Free Agency 2023 - Blazers and around the league.

Pattycakes · Post #61 » by **Pattycakes** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 6:36 pm

Waiving Watford when we actually need big men is mind numbing and a little off.

DusterBuster · Post #62 » by **DusterBuster** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 6:37 pm

Pattycakes wrote:Waiving Watford when we actually need big men is mind numbing and a little off.

I agree, but to be fair, he was wildly undersized to be playing C like he was so much.

Dangeruss · Post #63 » by **Dangeruss** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 6:45 pm

DusterBuster wrote:
Pattycakes wrote:Waiving Watford when we actually need big men is mind numbing and a little off.

I agree, but to be fair, he was wildly undersized to be playing C like he was so much.

Agreed. Played more like a 3/4 tween with a poor man point forward game. Couldn’t shoot or rebound well enough.

Little (if he stays), Murray and Rupert should be getting his minutes

BlazersBroncos · Post #64 » by **BlazersBroncos** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 6:50 pm

Dangeruss wrote:
DusterBuster wrote:
Pattycakes wrote:Waiving Watford when we actually need big men is mind numbing and a little off.

I agree, but to be fair, he was wildly undersized to be playing C like he was so much.

Agreed. Played more like a 3/4 tween with a poor man point forward game. Couldn’t shoot or rebound well enough.

Little (if he stays), Murray and Rupert should be getting his minutes

Agreed - its why I have no issue waiving Trendon. He wasnt a high upside guy - he didnt really excel anywhere and I dont really see a skillset to build on and become a plus, playoff caliber role player.

He would get beat alot on defense as his footspeed was pretty poor and wasnt nearly big enough to guard non-small-ball Centers. The 3PT shot may have been at 39% last year - but it was low volume and honestly, this is obviously just conjecture, but I never bought him developing into a volume 3PT guy.

He is a nice jack of all trades that might fit on certain teams as a 3rd string F/C - but I just dont see the fit here. He is young, but the other youngsters on our roster of similar size have much better upside IMO (Walker has a translatable skill as a rebounder, Kris looks fluid enough to guard both F spots, Rayan elite length, etc).

Norm2953 · Post #65 » by **Norm2953** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 6:51 pm

Three hours before the bell sounds for the start of free agency. Will Jerami Grant sign with Portland?

Norm2953 · Post #66 » by **Norm2953** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 6:54 pm

BlazersBroncos wrote:How can anyone say this franchise is cheap? Who did we let walk? We paid both our top FA last season (Actually, overpaid) - and we are likely to overpay Grant.

Not sure which stars of needle movers we have missed out on either - can someone enlighten me.

Cronin is playing the cards he has been dealt.

The new CBA requires a team spend their money wisely, not stupidly. I can't fault Cronin (yet)

Case2012 · Post #67 » by **Case2012** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 7:04 pm

People need to acknowledge Cronin’s influence on the roster and why things remain relatively unchanged is because he’s been involved over a decade. Nothing will change under Cronin, so saying you’ll wait and be patient to see what he does is laughable. He’s had a year and a half to make moves to compete and we’ve been in the lottery the last 2 off seasons.

And sure, the franchise hasn’t been cheap about paying their stars because they’re the ones that bring in the revenue. Of course they’re protecting their investments. But they are cheap when it comes to the tax, and to say they want to build a contender is an outright lie since no team has won a ring without going heavy into the tax. Perhaps that might change under the new cab but i doubt it.

Norm2953 · Post #68 » by **Norm2953** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 7:11 pm

Case2012 wrote:People need to acknowledge Cronin’s influence on the roster and why things remain relatively unchanged is because he’s been involved over a decade. Nothing will change under Cronin, so saying you’ll wait and be patient to see what he does is laughable. He’s had a year and a half to make moves to compete and we’ve been in the lottery the last 2 off seasons.

And sure, the franchise hasn’t been cheap about paying their stars because they’re the ones that bring in the revenue. Of course they’re protecting their investments. But they are cheap when it comes to the tax, and to say they want to build a contender is an outright lie since no team has won a ring without going heavy into the tax. Perhaps that might change under the new cab but i doubt it.

Portland has added Shannon Sharpe and Scoot Henderson in the last two drafts. Thats better than all but the Spurs.

Case2012 · Post #69 » by **Case2012** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 7:17 pm

Sure, that’s great if you’re rebuilding but not for building a contender Around Dame as promised for years.

mighty_duck · Post #70 » by **mighty_duck** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 7:44 pm

The Nets just traded away Joe Harris in to Detroit cap space. If a Dame trade was to happen with the Nets, Harris was expected to be included to match salaries. It could be an indication that it won't happen.

Or (my interpretation) we are genuinely in a watch-and-see approach, instead of proactively looking for either a Dame trade or a win-now trade. And the Nets aren't willing to risk waiting.

Norm2953 · Post #71 » by **Norm2953** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 7:53 pm

Case2012 wrote:Sure, that’s great if you’re rebuilding but not for building a contender Around Dame as promised for years.

Take a look at the new CBA penalties.

Going heavy into taxes will cost more than just money for there will be real penalties for over spending. Teams always promise they will build around player XX and Portland is still not FA destination. Don't blame Cronin, who has to work with the hand he's dealt with.

Ive seen Portland do these win now moves for the Shawn Kemp/Jermaine O'Neal was the classic win now move that set the team back for years

remi_222 · Post #72 » by **remi_222** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 7:54 pm

Rupert has signed a multi yr contract so he's on the 15 players roster next yr

tester551 · Post #73 » by **tester551** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:01 pm

Dangeruss wrote:
DusterBuster wrote:
Pattycakes wrote:Waiving Watford when we actually need big men is mind numbing and a little off.

I agree, but to be fair, he was wildly undersized to be playing C like he was so much.

Agreed. Played more like a 3/4 tween with a poor man point forward game. Couldn’t shoot or rebound well enough.

Little (if he stays), Murray and Rupert should be getting his minutes

Watford is a 3/4, so he was in the wrong position at C.
He's also significantly better than Walker or Murray. I'd even say he's better than Winslow.

DusterBuster · Post #74 » by **DusterBuster** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:16 pm

tester551 wrote:
Dangeruss wrote:
DusterBuster wrote:
I agree, but to be fair, he was wildly undersized to be playing C like he was so much.

Agreed. Played more like a 3/4 tween with a poor man point forward game. Couldn’t shoot or rebound well enough.

Little (if he stays), Murray and Rupert should be getting his minutes

Watford is a 3/4, so he was in the wrong position at C.
He's also significantly better than Walker or Murray. I'd even say he's better than Winslow.

That's what happens when you populate an entire 15-man roster with only 2 of those players being over 6'9".

DusterBuster · Post #75 » by **DusterBuster** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:18 pm

Goldbum wrote:I worry that this team is too reactionary.

We need a POA defender, GP2 played that role for the GSW...here's all our $$$
Who cares if he's been a scrub his whole career
Need a starting SF
Strus played well. He helped MIA make the final as an (under sized) SF.
Here take all our $$$...who cares that you've been a scrub.

You need these guys to be the BEST versions of themselves to recoup you value... most the time you'll be lucky to make "savy" moves for second round picks.

I'm so much more interested in getting buy low guys who's value you can rehab, and even if you miss, the ones you hit on can move the needle.

Yep. This is just such a classic Blazer FO move. Blow your FA money on a guy who's value will never be higher and guaranteed to be overpaid and will not worth the contract they're going to give him immediately.

Dangeruss · Post #76 » by **Dangeruss** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:34 pm

tester551 wrote:
Dangeruss wrote:
DusterBuster wrote:
I agree, but to be fair, he was wildly undersized to be playing C like he was so much.

Agreed. Played more like a 3/4 tween with a poor man point forward game. Couldn’t shoot or rebound well enough.

Little (if he stays), Murray and Rupert should be getting his minutes

Watford is a 3/4, so he was in the wrong position at C.
He's also significantly better than Walker or Murray. I'd even say he's better than Winslow.

Murray hasn’t played yet, so that point is out

Being better than Winslow and Walker is nothing to write home about

Otherwise, I think we agree here.

red_power · Post #77 » by **red_power** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:53 pm

Waiving Watford for a roster spot alone seems to be a weird move. Yeah, he's a classic tweener but he's a capable player nonetheless.

We can only assume what is coming next.

PDXKnight · Post #78 » by **PDXKnight** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:55 pm

red_power wrote:Waiving Watford for a roster spot alone seems to be a weird move. Yeah, he's a classic tweener but he's a capable player nonetheless.

We can only assume what is coming next.

Yeah something is probably brewing but who knows how big

Post #79 » by **The Sebastian Express** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 9:08 pm

The TWat news really hit me in the stomach. Great vibes guy and good backup PF who could pass out of the high post and be a relief valve with secondary playmaking.

The move on its face makes no sense. If the point was to clear up a roster space to bring in more vets to the bench, okay.. go and trade Keon or Nas (or both!) and attach a second to them for someone's TPE or something. Watford will be a good seventh to eighth man and pinch starter.

I love Nas.. but he's always injured and hasn't shown more than TWat. And he's paid more.

Just very frustrating. I'll save complete judgment until after FA is over, but.. I mean. If the goal is to surround Dame with talented vets - keeping a low cost guy with okay upside is ideal. If the secondary goal is to trade Dame and rebuild..

Keeping the low cost guy with okay upside is.. ideal.

Dame Lizard · Post #80 » by **Dame Lizard** » Fri Jun 30, 2023 9:57 pm

I'm also not a fan of the Watford news. Yes, he was a tweener PF/C, and to be frank we don't absolutely need him. However he was a good locked room guy on a superb contract.

Completely agree that we should have looked to move others players (with 2nds attached). I'll miss you Watford.