Vote Brandon Jennings for PG in 2009

by Winchester on Apr 20, 2008 11:54 PM PDT

This season has been crazy. The thing about this team that continues to blow my mind is how much potential we have on our roster. If any of these guys ( Frye, Jack, Outlaw, or Webster ) left the team and had a huge season next year would anyone be surprised?

It’s not a stretch of the imagination to imagine Jack suddenly not turning the ball over so much next year, or Webster becoming a lockdown defender, or Outlaw accidentally killing someone by dunking too hard.

Given that we aren’t making a title run next year and considering we have such tremendous potential, wouldn’t it make sense to let it all ride and see what happens? We would be better off trading away our 13th pick and waiting to trade up in the draft in 2009 if things don’t work out. Most of our guys would have better trade value by then anyway.

Plus, Brandon Jennings will be in the draft next year. Holy cow, that kid has some talent.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJpqtynQOAM

Poll

PG Vote.

0 recs | Comment 25 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

VERY forward thinking

who says we aren’t making a playoff run next year though?

Also, I have a qualm with the strategy that has been fronted around here for trading away our pick. I don’t inherently disagree with the idea, but people suggest it with the corollary that “we don’t need to get any younger.” What is the appeal of giving away our pick? How does this benefit the team?

Let me state this for the record: we’re not good enough to wantonly give away lottery picks. If someone were to ask me ‘who can benefit the most from the lottery?” I would suggest a talented young team (hey that’s us!)

We’re going to make our pick (or trade up), and that pick is going to make us a better team.

by OregonDuckworth on Apr 21, 2008 12:10 AM PDT 0 recs

sorry,

I meant title run. The two problems I have with using our 13th pick are:

A.) It won’t give us an upgrade at the point.
B.) It won’t give us an upgrade at SF.

Our PGs and SFs will either get better or they won’t. Jack and Martell aren’t lost causes, so trading one of them to move up in the draft this year seems like silly idea.

You make a good point, I just think it applies more for next year when:

A.) We won’t have a high draft pick.
B.) We can better judge what positions need to be filled.

by Winchester on Apr 21, 2008 12:36 AM PDT up 0 recs

You can get a god point guard in the middle of the first round.

Why, that’s exactly where we found Sebastian Telfair and Erick Barkley.

(Or, in other words, I agree about not getting an upgrade with the #13 pick.
Pritchard’s good, but nobody is THAT good.)

Blazers have a five-on-three...and they pull it back and wait for help.

by QualityPie on Apr 21, 2008 12:28 PM PDT up 0 recs

I wouldn't qualify

Telfair as good. He has enough skills to play in the NBA, making him better than us fans who sit here and discuss the finer points of basketball. However, a Telfair level player does us zero good, we’d be better off trading the pick for more cap space or making some noise trading for a prover PG.

Blazermania: back and better than ever

by CMCWizard on Apr 21, 2008 8:09 PM PDT up 0 recs

Quality Pie

forgot to use the “sarcasm font”. He was being facitious. Nic pic for your avatar

"Be wary of strong drink. It can make you shoot at tax collectors... and miss" Robert A. Heinlein

by 92wastheyear on Apr 21, 2008 8:20 PM PDT up 0 recs

I think

Steve Nash and John Stockton will tell you that you can, in fact, get a good point guard in the middle of the first round. And Gilbert Arenas will tell you that you can get a good point guard in the second round as well. The draft is much more of a crapshoot than most people seem to realize.

by trk on Apr 22, 2008 12:08 AM PDT up 0 recs

Why not trade up this year, then?

We may not be competing for the title next year, but i do expect us to make the playoffs … It doesn’t make sense to me to wait until we’re back in the playoffs to add our PG of the future … Why not try to add him now, and then give him a couple years to develop of gel with the team before we make that title run?

I understand the point of letting ride what we have right now—but not in order to pick up a different one-and-done player in next year’s draft …

by bfan on Apr 21, 2008 10:30 AM PDT 0 recs

Critical Window

We can´t spend more playing time developing PGs. We will develop a team with Oden, LMA, Roy, Rudy, etc..That´s enough, perhaps too much, and a good PG is required.
If KP wants Jose Calderon, this is the year to sign him, because he´s RFA.
The PGs we want are the PGs other teams want.

You own what you are.

by amlmart1 on Apr 21, 2008 10:58 AM PDT 0 recs

I don't think so.

KP can’t get Jose Calderon this year. The Raptors need him about 20 times more than TJ Ford. There is no way they are letting him go. The only other decent PGs we could pick up in a trade are:

1.) Devin Harris- Won’t happen, and it would cost us half the team.

2.) Mike Conley- Might happen, but would anyone besides GO really be excited about this?

3.) Barron Davis- Could happen, especially after his second half benching by Nellie. Then we would have a starting lineup of five guys with injury concerns!

Everyone else either costs too much or isn’t good enough. Why would KP trade now when he can wait until 2009 when we have massive sallary cap room? If we trade the 13th pick for some teams first round pick next year, we might actually be able to get something worth getting.

by Winchester on Apr 21, 2008 2:13 PM PDT up 0 recs

When I think about our salary cap problems

I realize how difficult will be for Toronto to sign Calderon for 8-10 millions per year when they pay 8 to TJ Ford. That´s 16-18 millions for two PGs for a team without much cap space. Plus, this year has been very evident that both players do better as starters and both want to be starters. Plus Toronto is a weak defender in the perimeter and in the low post, so they should improve at least one of those. Of course they prefer to trade TJ, but nobody will want TJ.

You own what you are.

by amlmart1 on Apr 21, 2008 3:17 PM PDT up 0 recs

I still think Captain Jack can develop

Really

It's a WAR, and we're bringin' the BOOM!

by prezofdeath on Apr 21, 2008 12:25 PM PDT 0 recs

Maybe.

I hope so, but I don’t think Calderon is going anywhere. Plus, he’s not a better defender than Jack or Blake. I would love to have him, but I wouldn’t give up Outlaw, Webster or Frye to do it.

by Winchester on Apr 21, 2008 3:51 PM PDT 0 recs

I would give

up Frye in a heart beat for Calderon. If we get Jose we could possibly offer both Sergio and Frye to Toronto in a sign and trade, this way they still have a spanish point guard and we then get a spanish point guard that would acutally play. This also allows us to use Jack in another trade, possibly moving up in the draft? Even though that would be done before we get calderon.

by ggassen85 on Apr 21, 2008 6:34 PM PDT up 0 recs

jennings

has a lot of growing and refining to do. but he is a baller for sure.

"Honor Terry Porter." Email me with your TP stories and memories.

by Ben. on Apr 21, 2008 6:16 PM PDT 0 recs

But...

they would never do it. Sergio and Frye for Calderon would be great but no GM would ever be dumb enough to do it. A third string PG and a back up PF for a top ten PG?

by Winchester on Apr 21, 2008 6:37 PM PDT 0 recs

If they dont have the

money to re-sign him, might as well get something in reutrn. If Portland is gonna sign calderon they are gonna have to do a sign and trade becasue Portland dosen’t have the cap space to sign him straight up. Thats the point of Toronto getting Sergio, they lose Calderon becasuse they can’t afford to sign him, but al least they get someone who someday could end up being a good point guard.

by ggassen85 on Apr 21, 2008 6:40 PM PDT up 0 recs

well

there are more teams that might be interested in calderon, than portland

by RipCity on Apr 21, 2008 8:39 PM PDT up 0 recs

Maybe.

I guess it might work.

by Winchester on Apr 21, 2008 8:20 PM PDT 0 recs

Jennings is good

But Blazers are in the playoffs next season, so to land Jennings we need to do some major trading (or some major tanking). Jennings looks like a long term project still.

All the talk surrounding Calderon is interesting, if anyone can get a deal done it would be KP. But adding Calderon will not address our need for a defensive PG who can stay infront of the Baron Davis’ and Chris Paul’s of the NBA.

It would be sweet if we could trade up and get Rose, but if not, I think Westbrook would really help the Blazers with perimeter defense. Sure we have Oden and LMA in the paint but with our defense the way it is, but against quality oponents we’ll either get torched from the outside or our bigs will get into foul trouble from covering. Westbrook is a defensive freak.

by LMA on Apr 22, 2008 10:13 AM PDT 0 recs

But...

couldn’t we trade our 13th pick to a team who probably won’t make the playoffs next year in exchange for their 1st round next year? Drafting at 13 is such a gamble anyway.

by Winchester on Apr 22, 2008 11:27 AM PDT up 0 recs

You don't often see teams swapping future lottery picks ...

because they know there’s always the chance they could win the lottery. Why not at least wait until the lottery to see what happens before dealing away your pick? The only time they really do that is for a sure thing …

by bfan on Apr 22, 2008 2:06 PM PDT up 0 recs

It depends really on who we can get at #13

As much as drafting at #13 is a gamble, other 2009 lottery bound teams will view it much the same. For them to give up their 1st round pick in 2009 they’d have to believe our #13 pick would greatly contribute to their team success right away, otherwise trading away their 1st round pick would not be worth it.

We’d probably have to package #13 with expiring contracts (e.g. LaFrentz) and/or our future draft picks to get MIami’s/Seattle’s/ or Minnesotta’s 1st round draft pick in 2009. But doing that is also a gamble… all those 3 teams could possibly improve 15-20 games next season and leave us with less ping pong balls in the 2009 draft lottery.

by LMA on Apr 22, 2008 11:51 AM PDT 0 recs

I guess

it depends on which is a bigger gamble. The odds of drafting a legit starter at the 13th spot is about 2 in 10. The odds of the Knicks missing the playoffs next year is probably 50/50. They might be willing to deal next years pick as they need the public to perceive them making progress now.

by Winchester on Apr 22, 2008 12:31 PM PDT up 0 recs

at #13

Westbrook wont be available, on almost every mock he doesn’t go lower than #12, if we picked up a pick from #6-11 then we could consider him an option but at #13 there is not much of a chance for him to fall

by blackandwite323 on Apr 22, 2008 5:41 PM PDT 0 recs