10 or 11. Duren 12 or below. This isn't based on my perceived feelings on them, but moreso just BPA. I think there are 10 players better than Daniels. I think there are at least 11 or 12 players better than Duren.
The first thing to understand is the order of operations. This isn't some monstrous four team trade. First we trade Bledsoe and 7 to the Hawks for Collins and 17. Then we trade 16 to the Spurs for 20 and 25. Then we trade 20 and the Bucks 2025 first rounder to the Pistons for Grant. Finally we draft Dalen Terry with 25 and Orlando Robinson with 36. Dame, Ant, Grant, Collins, Nurk, Hart, Nas, Justise, Terry, Robinson, Keon, Trendon, Greg and Didi with Williams and pick 57 as our two way players.
That would be much harder result to complete than a 4 team trade. It's four trades with five team all of which (except the Hawks) dependent on other trades with multiple teams in the same draft. I don't believe anything like this has happened in the history of the NBA, or any major professional sports.
1. Paolo 2. Smith 3. Ivey 4. Chey 5. Murray 6. Mathurin 7. Sharpe 8. Davis 9. Eason 10. Agbaji 11. Sochan
Id prolly say the tiers of players are pretty close 8-12. So duren and daniels are close, just not my idea of BPA in that range
Murray could quickly be as good as any player we could get in a trade, and Mathurin and Sharpe have All- Star potential. I also think Portland has proven to be a good place for players to develop, even more so with Billups.
This really changed my mind on Agbaji https://open.spotify.com/episode/1zXPwHCaSj7fQVtx61iv6j?si=vnZej56VReSUEaEekta0Cg
I don't know where you get your math but we don't count as a new team in every trade and there are only three trades made. So we make (in my opinion) the most important trade first, Bledsoe and 7 for Collins and 16. If we can't make the next deal with the Spurs we would try the Grizz for 22 and 29. We would probably still get the same players with the later picks. There are options. I don't know if trading back twice has been done in the NBA before but it's done in the NFL all of the time. Doing something like this is the ambition that we need. Does Bledsoe and 7 make sense for Collins and 16? If it does that's the first step. I think 16 for two picks in the twenties is also very doable. Detroit has said they need two firsts for Grant and we would be able to provide those if that second deal went down. So, I realize there are a lot of moving pieces and teams would likely be on the clock but this isn't impossible or even implausible because every trade makes sense on its own. I think it's far more likely that Cronin agrees with you that it would be too much, too quickly. So it likely goes: Bledsoe and 7 for Collins and 16 followed by 16 and probably the Bucks pick for Grant. Joe upgrades both starting forward positions... drafts whoever the fuck at 36 and calls it a day.
I don't know what Detroit will accept in a trade of Grant, but if they demand two 1st's they can pound sand, then fuck off, then drop dead
I don't know... if we can put a starting lineup out there of Dame, Ant, Grant, Collins and Nurk with Hart, Nas, Justise, pick 36 and the hole we need to fill in that rotation with the TPMLE, wouldn't it just be worth it?
Agreed. It is certainly a large improvement in our forward positions, but Grant isn't really a SF, and I'm not sure how Nurk fits with Collins. There there is the issue that you would have 5 players who all want to get their shots to get 15-25 points. Just don't see that working out well unless someone is really willing to take a back seat.
my bottom line is that Grant is not worth two first round picks. That's a simple equation. RoCo sure as hell was not worth 2 first's and I'd argue Nance was not worth one first, especially with the protections placed on it. So it's not like the Blazers don't have a couple of very good recent templates to use in gauging Grant's value vs 1st round picks
