Zions/Kings/Blazers

[sacking123]

I think this is a no brainer for the Pels. The Kings say yes.
Personally I wouldn’t tear it down like this if I were the Trailblazers.
I agree with previous Ingram and a couple of 1sts would be better.
I think the Blazers could get that plus NAW.
Start the rebuild with those two and whatever they can get for CJ and Nurk.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[SNPA]

I think this is a no brainer for the Pels. The Kings say yes.
Personally I wouldn’t tear it down like this if I were the Trailblazers.
I agree with previous Ingram and a couple of 1sts would be better.
I think the Blazers could get that plus NAW.
Start the rebuild with those two and whatever they can get for CJ and Nurk.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

It’s late, I’m out.

But if you said I could start a rebuild with 12/13+ firsts over 5ish years, a couple rookie scale (lotto pick) prospects, my choice of salary dump for flip guys and a virtual guarantee I’d be top 4/5 in the draft for a couple years (with a good shot at top two)…I’d take that every single flippin’ time. Especially with drafts that include Paolo and Bates.

Sign me up. That’s what I’d want my GM to do. Screw building around Ingram and few so-so picks. For me it’s not close.

Give me OKC’s optionality. Every time.

[Myth]

What kind of quality asset are you hoping for?

Ingram plus picks. Godaddy has it right, but Kings out. Take Ingram and a couple picks, trade other players near or over 30 for more youth/picks. Ingram is a good piece to build around with hoping other picks pay off, but he isn’t good enough to individually make us a treadmill team.

A player like Ingram (Cousins) often moves you from 1-4 to 5-8 by winning a handful more games (and barring hitting big outside the top 4/5), you end up drafting in that range for a year or two and then you go from 5-8 to 9-14. Plus you’re a small market, not desired by FA’s. Now you have Ingram (aging out his contract) and good (not great) supporting pieces.

Welcome to the treadmill. See you at the gym.

They’ve also flattened the lottery. I’d rather have Ingram, plus an ok chance at landing a superstar to make a legit team (plus bonus picks that can be used to possibly move up in the draft). If Portland has nobody so they can try harder at the top picks, but even if they land that star player, that star player is now by their lonesome and may be wanting out themselves. If we don’t end up landing a star partner for Ingram in a couple years, he likely gets traded for picks and we talk again. Essentially, I like Portland’s chances of tanking and having one young star with hopes of lucking out into another star than taking with nobody and hoping to luck out into 2 stars.

[Myth]

I wouldn’t do it with Ingram either but Ingram and bad picks is better than the 3 stooges and bad picks.

I’ll ask again, what would you be expecting? And how is that better than a full strip down, total rebuild with OKC level picks?

You keep comparing to OKC, but you know they have SGA, right? Ingram would be our SGA. We would have our picks, 2 bonus Pels picks, then can strip the rest of the roster for additional picks ala OKC. Keeping Ingram actually follows OKC’s playbook more than what you are proposing.

[SNPA]

I wouldn’t do it with Ingram either but Ingram and bad picks is better than the 3 stooges and bad picks.

I’ll ask again, what would you be expecting? And how is that better than a full strip down, total rebuild with OKC level picks?

You keep comparing to OKC, but you know they have SGA, right? Ingram would be our SGA. We would have our picks, 2 bonus Pels picks, then can strip the rest of the roster for additional picks ala OKC. Keeping Ingram actually follows OKC’s playbook more than what you are proposing.

The quality Pels picks are far out Lakers picks (still risky). The value is in the volume and being as terrible as possible. Bottoming out has the most value Portland can achieve in a Dame trade. Might as well bottom out with a ton of other firsts to wheel and deal plus a great cap (can be leveraged for even more picks/assets).

Portland could be absurdly asset rich/low cap with an open window or using a couple late Pels/Lakers firsts and Ingram/CJ while being cap adjacent trying to build a winner in the west.

I’m not proposing a one for one. There’s no Poku or SGA equivalent. It’s about overall strategy.

[JHFVF07]

I believe Sac is stealing value on this trade. If Im Portland and trading Dame, Im taking Ingram+NAW(or Lewis) plus picks. Trade McCollum and Cov for others picks or young players and rebuild. Or wait til the Simmons situation becomes uglier and offer Cov+McCollum for Simmons. Then you have a team of NAW-Powel-Ingram-Simmons-Nurk.

For the lols call Dallas and offer Nurk for Porzingis (Dallas fans would jump on this offer), Simmons would have the Center spot all for himself. Then, you have a young team with 2 all-stars and some promissing pieces and some picks.

[Knicks365247]

I believe Sac is stealing value on this trade. If Im Portland and trading Dame, Im taking Ingram+NAW(or Lewis) plus picks. Trade McCollum and Cov for others picks or young players and rebuild. Or wait til the Simmons situation becomes uglier and offer Cov+McCollum for Simmons. Then you have a team of NAW-Powel-Ingram-Simmons-Nurk.

For the lols call Dallas and offer Nurk for Porzingis (Dallas fans would jump on this offer), Simmons would have the Center spot all for himself. Then, you have a young team with 2 all-stars and some promissing pieces and some picks.

Sir, I like the way you think!

[expatbayern]

Pelicans could potentially make a serious offer for Dame: something like Ingram, Hayes, NAW plus two of their own picks and the various future MIL/LAL ones. But that seems more like a trade deadline move than a preseason one. Wait and see how each team looks, if NOP are ready to push all in, and if PDX are ready to tear it down (and see what's out there for CJ/RoCo/etc. if they are going to tank).

[sacking123]

I think this is a no brainer for the Pels. The Kings say yes.
Personally I wouldn’t tear it down like this if I were the Trailblazers.
I agree with previous Ingram and a couple of 1sts would be better.
I think the Blazers could get that plus NAW.
Start the rebuild with those two and whatever they can get for CJ and Nurk.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

It’s late, I’m out.

But if you said I could start a rebuild with 12/13+ firsts over 5ish years, a couple rookie scale (lotto pick) prospects, my choice of salary dump for flip guys and a virtual guarantee I’d be top 4/5 in the draft for a couple years (with a good shot at top two)…I’d take that every single flippin’ time. Especially with drafts that include Paolo and Bates.

Sign me up. That’s what I’d want my GM to do. Screw building around Ingram and few so-so picks. For me it’s not close.

Give me OKC’s optionality. Every time.

I get it. I'm not saying that isn't an option. They get 4 picks from this trade. All of them won't be that great. That's all well and good, but if you're trading Dame, particularly if you're not hamstrung to a team of his choice, you need at least that 1 asset, if not 2, to sell the fan base on. Preferably in your scenario where they aren't a good team, it needs to be a draft pick so they have potentially a couple of early picks. If that is this coming draft with Paolo and Bates, then yes you could sell the Blazers fan base on potentially landing both players with two excellent picks.

Part of the Trailblazers package for Dame couldn't be that they're going to suck and thus have a better chance at a good pick. If anything that adds to the package required to come into the Blazers.
I think if the Trailblazers had the open market of all teams for a Dame trade they would get a better proposal than this.
It's not a bad trade overall, it's just not what I would do with Dame if I'm Portland.
If you want to build a trade of Dame to your team centered around picks, it starts with a top 5 pick or a stud to build around.

[daoneandonly]

Seems to be favoring the Kings and dont seem them bein needed in this trade