Moving forward with Blake

[Joe Berry]

Trade Drummond for a star PG/wing. Drummond and Blake won't fit together in todays NBA. Blake is an inefficient jump shooter at best. Jordan is a different player who doesn't need the ball, they made the 2 big man pairing work in L.A. because they had the best PG in the NBA. The Pistons don't have any spacing and only 1 good 3pt shooter in the starting lineup.
We are stuck with Blake now, Drummond has value, get a 4/5 roleplayer next to Blake who can shoot the 3.

[Laimbeer]

If we wanted to get out from under Blake's contract, is there even a team out there that you can say would want him, and also able to make room for him?

Guaranteed, we could never get a package in return for him anywhere near what we (over)paid for. But, is there even a team that's as desperate and dumb as the Pistons?

Are these rhetorical questions? Lol. You’re a smart guy, I know you know the answers to these questions!

ATL - definitely no
BKN - definitely no
BOS - no
CHA - maybe trade for but not with assets
CHI - definitely no
CLE - definitely no
DAL - definitely no
DEN - no
GSW - definitely no
HOU - definitely no (would be funny though)
IND - maybe trade for but not with assets
LAC - obviously no
LAL - possible trade for but not with assets
MIL - definitely no
MIA - no
MEM - very doubtful
MIN - definitely no
NYK - definitely no
NOR - definitely no
OKC - definitely no
ORL - definitely no (if they learnt their lesson)
POR - very doubtful
PHI - definitely no
PHX - definitely no
SAC - dark horse due to stupidity of owner/gm
SAN - lol hell no
TOR - definitely no
UTA - no
WAS - maybe trade for but not with assets

The more you look at it the worse the Griffin trade really seems, nobody else would have given them a package like that. We lost our flexibility and draft picks all to take on a colossal contract who is declining as a player. #FIRESVG


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

I think you're too quick to write off interest in Blake.

ATL - No - Rebuilding
BKN - No - Rebuilding
BOS - Maybe but probably wouldn't give as good a deal
CHA - No - Rebuilding
CHI - No - Rebuilding
CLE - Maybe but probably wouldn't give as good a deal
DAL - No - Rebuilding
DEN - Possibly
GSW - No reason to mess with a good thing
HOU - No - doesn't get along with Paul
IND - Possibly
LAC - Obviously no
LAL - Not unless they strike out on free agency
MIL - No - redundant with Freak offensively
MIA - Yes
MEM - Possibly
MIN - Possibly
NYK - Possibly
NOR - No, got Boogie and AD
OKC - Possibly
ORL - No - Rebuilding
POR - Yes
PHI - Probably not
PHX - No - Rebuilding
SAC - Yes
SAN - Too consrvative an organization
TOR - Possibly
UTA - Possibly
WAS - Yes

[MotownMadness]

If we wanted to get out from under Blake's contract, is there even a team out there that you can say would want him, and also able to make room for him?

Guaranteed, we could never get a package in return for him anywhere near what we (over)paid for. But, is there even a team that's as desperate and dumb as the Pistons?

Are these rhetorical questions? Lol. You’re a smart guy, I know you know the answers to these questions!

ATL - definitely no
BKN - definitely no
BOS - no
CHA - maybe trade for but not with assets
CHI - definitely no
CLE - definitely no
DAL - definitely no
DEN - no
GSW - definitely no
HOU - definitely no (would be funny though)
IND - maybe trade for but not with assets
LAC - obviously no
LAL - possible trade for but not with assets
MIL - definitely no
MIA - no
MEM - very doubtful
MIN - definitely no
NYK - definitely no
NOR - definitely no
OKC - definitely no
ORL - definitely no (if they learnt their lesson)
POR - very doubtful
PHI - definitely no
PHX - definitely no
SAC - dark horse due to stupidity of owner/gm
SAN - lol hell no
TOR - definitely no
UTA - no
WAS - maybe trade for but not with assets

The more you look at it the worse the Griffin trade really seems, nobody else would have given them a package like that. We lost our flexibility and draft picks all to take on a colossal contract who is declining as a player. #FIRESVG


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

I think you're too quick to write off interest in Blake.

ATL - No - Rebuilding
BKN - No - Rebuilding
BOS - Maybe but probably wouldn't give as good a deal
CHA - No - Rebuilding
CHI - No - Rebuilding
CLE - Maybe but probably wouldn't give as good a deal
DAL - No - Rebuilding
DEN - Possibly
GSW - No reason to mess with a good thing
HOU - No - doesn't get along with Paul
IND - Possibly
LAC - Obviously no
LAL - Not unless they strike out on free agency
MIL - No - redundant with Freak offensively
MIA - Yes
MEM - Possibly
MIN - Possibly
NYK - Possibly
NOR - No, got Boogie and AD
OKC - Possibly
ORL - No - Rebuilding
POR - Yes
PHI - Probably not
PHX - No - Rebuilding
SAC - Yes
SAN - Too consrvative an organization
TOR - Possibly
UTA - Possibly
WAS - Yes

Oh he could be moved as every team has contracts they would turn into Blake if given the chance. It's not that LAC couldn't get rid of him but probably more that they're aren't many teams willing to give up assets for him like we did. I think you could easily dump him at any time for shorter deals if your not looking to get anything out of it.

[A_dub06]

If we wanted to get out from under Blake's contract, is there even a team out there that you can say would want him, and also able to make room for him?

Guaranteed, we could never get a package in return for him anywhere near what we (over)paid for. But, is there even a team that's as desperate and dumb as the Pistons?

Are these rhetorical questions? Lol. You’re a smart guy, I know you know the answers to these questions!

ATL - definitely no
BKN - definitely no
BOS - no
CHA - maybe trade for but not with assets
CHI - definitely no
CLE - definitely no
DAL - definitely no
DEN - no
GSW - definitely no
HOU - definitely no (would be funny though)
IND - maybe trade for but not with assets
LAC - obviously no
LAL - possible trade for but not with assets
MIL - definitely no
MIA - no
MEM - very doubtful
MIN - definitely no
NYK - definitely no
NOR - definitely no
OKC - definitely no
ORL - definitely no (if they learnt their lesson)
POR - very doubtful
PHI - definitely no
PHX - definitely no
SAC - dark horse due to stupidity of owner/gm
SAN - lol hell no
TOR - definitely no
UTA - no
WAS - maybe trade for but not with assets

The more you look at it the worse the Griffin trade really seems, nobody else would have given them a package like that. We lost our flexibility and draft picks all to take on a colossal contract who is declining as a player. #FIRESVG


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

I think you're too quick to write off interest in Blake.

ATL - No - Rebuilding
BKN - No - Rebuilding
BOS - Maybe but probably wouldn't give as good a deal
CHA - No - Rebuilding
CHI - No - Rebuilding
CLE - Maybe but probably wouldn't give as good a deal
DAL - No - Rebuilding
DEN - Possibly
GSW - No reason to mess with a good thing
HOU - No - doesn't get along with Paul
IND - Possibly
LAC - Obviously no
LAL - Not unless they strike out on free agency
MIL - No - redundant with Freak offensively
MIA - Yes
MEM - Possibly
MIN - Possibly
NYK - Possibly
NOR - No, got Boogie and AD
OKC - Possibly
ORL - No - Rebuilding
POR - Yes
PHI - Probably not
PHX - No - Rebuilding
SAC - Yes
SAN - Too consrvative an organization
TOR - Possibly
UTA - Possibly
WAS - Yes

You clearly didn’t understand the caveat that assets would need to be included in the trade not just trade contracts. Once you look at the list again in light of the requirement you will see we massively overpaid and now we would even need to compound the problem by taking back neutral at best contracts to move him. SVG **** us.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[MotownMadness]

Really though Blake is only a year older then Paul George who will be making close to the same and is 3-4 years younger then guys like Gasol, LMA, Horford etc who make big bucks as well. I think his game will age ok cause he's still got a very multi skillset for a big that can survive without all the 20 year old athleticism

[buzzkilloton]

Trade sucks not happy about it but on a diff note On a "moving forward with Blake" topic. I'm itching to see some basketball .All star breaks way to long.

Were going to soon see if Blake makes us any better. Some of the next games are tough. Were going to see what Blake and this team is made of right out the gate.

Celtics
@hornets
@raptors
bucks
@magic
@heat
@cavs
raps

Honestly that looks like 1-7 to me.

[Laimbeer]

Are these rhetorical questions? Lol. You’re a smart guy, I know you know the answers to these questions!

ATL - definitely no
BKN - definitely no
BOS - no
CHA - maybe trade for but not with assets
CHI - definitely no
CLE - definitely no
DAL - definitely no
DEN - no
GSW - definitely no
HOU - definitely no (would be funny though)
IND - maybe trade for but not with assets
LAC - obviously no
LAL - possible trade for but not with assets
MIL - definitely no
MIA - no
MEM - very doubtful
MIN - definitely no
NYK - definitely no
NOR - definitely no
OKC - definitely no
ORL - definitely no (if they learnt their lesson)
POR - very doubtful
PHI - definitely no
PHX - definitely no
SAC - dark horse due to stupidity of owner/gm
SAN - lol hell no
TOR - definitely no
UTA - no
WAS - maybe trade for but not with assets

The more you look at it the worse the Griffin trade really seems, nobody else would have given them a package like that. We lost our flexibility and draft picks all to take on a colossal contract who is declining as a player. #FIRESVG


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

I think you're too quick to write off interest in Blake.

ATL - No - Rebuilding
BKN - No - Rebuilding
BOS - Maybe but probably wouldn't give as good a deal
CHA - No - Rebuilding
CHI - No - Rebuilding
CLE - Maybe but probably wouldn't give as good a deal
DAL - No - Rebuilding
DEN - Possibly
GSW - No reason to mess with a good thing
HOU - No - doesn't get along with Paul
IND - Possibly
LAC - Obviously no
LAL - Not unless they strike out on free agency
MIL - No - redundant with Freak offensively
MIA - Yes
MEM - Possibly
MIN - Possibly
NYK - Possibly
NOR - No, got Boogie and AD
OKC - Possibly
ORL - No - Rebuilding
POR - Yes
PHI - Probably not
PHX - No - Rebuilding
SAC - Yes
SAN - Too consrvative an organization
TOR - Possibly
UTA - Possibly
WAS - Yes

You clearly didn’t understand the caveat that assets would need to be included in the trade not just trade contracts. Once you look at the list again in light of the requirement you will see we massively overpaid and now we would even need to compound the problem by taking back neutral at best contracts to move him. SVG **** us.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

I wouldn't discount the possibility some of those teams would trade assets. I also think we're overestimating what we gave up.

[MotownMadness]

Trade sucks not happy about it but on a diff note On a "moving forward with Blake" topic. I'm itching to see some basketball .All star breaks way to long.

Were going to soon see if Blake makes us any better. Some of the next games are tough. Were going to see what Blake and this team is made of right out the gate.

Celtics
@hornets
@raptors
bucks
@magic
@heat
@cavs
raps

Honestly that looks like 1-7 to me.

Yeah but with our bi polar team I don't know who they show up for for so long now that I can't even predict anymore

[MotownMadness]

I think you're too quick to write off interest in Blake.

ATL - No - Rebuilding
BKN - No - Rebuilding
BOS - Maybe but probably wouldn't give as good a deal
CHA - No - Rebuilding
CHI - No - Rebuilding
CLE - Maybe but probably wouldn't give as good a deal
DAL - No - Rebuilding
DEN - Possibly
GSW - No reason to mess with a good thing
HOU - No - doesn't get along with Paul
IND - Possibly
LAC - Obviously no
LAL - Not unless they strike out on free agency
MIL - No - redundant with Freak offensively
MIA - Yes
MEM - Possibly
MIN - Possibly
NYK - Possibly
NOR - No, got Boogie and AD
OKC - Possibly
ORL - No - Rebuilding
POR - Yes
PHI - Probably not
PHX - No - Rebuilding
SAC - Yes
SAN - Too consrvative an organization
TOR - Possibly
UTA - Possibly
WAS - Yes

You clearly didn’t understand the caveat that assets would need to be included in the trade not just trade contracts. Once you look at the list again in light of the requirement you will see we massively overpaid and now we would even need to compound the problem by taking back neutral at best contracts to move him. SVG **** us.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

I wouldn't discount the possibility some of those teams would trade assets. I also think we're overestimating what we gave up.

I do agree with that, even if you don't like the trade we didn't give up much. Tobias won't ever reach Blakes level with his one way tunnel vision and that pick is not high enough to sour over cause worst case it's not dropping any lower than 12.

[buzzkilloton]

Trade sucks not happy about it but on a diff note On a "moving forward with Blake" topic. I'm itching to see some basketball .All star breaks way to long.

Were going to soon see if Blake makes us any better. Some of the next games are tough. Were going to see what Blake and this team is made of right out the gate.

Celtics
@hornets
@raptors
bucks
@magic
@heat
@cavs
raps

Honestly that looks like 1-7 to me.

Yeah but with our bi polar team I don't know who they show up for for so long now that I can't even predict anymore

Thats true, should be interesting. Even though i hate SVG and this trade im looking forward to seeing what happens.

[MotownMadness]

Trade sucks not happy about it but on a diff note On a "moving forward with Blake" topic. I'm itching to see some basketball .All star breaks way to long.

Were going to soon see if Blake makes us any better. Some of the next games are tough. Were going to see what Blake and this team is made of right out the gate.

Celtics
@hornets
@raptors
bucks
@magic
@heat
@cavs
raps

Honestly that looks like 1-7 to me.

Yeah but with our bi polar team I don't know who they show up for for so long now that I can't even predict anymore

Thats true, should be interesting. Even though i hate SVG and this trade im looking forward to seeing what happens.

Yeah I'm over SVG but Gores is definitely the biggest problem. This may not be a favorable move but they were already trying to win now capped out anyways with less talent so the direction hasn't changed out of nowhere and won't anyways with Gores.

[MotownMadness]

Honestly my biggest fear was SVG overpaying Bradley not wanting to lose any players without the cap to go out after FAs. So dumping him and Boban was cool.

[Canadafan]

Trade sucks not happy about it but on a diff note On a "moving forward with Blake" topic. I'm itching to see some basketball .All star breaks way to long.

Were going to soon see if Blake makes us any better. Some of the next games are tough. Were going to see what Blake and this team is made of right out the gate.

Celtics
@hornets
@raptors
bucks
@magic
@heat
@cavs
raps

Honestly that looks like 1-7 to me.

Your post was pretty positive I was proud of ya lol. I feel the same way, can't wait to watch ball again. If we go 1-7 its overrrrrr. I see a win vs Hornets Bucks Magic Heat fo sho. I also feel good about the Boston game so let's go!

[Global Game]

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

How about we use our second round pick to swing for the fences on a prospect that could blossom into something instead of a 28 year old from Europe?


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

How does signing Heurtel stop what you suggest from happening?

Heurtel, the same age as Blake Griffin, is ready to contribute now. He's also cap friendly.

Draft that 2nd rounder. Use the G-League and/or a 2 way to development that player.

[Global Game]

Cap friendly
Drummond/Griffin complementing supporting cast
Wing shooting

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

[A_dub06]

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

How about we use our second round pick to swing for the fences on a prospect that could blossom into something instead of a 28 year old from Europe?


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

How does signing Heurtel stop what you suggest from happening?

Heurtel, the same age as Blake Griffin, is ready to contribute now. He's also cap friendly.

Draft that 2nd rounder. Use the G-League and/or a 2 way to development that player.

Or instead of drafting said player with the g-league in mind, why not have him predominantly with the main team and feed him minutes (even if small) from the get go?

At this stage I definitely do not want any more vets that could take minutes away from Kennard, Johnson, Ellenson and even our upcoming second round pick. Heurtel looks alright on film but saying he is “ready to contribute now” is far from a guarantee, and he would also need to come over here on a minimum deal.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[A_dub06]

I think you're too quick to write off interest in Blake.

ATL - No - Rebuilding
BKN - No - Rebuilding
BOS - Maybe but probably wouldn't give as good a deal
CHA - No - Rebuilding
CHI - No - Rebuilding
CLE - Maybe but probably wouldn't give as good a deal
DAL - No - Rebuilding
DEN - Possibly
GSW - No reason to mess with a good thing
HOU - No - doesn't get along with Paul
IND - Possibly
LAC - Obviously no
LAL - Not unless they strike out on free agency
MIL - No - redundant with Freak offensively
MIA - Yes
MEM - Possibly
MIN - Possibly
NYK - Possibly
NOR - No, got Boogie and AD
OKC - Possibly
ORL - No - Rebuilding
POR - Yes
PHI - Probably not
PHX - No - Rebuilding
SAC - Yes
SAN - Too consrvative an organization
TOR - Possibly
UTA - Possibly
WAS - Yes

You clearly didn’t understand the caveat that assets would need to be included in the trade not just trade contracts. Once you look at the list again in light of the requirement you will see we massively overpaid and now we would even need to compound the problem by taking back neutral at best contracts to move him. SVG **** us.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

I wouldn't discount the possibility some of those teams would trade assets. I also think we're overestimating what we gave up.

Lets eliminate the no teams and look over your revised list and speculate what "assets" the teams would give up shall we?

BOS - Horford, a filler plus an average 1st?

CLE - Lol they have Kevin Love who is one year older and fits the modern game much better with his shooting abilities, they aren't trading for Blake unless its to move Love to the 5 full time and they give us bad contracts and future 1sts which they wouldn't do unless Lebron resigns making those 1sts late picks.

DEN - Who? Like Paul Milsap? He has 3 years left on his deal and is already 32 while making $31m this season.

IND - Once again, what "asset" are you referring to? Oladipo & Turner wouldn't be coming back.

LAL - They aren't giving up Ball, Ingram or Kuzma, so which "assets" do you think they will trade?

MIA - Like a combination of Dragic, Johnson and Waiters?

MEM - They are going to rebuild. If not and they were interested in getting Griffin they don't have the contracts to match without including Gasol, Conley, or worse Parsons. If they going to try and compete they will want to hang on to both Gasol and Conley.

MIN - Once again which "asset" are they trading?

NYK - Like Kanter and THJ? Not really assets...

OKC - Melo & who? Not assets...

POR - I doubt they would be willing to trade Lillard or CJ for Griffin.

SAC - I consider their owner/gm dumb enough to trade for BG but who would they actually trade? Randolph, Bogdanovic and Koufos? That's a terrible return considering what we gave up.

TOR - Unless they trade us Ibaka, Lowry or Derozan they don't have the contracts to match BG.

UTA - Ingles and Rubio? lol

WAS - They aren't giving up Wall, Beal or Porter for BG, its just not happening.

As you can see we didn't just let the clippers have our way with us, we even supplied the condoms and KY. No team would actually be willing to trade us assets for Griffin in this new NBA climate where cap space is held to a premium. It's not just a matter of another team being wiling to trade certain players, its having the contracts to match salaries unless some team wants to create space and absorb his contract which would never happen as a team willing to do that would be in a rebuilding phase and thus looking to take on salary for picks over a 28 year old power forward who can't shoot well and is often injured. Too many people on this forum have jumped quickly at the chance to praise the move or pretend like this was a good thing without actually taking time to dig into the numbers and consider context. This is a clear example of how **** the situation really is, and it will only get worse from here on out.

[Laimbeer]

You clearly didn’t understand the caveat that assets would need to be included in the trade not just trade contracts. Once you look at the list again in light of the requirement you will see we massively overpaid and now we would even need to compound the problem by taking back neutral at best contracts to move him. SVG **** us.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

I wouldn't discount the possibility some of those teams would trade assets. I also think we're overestimating what we gave up.

Lets eliminate the no teams and look over your revised list and speculate what "assets" the teams would give up shall we?

BOS - Horford, a filler plus an average 1st?

CLE - Lol they have Kevin Love who is one year older and fits the modern game much better with his shooting abilities, they aren't trading for Blake unless its to move Love to the 5 full time and they give us bad contracts and future 1sts which they wouldn't do unless Lebron resigns making those 1sts late picks.

DEN - Who? Like Paul Milsap? He has 3 years left on his deal and is already 32 while making $31m this season.

IND - Once again, what "asset" are you referring to? Oladipo & Turner wouldn't be coming back.

LAL - They aren't giving up Ball, Ingram or Kuzma, so which "assets" do you think they will trade?

MIA - Like a combination of Dragic, Johnson and Waiters?

MEM - They are going to rebuild. If not and they were interested in getting Griffin they don't have the contracts to match without including Gasol, Conley, or worse Parsons. If they going to try and compete they will want to hang on to both Gasol and Conley.

MIN - Once again which "asset" are they trading?

NYK - Like Kanter and THJ? Not really assets...

OKC - Melo & who? Not assets...

POR - I doubt they would be willing to trade Lillard or CJ for Griffin.

SAC - I consider their owner/gm dumb enough to trade for BG but who would they actually trade? Randolph, Bogdanovic and Koufos? That's a terrible return considering what we gave up.

TOR - Unless they trade us Ibaka, Lowry or Derozan they don't have the contracts to match BG.

UTA - Ingles and Rubio? lol

WAS - They aren't giving up Wall, Beal or Porter for BG, its just not happening.

As you can see we didn't just let the clippers have our way with us, we even supplied the condoms and KY. No team would actually be willing to trade us assets for Griffin in this new NBA climate where cap space is held to a premium. It's not just a matter of another team being wiling to trade certain players, its having the contracts to match salaries unless some team wants to create space and absorb his contract which would never happen as a team willing to do that would be in a rebuilding phase and thus looking to take on salary for picks over a 28 year old power forward who can't shoot well and is often injured. Too many people on this forum have jumped quickly at the chance to praise the move or pretend like this was a good thing without actually taking time to dig into the numbers and consider context. This is a clear example of how **** the situation really is, and it will only get worse from here on out.

All you did was go through the list and ask "what assets are they trading?" or make up scenarios that don't work.

Don't forget all we gave was a mid-first, an above average (non all-star) player, a bad contract, and an expiring contract. All those teams have picks and young players . It's silly to suggest they couldn't put together a comparable package.

[A_dub06]

I wouldn't discount the possibility some of those teams would trade assets. I also think we're overestimating what we gave up.

Lets eliminate the no teams and look over your revised list and speculate what "assets" the teams would give up shall we?

BOS - Horford, a filler plus an average 1st?

CLE - Lol they have Kevin Love who is one year older and fits the modern game much better with his shooting abilities, they aren't trading for Blake unless its to move Love to the 5 full time and they give us bad contracts and future 1sts which they wouldn't do unless Lebron resigns making those 1sts late picks.

DEN - Who? Like Paul Milsap? He has 3 years left on his deal and is already 32 while making $31m this season.

IND - Once again, what "asset" are you referring to? Oladipo & Turner wouldn't be coming back.

LAL - They aren't giving up Ball, Ingram or Kuzma, so which "assets" do you think they will trade?

MIA - Like a combination of Dragic, Johnson and Waiters?

MEM - They are going to rebuild. If not and they were interested in getting Griffin they don't have the contracts to match without including Gasol, Conley, or worse Parsons. If they going to try and compete they will want to hang on to both Gasol and Conley.

MIN - Once again which "asset" are they trading?

NYK - Like Kanter and THJ? Not really assets...

OKC - Melo & who? Not assets...

POR - I doubt they would be willing to trade Lillard or CJ for Griffin.

SAC - I consider their owner/gm dumb enough to trade for BG but who would they actually trade? Randolph, Bogdanovic and Koufos? That's a terrible return considering what we gave up.

TOR - Unless they trade us Ibaka, Lowry or Derozan they don't have the contracts to match BG.

UTA - Ingles and Rubio? lol

WAS - They aren't giving up Wall, Beal or Porter for BG, its just not happening.

As you can see we didn't just let the clippers have our way with us, we even supplied the condoms and KY. No team would actually be willing to trade us assets for Griffin in this new NBA climate where cap space is held to a premium. It's not just a matter of another team being wiling to trade certain players, its having the contracts to match salaries unless some team wants to create space and absorb his contract which would never happen as a team willing to do that would be in a rebuilding phase and thus looking to take on salary for picks over a 28 year old power forward who can't shoot well and is often injured. Too many people on this forum have jumped quickly at the chance to praise the move or pretend like this was a good thing without actually taking time to dig into the numbers and consider context. This is a clear example of how **** the situation really is, and it will only get worse from here on out.

All you did was go through the list and ask "what assets are they trading?" or make up scenarios that don't work.

Don't forget all we gave was a mid-first, above average (non all-star), bad contract, and expiring contract. All those teams have picks and young players . It's silly to suggest they couldn't put together a comparable package.

Where I’ve written “what assets” I’m blatantly asking you what assets would they trade because I know that you are wrong in your assessment. Which scenario did I write that doesn’t work? Take Minnesota for instance, they aren’t going to trade us KAT, Butler or Wiggins, so I’m asking you who are they going to trade in your mind as you were the one to change the list so more teams were maybe or yes to suit your argument. The only assets Minnesota has are their 2.5 (sorry wiggins fans) stars and I’m not sure Wiggins can be called an asset after that contract. You are trying to strengthen your argument by simply changing the list without actually taking the time to look at what contracts would need to be included from the team trading for Blake to match his enormous salary.

Put your money where your mouth is and prove me wrong by copying the list and show me a trade example from each of those 15 teams you say would be able to “give us a comparable package”. All the teams with picks and young players are rebuilding and wouldn’t trade for a 28yr old often injured power forward who can’t shoot 3’s but hey I’ll eagerly await your reply.....

EDIT: We didn't ONLY give up a likely lottery first, above average starter, bad contract, and expiring contract, we just took one massive crap on our foreseeable cap flexibility like it was nothing at a time where cap space is at a premium. SVG traded like it was still 2016, and now the only way we can move Blake is for much less than what we received, we are ****.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[MotownMadness]

Lets eliminate the no teams and look over your revised list and speculate what "assets" the teams would give up shall we?

BOS - Horford, a filler plus an average 1st?

CLE - Lol they have Kevin Love who is one year older and fits the modern game much better with his shooting abilities, they aren't trading for Blake unless its to move Love to the 5 full time and they give us bad contracts and future 1sts which they wouldn't do unless Lebron resigns making those 1sts late picks.

DEN - Who? Like Paul Milsap? He has 3 years left on his deal and is already 32 while making $31m this season.

IND - Once again, what "asset" are you referring to? Oladipo & Turner wouldn't be coming back.

LAL - They aren't giving up Ball, Ingram or Kuzma, so which "assets" do you think they will trade?

MIA - Like a combination of Dragic, Johnson and Waiters?

MEM - They are going to rebuild. If not and they were interested in getting Griffin they don't have the contracts to match without including Gasol, Conley, or worse Parsons. If they going to try and compete they will want to hang on to both Gasol and Conley.

MIN - Once again which "asset" are they trading?

NYK - Like Kanter and THJ? Not really assets...

OKC - Melo & who? Not assets...

POR - I doubt they would be willing to trade Lillard or CJ for Griffin.

SAC - I consider their owner/gm dumb enough to trade for BG but who would they actually trade? Randolph, Bogdanovic and Koufos? That's a terrible return considering what we gave up.

TOR - Unless they trade us Ibaka, Lowry or Derozan they don't have the contracts to match BG.

UTA - Ingles and Rubio? lol

WAS - They aren't giving up Wall, Beal or Porter for BG, its just not happening.

As you can see we didn't just let the clippers have our way with us, we even supplied the condoms and KY. No team would actually be willing to trade us assets for Griffin in this new NBA climate where cap space is held to a premium. It's not just a matter of another team being wiling to trade certain players, its having the contracts to match salaries unless some team wants to create space and absorb his contract which would never happen as a team willing to do that would be in a rebuilding phase and thus looking to take on salary for picks over a 28 year old power forward who can't shoot well and is often injured. Too many people on this forum have jumped quickly at the chance to praise the move or pretend like this was a good thing without actually taking time to dig into the numbers and consider context. This is a clear example of how **** the situation really is, and it will only get worse from here on out.

All you did was go through the list and ask "what assets are they trading?" or make up scenarios that don't work.

Don't forget all we gave was a mid-first, above average (non all-star), bad contract, and expiring contract. All those teams have picks and young players . It's silly to suggest they couldn't put together a comparable package.

Where I’ve written “what assets” I’m blatantly asking you what assets would they trade because I know that you are wrong in your assessment. Which scenario did I write that doesn’t work? Take Minnesota for instance, they aren’t going to trade us KAT, Butler or Wiggins, so I’m asking you who are they going to trade in your mind as you were the one to change the list so more teams were maybe or yes to suit your argument. The only assets Minnesota has are their 2.5 (sorry wiggins fans) stars and I’m not sure Wiggins can be called an asset after that contract. You are trying to strengthen your argument by simply changing the list without actually taking the time to look at what contracts would need to be included from the team trading for Blake to match his enormous salary.

Put your money where your mouth is and prove me wrong by copying the list and show me a trade example from each of those 15 teams you say would be able to “give us a comparable package”. All the teams with picks and young players are rebuilding and wouldn’t trade for a 28yr old often injured power forward who can’t shoot 3’s but hey I’ll eagerly await your reply.....

EDIT: We didn't ONLY give up a likely lottery first, above average starter, bad contract, and expiring contract, we just took one massive crap on our foreseeable cap flexibility like it was nothing at a time where cap space is at a premium. SVG traded like it was still 2016, and now the only way we can move Blake is for much less than what we received, we are ****.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

Cause I'm bored, what did you like about the makeup of the roster before the trade? Just curious given we were still in win now and capped out regardless.