this is the case, but I'm not sure you're saying you believe that. And if you did believe that I'd question that, too.

All reports were that Portland would move Brogdon along... until recently when the FO moved into a 'hold' posture. you can believe whatever you want about that posture--Me: I think he's trying to get maximum value because he has leverage (by way of Brogdon's contract not expiring).

But sure, folks with no faith in the FO could believe that Joe isn't actually looking to trade Brogdon.