Athletic article on Cronin

[Predator]

If he even suggests trading 7 for Grant he should be fired, on the spot.

 

[Tince]

Oh, please. Let’s just admit that Cronin gambled and lost. It was a dumb trade and he came out looking dumb. Period. The guy doesn’t know how to do deals.

They wouldn't call it gambling if you always won, would they?

If you were one of the guys who got excited about the super low risk forward swap outs over the last 4 years, then I can understand why you would not be happy with a new GM taking a risk. Nothing wrong with that at all. I liked making the playoffs and wasn't near as upset others were with our lack of contending moves. I was simply pointing out your flawed logic.

 

[Tince]

If he even suggests trading 7 for Grant he should be fired, on the spot.

Straight up, that would be a bad trade, no doubt. Easily would be his worst move of the 2 he's already made, plus that one.

 

[Predator]

Do people not realize we got an “immediate” impact rookie at #6 who might be the best Blazer of all time when it’s all said and done?

Trading the 7th pick for Jerami Grant would be so, so dumb.

 

[blazerkor]

They wouldn't call it gambling if you always won, would they?

If you were one of the guys who got excited about the super low risk forward swap outs over the last 4 years, then I can understand why you would not be happy with a new GM taking a risk. Nothing wrong with that at all. I liked making the playoffs and wasn't near as upset others were with our lack of contending moves. I was simply pointing out your flawed logic.

The problem is it wasn't like he missed swinging for the fences he made a low reward, high risk move with good odds that went against the odds. That's just not something I can be cool with. If he was trying to knock it out of the park and missed, it would still be bad but I'd understand but he struck out trying to lay down a bunt when we needed at least an extra base hit.

 

[wizenheimer]

The problem is it wasn't like he missed swinging for the fences he made a low reward, high risk move with good odds that went against the odds.

and he traded a low-reward/bloated-salary player for that pick, so it was a good swap

and you're all over the place. If that draft pick was really a "low-reward" you wouldn't be so pissed off about losing it

 

[blazerkor]

and he traded a low-reward/bloated-salary player for that pick, so it was a good swap

and you're all over the place. If that draft pick was really a "low-reward" you wouldn't be so pissed off about losing it

Sorry but I think you know where I'm at on all of this and it's not all over the place. I think that for what we sent out we aimed to get a little less than fair value but close, what we ended up with when we got unlucky was far lower than fair value. So yeah that has me thinking that Croinin did a shitty job instead of the mediocre one he tried to do.

 

[Tince]

The problem is it wasn't like he missed swinging for the fences he made a low reward, high risk move with good odds that went against the odds. That's just not something I can be cool with. If he was trying to knock it out of the park and missed, it would still be bad but I'd understand but he struck out trying to lay down a bunt when we needed at least an extra base hit.

You think the odds of the NOPs making the playoffs were high at the time? I don't recall that being the narrative back then, nor did the analytics ever suggest they were likely to make the playoffs until the 2nd half of the 2nd play-in game. They were dogs even after PG13 was ruled out. Not sure how you can consider the NOP pick not conveying a high risk, low reward move.

In a more general discussion we can talk about the value (or lack there of) for CJs and Norm's contracts, but we were talking about the probabilty of the NOP pick becoming ours, so I'm trying to stay away from that topic of CJ's market.

I would be surprised if the Blazers front office thought getting out of $80m worth of salary was a strike-out at all. Though it's hard to grade the trade until the TPE and pick is conveyed. There is a chance I'll grade it an F, but it's without a doubt an Incomplete grade right now. If forced to grade it, I'd say C- at this point.

You don't get to make a long history of overpriced signings and pissing away 1st round draft picks without paying a price at some point. Cronin was in the front office during the signings, so I give him minor blame for that as well. Though it seems like he really wanted out of many of Olshey's deals once he was in control.

 

[blazerkor]

You think the odds of the NOPs making the playoffs were high at the time? I don't recall that being the narrative back then, nor did the analytics ever suggest they were likely to make the playoffs until the 2nd half of the 2nd play-in game. They were dogs even after PG13 was ruled out. Not sure how you can consider the NOP pick not conveying a high risk, low reward move.

In a more general discussion we can talk about the value (or lack there of) for CJs and Norm's contracts, but we were talking about the probabilty of the NOP pick becoming ours, so I'm trying to stay away from that topic of CJ's market.

I would be surprised if the Blazers front office thought getting out of $80m worth of salary was a strike-out at all. Though it's hard to grade the trade until the TPE and pick is conveyed. There is a chance I'll grade it an F, but it's without a doubt an Incomplete grade right now. If forced to grade it, I'd say C- at this point.

You don't get to make a long history of overpriced signings and pissing away 1st round draft picks without paying a price at some point. Cronin was in the front office during the signings, so I give him minor blame for that as well. Though it seems like he really wanted out of many of Olshey's deals once he was in control.

Sorry I didn't explain that well. I would be cooler with something that was medium risk, high reward or low risk, medium reward but this was low risk, neutral reward that became low risk, negative when the pick went from a late lotto pick this year to a pick three years later from the team with the best player in the game who is still 27 and will be under contract the season that will determine that pick.

It's just a huge drop in value when I didn't think the value was that good to begin with. When we were trading our second and probably fifth best players on a playoff team for the fourth best player on a lotto team and the pick that took that turn. It was a neutral to slightly negative trade if the Pelicans 2022 first round pick would have conveyed and it's a fucking terrible trade now that it's the Bucks 2025 first round pick.

This isn't a hard concept to understand. Cronin took a risk but the risk wasn't to make some kind of monumental gain, the risk was to get back to close to net even. The risk failed and we went from close to net even to a very negative result. It's just a big failure and it's not a big failure that opened up all kinds of cap room because in order to do that we have to let valuable players go. If we keep the players then we traded CJ and Larry for Hart and a pick when Dame will be close to his decline and will likely be very late in the first round. So there is no cap space, there is no draft capital to make the TPE valuable, it's just CJ and Larry for Hart and the Bucks 2025 first. For me that's inexcusable especially when coupled with Powell and Covington for Keon and avoiding the repeater tax.

I hope Cronin is an alchemist and can turn chicken shit into chicken salad. I really want us to utilize the pick we got from tanking, the TPE and the Bucks 2025 pick to upgrade both starting forward spots. If that happens then I'll gladly say that Cronin got unlucky but he had a backup plan that helped the team recover. If not I'll be fucking pissed. I don't think my reaction is in any way illogical but I do think people bright siding it like Cronin had no choice but to take a risk with no actual reward an no actual backup to make things even is very illogical.

 

[wizenheimer]

Sorry but I think you know where I'm at on all of this and it's not all over the place. I think that for what we sent out we aimed to get a little less than fair value but close, what we ended up with when we got unlucky was far lower than fair value. So yeah that has me thinking that Croinin did a shitty job instead of the mediocre one he tried to do.

what I saw you do was explicitly frame the Pels trade as: "low reward, high risk"

c'mon man...that's just false. We can debate the actual level of 'reward', but a 9-11 pick, Louzada, 21M TPE, 3.3M TPE and 75M in salary relief for CJ & and injured (again) Nance is not a 'low' reward by any realistic gauge.

the bigger issue is calling the risk high. We 'knew' at the time of the trade there was a much better than even chance that pick would convey. What were the odds at the time? 80%? That's actually low risk, not high risk, and it took a nearly perfect storm of bad luck to screw the Blazers out of that pick

I know you think Cronin sucks as a GM. That's fine. But framing that trade as low-reward/high-risk is not a logical argument

 

[Phatguysrule]

Sorry but I think you know where I'm at on all of this and it's not all over the place. I think that for what we sent out we aimed to get a little less than fair value but close, what we ended up with when we got unlucky was far lower than fair value. So yeah that has me thinking that Croinin did a shitty job instead of the mediocre one he tried to do.

That trade, if the pick conveyed, was by far the best trade that I've heard was legitimately discussed.

Keeping CJ very clearly was not an option, and we have no evidence of a better offer.

Seems silly to still be harping on it.