OFFICIAL AROUND THE NBA: JULY 2024

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Pinwheel1 said:
Ouch, Toronto pulled their 15 million per year offer off the table because Trent (and/or Rich Paul) wanted 25 per year. It will be interesting to see how much he loses over the next few years because of it.
Click to expand...
fify
 
giphy.webp


 
Driew said:
Probably some teams are desperate just for the name value lol
Click to expand...
Ben is a GM escape route at this point. "If Simmons was healthy, by golly this team could make some playoff noise."
 
Ben Simmons will never be 100% cause I do not think he has the heart for the NBA or cares about it I will call it the Oden effect cause Oden was not in LOVE with Basketball and I believe he even said it but he was tall so he did it. I think Ben Simmons was good at it in HS and in the NCAA so he was like what else is there to do but go to the NBA or I can take a job where I make a fraction of what I might as a pro athlete.
 
Ripcity4life77 said:
Ben Simmons will never be 100% cause I do not think he has the heart for the NBA or cares about it I will call it the Oden effect cause Oden was not in LOVE with Basketball and I believe he even said it but he was tall so he did it. I think Ben Simmons was good at it in HS and in the NCAA so he was like what else is there to do but go to the NBA or I can take a job where I make a fraction of what I might as a pro athlete.
Click to expand...
@THE HCP please tell this guy Oden loved basketball and to not get it twisted.
 
JFizzleRaider said:
@THE HCP please tell this guy Oden loved basketball and to not get it twisted.
Click to expand...
Watched a video today about how dominating Oden was even somewhat in pros. A fact I didn’t know was Connelly and Oden played together in high school and college. Oden won high school player of the year twice and use to play against Garnett
 
My comment on Oden to Simmons I might have been wrong or remembering it wrong it's been like what 12 years or something like that but maybe it just the way I remembered it and maybe the fact it turned out bad clouded my memory of him.
 
Galakelife said:
your next Blazer right there
Click to expand...
I didn't want Knecht at all at #7 or even #14 but if he's a throw in to a Grant deal that's fine. Maybe he becomes a bench role player some day. Really want us to get out of that Grant contract and instead see young upside players in Grants role.
 
SharpesTriumph said:
I didn't want Knecht at all at #7 or even #14 but if he's a throw in to a Grant deal that's fine. Maybe he becomes a bench role player some day. Really want us to get out of that Grant contract and instead see young upside players in Grants role.
Click to expand...
Grants contract is going to be considered a steal now. Even more so at the trade deadline. Blazers need to hold Grant until Feb. Might be the same for Simons.
 
kjironman1 said:
Grants contract is going to be considered a steal now. Even more so at the trade deadline. Blazers need to hold Grant until Feb. Might be the same for Simons.
Click to expand...

unless it's a contract for an absolute star who is on the youngish side, or the beginning of a rookie scale deal, I'd be surprised if any team really wants a player with 4 years left on a contract. That length of contract tends to limit options and flexibility and the NBA doesn't seem to value static rosters

Grant is a wing with length; he has some 3&D and 2-way value although his defense is may not be good enough for either designation. I'd assume he has quite a bit higher trade value than Ant because of those attributes; Ant doesn't have any of them. But the difference in contract duration probably levels their respective values. Grant's rebounding, or lack of, is certain to have been noticed too
 
wizenheimer said:
unless it's a contract for an absolute star who is on the youngish side, or the beginning of a rookie scale deal, I'd be surprised if any team really wants a player with 4 years left on a contract. That length of contract tends to limit options and flexibility and the NBA doesn't seem to value static rosters

Grant is a wing with length; he has some 3&D and 2-way value although his defense is may not be good enough for either designation. I'd assume he has quite a bit higher trade value than Ant because of those attributes; Ant doesn't have any of them. But the difference in contract duration probably levels their respective values. Grant's rebounding, or lack of, is certain to have been noticed too
Click to expand...
With the rising cap I think Grant contract is a slight positive value compared to Ants, $32 million when maxes are going up to 60-70+ million is very fine. Also we've seen a number of wings still perform well at age ~33+ when Grants contract ends. It's nothing like the good value of Deni cheap contract for sure - Grants contract has both negative and positive attributes. If Grant was on a cheaper contract he'd be worth more in a trade.

A team that views Grant a starter now that can help them contend immediately will be fine with the contract and may greatly prefer those extra years not having any possibility of him getting raises. Worst case scenario they could probably trade it in a couple years to pivot a new direction just as the Kings did last week with Harrison Barnes. So yes there is some downside but its not a Bradley Beal/Zach Lavine type of cap crippling downside.

The bigger question is how much value Grant has at his current age, current production, and with his contract in terms of FRP/asset coming back? I can see getting one decent pick or maybe two mediocre ones. This idea the Blazers are getting multiple unprotected picks or a great young player is delusional IMO. Guess we'll see what happens.
 
SharpesTriumph said:
With the rising cap I think Grant contract is a slight positive value compared to Ants, $32 million when maxes are going up to 60-70+ million is very fine. Also we've seen a number of wings still perform well at age ~33+ when Grants contract ends. It's nothing like the good value of Deni cheap contract for sure - Grants contract has both negative and positive attributes. If Grant was on a cheaper contract he'd be worth more in a trade.

A team that views Grant a starter now that can help them contend immediately will be fine with the contract and may greatly prefer those extra years not having any possibility of him getting raises. Worst case scenario they could probably trade it in a couple years to pivot a new direction just as the Kings did last week with Harrison Barnes. So yes there is some downside but its not a Bradley Beal/Zach Lavine type of cap crippling downside.

The bigger question is how much value Grant has at his current age, current production, and with his contract in terms of FRP/asset coming back? I can see getting one decent pick or maybe two mediocre ones. This idea the Blazers are getting multiple unprotected picks or a great young player is delusional IMO. Guess we'll see what happens.
Click to expand...

Grant is 30 years old and will turn 31 next season, He's a 10 year veteran, and in those 10 years he has established some benchmarks other teams can clearly see:

* he can average 20-21 points on a bad team; and 13-14 points on a good team
* he will only average 4-5 rebounds and 2-3 assists
* he has dramatically improved his 3pt shooting but plays below average defense with questionable versatility
* he has 4 years left on his deal at 33M/year; meaning he would need to start to justify that salary

I think those 'attributes' significantly limits his market. A team would have to believe he could start and average 15-16 points while spreading the floor for their 'stars'. And that team would have to overlook his poor rebounding, mediocre passing, and average, at best, defense. All that while being willing to absorb 33M/year

and of course be willing to meet Cronin's alleged two-first-round-picks price. Meaning, Grant will probably still be a Blazer heading into the trade deadline in 2027
 
wizenheimer said:
Grant is 30 years old and will turn 31 next season, He's a 10 year veteran, and in those 10 years he has established some benchmarks other teams can clearly see:

* he can average 20-21 points on a bad team; and 13-14 points on a good team
* he will only average 4-5 rebounds and 2-3 assists
* he has dramatically improved his 3pt shooting but plays below average defense with questionable versatility
* he has 4 years left on his deal at 33M/year; meaning he would need to start to justify that salary

I think those 'attributes' significantly limits his market. A team would have to believe he could start and average 15-16 points while spreading the floor for their 'stars'. And that team would have to overlook his poor rebounding, mediocre passing, and average, at best, defense. All that while being willing to absorb 33M/year

and of course be willing to meet Cronin's alleged two-first-round-picks price. Meaning, Grant will probably still be a Blazer heading into the trade deadline in 2027
Click to expand...

Jerami is a positive asset. I’ve been saying this since we traded for him. That is the whole reason we acquired him when we did was knowing when Dame inevitably dipped we would be able to get something for the price of JG.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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