Game 8: Portland vs New Orleans 7:30pm TNT

[Wizenheimer]

Thanks for proving my point Wiz. I'm not going to listen to your noise. I will listen to logical statements made by Olshey. I don't believe everything he says, but even his positive spin is a clear look at what he is thinking.

do you even know what it is you're disputing at this point?

Yeah, I'm disputing your entire false narrative. Mainly, I dispute that Olshey was going to trade Plumlee for Okafor but was saved by Nuggets last minute addition of a 1st round pick to their Nurkic for Plumlee offer.

If I recall, the rumors were Sixers wanted a 1st round pick for Okafor. They couldn't find any takers and eventually dumped his salary and a 2nd round pick for another overpaid steaming POS. Olshey got Nurkic plus a 1st round pick for Plumlee.

The reality is quite different from your fantasy.

LOL...of all the posters in this forum, you're the last one that should be accusing somebody else of fantasy

[d-train]

do you even know what it is you're disputing at this point?

Yeah, I'm disputing your entire false narrative. Mainly, I dispute that Olshey was going to trade Plumlee for Okafor but was saved by Nuggets last minute addition of a 1st round pick to their Nurkic for Plumlee offer.

If I recall, the rumors were Sixers wanted a 1st round pick for Okafor. They couldn't find any takers and eventually dumped his salary and a 2nd round pick for another overpaid steaming POS. Olshey got Nurkic plus a 1st round pick for Plumlee.

The reality is quite different from your fantasy.

LOL...of all the posters in this forum, you're the last one that should be accusing somebody else of fantasy

When I give my opinion it's clear that I am giving an opinion. I never attribute a fake narrative of trumped up "facts" to Olshey or anyone.

[LillardPortland]

Wtf is going on with CJ? Neil should trade his ass

[Wizenheimer]

When I give my opinion it's clear that I am giving an opinion. .

[d-train]

Wtf is going on with CJ? Neil should trade his ass

So far, his role has been reduced and he is TEMPORARILY in a slight shooting slump. There is only 1 basketball and shooting slumps happen. It's amazing how good he is even while in a slump.

[zzaj]

...No way would Olshey trade Plumlee (a high quality starting big man in the NBA) for a recent draft bust.

Lol, you are certainly getting the thing you like so much, d-train--debate.

I don't see how you can be a "facts or nothing" guy and at the same time pass off opinions as "facts" like the one above. It's this type of talking out of both sides of your mouth that make it hard for reasonable posters to take your position seriously.

[d-train]

...No way would Olshey trade Plumlee (a high quality starting big man in the NBA) for a recent draft bust.

Lol, you are certainly getting the thing you like so much, d-train--debate.

I don't see how you can be a "facts or nothing" guy and at the same time pass off opinions as "facts" like the one above. It's this type of talking out of both sides of your mouth that make it hard for reasonable posters to take your position seriously.

I'm not facts or nothing. But, we do have some facts that our opinions have to lineup with. It's a fact that Sixers traded Okafor for an overpaid lousy player, thus his value was low. It's a fact that Blazers got a lot in trade for Plumlee and Nuggets got a lot for Nurkic, thus both players had value.

[tester551]

...No way would Olshey trade Plumlee (a high quality starting big man in the NBA) for a recent draft bust.

Lol, you are certainly getting the thing you like so much, d-train--debate.

I don't see how you can be a "facts or nothing" guy and at the same time pass off opinions as "facts" like the one above. It's this type of talking out of both sides of your mouth that make it hard for reasonable posters to take your position seriously.

I'm not facts or nothing. But, we do have some facts that our opinions have to lineup with. It's a fact that Sixers traded Okafor for an overpaid lousy player, thus his value was low. It's a fact that Blazers got a lot in trade for Plumlee and Nuggets got a lot for Nurkic, thus both players had value.

You're also missing the two most important facts...
1) player's value are not stagnate. They fluctuate month to month, and sometimes even more frequently.
2) Okafor wasn't traded until a year after Plumlee.

Therefore Okafor's value when traded does not necessarily equal what his value was when Plumlee was traded. Which destroys the basis of your argument.

[The Sebastian Express]

When I posted the link, I knew that dewald would dispute the news from David Aldridge, 30+ year veteran of the league and esteemed reporter. I didn't even think about it twice. I just knew it was coming.

[zzaj]

...No way would Olshey trade Plumlee (a high quality starting big man in the NBA) for a recent draft bust.

Lol, you are certainly getting the thing you like so much, d-train--debate.

I don't see how you can be a "facts or nothing" guy and at the same time pass off opinions as "facts" like the one above. It's this type of talking out of both sides of your mouth that make it hard for reasonable posters to take your position seriously.

I'm not facts or nothing. But, we do have some facts that our opinions have to lineup with. It's a fact that Sixers traded Okafor for an overpaid lousy player, thus his value was low. It's a fact that Blazers got a lot in trade for Plumlee and Nuggets got a lot for Nurkic, thus both players had value.

That has nothing to do with my point...

That it's hard to take a poster seriously when they dismiss other people's "facts" as opinionated false narrative, and then post their own opinions as "facts"...like in the quote above.

[Soulyss]

Wtf is going on with CJ? Neil should trade his ass

So far, his role has been reduced and he is TEMPORARILY in a slight shooting slump. There is only 1 basketball and shooting slumps happen. It's amazing how good he is even while in a slump.

The first statement is simply false... He and Lillard are basically playing the same minutes, he's taking slightly fewer shots, but he's clearly been pressing at times... He needs more shots in the flow of the offense, rather than pounding the rock with the second unit like he did last season.

The second is very true... CJ is shooting a career worst pretty much across the board, I don't expect that to continue.

CJ will be fine guys. He and Lillard are basically playing career low starter minutes... in part because the 2nd unit has been so damn good that CJ & Dame have had to play less hero ball.

Isn't this what we have been asking for? If Portland continues to play like a top 4 team in the West, it will be interesting to see what happens at the trade deadline.

[d-train]

...No way would Olshey trade Plumlee (a high quality starting big man in the NBA) for a recent draft bust.

Lol, you are certainly getting the thing you like so much, d-train--debate.

I don't see how you can be a "facts or nothing" guy and at the same time pass off opinions as "facts" like the one above. It's this type of talking out of both sides of your mouth that make it hard for reasonable posters to take your position seriously.

I'm not facts or nothing. But, we do have some facts that our opinions have to lineup with. It's a fact that Sixers traded Okafor for an overpaid lousy player, thus his value was low. It's a fact that Blazers got a lot in trade for Plumlee and Nuggets got a lot for Nurkic, thus both players had value.

That has nothing to do with my point...

That it's hard to take a poster seriously when they dismiss other people's "facts" as opinionated false narrative, and then post their own opinions as "facts"...like in the quote above.

Then, I'm not sure what is you point. I basically said Olshey wouldn't trade a good player for a bad player. I hope that is a commonsense fact. Like, if I said, zzaj wouldn't jump off a 100' cliff. What I call a good player and a bad player is obviously opinion.

[d-train]

Lol, you are certainly getting the thing you like so much, d-train--debate.

I don't see how you can be a "facts or nothing" guy and at the same time pass off opinions as "facts" like the one above. It's this type of talking out of both sides of your mouth that make it hard for reasonable posters to take your position seriously.

I'm not facts or nothing. But, we do have some facts that our opinions have to lineup with. It's a fact that Sixers traded Okafor for an overpaid lousy player, thus his value was low. It's a fact that Blazers got a lot in trade for Plumlee and Nuggets got a lot for Nurkic, thus both players had value.

You're also missing the two most important facts...
1) player's value are not stagnate. They fluctuate month to month, and sometimes even more frequently.
2) Okafor wasn't traded until a year after Plumlee.

Therefore Okafor's value when traded does not necessarily equal what his value was when Plumlee was traded. Which destroys the basis of your argument.

Your first point is not fact. I completely disagree that a player's value typically fluctuates wildly in the short term. This is only true for fans and professional fans (the media). It's not true for the professional basketball experts that work for NBA teams. Sometimes player value changes over the long term because good players often are working hard to change their value. The most common attribute that changes a players value is maturity and a player learning how to incorporate their skills into an NBA setting. Many players with plenty of talent fall out of the league because they never learn how to apply their skill in a way that helps a team win games.

On your second point, it was 10 months chronologically, but 4 or 5 months of basketball. Nothing happened that changed his value in 4 or 5 months except people had 4 more months to confirm the doubts they already had that Okafor would gain the mental maturity he needs to contribute to a successful NBA team. The 17/18 season barely started and Sixers declined Okafor's option.

[d-train]

When I posted the link, I knew that dewald would dispute the news from David Aldridge, 30+ year veteran of the league and esteemed reporter. I didn't even think about it twice. I just knew it was coming.

It's amazing what you think you know. I didn't dispute Aldridge's tweet. I don't know if his tweet has any credibility because he doesn't give enough information to access its credibility. You can assume his tweet is an accurate fact and I still don't dispute it. I said, I don't doubt that Blazers might have had interest in Okafor. The ridiculous claim by Wiz is that Blazers planned to trade Plumlee for Okafor.

[The Sebastian Express]

When I posted the link, I knew that dewald would dispute the news from David Aldridge, 30+ year veteran of the league and esteemed reporter. I didn't even think about it twice. I just knew it was coming.

It's amazing what you think you know. I didn't dispute Aldridge's tweet. I don't know if his tweet has any credibility because he doesn't give enough information to access its credibility. You can assume his tweet is an accurate fact and I still don't dispute it. I said, I don't doubt that Blazers might have had interest in Okafor. The ridiculous claim by Wiz is that Blazers planned to trade Plumlee for Okafor.

Well let's apply common sense. The Blazers traded Plumlee for Nurkic and a first. David Aldridge mentions this trade in his second tweet, which references his first tweet which plainly states the Blazers were going to trade for Jahlil Okafor. Which, you know, suggests a connection and relevance between the two. The Blazers were not flush with quality big men prospects at the time, really only Vonleh and the incoming Nurkic. Collins and Swanigan had yet to be drafted and Ed Davis isn't really what one considers a prospect even two years ago.

The Blazers, to my recollection, didn't have any trade exceptions to absorb Okafor to begin with so they would have needed to have traded a player to start. So if they wanted him, they still would have traded for him if the original player didn't involve Plumlee. it would have shored up some big man depth.

Except they didn't.

They didn't trade injured Festus Ezeli with only one million guaranteed for the next season for him. They didn't trade Harkless or Aminu for him. They didn't trade Davis or Leonard for him. Two of those players you can immediately take off the list because the Blazers would've never traded Harkless and Aminu for him. They might've considered Ed Davis, but doubtful, and I don't think Philly would've made that trade.

The most sensible target for the Okafor trade was and remains Plumlee. Plumlee who was the starting center on a struggling team at the time. Plumlee who was good at initiating as a center but didn't perform well offensively and the team needed a third option to help take heat off Dame and CJ. Plumlee who was up for a contract extension in the summer whereas Okafor wasn't going to be for two more years (which was talked about multiple times when Nurkic was traded here).

So what's the more likely option here.

Blazers were going to trade Plumlee to Philly for Okafor but found a better deal at the last minute so they took it.

Or Blazers were going to trade a completely different player for Okafor, but ended up with a different trade with different players involved, and told another team to shove off thus ruining some good will despite the trade still being capable of being completed.

Hm.

Hm.

Hm. I wonder.

[d-train]

I have a question about these tweets. Can someone explain why these tweets are dated 2/18/17 when the original date must have been 2/12/17?

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

[Fitz303]

I have a question about these tweets. Can someone explain why these tweets are dated 2/18/17 when the original date must have been 2/12/17?

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

They were tweets after the fact. That's why the first one references "last week"

[d-train]

I have a question about these tweets. Can someone explain why these tweets are dated 2/18/17 when the original date must have been 2/12/17?

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

They were tweets after the fact. That's why the first one references "last week"

Thanks

[d-train]

When I posted the link, I knew that dewald would dispute the news from David Aldridge, 30+ year veteran of the league and esteemed reporter. I didn't even think about it twice. I just knew it was coming.

It's amazing what you think you know. I didn't dispute Aldridge's tweet. I don't know if his tweet has any credibility because he doesn't give enough information to access its credibility. You can assume his tweet is an accurate fact and I still don't dispute it. I said, I don't doubt that Blazers might have had interest in Okafor. The ridiculous claim by Wiz is that Blazers planned to trade Plumlee for Okafor.

Well let's apply common sense.

Uh-oh

The Blazers traded Plumlee for Nurkic and a first. David Aldridge mentions this trade in his second tweet, which references his first tweet which plainly states the Blazers were going to trade for Jahlil Okafor. Which, you know, suggests a connection and relevance between the two. The Blazers were not flush with quality big men prospects at the time, really only Vonleh and the incoming Nurkic. Collins and Swanigan had yet to be drafted and Ed Davis isn't really what one considers a prospect even two years ago.

The Blazers, to my recollection, didn't have any trade exceptions to absorb Okafor to begin with so they would have needed to have traded a player to start. So if they wanted him, they still would have traded for him if the original player didn't involve Plumlee. it would have shored up some big man depth.

Except they didn't.

They didn't trade injured Festus Ezeli with only one million guaranteed for the next season for him. They didn't trade Harkless or Aminu for him. They didn't trade Davis or Leonard for him. Two of those players you can immediately take off the list because the Blazers would've never traded Harkless and Aminu for him. They might've considered Ed Davis, but doubtful, and I don't think Philly would've made that trade.

The most sensible target for the Okafor trade was and remains Plumlee. Plumlee who was the starting center on a struggling team at the time. Plumlee who was good at initiating as a center but didn't perform well offensively and the team needed a third option to help take heat off Dame and CJ. Plumlee who was up for a contract extension in the summer whereas Okafor wasn't going to be for two more years (which was talked about multiple times when Nurkic was traded here).

So what's the more likely option here.

[A] Blazers were going to trade Plumlee to Philly for Okafor but found a better deal at the last minute so they took it.

[B]Or Blazers were going to trade a completely different player for Okafor, but ended up with a different trade with different players involved, and told another team to shove off thus ruining some good will despite the trade still being capable of being completed.

Hm.

Hm.

Hm. I wonder.

Obviously, [B] - Except, they didn't ruin any goodwill by making the best deal they could

You are reading too much into those tweets. His first tweet would have proven something if it was posted before the trade happened, It could have proved that Aldridge has contact with someone at the NBA offices that knew Blazers were close to making a trade even though he had the details wrong. IMO, these tweets are nothing.

For you, I will play along and pretend these tweets mean what they say and are of some consequence.

The first tweet only says Sixers and Blazers are CLOSE to a deal that would send Okafor the the Blazers. It doesn't say anything about who the Blazers would trade to Sixers. It also says Sixers pulled Okafor from their lineup in preparation for the trade. This suggests that the supposed trade doesn't include anyone traded by the Blazers to Nuggets on 2/12/17. IOW, Sixers wouldn't pull players on 2/13/2017 to prepare for a trade with Blazers that included players Blazers already traded to Nuggets. So, if true, the Blazers and Sixers were close to a trade that would have sent Okafor to the Blazers for something other than Plumlee and the 2nd round pick Blazers conveyed to Nuggets.

The second tweet says Blazers backed out of the Sixers deal because of the trade with Nuggets. IOW, Blazers liked the Okafor trade if it was to add Okafor's low post game to Plumlee's high post game. Blazers didn't want Okafor and Nurkic.