[KINGS] Comments that don't warrant their own thread (Redux)
- Thread starter Section 101
- Start date
Agreed. Wemby is too skinny and not strong enough to have an immediate impact. He’s going to need to get a lot bigger and stronger, before he becomes a real force in the league. He’s not coming into the league with a NBA body like LeBron did, it’s going to take a few years to reach his potential.
Last edited:
He is around the same weight as Mobley but with an 8 foot wingspan. I would be shocked if he isn’t an impact defender immediately. If he ends up with San Antonio he will not likely be able to turn around the team right away but in the right situation (Portland with Dame, Simons, Grant, Sharpe) or Houston (Harden? Green, Jabari, Eason plus all the trade assets like Sengun and future picks plus a ton of cap space) I could see it happening
That’s one way of doing it but you are kicking the can down the road 3 years and even then you are probably just a playoff team. Considering their loyalty to Dame the more likely scenerio would be for them to trade Sharpe and picks for a star. Dame is 32 and if he ages like Steph he has 3-5 more years of prime left. If Evan Mobley can get consideration for defensive player of the year in his second season imagine what the best prospect since Lebron can do. If you trade Sharpe for a second star and can build around those 3 plus Simons you have a real title shot. If it doesn’t work out you have Dame and the second star to sell off for picks and rebuild around Wemby.
The Blazers are hitting a tipping point. Lillard will turn 33 this offseason.
If they want to hold on to him and give him a chance to compete, they don't have a lot of options. Sharpe by himself isn't returning a 2nd star. He showed flashers to end the season, but would Toronto give up OG or Siakam for him? Would Washington trade Beal for him? I don't see it.
Sharpe plus 2 or 3 future 1sts? Maybe. So if the Blazers win the lottery and land Wemby, would it make sense to mortgage future assets to make a push with Dame for the next 2-3 years and be short FRPs when he leaves or retires and you have to build around Wembanyama?
The other part of it is that if Portland were fortunate enough to land the #1 pick, I think you give that kid as much freedom as possible his first year. Don't put playoff pressure and Dame's legacy on him. Let him make mistakes, try things he may not be ready to do yet and test his limits vs being in a Keegan Murray like role where you minimize what you do on both ends to limit mistakes and focus on immediate wins.
Do you mortgage the future to try and win now with Dame? Or do you sacrifice the present for draft capital and cap room to build around young talent?
Because the middle road of standing pat with an aging Lillard, a handful of vets like Nurkic, Grant, Winslow and trying to win games while also developing your young players is likely to end with the team doing neither.
If they want to hold on to him and give him a chance to compete, they don't have a lot of options. Sharpe by himself isn't returning a 2nd star. He showed flashers to end the season, but would Toronto give up OG or Siakam for him? Would Washington trade Beal for him? I don't see it.
Sharpe plus 2 or 3 future 1sts? Maybe. So if the Blazers win the lottery and land Wemby, would it make sense to mortgage future assets to make a push with Dame for the next 2-3 years and be short FRPs when he leaves or retires and you have to build around Wembanyama?
The other part of it is that if Portland were fortunate enough to land the #1 pick, I think you give that kid as much freedom as possible his first year. Don't put playoff pressure and Dame's legacy on him. Let him make mistakes, try things he may not be ready to do yet and test his limits vs being in a Keegan Murray like role where you minimize what you do on both ends to limit mistakes and focus on immediate wins.
Do you mortgage the future to try and win now with Dame? Or do you sacrifice the present for draft capital and cap room to build around young talent?
Because the middle road of standing pat with an aging Lillard, a handful of vets like Nurkic, Grant, Winslow and trying to win games while also developing your young players is likely to end with the team doing neither.
It comes down to how long you think Lillard has. Steph had one of his best years at 35. Nothing suggests he doesn’t have say 2 more years. Dame is pretty comparable so if he has 4 years of prime left I’m risking going for it knowing my fall back is I have to build around a generational talent a couple years down the line. To me thats a better route than trading a hall of famer in his prime so I can get picks that might help me 3 or 4 years from now.
I hope we don’t get to see any of these scenarios play out and he ends up in the eastern conference or with the Spurs
He looked pretty average in the games against the best team in France this year AC Monaco.Monaco rosters mainly the dudes that bounced around the NBA but did not stick.They made Euro league final four so it's a solid team but still something to think about.I doubt he has anywhere near the impact that Luka had in his first year
Wemby will be good if for no other reason because the current rules don’t allow much defense in the NBA. And he’s a super long athletic freak that can handle the ball.
And he’ll block shots.
The big challenge with players of his height has historically been health related. If he dodges that bullet, he should be a damned good player.
And he’ll block shots.
The big challenge with players of his height has historically been health related. If he dodges that bullet, he should be a damned good player.
Last edited:
