No shorts or deal coming soon but not the greatest rumor

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Tince said:
I agree trading Ant or Nurk should be dependent on who we can get in return (same goes for the #3 pick). Curious why you feel Nurk/Ant have more value to Portland than the rest of the league, and therefore you're doubtful we can do better than those two?

A roster with Dame/Ant/Sharpe/Scoot would somehow be the most imbalanced roster we've had in the last decade of having imbalanced rosters.
Click to expand...

Nurk:
  • As a Blazer: He's fine. Not great, and paid for being "fine", but definitely an NBA starting-level guy. I have been pleased with his three point shooting coming along, and it's hard to tell how injured he's really been the last couple of years, given our back-to-back tank jobs.
  • No reasonable alternative: We currently have no reasonable player to plug in at the center spot and he is, what, one of two guys on our roster taller than 6'9"? Unless there's some mental/interpersonal thing where we NEED to get rid of him, I can't imagine getting a player that is about as good but fits better without giving up additional value... maybe someone like Capela? I just don't know what value he has elsewhere, but there's always a transaction cost even when you swap "equal" guys unless another team values Nurk more than we do or their guy less than we do. Of the problems this team has, Nurk is low on the list for me.
Ant:
  • As a Blazer: He's young, he's not overpaid, and he's still getting better. It's hard for me to believe this was his first year as a starter, but it was. With more run and more experience I suspect he'll continue to get better, and perhaps a lot better (given how much he's improved in the first four years of his Blazers career).
  • Value to other teams: He doesn't seem to be being respected as an asset, but more of a salary match. More than Nurk, I think he's a net-positive and I don't want him to be a throw-in for an older guy that will probably have about as much impact as Grant did last year (which is to say: not much). I look at it as similar to Herro in Miami... is any team excited to trade for him? No. Is Miami excited about his future as a Heat? Yes (unless they can use him to get a superstar like Dame).
  • Depth and rotation:
    • I think Dame/Ant/Sharpe/Scoot is actually a pretty good rotation... 96 combined minutes in the back court and maybe half the game at the 3 for Sharpe seems reasonable; that's 30 minutes each on average. And also remember that we get injuries just like everyone else, and I'd rather have four quality guys than scraping the bottom the barrel to fill in if a couple of guys go down.
    • Even if they ARE healthy, Scoot will be a rookie, Sharpe will be 20, and Ant will still be 24... they aren't going to be in a reasonable position to demand a trade or make a lot of noise if they don't play 30 minutes a night. Further, I don't think Dame should be playing 36 minutes a game... he's getting older and if we're going to have a chance to be good in the next couple of years, we need him to be healthy and ready to go. Having three hopefully reasonable options to carry the scoring load in the back court should help Chauncey not run him into the ground like he seemed to be doing with starters this season before Operation: Shutdown.
    • I agree that there is a lot of talent there, but there's not a lot of financial investment. If we have Dame, CJ, Powell, and (Sharpe or Scoot), we'd be using up a MASSIVE part of our salary cap. Due to Sharpe and Scott being so cheap, it doesn't hurt to have a starting-level guy (with associated salary obligations) in Simons on the team, too.
 
Ed O said:
Nurk:
  • As a Blazer: He's fine. Not great, and paid for being "fine", but definitely an NBA starting-level guy. I have been pleased with his three point shooting coming along, and it's hard to tell how injured he's really been the last couple of years, given our back-to-back tank jobs.
  • No reasonable alternative: We currently have no reasonable player to plug in at the center spot and he is, what, one of two guys on our roster taller than 6'9"? Unless there's some mental/interpersonal thing where we NEED to get rid of him, I can't imagine getting a player that is about as good but fits better without giving up additional value... maybe someone like Capela? I just don't know what value he has elsewhere, but there's always a transaction cost even when you swap "equal" guys unless another team values Nurk more than we do or their guy less than we do. Of the problems this team has, Nurk is low on the list for me.
Ant:
  • As a Blazer: He's young, he's not overpaid, and he's still getting better. It's hard for me to believe this was his first year as a starter, but it was. With more run and more experience I suspect he'll continue to get better, and perhaps a lot better (given how much he's improved in the first four years of his Blazers career).
  • Value to other teams: He doesn't seem to be being respected as an asset, but more of a salary match. More than Nurk, I think he's a net-positive and I don't want him to be a throw-in for an older guy that will probably have about as much impact as Grant did last year (which is to say: not much). I look at it as similar to Herro in Miami... is any team excited to trade for him? No. Is Miami excited about his future as a Heat? Yes (unless they can use him to get a superstar like Dame).
  • Depth and rotation:
    • I think Dame/Ant/Sharpe/Scoot is actually a pretty good rotation... 96 combined minutes in the back court and maybe half the game at the 3 for Sharpe seems reasonable; that's 30 minutes each on average. And also remember that we get injuries just like everyone else, and I'd rather have four quality guys than scraping the bottom the barrel to fill in if a couple of guys go down.
    • Even if they ARE healthy, Scoot will be a rookie, Sharpe will be 20, and Ant will still be 24... they aren't going to be in a reasonable position to demand a trade or make a lot of noise if they don't play 30 minutes a night. Further, I don't think Dame should be playing 36 minutes a game... he's getting older and if we're going to have a chance to be good in the next couple of years, we need him to be healthy and ready to go. Having three hopefully reasonable options to carry the scoring load in the back court should help Chauncey not run him into the ground like he seemed to be doing with starters this season before Operation: Shutdown.
    • I agree that there is a lot of talent there, but there's not a lot of financial investment. If we have Dame, CJ, Powell, and (Sharpe or Scoot), we'd be using up a MASSIVE part of our salary cap. Due to Sharpe and Scott being so cheap, it doesn't hurt to have a starting-level guy (with associated salary obligations) in Simons on the team, too.
Click to expand...

Very well thought out response!

Hard to know that teams don't value either of those guys in comparison to players they are willing to trade.

I don't hate Nurk at all. However, I would think a more durable and mobile center would have more value given the roster having no quality backup center and the style of defense we appeared to be trying to play last year.

It's hard for me to imagine both those guys values are being maximized in Portland given the situation. We simply see it differently
 
Need some help from the Cap gurus.

IF.....Portland were to get Zion + for Scoot, how would that work Before and After January 1? He is on his smaller contract now and the new one kicks in starting July IIUC. What would need to go out now versus what would need to go out after July 1? My understanding is the cap impact would be different in terms of what we would ship out and what would come back. We have so few tradable contracts that would seem to make it more difficult.

Thank you in advance.
 
TBpup said:
Need some help from the Cap gurus.

IF.....Portland were to get Zion + for Scoot, how would that work Before and After January 1? He is on his smaller contract now and the new one kicks in starting July IIUC. What would need to go out now versus what would need to go out after July 1? My understanding is the cap impact would be different in terms of what we would ship out and what would come back. We have so few tradable contracts that would seem to make it more difficult.

Thank you in advance.
Click to expand...


I’m not an expert but I believe we have to match the money of his salary for next year regardless…the poison pill contract
 
TBpup said:
Need some help from the Cap gurus.

IF.....Portland were to get Zion + for Scoot, how would that work Before and After January 1? He is on his smaller contract now and the new one kicks in starting July IIUC. What would need to go out now versus what would need to go out after July 1? My understanding is the cap impact would be different in terms of what we would ship out and what would come back. We have so few tradable contracts that would seem to make it more difficult.

Thank you in advance.
Click to expand...

Exactly there is a difference between now and after July 1st. He is on Poison Pill Provision because his 1st year of extension hasn't kicked yet.

Outgoing salary is his actual salary (13,5M) and incoming has to be the average salary of his extension (34,6M). That would make a 2 teams trade really difficult for Portland.
 
blazedanugz said:
I’m not an expert but I believe we have to match the money of his salary for next year regardless…the poison pill contract
Click to expand...

I thought I saw somewhere that Portland would have to send out players to match his contract now, but be able to take on the @@ for next year. Come July 1, they would have to send out matching salaries. Not sure how that works (if that is the case) but trying to get clarification from those who know the CBA well.
 
SwissBlazer said:
Exactly there is a difference between now and after July 1st. He is on Poison Pill Provision because his 1st year of extension hasn't kicked yet.

Outgoing salary is his actual salary (13,5M) and incoming has to be the average salary of his extension (34,6M). That would make a 2 teams trade really difficult for Portland.
Click to expand...

Thank you @SwissBlazer So if Portland got rid of some of their cap holds (i.e., Cam Reddish), what players would go out for Portland now, vs what would have to go out in a couple of weeks? And could we create enough cap space to take on an unbalanced trade, if that were even an option?
 
TBpup said:
Thank you @SwissBlazer So if Portland got rid of some of their cap holds (i.e., Cam Reddish), what players would go out for Portland now, vs what would have to go out in a couple of weeks? And could we create enough cap space to take on an unbalanced trade, if that were even an option?
Click to expand...
TBpup said:
I thought I saw somewhere that Portland would have to send out players to match his contract now, but be able to take on the @@ for next year. Come July 1, they would have to send out matching salaries. Not sure how that works (if that is the case) but trying to get clarification from those who know the CBA well.
Click to expand...

so we would have to take back more salary in this trade other than Zion to get to 34.5?
 
blazedanugz said:
so we would have to take back more salary in this trade other than Zion to get to 34.5?
Click to expand...

I would want more than just Zion for #3. There is so much risk with him (and upside) that I want another young player (Murphy or Jones) and #14. Zion's downside is huge and the money going forward combined with Dame's combined with Grant will be somewhat prohibitive in a couple of years.
 
TBpup said:
I would want more than just Zion for #3. There is so much risk with him (and upside) that I want another young player (Murphy or Jones) and #14. Zion's downside is huge and the money going forward combined with Dame's combined with Grant will be somewhat prohibitive in a couple of years.
Click to expand...

oh yeah I agree just trying to figure out exactly how the poison pill thing works
 
In the current year, I believe, the team getting Zion takes on $34,639,137 (take the 5 years of extension money, current year salary, and get the average of those 6 years), and the Pelicans send out $13,534,817 (just current year salary). They can only take back a maximum of 17,018,521, while the team getting Zion has to send out a minimum of 27,631,310 (125% rule). It makes PPP deals very difficult with 2 teams unless the team getting the player has cap space, or if a 3rd team is involved to absorb salary.

I have to imagine any deal with Portland and Zion would just be completed on July 1. Makes things much less messy
 
Fitz303 said:
In the current year, I believe, the team getting Zion takes on $34,639,137 (take the 5 years of extension money, current year salary, and get the average of those 6 years), and the Pelicans send out $13,534,817 (just current year salary). They can only take back a maximum of 17,018,521, while the team getting Zion has to send out a minimum of 27,631,310 (125% rule). It makes PPP deals very difficult with 2 teams unless the team getting the player has cap space, or if a 3rd team is involved to absorb salary.

I have to imagine any deal with Portland and Zion would just be completed on July 1. Makes things much less messy
Click to expand...

Okay, so if it is after July 1, if we have cap space, it can be an unbalanced trade but more easily done? Then we could take back a player like Murphy into the Payton TPE or Jones into the Hart TPE? Just trying to put the pieces together.....in case.
 
TBpup said:
Need some help from the Cap gurus.

IF.....Portland were to get Zion + for Scoot, how would that work Before and After January 1? He is on his smaller contract now and the new one kicks in starting July IIUC. What would need to go out now versus what would need to go out after July 1? My understanding is the cap impact would be different in terms of what we would ship out and what would come back. We have so few tradable contracts that would seem to make it more difficult.

Thank you in advance.
Click to expand...
I’m an idiot in all things cap, but luckily, no sarcasm, I think Joe is knows to be a very good capologist
 
TBpup said:
Okay, so if it is after July 1, if we have cap space, it can be an unbalanced trade but more easily done? Then we could take back a player like Murphy into the Payton TPE or Jones into the Hart TPE? Just trying to put the pieces together.....in case.
Click to expand...

Yeah at July 1, they just have to get within 125% of the other's salaries (Blazers wont have any cap space but the PPP is gone on Zion). Murphy or Jones easily fits into TPEs (that deal can actually be done right away, before the zion deal finalizes, if they want). Blazers just need to come up with $26,720,000 outgoing to make a legal trade for Zion's contract
 
TBpup said:
Okay, so if it is after July 1, if we have cap space, it can be an unbalanced trade but more easily done? Then we could take back a player like Murphy into the Payton TPE or Jones into the Hart TPE? Just trying to put the pieces together.....in case.
Click to expand...

If we can get Zion and another piece along with 14 for 3. I'm on board with it. If that scenario panned out, do you think we would hear about it prior to July 1?
 
Using the ESPN Trade checker, it would work today to trade

To Orlando

Simons

To New Orleans

Nurk, #3, Harris, Little

To Portland

Zion, Valancuinas, Alvarado, Wagner

Obviously this trade would have to be worked out to even compensation but it works under CBA rules
 
Ed O said:
Nurk:
  • As a Blazer: He's fine. Not great, and paid for being "fine", but definitely an NBA starting-level guy. I have been pleased with his three point shooting coming along, and it's hard to tell how injured he's really been the last couple of years, given our back-to-back tank jobs.
  • No reasonable alternative: We currently have no reasonable player to plug in at the center spot and he is, what, one of two guys on our roster taller than 6'9"? Unless there's some mental/interpersonal thing where we NEED to get rid of him, I can't imagine getting a player that is about as good but fits better without giving up additional value... maybe someone like Capela? I just don't know what value he has elsewhere, but there's always a transaction cost even when you swap "equal" guys unless another team values Nurk more than we do or their guy less than we do. Of the problems this team has, Nurk is low on the list for me.
Ant:
  • As a Blazer: He's young, he's not overpaid, and he's still getting better. It's hard for me to believe this was his first year as a starter, but it was. With more run and more experience I suspect he'll continue to get better, and perhaps a lot better (given how much he's improved in the first four years of his Blazers career).
  • Value to other teams: He doesn't seem to be being respected as an asset, but more of a salary match. More than Nurk, I think he's a net-positive and I don't want him to be a throw-in for an older guy that will probably have about as much impact as Grant did last year (which is to say: not much). I look at it as similar to Herro in Miami... is any team excited to trade for him? No. Is Miami excited about his future as a Heat? Yes (unless they can use him to get a superstar like Dame).
  • Depth and rotation:
    • I think Dame/Ant/Sharpe/Scoot is actually a pretty good rotation... 96 combined minutes in the back court and maybe half the game at the 3 for Sharpe seems reasonable; that's 30 minutes each on average. And also remember that we get injuries just like everyone else, and I'd rather have four quality guys than scraping the bottom the barrel to fill in if a couple of guys go down.
    • Even if they ARE healthy, Scoot will be a rookie, Sharpe will be 20, and Ant will still be 24... they aren't going to be in a reasonable position to demand a trade or make a lot of noise if they don't play 30 minutes a night. Further, I don't think Dame should be playing 36 minutes a game... he's getting older and if we're going to have a chance to be good in the next couple of years, we need him to be healthy and ready to go. Having three hopefully reasonable options to carry the scoring load in the back court should help Chauncey not run him into the ground like he seemed to be doing with starters this season before Operation: Shutdown.
    • I agree that there is a lot of talent there, but there's not a lot of financial investment. If we have Dame, CJ, Powell, and (Sharpe or Scoot), we'd be using up a MASSIVE part of our salary cap. Due to Sharpe and Scott being so cheap, it doesn't hurt to have a starting-level guy (with associated salary obligations) in Simons on the team, too.
Click to expand...

Nurk has seemed a bit out of shape and lackadaisical. He has trouble finishing at or even being assertive at the rim. That said, he is a starter level center. While I am glad he can shoot the three, he should focus on other parts of his game. Part of that, in his defense, is that he isn't being used correctly by Chauncey.

If the Blazers are going to make a deal that brings back a star, they will likely need his salary to match. If they do, they need to bring a big back though.

Ant is a hell of an offensive player. But, not sure how successful it is to have another ball dominant small guard next to Lillard. He will keep getting better, and I agree is likely underrated around the league. He is certainly the main player that needs to go out to bring in another star level player, and hopefully it is a star level player coming back, especially for him and the third.
 
Fitz303 said:
Yeah at July 1, they just have to get within 125% of the other's salaries (Blazers wont have any cap space but the PPP is gone on Zion). Murphy or Jones easily fits into TPEs (that deal can actually be done right away, before the zion deal finalizes, if they want). Blazers just need to come up with $26,720,000 outgoing to make a legal trade for Zion's contract
Click to expand...

So Nurk, Little, Keon ish? It's still just a hair under $26, 720,000. I'm sure they would figure it out, but Portland would need players coming back on the TPE's or we would be devoid of depth.
 
TBpup said:
So Nurk, Little, Keon ish? It's still just a hair under $26, 720,000. I'm sure they would figure it out, but Portland would need players coming back on the TPE's or we would be devoid of depth.
Click to expand...

Yeah Nurk, Little, Keon, and Knox would work for Zion and Murphy (TPE). Leaving Simons available for another move (Orl for WCJr and Cole Anthony?)
 
Charcoal Filtered said:
Using the ESPN Trade checker, it would work today to trade

To Orlando

Simons

To New Orleans

Nurk, #3, Harris, Little

To Portland

Zion, Valancuinas, Alvarado, Wagner

Obviously this trade would have to be worked out to even compensation but it works under CBA rules
Click to expand...

Mo Wagner? They are not trading Franz Wagner for Ant LOL.
 
Interesting that Nets worked out Lively yesterday. Why would they need to do that unless they are trading their young center and are moving up in the draft????

Template public:_media_site_embed_twitter not found. Try rebuilding or reinstalling the s9e/MediaSites add-on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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