Trade Grant to Portland for Mil first done deal

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
RR7 said:
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.
Click to expand...

He still put up good numbers playing out of position. I refuse to believe that the guy had no value around the league on a reasonable contract for a guy who could start at shooting guard for a lot of teams.
 
B-Roy said:
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?
Click to expand...
We would have got more back. I don't think that's even a question. Grant on an expiring contract does not have the value of a lottery pick, especially when Detroit was trying to clear salary.
 
Idog1976 said:
Wow! Ok we can grab Sochan, Sharpe, Murray, Daniels or Duren at 7.

This is freaking huge. Best move by Cronin EASILY and actually gives me a surge of hope!!!!
Click to expand...
I like finding a way to get Hayward from CHO for #13 or #15, then drafting either Sochan/Daniels at #7 and Duren at #13 or #15

Then start Nas/Grant at forward, then bring in Hayward and whichever of Sochan/Daniels we get at backup forward. Hart and Hayward could both potentially be 6MOY candidates, and the defense does get a lot better.

Relieving news that Grant only cost the MIL pick.
 


Yeah I guess you’re right tubby, they didn’t go down that path lolol
 
  • Like
Reactions: RR7
Idog1976 said:
Yes, yes it does. I would have done that trade without a second thought. I don’t care HOW he got it done, but he got it done. Now draft Murray, Sharpe, Daniels, Duren or Sochan in that order if available. Although Im tempted to bump Sochan a bit. I wish we could somehow get two of those guys like Sochan and Duren if we trades for Charlotte’s picks and then got lucky as they fell to us. A guy can dream!!!
Click to expand...
Hayward makes for a nice supercharged sixth man, and you can draft a guy with #13.
 
Natebishop3 said:
He still put up good numbers playing out of position. I refuse to believe that the guy had no value around the league on a reasonable contract for a guy who could start at shooting guard for a lot of teams.
Click to expand...
You're entitled to refuse to believe anything you want. He's a very good shooter, I liked his willingness to get out and run. That's about it. He could start. As an undersized 2. And those teams aren't likely any good. And not beating down the doors to pay good value for him on that deal. We got a recent 1st round pick who was only 19. That's good value for who norm is.
 
RR7 said:
You're entitled to refuse to believe anything you want. He's a very good shooter, I liked his willingness to get out and run. That's about it. He could start. As an undersized 2. And those teams aren't likely any good. And not beating down the doors to pay good value for him on that deal. We got a recent 1st round pick who was only 19. That's good value for who norm is.
Click to expand...

People around the league thought it was a very good pickup when we traded for him.

People around the league though the deal was a bargain when we re-signed him.

But magically everyone thought he was basically trash after we asked him to play out of position for a year..... I guess I don't understand.
 
riverman said:
This deal was part of the 2nd deal so ....there's that...I think he won this trade and had to do the first trade....he was interim then
Click to expand...

It's connected to the second deal because the pick in that deal didn't convey and we got the Milwaukee pick instead. It makes that deal seem less bad, but it still wasn't a great deal. The Pelicans really wanted CJ, and we didn't even dangle him a bit and make them pay.

It's great the Milwaukee pick netted us Grant. I'm glad for that. I think he will fit well with what Billups is doing and we got him for nothing practically.

You could say it's somewhat connected to the first deal too in that the Clippers deal gave us the space to be the only team to be able to take Grant without returning players to match salary. It was still a shit trade through. We could have traded them for some assets like picks ...some people say Keon is like getting a 1st from them.

I don't solely blame Cronin for the Clipper trade. I know he was pressured by Kolde and Jody to get under the luxury.

We had two weeks to do it, and could have gotten better deals. It was really a favor to the Clippers. One that will likely not be equally repaid.

Look, in a nutshell Cronin has just started as GM. Three trades have happened with him as GM/Interim GM. Objectively two were crap, but kind of sorta look better now...a little....maybe. This one has the potential to be very good.

That said, it's not really enough to grade him on yet. We haven't seen his vision come to fruition yet. I don't think we were on Olshey's ass already a few months after becoming GM. We gave him time and then threw his ass under the bus that was being valet parked.

So for those arguing Cronin is good or bad at this point. It's too soon either way.
 
Driew said:
I don't get the OG obsession....he's played in 43 and 48 games the last two seasons. Rather take a swing on someone with the #7 pick then hold my breath all season hoping OG doesn't get hurt again.
Click to expand...
Yup, I’m honestly more inclined to take Hayward’s contract for #13 than to trade for OG. Nas has shown enough flashes that I would be on board with starting him at SF next to Grant. You just hope Nas turns into OG eventually.

While Nas is still playing out the year for an extension, Hayward can remain on the team as a high scoring sixth man. The following year, he is an expiring contract that would be intriguing to a team needing cap space for 2024.
 
We have to remember that Nurk is a free agent.
 
julius said:
We have to remember that Nurk is a free agent.
Click to expand...

The Blazers have already come to a deal with him. It's why they tested him the remainder of the season. We here as soon as the moratorium ends, that he's been re-signed...probably for a team friendly deal.
 
Chris Craig said:
It's connected to the second deal because the pick in that deal didn't convey and we got the Milwaukee pick instead. It makes that deal seem less bad, but it still wasn't a great deal. The Pelicans really wanted CJ, and we didn't even dangle him a bit and make them pay.

It's great the Milwaukee pick netted us Grant. I'm glad for that. I think he will fit well with what Billups is doing and we got him for nothing practically.

You could say it's somewhat connected to the first deal too in that the Clippers deal gave us the space to be the only team to be able to take Grant without returning players to match salary. It was still a shit trade through. We could have traded them for some assets like picks ...some people say Keon is like getting a 1st from them.

I don't solely blame Cronin for the Clipper trade. I know he was pressured by Kolde and Jody to get under the luxury.

We had two weeks to do it, and could have gotten better deals. It was really a favor to the Clippers. One that will likely not be equally repaid.

Look, in a nutshell Cronin has just started as GM. Three trades have happened with him as GM/Interim GM. Objectively two were crap, but kind of sorta look better now...a little....maybe. This one has the potential to be very good.

That said, it's not really enough to grade him on yet. We haven't seen his vision come to fruition yet. I don't think we were on Olshey's ass already a few months after becoming GM. We gave him time and then threw his ass under the bus that was being valet parked.

So for those arguing Cronin is good or bad at this point. It's too soon either way.
Click to expand...

Hence my comment about a hasty fire cronin thread that seemed to ruffle feathers. :dunno:
 
Scalma said:
he doesn’t make for a nice anything besides a nice fat albatross contract.
Click to expand...
No doubt it’s a albatross lol. But when he plays, he’s still very productive, 16ppg and almost 20ppg the year before that.

I guess it all depends on if you feel like Nas can start next to Grant. Personally, I would want to see him starting over trading #7 for OG.

If your bench was, say,
Hart/Hayward/Watford + #7 and #13 off the bench, then I’m happy to overpay him for a year while Nas is still on the last his rookie contract, then trade him next year if need be when he only has one year $30m on his deal. I feel like it would be a win now move that doesn’t hurt the future.

I’ll ask you, do you think Nas could start for us next year if we are a contending team?
 
Chris Craig said:
The Blazers have already come to a deal with him. It's why they tested him the remainder of the season. We here as soon as the moratorium ends, that he's been re-signed...probably for a team friendly deal.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but we have to remember, he's a free agent and he can't be traded.
 
BankTeller said:
I’ll ask you, do you think Nas could start for us next year if we are a contending team?
Click to expand...

good question. I’d say if Nas were to stay healthy, yes. Pretty big if though. But yeah I still believe in him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top