Blazers Previously Had Serious Sign-And-Trade Talks For Greg Monroe

Moderators: bwgood77, Domejandro

RealGM Wiretap
RealGM
Posts: 102,614
And1: 293
Joined: Mar 19, 2013

Blazers Previously Had Serious Sign-And-Trade Talks For Greg Monroe 

Post#1 » by RealGM Wiretap » Thu Jul 17, 2014 2:03 pm

The Portland Trail Blazers and Detroit Pistons had serious sign-and-trade discussions earlier this month centered on Greg Monroe.


Monroe remains a restricted free agent and many have speculated that the Pistons will be unable to keep both he and Josh Smith.


The Blazers ultimately decided to sign Chris Kaman to serve as the backup to Robin Lopez at center.

Via Marc Stein/ESPN

Chamberneezy
Ballboy
Posts: 45
And1: 8
Joined: Jul 03, 2014
       

Re: Blazers Previously Had Serious Sign-And-Trade Talks For  

Post#2 » by Chamberneezy » Thu Jul 17, 2014 6:39 pm

Can't imagine why anybody in their right mind would take Josh Smith over Monroe.
HKapM82
Sophomore
Posts: 225
And1: 1
Joined: Aug 24, 2003

Re: Blazers Previously Had Serious Sign-And-Trade Talks For 

Post#3 » by HKapM82 » Fri Jul 18, 2014 1:53 am

[quote="Chamberneezy"]Can't imagine why anybody in their right mind would take Josh Smith over Monroe.[/quote]

One plays defense...but yeah, Monroe is a better long-term bet. I would love if either were my 4th or 5th best starter (or if Smith only played defense and ignored offense beyond tip-ins), but having them be a main piece is a disaster. Who would Portland have traded? He's not good defensively so he couldn't start with Aldridge and he's not good enough to supplant him. Not sure about this one.
User avatar
God Squad
RealGM
Posts: 12,220
And1: 10,184
Joined: Feb 22, 2010
Location: Toronto
 

Re: Blazers Previously Had Serious Sign-And-Trade Talks For 

Post#4 » by God Squad » Fri Jul 18, 2014 7:45 am

HKapM82 wrote:
Chamberneezy wrote:Can't imagine why anybody in their right mind would take Josh Smith over Monroe.


One plays defense...but yeah, Monroe is a better long-term bet. I would love if either were my 4th or 5th best starter (or if Smith only played defense and ignored offense beyond tip-ins), but having them be a main piece is a disaster. Who would Portland have traded? He's not good defensively so he couldn't start with Aldridge and he's not good enough to supplant him. Not sure about this one.

The goal would be Monroe plays closer to the basket, while Aldridge stretches the floor. But you're right on defence it's a disaster.
Image
User avatar
D21
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,493
And1: 658
Joined: Sep 09, 2005

Re: Blazers Previously Had Serious Sign-And-Trade Talks For  

Post#5 » by D21 » Fri Jul 18, 2014 9:05 am

Chamberneezy wrote:Can't imagine why anybody in their right mind would take Josh Smith over Monroe.


If you need a PF (and you have lots of 3pts shooters taking long shots of Smith before he even think about it), you will be better with Smith, because he's better than Monroe at PF.

If you need a C, than go for Monroe, because he's better at C than at PF

The interesting thing is that the real problem of DET is having both Drummond and Monroe being C, and that they would improve by trading Monroe (or even Drummond) for a wing of his level.
Valid
RealGM
Posts: 13,263
And1: 12,656
Joined: Jul 07, 2012
Location: New Jersey

Re: Blazers Previously Had Serious Sign-And-Trade Talks For  

Post#6 » by Valid » Fri Jul 18, 2014 3:06 pm

An Aldridge/Monroe frontcourt would be a disaster defensively. I'm not even sure why Portland would consider this.
Trader_Joe
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 29,174
And1: 3,948
Joined: Jan 19, 2009
 

Re: Blazers Previously Had Serious Sign-And-Trade Talks For 

Post#7 » by Trader_Joe » Fri Jul 18, 2014 4:58 pm

Valid wrote:An Aldridge/Monroe frontcourt would be a disaster defensively. I'm not even sure why Portland would consider this.

Why?
LMA is a good defender and Monroe can defend from the C spot.
He held opponents to 51% shooting around the rim which is pretty good.
He's also young with plenty of room to improve.
Mikhail Prokhorov wrote:My posse usually needs another vacation after a vacation with me.

Return to Wiretap Discussion