The 'Next' Move

[glazeduck]

if there’s some kind of unique asset that we got in the clippers trade—an asset that we only got in order to a very specific follow up move—it makes no sense to do this deal “early” without the other deal in place to execute immediately afterward.

This entirely misses my point... in my theory, the "unique asset" would be increased leverage in some other trade discussion. It would cause those discussions to take a step back, not happen immediately after...

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Regardless of your feelings on the haul (I tend to think Joe was short at least an asset), the fact that he made the deal a week early makes me think there has to be a "next move", otherwise why settle on losing a trade with another week to negotiate?

...

The one (and, frankly, only) theory I keep coming back to is leverage in another deal, specifically, a CJ deal. It stands to reason that our big haul was always going to come from moving CJ. It also stands to reason, that the offseason is likely the time where you're going to have maximum suitors for him, and thus maximum negotiating leverage. Is it possible that a team, say NO, was lowballing us for CJ and Cronin's leverage chip was holding him until the offseason? If true, prior to the trade, that team could've been trying to leverage us being in "no-man's land" with Ant, CJ, Norm and Powell. By trading Roco and Powell, Cronin makes it clear that we're all-in on youth and tanking. It's Cronin not blinking in a game of chicken.

These two statements seem contradictory. If the early trade date points to a "next move", wouldn't that imply said next move occurring within the next 3 days? Or if the Powell deal is intended to maximize an offseason CJ deal, what's the value in consummating is a week before the trade deadline?

 

[glazeduck]

These two statements seem contradictory. If the early trade date points to a "next move", wouldn't that imply said next move occurring within the next 3 days? Or if the Powell deal is intended to maximize an offseason CJ deal, what's the value in consummating is a week before the trade deadline?

I'm saying -- without the Powell/Roco trade, the optimal time to trade CJ would've been in the offseason -- that's our leverage point in trade negotiations. By moving Powell and Roco, Cronin signals to other teams that the "no man's land" leverage is null and void and even WITH CJ, we'll still suck this season, so pony up or we hang onto him until we have a better offer this offseason.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I'm saying -- without the Powell/Roco trade, the optimal time to trade CJ would've been in the offseason -- that's our leverage point in trade negotiations. By moving Powell and Roco, Cronin signals to other teams that the "no man's land" leverage is null and void and even WITH CJ, we'll still suck this season, so pony up or we hang onto him until we have a better offer this offseason.

OK, I see--thank you for the clarification

 

[SharpesTriumph]

Late to the party here, because this place has been a freaking loony bin since the trade, but one of the things I find interesting that folks aren't talking about is the timing of it... Regardless of your feelings on the haul (I tend to think Joe was short at least an asset), the fact that he made the deal a week early makes me think there has to be a "next move", otherwise why settle on losing a trade with another week to negotiate?

It's a head-scratcher, to be honest, but those who argue that Cronin used "no logic" in the move are themselves, not being logical. He's a 15-year vet in the industry who's scratching and clawing for his once-in-a-lifetime job. We may not appreciate his logic, or see the whole picture, but to just pretend that he's some NBA exec Manchurian candidate making decisions with no strategic thought is just silly... The question is what was that logic?

The one (and, frankly, only) theory I keep coming back to is leverage in another deal, specifically, a CJ deal. It stands to reason that our big haul was always going to come from moving CJ. It also stands to reason, that the offseason is likely the time where you're going to have maximum suitors for him, and thus maximum negotiating leverage. Is it possible that a team, say NO, was lowballing us for CJ and Cronin's leverage chip was holding him until the offseason? If true, prior to the trade, that team could've been trying to leverage us being in "no-man's land" with Ant, CJ, Norm and Powell. By trading Roco and Powell, Cronin makes it clear that we're all-in on youth and tanking. It's Cronin not blinking in a game of chicken.

I believe there's a strategy in place, and that Dame has been bought in (because, come on, no interim-GM wanting the gig is going to do anything without his star's approval), but this is really the only scenario I can think of that feels like it might make some sense... If Cronin came up an asset short in one trade but is able to leverage an additional asset in another, you could at least see how that could be...

I don't buy your far reaching grasp at justifying that trade. Cronin took a crap return because it sends some message to potential CJ trade partners? If so he might be a bigger idiot than I'm thinking.

Secondly, trading Powell didn't even solve the crowded backcourt. It still is overcrowded with three short guards making 20-50 million each that can't all play together. Norm was literally the only one of the 4 that the team didn't have to trade.

Its more likely the team just made a stupid trade. Your sentiment was the same when the team traded away Zach Randolph for nothing, or signed Evan Turner, or had LaMarcus walk away. Sometimes the team just does something that is immediately bad and stupid.

Another possibility is Jody said you must 100% get below the luxury tax now I don't care the return. And Joe panicked. All of these seem much more plausible than Cronin being a hidden genius playing 4 dimensional chess.

 

[MickZagger]

if there’s some kind of unique asset that we got in the clippers trade—an asset that we only got in order to a very specific follow up move—it makes no sense to do this deal “early” without the other deal in place to execute immediately afterward.

Some team is just clamoring for Eric Bledsoe and couldn’t put together a package to peel him away from the Clips?

 

[SharpesTriumph]

I'm saying -- without the Powell/Roco trade, the optimal time to trade CJ would've been in the offseason -- that's our leverage point in trade negotiations. By moving Powell and Roco, Cronin signals to other teams that the "no man's land" leverage is null and void and even WITH CJ, we'll still suck this season, so pony up or we hang onto him until we have a better offer this offseason.

And you think this message is going to get us what, a top 55 protected second round pick?

There is no way this message gives us a better return than the team just lost in the stupid Clipper trade.

 

[glazeduck]

And you think this message is going to get us what, a top 55 protected second round pick?

There is no way this message gives us a better return than the team just lost in the stupid Clipper trade.

I feel like I went out of my way to make clear that I wasn't excited about the trade. I posited a theory, fine to disagree with it, but there's not a lot to discuss when you're not willing to embrace a premise of there being some sort of logic behind the move. If you're right, we'll have YEARS to be miserable and bemoan ownership. Why get a head start?

 

[cheesehoff]

One of the most frustrating things I read in here on a daily basis is the "throw in a frp or 2". Another is the common offseason sentiment about how hamstrung we are because of the cap situation. Now there's a good chance we won't have to worry as much about our cap and very few members have identified that after the trade. And then the response is "no good fa want to come here". So, it's obvious the most reliable way to improve the talent is through the draft. And if it takes our draftees a couple years to develop and they aren't ready during Dame's best years, so what. It's one roster spot a year, maybe two. But, if we just keep throwing those picks in trades like they're useless, we'll keep circling back to the same issue. I have a feeling CB will be very good at developing young guys/rookies and the best part about a rookie is it only lasts one year. Not to mention that there are rookies who actually can contribute their first year.
So, while everyone is trying to figure out the trade that puts us over the top, leave the draft picks alone. When management is unable to attract a star fa year after year, those useless draft picks will be developing just like Ant and Nas. (Speaking of Nas, I can see KJ following in his footsteps as far as his development goes. Same kind of descriptors used on both guys.) Maybe these young guys aren't gonna contribute to a ring in the next year or two and that's ok because Dame's career won't be over in a year or two. Use our other assets for the short term but keep making draft picks for the future and maybe, just maybe, they pick someone that is able to contribute right away in some aspect of the game. Oscar Tsheibwe, Keegan Murray, Ochai Agbaji, Christian Koloko, Orlando Robinson, Jalen Duren, Kendall Brown. All guys who have something to offer right away and if they don't, then let them sit for a year and grow so that they are ready to contribute while our window is still open.

 

[Labinot41]

does really anyone here want's to see Cronins next move ?

 

[PtldPlatypus]

does really anyone here want's to see Cronins next move ?

Is it to Los Angeles?

 

[Labinot41]

who remembers this? It’s when the Blazers drafted CJ in 2013

 

[wizenheimer]

Late to the party here, because this place has been a freaking loony bin since the trade, but one of the things I find interesting that folks aren't talking about is the timing of it... Regardless of your feelings on the haul (I tend to think Joe was short at least an asset), the fact that he made the deal a week early makes me think there has to be a "next move", otherwise why settle on losing a trade with another week to negotiate?

that has been said here several times and I have asked the question before, what exactly happened in that trade that sets up another trade?

* Blazers traded away 2 players and brought back 3 so they now have a full roster. No open slots so that wasn't the strategy

* Blazers got under the tax line but only shaved 6.1M off of next year's cap. That's a pittance compared to what Simons and Nurkic will get paid. So clearing salary for next season wasn't a significant component of this trade

* because of this season's tax avoidance and next season's potential tax squeeze, the option of using Bledsoe in a trade before the deadline seems pretty remote. And trying to preserve his 3.9M guarantee as a trade chip around the draft would not pivot on any trade the Blazers make now

* Blazers now have a 2025 2nd round pick as trade leverage....which is only slightly better than a bag of chips and a beer

but more than all that, I haven't seen a single trade suggestion, for CJ or Nurkic or Nance that couldn't be completed if that trade hadn't happened. There is no connection I've seen yet. In fact, because the Blazers have a full roster after Friday's trade, if they do a subsequent 1 for 2 or 2 for 3 trade they have to waive a current player

I'm not saying there is absolutely no way the trade wasn't necessary for whatever happens over the next 3 days. I just can't imagine what that need would be

 

[BoomChakaLaka]

who remembers this? It’s when the Blazers drafted CJ in 2013

View attachment 44994

caption this!

 

[glazeduck]

that has been said here several times and I have asked the question before, what exactly happened in that trade that sets up another trade?

* Blazers traded away 2 players and brought back 3 so they now have a full roster. No open slots so that wasn't the strategy

* Blazers got under the tax line but only shaved 6.1M off of next year's cap. That's a pittance compared to what Simons and Nurkic will get paid. So clearing salary for next season wasn't a significant component of this trade

* because of this season's tax avoidance and next season's potential tax squeeze, the option of using Bledsoe in a trade before the deadline seems pretty remote. And trying to preserve his 3.9M guarantee as a trade chip around the draft would not pivot on any trade the Blazers make now

* Blazers now have a 2025 2nd round pick as trade leverage....which is only slightly better than a bag of chips and a beer

but more than all that, I haven't seen a single trade suggestion, for CJ or Nurkic or Nance that couldn't be completed if that trade hadn't happened. There is no connection I've seen yet. In fact, because the Blazers have a full roster after Friday's trade, if they do a subsequent 1 for 2 or 2 for 3 trade they have to waive a current player

I'm not saying there is absolutely no way the trade wasn't necessary for whatever happens over the next 3 days. I just can't imagine what that need would be

I'm certainly not suggesting that somehow Cronin got some super special piece that's going to leverage [INSERT FAVORITE SUPERSTAR HERE], but let's use Herb Jones for example... Let's say in their discussions (because they've ABSOLUTELY been involved in these discussions) Chauncey is just absolutely convinced that he's the missing piece (as some here are)... It's no secret that NO has been in talks for CJ, but perhaps Jones is the sticking point? All my theory is really suggesting is perhaps Cronin sees effectively tearing off the tanking band-aid as gaining leverage on NO to include Herb.

I'm offering from a place of rationality. As others have suggested, perhaps that's my issue, but I'm willing to give Cronin the benefit of the doubt at least up to the deadline that perhaps there was some strategic forethought in that aberration of a trade. Because again, if that's not the case, and he really just screwed the pooch, we're going to be miserable for a long time to come anyway.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

that has been said here several times and I have asked the question before, what exactly happened in that trade that sets up another trade?

* Blazers traded away 2 players and brought back 3 so they now have a full roster. No open slots so that wasn't the strategy

* Blazers got under the tax line but only shaved 6.1M off of next year's cap. That's a pittance compared to what Simons and Nurkic will get paid. So clearing salary for next season wasn't a significant component of this trade

* because of this season's tax avoidance and next season's potential tax squeeze, the option of using Bledsoe in a trade before the deadline seems pretty remote. And trying to preserve his 3.9M guarantee as a trade chip around the draft would not pivot on any trade the Blazers make now

* Blazers now have a 2025 2nd round pick as trade leverage....which is only slightly better than a bag of chips and a beer

but more than all that, I haven't seen a single trade suggestion, for CJ or Nurkic or Nance that couldn't be completed if that trade hadn't happened. There is no connection I've seen yet. In fact, because the Blazers have a full roster after Friday's trade, if they do a subsequent 1 for 2 or 2 for 3 trade they have to waive a current player

I'm not saying there is absolutely no way the trade wasn't necessary for whatever happens over the next 3 days. I just can't imagine what that need would be

Agreed.

Add to that, if the LAC trade was necessary for a subsequent move, you do it as a 3 team trade when the big asset your trying to get is confirmed to come. You don't break them into 2 seperate trades where you might be stuck without agreements for the follow up deal. Being a GM 101.

Otherwise this would be more like the Kings trading away picks to clear cap space to make an offer to Wesley Matthews.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

I'm certainly not suggesting that somehow Cronin got some super special piece that's going to leverage [INSERT FAVORITE SUPERSTAR HERE], but let's use Herb Jones for example... Let's say in their discussions (because they've ABSOLUTELY been involved in these discussions) Chauncey is just absolutely convinced that he's the missing piece (as some here are)... It's no secret that NO has been in talks for CJ, but perhaps Jones is the sticking point? All my theory is really suggesting is perhaps Cronin sees effectively tearing off the tanking band-aid as gaining leverage on NO to include Herb.

This isn't rational. It makes no logical sense. If a GM is behaving this way, he is irrational.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

I feel like I went out of my way to make clear that I wasn't excited about the trade. I posited a theory, fine to disagree with it, but there's not a lot to discuss when you're not willing to embrace a premise of there being some sort of logic behind the move. If you're right, we'll have YEARS to be miserable and bemoan ownership. Why get a head start?

Yes I completely disagree with your theory.

If I'm right I have 3 more days to vent my frustrations with Blazers management then I'm probably going to take a break of following this team closely until the draft. I'm venting now because I'm pissed a team I rooted for the last 30 years sent out 2 starters for 3 scrubs earning 11 million next year with no way to replace them.

I can vent all I want now. Your posting irrational justifications to explain a horrible trade doesn't make sense to me and I may call it out.

 

[wizenheimer]

Yes I completely disagree with your theory.

If I'm right I have 3 more days to vent my frustrations with Blazers management then I'm probably going to take a break of following this team closely until the draft. I'm venting now because I'm pissed a team I rooted for the last 30 years sent out 2 starters for 3 scrubs earning 11 million next year with no way to replace them.

I can vent all I want now. Your posting irrational justifications to explain a horrible trade doesn't make sense to me and I may call it out.

I know you know, but that's only 2 scrubs earning 7M and 4M in dead money. The good thing is that, IIRC, if Bledsoe signs with another team this summer, that 3.9M will be reduced.

 

[Idog1976]

CJ McCollum to Pelicans
Jusuf Nurkic and Josh Hart to Indy
Domantas Sabonis, Jackson Hayes and Tomáš Satoranský to Portland

Now THAT is a delicious trade and one I would endorse. Sabonis and a hopefully revitalized Hayes would be potentially awesome. I also love bringing Sabonis to Portland due to his dad.