RealGM

Blazers trade: Brogdon/Grant
Blazers get: Simmons/Wade/27 PHI 1st(top 8, top 8, then 28 PHI 2nd)

Cavs trade: LeVert/Wade/#20
Cavs get: Grant

Nets trade: Simmons/27 PHI 1st
Nets get: Brogdon/LeVert/#20

Nets get two players who can help them now and turn a future 1st into a current one. Keeps all 25 FA hopes alive.

Cavs go get a guy who pairs well with either of their bigs and can be played at SF alongside both. Cost is minimal.

Blazers get a first and shed a ton of future salary. Can buy out Simmons if they don't want him or can see if his past talent can be unlocked. In theory he's a great fit next to Simons. In theory.

I don't hate the idea of Grant in Cleveland, but the value feels off here. Swap out Wade for Niang, and it's closer.

So POR trades two starter level players for a guy who may never play again and what might end up as a SRP?

POR politely declines.

mcfly1204 wrote:I don't hate the idea of Grant in Cleveland, but the value feels off here. Swap out Wade for Niang, and it's closer.

I had it with Niang at first, but with Portland tax issues it just works better with Wade and it shouldn't be that big a deal for Cleveland with Grant added.

JRoy wrote:So POR trades two starter level players for a guy who may never play again and what might end up as a SRP?

POR politely declines.

I mean I could have simplified it and just given Portland the gtd pick 20. But then I'd hear this draft sucks and they already have multiple picks so I tried to improve it by giving them a similarly valued pick in a future year. Yes it could become a 2nd. As is the case with most traded picks.

Oh and you left out the $90M or so in savings. Feels like a pretty big omission when discussing value.

Texas Chuck wrote:

JRoy wrote:So POR trades two starter level players for a guy who may never play again and what might end up as a SRP?

POR politely declines.

I mean I could have simplified it and just given Portland the gtd pick 20. But then I'd hear this draft sucks and they already have multiple picks so I tried to improve it by giving them a similarly valued pick in a future year. Yes it could become a 2nd. As is the case with most traded picks.

Oh and you left out the $90M or so in savings. Feels like a pretty big omission when discussing value.

Cap space means little in POR. You know that.

Quality FA do not sign here.

Imbalanced trades are possible but less possible when POR hands out talent like complementary breath mints.

As always cap/tax space can be leveraged in lots of ways that aren't signing free agents. But yes if you believe that Grant+Brogdon on those contracts are high value pieces I definitely see why you think this is light. I have Brogdon worth maybe a 2nd? Swapping Grant for an expiring worth a mid to late 1st.

Because the money always matters.

Texas Chuck wrote:

JRoy wrote:So POR trades two starter level players for a guy who may never play again and what might end up as a SRP?

POR politely declines.

I mean I could have simplified it and just given Portland the gtd pick 20. But then I'd hear this draft sucks and they already have multiple picks so I tried to improve it by giving them a similarly valued pick in a future year. Yes it could become a 2nd. As is the case with most traded picks.

Oh and you left out the $90M or so in savings. Feels like a pretty big omission when discussing value.

Cut Brooklyn out of the deal completely.

Send #20 to Chicago & return Portlands future pick back.

Portland can find a trade for LeVert later in the season

Texas Chuck wrote:As always cap/tax space can be leveraged in lots of ways that aren't signing free agents. But yes if you believe that Grant+Brogdon on those contracts are high value pieces I definitely see why you think this is light. I have Brogdon worth maybe a 2nd? Swapping Grant for an expiring worth a mid to late 1st.

Because the money always matters.

If that is their value, may as well keep them; we won’t sign anyone better and can move Simons.

Texas Chuck wrote:

JRoy wrote:So POR trades two starter level players for a guy who may never play again and what might end up as a SRP?

POR politely declines.

I mean I could have simplified it and just given Portland the gtd pick 20. But then I'd hear this draft sucks and they already have multiple picks so I tried to improve it by giving them a similarly valued pick in a future year. Yes it could become a 2nd. As is the case with most traded picks.

Oh and you left out the $90M or so in savings. Feels like a pretty big omission when discussing value.

Really Simmons for two EC's that can actually play next year with no 2025 issues is a big win for the Nets. They should be sending out a 1st for that, not just swapping picks. Portland should get the Philly 1st and #20 (perhaps sending back a later pick to Cleveland as Portland doesn't need more 2024 picks but could use a move up).

giberish wrote:

Texas Chuck wrote:

JRoy wrote:So POR trades two starter level players for a guy who may never play again and what might end up as a SRP?

POR politely declines.

I mean I could have simplified it and just given Portland the gtd pick 20. But then I'd hear this draft sucks and they already have multiple picks so I tried to improve it by giving them a similarly valued pick in a future year. Yes it could become a 2nd. As is the case with most traded picks.

Oh and you left out the $90M or so in savings. Feels like a pretty big omission when discussing value.

Really Simmons for two EC's that can actually play next year with no 2025 issues is a big win for the Nets. They should be sending out a 1st for that, not just swapping picks. Portland should get the Philly 1st and #20 (perhaps sending back a later pick to Cleveland as Portland doesn't need more 2024 picks but could use a move up).

That's fair. I think at that point though we go back to the idea above of just cutting Brooklyn out. I could see Brooklyn giving up a chance at a better pick to get help now and pick up a young player now. Not sure they give up a first just to rent two guys who don't move the needle that much. I wouldn't.

Texas Chuck wrote:

JRoy wrote:So POR trades two starter level players for a guy who may never play again and what might end up as a SRP?

POR politely declines.

I mean I could have simplified it and just given Portland the gtd pick 20. But then I'd hear this draft sucks and they already have multiple picks so I tried to improve it by giving them a similarly valued pick in a future year. Yes it could become a 2nd. As is the case with most traded picks.

Oh and you left out the $90M or so in savings. Feels like a pretty big omission when discussing value.

I’m totally with your reasoning here. Big savings, I risk the 2027 pick over this year’s #20. It also helps us tank this year. I say yes to this trade even though I repulse a bit when I see Simmons to Portland, but then I saw he is finally expiring.

The Chauncey Billups led Blazers don't need help tanking

I think it works better without the Nets.

I would do it from Brooklyn, even though Philly's 2027 pick might get interesting if this offseason doesn't go well. Just having 2 more competent playmakers on the squad would do us a ton of good. Having the right-now asset return of the 20th also cushions the blow, even in a weaker draft.

But it seems, more folks are more inclined to cut us out completely. Also fine by me.

I like the idea of Garland, Niang, and Jerome for Grant, Henderson, and Williams/Thybulle

I don’t think CLE would go for that.

Brogdon and Grant are both worth a first and the cap savings doesn't really matter, no one is gonna sign in Portland and we don't really need to sign anyone, the goal should be to get as many picks as possible and develop talent that way. I would rather trade them separately to get more value.

The cap implications for the Cavs are brutal here, although what happens with the core of the team matters a lot. LeVert expiring is designed to offset Mobley's raise.

Cavs insist on Niang out over Wade.

I like the other one a lot better