Captain Canada has Portland on 3 team shortlist?

[Blazinaway]

Joel Freeland may be the key to whether Portland resigns JJ Hickson. According to the RealGM Wiretap, the Blazers are overseas to watch him play today. Perhaps we'll know more in the next day or two as to whether Freeland fits into the Blazers plans next season. If so, they may not resign Hickson.

a correction, Blazers are in Houston to wattch and meet with him

[Wizenheimer]

http://twitter.com/WolstatSun/status/216525821035282432

Ryan Wolstat‏

@WolstatSun

More updated Nash intel: Belief is Brooklyn is third team with Phoenix, Toronto in serious hunt (assuming Deron leaves), not Portland

6:39 AM - 23 Jun 12 via UberSocial for BlackBerry

I'm more inclined to believe this then that Portland is in the mix. Other then proximity to BC, the Blazers don't make much sense for Nash

[jhern87]

I forget who it was but someone on the Blazers said that they would not be interested in bringing in an aging PG at the end of their career.. If that's the case then it wouldn't be Nash..

Gotta believe it's Dragic we're after.. Makes you wonder who else.. Aaron Brooks is a RFA.. Lowry might be available.. We'll see..

[Vega]

Bringing Nash in would be kind of like taking an around the world vacation while saving up to buy a house. Sure it would be a hell of a lot of fun while it lasted, but in 3 years you're not only back to square one but you're well behind where you started.

Nash would instantly make the team better and much more enjoyable to watch, we might even make the playoffs as a 7th or 8th seed (only to get trounced in the first round). We would also definitely lose our 1st next season to NOH.

The big drawback is that in 3 years or so when he retires we might just be good enough to be a fringe playoff team for a very long time, depending upon how our draft picks this season develop. Which frankly isn't the best place to be, too bad to be a contender too good to accumulate assets through the draft. On the other hand if we are back in the lottery the ages of our core players will be that much more spread out, we'll be essentially forced to trade Aldridge who won't have as much value at 30 as he does now.

Rather than bringing in a player like Nash who isn't in Portland's long term plans, the course I would like to see them take is to acquire a lot of young assets in the short window we have. Focus on a young core around the same age and continue to draft well with with high picks as they're developing.

[Clarity]

Nash is definitely someone I would look at if I was Portland. He could be a huge asset to a very fractured locker room.. He would be an awesome leader especially w/ two rookies coming in.

His on court addition immediately puts Portland in that 3/4/5 ish seed. Nash in Portland last year & they are atleast .500 in games decided by 5 or less which easily makes them a playoff team.

[PDXKnight]

I guess my issue, Oden, is that I don't think either will get us a title. We are so far away from a title that no mid-grade PG will get us there. We'll be lucky to make the playoffs next season. The question is: we need to have *something* there playing the point, so which mediocre option costs the least and gives you the most flexibility once the overall talent level is good enough that we can actually think about deep playoff runs? I think that ain't Dragic. Once our talent level improves in 2-3 seasons, we'll be stuck with an expensive mediocrity for another 2-3 seasons that we can't easily move. I think that's a recipe for us treading water for a long, long time.

If we're far away from a title then there's no sense in signing somebody like Nash.

Sure there is. Nash makes our crappy talent better. Additionally, he is a scorer as much as he is a distributor, which takes pressure off of LMA so he won't wear himself into the ground so quickly. And finally, having Nash allows us to teach guys like Batum and LMA how to really run a fast break, really spread the floor, and really move to get open, things that will prove very valuable once we make it to the playoffs again.

How long are you planning it to take before the Blazers make it to the finals again?

[mojomarc]

How long are you planning it to take before the Blazers make it to the finals again?

Given where we are, and given where OKC is, I would be shocked if we could make the finals within the next five years unless a miracle happens. An example of that sort of miracle would be winning the draft lotto next year and getting a Greg Oden-type prospect only without the health concerns and then getting a Brandon Roy-calibre talent as well. Without that, we're not making the finals. So the next question becomes: if we can't make the finals, what should we do? My thought is you bring in a guy who can teach the parts that we have to be better so maybe we have a shot at the finals with only one of those two (or more) necessary miracles happening. Nash helps that way, and to me that makes him worth it. The fact we could get him with a two year guaranteed/one year team option makes him worth the risk just for his ability to teach the young players how to play at a high level.

[PDXKnight]

How long are you planning it to take before the Blazers make it to the finals again?

Given where we are, and given where OKC is, I would be shocked if we could make the finals within the next five years unless a miracle happens. An example of that sort of miracle would be winning the draft lotto next year and getting a Greg Oden-type prospect only without the health concerns and then getting a Brandon Roy-calibre talent as well. Without that, we're not making the finals. So the next question becomes: if we can't make the finals, what should we do? My thought is you bring in a guy who can teach the parts that we have to be better so maybe we have a shot at the finals with only one of those two (or more) necessary miracles happening. Nash helps that way, and to me that makes him worth it. The fact we could get him with a two year guaranteed/one year team option makes him worth the risk just for his ability to teach the young players how to play at a high level.

Well the reason I asked the big question is if it'll take that long we have to either make a big trade or deal Aldridge. I don't think we should settle for mediocrity, so if the most we can go with LA is a first round exit why bother keeping him? We need to go for the gold and if having LA makes us too good to succeed then we should considering dealing him away. Seems like if we wanted to deal him we could get some great picks and offload Wes's contract, which, lets face it, if LA were leaving Wes wouldn't be somebody we'd want to hold onto either.

[mojomarc]

I agree--if we can get a legit superstar, LMA would have to be included. Dwight Howard is an obvious candidate.