What if?

by NWfan on May 12, 2008 4:56 PM PDT

Let's say we got the number 2 pick in the draft and Rose went with the first pick. By the best player available (BPA) mantra, KP would select Beasley from Kansas. But would he really do that? Apparently there are character concerns with Beasley (from reading Chad Ford's who goes #1 article).

I put forth to all of you who are bored and want new and meaniful (well, at least hopeful) Blazers talk and speculation. Put out you're two cents worth. What would you do? Do you select Beasley #2 and then trade Frye or Aldridge. Do you try and trade for a point guard upgrade? Can you package beasley to with another player and try to pry Rose fromt he team who selects first? Do you trade down and repeat the Nash mistake(need/Martlell over BPA/Paul). It's a conudrum that has interesting possiblities and no sure-cut solution.

Tweet Comment 23 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

You take Beasley...

... and find a way to make it work. He’s far too good to pass up. Maybe Beas or Aldridge can play some 3 in a giant lineup, or maybe not, but you take the best player and then change your roster accordingly.

Boomshakalaka

by jksnake99 on May 12, 2008 5:00 PM PDT reply actions

I think Beasley

would be able to play the three, and he has enough of an outside game to make it work on offense.

by The Graduate on May 13, 2008 1:11 AM PDT up reply actions

If we get the second pick

I guarantee KP will find a way to land Rose.

If it fills a need, if it fills a rebuilding situation. And my goal is to fill and rebuild and I am not going to be shortsighted.
- Isiah Thomas

by JTDuck22 on May 12, 2008 5:10 PM PDT reply actions

agreed

by Blazermaniac77 on May 12, 2008 9:07 PM PDT up reply actions

What if a team like Indiana ended up with the first pick?

Pundits all year long have discussed their point guard needs. No way they give that pick up for anyone outside of the big 3 and the #2 pick.

by The Graduate on May 13, 2008 1:13 AM PDT up reply actions

That is a good point

If it fills a need, if it fills a rebuilding situation. And my goal is to fill and rebuild and I am not going to be shortsighted.
- Isiah Thomas

by JTDuck22 on May 13, 2008 8:21 AM PDT up reply actions

Then we trade the pick for Granger.

by timg56 on May 13, 2008 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions

#2 pick for Granger?

Not happening. The #2 pick is more valuable than that. No way would we trade Indy the #2 pick if they already had #1.

Boomshakalaka

by jksnake99 on May 13, 2008 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions

yeah

Why didn’t Seattle give us #2 for Zach?

If it fills a need, if it fills a rebuilding situation. And my goal is to fill and rebuild and I am not going to be shortsighted.
- Isiah Thomas

by JTDuck22 on May 13, 2008 3:37 PM PDT up reply actions

Ha

That’s about his trade value now. Oh wait, you’re talking about draft picks, aren’t you?

"Reality is for people who can't handle Blazers Edge." - MiledAnimal

by tominhawaii on May 13, 2008 3:46 PM PDT up reply actions

There is no"fixed" value to a draft pick.

It is only as valuable as the asset you can acquire with it. There is no guarantee that the second pick of the draft is going to be a valuable asset. Plus, GM’s value draft picks differently and team needs differ.

Take the 2002 draft. It is arguable that the last guy selected (Tony Parker) is more valuable than any of the guys selected before him. Take a lot at the first ten guys taken that year and tell me any of them has been a more valuable player to date in his career:

1 WAS Kwame Brown Glynn Academy, HS
2 LAC Tyson Chandler Dominguez, HS
3 ATL Pau Gasol None
4 CHI Eddy Curry Thornwood, HS
5 GSW Jason Richardson Michigan St.
6 VAN Shane Battier Duke
7 NJN Eddie Griffin Seton Hall
8 CLE Desagana Diop Oak Hill Academy, HS
9 DET Rodney White Charlotte
10 BOS Joe Johnson Arkansas

In fact I’d challenge anyone to make the argument that any of these ten guys would be a better fit on the Blazers than say a guy like Granger.

by timg56 on May 13, 2008 4:44 PM PDT up reply actions

Man...

That’s a pretty sweet draft. So, a soft PF in Gasol, a good glue player in Battier, and a high-volume scorer lesser version of Brandon Roy in Joe Johnson are the best players?

Chandler has come around, of course. But man…

I know it’s not the only underwhelming draft in the last 10 years, but it makes me stand in defiance all the more to the crap the Roy/LMA/Gay draft got, people calling it “the worst draft ever”. Of course, the low balling of the value made it easier for KP to steal lottery picks away for ‘nuthin.

Granger would be AWESOME as a Blazer. He guards the best player every night, is a great 3 point shooter, athletic, smart, he’s nice. I… would give up Beasley for him probably. Granger just fits so perfectly and adding someone like Beasley, even if he’s a perfect angel, would be problematic with Oden and LMA and all. #2 for Granger and sumthin’ to sweeten the pot for us, why not? Let’s do it.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on May 13, 2008 5:32 PM PDT up reply actions

I say...

You trade him and get whatever PG Pritchard and Friends think is the best fit. Harris, Calderon, whomever. Plus, since Beasley is more valuable than Harris or Calderon, you get some other good role players the other team has, if any. You do SUMTHIN’ like that.

I don’t think trying to make it work would work. It would be too crowded of a front court and too slow of a 3 if we try to play all 3 at once. Instead of trying to make it maybe work, and more likely messing everything up, I’d move him for the last piece we all think we need—a solid, good to great PG.

Or, like JTDuck22 sez, turn Beasley into Rose somehow.

I SAY, we just win the dumb lottery. We got lottery winning experience and that takes precedence over lottery newbies, so our lottery veteraness will make it all too easy to get the #1. Then we can do what we want.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on May 12, 2008 5:13 PM PDT reply actions

Boy

I don’t know if I want the first pick. How many times will we here KP say the word, “process” before the draft?

Anyhow, if you can’t get Rose, trade down one pick to draft Jerryd Bayless.

"Reality is for people who can't handle Blazers Edge." - MiledAnimal

by tominhawaii on May 12, 2008 5:40 PM PDT up reply actions

More role players?

Do we want more role players from other teams. I guess I would understand if we acquired future first rounders in the deal, but even then, I am not sure if I would do it. And I do think Beasley could become a large three in this league, whether he is a fit for us though… I don’t know.

by The Graduate on May 13, 2008 1:15 AM PDT up reply actions

Take Beasley

and then trade him for a veteran, possibly a point guard. Whoever it is should be pretty good.

by ranma on May 12, 2008 5:45 PM PDT reply actions

If

Memphis gets the first pick and Portland gets the 2nd then we would definately get Rose, if not we trade Jack and Beasley to New Jersey for Harris and a future #1 pick.

Maybe even Charlotte for Felton, and pieces.

Everytime Raef checks into a game, an angel gets its wings.

by Outlaw is Rejector on May 12, 2008 6:12 PM PDT reply actions

Jack and Beasley for Harris & Future #1?

At first thought, I would say no way. But then I realized that it might take Beasley a year or two to mature in the NBA. And without Haris, New Jersey does not do well. But still, is Beasley worth Harris and a high lotto pick next year? I am still not so convinced.

One of Two Official Blazer's Edge Poets Laureate for the 2008-2009 Season

"Scholars have long known that fishing eventually turns men into philosophers. Unfortunately, it is almost impossible to buy decent tackle on a philosopher's salary." - Patrick McManus

by T Darkstar on May 12, 2008 6:21 PM PDT up reply actions

Agreed

It’s a risk, but we really don’t have room for Beasley anyways, and this would ‘potentially’ complete our roster… Potentially.

Everytime Raef checks into a game, an angel gets its wings.

by Outlaw is Rejector on May 12, 2008 6:26 PM PDT up reply actions

But would drafting Beasley rather mean that we wouldn’t have room for Webster, Outlaw or Frye? Would Beasley be the best 3/4 we had to put up with Aldrige and Oden?

But no matter. After we get the #1 pick, we’ll just draft Rose and end the argument.

One of Two Official Blazer's Edge Poets Laureate for the 2008-2009 Season

"Scholars have long known that fishing eventually turns men into philosophers. Unfortunately, it is almost impossible to buy decent tackle on a philosopher's salary." - Patrick McManus

by T Darkstar on May 13, 2008 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions

Draft Durant

No matter who we get in the next 12 years. Do not trade LmA. In this situation, i’d say trade the pick.

by Sabonis4Ever on May 12, 2008 6:28 PM PDT reply actions

Do what it takes to get Rose

I don’t think there’s another team in lotto that has such a no brainer on Rose… or to put it another way, whoever is number 1 is probably already seriously considering Beasley so it shouldn’t be impossible to throw in some sweeteners and get the number 1 pick.

by Gargen on May 12, 2008 10:10 PM PDT reply actions

If you get that lucky I think you have to take the gamble

We need a PG and we might need a 3 depending on how you shuffle around our current personnel. I don’t think Marty is ever going to be a legit NBA starter, at least based off what I’ve seen so far. I think if you get pick #1 or 2 you keep it and take a flyer on one of those guys.

by leeroyjenkins on May 13, 2008 11:55 AM PDT reply actions