Jerami Grant receiving a lot of trade interest- (Jake Fisher)

[vege]

In fact the deal I've repeatedly advocated for (Grant/Olynyk for Hart/Bledsoe) continually get's crapped on because 1) people underrate Hart and 2) It doesn't include a pick. But it gives us back an excellent 2-way guard AND free's up an additional $15 mil n cap room, putting us around $43 mil which allows us to add multiple impact FA targets by virtue of clearing Olynyk's salary in the move.

Hart is a below average 3 point shooter who's in a hot streak on his new team. He has consistently been a 34% 3 point shooter, 13 games won't change that.Grant is by far the superior player of the two. Hart is only 1 year younger than Grant.

While Olynyk won't have a place/role in our team next season, Mr I don't want to be here is a cancer. An expiring cancer? sure, but Olynyk is a semi expiring and have a lot more value than Bledsoe around the league.

And no, you can't trade Bledsoe for Olynyk and then waive Bledsoe for only a few millions cap hit, you need to guarantee Bledsoe's entire contract to make that work, just like we had to guarantee Ariza's entire salary when we had to eat him in the Stewart's trade (so Houston could land Wood), and that part made the trade absolutely disgusting, but people don't understand that.

[Cowology]

In fact the deal I've repeatedly advocated for (Grant/Olynyk for Hart/Bledsoe) continually get's crapped on because 1) people underrate Hart and 2) It doesn't include a pick. But it gives us back an excellent 2-way guard AND free's up an additional $15 mil n cap room, putting us around $43 mil which allows us to add multiple impact FA targets by virtue of clearing Olynyk's salary in the move.

Hart is a below average 3 point shooter who's in a hot streak on his new team. He has consistently been a 34% 3 point shooter, 13 games won't change that.Grant is by far the superior player of the two. Hart is only 1 year younger than Grant.

While Olynyk won't have a place/role in our team next season, Mr I don't want to be here is a cancer. An expiring cancer? sure, but Olynyk is a semi expiring and have a lot more value than Bledsoe around the league.

And no, you can't trade Bledsoe for Olynyk and then waive Bledsoe for only a few millions cap hit, you need to guarantee Bledsoe's entire contract to make that work, just like we had to guarantee Ariza's entire salary when we had to eat him in the Stewart's trade (so Houston could land Wood), and that part made the trade absolutely disgusting, but people don't understand that.

I wasn't aware that we couldn't waive Bledsoe after the trade. That's weird. But I just found this article explaining how it changed with the most current CBA. Thanks. TPE works just as well. *shrug* Blazers waive him themselves, absorb the salary it's basically the same thing.

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2018/03/how-non-guaranteed-salaries-will-affect-trades-in-new-cba.html

[Kalamazoo317]

Bey is perfectly capable of playing well with Grant and of stinking without Grant. He just struggles with consistency right now. I think in general, though, he may struggle to be high impact with low usage unless he's just hot from the outside that night. Killian being more aggressive has also equated with Bey having more offensive struggle.

If we ever get to the playoffs, we'll really want players like Grant who can generate their own offense, beat one on one defense, and make tough shots.

[bstein14]

Here's a 3 way trade that would be interesting, and works in the trade checker.

Portland gets Jerami Grant, giving up a lottery pick this year and Eric Bledsoe.

LA Lakers trade Westbrook and a 2027 unprotected 1st and get Bledsoe, Olynyk, and CoJo.

Detroit trades Grant, Olynyk, and CoJo and gets a Blazers lottery pick this year, the Lakers 2027 unprotected 1st, and Westbrook.

Why for Portland? It's pretty much the rumored deal they would be willing to make to get Grant.

Why for the Lakers? They get three vets that can shoot the ball. CoJo and Bledsoe are both Klutch clients, and Bledsoe is really close with LeBron. But overall, most importantly they get out of the Westbrook situation without taking on more longer term money.

Why for Detroit? They give up $10 million of cap space next year to take on Westbrook's contract, but in return they get a lottery pick this year and a potentially good pick 5 years from now... This still leaves Detroit with more than MLE money to spendt his summer, but really sets them up for the summer of 2023 to be their big FA addition offseason with Westbrook's $47 million coming off the books. I'm not a Westbrook fan by any means and part of me hates it for Detroit, but the Lakers might turn desperate to move Westbrook out of town without having to simply agree to a buyout.

[Manocad]

Other than your abstract anecdote of claiming its a correlation vs causation situation, you didn't bring anything forth here that reflects on the team being better with Jerami Grant.

Correlation vs causation isn't an "abstract anecdote." Correlation is simply a data comparison whereas causation is a scientific analysis of cause and effect. The point made is simple; a correlation of greater winning percentage without Grant than with him--especially given a small sample size--does not equate to the team playing better BECAUSE Grant is out, nor vice versa. It could be coincidental, especially given that we have seen the "Big 3" put up some pretty solid games and have also seen some games where the offense flowed better without Grant.

That all being said, would the team be better without Grant? Who knows. The only thing that can be said if that if there isn't a good deal for Grant available the team will just have to make the best of it.

[Cowology]

Chet/Paolo/Jabari & even Bagley could all arguably push for that 4 spot. Obviously we need to wait on the draft, but you don't have to be a Grant hater to recognize that we've potentially got a logjam at the 3/4 spot we need to clear up. One of Bey or Grant will probably have to give.

We can move Grant to the 3-spot but that almost certainly ends Beys' career in Detroit. He's still on a rookie contract and should get 1 more year to see if he can become more consistent. Despite his struggles, he did show improvement over his rookie season.

It makes a lot more sense to move Grant for a guard. It's not about hating Grant or thinking he sucks; it's simply recognizing that the best way for us to rebalance our roster may be to shift his productivity to the backcourt. We don't need another pick/prospect; we need a guy who can essentially give you the same production/impact but at a great position of need. If you take emotion out of this and get over whatever attachment you have Grant, this is the move that probably makes the most sense in terms of addressing our needs.

[DetroitSho]

Chet/Paolo/Jabari & even Bagley could all arguably push for that 4 spot. Obviously we need to wait on the draft, but you don't have to be a Grant hater to recognize that we've potentially got a logjam at the 3/4 spot we need to clear up. One of Bey or Grant will probably have to give.

We can move Grant to the 3-spot but that almost certainly ends Beys' career in Detroit. He's still on a rookie contract and should get 1 more year to see if he can become more consistent. Despite his struggles, he did show improvement over his rookie season.

It makes a lot more sense to move Grant for a guard. It's not about hating Grant or thinking he sucks; it's simply recognizing that the best way for us to rebalance our roster may be to shift his productivity to the backcourt. We don't need another pick/prospect; we need a guy who can essentially give you the same production/impact but at a great position of need. If you take emotion out of this and get over whatever attachment you have Grant, this is the move that probably makes the most sense in terms of addressing our needs.

Ya know, just a thought. Making a case for Grant being able to be a positivecontributor to this =/= being attached to him. I haven't seen a single poster with an actual attachment to Grant. So that commentary is weird AT BEST.

But there are posters that legit think dropping Grant for a street sign in return would be good for the team. Nobody with a brain would argue that getting like production as Grant from another position we're weak at would be good, especially with a good chance of getting a big high in the draft. But when you see a post in defense of Grant it's generally the adults in the room countering this myth of Grant somehow being the source of this team's ills.

*checks boxscore*

By the way, tonight was yet another sub 40% shooting night by Bey without Grant.

Sent from my SM-N975U using RealGM mobile app

[kpt]

I am actually warming up to keeping Grant. The leadership, skill, and versatility he brings are all underestimated.

If we land Smith and resign Bags we would be deep at the 4 but could role some interesting line ups out.

G: FA/ killian / Cade
G: Cade/ Diallo
F: Bey/Smith /livers
F: Grant / Smith / Bags
C: Stewart/ Bags /Grant

10 man rotation. We still would lack that rim protector and Bags and the FA need to step up their Def and 3pt shooting.

This leaves Kelly, FJ, and Joseph out of rotation. Possibly trade for a bag of chips.

[Southern Piston]

I don’t think Bey or Grant would want to come off the bench, you might be able to get a pick between 7-12 for one of them, I would draft the best big with one pick, and the best guard with the other.

[Cowology]

In fact the deal I've repeatedly advocated for (Grant/Olynyk for Hart/Bledsoe) continually get's crapped on because 1) people underrate Hart and 2) It doesn't include a pick. But it gives us back an excellent 2-way guard AND free's up an additional $15 mil n cap room, putting us around $43 mil which allows us to add multiple impact FA targets by virtue of clearing Olynyk's salary in the move.

Hart is a below average 3 point shooter who's in a hot streak on his new team. He has consistently been a 34% 3 point shooter, 13 games won't change that.Grant is by far the superior player of the two. Hart is only 1 year younger than Grant.

While Olynyk won't have a place/role in our team next season, Mr I don't want to be here is a cancer. An expiring cancer? sure, but Olynyk is a semi expiring and have a lot more value than Bledsoe around the league.

And no, you can't trade Bledsoe for Olynyk and then waive Bledsoe for only a few millions cap hit, you need to guarantee Bledsoe's entire contract to make that work, just like we had to guarantee Ariza's entire salary when we had to eat him in the Stewart's trade (so Houston could land Wood), and that part made the trade absolutely disgusting, but people don't understand that.

I wasn't aware that we couldn't waive Bledsoe after the trade. That's weird. But I just found this article explaining how it changed with the most current CBA. Thanks. TPE works just as well. *shrug* Blazers waive him themselves, absorb the salary it's basically the same thing.

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2018/03/how-non-guaranteed-salaries-will-affect-trades-in-new-cba.html

Hey vege, I've been looking over the CBA and can't find anything about needing to "guarantee" a salary. Do you happen to know a specific article that may be in?

For the purposes of the trade it requires you to use the guaranteed portion of the contact to match salaries. So in the case of Bledsoe we could still trade for him at a value of $4 mil and waive his remaining $15 mil provided the salaries still work under the CBA for purposes of a trade. So it's more dependent on the team having available capspace to absorb that $15 mil difference in salary. But as long as the trade itself passes that threshold then functionally it's still the same, yes? It's effectively;

Olynyk $12.8
Grant $21.0

For
Hart $13.0
Bledsoe $3.9

So Portland is required to "absorb" $16.9 mil, which would obviously be dependent on their cap situation.

I know in this instance the Blazers can just waive Bledsoe, create the cap space and absorb the salary anyway, but I really am trying to understand how this works on a technical level so curiosity is sorta driving this buss right now. Unless there really is an article specifying the entire contract must be guaranteed to be traded, in which case I'd really like to know what it is so I can read it over in it's entirety.

it seems like guaranteeing Ariza's salary was an opt-in to make the salaries work in that particular scenario and not a blanket requirement for a trade. Unless I'm missing something...

[edmunder_prc]

Moving Grant for a guard to play with Cade makes sense - but which player is this guard?

Also - The team has a good player at guard but wants to trade that player? Why exactly? They have so many? Then that team also needs Grant.

Its a tricky situation. Talent for talent trades arent easy. Its usually a team that wants to end the treadmill and start over, so they want youth and picks.

It will need to be a 3-team trade but then it becomes way beyond my pay grade to work out.

[edmunder_prc]

I am actually warming up to keeping Grant. The leadership, skill, and versatility he brings are all underestimated.

If we land Smith and resign Bags we would be deep at the 4 but could role some interesting line ups out.

G: FA/ killian / Cade
G: Cade/ Diallo
F: Bey/Smith /livers
F: Grant / Smith / Bags
C: Stewart/ Bags /Grant

10 man rotation. We still would lack that rim protector and Bags and the FA need to step up their Def and 3pt shooting.

This leaves Kelly, FJ, and Joseph out of rotation. Possibly trade for a bag of chips.

Try Smith or Paolo at C if we draft them. Don't resign Bags.

Still need a guard - maybe someone to replace Bey if he can't shoot consistently.

[vege]

Moving Grant for a guard to play with Cade makes sense - but which player is this guard?

Also - The team has a good player at guard but wants to trade that player? Why exactly? They have so many? Then that team also needs Grant.

Its a tricky situation. Talent for talent trades arent easy. Its usually a team that wants to end the treadmill and start over, so they want youth and picks.

It will need to be a 3-team trade but then it becomes way beyond my pay grade to work out.

Brogdon is a possibility but Grant should be worth more than him.

[LaSheed]

Moving Grant for a guard to play with Cade makes sense - but which player is this guard?

Also - The team has a good player at guard but wants to trade that player? Why exactly? They have so many? Then that team also needs Grant.

Its a tricky situation. Talent for talent trades arent easy. Its usually a team that wants to end the treadmill and start over, so they want youth and picks.

It will need to be a 3-team trade but then it becomes way beyond my pay grade to work out.

I'll beat this drum until I see him resign in Dallas or in NY.

S&T Brunson for Grant.

[LaSheed]

Maybe it's because I'm over thinking and we have many routes to go in my head until draft lottery....but I'm open to keeping Grant.

[Pharaoh]

I was all season up to and including the deadline with no quality offers coming to the fore.

But it appears Portland is ready to make a short term last gasp attempt to please Dame and we should be able to get 1 Lotto pick for Grant.

That + there's the fact we can't really retain Cade, Grant, Bey & our 2022 pick all at fair market value long term so someone is going to have to get moved sooner or later means I'm on the trade Grant bandwagon.

Blazers current slotted in at 11 as they own the Pelicans pick. #11 for Grant might seem a little light but if they're absorbing him into the CJ TPE it creates a whole lot more cap room for us.

Assume the Draft goes according to Tankathon right now:

#3 Paolo (Cade is happy)
#11 Duren (many here are happy)
#46 who cares

Free agency comes and we retain Bagley on a reasonable deal, get Brunson on a reasonable deal and roll over the remaining cap to next off-season:

Stewart - Duren - KO
Paolo - Bagley
Bey - Livers
Cade - Diallo
Brunson - Hayes - CoJo

IDK something like that could be the next step back towards being a legit team within 3 years

Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM Forums mobile app

[vic]

If I'm Troy I'm not moving Grant for less than a top 7ish pick.
To me that's not extreme, because the cost for Grant a few months ago was TWO picks!

If we get our pick and another top 7 pick, we don't need Hart, Grant can just be traded for the Trade exception & pick. Then we use the extra pick to get Sharpe Ivey or Mathurin!

This makes sense both ways because Portland wants win now vets why would they trade Hart who is a highly underestimated two way player? Vet teams dont need to give up players like Hart in their prime. Portland literally NEEDS Grant AND Hart to surround Dame with high iq complementary players.

Which is why they will give us what we need too! The only question is which pick they give up!

If they dont want to give up a high pick we just keep Grant who is the type of quality two way player that is needed on any contender - which is why he is worth a top 10 pick. Which is why that's the only thing he'll be traded for.

Bey is awesome but he is too streaky and defensively shaky for me to totally give up on Grant and act like we dont need him.

As far as paying our players - I'm not concerned about that let's just get all the talent we need for now that fits with Cade, and let the MotorCade roll!

[440BB]

I was all season up to and including the deadline with no quality offers coming to the fore.

But it appears Portland is ready to make a short term last gasp attempt to please Dame and we should be able to get 1 Lotto pick for Grant.

That + there's the fact we can't really retain Cade, Grant, Bey & our 2022 pick all at fair market value long term so someone is going to have to get moved sooner or later means I'm on the trade Grant bandwagon.

Blazers current slotted in at 11 as they own the Pelicans pick. #11 for Grant might seem a little light but if they're absorbing him into the CJ TPE it creates a whole lot more cap room for us.

Assume the Draft goes according to Tankathon right now:

#3 Paolo (Cade is happy)
#11 Duren (many here are happy)
#46 who cares

Free agency comes and we retain Bagley on a reasonable deal, get Brunson on a reasonable deal and roll over the remaining cap to next off-season:

Stewart - Duren - KO
Paolo - Bagley
Bey - Livers
Cade - Diallo
Brunson - Hayes - CoJo

IDK something like that could be the next step back towards being a legit team within 3 years

Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM Forums mobile app

The Blazers won't get the Pelicans 2022 first round pick if they win twice in the play in. It then conveys to Charlotte, and the Pelicans instead convey Milwaukee's 2025 first round pick to Portland.
In other words, we need the Pelicans to lose in the play in, either first or second round.

[Pharaoh]

I was all season up to and including the deadline with no quality offers coming to the fore.

But it appears Portland is ready to make a short term last gasp attempt to please Dame and we should be able to get 1 Lotto pick for Grant.

That + there's the fact we can't really retain Cade, Grant, Bey & our 2022 pick all at fair market value long term so someone is going to have to get moved sooner or later means I'm on the trade Grant bandwagon.

Blazers current slotted in at 11 as they own the Pelicans pick. #11 for Grant might seem a little light but if they're absorbing him into the CJ TPE it creates a whole lot more cap room for us.

Assume the Draft goes according to Tankathon right now:

#3 Paolo (Cade is happy)
#11 Duren (many here are happy)
#46 who cares

Free agency comes and we retain Bagley on a reasonable deal, get Brunson on a reasonable deal and roll over the remaining cap to next off-season:

Stewart - Duren - KO
Paolo - Bagley
Bey - Livers
Cade - Diallo
Brunson - Hayes - CoJo

IDK something like that could be the next step back towards being a legit team within 3 years

Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM Forums mobile app

The Blazers won't get the Pelicans 2022 first round pick if they win twice in the play in. It then conveys to Charlotte, and the Pelicans instead convey Milwaukee's 2025 first round pick to Portland.
In other words, we need the Pelicans to lose in the play in, either first or second round.

They might beat the Spurs but on the other side of the play in are the Wolves and Clippers - both would appear to be a more difficult match up for them.

Time will tell

Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM Forums mobile app

[440BB]

They might beat the Spurs but on the other side of the play in are the Wolves and Clippers - both would appear to be a more difficult match up for them.

Time will tell

I'm optimistic. it sure would improve our bargaining position with Portland if they get that pick. I want both.