Jerami Grant Extension?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
I have a bad feeling about giving this dude a ton of money.
 
The only reason to retain him is for his contract slot. Losing that will remove one of the few avenues we have of acquiring 30 mil players.

Hopefully we can get a shorter deal that's not too hard to move. But his impact towards winning cratered once his shooting regressed to the mean.

We also traded Hart so that we could pay Grant and not have a tax burden. Losing him For nothing would be a devastating blow and yet another wasted pick.
 
Graduate32 said:
No team with cap space there that is remotely more appealing than Portland really. And frankly, I don't see Portland being outbid (whether we should or not is a different question) unless something insane comes his way... and I don't really see the team (with cap space) that would do that. Would Dallas (if losing Kyrie) make that move?
Click to expand...
Does any of that impact what the Blazers pay Grant? Nobody was offering Nurk a contract and we gave him 70 million.
 
WesleyMatthews said:
Does any of that impact what the Blazers pay Grant? Nobody was offering Nurk a contract and we gave him 70 million.
Click to expand...

Probably not, no. That said, I do think it impacts the Blazers risk of losing him for nothing.

In terms of pay, I am of the mind that the Blazers and Grant have worked out a number already, and it is likely higher than we here would like. My guess is that they will let Grant spend the first bit of free agency trying to find something stronger to bring back to the Blazers to potentially match, and unless it's obscene, the Blazers will.

I will be shocked if these two things don't happen this summer: 1) Grant re-signs with the Blazers; and 2) he re-signs at a level with which we are all uncomfortable.
 
illmatic99 said:
Hopefully we can get a shorter deal that's not too hard to move. But his impact towards winning cratered once his shooting regressed to the mean.
Click to expand...

So he regressed to 50% from two and 40% from three? That is still pretty good. I don't think his shooting is the problem. But I agree it would be best if he signed a shorter contract.
 
illmatic99 said:
The only reason to retain him is for his contract slot. Losing that will remove one of the few avenues we have of acquiring 30 mil players.

Hopefully we can get a shorter deal that's not too hard to move. But his impact towards winning cratered once his shooting regressed to the mean.

We also traded Hart so that we could pay Grant and not have a tax burden. Losing him For nothing would be a devastating blow and yet another wasted pick.
Click to expand...
We traded Hart because our team sucked, he was a free agent, and sounds like very unlikely to re-sign here. We got a 1st round pick for him. That's a great trade.
 
Everyone, I think Joe has a track record now. I don't think he let's Jerami get pats the trade deadline without a handshake deal and I don't think Jerami is Carlos Boozer.

On the first day that deals can be announced we will all see that Jerami is re-signed. It will be a deal that we all think is a little too big but won't make us lose our minds. I'm expecting him to get 30M next season and for it to ramp up from there over the next 5 seasons. Something in the ball park of 5 years 170M. I am not cool with that because it's what is to be expected buy I don't approve of it.

I think Jerami is being paid market value right now at 21M. I don't think he has underperformed for that number but I don't think he has outperformed that either. So if I was in charge I would tell him he deserves a small raise every year for five years 23M first year, 25M second, 27M third 29M fourth and 31M fifth as a team option. That's like 5 years 135M. So I think Joe will overpay him by 35M but that should be expected given what happened with Ant and Nurk.

No other team can give him the fifth year and every other team has to fit him under their cap for next season. We'll get him, it won't be a team friendly deal but it won't be a deal that ruins our ability to move him if we need to, it will be a deal that makes him a much less valuable trade chip than a team friendly deal would make him and likely seen as neutral value but that seems to be what Joe does.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
So he regressed to 50% from two and 40% from three? That is still pretty good. I don't think his shooting is the problem. But I agree it would be best if he signed a shorter contract.
Click to expand...
He shot 23.7% from 3 in february.
 
MickZagger said:
Would be dumb to get in a bidding war for this guy. I think he’s more of a 4th piece on a legit contender. Not another 100mil contract to get anchored down with.
Click to expand...
There won't be a bidding war because I would almost guarantee that we've already bid against ourselves and the dude's deal will be announced the moment it can be and if 100M seems like an anchor I think that closer to 200M deal Jerami ends up with is going to make you lose it. Like I just said I think it will be 5 years and 170M which is overpaying but not so much that most of us will immediately call for Joe's job. This is all assuming that Joe can get something done that brings in someone better than Jerami to play with Dame, Jerami and Shaedon.

Should be interesting.
 
blazerkor said:
There won't be a bidding war because I would almost guarantee that we've already bid against ourselves and the dude's deal will be announced the moment it can be and if 100M seems like an anchor I think that closer to 200M deal Jerami ends up with is going to make you lose it. Like I just said I think it will be 5 years and 170M which is overpaying but not so much that most of us will immediately call for Joe's job. This is all assuming that Joe can get something done that brings in someone better than Jerami to play with Dame, Jerami and Shaedon.

Should be interesting.
Click to expand...

UghA. I will call for his job. But I’ve kinda thought he’s in over his head after several moves he made.

This is a guy who hard capped us for Gary Payton’s blowhard son
 
MickZagger said:
UghA. I will call for his job. But I’ve kinda thought he’s in over his head after several moves he made.

This is a guy who hard capped us for Gary Payton’s blowhard son
Click to expand...
That's reasonable. Joe fucked up with GP2, he bid against himself with both Ant and Nurk making them more like salary filler in a trade than wanted commodities and I think he'll do the same with Jerami.

The only way he doesn't is if he punts on draft day, uses both picks on guys we want to play with Ant and Shae, tells Dame he can't land him immediate help, Dame asks to be traded because that's the corner Joe will have pushed him into and we trade Dame. That's when we will not overpay Jerami but we might still sign and trade him.
 
As someone who is firmly in the "Blazers are likely to overpay Grant" camp, I will say that re-signing Grant for a higher-than-market value contract is still better than letting him go for nothing for a couple of reasons:

1) The player is still useful/good, and you keep the player.
2) His salary slot can be useful.
3) Overpaid players can still be moved... and still be moved to acquire positive assets. CJ is a prime example. While he may not have brought back the same value he would have if he were making $20-25 million, the Blazers certainly acquired positive assets in return in the deal. (Other examples: Gobert, Kyrie, Westbrook from Washington to LA). Overpaid, but useful players still have positive value. What you are gambling on is that they don't become Ben Simmons headcases, Russell Westbrook team cancers, and/or John Wall walking injuries, etc. ... Knock on wood, but Grant has shown no signs that this should be feared.

Assuming that re-signing Grant doesn't mean that you lose the opportunity to sign someone better or who is a better fit (and we'll have no cap flexibility regardless), we should certainly be hoping that Grant returns next year, even if he is making more than we'd like.
 
Graduate32 said:
As someone who is firmly in the "Blazers are likely to overpay Grant" camp, I will say that re-signing Grant for a higher-than-market value contract is still better than letting him go for nothing for a couple of reasons:

1) The player is still useful/good, and you keep the player.
2) His salary slot can be useful.
3) Overpaid players can still be moved... and still be moved to acquire positive assets. CJ is a prime example. While he may not have brought back the same value he would have if he were making $20-25 million, the Blazers certainly acquired positive assets in return in the deal. (Other examples: Gobert, Kyrie, Westbrook from Washington to LA). Overpaid, but useful players still have positive value. What you are gambling on is that they don't become Ben Simmons headcases, Russell Westbrook team cancers, and/or John Wall walking injuries, etc. ... Knock on wood, but Grant has shown no signs that this should be feared.

Assuming that re-signing Grant doesn't mean that you lose the opportunity to sign someone better or who is a better fit (and we'll have no cap flexibility regardless), we should certainly be hoping that Grant returns next year, even if he is making more than we'd like.
Click to expand...
If Joe punts we won't need salaries to match other salaries. We'll likely trade anyone older than Ant and Nas that has value of any kind or who can bring back an expiring contract in the stead of money owed in the future. We'll likely have cap space. After next season that is greater than what we would have in Jerami's outgoing salary. I could see a sign and trade though.
 
blazerkor said:
If Joe punts we won't need salaries to match other salaries. We'll likely trade anyone older than Ant and Nas that has value of any kind or who can bring back an expiring contract in the stead of money owed in the future. We'll likely have cap space. After next season that is greater than what we would have in Jerami's outgoing salary. I could see a sign and trade though.
Click to expand...

Yeah, if Dame's gone and "Joe punts," you immediately shift to sign-and-trade with Grant. But, if that can't be done over the summer, I still sign Grant and look to move him in February or even the following summer if necessary. I think we would be able to get return salary in a Grant trade that didn't extend any longer than the return (dead) salary that we'd receive in Dame and Nurkic trades (assuming we are rebuilding) anyway. I think Grant is still flippable for positive assets without impacting potential cap space in 2024/25. Given the historical value of Blazers cap space, I think its a gamble well worth taking. Others may disagree, of course.
 
Graduate32 said:
Yeah, if Dame's gone and "Joe punts," you immediately shift to sign-and-trade with Grant. But, if that can't be done over the summer, I still sign Grant and look to move him in February or even the following summer if necessary. I think we would be able to get return salary in a Grant trade that didn't extend any longer than the return (dead) salary that we'd receive in Dame and Nurkic trades (assuming we are rebuilding) anyway. I think Grant is still flippable for positive assets without impacting potential cap space in 2024/25. Given the historical value of Blazers cap space, I think its a gamble well worth taking. Others may disagree, of course.
Click to expand...

if there's any chance that Dame is gone Grant won't re-sign in Portland
 
wizenheimer said:
if there's any chance that Dame is gone Grant won't re-sign in Portland
Click to expand...

Eh, he might if the money's right... the other teams with cap space aren't any better positioned than a post-Dame Blazers team (maybe OKC? Would they be interested? Would he want to return?). Again, I could see him really valuing a sign-and-trade, of course, but if that doesn't come to fruition, he has already proven once that money and role might be a deciding factor. And the Blazers could sell him on, "listen, Jerami, we want to feature you for half a season/season, but then we can work together that gets you to a destination where you want to go and provides us with a reasonable package."
 
blazerkor said:
Everyone, I think Joe has a track record now. I don't think he let's Jerami get pats the trade deadline without a handshake deal and I don't think Jerami is Carlos Boozer.

On the first day that deals can be announced we will all see that Jerami is re-signed. It will be a deal that we all think is a little too big but won't make us lose our minds. I'm expecting him to get 30M next season and for it to ramp up from there over the next 5 seasons. Something in the ball park of 5 years 170M. I am not cool with that because it's what is to be expected buy I don't approve of it.

I think Jerami is being paid market value right now at 21M. I don't think he has underperformed for that number but I don't think he has outperformed that either. So if I was in charge I would tell him he deserves a small raise every year for five years 23M first year, 25M second, 27M third 29M fourth and 31M fifth as a team option. That's like 5 years 135M. So I think Joe will overpay him by 35M but that should be expected given what happened with Ant and Nurk.

No other team can give him the fifth year and every other team has to fit him under their cap for next season. We'll get him, it won't be a team friendly deal but it won't be a deal that ruins our ability to move him if we need to, it will be a deal that makes him a much less valuable trade chip than a team friendly deal would make him and likely seen as neutral value but that seems to be what Joe does.
Click to expand...
Signing Grant for 5 years/$170m and trading our lotto pick for someone in the same summer would suck so hard.
 
BankTeller said:
Signing Grant for 5 years/$170m and trading our lotto pick for someone in the same summer would suck so hard.
Click to expand...
If we end up with a second bonafide all star, Dame, Jerami, Shaedon and a few new role players then that summer won't suck so hard. I don't know if Joe is up to the task but we're going to find out. Either Joe will land an all star around the draft or Dame will get traded this summer and you won't have to worry about Jerami re-signing.
 
I like Grant and all but the problem is that he’s not a PF. He’s got a small forward body. Can he guard SFs? I don’t know, but I do know he can’t guard 4s or rebound like a 4

So how do you combat that?
 
Mediocre Man said:
I like Grant and all but the problem is that he’s not a PF. He’s got a small forward body. Can he guard SFs? I don’t know, but I do know he can’t guard 4s or rebound like a 4

So how do you combat that?
Click to expand...
Jerami is a wing. He does well guarding 2-4... I don't want the dude picking up the ball every fucking play (that was weird) but he's a really really solid defender one on one and a solid help defender/weakside shot blocker. The dude is slender though, so you probably want to get a banger next to him. Let's just see what happens on May 16th and June 22nd. That will tell us where this team is going and how Jerami might or might not fit in.
 
Mediocre Man said:
I like Grant and all but the problem is that he’s not a PF. He’s got a small forward body. Can he guard SFs? I don’t know, but I do know he can’t guard 4s or rebound like a 4

So how do you combat that?
Click to expand...

Yeah, he is certainly no banger. I know we are not going to get Siakam, but that is the style of forward who would fit nicely next to Grant IM. Someone thicker (230 lbs) who can attack the basket.

Of course, Watford is no Sialkam but I did want to see a few games with a lineup of Nurk, Watford, Grant, Dame, and SS.
I am guessing Grant can guard most SFs (at least the taller ones) but would struggle with the really quick ones.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
Yeah, he is certainly no banger. I know we are not going to get Siakam, but that is the style of forward who would fit nicely next to Grant IM. Someone thicker (230 lbs) who can attack the basket.

Of course, Watford is no Sialkam but I did want to see a few games with a lineup of Nurk, Watford, Grant, Dame, and SS.
I am guessing Grant can guard most SFs (at least the taller ones) but would struggle with the really quick ones.
Click to expand...
How do you know we're not going to get Siakam? If we have the number 5 pick in this draft, we give them that, the Knicks pick, our 2026 and 2028 FRPs along with Ant and Nurk... I'm pretty sure that's more than enough for Pascal. At 29 he doesn't fit with Barnes and OGs timelines as well as Ant and picks. I don't even know if I'd want to do the deal but I think that it could get done. Also, no deal is likely until it actually happens, so I'm not saying it's likely.
 
AldoTrapani said:
Grant sucks imo
Click to expand...
In your opinion an efficient 20ppg forward who is really solid on both ends of the court sucks? I can see the opinion being that he isn't worth the money he's going to get paid but that he sucks? Keon sucks, Greg Brown III sucks, Jerami definitely doesn't suck.
 
Mediocre Man said:
I like Grant and all but the problem is that he’s not a PF. He’s got a small forward body. Can he guard SFs? I don’t know, but I do know he can’t guard 4s or rebound like a 4

So how do you combat that?
Click to expand...
We started the year watching the Olympic version of Jerami, an incredible 2 way Forward. Coach Billups ran Jerami hard, max pt, no games off to recoup. Jerami transitioned towards the Pistons version of Jerami Grant. Hustling to get offensive stats, but mysteriously disappeared on defense.

the Blazers regurgitate the outdated defensive stopper label for Grant. He is a talented scorer and good shooting stretch 4. He's definitely an upgrade for a position that was given to old man Melo.

How to fix the defensive woes of Dame/Ant/Grant ??

the fix is already happening by the GM pulling them at the end of the season so the team can tank for picks. When you have superstars that are complacent with taking the last month of the season off, while players in their classification are involved in some sort of sports pride competition thingy bobber, you'll be able to get some amazing rookies.
 
blazerkor said:
How do you know we're not going to get Siakam? If we have the number 5 pick in this draft, we give them that, the Knicks pick, our 2026 and 2028 FRPs along with Ant and Nurk... I'm pretty sure that's more than enough for Pascal. At 29 he doesn't fit with Barnes and OGs timelines as well as Ant and picks. I don't even know if I'd want to do the deal but I think that it could get done. Also, no deal is likely until it actually happens, so I'm not saying it's likely.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you said, but do we ever get the player who would really help us?
Anything is possible, even getting Victor, but the odds are not great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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