Might be a moot point
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:14 am
Oregon Ducks Sports Message Board Forum
http://www.ducksattack.com/forum/
Yeah, they absolutely could be. Plenty of guys who have gone in that range have become legit assets. I'm not saying they're worth their weight in gold, but I just don't see what the upside of one year of PG is. The way I see it, it's all about five years from now for the Blazers -- it's impossible to win the conference any earlier than that -- and from that perspective trading for PG hurts, not helps.Ducks10 wrote:lol, the 20th and 26th picks (not including 15th, and those numbers might be a little off) are building blocks? I highly doubt it. And Warriors are going to run this conference for the next few years, by the time they're done, Lillard might already be past his prime.
That would be great. Not sure it's enough for him, though.Duckattack7 wrote:I would rather give up one of AC/Evan Turner/Harkless and 2-3 picks for Porzingus then anything else. Would do wonders next to Nurkic and would spread the floor for everyone.
Phalanx wrote:If I were Olshey, my first priority is to dump any of Crabbe, Turner, or Leonard. Doing that would take the Blazers out of that much luxury tax (however much the deal would cut payroll), but it would also enable them to actually use those draft picks, which is the ONLY way the Blazers will ever actually become a contender. The way to win in this environment is to get good players on cheap deals.
The second priority would be to limit the luxury tax situation to one season to avoid the 'repeat offender' situation. Trading for a one-year rental would definitely accomplish that. While players like Paul George are probably best suited for a contender trying to get over the top, there are only so many of those, and they might not be willing or able to do a satisfactory deal. Anyway, it's worth a shot.
I know everyone is in love with McCollum, but I think he is overpaid, and if Indiana wanted to trade George and their 18th pick, I would do that deal in a heartbeat.
I agree that it will probably cost at least one pick to get rid of salary. If so, it makes me wonder why the Blazers ever did the Varejao deal. Yes, they saved salary by reaching near the team minimum for that year, but they are paying it all out again over the next several years. $2 million per season + luxury tax + that much less cap space to work with. All to get a pick they turned around and gave away so that someone could take another player off their hands. SMHoregontrack wrote:
i believe we shall attempt to do just that. hopefully by this time tomorrow we'd dumped a bad contract and come away with a good looking rookie or two.