Trade Grant to Portland for Mil first done deal

[Hoopguru]

Over the last several years we've not had any consistency at the forward position. JerG gives us a guy that can score down low. We never got that from RoCo or Powell.

 

[Natebishop3]

with prime giannis i dont see the pick being that great

In all likelihood you're right. The pick will probably be crap.

But....

The Lakers pick this year is proof that things can go horribly wrong for really good teams. Another example is the Clippers trading their pick for Baron Davis and then it ended up being the #1 pick and Cleveland got Kyrie. Now, this pick is protected top 4, but it CAN happen.

 

[Natebishop3]

The Clipper trade had to happen. It wasn't a question of it being a good trade.

Why?

And more important, why did it have to happen a week before the deadline?

 

[Labinot41]

i cant stop thinking about the pelicans pick, imagine us having picks 7 & 15 after getting grant

we could make another big move and draft someone

We wouldn't have the 15th pick after the Grant trade.

 

[Mr. Robot]

I'm failing to see the risk in trading a likely mid 20s pick for help in a position of need.

youre short sighted

point is cronin is willing to make trades and not playing it safe

neil olshey would never do it, wed still have cj mccollum, powell & roco

 

[Wade Garrett]

This was the only way I wanted Grant.
Looks like My Guy done good.
Again.

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

I said they were getting Grant
I said there were whispers about a deal that wasn’t horrible

YOU HAVE TO PAY ATTENTION

I mean this with all due respect, really... but everyone and their grandma has been saying that we were getting Grant for the past several months, so I stopped paying attention.

Glad to see it finally happened (since the price was reasonable).

 

[Natebishop3]

i cant stop thinking about the pelicans pick, imagine us having picks 7 & 15 after getting grant

we could make another big move and draft someone

I don't think we are able to keep that pick. We still sent out a first rounder.

 

[Mr. Robot]

We wouldn't have the 15th pick after the Grant trade.

care to explain

 

[HansenYang]

i cant stop thinking about the pelicans pick, imagine us having picks 7 & 15 after getting grant

we could make another big move and draft someone

That 'Pelicans pick' is what we traded to Detroit for Grant.
If we get the Pels pick, we don't have the Bucks '25 pick to trade.... It was one or the other.

 

[Phatguysrule]

These guys want to throw him a parade for not grossly losing a trade. The trade is solid, but come on... I think people are just happy we didn't trade the 7th after that was the expectation for so long.

No, I'm happy we have made changes, have a better balanced roster, and a brighter future. And I'm happy our GM might actually be decent.

 

[oldmangrouch]

No one is talking parade. I just read the thread. Cant some of us just be happy with a good trade?

No one is denouncing this as a bad trade...but some of us see it as an essentially meaningless trade.

 

[illmatic99]

care to explain

The pick we got back from NO was either their own OR the MIL pick. If NO made the playoffs, we'd get the MIL pick, and the NO pick would go to Charlotte. We could never have both, it was one or the other.

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

That 'Pelicans pick' is what we traded to Detroit for Grant.
If we get the Pels pick, we don't have the Bucks '25 pick to trade.... It was one or the other.

This.

 

[Natebishop3]

No, I'm happy we have made changes, have a better balanced roster, and a brighter future. And I'm happy our GM might actually be decent.

You didn't come in and call people out with your first post, correct?

 

[Chris Craig]

Absolutely, in the end, it didn't make any difference. Actually it was good, because it doesn't hurt to trade a 25 Bucks 1st than a 13th pick in this draft. Except Giannis leaves Milwaukee and the Bucks are awful in 2025, but thats extremely unlikely.

If that's true, it will likely be a top 4 anyway and the Blazers wouldn't get it.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Why?

And more important, why did it have to happen a week before the deadline?

Because that's how it worked out. We don't get to know the details. The main thing is that we end up better balanced with a brighter future. Ideally with at least a punchers chance of winning a title.

 

[Phatguysrule]

You didn't come in and call people out with your first post, correct?

Heh heh... Maybe I should have.

J/K. I'm just happy we have possibly our best forward since Aldridge and still have the #7

 

[Natebishop3]

Because that's how it worked out. We don't get to know the details. The main thing is that we end up better balanced with a brighter future. Ideally with at least a punchers chance of winning a title.

We don't have this yet.

We are still very very low on assets and depth. We traded Norm and RoCo and we really didn't get back much in the way of assets. Those are two starters and we didn't get a starter back. Norm wasn't a bad contract and RoCo was an expiring. I'm not sure why we needed to make that deal and I'm really not sure why he didn't wait until closer to the deadline.

 

[Scalma]

That 'Pelicans pick' is what we traded to Detroit for Grant.
If we get the Pels pick, we don't have the Bucks '25 pick to trade.... It was one or the other.

we probably would’ve traded that pelicans pick for Grant anyway.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

not unless it’s a trade (which these dorks conveniently never actually specify) that instantly makes Portland a contender

I get and agree with this, however I'm pretty sure if any whale penises created an account, the mods would have them banned.

 

[Chris Craig]

But I thought Cronin was an idiot?

He made one good trade out of three so far.

 

[Tince]

Why?

And more important, why did it have to happen a week before the deadline?

Deals can get worse closer to the deadline, so maybe he wait too long? Or maybe he should've waited until right before the 2025 draft to make sure we knew where the Milwaukee pick was going to land and Dame was 35?

Or maybe, we should just tip our cap and say, "good trade."

 

[Mr. Robot]

ahh, thanks guys for the explanation, didnt think about it really

it would still be better to get 15 pick, but this works too

 

[Chris Craig]

Nice move by Joe we still got our 3 picks this year.

The 36 is switched for the 46 but yeah

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

No one is denouncing this as a bad trade...but some of us see it as an essentially meaningless trade.

I fail to see how balancing the roster is meaningless? What would it take to be meaningful for you? And still be realistic?

 

[RR7]

We don't have this yet.

We are still very very low on assets and depth. We traded Norm and RoCo and we really didn't get back much in the way of assets. Those are two starters and we didn't get a starter back. Norm wasn't a bad contract and RoCo was an expiring. I'm not sure why we needed to make that deal and I'm really not sure why he didn't wait until closer to the deadline.

Norm was a mediocre defender touted as a good one. He's an undersized SG. And he is paid 18 a year. Since he wouldn't start over Ant, and should have never started at SF. Then yes, 18 a year for a bench player is a bad deal.

 

[B-Roy]

So if we had the Pels pick instead (#12). Do we just trade that straight up for Grant without all the additional seconds? Or do we get some stuff back too?

 

[Phatguysrule]

We don't have this yet.

We don't. But we're on the way.

 

[Driew]