Game 50: Portland vs Phoenix 7:00pm Chargetv and KUNP

[Blazinaway]

I suppose I could get behind a Zion move but what is the cost?

Sharpe, Ayton and a future pick - I think I would take that gamble.

Sharpe to me is a gamble to pay so we go from a Sharpe gamble to a Zion gamble. I would prefer to include Simons for CJ as well to get more vets around Zion (And b/c I think CJ is more likely to take a bench role than Ant).

But for NO to make this deal they would have to love Sharpe IMO.

I think Scoot and Zion could be a pretty deadly PNR. If Deni, Scoot and Camara are all hitting 35%+ from 3 there is a chance the spacing doesnt tank the plan (Spacing w/ adding Zion is the 2nd biggest issue to me regarding making a move for him - a big second to the main issue of him potentially just not really enjoying the sport of basketball).

The fit of Zion and Clingan / RWIII is pretty poor. You sort of need a 3PT shooting big man next to him IMO. But you cant have everything right off the bat.

I'm also getting pretty concerned about the upcoming payday for Sharpe tbh...

There is little reason to NOT be concerned. A elite talent with a hot/cold motor who dissapears for huge stretches but is still a tantalizing prospect is the exact type of guy that gets 25M+ AV and just straight up burns a team.

Pat Williams is similar, but even less inspiring, and he just got a 20M AV extension. Sharpe is going to be looking at 25-30M AV and that will be on a contract longer, and less extinguishable, than Zion.

So really if the meat of the deal from PDX is build around Sharpe in a Zion trade, I think your mitigating alot of the risk factors. Not negating the risk, but trading one risk for another risk. And that I can live with - especially as we see Camara and Deni able to handle the SG spot with very good results as of late.

Hadn't thought about Sharpe as the piece (besides big salary) in a Zion trade but agree with the "risk take" if you did do it

[dckingsfan]

1) Zion isn't a star. If you can't stay on the court, you aren't a star (this is an opinion). I don't see a pathway for him staying on the court (this is also an opinion). I think that any trade for Zion where you keep him is a mistake - especially if you are giving up any draft assets.

We will again have to agree to disagree on that definition of a "star". Zion puts up star quality stats, I also don't believe the pathway opinion as that's essentially trying to predict the future. Players have had rough years early in their careers staying healthy and then are able to correct it. The player who preceded Zion in New Orleans is a good example, AD. He was considered injury plagued his whole career but has largely be pretty dependable in his Laker years. One has to wonder if there's not some questionable medical + training staff in New Orleans...

2) I could see a team that wants to clean up its payroll trading for Zion (if the price is right) and waiving him (an opinion).

I can't imagine any way in which that would be realistic scenario for anyone. This feels like your personal opinion of Zion is getting in the way of reality when trying to look at the situation objectively and through other peoples eyes.

3) I don't think it should be either/or on trading/draft. It should be both. There is no reason not to try to make a trade and picking the BPA in the draft. Cronin hasn't had the best track record thus far but even a squirrel...

When you've essentially taken yourself out of contention for a top 6 pick as the Blazers have (lottery luck not withstanding), you essentially do only have the Trade option to get a star player. Of course you can draft and trade, that's not my point I'm making. But picking as low as the Blazers are projecting to do, the chance of getting a star is pretty diminished (not impossible, but significantly harder).

Portland is quickly getting themselves into treadmill territory with a team that won't ever be good enough to compete at a high level but never bad enough to get a blue-chip prospect in the draft. At that point, then yes, a Trade is the only way to get that star building block.

Yep, need to agree to disagree. But I appreciate the considered responses.

I don't think that Zion is going to be healthy and therefore isn't going to be a star. My definition of a star is partial based upon minutes played (not just on stats). This goes for RWIII as well, for example.

And no, it is my opinion on where the current cap situation is - that is why I could see a team doing a Zion trade and waiving him.

And no, it isn't an either/or scenario. It is a both scenario. We are seeing teams with "stars" that can't make the jump because they don't have the supporting cast around them.

[m0ng0]

Wait a minute do Zion and CJ fit the "timeline" remember that buzz word?

[DusterBuster]

Wait a minute do Zion and CJ fit the "timeline" remember that buzz word?

Zion is 24 years old.

From Google: As of February 2025, the average age of the Portland Trail Blazers roster was 24.2 years old

Sooooo, yeah... he would fit that actually...

No one ever seems to remember just how young Zion still is.

[Pattycakes]

I don’t like Zion cause with Deni and Toumani we don’t need him anymore. Then you add the chronic injuries plus Shae, no thank you. I do see them making a move like this but def not for Zion, all things considered.

[Walton1one]

The issue with Zion has never been talent, it has always been conditioning and his passion for the game. I think that is just too huge a risk to take, however if POR is not looking to acquire a star through the draft (which is just beyond foolish IMO), then this is the avenue (via trade) which means paying premium costs or a reduced cost on a player with flaws, of which Zion is an example and I am not convinced that NO would trade him away at a discount, they would want multiple 1st round picks PLUS a young player or two, think 2 of Scoot\Sharpe\Clingan\Camara or Deni.

POR has just not acquired sufficient assets to acquire such a player without it costing part of their core like SA just did. Nor do I think the risk of acquiring Zion is worth the possibility (dream?) of a reward.

[DusterBuster]

I don’t like Zion cause with Deni and Toumani we don’t need him anymore. Then you add the chronic injuries plus Shae, no thank you. I do see them making a move like this but def not for Zion, all things considered.

This kind of thought process is wild to me. Don't get me wrong, I love Deni and Tou and what they bring... but neither are every going to sniff even the worst season stat of Zion's. The Blazers need a star who can get numbers like they lost when they traded Dame. That player is not on the roster now and no matter how much we like these guys, none of them are projecting to be able to put up 23/8/5 type numbers... Additionally, those guy are perfect complements to someone like a Zion (or literally anyone at any position who can put up stats like that).

The reality is, if he didn't have his question marks, then he wouldn't be potentially available. Look, Luka trade aside (cause that was some weird outta nowhere ****), teams only trade guys if they demand out or have some big question marks / risks. Without those things, players of this talent level are simply not available ever to you.

If the Blazers could do a deal of like Grant, Sharpe, and say 2-3 FRPs for Zion, I could see that being something the Blazers would do tbh. I'm getting skeptical they want to pay Sharpe what his next contract is going to be after his rookie deal is up. The Blazers are kind of an a similar situation with Sharpe as the Warriors are with Kuminga. A good player, but on the weird middle ground where this could be him tapped out on his potential already, so do you want to drop 150mil over the next 5 on that player or cash out and let someone else make that call.

I'm just getting to the point where, with the draft avenue looking less and less viable for a difference maker due to the talent level of the current squad, then a swing for the fence trade makes the most sense to get that star difference maker. When looking at the landscape right now of who might be available for the assets the Blazers have at their disposal and what players fit the Blazers groups age, it's a pretty small list of players.

What truly other options are there for getting a player of that talent caliber outside of hopes and prayers?

I can understand maybe wanting to be a bit more patient and maybe see where the pingpong balls land, certainly it's not out of the realm of possibility of a moving up from the 9th spot, that's still a 23% chance to get into the top 4... and if the Blazers land Flagg, this is likely all a moot point... but again... hopes and prayers.

If the odds fall where they likely will and the Blazers are stuck with a 9/10 seed pick in the lottery, then it might just be time to do something different before the team gets stuck on even a worse treadmill than they were with Dame.

[dckingsfan]

Smh. 3 FRPs for a guy who averages just over 1000 minutes per season isn't a good idea. That can't be understated. I mean Fox went for essentially 1 FRP and SRPs. That isn't what the market is demanding at this trade deadline.

I would hope to heck that even Cronin wouldn't do this. Let some other really silly FO do this please.

IF we really have to do this trade it should be Grant & Sharpe and MAYBE a couple of SRPs for Zion. Then we can let Zion not play for another season and finally wave him. It would save us the heartache of resigning Sharpe and Grant comes off the books.

Okay, I will check out of this Zion thing - we are going in circles and it ain't happening (IMO).

[DusterBuster]

Smh. 3 FRPs for a guy who averages just over 1000 minutes per season isn't a good idea. That can't be understated. I mean Fox went for essentially 1 FRP and SRPs. That isn't what the market is demanding at this trade deadline.

I would hope to heck that even Cronin wouldn't do this. Let some other really silly FO do this please.

IF we really have to do this trade it should be Grant & Sharpe and MAYBE a couple of SRPs for Zion. Then we can let Zion not play for another season and finally wave him. It would save us the heartache of resigning Sharpe and Grant comes off the books.

Okay, I will check out of this Zion thing - we are going in circles and it ain't happening (IMO).

Ok, whatever about the picks, just spitballing. And yes, we absolutely are going in circles. It's OK for you to not like Zion...

But again, give me an actual path to an All Star caliber player at this point other than a trade that's not hopes and prayers based? This team is too good at this point to be battling for one of the best odds of a Top 4 pick in the draft, but they're not good enough to be anything resembling a contender ... they're barely a play-in quality talent level roster at their ceiling at the moment.

So whats the plan here to get past that? Make a bunch more trades for some high-level starters and hope one pops? Hope your #9 pick becomes an unexpected breakout star? None of those seem like viable options imo unless you want to be in this same treadmill of where the team is for the next 4-5 years at minimum...

[m0ng0]

Does a team have to have a superstar to win? We are plugging away pretty good without one, is that the only formula that wins? I know this could just be a wild lucky streak? I think Billups has come up with or stumbled across a weird formula that at least in the short term is working, add another piece or two in the draft and tweak it. It's not sexy but it seems to be working... short term at least

[DusterBuster]

Does a team have to have a superstar to win? We are plugging away pretty good without one, is that the only formula that wins? I know this could just be a wild lucky streak? I think Billups had come up with our stumbled across a weird formula that at least in the short term is working, add another piece or two in the draft and tweak it. It's not sexy but it seems to be working... short term at least

Yes. Unquestionably yes.

And look, the team can keep "plugging away". If having a team capped out at some play-in appearances and 41 wins gets you where you need to be as a fan, more power to ya.

Speaking for myself, I certainly want something better and with a higher ceiling and I'd rather not wait another 5 years to see if that can happen.

[dckingsfan]

Smh. 3 FRPs for a guy who averages just over 1000 minutes per season isn't a good idea. That can't be understated. I mean Fox went for essentially 1 FRP and SRPs. That isn't what the market is demanding at this trade deadline.

I would hope to heck that even Cronin wouldn't do this. Let some other really silly FO do this please.

IF we really have to do this trade it should be Grant & Sharpe and MAYBE a couple of SRPs for Zion. Then we can let Zion not play for another season and finally wave him. It would save us the heartache of resigning Sharpe and Grant comes off the books.

Okay, I will check out of this Zion thing - we are going in circles and it ain't happening (IMO).

Ok, whatever about the picks, just spitballing. And yes, we absolutely are going in circles. It's OK for you to not like Zion...

But again, give me an actual path to an All Star caliber player at this point other than a trade that's not hopes and prayers based? This team is too good at this point to be battling for one of the best odds of a Top 4 pick in the draft, but they're not good enough to be anything resembling a contender ... they're barely a play-in quality talent level roster at their ceiling at the moment.

So whats the plan here to get past that? Make a bunch more trades for some high-level starters and hope one pops? Hope your #9 pick becomes an unexpected breakout star? None of those seem like viable options imo unless you want to be in this same treadmill of where the team is for the next 4-5 years at minimum...

Yep, that is it. A different player and I might have a different reaction. But don't ask me a question that doesn't have an answer. We didn't know AD, Fox or Luka would become available. Patience is a virtue in this case. Okay, let me drop this

[BlazersBroncos]

Does a team have to have a superstar to win? We are plugging away pretty good without one, is that the only formula that wins? I know this could just be a wild lucky streak? I think Billups has come up with or stumbled across a weird formula that at least in the short term is working, add another piece or two in the draft and tweak it. It's not sexy but it seems to be working... short term at least

The answer is obviously yes. Look at not just title winners but teams that, say, made the WCF or ECF even over the past 10+ years.

[zzaj]

Does a team have to have a superstar to win? We are plugging away pretty good without one, is that the only formula that wins? I know this could just be a wild lucky streak? I think Billups has come up with or stumbled across a weird formula that at least in the short term is working, add another piece or two in the draft and tweak it. It's not sexy but it seems to be working... short term at least

Yep, sure do. Unless of course you think the current roster can rewrite history...in which case, more power to you. I'm not here to squash dreams.

But I'm biased. I also don't think that winning 8 of 9 given the season the Blazers have had (read, blown out most nights) and the competition they've faced in this little blip are "plugging away".

I also remember a couple seasons ago when the blazers started hot in their first 10 games, and immediately fell apart after that.

[Walton1one]

Does a team have to have a superstar to win? We are plugging away pretty good without one, is that the only formula that wins? I know this could just be a wild lucky streak? I think Billups has come up with or stumbled across a weird formula that at least in the short term is working, add another piece or two in the draft and tweak it. It's not sexy but it seems to be working... short term at least

Yes unfortunately, I can't think of a team that won a championship without a star player (or more than 1)

[DusterBuster]

Does a team have to have a superstar to win? We are plugging away pretty good without one, is that the only formula that wins? I know this could just be a wild lucky streak? I think Billups has come up with or stumbled across a weird formula that at least in the short term is working, add another piece or two in the draft and tweak it. It's not sexy but it seems to be working... short term at least

The answer is obviously yes. Look at not just title winners but teams that, say, made the WCF or ECF even over the past 10+ years.

I mean, go back even the last 30 years... outside of a very very very rare select few (maybe only one, that Pistons team Billups was on), any and every title winner had a superstar or superstars on it

[BlazersBroncos]

Does a team have to have a superstar to win? We are plugging away pretty good without one, is that the only formula that wins? I know this could just be a wild lucky streak? I think Billups has come up with or stumbled across a weird formula that at least in the short term is working, add another piece or two in the draft and tweak it. It's not sexy but it seems to be working... short term at least

The answer is obviously yes. Look at not just title winners but teams that, say, made the WCF or ECF even over the past 10+ years.

I mean, go back even the last 30 years... outside of a very very very rare select few (maybe only one, that Pistons team Billups was on), any and every title winner had a superstar or superstars on it

Ya, and people love to talk about that Pistons team - but even that team had the equivalent of a starting lineup of NBA 1st team defenders - which is even harder to make happen than actually lucking out into a superstar. That archetype isnt some hack - its an even harder team to field than what the norm is (1-2 superstar).

Like, the equivalent of that Pistons team today would be something like Jrue Holiday / Devin Booker / OG / JJJ / Gobert.