Jerami Grant: Best Offer?

[Myth]

Oh TC, you had been doing so well recently. Don't think I didn't notice and appreciate it. But I think here you have taken a slight step backwards in terms of miscasting our viewpoint as unreasonable instead of engaging with us about why we have analyzed things differently. It isn't some shortsighted need for immediate return and an inability or unwillingness to see other ways to receive value and I hope to explain why.

OK so we can start with the premise to which we all agree: Rebuilding teams should use capspace in order to build an asset base. You wont find Portland fans disagreeing about that, and I think our ownership spending right up to the taxline shows they are trying to leverage that capspace. (Of course I have many criticisms about our ownership/management group so by no means is that a tacit endorsement of them overall.)

I would then suggest that there are two main ways in which a rebuilding team can use capspace to build assets:
A. Acquire bad contracts to get additional value and then let those bad contracts expire.
B. Acquire neutral value contracts and wait for the right opportunity to sell high on them to the right team. (which could include taking on bad contracts with value like option A)

I would strongly suggest that with regards to Grant that Portland is already executing option B instead of option A. We are sitting on a player that we think can hold positive value to the right team and waiting to sell for a maximum return. You are obviously advocating we go the option A route, which I get as a viable strategy but I personally think the return of Grant is likely to bring back better assets than what we might get for eating a bad contract - I am not sure which contracts out there teams are desperate to drop this offseason. That was a strategy that was more viable in the past, particularly after the year the cap jumped and a bunch of bad contracts were handed out, but I just don't see that being the case this summer.

Now it is totally FINE to agree with that analysis. I personally think 20% of the cap to a 2nd/3rd option is not a bad contract but if there is disagreement about that percentage or Grant's ability to be a 2nd/3rd option type player those are fine debates and disagreements to have. Portland fans could be wrong that Grant holds value to the right team - I would point to some of the offers in here indicating there are others who see him as having positive value, I think SAC makes a ton of sense as the "right team" to sell high to - but that doesn't mean we arrived at that conclusion with a lack of logic or reason, it just means we analyzed the situation differently than you did.

I think the bolded is generally poor strategy because it hurts your ability to tank. Now the odds don’t help but once out of the top 5 the likelihood of an all-star drops precipitously.

By the way I say this statement even with the Kings who should have traded Barnes to Boston for Nesmith and a 1st when they had a chance. Instead the Kings held out for maximum value and in hind sight it was a bad decision.

I’d like him gone this summer or early in the season for tanking purposes, but we should be making sure we get some reasonable value for him rather than just giving him away.

[Kalamazoo317]

6-8 wings who can score 20 a game have value. I thinknhes going to return a decent asset on the market even as the worst of that ilk.

I think depending on what Portland takes back, I agree. He's a good player. I just don't think Portland can move off the entire thing and expect a good asset. I might have to eat a bunch of crow on that, but I just don't see cap space teams lining up to give up a good asset to effectively use their cap space to sign Grant to a 4/120M deal.

And I don't think Portland even has to necessarily take back a "bad contract". We've talked around Barnes/filler/asset for Grant. Makes sense. I've suggested Dallas with THJ/Kleber/asset for him. Makes sense. Warriors want to YOLO, something around Paul/asset makes sense. Certainly others.

Which is why I think offering to let Portland off the entire contract makes sense for Detroit. Acquire an actual asset and a player that at worst fits our roster well and doesn't cripple our cap (given the crazy amount of room we have). And why offering a small asset, such as a trade down, makes sense for us as well. Obviously 5 to 7 is a lot more enticing than 5 to 14, but I really think I would do 5 to 14 given how flat this draft is.