Lowe: Capped-Out Blazers Are Free Agency Losers

[BigGameDamian]

https://www.blazersedge.com/2017/7/...rades-allen-crabbe-evan-turner-espn-zach-lowe

ESPN’s Zach Lowe names Portland as a loser in free agency, handcuffed by huge contracts as other teams passed them by.

ESPN’s Zach Lowelabeled idle Portland a “loser” in 2017 NBA Free Agency, because other Western Conference teams made smart transactions to improve their rosters.

With the Trail Blazers currently expected to be luxury tax payers at season’s end, their free agency flexibility was limited. So aside from waiving Festus Ezeli and moving Tim Quartermanto the Rockets, the Blazers have made no real moves since the NBA Draft.

Lowe reminds readers that “the priced-out Blazers” could have more than $130 million in player payroll in each of the next three years. Portland’s last significant roster move was acquiring Jusuf Nurkić from the Denver Nuggets, along with a draft pick that helped the team acquire Zach Collins on Draft Night.

Standing still in the West is like pulling your hamstring in a road race and watching everyone whiz by you. The Blazers are coming off a .500 season, and at least two teams below them -- the Wolves and Nuggets -- are primed for a leap. Utah and the Clippers should hang in the playoff race. Portland could have more than $130 million, and perhaps much more, committed in each of the next three seasons.

He also discusses the risk Neil Olshey took in signing Evan Turner to a sizeable contract, then matching an even larger offer sheet for Allen Crabbe. Are those contracts tradeable?

Nope. Portland would need to sweeten the pot with a first-round pick to flip either of those guys right now. In hindsight -- and you know what they say about hindsight -- they probably should have picked one.

Lowe had more upbeat thoughts about Al-Farouq Aminu and Maurice Harkless, who are signed to smaller contracts. He also likes the addition of Nurkić, but isn’t convinced he’s enough to topple the new Western order.

The Blazers have upside. Their best players are young, and they went 14-5 with Jusuf Nurkic in the starting lineup before he broke his leg. But the landscape has changed.

Visit his article for far more analysis of the free agency season, including why he believes one of the big winners was “Boredom.”

 

[e_blazer]

Given the Blazers were never going to have significant cap space this summer even if they'd done nothing last summer, this analysis seems pretty weak.

 

[Cippy91]

Given the Blazers were never going to have significant cap space this summer even if they'd done nothing last summer, this analysis seems pretty weak.

The point is, our only valued players seem to be Aminu and Harkless but guess what? they are on very favorable contracts that we would rather keep where as we were toxic as fuck with Turner, Crabbe, and Aminu. Those are tough contracts to move so we essentially fucked ourselves with those three contracts

 

[Sweetriverphil]

Zach Lowe also was not a major player in free agency. So... Take that for data

 

[e_blazer]

The point is, our only valued players seem to be Aminu and Harkless but guess what? they are on very favorable contracts that we would rather keep where as we were toxic as fuck with Turner, Crabbe, and Aminu. Those are tough contracts to move so we essentially fucked ourselves with those three contracts

No, the point is that we would have had no cap space of significance regardless of whether we signed those contracts or not. Aminu's contract is very favorable so I assume you meant Leonard. Crabbe and Turner have overinflated contracts that are getting less so every summer. I'd rather have them than nonexistent cap space. Leonard's contract is bad, but not that large in the scheme of things.

 

[Cippy91]

No, the point is that we would have had no cap space of significance regardless of whether we signed those contracts or not. Aminu's contract is very favorable so I assume you meant Leonard. Crabbe and Turner have overinflated contracts that are getting less so every summer. I'd rather have them than nonexistent cap space. Leonard's contract is bad, but not that large in the scheme of things.

Yeah thats what I meant. It's not really about the cap space, more so we could of done more if we had more favorable contracts which Turner,Crabbe, and Leonard signings screwed us out of doing

 

[Pinwheel1]

So when we don't sign any significant free agents in all those years when we do have cap space, what is the excuse then?

 

[riverman]

 

[Sweetriverphil]

So when we don't sign any significant free agents in all those years when we do have cap space, what is the excuse then?

El nino.

Players also don't like driving their fancy cars on our roads cause of all the pot holes.

 

[Phatguysrule]

When has Portland ever been a free agency winner? Brian Grant?

 

[Minstrel]

Andre Miller was Portland's last non-calamitous free agent strike.

 

[Rhal]

Not surprised Lowe wrote this. He has been down on the Blazers since LMA left. Never buys in and constantly talks down about them, he likes certain players just not our team.
This also seems to be an article more about others got "better" while we couldn't but he offers no solutions to any of our problems and not signing anyone to a contract last season wouldn't' let us have capspace or make any significant moves this year anyway.

 

[Scalma]

Zach "I'm an expert because I watch league pass" Lowe.

Just kidding. Lowe is cool. This little section ain't. Don't know what he's trying to say.

 

[THE HCP]

You guys think he's wrong?

 

[THE HCP]

What did he say that you find incorrect?

 

[B-Roy]

Not surprised Lowe wrote this. He has been down on the Blazers since LMA left. Never buys in and constantly talks down about them, he likes certain players just not our team.
This also seems to be an article more about others got "better" while we couldn't but he offers no solutions to any of our problems and not signing anyone to a contract last season wouldn't' let us have capspace or make any significant moves this year anyway.

He hasn't been wrong....projected 48 wins last year before the season when all the fans were saying 50+.

Well....

 

[Mediocre Man]

What did he say that you find incorrect?

He said something negative. That's enough to get the homers going

 

[SwissBlazer]

Zach is one of the best. And actually he is 100% right on this writing.

 

[Reep]

He said something negative. That's enough to get the homers going

So you believe that free agents are trying hard to get to Portland but can't because of our cap situation? Because history shows that?

The point is that having more cap flexibility this year would have us with less talent and would be as useful as RLEC was.

I'm sure NO could have made a bad deal just to get one on the books to make Lowe happy. But why? NO would have made a deal if a good one was to be had. It wasn't, yet. Remember the whole Nurkic trade?????

 

[Charcoal Filtered]

Zach is one of the best. And actually he is 100% right on this writing.

What could we have done if we did not make the signings last summer?

Turner and Crabbe are overpaid but doubt we could have a better team if we tried to use money this year.

 

[riverman]

What did he say that you find incorrect?

#23 wins again?

 

[Minstrel]

The only problem I see with what Lowe wrote is that it's extremely obvious, with no insight for us. But it's written for a national audience, not specifically for Blazers fans--a national audience hasn't been discussing/arguing the details of the Blazers' situation for the past year. Not everyone is versed in every detail of the Blazers' cap.

Portland was a loser in this year's off-season overall--whether or not that's Olshey's fault. Though I think there might be some missing the forest for the trees in arguing "How would we be better off if we didn't have these three specific contracts?" How much blame accrues to a GM who's into the luxury tax with so few assets? If Nurkic were being paid market value, that would be one thing but that isn't even an issue (yet). The only two players on the team justifiably making a lot are Lillard and McCollum. Portland lacks flexibility to make moves because the roster has so many non-assets. That's someone's fault.

 

[Reep]

I disagree with the premise. Staying the same is average. Making a bad trade is negative. Portland gets a C. Chicago and Indiana get a D-

Both those teams are worse off than before the draft/free agency.

 

[Nikolokolus]

My Gripe with Neil handing out those princely sums to Turner, Crabbe and Meyers was that it was spent on such obviously mediocre talent -- Turner was and is is nothing but a solid backup level player for the length of his career, Crabbe was and is a one-trick pony (although that one trick he does very well) and Meyers was and still is all hat, no cattle. If Neil had been overpaying to keep a title contender together you can maybe justify going deep into the luxury tax, but when you lock yourself in, hoping that 'D+' to 'C+' talent are going to mature into solid 'B' players to push you over the top it feels like a longshot strategy and forces some hard decisions with other guys that come up for their deals later. And if you want to get rid of those bad contracts you usually have to give up picks or other young assets you need to round out your roster and keep your talent pipeline moving.

I agree that the cap space was a sort of use it or lose it proposition last season, but it's the strategy to aim for last summer that seems dubious. Neil's job isn't just to draft guys and make trades, it's to structure your cap in such a way that maximizes your opportunities. Either by plan or accident he put himself in position to have cap space when 26 other teams were also going to have significant cap room, which means that there were going to be more dollars chasing fewer players -- not exactly an ideal position for a small market team that has never been very successful wooing quality free agents. Also, the crowded field of teams in free agency aside, what was the plan last summer? Who were the free agents Neil thought were going to be worth pursuing? I remember names like Greg Monroe, Chandler Parsons, and a Dwight Howard pipe dream. That was it? That was what he was angling for? That was supposed to be the payoff for clearing space? Okie dokie . . .

 

[riverman]

My Gripe with Neil handing out those princely sums to Turner, Crabbe and Meyers was that it was spent on such obviously mediocre talent -- Turner was and is is nothing but a solid backup level player for the length of his career, Crabbe was and is a one-trick pony (although that one trick he does very well) and Meyers was and still is all hat, no cattle. If Neil had been overpaying to keep a title contender together you can maybe justify going deep into the luxury tax, but when you lock yourself in, hoping that 'D+' to 'C+' talent are going to mature into solid 'B' players to push you over the top it feels like a longshot strategy and forces some hard decisions with other guys that come up for their deals later. And if you want to get rid of those bad contracts you usually have to give up picks or other young assets you need to round out your roster and keep your talent pipeline moving.

I agree that the cap space was a sort of use it or lose it proposition last season, but it's the strategy to aim for last summer that seems dubious. Neil's job isn't just to draft guys and make trades, it's to structure your cap in such a way that maximizes your opportunities. Either by plan or accident he put himself in position to have cap space when 26 other teams were also going to have significant cap room, which means that there were going to be more dollars chasing fewer players -- not exactly an ideal position for a small market team that has never been very successful wooing quality free agents. Also, the crowded field of teams in free agency aside, what was the plan last summer? Who were the free agents Neil thought were going to be worth pursuing? I remember names like Greg Monroe, Chandler Parsons, and a Dwight Howard pipe dream. That was it? That was what he was angling for? That was supposed to be the payoff for clearing space? Okie dokie . . .

Neil likes to take the target off our back early in the season....element of surprise...we're not getting much ink around the league at all this summer. I'm really used to the underdog tag we start most seasons with

 

[Nikolokolus]

Neil likes to take the target off our back early in the season....element of surprise...we're not getting much ink around the league at all this summer. I'm really used to the underdog tag we start most seasons with

If you don't have a target on your back then that probably means you're no threat. What is it? Second or third highest payroll in the league and no target on their back? Shit, I need a drink.

 

[BBert]

What did he say that you find incorrect?

The tacit insinuation that the Blazers could have been major players in free agency had they not signed Turner and Crabbe. That's just false.

 

[andalusian]

Lowe is right, Portland did not improve at the free agent market. Anyone surprised about it had not been paying attention.

The plan I believe is for Portland to University organically or during the season when some teams are ready to call the season off or sour on a player

 

[Reep]

Lowe is right, Portland did not improve at the free agent market. Anyone surprised about it had not been paying attention.

The plan I believe is for Portland to University organically or during the season when some teams are ready to call the season off or sour on a player

He did not say they didn't improve. He said they lost, as in last place. Completely ignoring teams that made trades that made them worse than before.

 

[riverman]

If you don't have a target on your back then that probably means you're no threat. What is it?

It means Lebron takes a game off when they play you until you win and then they go...hey...they're better than we thought...