Teams aren't bad by accident; Case study: Trailblazers

[beasted]

This team was a yearly middle to upper middle playoff team through most of the 2010s. After lucking into Lillard and CJ, the team made poor decision after poor decision in building around them.

I won't dwell on the past decisions. Let's level set leading up to the Lillard trade:

Bad decision #1:
They had a middling roster, were a tax team, and had been in the lottery back to back seasons. Instead of coming to Dame and proposing a trade that would leave all parties on good terms (see: RWB, Beal, etc.) instead they played this stupid game of pretending they were retooling around him by drafting a PG.

Bad decision #2:
Instead of using the Miami Heat's desire to satisfy Jimmy heading up to a contract extension they fumbled and took a stupid yield of bad contracts. Unlike for example how LAC owned the Thunder's desperation, or the Texans owned the Brown's desperation for "their guy", they mismanaged the deal to have this current net value of the trade be:

Out:
Damian Lillard - 10x allstar and coming off a career scoring year

Jusuf Nurkic - Servicable starter who is slightly overpaid

In:
DeAndre Ayton - low IQ big on an insanely bloated value contract

Robert Williams - a player unable to play alongside the aforementioned player received back, who is also extremely injury prone and thus a bad contract.

Deni Avdija - solid rotational wing with some possible upside, but is unlikely to be an allstar. He could just as easily fall into oblivion that last year was a fluke season offensively, and just settles into a rotational defensive forward.

And most importantly... ONE first round draft pick.

Yes, you read that right. They will only receive 1 single first round pick given what they traded for Deni,and that all of the remaining picks amount to swaps (very likely Blazers continue to be a worse team than both the Celtics and Bucks).

If you sat any NBA fan down a year ago and said Damian Lillard will be traded for 2 bad salary dumps, Avdija and a likely non-lottery pick, everyone would have laughed in your face. But there's a group of dickheads in the Portland front office high-fiving each other and grinning ear to ear thinking they're going to be the Best in the West within 5 years.

This is the textbook ineptitude of a middling franchise who will complain during the next CBA negotiations to receive higher revenue sharing.

[Real Men Wear Green]

If he can't play then Williams is a bad contract but if he can play 13 mil per year is an excellent contract and a team close to contending or close to the playoffs will be willing to roll the dice if he can average 10, 8 and 2 in the first few games of the year. The knicks and Lakers would both love to have the healthy version (everyone would). Clearly can't guarantee his health but the Lakers have to be desperate to capitalize on the last year or two for James. At some point they will have to roll the dice to be more than a play-in team. They would be willing to give up something for Williams if he can just have a stretch where he plays 20 out of 25 games. Relatively low risk (distant future first or second round pick), high reward.

[beasted]

If he can't play then Williams is a bad contract but if he can play 13 mil per year is an excellent contract.

This is not fantasy basketball, we have to evaluate based on reality, not some wishful hypothetical. It's unrealistic to believe he will be healthy when he has only played 215 out of 472 games (45%). The problem is that you still have to payout the full salary even when he plays 37 games per year on average over his career. In that context, if we measured out his contract pay based on availability, he's actually paid $28.7M annually which is a bad contract.

This isn't some biased 2 year sample like a Ben Simmons. This is what he's done over every year of his 6 year career. I'm going to just say it now, there's no way a team gives up a distant first for him unless they are salary dumping an even worse contract on the Blazers.

[Real Men Wear Green]

He needs to show some sign that he might be able to give 60 games and a playoff run. I won't pretend that it's even a good bet but it's possible.

[beasted]

Even if we adjusted for rookie non-rotation play and erased his rookie season, he's still only available 49% BTW.

[beasted]

He needs to show some sign that he might be able to give 60 games and a playoff run. I won't pretend that it's even a good bet but it's possible.

When Drummond is available for 79 games and gives 8.4 PPG / 9.0 REB, Wood 7 and 5, both for the minimum, why are we taking such risks unless you're dumping a similarly bad contract?

[Real Men Wear Green]

When Drummond is available for 79 games and gives 8.4 PPG / 9.0 REB, Wood 7 and 5, both for the minimum, why are we taking such risks unless you're dumping a similarly bad contract?

Because before he got hurt in 2022 he had the Celtics playing the best ball of any team in the league. He was having impact on a Been Wallace level defensively. Andre Drummond will get abused if he has to switch onto a guard. Rob Williams can stay in front of anyone. A true shame that he hasn't been able to stay healthy. He would absolutely have been a star based on defensive impact.

[beasted]

Because before he got hurt in 2022 he had the Celtics playing the best ball of any team in the league. He was having impact on a Been Wallace level defensively. Andre Drummond will get abused if he has to switch onto a guard. Rob Williams can stay in front of anyone. A true shame that he hasn't been able to stay healthy. He would absolutely have been a star based on defensive impact.

Your team was 3rd defensively without RW last season. Is it possible you're attributing too high of an impact to one guy who is a component of a system? A bit too optimistic to compare him to a 4x DPOY don't you think?

RW is a fine player when he's healthy, which is never. Which makes his contract a net negative. To answer your original reply directly, sure, I could see Gabe Vincent and some 2nds for RW. Vincent, this far, has a terrible contact, too. Possibly Vanderbilt straight up because RW would yield much less years left. But the idea that Timelord holds value that will be easily flippable amongst a long list of suitors is simply unrealistic.

So, as far as the topic, it's fair to suggest he's part of a bad yield for a superstar.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Your team was 3rd defensively without RW last season. Is it possible you're attributing too high of an impact to one guy who is a component of a system? A bit too optimistic to compare him to a 4x DPOY don't you think? Porzingis is very good at protecting the rim and the team doesn't play bad defenders. Bread Stevens made sure he was well-replaced. That doesn't change the fact that his defense was major. He was All-D that year even though he only played 61 games, was absolutely the team's best defender when he was out there. He turned a good team into the best team.


RW is a fine player when he's healthy, which is never. Which makes his contract a net negative. To answer your original reply directly, sure, I could see Gabe Vincent and some 2nds for RW. Vincent, this far, has a terrible contact, too. Possibly Vanderbilt straight up because RW would yield much less years left. But the idea that Timelord holds value that will be easily flippable amongst a long list of suitors is simply unrealistic.

So, as far as the topic, it's fair to suggest he's part of a bad yield for a superstar.I don't deny that he has to play for that contract to have value which is why I'm saying is he can put together a healthy stretch of games a team that badly wants to teach a higher level could gamble a lesser asset to get him.

[iamgine]

What's really the use of trading Lillard for 5 first rd picks?

[beasted]

Porzingis is very good at protecting the rim and the team doesn't play bad defenders. Bread Stevens made sure he was well-replaced. That doesn't change the fact that his defense was major. He was All-D that year even though he only played 61 games, was absolutely the team's best defender when he was out there. He turned a good team into the best team.

I don't deny that he has to play for that contract to have value which is why I'm saying is he can put together a healthy stretch of games a team that badly wants to teach a higher level could gamble a lesser asset to get him.

It also comes into thought how much opportunity RW will even get honestly. They just drafted a Center who can only play Center 7th overall, and are paying another Center who can only play Center the max.

Is Timelord able to play the 4? Will he even be healthy coming off the most significant injury of his career?

[beasted]

Porzingis is very good at protecting the rim and the team doesn't play bad defenders. Bread Stevens made sure he was well-replaced. That doesn't change the fact that his defense was major. He was All-D that year even though he only played 61 games, was absolutely the team's best defender when he was out there. He turned a good team into the best team.

I don't deny that he has to play for that contract to have value which is why I'm saying is he can put together a healthy stretch of games a team that badly wants to teach a higher level could gamble a lesser asset to get him.

It also comes into thought how much opportunity RW will even get honestly. They just drafted a Center who can only play Center 7th overall, and are paying another Center who can only play Center the max.

Is Timelord able to play the 4? Will he even be healthy coming off the most significant injury of his career?

It's incompetent to have this much invested into one position.

[Real Men Wear Green]

It also comes into thought how much opportunity RW will even get honestly. They just drafted a Center who can only play Center 7th overall, and are paying another Center who can only play Center the max.

Is Timelord able to play the 4? Will he even be healthy coming off the most significant injury of his career?

It's incompetent to have this much invested into one position.

Team construction isn't important when you're tanking. What is important is that they maximize the assets that they have, which they may not be doing. I'm not arguing either way about your overall point just defending Williams.

[tontoz]

When teams are bad for a long time (like the wizards :() it is always bad management.

[beasted]

Team construction isn't important when you're tanking. What is important is that they maximize the assets that they have, which they may not be doing. I'm not arguing either way about your overall point just defending Williams.

How do you maximize an asset who can't get playing time or is forced to play out of position?

I get it. A rebuilding team should always focus on getting the best players available regardless of position, but there is a limit.

We saw the theoretical limit years ago with Philly obsessed with drafting Centers. At some point it will cost you on the return of those assets when it's time to trade him and other teams know this guy is rotting on your bench and they will need to allow him to get into shape to even have a meaningful impact on a playoff rotation.

[Real Men Wear Green]

How do you maximize an asset who can't get playing time or is forced to play out of position?

I get it. A rebuilding team should always focus on getting the best players available regardless of position, but there is a limit.

We saw the theoretical limit years ago with Philly obsessed with drafting Centers. At some point it will cost you on the return of those assets when it's time to trade him and other teams know this guy is rotting on your bench and they will need to allow him to get into shape to even have a meaningful impact on a playoff rotation.
Sooner or later they will be trading a big or two. I'm not saying that I know the trade will be good, maybe it won't, but if the Lakers or Knicks are desperate enough they could overpay.