What a team would Blazers be were Roy and Oden health

Roy + Oden + Alridge + Batum + Lillard = 17.8 + 14.7 + 14.1 + 10.9 + 3.2 = $60.7m spent on 5 guys. And they'd still need a starting point guard and at least 2 more decent rotation guys for the bench. Even if they sell out every game, can Portland support that kind of salary?

Also don't see how Lillard breaks out playing behind Roy. And, if he did, he's leaving when his rookie contract expires anyway. A team spending $60m (probably closer to $70m by then) on a Big 4 can't pay big money to the 5th.

And, you have a phenomenon of diminishing returns. If Roy and Oden are the first 2 options, you aren't maximizing the utility of Lillard and Batum and Aldridge even when you know they're very good. There's still just one ball. Oden might be able to add 10 wins to the Bobcats by himself, and maybe just 1 win to a stacked Blazers team.

These kinds of teams always seem to fall apart. Joe Johnson ditched the over-talented Suns. James Harden ditched the over-talented Thunder. In the present landscape, I think you stop at a Big-3 to be sustainable.

 

you're assuming too far ahead....who says they would've traded for gerald wallace which would eventually net them lillard.

With Roy,Aldridge,Oden and their pay gerald wallace probably wouldn't have been acquired

and o yea we traded batum for joey dorsey and another scrub whose name i forgot

 

-They wouldn't have had the 5th pick in the draft to get Lillard

-They wouldn't have the cap space to go out and spend on Matthews & Batum

-With so many years with the same group, everyone in the league would know exactly how to scout them night after night.


They might be more of a threat in the postseason with the LMA, Roy, Oden trio, but I dont think they would be the clear favorites in the West necessarily. Still Brandon Roy was set to be the next great SG in the league before his injuries. They would have been a contender for years & years even with those 3 guys healthy alone.

 

They would too have Lillard.

Portland traded Gerald Wallace to the Nets for a Top 3 protected, 1st round pick, which turned into Lillard. Portland's pick was 11th, which they probably would not have had. They would have been in the 20s.

http://espn.go.com/new-york/nba/sto...forward-gerald-wallace-portland-trail-blazers

 

Roy is a SG and Lillard is a PG. I fail to see how that is relevant. Also Oden would not add just 1 win. He had the potential to be the best center in the league and he was fantastic defensively. He adds a lot of value through his defense alone.

Cap space is an issue though I agree.

 

Why would Portland trade Wallace for picks, if they had a healthy Roy and Oden? They would be in contention, not trying to rebuild with picks.

I'm not even sure they trade for Wallace in the first place, if Roy was healthy. They traded for him after Roy had surgery on both knees and it was widely speculated he would never be the same again. They were trying to get a big talent to help ease things on Roy, when/if he returned.

So, i highly doubt they would have still been able to draft Lillard. This thread is isn't very realistic.

 

There's probably some alternate universe where the Blazers are coming off a 55 win season, Dwight Howard is playing on the Nets (after being traded for Lillard), Nash is on the Raptors (because without Dwight in LA, he had no reason to sign there), Lowry is on the Bucks (where he was traded to instead of Toronto) and the Bobcats are all set to retire Gerald Wallace's number as the greatest and longest playing Bobcat of all time.

 

Because the Nets offered them two, 1st round picks...and an IMMEDIATE Top 3 protected #1.

You'd be a fool not to take that trade. It was regarded as a steal by Portland. So, you are saying you would have rejected two 1st round picks (one barely protected and destined to be a great pick) for Gerald Wallace.

Just because you're a playoff team does not mean you don't make trades.

 

To me, the issue isn't the Nets trading for Wallace, it's why Portland would trade for Wallace with Roy and Oden anyway. I don't think they would need to or be able to afford it.

 

You really think that trade would have developed, if they were in contention? The Nets were trading their vets and fired McMillan. Trading Wallace was a move in line with their overhaul.

And i doubt that was the first offer the Nets made. There was likely a lot of negotiating back and forth before they agreed on a deal.

Even if this unlikely scenario still played out, you still need another unlikely scenario, trading for Wallace in the first place, to also play out for this thread to make sense.

 

You guys are reaching just to say Portland wouldn't have Lillard. To make a trade all you have to do is match salaries. They didn't acquire him in FAgency. If they still had Oden (Roy was coming off his last great year), one could argue that they are more likely to trade for Wallace, not less. Contenders make trades for guys to take them over the top all the time.

 

They would of been a really dangerous team for a long time to come.

Since we are playing hypotheticals though, they would be as good as:

http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=205244

 

So, you're saying the blazers would have traded for Wallace, even with a healthy roy, because they were contenders looking for a guy to take them over the top....but then they'd turn around and trade the same guy, soon after, for a pick that likely wouldn't? The only way i think that happens is, if there is a change of direction by the team. As a top 3 protected pick, they couldn't be sure they'd get a player ready to contribute significantly right away.

 

They would have traded for Wallace. 2 years ago why wouldnt they want a team consisting of Roy/Wallace/Aldridge/Oden?? Batum was alright back in 2011. He's much better than he is now. Then the Blazers saw that Wallace wasn't as good as he used to be, saw that Batum had potential and traded for a LOTTERY pick.

The only thing that is making me not think the Blazers could have all 5 guys is cap space issues. Roy/Oden would both probably be being paid max.(15 milion both I think) Aldridge making 15 million or however much that is, then Butum getting paid his 10m. Plus Lillard's rookie salary. That's a lot going into the starting line up.

I just want to say, (and this is a bad arguement logic for me) if cap space wasn't an issue they WOULD have those 5 guys.

And if you want to be that guy who says "nah they wouldn't trade for Wallace" or "nah they wouldnt trade Wallace" then here: They COULD of had those 5 guys.

Luckily we live in a world where everything is right and that didn't happen.

 

It's easy to use that reasoning in hindsight, but Batum was already showing his potential when they traded for Wallace. It's not like his numbers improved significantly the next year and it suddenly dawned on them he was for real, in fact, he was out for 20 games that season.

I don't understand how people can say their decision making wouldn't change at all, after losing their franchise player and potentially their second best/most important player.

-Roy gets injured.
-They trade for Wallace.
- Roy comes back.
-They lose Roy again.
-They waive Roy.
-They waive Oden (On the same day they trade Wallace for the pick AND trade Camby for a pick/thabeet/Flynn)
-Extend Batum.

Looks like to me they changed directions, got rid of some more vets, and moved on looking towards the future by picking up the picks and extending Batum.

 

the nets traded for wallace bc of the hype of dwight howard wanting to play with him, nothing more. Wallace could have been on any team and that deal would have happened but the reality is portland doesn't trade for wallace in the first place with a healthy roy,aldridge,oden,batum

that's a fact

 

A lot of that is your interpretation of what he 'might' have done.

It's also true that Adam Morrison dominated at college level. He didn't run with a limp, nor look like a gimp though. However the reason he went number 1 is because getting a legit big man is so worth the gamble (signed, Olowokandi, Kwame Brown, etc).

I couldn't see Oden averaging double digit rebounds in the NBA if he didn't manage it in college. And he had no post moves, was just good up and down the court.
There's a reason Ming was good, despite athletic restrictions, and Oden isn't.

 

There is just too many could have been.

I seriously thought it will be the beginning of the new generations of Roy and Rose. And fully establishing NBA as a guard's league.

Instead we are now looking at lebron, durant, melo the spread 4 league.