RealGM

This trade assumes Donovan Clingan is still on the board at 5.

Detroit gets: 7, Jerami Grant, Robert Williams
Blazers get: 5 (Donovan Clingan), $29.8m TPE, $12.4m TPE

Why for Detroit: Get two real NBA players to helpfully help the Pistons win like 30 games while not giving up that much draft capital
Why for Portland: Apparently they really like Clingan and this is a team that seems in for a long haul tank. They can use these TPEs to absorb bad contracts later on in FA while still staying under the tax.

Take out Williams. Detroit should prefer cap space to an injury prone 3rd center. And Blazer fans seem willing to take a chance that Williams gets healthy enough to trade for value or simply back up Ayton. And with them saving a ton of money anyway no reason for them not to take that chance. Nothing lost if he barely plays.

I actually want Clingan. So I guess I'd have to decline.

Texas Chuck wrote:Take out Williams. Detroit should prefer cap space to an injury prone 3rd center. And Blazer fans seem willing to take a chance that Williams gets healthy enough to trade for value or simply back up Ayton. And with them saving a ton of money anyway no reason for them not to take that chance. Nothing lost if he barely plays.

In this trade, they're drafting a center they really like so they can't keep both centers.

Detroit also has no functional defenders at center.

HadAnEffectHere wrote:

Texas Chuck wrote:Take out Williams. Detroit should prefer cap space to an injury prone 3rd center. And Blazer fans seem willing to take a chance that Williams gets healthy enough to trade for value or simply back up Ayton. And with them saving a ton of money anyway no reason for them not to take that chance. Nothing lost if he barely plays.

In this trade, they're drafting a center they really like so they can't keep both centers.

That is not Detroit's problem. Detroit should not take on the money just because Portland is drafting a center. Portland saves enough money and are going to be bad either way. They are hurt far less than a cap space team from having the money on the books.

It just makes far more sense for the deal to leave Williams out. Doesn't hurt Portland. Does hurt Detroit. Both will be bad and have two centers they prefer either way. Leave him on the team that doesn't have to waste cap space on him.

I would rather try for a future FRP or a middle pick in this draft than use Grant to move up 2 slots.

Maybe a 3 way where Grant goes to DET, Ivey to team X and a pick to PDX.

BlazersBroncos wrote:I would rather try for a future FRP or a middle pick in this draft than use Grant to move up 2 slots.

Maybe a 3 way where Grant goes to DET, Ivey to team X and a pick to PDX.

Same, but that is partially because I’m not enamored with Clingan.

Myth wrote:

BlazersBroncos wrote:I would rather try for a future FRP or a middle pick in this draft than use Grant to move up 2 slots.

Maybe a 3 way where Grant goes to DET, Ivey to team X and a pick to PDX.

Same, but that is partially because I’m not enamored with Clingan.

O same. I think Clingan is going to be really good - a bit of a Adams level talent IMO. But PDX shouldnt be looking for excellent 5th starter types. We need to take bigger swings, especially at the F spots.

I sorta hope Clingan falls to 7 and we trade down w/ OKC for 12 and some future assets. Think that works well for both squads, but in reality PDX would likely simply draft him.

Doubt Detroit wants Grant’s contract but I also doubt Clingan helps Detroit much for its unclear if
Clingan’s combine shot is functional in a game. That is one team with Duren, Ausar, Isiah that has
spacing issues that a shooter like Knecht would help more

I don't believe the Blazers would have any interest in trading Grant to just move up from 7 to 5

Grant + 14 + 34, for 5, OK. Not sure the Pistons would do that, but that's about the most the Blazers should pay, IMO

Brogdon, Williams Picks 7 and 34 for nr.5 and sasser

pistons4ever wrote:Brogdon, Williams Picks 7 and 34 for nr.5 and sasser

Pass for POR.

That’s a bit rich.

JRoy wrote:

pistons4ever wrote:Brogdon, Williams Picks 7 and 34 for nr.5 and sasser

Pass for POR.

That’s a bit rich.

Ya I dont see any reason really to move from 7 to 5. I see Sarr and Riascher as the clear top 2, and I would trade up for either. But after them I see a leveling of talent and would just sit and take 2 swings w/ 7 and 12.

JRoy wrote:

pistons4ever wrote:Brogdon, Williams Picks 7 and 34 for nr.5 and sasser

Pass for POR.

That’s a bit rich.

Agreed.

The difference between #5 and #7 in this draft is on the order of a Thybulle caliber player

Norm2953 wrote:Doubt Detroit wants Grant’s contract but I also doubt Clingan helps Detroit much for its unclear if
Clingan’s combine shot is functional in a game. That is one team with Duren, Ausar, Isiah that has
spacing issues that a shooter like Knecht would help more

I'm just not convinced a 58% free throw shooter is suddenly a reliable 3 point threat. Maybe he can develop so he isn't a tragic option for one or two a game if left wide open but I don't see him being a go-to type option. Anything else is draft hype IMO. I also really hope he is just a smoke screen, that we are having conversations about moving up without really tipping our hat to our true target but I wouldn't be too surprised I guess.

DeBlazerRiddem wrote:I'm just not convinced a 58% free throw shooter is suddenly a reliable 3 point threat. .

Ah yes the Bruce Bowen. There are some others who are good 3-pt shooters and below average FT shooters, but Bowen is the only example I can think of that you could trust from 3(the corners obviously) who couldn't shoot FT's-- of course as a spacer he's not having to shoot FT's much so not too big a deal.

Knecht did shoot 40% from the college line on high volume. Maybe he's a KG who has 20 foot range but not 24 foot range? Not watched enough of him to know.

Texas Chuck wrote:

DeBlazerRiddem wrote:I'm just not convinced a 58% free throw shooter is suddenly a reliable 3 point threat. .

Ah yes the Bruce Bowen. There are some others who are good 3-pt shooters and below average FT shooters, but Bowen is the only example I can think of that you could trust from 3(the corners obviously) who couldn't shoot FT's-- of course as a spacer he's not having to shoot FT's much so not too big a deal.

Knecht did shoot 40% from the college line on high volume. Maybe he's a KG who has 20 foot range but not 24 foot range? Not watched enough of him to know.

Oh I meant Clingan, there is this odd idea out there that he can be a floor spacing big from some combine results.

Knecht was 77% from FT so I definitely believe him as a floor spacer.

DeBlazerRiddem wrote:

Texas Chuck wrote:

DeBlazerRiddem wrote:I'm just not convinced a 58% free throw shooter is suddenly a reliable 3 point threat. .

Ah yes the Bruce Bowen. There are some others who are good 3-pt shooters and below average FT shooters, but Bowen is the only example I can think of that you could trust from 3(the corners obviously) who couldn't shoot FT's-- of course as a spacer he's not having to shoot FT's much so not too big a deal.

Knecht did shoot 40% from the college line on high volume. Maybe he's a KG who has 20 foot range but not 24 foot range? Not watched enough of him to know.

Oh I meant Clingan, there is this odd idea out there that he can be a floor spacing big from some combine results.

Knecht was 77% from FT so I definitely believe him as a floor spacer.

ah my bad. Yeah I always doubt the "shooting" big man with no real track record until I see it. We still have Mavs fans insisting Lively is going to be a 3-pt shooter, and well yeah great if he does, but some videos of him making them with no defense in a gym don't move me. Gafford is making them too. McGee made them. Powell makes them.

I think Clingan has enough going for him(for the right team, not saying that's Portland) even without projecting that.

Texas Chuck wrote:

DeBlazerRiddem wrote:

Texas Chuck wrote:
Ah yes the Bruce Bowen. There are some others who are good 3-pt shooters and below average FT shooters, but Bowen is the only example I can think of that you could trust from 3(the corners obviously) who couldn't shoot FT's-- of course as a spacer he's not having to shoot FT's much so not too big a deal.

Knecht did shoot 40% from the college line on high volume. Maybe he's a KG who has 20 foot range but not 24 foot range? Not watched enough of him to know.

Oh I meant Clingan, there is this odd idea out there that he can be a floor spacing big from some combine results.

Knecht was 77% from FT so I definitely believe him as a floor spacer.

ah my bad. Yeah I always doubt the "shooting" big man with no real track record until I see it. We still have Mavs fans insisting Lively is going to be a 3-pt shooter, and well yeah great if he does, but some videos of him making them with no defense in a gym don't move me. Gafford is making them too. McGee made them. Powell makes them.

I think Clingan has enough going for him(for the right team, not saying that's Portland) even without projecting that.

I still remember going to Vegas about a decade ago and watching the Team USA scrimmage, and during warmups Kenneth Faried drilled like 10 straight threes from the top. The guy was 10 for 45 from 3 for his career.

As for Clingan, I’m fine taking him at 7, but I’d be pretty disappointed to use real assets or players that can get assets to move up for Clingan.

I would hazard a guess that whoever we want at 5 will be available at 7. If Williams was taken out I would do it. I think a 3 and D player like Grant is a good addition and I doubt we will do better with our cap space.