FREE AGENCY 2024

[JasonStern]

I didn't miss your point which apparently is to prop up Simons and Ayton more than I 'bash' them

just so we're clear: you constantly saying Simons was "arguably" the best player on Portland is not persuasive for me. I've watched Simons for 6 seasons and 330 games. And I've watched the NBA for 50 years. I know where Simons ranks as a player, and it's not high enough to warrant any kind of attachment. I'd trade him for a lottery protected 1st and an expiring in a heartbeat and the Blazers would be better off afterward

Okay. If Simons isn't arguably the best player on this team, who exactly is? And at 25 and on a reasonable contract, I don't get the point of trading him for a Kris Murray tier pick that is more likely to bust than boom. Let's just look at the 2018 draft. The only player of any real value drafted after Simons was Brunson. So you're willing to move a 21ppg combo guard for a 1-in-40 chance to draft a better player? Unless Portland somehow becomes a free agency destination with a GM that properly utilizes cap space (cough Grant contract cough), how does that make us better unless we hit on a ~3% chance in the draft?

Again, my main point isn't that Simons and Ayton are amazing players. It's that the roster is so bad that they (and Grant, who I am all for moving) are the best we have. And Simons and Ayton are still young enough to rebuild with. Now, if Simons could be flipped for a proven young player, you'd have my attention. But some Bruce Brown tier player and a protected 1st when our roster is already full of prospects doesn't really entice me.

[Wizenheimer]

Thanks for taking the time, and your perspective on Deni...to be clear, I believe in Deni as a player and think he's right now the best young player the Blazers have on the roster--if i'm the Blazers i'm building around him and next year's draft pick.

What I question is his ability to be his best on this roster with at least 2 other players in the starting lineup that need the ball in their hands to be effective. Nor do I have faith that Chauncey and Co. will implement something to best utilize Deni.

Are the Blazers going to be able to retain him if he plays well?

Yes. The Blazers can retain him. Ideally the Blazers move Grant before then, but if not - Ayton's contract is up and he won't be getting a max deal in 2026..

that ability to retain Avdija is more complicated because of Avdija's contract. This is assuming that he really elevates his game

the earliest Portland can sign him to an extension is before the 2026-27 season. His contract:

2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28
$15,625,000 $14,375,000 $13,125,000 $11,875,000

the max extension he could sign in 2026 would start at a 40% raise over his previous salary (14.375M); that would be 20.1M. An extension in 2027 would be even lower. If Avdija becomes the player we all hope he can be, then there is no way at all he'll sign for a base salary of 20M/year. None

the only alternative for an extension is if the Blazers create sufficient cap-space to use for the extension; just like Utah just did for Markkanen. And that can't happen with Ayton and Simon on the payroll for similar salaries as they have currently (and Sharpe will be RFA with a huge cap-hold)

it's much more likely that the Blazers will have to let Avdija become UFA and then use Bird Rights to sign a new deal. But that allows for the chance he signs elsewhere

[Butter]

I didn't miss your point which apparently is to prop up Simons and Ayton more than I 'bash' them

just so we're clear: you constantly saying Simons was "arguably" the best player on Portland is not persuasive for me. I've watched Simons for 6 seasons and 330 games. And I've watched the NBA for 50 years. I know where Simons ranks as a player, and it's not high enough to warrant any kind of attachment. I'd trade him for a lottery protected 1st and an expiring in a heartbeat and the Blazers would be better off afterward

Okay. If Simons isn't arguably the best player on this team, who exactly is? And at 25 and on a reasonable contract, I don't get the point of trading him for a Kris Murray tier pick that is more likely to bust than boom. Let's just look at the 2018 draft. The only player of any real value drafted after Simons was Brunson. So you're willing to move a 21ppg combo guard for a 1-in-40 chance to draft a better player? Unless Portland somehow becomes a free agency destination with a GM that properly utilizes cap space (cough Grant contract cough), how does that make us better unless we hit on a ~3% chance in the draft?



Again, my main point isn't that Simons and Ayton are amazing players. It's that the roster is so bad that they (and Grant, who I am all for moving) are the best we have. And Simons and Ayton are still young enough to rebuild with. Now, if Simons could be flipped for a proven young player, you'd have my attention. But some Bruce Brown tier player and a protected 1st when our roster is already full of prospects doesn't really entice me.

Ahh, but that's not how NBA teams look at draft picks. They don't necessarily see Kris Murray, they see a potential raffle ticket.

Sure, it could be a Kris Murray, but what if it's a Nikola Jokić or a Giannis Antetokounmpo?

Acknowledge that real world lottery tickets don't usually make people rich, but....what if...?

[JasonStern]

I didn't miss your point which apparently is to prop up Simons and Ayton more than I 'bash' them

just so we're clear: you constantly saying Simons was "arguably" the best player on Portland is not persuasive for me. I've watched Simons for 6 seasons and 330 games. And I've watched the NBA for 50 years. I know where Simons ranks as a player, and it's not high enough to warrant any kind of attachment. I'd trade him for a lottery protected 1st and an expiring in a heartbeat and the Blazers would be better off afterward

Okay. If Simons isn't arguably the best player on this team, who exactly is? And at 25 and on a reasonable contract, I don't get the point of trading him for a Kris Murray tier pick that is more likely to bust than boom. Let's just look at the 2018 draft. The only player of any real value drafted after Simons was Brunson. So you're willing to move a 21ppg combo guard for a 1-in-40 chance to draft a better player? Unless Portland somehow becomes a free agency destination with a GM that properly utilizes cap space (cough Grant contract cough), how does that make us better unless we hit on a ~3% chance in the draft?



Again, my main point isn't that Simons and Ayton are amazing players. It's that the roster is so bad that they (and Grant, who I am all for moving) are the best we have. And Simons and Ayton are still young enough to rebuild with. Now, if Simons could be flipped for a proven young player, you'd have my attention. But some Bruce Brown tier player and a protected 1st when our roster is already full of prospects doesn't really entice me.

Ahh, but that's not how NBA teams look at draft picks. They don't necessarily see Kris Murray, they see a potential raffle ticket.

Sure, it could be a Kris Murray, but what if it's a Nikola Jokić or a Giannis Antetokounmpo?

Acknowledge that real world lottery tickets don't usually make people rich, but....what if...?

If that was true, we could have just traded away a few future 1sts for massive depth/talent. Let some other GM gamble on low probability odds. The lottery makes states a ton of money because they rarely pay out.

Instead we spent 5 first round picks on rentals of Arron Afllalo, Robert Covington, Mason Plumlee, and Larry Nance. Not exactly a high return on investment. To be fair, that could have been because Olshey is an incompetent idiot. Even if, like me, you don't overvalue late 1sts, you would hope for a better return for 5 of them.

[Walton1one]

Just because a guy puts up a bunch of points doesn’t mean he’s the team best player?

Simons is 25 years old, and the young guys (Scoot\Sharpe\Rupert\Clingan) are all 19/20/21 so trying to compare them now to what Simons is now is foolish.

The real exercise, is if Simons\Grant were gone from this team who would be the team’s best player?

Which players would elevate to take over that production?

IMO, if you want to fast track development of young players, then play them. It’s one thing if you were already a playoff or play in contending team, understandable why you would want to play veteran players, make young guys “earn it”, but to play those veteran players and still remain a bottom feeding lottery team makes literally no sense, it is counterproductive.

Which is exactly what this management is doing, and why a lot of people not just fans, are questioning them on what their direction/goal actually is? At some point, it’s ceases to look like a strategy and looks more like incompetence, Cronin is reaching that point.

[zzaj]

Thanks for taking the time, and your perspective on Deni...to be clear, I believe in Deni as a player and think he's right now the best young player the Blazers have on the roster--if i'm the Blazers i'm building around him and next year's draft pick.

What I question is his ability to be his best on this roster with at least 2 other players in the starting lineup that need the ball in their hands to be effective. Nor do I have faith that Chauncey and Co. will implement something to best utilize Deni.

Are the Blazers going to be able to retain him if he plays well?

Yes. The Blazers can retain him. Ideally the Blazers move Grant before then, but if not - Ayton's contract is up and he won't be getting a max deal in 2026..

that ability to retain Avdija is more complicated because of Avdija's contract. This is assuming that he really elevates his game

the earliest Portland can sign him to an extension is before the 2026-27 season. His contract:

2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28
$15,625,000 $14,375,000 $13,125,000 $11,875,000

the max extension he could sign in 2026 would start at a 40% raise over his previous salary (14.375M); that would be 20.1M. An extension in 2027 would be even lower. If Avdija becomes the player we all hope he can be, then there is no way at all he'll sign for a base salary of 20M/year. None

the only alternative for an extension is if the Blazers create sufficient cap-space to use for the extension; just like Utah just did for Markkanen. And that can't happen with Ayton and Simon on the payroll for similar salaries as they have currently (and Sharpe will be RFA with a huge cap-hold)

it's much more likely that the Blazers will have to let Avdija become UFA and then use Bird Rights to sign a new deal. But that allows for the chance he signs elsewhere

Yeah, this is the conundrum I was hinting at. I highly doubt he's going to sign an abysmal extension, and I'm sure that the Blazers aren't going to want to give him the opportunity to walk as an UFA...so that puts the Blazers in a financial bind--especially considering how Sharpe's contract may look.
it's much more likely that the Blazers will have to let Avdija become UFA and then use Bird Rights to sign a new deal. But that allows for the chance he signs elsewhere

[m0ng0]

Just because a guy puts up a bunch of points doesn’t mean he’s the team best player?

Simons is 25 years old, and the young guys (Scoot\Sharpe\Rupert\Clingan) are all 19/20/21 so trying to compare them now to what Simons is now is foolish.

The real exercise, is if Simons\Grant were gone from this team who would be the team’s best player?

Which players would elevate to take over that production?

IMO, if you want to fast track development of young players, then play them. It’s one thing if you were already a playoff or play in contending team, understandable why you would want to play veteran players, make young guys “earn it”, but to play those veteran players and still remain a bottom feeding lottery team makes literally no sense, it is counterproductive.

Which is exactly what this management is doing, and why a lot of people not just fans, are questioning them on what their direction/goal actually is? At some point, it’s ceases to look like a strategy and looks more like incompetence, Cronin is reaching that point.

You make it sound like poor Scoot is out in the cold, there are more than enough minutes to go around for all of our rooks or young players, the problem is can these dainty china dolls stay healthy enough?

[tester551]

I know that I'm wrong, but I kinda wish we could nab Nas now that he's been stretched. I think he's got more to offer this roster than say a guy like Reath (only because DA/ClingKong/Timelord). Trading Reath to a team that needs another center for a couple 2nds and signing Nas would be a feel good story for me (especially if we move Matisse).

Nas is a GREAT dude. Wish him the best.

But hes a mediocre player

[BlazersBroncos]

Remember that time we traded Zach Randolph for a pretty bad return to jettison a empty stats player that wasnt helping us win games? Remember how that helped reset the culture and truly turn the page?

Simons falls in that category. We need to move away from undersized score-only guards. Its time. We have a #7 pick waiting in the wings and Thybulle is more than capable to be a nice backup at SG - with Banton as a unique 3rd string SG to boot.

[m0ng0]

Zach was an actual cancer off the court, big difference, and you should also consider the team around Zach, his behavior was almost encouraged. I don't see anything like that in Simons...well done man

[BlazersBroncos]

Zach was an actual cancer off the court, big difference, and you should also consider the team around Zach, his behavior was almost encouraged. I don't see anything like that in Simons...well done man

But that isnt the whole story. Zach was also moved because his numbers didnt translate to winning ball and because we had just drafted LMA to play the same spot.

[m0ng0]

Zach was an actual cancer off the court, big difference, and you should also consider the team around Zach, his behavior was almost encouraged. I don't see anything like that in Simons...well done man

But that isnt the whole story. Zach was also moved because his numbers didnt translate to winning ball and because we had just drafted LMA to play the same spot.

And in the end what did that really net us?

[Wizenheimer]

Zach was an actual cancer off the court, big difference, and you should also consider the team around Zach, his behavior was almost encouraged. I don't see anything like that in Simons...well done man

But that isnt the whole story. Zach was also moved because his numbers didnt translate to winning ball and because we had just drafted LMA to play the same spot.

And in the end what did that really net us?

the room for Aldridge to become an all-star, the cap-space to sign Andre Miller; plus Patty Mills, Jeff Pendergraph, & Armon Johnson

[m0ng0]

But that isnt the whole story. Zach was also moved because his numbers didnt translate to winning ball and because we had just drafted LMA to play the same spot.

And in the end what did that really net us?

the room for Aldridge to become an all-star, the cap-space to sign Andre Miller; plus Patty Mills, Jeff Pendergraph, & Armon Johnson

and? What did these acquisitions ultimately net us? And what if Zach played alongside Roy instead? We will never know, but Aldridge was a softer Randolph with more polish and less grit... And he quit on us

[PDXKnight]

Remember that time we traded Zach Randolph for a pretty bad return to jettison a empty stats player that wasnt helping us win games? Remember how that helped reset the culture and truly turn the page?

Simons falls in that category. We need to move away from undersized score-only guards. Its time. We have a #7 pick waiting in the wings and Thybulle is more than capable to be a nice backup at SG - with Banton as a unique 3rd string SG to boot.

While I do concur we should move on from ant I think the vastly more important move here is head coach

[BlazersBroncos]

And in the end what did that really net us?

the room for Aldridge to become an all-star, the cap-space to sign Andre Miller; plus Patty Mills, Jeff Pendergraph, & Armon Johnson

and? What did these acquisitions ultimately net us? And what if Zach played alongside Roy instead? We will never know, but Aldridge was a softer Randolph with more polish and less grit... And he quit on us

He didnt quit on us - he left for what he thought was a better chance to win a ring.

LMA was clearly better than Zach. Every metric shows this. And it took until ZR ended up in MEM for him to come close to getting his stuff together. There is little chance he would have turned his career around if he wasnt bouncing around first.

[Wizenheimer]

And in the end what did that really net us?

the room for Aldridge to become an all-star, the cap-space to sign Andre Miller; plus Patty Mills, Jeff Pendergraph, & Armon Johnson

and? What did these acquisitions ultimately net us? And what if Zach played alongside Roy instead? We will never know, but Aldridge was a softer Randolph with more polish and less grit... And he quit on us

I just listed the 'assets' than came from trading Zach. The biggest of course was elevating Aldridge to the starting PF position. The notion that either Zach or LMA could be a bench player is ludicrous....one had to go; that was clear

Mills-Pendergraph-Johnson...were all 2nd round picks. Sometimes that's the value that you get; other times 2nd round picks have yielded Manu Ginobli, Draymond Green, and Nicola Jokic. 2nd round picks are opportunities and you won't have the opportunities if you don't have the picks

moving Zach to clear way for LMA was a good trade for Portland; a necessary trade. And Zach at 25 was a much better player than Simons at 25. But Portland didn't miss him a bit. And they wouldn't miss Simons either

[Walton1one]

Scoot played his best without Simons on the floor with him, he played poorly when they shared the floor together.

Simons dominates the ball too much, he can get away with it on a bad team like POR, but if he wants to be a key member of a good team, he will need to be playing off the ball.

Grant- Ant - Thybulle - Ayton, people defending these guys, acting like these guys have great value, when they are the “vets” on a horrible team, one of the worst in the NBA. But yeah, let’s continue to play them a bunch more minutes instead of the guys you spent high LOTTERY picks on.

This is how mediocrity thrives. Except they’re not even at that level yet

[m0ng0]

the room for Aldridge to become an all-star, the cap-space to sign Andre Miller; plus Patty Mills, Jeff Pendergraph, & Armon Johnson

and? What did these acquisitions ultimately net us? And what if Zach played alongside Roy instead? We will never know, but Aldridge was a softer Randolph with more polish and less grit... And he quit on us

I just listed the 'assets' than came from trading Zach. The biggest of course was elevating Aldridge to the starting PF position. The notion that either Zach or LMA could be a bench player is ludicrous....one had to go; that was clear

Mills-Pendergraph-Johnson...were all 2nd round picks. Sometimes that's the value that you get; other times 2nd round picks have yielded Manu Ginobli, Draymond Green, and Nicola Jokic. 2nd round picks are opportunities and you won't have the opportunities if you don't have the picks

moving Zach to clear way for LMA was a good trade for Portland; a necessary trade. And Zach at 25 was a much better player than Simons at 25. But Portland didn't miss him a bit. And they wouldn't miss Simons either

At the end of the day what did it achieve? Miller was toast, Patty was the only other thing that came from that, and God bless him he has a career still, but what did we really gain?

[m0ng0]

Scoot played his best without Simons on the floor with him, he played poorly when they shared the floor together.

Prove that? or was it more of a case of Scoot starting to figure things out? Look at Simons last 5 games before they benched him...
.