The Case for Jake

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

So still willing to let Aminu walk so you can Pay Jake $12M?

This forum cracks me up as the ones wanting to pay Layman anything over 10 mil should not be offering advice and what makes it funny is that some in this thread were ones complaining about the 2016 signings and here they suggest doing it again for Layman. Layman is a nice player but anything over 5-6 mil will likely be over paying.
 
that's not entirely accurate. Nets didn't waive Darrell Arthur; they traded him for Jared Dudley and a 2nd round pick from the Suns

meaning their 'haul' for taking on those contracts was Jared Dudley, a first round pick, and 2 second round picks. Nothing too substantial but certainly an indication that the Blazers would have to give up considerably more that just a 1st to dump Turner. It's also the case that the trade happened more than a week into the off-season, an off-season when there wasn't much in the way of either cap-space or free agents....

http://www.prosportstransactions.co...ndDate=&PlayerMovementChkBx=yes&Submit=Search

...meaning that in this coming off-season, arranging a salary dump trade might take significant time in which teams determine whether or not their cap-space could fetch more than just an unattractive pick package for taking on bad salary. I'm not sure that delay on top of uncertainty will work in Portland's favor this summer.

I'd also wonder, looking at what Portland "needs" to accomplish, if the full-MLE is that much better than the tax-MLE (5.5M vs 9M) that the Blazers need to mortgage even more future picks to gain that extra 3.5M. Sure, if JA insists on minimal tax that might have an impact. I'd also wonder if paying 8-9M a year for either Curry or Kanter is wise. I wouldn't pay it for Curry and maybe not for Kanter.

still seems to me like the best option might be offering Meyers and the 25th pick to Atlanta before or during the draft. It would give the Blazers the breathing room for a full-MLE, but sure leave Portland crazy thin at C and PF

I wonder if rolo would take the vet minimum to play for a good team. If not, Gortat probably would.
 
This forum cracks me up as the ones wanting to pay Layman anything over 10 mil should not be offering advice and what makes it funny is that some in this thread were ones complaining about the 2016 signings and here they suggest doing it again for Layman. Layman is a nice player but anything over 5-6 mil will likely be over paying.
8 million for 4 years 32 million total is what I am seeing. 5 might be light? Would love to see 6.
 
8 million for 4 years 32 million total is what I am seeing. 5 might be light? Would love to see 6.

maybe it would be a regret, but no way should the Blazers pay Layman 8M/year IMO. I even think 6 may be too high

and for chrissakes, if they do re-sign him make it only a 2 or 3 year deal with the last year being a team option or non-guaranteed. If they would have done that with Turner and Meyers, Portland would be in great shape this summer. Not only did Olshey go batshit on the salary he offered those two, he dropped the ball big time by making the contracts max duration...stacking dumb on top of stupid
 
maybe it would be a regret, but no way should the Blazers pay Layman 8M/year IMO. I even think 6 may be too high

and for chrissakes, if they do re-sign him make it only a 2 or 3 year deal with the last year being a team option or non-guaranteed. If they would have done that with Turner and Meyers, Portland would be in great shape this summer. Not only did Olshey go batshit on the salary he offered those two, he dropped the ball big time by making the contracts max duration...stacking dumb on top of stupid
Nah... Jake will get at least 6 IMO
 
So I guess you are not coming up with a plan, even if he makes $12m????
Where did I say I'd do that? I was responding to someone saying that if Jake made 8 figures, Full MLE wouldnt be an option. I said that it (hypothetically) could be if we let Aminu walk and traded Meyers or Moe. Never said I'd do that and it was merely a hypothetical discussing space below the tax apron.

You took that and spun it into me saying we should let Aminu walk so we could pay Jake $12M... your reading comprehension needs some work.
 
Where did I say I'd do that? I was responding to someone saying that if Jake made 8 figures, Full MLE wouldnt be an option. I said that it (hypothetically) could be if we let Aminu walk and traded Meyers or Moe. Never said I'd do that and it was merely a hypothetical discussing space below the tax apron.

You took that and spun it into me saying we should let Aminu walk so we could pay Jake $12M... your reading comprehension needs some work.
NO a normal person says no way Jake is worth 10+ million. You go and say if it takes 12m we can just let Aminu walk.
 
NO a normal person says no way Jake is worth 10+ million. You go and say if it takes 12m we can just let Aminu walk.
Dude, your reading comprehension is poor. Youre off-base, and you're trying to argue with me on what I meant. It's ridiculous.

Here, let me try to spell it out for you.


- Layman is NOT worth $10M+
- I dont think we should dump Aminu to keep Layman.
- If we traded Moe or Meyers, and let Aminu walk, we'd have the Full MLE and $12M left over to resign Layman (That does NOT mean we should use all $12M to resign him).

Do you understand now?
 
Dude, your reading comprehension is poor. Youre off-base, and you're trying to argue with me on what I meant. It's ridiculous.

Here, let me try to spell it out for you.


- Layman is NOT worth $10M+
- I dont think we should dump Aminu to keep Layman.
- If we traded Moe or Meyers, and let Aminu walk, we'd have the Full MLE and $12M left over to resign Layman (That does NOT mean we should use all $12M to resign him).

Do you understand now?

Well that is not what your original post said. Maybe instead of criticizing other people comprehension skills you should work on your own writing skills and actually type what you mean.
 
I see Jake at $6 million for 3 years w/ an option.

Or traded.
 
Well that is not what your original post said. Maybe instead of criticizing other people comprehension skills you should work on your own writing skills and actually type what you mean.
Blame me for your terrible reading comprehension, got it. You're saying I said words I never said. That's not me "Not typing what I mean", that's you making up things I didnt say, and then arguing with me when I try to correct you... Thats your fault.
 
Blame me for your terrible reading comprehension, got it. You're saying I said words I never said. That's not me "Not typing what I mean", that's you making up things I didnt say, and then arguing with me when I try to correct you... Thats your fault.
so you didn't say we could just not sign Aminu if Jake got 12 mil. Then you get all butt hurt because you are getting called on your usual full of your self attitude. You get all defense becasue you have terrible writing ability and the try to come back when you are called on it and try to say you mean something else.
 
so you didn't say we could just not sign Aminu if Jake got 12 mil. Then you get all butt hurt because you are getting called on your usual full of your self attitude. You get all defense becasue you have terrible writing ability and the try to come back when you are called on it and try to say you mean something else.
Now you're changing your narrative. This is dumb. I dont have time for your petty little drama.
 
Portland is up 3-1 but no thanks to Turner or Hood. I'd like to see Layman get a shot especially at home. He was one of the biggest contributors off the bench for a big part of the season.
 
Jake scored 2 points in 0 minutes.

Discuss.
Jake has not played well in the post season up to that bucket really...Stotts has pulled him quickly mostly over turnovers and bricking jumpers. If Jake played better at this point he'd get minutes. Bad time for Jake to slump. Hood gets his burn because of Hood's defense although Hood has struggled on offense
 
So, ANYWAY... do Layman and Turner need to play together in order for both to be effective? How about trying that out again?

There was a time when they were connecting on lob dunks and cuts and looked good together. Not surfe what happened
 
So, ANYWAY... do Layman and Turner need to play together in order for both to be effective? How about trying that out again?

Things seem to be working pretty good right now so why experiment? The only game that OKC was in was a game that they were able to shoot around 15 more free throws than us. There will likely be a chance for Layman in the future.
 
Jake has not played well in the post season up to that bucket really...Stotts has pulled him quickly mostly over turnovers and bricking jumpers. If Jake played better at this point he'd get minutes. Bad time for Jake to slump. Hood gets his burn because of Hood's defense although Hood has struggled on offense

Wait, what? Hasn't played well? In the grand total of 2 minutes that weren't garbage time? The other massive 5 total minutes has been in mop up duty. 1 missed shot? Not exactly a 'slump'. Surprised by that take.
 
Stotts never trusted him, taking him out of the rotation game 1 outta nowhere was just confirmation. At least he won’t be as expensive as he would’ve been had Stotts managed him correctly.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top