Season finale: Portland vs LA Lakers 12:30pm Chargetv and KUNP

[PDXKnight]

I would argue since leaving Denver we have seen Grant as someone who is less than interested in being a low usage 3/D guy who can save himself for defense. He wants shots.

He left Denver, a place where he could have carved out a career legacy as the new Tayshaun Prince type glue guy to instead get 15+ shots in Detroit.

He should be on the bench playing 20mpg. I dont think the argument for Sharpe starting over Grant is simply due to youth and potential - the team is better with Sharpe on the floor than Grant.

Sharpe had a better On/Off and OnCourt per 100 possessions than Grant this year. He also had a better WS/48 and OBPM than Grant. His ORtg was slightly better and the DRtg was the same.

Grant has no argument for starting over Sharpe, Camara or Deni other than being wildly overpaid - but I say you simply take the sunk cost and bench him.

I'd say it depends on the cost. It kills me because i and likely most of us knew it was a bad contract from day 1, but as suggested in other posters that 2029 (worst of 3) frp isn't gonna be all that good. That'd be something to consider I think.

I don't know if benching him would be great as I could see locker room drama. He's been a good presence by all accounts but he seems like he'd get disgruntled over an excessively small role much like ayton or Ant then we'd have to deal with losing the locker room.

Feels like maybe we need to have a heart to heart with him something like "hey we gave you this huge deal and you're getting outplayed, no hard feelings but we are gonna bring you off the bench. Feel free to see with your agent if any other team wants your contract and arrange a deal that doesn't cost us additional assets to move you. We kept our promise to pay you this small fortune so please keep yours and be a professional until we can move you. Not doing so will result in consequences laid out in the cba and in your contract"

I just dont see where Grant fits anywhere outside as a bench player.

We have the forward spots basically locked up w/ Camara and Deni. Grant should accept his role and look at his bank account before bitching about anything.

I am not of mind that a starting trio of Camara / Grant / Deni has enough offensive juice to really get anywhere. In my minds eye the late play of Sharpe has cemented him as the guy to roll with at SG next season - nothing is guaranteed but given the pieces we have to really take the 'next step' a scoring guard like Sharpe who can call his own number is quite needed - especially if Scoot is the PGOTF as he doesnt really project as a high volume scorer as much as he does a middle of the road floor general (Conley type if the stars align).

So unless we are going to bench a youngster in Sharpe who doesnt just have the potential to provide the most in-need offensive skillset given the other youths in town (Deni, Camara, Scoot, DC) but is also on a contract year where we 10000% need to know what we have - unless we make that foolish move then I see no route for Grant being a starter here.

And I see no route for us moving off him either outside attaching serious assets.

So Grant should accept his role, accept he inked a huge deal in a small market for an absurd length in years and just grind it out as a good solider. We already did a solid by not backing out of his insane deal when Dame asked out. He can zip it and play the role we need given the current state of the team.

Oh I agree, he definitely shouldn't start. I cant see them paying him that money to play under 25 mpg as a reserve though

[oldfishermen]

I'd say it depends on the cost. It kills me because i and likely most of us knew it was a bad contract from day 1, but as suggested in other posters that 2029 (worst of 3) frp isn't gonna be all that good. That'd be something to consider I think.

I don't know if benching him would be great as I could see locker room drama. He's been a good presence by all accounts but he seems like he'd get disgruntled over an excessively small role much like ayton or Ant then we'd have to deal with losing the locker room.

Feels like maybe we need to have a heart to heart with him something like "hey we gave you this huge deal and you're getting outplayed, no hard feelings but we are gonna bring you off the bench. Feel free to see with your agent if any other team wants your contract and arrange a deal that doesn't cost us additional assets to move you. We kept our promise to pay you this small fortune so please keep yours and be a professional until we can move you. Not doing so will result in consequences laid out in the cba and in your contract"

I just dont see where Grant fits anywhere outside as a bench player.

We have the forward spots basically locked up w/ Camara and Deni. Grant should accept his role and look at his bank account before bitching about anything.

I am not of mind that a starting trio of Camara / Grant / Deni has enough offensive juice to really get anywhere. In my minds eye the late play of Sharpe has cemented him as the guy to roll with at SG next season - nothing is guaranteed but given the pieces we have to really take the 'next step' a scoring guard like Sharpe who can call his own number is quite needed - especially if Scoot is the PGOTF as he doesnt really project as a high volume scorer as much as he does a middle of the road floor general (Conley type if the stars align).

So unless we are going to bench a youngster in Sharpe who doesnt just have the potential to provide the most in-need offensive skillset given the other youths in town (Deni, Camara, Scoot, DC) but is also on a contract year where we 10000% need to know what we have - unless we make that foolish move then I see no route for Grant being a starter here.

And I see no route for us moving off him either outside attaching serious assets.

So Grant should accept his role, accept he inked a huge deal in a small market for an absurd length in years and just grind it out as a good solider. We already did a solid by not backing out of his insane deal when Dame asked out. He can zip it and play the role we need given the current state of the team.

Oh I agree, he definitely shouldn't start. I cant see them paying him that money to play under 25 mpg as a reserve though

The money is in Grants wallet no matter how much he plays..

Make Grant earn his minutes. AKA, do what is best for the team.

[dckingsfan]

I would argue since leaving Denver we have seen Grant as someone who is less than interested in being a low usage 3/D guy who can save himself for defense. He wants shots.

He left Denver, a place where he could have carved out a career legacy as the new Tayshaun Prince type glue guy to instead get 15+ shots in Detroit.

He should be on the bench playing 20mpg. I dont think the argument for Sharpe starting over Grant is simply due to youth and potential - the team is better with Sharpe on the floor than Grant.

Sharpe had a better On/Off and OnCourt per 100 possessions than Grant this year. He also had a better WS/48 and OBPM than Grant. His ORtg was slightly better and the DRtg was the same.

Grant has no argument for starting over Sharpe, Camara or Deni other than being wildly overpaid - but I say you simply take the sunk cost and bench him.

I'd say it depends on the cost. It kills me because i and likely most of us knew it was a bad contract from day 1, but as suggested in other posters that 2029 (worst of 3) frp isn't gonna be all that good. That'd be something to consider I think.

I don't know if benching him would be great as I could see locker room drama. He's been a good presence by all accounts but he seems like he'd get disgruntled over an excessively small role much like ayton or Ant then we'd have to deal with losing the locker room.

Feels like maybe we need to have a heart to heart with him something like "hey we gave you this huge deal and you're getting outplayed, no hard feelings but we are gonna bring you off the bench. Feel free to see with your agent if any other team wants your contract and arrange a deal that doesn't cost us additional assets to move you. We kept our promise to pay you this small fortune so please keep yours and be a professional until we can move you. Not doing so will result in consequences laid out in the cba and in your contract"

I just dont see where Grant fits anywhere outside as a bench player.

We have the forward spots basically locked up w/ Camara and Deni. Grant should accept his role and look at his bank account before bitching about anything.

I am not of mind that a starting trio of Camara / Grant / Deni has enough offensive juice to really get anywhere. In my minds eye the late play of Sharpe has cemented him as the guy to roll with at SG next season - nothing is guaranteed but given the pieces we have to really take the 'next step' a scoring guard like Sharpe who can call his own number is quite needed - especially if Scoot is the PGOTF as he doesnt really project as a high volume scorer as much as he does a middle of the road floor general (Conley type if the stars align).

So unless we are going to bench a youngster in Sharpe who doesnt just have the potential to provide the most in-need offensive skillset given the other youths in town (Deni, Camara, Scoot, DC) but is also on a contract year where we 10000% need to know what we have - unless we make that foolish move then I see no route for Grant being a starter here.

And I see no route for us moving off him either outside attaching serious assets.

So Grant should accept his role, accept he inked a huge deal in a small market for an absurd length in years and just grind it out as a good solider. We already did a solid by not backing out of his insane deal when Dame asked out. He can zip it and play the role we need given the current state of the team.

Violent disagreement there

I think Camara's 3-point shooting percentage will continue to improve as well as the rest of his offensive game. I think Deni hasn't peaked either. And Grant as a 3&D in the corner would have a much higher 3-point shooting percentage as well.

Add to that - it is a long defensive group, I still think that defense is half the game. The month where Grant was locked in on D, the team played pretty well. As a note, when Sharpe was coming off the bench he put forth more effort on the defensive end - interesting.

I like Sharpe, but until he decides to get to the hoop on offense and really put forward the effort on defense - I would rather go with the length and 3-point shooting from Grant.

But I do understand your view, just agree to disagree.

[dckingsfan]

I think he wants out of Portland so he'd probably consider a buy-out but it wouldn't be by much. He's owed 103M over the next 3 seasons So maybe he's agree to a reduction to 95-100M if he has confidence he can sign elsewhere. I forget what the cap-impact is for Portland if he signed a 5M/year deal with some team. Maybe a couple million a year. So, theoretically the Blazers might be able to knock 3M/year off of their obligation.

they be better off sending the worst of their 2029 first's + Grant for an expiring contract

You oft have information I don't - where are you seeing this?

his exit interview

This?

Watch on YouTube

It didn't seem that negative? More like, tentative? ~we might be on the cusp of competing...

I thought Matisse Thybulle's exit interview was super positive.

[DaVoiceMaster]

Why wouldn't the Lakers wannt turn Rui and Gabe into Grant and a future pick? Blazers get expiring contracts. That future asset could be important for them.

[Wizenheimer]

Why wouldn't the Lakers wannt turn Rui and Gabe into Grant and a future pick? Blazers get expiring contracts. That future asset could be important for them.

one problem: Rui has been better than Grant the last 2 seasons. He's been a better 3 points shooter and a much better rebounder. And he doesn't need the ball as much

and, the Lakers will be flirting with the 2nd apron again next season. Meaning that 2-for-1 trade would not only add 3M in salary, it would force them into signing another player to reach the minimum roster

[BlazersBroncos]

Why wouldn't the Lakers wannt turn Rui and Gabe into Grant and a future pick? Blazers get expiring contracts. That future asset could be important for them.

one problem: Rui has been better than Grant the last 2 seasons. He's been a better 3 points shooter and a much better rebounder. And he doesn't need the ball as much

and, the Lakers will be flirting with the 2nd apron again next season. Meaning that 2-for-1 trade would not only add 3M in salary, it would force them into signing another player to reach the minimum roster

Not to mention - taking on Grant's salary takes LAL out of being a FA player in 2026. As it stands LAL will have only 81M committed to the books entering the 2026 offseason. I could see LBJ coming back for a last season on the cheap - but more importantly the 2026 offseason is the last time they will have Reaves on the cheap (under 15M).

They would be absolutley idiotic to take on Grant and his 34M+ deal and nuking the high chance that a big name FA signs with LAL for the weather, glamor and Luka factor.

Grant is on the Beal level of value. A year longer than Beal but cheaper. I would swap Grant + RWIII for Beal if he waived his NTC simply to shave a year of Jerami - but I dont think that NTC gets waived for Portland and even then I am not sure PHX would take the extra year over paying Beal more $$$.

[JasonStern]

Glad to see people join the "trade Grant" bandwagon.
Doubt it requires "serious assets" as many have stated, but it isn't going to be a free ride. Either you get a trade similar to Nurkic for Ayton where you actually take on salary, ideally short-term - or, you have to attach a 2nd or something and take on some short-term dead weight salary. But GMs get desperate needing to make some move to keep their jobs. Bradley Beal should have been unmovable, yet he found a new home. So, you never know. But the idea that the Blazers would get anything of value back in a trade is unrealistic.
Next season will be terrible, but there is a path (that I am sure the Blazers will mess up) where the Blazers have max cap space and several young players either on rookie scale contracts or that the Blazers have RFA rights to eligible for extensions.