Portland - Orlando - Sacramento

[Mavrelous]

I like it a lot.

[DaVoiceMaster]

So Portland trades Simon's to give Scoot more playing time, but takes back LaVine pushing Sharpe to the bench? That's makes zero sense.

yea i think scoot has a higher ceiling. he took a step forward in year 2 and i want to see what he can do in year 3. Lavine/Sharpe/camara/Deni can share the bulk of SG/SF/PF minutes

How about we get rid of everyone in the way of Scoot and Sharpe so both can start and get the bulk of minutes?!?!? It's ridiculous to bring in Lavine to play in front of Sharpe.

[Myth]

I don’t like it for Portland. It doesn’t save Portland much money, it just changes the years we pay it, which actually hinders potential moves next year by adding almost $30M, while taking away our forward depth. I’m not convinced this makes us better next year by upgrading Simons to LaVine but fully losing a big minutes forward. It makes retaining players easier in 2 years, but bringing in upgrades while we can next year more difficult.

[Godaddycurse]

I don’t like it for Portland. It doesn’t save Portland much money, it just changes the years we pay it, which actually hinders potential moves next year by adding almost $30M, while taking away our forward depth. I’m not convinced this makes us better next year by upgrading Simons to LaVine but fully losing a big minutes forward. It makes retaining players easier in 2 years, but bringing in upgrades while we can next year more difficult.

it adds 15M next year, anthony is TO/essentially an expiring.

Total:
Simons + Grant = 130M guaranteed over 3 years
Lavine + Anthony = 110M guaranteed over 2 years

20M savings is quite a bit?

[Myth]

I don’t like it for Portland. It doesn’t save Portland much money, it just changes the years we pay it, which actually hinders potential moves next year by adding almost $30M, while taking away our forward depth. I’m not convinced this makes us better next year by upgrading Simons to LaVine but fully losing a big minutes forward. It makes retaining players easier in 2 years, but bringing in upgrades while we can next year more difficult.

it adds 15M next year, anthony is TO.

I missed that, but for the other reasons, I still don’t like it for Portland. I just don’t love LaVine’s fit on this team and I don’t think Portland should be as desperate to move Grant as people think. His contract his bad, but he is a useful player and Blazers aren’t in a situation desperate to move him. They should definitely look to move him, but a less expensive, semi-playable backup forward would make significantly more sense than a guard not meant to be part of the future who is used to getting 34mpg. Simons has played that much too, but it isn’t something he has likely come to expect for like 7 years.

[Godaddycurse]

I don’t like it for Portland. It doesn’t save Portland much money, it just changes the years we pay it, which actually hinders potential moves next year by adding almost $30M, while taking away our forward depth. I’m not convinced this makes us better next year by upgrading Simons to LaVine but fully losing a big minutes forward. It makes retaining players easier in 2 years, but bringing in upgrades while we can next year more difficult.

it adds 15M next year, anthony is TO.

I missed that, but for the other reasons, I still don’t like it for Portland. I just don’t love LaVine’s fit on this team and I don’t think Portland should be as desperate to move Grant as people think. His contract his bad, but he is a useful player and Blazers aren’t in a situation desperate to move him. They should definitely look to move him, but a less expensive, semi-playable backup forward would make significantly more sense than a guard not meant to be part of the future who is used to getting 34mpg.

Perfectly fair take. I respect you guys' opinion on which veteran you prefer to have. Just making sure we are on same page about my rationale for OP re: salary implications. I appreciate the feedbacks overall

[LightTheBeam]

I dont want either of these players. This is tough, that extra year of Grant at 36 million is gross. Rather just be done with LaVine. But at least moving LaVine opens the door for us to extend Ellis and start him ASAP. Sure.

As a follow up for Sac, turn Demar into Jrue (and maybe 28?). Give this bad old team a 3 year run, can they scrap together 45 wins?
Jrue/Monk
Keon/Carter
Keegan/LaRavia*
Grant/Isaac
Sabonis/JV
+ 25 & Maybe 28

[longfellow44]

I just really would rather keep lavine over this trade. Lavine will likely have significant value after next season when his contract becomes a large expiring deal. I would rather wait till then to move him if we are stuck with trade packages for bad players.