Forum Game Would you be okay with keeping Anfernee if he went to the bench?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

OK with Anfernee so long as he's not a starter?

  • Yes

    Votes: 25 67.6%

  • No - just let him walk next Summer

    Votes: 8 21.6%

  • No - attach a pick to him to offload him now

    Votes: 4 10.8%
  • Total voters
    37

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Rastapopoulos

Rastapopoulos

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Messages
42,203
Likes
26,575
Points
113
Answer the question! (I'm going to build in the assumption that we cannot trade him for positive assets.)
 
Yes, if he didn’t pout and embraced the “microwave” roll. Having shooters on the bench is important imo.
 
yeah it would never happen.
 
Simons won't accept being a backup here or a backup sized contract. Thats not uncommon - its the same situation with Grant/Ayton. It takes going to a new team for players in these situations to accept that.
 
Yeah, it all comes down to his contract. I have been his biggest supporter, but I have always said he needs to come off the bench.
I was ok with trading him for #16, but that ship has sailed.

If someone wants to pay him more when he becomes a FA then let him walk. If someone gives us a quality RFP, then take it.
But overall, I would like him coming off our bench for about 20 million per.
 
42N8Bounce said:
Honest question, why not? Coaching, or player attitude?

if it’s for the betterment of the team, why would the coach or player object to Ant coming off the bench? Ego?
Click to expand...
It's the same dynamic as anyone here in their careers. Lets say you get hired as an entry level position then work your way up to a manager. Your not going to accept going back to your old role. Maybe you would accept doing those duties if you started at a new company.
 
SharpesTriumph said:
It's the same dynamic as anyone here in their careers. Lets say you get hired as an entry level position then work your way up to a manager. Your not going to accept going back to your old role. Maybe you would accept doing those duties if you started at a new company.
Click to expand...
That makes sense. I didn't realize that they accepted a certain roll with the team and their contract stipulated that they had to start. I thought that's why we had a coach.
 
SharpesTriumph said:
It's the same dynamic as anyone here in their careers. Lets say you get hired as an entry level position then work your way up to a manager. You're not going to accept going back to your old role. Maybe you would accept doing those duties if you started at a new company.
Click to expand...

I agree that is how it usually happens, but not in every case. It will still come down to his next contract IMO. Especially if:

If he and the team excelled with him coming off the bench, this next year.
If no one else is willing to start him, either.
If no one else has the cap space, or has it but prefers someone else.

I would still take a decent FRP for him, but if it isn't offered, then sit him down and explain how he would help the team by coming off the bench.
The way the team is constructed now....we need his shooting for this next year.
 
Bench him, but I don't think the team will do that. I do wish the team had developed him to be a bench player, because he is a one trick player and that skill (shooting) is great coming off the bench.
 
Quatro44 said:
Bench him, but I don't think the team will do that. I do wish the team had developed him to be a bench player, because he is a one trick player and that skill (shooting) is great coming off the bench.
Click to expand...

I think that was the goal when they had Dame and drafted Shae.
 
There is no way he comes off the bench.
 
THE HCP said:
Not happening FAMS!
Click to expand...
If he beats out either Shae or Scoot for a guard position then he starts. However, i'm sure that would be predicated, being part of their short term plan and/or any trade that would affect the guards?
 
Wizard Mentor said:
correction, there is no way Billups brings him off the bench.

Our GM said he's building a team around Scoot and Sharpe. If they don't start, he should be fired.
Click to expand...
GMs have a lot of meaningless talk. It's the GM that hasnhaf Ant Ayton Grant on the roster. They earn the majority of the payroll and have started 100% of their games post CJ era.

If the GM wants the team to be built around Scoot/Sharpe it's on him to clear entitled veterans out of the way.
 
Hoopguru said:
If he beats out either Shae or Scoot for a guard position then he starts. However, i'm sure that would be predicated, being part of their short term plan and/or any trade that would affect the guards?
Click to expand...
It really doesn't matters how these guys perform. Deni and Camara clearly outplayed Grant all season. Grant still started 100% of games and got tons of shots.

It's just going to be Ant and Grant starting no matter what. So two of Scoot Sharpe Deni Camara will be benched.
 
42N8Bounce said:
That makes sense. I didn't realize that they accepted a certain roll with the team and their contract stipulated that they had to start. I thought that's why we had a coach.
Click to expand...
Their legally not contractually obligated to start or keep a role, it's just a standard expectation.

Blazers aren't the only team. Look a Klay getting bitter in Golden State when they tried to reduce his role. It's part of a dynamic that normally leads to player movement.

I do agree that this could be something that changes next summer - even if Ant stays. If Ant gets to free agency and no team will pay him more than the MLE - then the Blazers could negotiate a deal with him under an expectation he might come off the bench. Totally different than right now where he was told he leads the teams offense post Dame.
 
While I'd love to trade them, I am perfectly fine with Ant, Grant and Ayton going to the bench and staying there except for rare occasion. If we can trade them and get any kind of value back, great. If not, let them sit their contracts out and walk.
 
42N8Bounce said:
Honest question, why not? Coaching, or player attitude?

if it’s for the betterment of the team, why would the coach or player object to Ant coming off the bench? Ego?
Click to expand...
Because he is the best and longest tenured player in the team. This is professional sports and he will not be coming off the bench. Said the exact same things last summer when people swore he wasn’t going to start. As long as he is on this roster, he will start.
 
THE HCP said:
Because he is the best and longest tenured player in the team. This is professional sports and he will not be coming off the bench. Said the exact same things last summer when people swore he wasn’t going to start. As long as he is on this roster, he will start.
Click to expand...
Exactly why he needs to be traded as soon as humanly possible. And should have been traded before last season.
 
Last edited:
Now are we asking if he SHOULD come off the bench…. Or do you WANT him coming off the bench… or COULD he?
 
Phatguysrule said:
Exactly why he needs to be traded as soon as humanly possible. Amd should have been traded before last season.
Click to expand...
If we are not trying to lose games anymore, I’m not so sure that’s a good idea. We are definitely better with him or we have a better shot at winning games with him.
 
SharpesTriumph said:
It really doesn't matters how these guys perform. Deni and Camara clearly outplayed Grant all season. Grant still started 100% of games and got tons of shots.
Click to expand...
My theory is that Billups was going to bench Grant - and that is when his 'injury' occurred.

Grant/Blazers both agreed to let him sit out the remaining games and try and trade him in the summer.

We can't know for sure... but we may have clues if Grant is still on the team at the beginning of the season.
 
THE HCP said:
Because he is the best and longest tenured player in the team. This is professional sports and he will not be coming off the bench. Said the exact same things last summer when people swore he wasn’t going to start. As long as he is on this roster, he will start.
Click to expand...

As long as he is the best option, then he should start. I am not one to give a starting position based on their draft position.

At the same time, if Scoot has a killer summer and earns the starting PG position, then he needs to start regardless of tenure or salary.
Ant is also the best option we have to provide scoring off the bench. Bottom line is because this is professional sports, the only thing that should matter is what is best for the team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top