- Joined
- Oct 5, 2008
- Messages
- 127,016
- Likes
- 147,624
- Points
- 115
but we at least have a lot of tradeable players
Sure, anyone can be traded. The question is what will we get in return.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
but we at least have a lot of tradeable players
They guy can't play. We're in what, year five? How much better is he likely to get? He looks like the same spastic marshmallow he was when he entered the league.$10 mil per year for a young mid-career 7-footer is nothing in this league. By the end of his 4 year contract, it's going to look like peanuts. GMs and coaches around the league certainly know his shortcomings as a player, but I'd bet that a lot of them are going to also see his shooting and athletic ability as indicators that maybe he can succeed in a different situation than he's been put into here in Portland.
They guy can't play. We're in what, year five? How much better is he likely to get? He looks like the same spastic marshmallow he was when he entered the league.
Massive overpay is a definition constantly changing though.The problem with "not losing assets for nothing" is that they cease to be assets as soon you massively overpay them to avoid losing them for nothing.
They guy can't play. We're in what, year five? How much better is he likely to get? He looks like the same spastic marshmallow he was when he entered the league.
The problem with "not losing assets for nothing" is that they cease to be assets as soon you massively overpay them to avoid losing them for nothing.
Eating bad contracts might be the way he moves, but that still doesn't change the fact that Meyers is a net negative asset; a pile of crap that has to be dumped, and not a net positive asset that other teams find desirable, ergo an "albatross."Here's a list of mid-level centers and their salaries:
![]()
Most of those guys are old and likely to be out of the league in 3-4 years. I'm not saying that Meyers alone is going to get much value in return. I think that the Blazers will have to eat someone else's bad contract and that Meyers will work as filler to make salaries match.
Eating bad contracts might be the way he moves, but that still doesn't change the fact that Meyers is a net negative asset; a pile of crap that has to be dumped, and not a net positive asset that other teams find desirable, ergo an "albatross."
Eating bad contracts might be the way he moves, but that still doesn't change the fact that Meyers is a net negative asset; a pile of crap that has to be dumped, and not a net positive asset that other teams find desirable, ergo an "albatross."
$10 mil per year for a young mid-career 7-footer is nothing in this league. By the end of his 4 year contract, it's going to look like peanuts. GMs and coaches around the league certainly know his shortcomings as a player, but I'd bet that a lot of them are going to also see his shooting and athletic ability as indicators that maybe he can succeed in a different situation than he's been put into here in Portland.
Even for one that averages 16 minutes per game? His salary is in the top 20th percentile in the league, so no, it's not "nothing." Where are you getting your sense of perspective on this?
Bigs get paid. Thats what it is.Even for one that averages 16 minutes per game? His salary is in the top 20th percentile in the league, so no, it's not "nothing." Where are you getting your sense of perspective on this?
I can see keeping our players but our big FA signing is a bench player is a just sad.
Even for one that averages 16 minutes per game? His salary is in the top 20th percentile in the league, so no, it's not "nothing." Where are you getting your sense of perspective on this?
Lol at the people that shit all over those of us that even questioned the signing.I can see keeping our players but our big FA signing is a bench player is a just sad.
Which one is overpayed? Leonard is getting paid like a bench player. Crabbe is overpayed only because of his current role, but there are teams out there that would have no issue making him a starter where his contract would look standard. Harkless is a steal. So who's overpayed again?
Massive overpay is a definition constantly changing though.
That's true, but the players themselves are going to have to improve quite a bit before even changing salary landscape makes these deals (Crabbe/Leonard/Turner) decent, in my opinion.

At least not yet. Hear me out
- He knew he needed a rim protector. He pursued Whiteside, who would've been perfect. He chose to stay in Miami (MIAMI) for more money. Can't blame Olshey for that.
- After Whiteside was off the board, and Parsons passed, he signed Turner. He could've overplayed for a big man like Mozgov and Biyombo, but chose to go with Turner, knowing he's a better player than both those guys, and thus more of an asset. You think Turner is untradeable? Who the hell would want Biyombo?
- He kept all of his own players instead of letting them go for nothing. Is Crabbe overpayed? Maybe. Probably. Would he be overpayed if he were a starter? Not with the way the NBA is headed. Is he starter material? Stats say he is. Not only is he starter material, Portland plays better the more minutes and shot attempts he gets. Harkless is a bargain and Leonards contract is that of a bench player. All three are moveable assets despite what some may think.
- He made a relatively safe, short term gamble on Ezeli. It didn't work out, but now his contract becomes another moveable asset.
- We still need a rim protector but the trade market is shaping up to be A LOT better than the free agent market after the Whitesides went off the table. It's looking like a buyers market. Olshey has ammo. He could even be in the conversation for someone like Cousins if he wanted to be, especially if the Kings hold onto him until the offseason.
In summary, I guess what I'm trying to say is I don't believe Olshey kept this group together because he believed that it's a championship contender, but rather because he didn't want to lose his assets for nothing, and he didn't want to overpay for centers just because he needed one. He chose the patient route. The puzzle isn't finished. Let's see what it looks like when it is, and then we can call for his dumb stupid shit for brains head. Thank you.
I swear if I see one more person say Crabbe is just a spot up shooter like it's somehow a negative..I swear.
And by the way he's shown flashes of more. Was excellent in pick and roll with Ed Davis last year. Teams will see that there's more in Crabbes toolbox than what he's shown. They wouldn't be trading for what he is, but what he can become in their respective system. Brooklyn was going to make him a featured scorer. It's naive to think they're the only ones who feel that way.
I swear if I see one more person say Crabbe is just a spot up shooter like it's somehow a negative..I swear.
And by the way he's shown flashes of more. Was excellent in pick and roll with Ed Davis last year. Teams will see that there's more in Crabbes toolbox than what he's shown. They wouldn't be trading for what he is, but what he can become in their respective system. Brooklyn was going to make him a featured scorer. It's naive to think they're the only ones who feel that way.
much of our "ammo" that was purchased this past summer are blanksLetting some of them go would have been unpopular, but a better long-term strategy than saddling the team with albatross contracts on players that aren't producting (Meyers I'm looking at you). Outside of that, sign-and-trades might have been worked out, but right now the supposed "ammo" we've "stockpiled" is in pretty short supply.
An offseason of signing Cole Aldrich and retaining only Harkless and Henderson would arguably have this team significantly better than it presently is, and most certainly at a lower price tag.Regardless of how well or poorly the guys that were re-signed are performing, if NO had let them walk, we'd have much worse players in their place.
We'd have a vet minimum salary guy in Leonard's spot, because that's all the money NO would have had to spend to replace him. Same goes for all the rest. NO could re-sign our guys because of Bird exceptions.
NO had $25M or so in cap space and nobody but Turner seemed to want to take it.
