Can we agree that it's time...

If you want to play semantics games, “stripping the team down to the foundational players” is the same thing as “changing out the role players”. Wallace is what, the Blazers third or fourth option on any given possession? That’s the definition of a role player. Just because he makes $11 mil does not make him something more. My point is that LA, by your own admission, is someone you can build around. Everyone else is just a rotation/role player. Whatever term you use, it’s the same thing. So let’s look at the possibility of acquiring a superstar.

Here are two trades that would net us Dwight Howard (we would probably add Kurt Thomas after March 1 to make the salaries a little more even, and you can also swap Crawford for Matthews) or Deron Williams. I say “or”, because Batum is the key player in both trades (also, Deron Williams only really becomes a possibility if Howard is traded somewhere other than NJ). My question is, would you do either of those trades? I say yes in a heartbeat. So would the Blazers, IF Howard or Williams would agree to sign an extension to stay in Portland. The problem is, neither player wants to be here. Nor do other superstars. You know the problems: small market, bad weather, high income taxes. They don’t care we have a top-5 home court in the NBA. They aren’t going to sign here as FA, and no one else is available via trade.

So you either have to accept that the Blazers can win a championship with LA as their best player, or if you think they can’t then we have to commit to a re-build which means blowing it up. You have to trade everyone to acquire high lottery picks and blue-chippers. Anything in the middle is just changing out the role players, not “rebuilding”.