MagicMatic wrote:MagicFan101 wrote:MagicMatic wrote:
Maybe. I’m just pointing out that this move (like the IT rumors) were just a save face move by management to address what they couldn’t accomplish in the draft. I’m much happier with the Grant result than IT or not addressing it at all. Still would rather have taken a swing on one of those underrated guards in the draft, but I can live with it.
You’re pointing out a bitter, shortsighted opinion... not reality.
Mozgov + an expiring PG contract offers (slightly) more flexibility than Biz + a late draft pick PG. Nothing groundbreaking but there is more wiggle room in trades or 2019 cap space.
Grant is still a relatively young yet experienced recent 1st round PG. Along with the monetary value of an expiring contract, he offers about as much on the court hope you could have for those late PGs in the draft.
While marginal or perhaps even negligible, this is a net-positive trade with a lot of time to go before opening night and yet another moveable asset.
I think the Grant deal is perfectly fine.
Drafting a younger point guard on a rookie deal without giving up assets is better. That’s not an argument. Splitting the difference between Grant and a majority of those starters is arguable at best.
A draft pick doesn’t come on a one year deal attractive in trades... some moves are made to set up future moves. That follow-up trade doesn’t always happen but putting yourself in a position to explore them has value.