RealGM

If you could trade the whole Blazers team for another team's roster, which teams would you trade our team to get?

Here's the 29 other teams:
Milwaukee Bucks
Toronto Raptors
Los Angeles Lakers
Los Angeles Clippers
Boston Celtics
Denver Nuggets
Indiana Pacers
Houston Rockets
Miami Heat
Oklahoma City Thunder
Utah Jazz
Dallas Mavericks
Philadelphia 76ers
Brooklyn Nets
Memphis Grizzlies
Phoenix Suns
Orlando Magic
San Antonio Spurs
Sacramento Kings
New Orleans Pelicans
Washington Wizards
Charlotte Hornets
Chicago Bulls
New York Knicks
Atlanta Hawks
Detroit Pistons
Cleveland Cavaliers
Minnesota Timberwolves
Golden State Warriors

Edit: Please include an explanation why you would prefer a team's roster over the Blazers. Show your work.

Trick question, none of the above.

Right off the top of my head without an indepth look I like these teams:

Milwaukee Bucks
Los Angeles Lakers
Los Angeles Clippers
Denver Nuggets
Houston Rockets
Dallas Mavericks
Philadelphia 76ers
Memphis Grizzlies
New Orleans Pelicans
Atlanta Hawks
Minnesota Timberwolves
Golden State Warriors

This is not my final answer, I literally took just 2 minutes to go through the list. I need to look at more thoroughly. When I give my answer I will include an explanation why I would prefer the other team's roster over ours.

DeBlazerRiddem wrote:Trick question, none of the above.

No trick, just fun discussion.

Some teams that are better would quickly lose stars to FA. So eliminate the LAs. Dallas did what I wish Portland had done. Got aggressive to get a generational player. Looks like they got a bargain in KP. They have free agent flexibility, too. Also a first date HC. That will be a fun team to watch, and will spend the next five years finishing ahead of PDX.

dunlop212 wrote:Dallas did what I wish Portland had done. Got aggressive to get a generational player.

What took them so long to get aggressive? They had nothing to lose when they "got aggressive." Mavs for 7 years were somewhere between not so good and complete trash. I wonder why they didn't just skip that 7 years and go straight to aggressive.

Miami would be my top choice. I love the way they play hustling, unselfish team basketball on both ends. Spoelstra and Riley have done a fantastic job assembling the roster and developing player.

What took them so long to get aggressive? They had nothing to lose when they "got aggressive." Mavs for 7 years were somewhere between not so good and complete trash. I wonder why they didn't just skip that 7 years and go straight to aggressive.

They won a chip in 2011, treadmilled-to-sucked for 7 years then ended up with another franchise player. They are like the Packers of the NBA, going from Farve to Aaron in like one year.

Doncic will be a GOAT caliber player when he is done in this league. I love Dame to death, but I would trade two Dame Lillards for one Luka Doncic.

Boston, Dallas, Denver, GS, Lakers, Clips, Bucks, Nets, NOP, Philly

All have more of a legit shot at a title than Portland I’d say

dunlop212 wrote:Some teams that are better would quickly lose stars to FA. So eliminate the LAs. Dallas did what I wish Portland had done. Got aggressive to get a generational player. Looks like they got a bargain in KP. They have free agent flexibility, too. Also a first date HC. That will be a fun team to watch, and will spend the next five years finishing ahead of PDX.

as much as I love watching Zingis play... he's as injury prone as it gets. he can't be relied on to stay healthy... ever. unfortunately.

Give me the Celtics, Nuggets, Heat and Pelicans. Pelicans in particular have a ton of FRP's as
trade assets to get any one player they want.

I'm with Norm, give me (in no particular order) the Celtics, Nuggets, and Heat, but he can keep the Pelicans.

The Celtics have a lot of talent and some extra picks cuz Ainge is a wizard.
The Nuggets have a lot of young talent and depth.
The Heat have a lot of depth and good shooters.

If I were to rank those teams, I know the Heat would be #3. I would probably give the nod to the Nuggets as a Division foe so the Celtics #2 and the Nuggets #1.

Pelicans are relying heavily on Zion being healthy and being a superstar. There is a world where Zion doesn't live up to the hype, I guess you take that swap if you think Lillard is going to be past his prime soon and Zion has potential.

1st round picks are nice, but they don't always pay off in fact most teams miss out big time when looking for all-star talent unless they are just looking for a solid player.

monopoman wrote:Pelicans are relying heavily on Zion being healthy and being a superstar. There is a world where Zion doesn't live up to the hype, I guess you take that swap if you think Lillard is going to be past his prime soon and Zion has potential.

1st round picks are nice, but they don't always pay off in fact most teams miss out big time when looking for all-star talent unless they are just looking for a solid player.

Don't the Blazers know that... Bowie, Oden, Roy, etc.

Here's the 29 other teams:
Milwaukee Bucks - Yes
Toronto Raptors - Yes
Los Angeles Lakers - Maybe. Talent wise would be an upgrade. I just can't sell out to the Lakers...
Los Angeles Clippers - Maybe. It will be interesting what happens this off-season
Boston Celtics - Yes
Denver Nuggets - Yes
Indiana Pacers - No. They're in a similar situation as Portland, but I don't see any hope for them to get better
Houston Rockets - No. Can't stand Harden or Westbrook.
Miami Heat - Yes
Oklahoma City Thunder - Maybe. Current roster, no... but they have a warchest of assets to turn it around.
Utah Jazz - Maybe. They're in a similar situation as Portland.
Dallas Mavericks - Yes
Philadelphia 76ers - Maybe. They looked boxed in, without much flexibility to improve
Brooklyn Nets - No. They rub me the wrong way.
Memphis Grizzlies - Maybe. Ja is awesome. I also really like JJJ.
Phoenix Suns - Maybe. They're in a similar situation as Portland.
Orlando Magic - No. Poor management.
San Antonio Spurs - No. Too old.
Sacramento Kings - No. Poor management.
New Orleans Pelicans - No. Don't trust Zion or Ball.
Washington Wizards - No. Poor management.
Charlotte Hornets - No. Poor management.
Chicago Bulls - No. Poor management.
New York Knicks - No. Poor management.
Atlanta Hawks - Maybe. I like the direction of their team.
Detroit Pistons - No. Poor management.
Cleveland Cavaliers - No. Poor management.
Minnesota Timberwolves - No. Poor management.
Golden State Warriors - Yes, assuming everyone is healthy

Honestly there is quite a few I’d trade, the hardest thing would be swapping dame for anybody. Overall roster talent though I think there’s close to 10 teams with better rosters. The one I’m really intrigued by and have been jealous of their player acquisitions last couple years is the Suns. Love booker and think bridges and ayton got legit potential. Also some low key pickups like saric, oubre and Rubio. I just think blazers have 1 really high end talent and a bunch of players in the middle of the league talent wise. I think lillard elevates this entire roster and keeps everything together. If you said could keep the star player and trade the rest of the roster that 10 number jumps up quite a bit as I think lillard draws the short end of the stick for supporting casts around the league

whatchaknow wrote:Honestly there is quite a few I’d trade, the hardest thing would be swapping dame for anybody. Overall roster talent though I think there’s close to 10 teams with better rosters. The one I’m really intrigued by and have been jealous of their player acquisitions last couple years is the Suns. Love booker and think bridges and ayton got legit potential. Also some low key pickups like saric, oubre and Rubio. I just think blazers have 1 really high end talent and a bunch of players in the middle of the league talent wise. I think lillard elevates this entire roster and keeps everything together. If you said could keep the star player and trade the rest of the roster that 10 number jumps up quite a bit as I think lillard draws the short end of the stick for supporting casts around the league

Actually, the primary argument to prefer another team is to get a better "best" player than Lillard. The ceiling of the Blazers is determined by how good our current best player, Lillard, can be. Other teams with a better player than Lillard are ahead of
Blazers at developing a contender simply because of their best player. For example, Pelicans have a great future if Zion can get his conditioning under control. Without Zion, they aren't even a contender to win 40 games. Lakers spent years accumulating lottery picks that got them nowhere until LeBron made them an instant contender and a free agent destination. No free agent wanted to go to LA before LeBron, and no free agent wants to go to Cleveland now. The greatness of an NBA franchise is all about how good its best player is. Even a team like the Hawks, who so far have been awful, are further along at becoming a contender than Blazers are. Trae Young is going to be a bigtime star and he alone takes care of all the heavy lifting Hawks need to build a contender. OTOH, Heat were in the finals, but I wouldn't trade Blazers roster for Heat's roster. Heat have a very good roster, lots of very good young talent on cheap contracts, but they are really no better off than the Blazers. Maybe Heat can parlay their financial advantage of having good players on cheap contracts into free agent gold, but this means nothing until it translates into a great "best" player.

dunlop212 wrote:Dallas did what I wish Portland had done. Got aggressive to get a generational player.

Before CJ signed his huge extension, talks on this board involved CJ being viewed high enough to get unprotected picks from very bad teams. I was onboard for about 2 years being willing to include him to a team that had a chance of being the worst (not even a guaranteed top 3 pick) because I was high on Doncic for that long. I simply could not believe he didn't go #1 by the time we got to that point. Still may not have worked out (could have had pick #6 or worse for all I know), but man what a dream come true Lillard and Doncic would have been.

Dallas (2 young stars, one a generational talent) or Miami, as long as Pat Riley is still running things. Dallas is very entertaining to watch and Miami just went to the Finals with Butler, some olds, and a bunch of youngs/D-leaguers. What a scrappy bunch!

Dallas is the only answer