Trade the vets?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Which of these should be traded by this season's trade deadline?

  • Total voters
    72
Grant is one of the most overpaid players in the NBA. Cronin is dishing out $160 million to a forward who has no interest in rebounding. Get his ass out of here.
 
- Grant to Chicago for Lonzo/Patrick Williams/Our pick back.

- Brogdon for Batum/Roco/2028 pick (try to negotiate minimal protections).

- Thybulle for Holmes + 2025 lottery protected pick.

We get a potential PFotF in Williams to plug in next to Toumani at SF and effectively 3 firsts. Lonzo and Holmes will be on for another year and we can use their contracts later on in future moves.
 
illmatic99 said:
- Grant to Chicago for Lonzo/Patrick Williams/Our pick back.

- Brogdon for Batum/Roco/2028 pick (try to negotiate minimal protections).

- Thybulle for Holmes + 2025 lottery protected pick.

We get a potential PFotF in Williams to plug in next to Toumani at SF and effectively 3 firsts. Lonzo and Holmes will be on for another year and we can use their contracts later on in future moves.
Click to expand...

The problem with these types of threads is they start to become a wish list with little chance of happening. If Wiliams is any good why would Chicago do that deal? They would be crazy to. And I am not sure the picks do much. People are already complaining about Murray and even though I was not thrilled with that pick, there are not many others that we missed out on. Some will emerge but it is such a crap shoot. Sre they can be combined with trades but I am happy with Thybulle.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Brook and Casey did a podcast and they said Brogdon has basically been like a coach for this team. Maybe he doesn’t want to leave?
Click to expand...
If he's not starting and he's not competing for wins, he'll want to leave. He only has one more season on this contract and it likely isn't his last big one if he can stay healthy and show his value. I could see him sticking around until the deadline but it's not like the guy is Kyle Lowry.
 
In my opinion the one of the three of Grant , Brogs and Williams will be OFF the team by deadline for sure and I put the percentage that 2 are gone by deadline at 70% and all three like 25% ( Grant staying if 2 of 3 are gone )

Grant -- I would like to see him gone over the other three but his contract is a hard one to swallow unless a team is like -- Grant is the perfect piece for our team to get us over the hump and not going to lie not sure if this is going to happen but who knows the NBA is funny that way.

Brogs -- I like Brogs for this team as long as he wants to be here and I am guessing he will be all sunshine and roses until the end of Nov. when he can be traded with other players. I happen to like Brogs even though some think he is a ball hog ( WRONG !) but he is also a good mentor for Scoot to help him through the tough stretch he is going through and such. I am not against trading him but now that Ant is out I think he will remain a Blazers until Ant is back almost for certain unless some team just makes an offer Cronin cannot refuse.

Williams -- I think it's 50/50 if he is traded but IF he is traded and if not a part of being packaged with Brogs again then he will be a Blazer until the deadline almost for sure. I have not seen enough of him so far to say IF i want him to stay or go but I also think it's about if he can be happy with only getting 15 to 20 minutes a night and maybe being sat every few games to make sure he is good.


What I would like the team to get for these players

Grant -- player with a big contract with 2 or less years remaining but can still play a little not just a shell of a player -- young player ( under 26 ) who needs a change ( Reddish type player ) and couple 2nd round picks --- this is the best you can hope for cause of Grants deal

Brogs -- Similar to Grant on 1st part -- future 1st and maybe a solid young player but more upside then the player wanted in Grant deal

Williams -- Late 1st rounder ( 24 plus ) plus a solid role player / aging vet with tread on tires ( 10 to 15 min per game type ) and either a young player with a touch of upside or sub in a 2nd round pick that will be in the Top 15 of the 2nd round

I may not be a fan of Cronin but he has shown this summer he might not be a complete idiot when it comes to making trades but was that a fluke and he learned his lessons from the Clipps and Pels trades that made a lot of fans outside of the Dame thing dislike him.
 
I'm on board with trading Brogdon, because even though he's good, he doesn't fit with the timeline, and there isn't enough room long term for him, Simons, Scoot, and Sharpe. Also Grant, because he's a chucker who can't rebound.

Simons, I used to want to trade him, but after seeing Scoot, I've greatly cooled on that. We have no idea if Scoot will end up being any good. Right now, he looks like Markelle Fultz.

This team really needs to find a PF for the young core. (Camara might be the answer at SF)
 
I'd think the Raptors would be interested in a player like Brogdon, in exchange for one or more of their plethora of forwards.

Maybe for Precious and Trent (filler). Precious is a very good defender and rebounder.

Then Grant can move to SF till we find a new spot for him.
 
beast crnjo said:
I'd think the Raptors would be interested in a player like Brogdon, in exchange for one or more of their plethora of forwards.

Maybe for Precious and Trent (filler). Precious is a very good defender and rebounder.

Then Grant can move to SF till we find a new spot for him.
Click to expand...
Move Grant…. Off the team.
 
illmatic99 said:
- Grant to Chicago for Lonzo/Patrick Williams/Our pick back.

- Brogdon for Batum/Roco/2028 pick (try to negotiate minimal protections).

- Thybulle for Holmes + 2025 lottery protected pick.

We get a potential PFotF in Williams to plug in next to Toumani at SF and effectively 3 firsts. Lonzo and Holmes will be on for another year and we can use their contracts later on in future moves.
Click to expand...
Patrick Williams saying he wanted $30+ per year on his next deal frightens me quite a bit.
 
I think this team is still very raw other than Simons / Grant / Brogdon / DA / RW3 - only one of them is a forward. I think that until Sharpe becomes even better at ball handling (and he already is much better than last year), this team still needs someone a little bigger like Grant that can put it on the floor and attack the basket. So, unless Sharpe continues to increase his play at the amazing rate we have seen so far, I think we are probably keeping Grant for this year.

Unless an amazing deal can be had, my gut feeling is that Simons, Grant and probably Brogdon are still around, RW3 is the most likely to be moved if you ask me, he is on a very team friendly deal which makes him easy to trade, he offers a real option to a contender that needs another good defensive big and the Blazers can get a nice portion of his production with Walker, TC on the court behind DA.
 
Question -- IF the Blazers had to package a future 1st to get off of Grant's deal would that be a deal breaker ??

I think for me and this year it would be a deal breaker but after this year I think it's something that would need to be considered for the future of the team. I would be ok with a trade of a future 1st IF - I was confident that getting Grant off this team would be better for the growth of this team in the long run AND pretty sure that pick would end up in the 23 or lower range . It would be a gamble for sure but right now not sure Grant helps the young guys be better but also wonder how much is tied to Billups and his style too. I am curious on how other feel on this cause it could be a legit question IF he is not traded by the start of next season.
 
Ripcity4life77 said:
Question -- IF the Blazers Had to package a future 1st to get off of Grant's deal would that be a deal breaker ??

I think for me and this year it would be a deal breaker but after this year I think it's something that would need to be considered for the future of the team. I would be ok with a trade of a future 1st IF I was confident that getting Grant off this team would be better for the growth of this team in the long run and pretty sure that pick would end up in the 23 or lower range . It would be a gamble for sure but right now not sure Grant helps the young guys be better but also wonder how much is tied to Billups and his style too. I am curious on how other feel on this cause it could be a legit question IF he is not traded the start of next season.
Click to expand...
Absolute deal breaker. Either they think/know he has value around the league, or they want to keep him around. Because they knew Dame wanted out when they signed that deal. There's no chance you offer that to him if you know you'll have to pay to eventually get off of it.
 
Ripcity4life77 said:
Question -- IF the Blazers had to package a future 1st to get off of Grant's deal would that be a deal breaker ??

I think for me and this year it would be a deal breaker but after this year I think it's something that would need to be considered for the future of the team. I would be ok with a trade of a future 1st IF I was confident that getting Grant off this team would be better for the growth of this team in the long run and pretty sure that pick would end up in the 23 or lower range . It would be a gamble for sure but right now not sure Grant helps the young guys be better but also wonder how much is tied to Billups and his style too. I am curious on how other feel on this cause it could be a legit question IF he is not traded by the start of next season.
Click to expand...
We have to have contracts on this team to hit the floor. If we have to pay to get off his salary we just keep him. It won’t hurt until Sharpe is due for his extension.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RR7
I have to say Nate your comment on Grant in your 1st response of this thread kind of got me thinking about this cause I agree with you on this point on Grant but NOW your saying it's not the case. I think your right the longer he is a Blazer and NOT traded outside the last year of the deal it will become harder to trade him cause of his contract.

What has changed that has made you soften your stance or am i mistaken cause it sounds like you have kind of walked back your take to a degree.
 
If Grant would just reign it in and start playing within the offense a bit, he'd be ok.

Wouldn't it be nice if the Blazers had a person whose role was to instruct players how to play?
 
Ripcity4life77 said:
I have to say Nate your comment on Grant in your 1st response of this thread kind of got me thinking about this cause I agree with you on this point on Grant but NOW your saying it's not the case. I think your right the longer he is a Blazer and NOT traded outside the last year of the deal it will become harder to trade him cause of his contract.

What has changed that has made you soften your stance or am i mistaken cause it sounds like you have kind of walked back your take to a degree.
Click to expand...
I want to get assets for Grant. I didn’t want him to walk for nothing after giving up the first that ended up being Jalen Duren. But if we have send out a first to move him, fuck that. Rather just keep his salary. We don’t have to worry about his money for a few years when Sharpe is due for a payday or Ayton is due for an extension.
 
beast crnjo said:
If Grant would just reign it in and start playing within the offense a bit, he'd be ok.
Click to expand...

I agree with you but like I said in another thread, with Simons out and Brogdon coming off the bench....the offense is struggling right now and I think the game plan is for Grant to create his own shot....which is not a good idea. But other than Sharpe, who else in that starting lineup can? I think replacing Tisse in the starting lineup with Brogdon would allow Grant to do what he does best.......catch and shoot. (and cut to the basket)
 
RR7 said:
Absolute deal breaker. Either they think/know he has value around the league, or they want to keep him around. Because they knew Dame wanted out when they signed that deal. There's no chance you offer that to him if you know you'll have to pay to eventually get off of it.
Click to expand...
They might have been wrong, though. In the world where no team wants him at his current contract (which I don't think it an unreasonable world, although who knows?), are the Blazers better off overpaying him to be a shoot-first guy who's a liability in other areas of the game, or give additional value to get rid of him?

I don't know the answer. Right now, clearly we're only 4 games in, and there's no rush, but it's also tough to justify paying so much for a guy who may stunt development of the younger guys while occasionally helping us win games (diminishing the draft picks we get while we're rebuilding).
 
beast crnjo said:
Average coach of a some very talented teams I'd say.
Click to expand...
Where it has been said many times that Stotts was a good coach that took way less talented teams further than they should ever have gone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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