Shams: Dame Lillard, Blazers Close to 2-Yr/$120M Max Extension

Moderators: Domejandro, infinite11285, Harry Garris, ken6199, Dirk, bisme37, KingDavid, bwgood77, zimpy27, cupcakesnake

nikster
RealGM
Posts: 13,231
And1: 11,762
Joined: Sep 08, 2013

Re: Shams: Dame Lillard, Blazers Close to 2-Yr/$120M Max Extension 

Post#221 » by nikster » Sat Mar 18, 2023 9:41 pm

Revived wrote:
KyRo23 wrote:I don't know how this guy did it, but he gets the benefit of being "loyal" with no expectations. More power to him, but Jesus, does any other player of his caliber get as many breaks as him when it comes to team success?

There was an NBA exec that said this the other day and it’s true, “it’s easy to be loyal when you’re making so much damn $$”.

If either Lillard or Beal were that committed to winning with Blazers/Wizards, I’d like to have seen either one take a paycut so that both teams can use that $$ to put a better team around them and compete.

At the end of the day neither Lillard or Beal are “loyal”….they simply decided to stay with the team that can pay them the most $$.

If it was so easy why are so many stars demanding trades and moving around? It's "so easy" to stay loyal yet Dame and Beal are the only players who have stuck around in a tough spot. Lots of players of their caliber have jumped around the league and avoided the bonus pay they could only be offered by their original team.
jokeboy86
General Manager
Posts: 7,971
And1: 5,000
Joined: May 08, 2007

Re: Shams: Dame Lillard, Blazers Close to 2-Yr/$120M Max Extension 

Post#222 » by jokeboy86 » Sat Mar 18, 2023 10:23 pm

Bum Adebayo wrote:It's hilarious how many fans are now changing the narrative, they make it seem like it's better to ring chase like Lebron or Durant did than what Dame is doing. It's not Dame's fault, it's the FO's fault, period. He is having an amazing season, in fact, he has been the best offensive player this season with 8.11 ORPM, of course we know his defense is mediocre, but one just needs to put the right pieces around him to overcome that, something the FO absolutely failed to do over and over.


See I wouldnt criticize Dame for not winning and staying loyal but I am surprised in his constant faith in the Blazers FO. Not once since Aldridge left have I thought the Blazers were close to contending and I’m sure other GMs around the league have felt the same way. I really dont know what he’s been seeing all this time to make him think that his teams have just got bad breaks and that nothing drastic has needed to be done or even attempted roster wise. Maybe Dame wants to be like Malone and Payton or Ewing and wait till the Blazers are done with him or maybe he is just really genuinely tired of the national media’s disrespect for Portland and all small markets in the way they try to get the biggest stars to leave all the time non stop. If Jokic were American or had more of a personality not only would the media have tried to get him out of Denver but they probably would like him more. Giannis ignored them and Zion is to hurt for them to care about. Dont be surprised if they start trying to get Ja out of Mem if they dont contend.

Dame sees all this and I think at this point this is his way of sticking it to the national media. I still think he can wind up in Denver if he just asks.
LakersLegacy
Head Coach
Posts: 7,118
And1: 3,868
Joined: Apr 27, 2015
   

Re: Shams: Dame Lillard, Blazers Close to 2-Yr/$120M Max Extension 

Post#223 » by LakersLegacy » Sat Mar 18, 2023 10:34 pm

Love Dame

But I honestly thought
It’s Dame Dollars not Dame Championships

I prefer my players who never made the Finals to ring chase in their mid-thirties
bovice
Pro Prospect
Posts: 758
And1: 889
Joined: Oct 26, 2012

Re: Shams: Dame Lillard, Blazers Close to 2-Yr/$120M Max Extension 

Post#224 » by bovice » Sat Mar 18, 2023 10:42 pm

money > rings
Courant
Sophomore
Posts: 118
And1: 136
Joined: Nov 22, 2021
       

Don't let facts get in your way 

Post#225 » by Courant » Sat Mar 18, 2023 10:49 pm

JulesWinnfield wrote:It’s pretty lazy analysis to say they were better in 91 than 92 based solely on the basis of winning a best of 5 series, especially given how heavily matchups can come into play in a short series. The warriors won 55 games the year after trading Richmond. It’s worth noting that was at the time the second most in franchise history trailing only the ‘76 team.


Just like it's a lazy analysis not to consider the 1992 Warriors were one of the teams in the Pacific Division that benefited from the Los Angeles Lakers' decline from the previous season, thanks to Magic Johnson's retirement. It certainly wasn't because a rookie Billy Owens' 14/8/2 averages were better than what Mitch Richmond produced in his final season in Golden State (24/6/3).

It still doesn't change that the 1992 Warriors team lost in the first round of the playoffs, while the 1991 team went to the second round. Warriors coach Don Nelson later said in a interview he was under pressure to make a trade to make the team bigger and wished he had never traded Richmond for Owens.

And it still doesn't change the fact the Warriors missed the playoffs 13 out of the next 15 years after trading Richmond. So once again, how did Golden State "get better" after trading Richmond?
Sedale Threatt
RealGM
Posts: 48,910
And1: 40,827
Joined: Feb 06, 2007
Location: Clearing space in the trophy case.

Re: Shams: Dame Lillard, Portland Close to 2-Yr/$120M Max Extension 

Post#226 » by Sedale Threatt » Sat Mar 18, 2023 10:54 pm

MrBigShot wrote:Ring chase and people get upset, stay loyal to the team that drafted you people get upset.


It's pretty wild. A perfect representation of that saying about opinions and buttholes.
anotherhomer
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,101
And1: 2,962
Joined: Jun 23, 2008

Re: Shams: Dame Lillard, Portland Close to 2-Yr/$120M Max Extension 

Post#227 » by anotherhomer » Sat Mar 18, 2023 11:03 pm

Sedale Threatt wrote:
MrBigShot wrote:Ring chase and people get upset, stay loyal to the team that drafted you people get upset.


It's pretty wild. A perfect representation of that saying about opinions and buttholes.


ya you can never win....he stays, ppl say he's chasing money, he leaves, then he's disloyal
BNM
Analyst
Posts: 3,467
And1: 4,192
Joined: Jun 28, 2016

Re: Shams: Dame Lillard, Blazers Close to 2-Yr/$120M Max Extension 

Post#228 » by BNM » Sat Mar 18, 2023 11:29 pm

LakersLegacy wrote:Love Dame

But I honestly thought
It’s Dame Dollars not Dame Championships

I prefer my players who never made the Finals to ring chase in their mid-thirties


He's 32. So, not mid-30s for a couple more seasons. He still has time to ride someone else's coattails - if he chooses.

Personally, I'd much rather see him win, or at least make the finals, in Portland. It will take a miracle for that to ever happen - something like winning the lottery and Victor actually becomes a dominant player by his 3rd season, or another disgruntled superstar actually, somehow, ends up in Portland. Highly, HIGHLY unlikely.

If Dame does get traded to a contender, it will be with his consent, but not because he demanded it.
User avatar
JulesWinnfield
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,766
And1: 6,354
Joined: Mar 24, 2013
Location: NY
   

Re: Don't let facts get in your way 

Post#229 » by JulesWinnfield » Sat Mar 18, 2023 11:33 pm

Courant wrote:
JulesWinnfield wrote:It’s pretty lazy analysis to say they were better in 91 than 92 based solely on the basis of winning a best of 5 series, especially given how heavily matchups can come into play in a short series. The warriors won 55 games the year after trading Richmond. It’s worth noting that was at the time the second most in franchise history trailing only the ‘76 team.


Just like it's a lazy analysis not to consider the 1992 Warriors were one of the teams in the Pacific Division that benefited from the Los Angeles Lakers' decline from the previous season, thanks to Magic Johnson's retirement. It certainly wasn't because a rookie Billy Owens' 14/8/2 averages were better than what Mitch Richmond produced in his final season in Golden State (24/6/3).

It still doesn't change that the 1992 Warriors team lost in the first round of the playoffs, while the 1991 team went to the second round. Warriors coach Don Nelson later said in a interview he was under pressure to make a trade to make the team bigger and wished he had never traded Richmond for Owens.

And it still doesn't change the fact the Warriors missed the playoffs 13 out of the next 15 years after trading Richmond. So once again, how did Golden State "get better" after trading Richmond?


They went 3-2 against the Magic-less Lakers in 92 and that explains an 11 win improvement? it makes less than zero sense

Golden state didn’t do much with Richmond or without, but they had their most sustained success over the course of a season the year after dealing him. What their track record was long term after a number of circumstances transpired doesn’t say much of anything about Richmond’s ability to impact their winning. They blew the team up multiple times in the coming years. He didnt do any winning in sacramento and his eventual trade out of that destination there helped kickstart the best run theyve had in Sacramento without dispute
Bankai
RealGM
Posts: 32,537
And1: 26,476
Joined: Oct 16, 2006
Location: Toronto, ON
       

Re: Shams: Dame Lillard, Blazers Close to 2-Yr/$120M Max Extension 

Post#230 » by Bankai » Sat Mar 18, 2023 11:36 pm

No wonder the Blazers cant afford a decent team, Dame eating up that cap.
NBA4Lyfe
Starter
Posts: 2,453
And1: 1,558
Joined: Mar 23, 2022
       

Re: Shams: Dame Lillard, Blazers Close to 2-Yr/$120M Max Extension 

Post#231 » by NBA4Lyfe » Sat Mar 18, 2023 11:40 pm

bovice wrote:money > rings


james harden is now realizing that, should have never left houston and he would have gotten his supermax

no matter where you go winning a championship is not a given
User avatar
monopoman
RealGM
Posts: 12,358
And1: 6,221
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
     

Re: Shams: Dame Lillard, Blazers Close to 2-Yr/$120M Max Extension 

Post#232 » by monopoman » Sat Mar 18, 2023 11:50 pm

NBA4Lyfe wrote:
bovice wrote:money > rings


james harden is now realizing that, should have never left houston and he would have gotten his supermax

no matter where you go winning a championship is not a given


We have also seen other players ring chase to no avail, remember Carmelo to the Knicks. CP3 also lacking one despite moving around quite a bit, so this narrative that ring chasing always results in championships is odd. So again it depends, It likely gives you a better chance at winning but nothing is guaranteed. You can also note Paul George who is a lesser player after his ridiculous injury in Indiana, but still is considered one of the better players in the league hasn't won **** despite moving around.
Myth
General Manager
Posts: 9,685
And1: 8,379
Joined: Oct 01, 2008
   

Re: Shams: Dame Lillard, Blazers Close to 2-Yr/$120M Max Extension 

Post#233 » by Myth » Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:04 am

Bankai wrote:No wonder the Blazers cant afford a decent team, Dame eating up that cap.

Portland failed to build around him even when they had capspace. They spent seasons overpaying scrubs to stay too as they couldn’t draw stars (think Evan Turner, Allen Crabbe, Meyers Leonard). Why take a pay cut when the team just wasted money at every turn. If we had $20M extra going into this offseason, what do you think Portland would have done with it? My guess: kept Josh Hart despite us being a 10th seed when we still had him. If that is the case, I’d take $20M extra per season too. Other teams spend just as much on stars and still have put better rosters around them.
User avatar
monopoman
RealGM
Posts: 12,358
And1: 6,221
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
     

Re: Shams: Dame Lillard, Blazers Close to 2-Yr/$120M Max Extension 

Post#234 » by monopoman » Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:05 am

Myth wrote:
Bankai wrote:No wonder the Blazers cant afford a decent team, Dame eating up that cap.

Portland failed to build around him even when they had capspace. They spent seasons overpaying scrubs to stay too as they couldn’t draw stars. Why take a pay cut when the team just wasted money at every turn. If we had $20M extra going into this offseason, what do you think Portland would have done with it? My guess: kept Josh Hart despite us being a 10th seed when we still had him. If that is the case, I’d take $20M extra too.


Small market teams typically have trouble courting big name free agents, it's just how things work. Now they could have possibly tried some sort of trade, and hope the guy stays but that doesn't always work out either. When a guy like a James Harden or CP3 comes on free agency they typically pick a big market team 8 or 9 times out of 10.
Courant
Sophomore
Posts: 118
And1: 136
Joined: Nov 22, 2021
       

Last comment on this topic 

Post#235 » by Courant » Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:06 am

JulesWinnfield wrote:They went 3-2 against the Magic-less Lakers in 92 and that explains an 11 win improvement? it makes less than zero sense.


It's an overall weaker and division conference when the team that made the NBA Finals the previous season loses its best player just before the start of the season. And the 1991 Warriors team at least won a playoff series; I'll take that over a few more regular-season wins and not winning a playoff series like the 1992 Warriors team did.

Once again, how did the 1992 Warriors "get better" with Billy Owens vs. Mitch Richmond? I can say that Sarunas Marciulionis had a more expanded role because Richmond was gone, but overall that trade of Owens for Richmond didn't make the team better short-term or long-term. If anything, the Warriors got worse collectively to the point where they dismantled the team twice (by your admission) and went more than a decade between playoff appearances (1995-2006).

And once again, it doesn't change the fact the team the Warriors lost in the first round of the playoffs in 1992, missed the playoffs 12 out of the next 13 years and never got back to the second round of the playoffs until the 2007 team.

JulesWinnfield wrote:He didnt do any winning in sacramento and his eventual trade out of that destination there helped kickstart the best run theyve had in Sacramento without dispute.


Can you name the second-best player on those Kings teams during Richmond's time there (Olden Polynice? Wayman Tisdale? Spud Webb? Walt Williams?)? Those Kings teams outside of Richmond were mainly a group of castoff veterans and spare parts who were not NBA-caliber starters (the bulk of Webb's and Tisdale's NBA career starts came in Sacramento).

No one ever considered Richmond a franchise-altering player, just a good No. 2 player stuck with a bad franchise. Richmond was more like a better DeMar DeRozan-level player, so imagine DeRozan in his San Antonio days (but slightly better) yet playing with much worse talent. It would have taken a Michael Jordan-level player to get those Kings teams consistently in the playoffs, especially given the competition in the West at that time (Utah, San Antonio, Phoenix, Seattle, Houston, early Shaq-era Lakers).

As for Sacramento getting better after trading Richmond for Chris Webber, you omitted the part that Jason Williams (rookie), Peja Stojakovic (rookie) and Vlade Divac (free agent) also arrived in Sacramento the same time Webber got there. The Kings got better immediately because the Webber teams had much better talent around Webber than what the Richmond teams had around Richmond, not just by swapping out Richmond for Webber.

You're playing a little fast and loose with the details for my tastes. On that note, I'm ending this conversation.
NBA4Lyfe
Starter
Posts: 2,453
And1: 1,558
Joined: Mar 23, 2022
       

Re: Shams: Dame Lillard, Blazers Close to 2-Yr/$120M Max Extension 

Post#236 » by NBA4Lyfe » Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:07 am

monopoman wrote:
NBA4Lyfe wrote:
bovice wrote:money > rings


james harden is now realizing that, should have never left houston and he would have gotten his supermax

no matter where you go winning a championship is not a given


We have also seen other players ring chase to no avail, remember Carmelo to the Knicks. CP3 also lacking one despite moving around quite a bit, so this narrative that ring chasing always results in championships is odd. So again it depends, It likely gives you a better chance at winning but nothing is guaranteed. You can also note Paul George who is a lesser player after his ridiculous injury in Indiana, but still is considered one of the better players in the league hasn't won **** despite moving around.


correct
Myth
General Manager
Posts: 9,685
And1: 8,379
Joined: Oct 01, 2008
   

Re: Shams: Dame Lillard, Blazers Close to 2-Yr/$120M Max Extension 

Post#237 » by Myth » Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:11 am

monopoman wrote:
Myth wrote:
Bankai wrote:No wonder the Blazers cant afford a decent team, Dame eating up that cap.

Portland failed to build around him even when they had capspace. They spent seasons overpaying scrubs to stay too as they couldn’t draw stars. Why take a pay cut when the team just wasted money at every turn. If we had $20M extra going into this offseason, what do you think Portland would have done with it? My guess: kept Josh Hart despite us being a 10th seed when we still had him. If that is the case, I’d take $20M extra too.


Small market teams typically have trouble courting big name free agents, it's just how things work. Now they could have possibly tried some sort of trade, and hope the guy stays but that doesn't always work out either. When a guy like a James Harden or CP3 comes on free agency they typically pick a big market team 8 or 9 times out of 10.

Agreed. Portland will always have that sort of uphill battle, and they have unfortunately not overcome it in Dame’s career. My point is this isn’t on Dame.
76Shots
Sophomore
Posts: 184
And1: 219
Joined: Aug 03, 2013

Re: Shams: Dame Lillard, Blazers Close to 2-Yr/$120M Max Extension 

Post#238 » by 76Shots » Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:38 am

Myth wrote:
Bankai wrote:No wonder the Blazers cant afford a decent team, Dame eating up that cap.

Portland failed to build around him even when they had capspace. They spent seasons overpaying scrubs to stay too as they couldn’t draw stars (think Evan Turner, Allen Crabbe, Meyers Leonard). Why take a pay cut when the team just wasted money at every turn. If we had $20M extra going into this offseason, what do you think Portland would have done with it? My guess: kept Josh Hart despite us being a 10th seed when we still had him. If that is the case, I’d take $20M extra per season too. Other teams spend just as much on stars and still have put better rosters around them.


Yes, Portland swung and missed plenty but so have many other teams. But the thing is you have to keep swinging and you have to make sure you're in a position to keep swinging. By Dame milking Portland for every penny he can, he took away the Blazers ability to keep swinging. Also, FA acquisitions aren't the only way cap space can be used to get better, Portland could potentially used that space to facilitate a trade. But again, Dame milked them for every penny he could, essentially taking Portland's chances of improving via FA or trade from low to not at all. Unless he's a complete moron (which I dont think he is at all) he knows full well that by him eating so much space his teams will never be able to compete for anything of significance.

Its easy for him to pretend to be loyal when he contributes to manufacturing the circumstance of being able to get every penny available, go into every season with zero expectations, get all his personal accolades and still be spoken in the same breath as elite players, all the while not having to face ANY pressure or criticism for lack of team success.
The Servant
Senior
Posts: 500
And1: 650
Joined: Dec 26, 2022
   

Re: Shams: Dame Lillard, Blazers Close to 2-Yr/$120M Max Extension 

Post#239 » by The Servant » Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:43 am

bovice wrote:money > rings


Thats the reason why no one will ever really hear his name 5 years after he's out of the league. He'll be forgotten almost immediately.
BobbyPortisEyes
Pro Prospect
Posts: 879
And1: 1,771
Joined: Nov 24, 2021

Re: Shams: Dame Lillard, Blazers Close to a 2-Yr/$120M Max Extension 

Post#240 » by BobbyPortisEyes » Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:47 am

iLLmatic860 wrote:Guess he will ring chase when hes 33.. More power to him!
Too lazy to look it up but there's no way he'll only be 33 after the extension.
hauntedcomputer wrote:Jokic is just a stranger dribbling a basketball. The humility bit could well be a carefully crafted business model for all we know. It's actually getting as tiresome as egotistical bloviating at this point. "Look at me, look how humble I am!!"

Return to The General Board