RealGM

Simple trade:

Portland trades 7 for 11+future pick back (currently top 14 protected till 2028).

Why for the Blazers? Save a bit a luxury tax space (where every dollar matters right now given their situation) between the salary of 7 vs the salary of 11. The more important reason is getting their pick back to allow for more flexibility in the future as well as assurance that they control all of their future first round picks.

Why for the Bulls?
Move up in the draft for someone like Clingan, Topic, Ron Holland, etc. That future Portland pick probably doesn't convey given the strength of the west, so they make a small move up for a better prospect.

A team like Portland much like Chicago needs better prospects. NO

Hard pass for POR.

That owed pick projects as a SRP at this time. That may change but still would not do this deal for POR.

Unless the Bulls, foolishly, have their heart set on one guy, no way I even bother to move from 11 to 7 for free. There's no way to predict what happens at 3-10 so why bother fixating on one guy and giving up an asset to move up when your guy could easily slip to #11.

That PORT pick is only worth getting back if they decide to get a real plan and trading a future pick through 2029 is part of it.

mhd wrote:Simple trade:

Portland trades 7 for 11+future pick back (currently top 14 protected till 2028).

Why for the Blazers? Save a bit a luxury tax space (where every dollar matters right now given their situation) between the salary of 7 vs the salary of 11. The more important reason is getting their pick back to allow for more flexibility in the future as well as assurance that they control all of their future first round picks.

Why for the Bulls?
Move up in the draft for someone like Clingan, Topic, Ron Holland, etc. That future Portland pick probably doesn't convey given the strength of the west, so they make a small move up for a better prospect.

I'd pull the trigger on this for Portland, if my targets (Risacher, Sarr, Holland, & Buzelis) have all been drafted and are off the board.

I think one of Holland, Buzelis, Sarr and Risacher will be there but will be gone if they
dropped down to 11.

I do buy the notion that there is a group of 10 players (Sarr, Risacher, Sheppard, Topic,
Buzelis, Clingan, Holland, Knecht, Castle, Dillingham) according to Tankathon, that
could go in any order. Staying at 7 allows you to pick one of these guys

I'm wondering if there is a way to salvage the couple of suggestions in this thread, and this other thread from yesterday (viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2382319&start=31)

Charlotte:
#6 => #11 + Thybulle
Hornets drop back and pick up an elite defender.

Chicago:
#11 + Portland Future 1st => #7 + #40
Bulls move up to get their guy.

Portland:
#7 + #40 + Thybulle => #6 + Portland Future 1st returned
Blazers clear their future pick obligation and clear salary.

tester551 wrote:I'm wondering if there is a way to salvage the couple of suggestions in this thread, and this other thread from yesterday (viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2382319&start=31)

Charlotte:
#6 => #11 + Thybulle
Hornets drop back and pick up an elite defender.

Chicago:
#11 + Portland Future 1st => #7 + #40
Bulls move up to get their guy.

Portland:
#7 + #40 + Thybulle => #6 + Portland Future 1st returned
Blazers clear their future pick obligation and clear salary.

Portland easily says yes to your idea. Ditto Chicago. I'm not sure Charlotte says yes without getting some future draft consideration back IMO. With Mark Williams have injury issues, I see them as the floor for Clingan.

ChettheJet wrote:Unless the Bulls, foolishly, have their heart set on one guy, no way I even bother to move from 11 to 7 for free. There's no way to predict what happens at 3-10 so why bother fixating on one guy and giving up an asset to move up when your guy could easily slip to #11.

That PORT pick is only worth getting back if they decide to get a real plan and trading a future pick through 2029 is part of it.

I mean this is just silly. If you have a guy you like, he's on the board at 7, and the cost to move up is minimal, why take the risk that he's off the board at 11? Like you say, there's no way to predict what happens.

Take numbers out of the equation here. If #7 is on the clock and you're Chicago, you ask yourself: would I trade the guy who's #5 on my board and the PDX pick for the guy who's #1 on my board?

mhd wrote:

tester551 wrote:I'm wondering if there is a way to salvage the couple of suggestions in this thread, and this other thread from yesterday (viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2382319&start=31)

Charlotte:
#6 => #11 + Thybulle
Hornets drop back and pick up an elite defender.

Chicago:
#11 + Portland Future 1st => #7 + #40
Bulls move up to get their guy.

Portland:
#7 + #40 + Thybulle => #6 + Portland Future 1st returned
Blazers clear their future pick obligation and clear salary.

Portland easily says yes to your idea. Ditto Chicago. I'm not sure Charlotte says yes without getting some future draft consideration back IMO. With Mark Williams have injury issues, I see them as the floor for Clingan.

I don’t know about easily, I’d say maybe. If Hornets are on the board and Blazers are essentially a coin flip between 2 players, then the rest of the trade is Thybulle + 40 for their pick back that may become keeping their 2nd rounder itself. If Blazers management don’t plan on aiming for the playoffs in a couple years, they may be better off sending Thybulle for multiple 2nds or keeping Thybulle and cutting costs elsewhere. If they do like a player clearly more and want to secure them at 6 and/or this is the salary path they want to take, then this could happen.

Myth wrote:

mhd wrote:

tester551 wrote:I'm wondering if there is a way to salvage the couple of suggestions in this thread, and this other thread from yesterday (viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2382319&start=31)

Charlotte:
#6 => #11 + Thybulle
Hornets drop back and pick up an elite defender.

Chicago:
#11 + Portland Future 1st => #7 + #40
Bulls move up to get their guy.

Portland:
#7 + #40 + Thybulle => #6 + Portland Future 1st returned
Blazers clear their future pick obligation and clear salary.

Portland easily says yes to your idea. Ditto Chicago. I'm not sure Charlotte says yes without getting some future draft consideration back IMO. With Mark Williams have injury issues, I see them as the floor for Clingan.

I don’t know about easily, I’d say maybe. If Hornets are on the board and Blazers are essentially a coin flip between 2 players, then the rest of the trade is Thybulle + 40 for their pick back that may become keeping their 2nd rounder itself. If Blazers management don’t plan on aiming for the playoffs in a couple years, they may be better off sending Thybulle for multiple 2nds or keeping Thybulle and cutting costs elsewhere. If they do like a player clearly more and want to secure them at 6 and/or this is the salary path they want to take, then this could happen.

How else will Portland shave the money to avoid the tax? It could be a Simons trade, but is Portland willing to do it, and who takes on that money? I just don't see a viable Brogdan destination that saves them significant money. Clearing out the Thybulle contract gets them some breathing room.

mhd wrote:

Myth wrote:

mhd wrote:

Portland easily says yes to your idea. Ditto Chicago. I'm not sure Charlotte says yes without getting some future draft consideration back IMO. With Mark Williams have injury issues, I see them as the floor for Clingan.

I don’t know about easily, I’d say maybe. If Hornets are on the board and Blazers are essentially a coin flip between 2 players, then the rest of the trade is Thybulle + 40 for their pick back that may become keeping their 2nd rounder itself. If Blazers management don’t plan on aiming for the playoffs in a couple years, they may be better off sending Thybulle for multiple 2nds or keeping Thybulle and cutting costs elsewhere. If they do like a player clearly more and want to secure them at 6 and/or this is the salary path they want to take, then this could happen.

How else will Portland shave the money to avoid the tax? It could be a Simons trade, but is Portland willing to do it, and who takes on that money? I just don't see a viable Brogdan destination that saves them significant money. Clearing out the Thybulle contract gets them some breathing room.

Meh, there aren't a ton of players worth spending cap space on, Brogdon is a solid vet and he's expiring. I could see someone taking him for cap space once the dust settles and their primary FA targets are off the table.

mhd wrote:

Myth wrote:

mhd wrote:

Portland easily says yes to your idea. Ditto Chicago. I'm not sure Charlotte says yes without getting some future draft consideration back IMO. With Mark Williams have injury issues, I see them as the floor for Clingan.

I don’t know about easily, I’d say maybe. If Hornets are on the board and Blazers are essentially a coin flip between 2 players, then the rest of the trade is Thybulle + 40 for their pick back that may become keeping their 2nd rounder itself. If Blazers management don’t plan on aiming for the playoffs in a couple years, they may be better off sending Thybulle for multiple 2nds or keeping Thybulle and cutting costs elsewhere. If they do like a player clearly more and want to secure them at 6 and/or this is the salary path they want to take, then this could happen.

How else will Portland shave the money to avoid the tax? It could be a Simons trade, but is Portland willing to do it, and who takes on that money? I just don't see a viable Brogdan destination that saves them significant money. Clearing out the Thybulle contract gets them some breathing room.

Thybulle for multiple 2nds
Simons for a package that involves taking back less money
Brogdon for a package that involves taking back less money
Grant for a package that involves taking back less money
Ayton for a package that involves taking back less money

And these are just the simple versions of trades Blazers could make to save money. The one proposed above is a viable option, but it isn’t the only option.