Pat Riley and Joe Cronin meet again! - Jerami Grant To Heat

[R-DAWG]

No thanks from POR.

POR would want real value for Grant, not 3 bench guys and a SRP.

I remember having these same debates about Norman Powell a few years back. Blazers fan thought they would get real value in return for him. They ended up dumping the contract. Now, if I recall correctly there were luxury tax concerns at that time, which might have motivated the trade. But I put Grant in a similar bucket with once exception - it's harder to find 6-9 guys who do what Grant does than 6-4 guys that do what Norm does.

I hoped POR would keep Norm and trade CJ instead of playing NP as a 6’3” small forward. Smallest forward is more like it.

Grant is overpaid for what he brings but he does have a solid skill set and the contract may not look as bad in 1-2 years.

Since POR does not view Grant as a salary dump and the offers for Grant are largely dumps, why do it at all from POR point of view? POR will not sign a better FA, likely not even a solid FA in his place.

I don't think a future 1st, even if it is a late 1st, is chump change. And the contract is never going to be great, it just might not be awful, in a few years.

Seems like for a rebuilding team the opportunity to turn a future liability into an asset is a good thing and not a bad thing.

Remember, extra cap space doesn't necessarily need to be turned into a player. We just saw OKC use cap space as a way to move up in the draft without including additional draft capital.

[HotelVitale]

Yeah, I'm not sure he's the perfect power forward for us, but it's something.

His rebounding makes him not a perfect power forward for anybody. But for him to work on a team, I think that team would have a good use for high end scoring from the perimeter (and a bit of an ability to drive) while having rebounding by other positions to make up for that weakness.

As for the trade, the value is probably mostly fine, I just don’t see it making much sense for Portland. Martin is my favorite piece there, but he is a downgrade from Grant and I worry he is even worse playing for Billups instead of Spo. I’m not big on Duncan or Jovic, and a 2nd rounder does little to change my take on this. A 3rd team as others mentioned makes some sense, but if the 1st pick we seek is pretty weak, I’d still want an ok player with it. So that Denver pick plus expiring contracts doesn’t do it for me.

I don't see you getting what you want for him. I don't think he has that kind of value. You're not getting a useful player and a good pick. Most see him as a bad contract...

I don't think he's still seen as just a bad contract, but yeah saying 'I don't know if Martin even better than Grant' and 'I don't love Jovic enough' sounds like it's not understanding the asset you have.

This is premised on PDX getting a solid replacement who can keep the team competitive (and makes $20m+ less next year), and a couple of solid but not blue-chip assets in Jovic and the DEN 1st. Don't think PDX fans have to think it's the best deal for them, but value-wise that sounds like it's abstractly worth about as much as they could expect.

[JRoy]

I remember having these same debates about Norman Powell a few years back. Blazers fan thought they would get real value in return for him. They ended up dumping the contract. Now, if I recall correctly there were luxury tax concerns at that time, which might have motivated the trade. But I put Grant in a similar bucket with once exception - it's harder to find 6-9 guys who do what Grant does than 6-4 guys that do what Norm does.

I hoped POR would keep Norm and trade CJ instead of playing NP as a 6’3” small forward. Smallest forward is more like it.

Grant is overpaid for what he brings but he does have a solid skill set and the contract may not look as bad in 1-2 years.

Since POR does not view Grant as a salary dump and the offers for Grant are largely dumps, why do it at all from POR point of view? POR will not sign a better FA, likely not even a solid FA in his place.

I don't think a future 1st, even if it is a late 1st, is chump change. And the contract is never going to be great, it just might not be awful, in a few years.

Seems like for a rebuilding team the opportunity to turn a future liability into an asset is a good thing and not a bad thing.

Remember, extra cap space doesn't necessarily need to be turned into a player. We just saw OKC use cap space as a way to move up in the draft without including additional draft capital.

Those offers are underwhelming. If that his perceived value, no reason to move him at all for the Duncan Robinsons of the world and SRPs.

[tester551]

No thanks from POR.

POR would want real value for Grant, not 3 bench guys and a SRP.

I remember having these same debates about Norman Powell a few years back. Blazers fan thought they would get real value in return for him. They ended up dumping the contract. Now, if I recall correctly there were luxury tax concerns at that time, which might have motivated the trade. But I put Grant in a similar bucket with once exception - it's harder to find 6-9 guys who do what Grant does than 6-4 guys that do what Norm does.

The Powell trade was 100% motivated by the tax for Portland.
That scenario does not apply for any potential Grant move.

[BBallFreak]

Let me make myself clear on this because I'm not sure I have - the original deal isn't enough for Portland. I would consider the three team deal with Orlando where Portland gets the Denver FRP and Miami gives Herro. I don't love it but it makes sense for everyone.

[cgf]

If you could swing any of that to a third team for a future frp maybe, but otherwise I think Portland is okay keeping grant.

I might just be higher on Robinson than most, but as a Knicks fan, I'd be game to be that 3rd team if we're talking our protected future FRPs and not an unprotected future NYK FRP. Jovic is an interesting project, Martin is a thibsy player who could step into the rotation when someone was injured without missing a beat, and Robinson's evolution as a ball handler makes him very interesting to me.


MIA (+0.28M): Grant
NYK (+4.5M): Robinson + Jovic | + Martin*
POR (-4.8M): Fournier + 1 of DET/MIL/WSH FRP + 24 UTA SRP + 26 LAL SRP | + Flynn*

Brunson | McBride
DiVincenzo | Martin
Hart | Robinson
Achiuwa | Jovic
Hartenstein | Sims
+
Randle, Anunoby, Robinson, & Grimes


*separate 1-for-1 from our POV, since Flynn can't be aggregated.

[DiegoChara]

No thanks from POR.

POR would want real value for Grant, not 3 bench guys and a SRP.

I remember having these same debates about Norman Powell a few years back. Blazers fan thought they would get real value in return for him. They ended up dumping the contract. Now, if I recall correctly there were luxury tax concerns at that time, which might have motivated the trade. But I put Grant in a similar bucket with once exception - it's harder to find 6-9 guys who do what Grant does than 6-4 guys that do what Norm does.

Sounds like a reason to think Grant will return value to me.

Incidentally, I think “fan base x was wrong about a situation in the past and I was right, so the same is true now” posts are lame.

[JRoy]

It is funny how POR fans are largely not posting trade proposals including Grant but largely declining lowball offers; “your guy sucks, trade him to us for our trash”

Edit

Maybe that’s a little harsh.

[Texas Chuck]

It is funny how POR fans are largely not posting trade proposals including Grant but largely declining lowball offers; “your guy sucks, trade him to us for our trash”

Edit

Maybe that’s a little harsh.

It's both harsh and pointless. Any Blazer fans who are triggered by Grant threads can simply avoid them. And like most threads, nobody was trying to trick anyone. Grant is right there in the title.

And nobody has called Grant trash. He's got some flaws(Defense and rebounding) but mostly the concern is 4 years remaining on a big contract.

Portland fans have been consistent in their position. And its a fair one for sure. But equally fair is a position that says a bad team gains value by removing a contract of this size and its associated risk for a guy who clearly isn't a needle mover for them.

[BBallFreak]

It is funny how POR fans are largely not posting trade proposals including Grant but largely declining lowball offers; “your guy sucks, trade him to us for our trash”

Edit

Maybe that’s a little harsh.

I don't think anyone did that here, even remotely. I know what I said was that you should get expiring contracts and a real, if late, first round pick. I stand by the idea that that's a fair deal. If you think otherwise, you're more than willing to keep him or find a better deal. No one's trying to strong arm you, here. No one's saying take trash or get nothing.

We can discuss this in good faith if you're willing. If not, that's okay, too.

[louc1970]

PDX OUT - Grant
PDX IN - Harris, Fultz, Jovic, Howard, DEN25 FRP

MIA OUT - Herro, Jovic
MIA IN - Grant

ORL OUT - Harris, Fultz, Howard, DEN25 FRP
ORL IN - Harro

Not sure how it works w/ all the bodies going to PDX though. Maybe another highly protected FRP rather than Howard.

I don’t see the need for Portland to bring in another 3 guards/wings. With Sharpe, Henderson, Simons, Bogs already and none leaving, adding Fultz, Harris and Howard really complicates things.

[DeBlazerRiddem]

If Portland decides to shop Grant I think we will have plenty of options like this to choose from so its easy to say no to an offer that is fair but doesn't stand out, something else will come up to take its place.

I would think that the offers for Grant come in one of two varieties:

1. Like this deal, split Grant into smaller more manageable (and maybe expiring) salaries and get a 2nd round pick or two for the downgrade in talent. I dislike this because the game is all about consolidating player value and this goes the wrong direction but there are scenarios where it can make sense.

2. If necessary take on a worst contract or add an extra player/2nd round pick from our end in order to return a decent first round pick or a prospect that our scouting really covets. I am a little more in favor of this route in theory because again I generally favor quality > quantity type moves.