Trade Trading Trent

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Fez Hammersticks

スーパーバッド Zero Cool
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
29,208
Likes
9,903
Points
113
The ‘21 free-agency crop is drying up and teams (Knicks) could throw absurd money at Trent.

For the record, I don’t want to trade Trent and view him as a legitimate building block that should be the starting SG (if it weren’t for CJ’s enormous contract).

To avoid losing Trent for nothing — trading him could be the smart move, especially when you consider his anti-small market agent in Rich Paul.

:banghead2:
 
Not buying the theory that Stotts starts CJ because of his contract. And as long as Trent comes in halfway through the 1st quarter, do we really care? If Trent shoots better than Jones and Hood, I guarantee he will be finishing games at SF...
 
Unless Trent proves he can be great with the in his hands I don't see anyone dropping a significant amount for him.
 
Whats the biggest contract he's eligible for after this season?
 
He turned down 4 years $51 million. He is not going to be cheap to keep.
 
Whats the biggest contract he's eligible for after this season?

if the cap stays the same, as some are already projecting, then at 109.1M Trent would be eligible for a base salary of 25% of the cap, or 27.28M. 4 years would put his total base salary at 109.1M (duh). IIRC another team can only offer 5% step raises of 1.36M. Six of those = 8.2M for a total of 117.3M

in other words a 4 year deal at 29.3M a year. Obviously, he isn't going to get that but there's a huge margin between that and the max extension Portland can give Trent this season which is in the range of 11-12M year. That margin is a wide target for Trent and his agent to shoot for and the obvious incentive for Trent to not sign and extension right now. I also doubt he'd willingly sign up to be CJ's backup for the next 4 years
 
Isn't he a RFA at the end of the year? And can't we match any offer?
 
He turned down 4 years $51 million. He is not going to be cheap to keep.
Yeah depending on the year he has I think he'll cost us between 15 and 18 million per season. Like everything this season, with a few guys returning from injury and a few new pieces. We will have to see how each player's individual value plays out. We should keep players based on their value relative to Dame. Who makes Dame better and who can Dame be a champion with? I actually think that when all is said and done Gary and DJJ will prove that they are the exact kind of players that Dame needs around him.

There are a lot of situations in which I can see us keeping both but the one that will ruffle the fewest feathers around here is Neil convincing DJJ to stay on for the second year of his deal and then promising him the early bird extension of 15 million per year after that and then paying Gary anything he is offered under 20 million per.
 
Yeah depending on the year he has I think he'll cost us between 15 and 18 million per season. Like everything this season, with a few guys returning from injury and a few new pieces. We will have to see how each player's individual value plays out. We should keep players based on their value relative to Dame. Who makes Dame better and who can Dame be a champion with? I actually think that when all is said and done Gary and DJJ will prove that they are the exact kind of players that Dame needs around him.

There are a lot of situations in which I can see us keeping both but the one that will ruffle the fewest feathers around here is Neil convincing DJJ to stay on for the second year of his deal and then promising him the early bird extension of 15 million per year after that and then paying Gary anything he is offered under 20 million per.

I could see a team offering him a toxic offer sheet
 
I could see a team offering him a toxic offer sheet
There really is no such thing for us. We aren't the Utah Jazz and I'm pretty sure those front loaded contracts aren't even allowed anymore after what we did to them with Wes. If someone offers Gary more money a year than we think he's worth then we either have to tell them we'll call their bluff and try to extract draft considerations in a sign and trade for him or we let him go for nothing. We can't pay a player more than he's worth and there's nothing toxic about that, it's just a dumb move by another team that they'll regret and we won't.

If Gary comes out this season and is a total stud. A stopper on defense, great three point shooter and has added to his game as someone who can create his own shot, then we have a lot of ways we can make adjustments to match any offer another team would give him.
 
Let's wait and see if he's early bubbly Trent or playoff Trent. The latter is not worth much.
 
Let's wait and see if he's early bubbly Trent or playoff Trent. The latter is not worth much.
I liked what we got out of Gary in the five games against the Lakers. He was playing out of position much of the time and tasked far too often with defending LeBron which is a horrible mismatch. When he was defending Green he was doing great. He was lights out from three. The only thing I didn't like was that he tried to do too much and took some bad shots inside. It was a learning experience for him and didn't discourage me at all.
 
Let see how many minutes he gets this year before we start throwing out big contract. Will Hood start taking some of his minutes when everyone is healthy due to he can play the 2 also. I believe trade deadline one or 2 players will have traded to make players happy about there playing time. Right now when everyone healthy there will be 11 players deserve minutes so you know that's not going happen so who going be left out. My prediction at trade deadline there will one or two players traded.
 
For better or worse I think having no fans will boost his performance this year.
 
The ‘21 free-agency crop is drying up and teams (Knicks) could throw absurd money at Trent.

For the record, I don’t want to trade Trent and view him as a legitimate building block that should be the starting SG (if it weren’t for CJ’s enormous contract).

To avoid losing Trent for nothing — trading him could be the smart move, especially when you consider his anti-small market agent in Rich Paul.

:banghead2:

Lets win the championship first this year then we'll talk.
 
Crabbe got 17 million a year. Look at how much money Danny Green has gotten over the years. A decent 3&D guy can pull in the cash.

That Crabbe offseason was an anomaly, everyone got overpaid that year because of the cap spike.

Now comparing Green to Trent i don't think it's ok. Green was very well known and respected for his past and he also got a 2 year deal on this overpay, but Lakers had the cap to give it to him. His previous 40/4 was a bargain for what he brought on the table.

Trent is not that good right now to worry about his contract, we will see next offseason how much he has improved. He is an ok defender and can see him getting maybe 10M because we cannot afford to miss him. There are many Trents around the league that you wouldn't want to spend 50M/4 for, but since we cannot replace him through free agency he will probably be another overpay.

I would have absolutely no problem replacing Trent with Justin Holiday for example in the current win now situation we are in. Holiday is better defender and same shooter. Yes Trent is 9 years younger so he won't go for 5M like Holiday, but he is no better on the court.
 
We should trade Nurk and Roco soon as they will be on expiring contracts in the summer.

DJJ should be traded first as he can walk for nothing.

Trade Giles too as if he plays well we may not be able to resign him.
 
That Crabbe offseason was an anomaly, everyone got overpaid that year because of the cap spike.

Now comparing Green to Trent i don't think it's ok. Green was very well known and respected for his past and he also got a 2 year deal on this overpay, but Lakers had the cap to give it to him. His previous 40/4 was a bargain for what he brought on the table.

Trent is not that good right now to worry about his contract, we will see next offseason how much he has improved. He is an ok defender and can see him getting maybe 10M because we cannot afford to miss him. There are many Trents around the league that you wouldn't want to spend 50M/4 for, but since we cannot replace him through free agency he will probably be another overpay.

I would have absolutely no problem replacing Trent with Justin Holiday for example in the current win now situation we are in. Holiday is better defender and same shooter. Yes Trent is 9 years younger so he won't go for 5M like Holiday, but he is no better on the court.
There is going to be quite a bit of FA money available next offseason and IMO some 2016 type bad contracts will be given out. I'd rather trade a guy or two that may not be here next summer if that is doable.
 
Isn't he a RFA at the end of the year? And can't we match any offer?

Yeah, Portland can match any offer--the question is if another team offers him a big contract, will Portland match? Because Portland can't match any offer and stay out of the luxury tax. If not paying luxury tax is important to Portland ownership, they might have to let him go. Especially considering that matching a big offer would push Portland way into the tax, not just barely.
 
Yeah, Portland can match any offer--the question is if another team offers him a big contract, will Portland match? Because Portland can't match any offer and stay out of the luxury tax. If not paying luxury tax is important to Portland ownership, they might have to let him go. Especially considering that matching a big offer would push Portland way into the tax, not just barely.
I imagine we'll be less cheap next year because the main reason for being cheap this year is to avoid the "repeater" tax.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top