hypothetically speaking
Moderators: Moonbeam, DeBlazerRiddem
Re: hypothetically speaking
-
Norm2953
- RealGM
- Posts: 16,500
- And1: 2,235
- Joined: May 17, 2003
- Location: Oregon
Re: hypothetically speaking
It'll be interesting to see if Hart does want the $112/4 deal, for that's the same deal Grant wants. Do
you pay Hart or Grant if the team had to choose to pay only one?
you pay Hart or Grant if the team had to choose to pay only one?
Re: hypothetically speaking
-
Case2012
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,027
- And1: 2,101
- Joined: Jan 03, 2012
-
Re: hypothetically speaking
When was the last time the blazers went into the tax? We've made many moves over the years to avoid it, I doubt this year will be any different.

Instagram: @casetwelve
Re: hypothetically speaking
-
BNM
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,565
- And1: 4,305
- Joined: Jun 28, 2016
Re: hypothetically speaking
Case2012 wrote:When was the last time the blazers went into the tax? We've made many moves over the years to avoid it, I doubt this year will be any different.
In 2019-20 the Blazers had the highest payroll in the entire league and paid the highest luxury tax of any team:
https://www.sportscasting.com/which-nba-team-had-the-highest-payroll-for-the-2019-2020-season/
That was Jody "Cheap AF" Allen's first full season as owner (Paul passed away early in the 2018-19 season). It was also the year after the Blazers went to the WCF. Jody, like Paul, showed that she was willing to open the checkbook whenever the team overachieved and looked like a potential contender (like Paul did in the summer of 2016 after the post-Aldridge Blazers upset the Clipper in the 1st round).
You have created this false narrative that Jody is too cheap to pay the luxury tax when the facts prove otherwise. It's simply not true. Avoiding the tax when you are trying to build a competitive team, and then going all in for that final missing piece, is just good roster management. Overpaying for crappy results (like 2019-20) is just plain stupid and extremely shortsighted.
Re: hypothetically speaking
-
BlazersBroncos
- RealGM
- Posts: 12,494
- And1: 10,043
- Joined: Oct 27, 2016
Re: hypothetically speaking
Ya there is demonstrable evidence that Jody isnt cheap. All you have to do is look at where we ranked salary wise since her takeover. Its high, very high. Way too high for the produce on the court in fact.
Re: hypothetically speaking
-
Case2012
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,027
- And1: 2,101
- Joined: Jan 03, 2012
-
Re: hypothetically speaking
BNM wrote:Case2012 wrote:When was the last time the blazers went into the tax? We've made many moves over the years to avoid it, I doubt this year will be any different.
In 2019-20 the Blazers had the highest payroll in the entire league and paid the highest luxury tax of any team:
https://www.sportscasting.com/which-nba-team-had-the-highest-payroll-for-the-2019-2020-season/
That was Jody "Cheap AF" Allen's first full season as owner (Paul passed away early in the 2018-19 season). It was also the year after the Blazers went to the WCF. Jody, like Paul, showed that she was willing to open the checkbook whenever the team overachieved and looked like a potential contender (like Paul did in the summer of 2016 after the post-Aldridge Blazers upset the Clipper in the 1st round).
You have created this false narrative that Jody is too cheap to pay the luxury tax when the facts prove otherwise. It's simply not true. Avoiding the tax when you are trying to build a competitive team, and then going all in for that final missing piece, is just good roster management. Overpaying for crappy results (like 2019-20) is just plain stupid and extremely shortsighted.
Ok, geez I stand corrected. I asked a question and it was answered, thank you.

Instagram: @casetwelve
Re: hypothetically speaking
-
BNM
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,565
- And1: 4,305
- Joined: Jun 28, 2016
Re: hypothetically speaking
Case2012 wrote:BNM wrote:Case2012 wrote:When was the last time the blazers went into the tax? We've made many moves over the years to avoid it, I doubt this year will be any different.
In 2019-20 the Blazers had the highest payroll in the entire league and paid the highest luxury tax of any team:
https://www.sportscasting.com/which-nba-team-had-the-highest-payroll-for-the-2019-2020-season/
That was Jody "Cheap AF" Allen's first full season as owner (Paul passed away early in the 2018-19 season). It was also the year after the Blazers went to the WCF. Jody, like Paul, showed that she was willing to open the checkbook whenever the team overachieved and looked like a potential contender (like Paul did in the summer of 2016 after the post-Aldridge Blazers upset the Clipper in the 1st round).
You have created this false narrative that Jody is too cheap to pay the luxury tax when the facts prove otherwise. It's simply not true. Avoiding the tax when you are trying to build a competitive team, and then going all in for that final missing piece, is just good roster management. Overpaying for crappy results (like 2019-20) is just plain stupid and extremely shortsighted.
Ok, geez I stand corrected. I asked a question and it was answered, thank you.
You're welcome.
You've called Jody Allen cheap af in multiple threads when the exact opposite has been true. Just wanted to let the facts speak for themselves.
Re: hypothetically speaking
- PDXKnight
- RealGM
- Posts: 26,269
- And1: 3,193
- Joined: May 29, 2007
- Location: Portland
-
Re: hypothetically speaking
Norm2953 wrote:It'll be interesting to see if Hart does want the $112/4 deal, for that's the same deal Grant wants. Do
you pay Hart or Grant if the team had to choose to pay only one?
That's a tough one. I like Hart better as a player but at the same time grant has more size
Re: hypothetically speaking
-
Norm2953
- RealGM
- Posts: 16,500
- And1: 2,235
- Joined: May 17, 2003
- Location: Oregon
Re: hypothetically speaking
PDXKnight wrote:Norm2953 wrote:It'll be interesting to see if Hart does want the $112/4 deal, for that's the same deal Grant wants. Do
you pay Hart or Grant if the team had to choose to pay only one?
That's a tough one. I like Hart better as a player but at the same time grant has more size
Portland however has a big backlog of guards with Dame, Ant, Sharpe, GP2, Keon and has a positional need
for Grant but the guy doesn't rebound. It's a tough choice and it likely will come down to who really wants
to be here. I'd trade both of them for Siakum for Portland has a crying need for another big body to help
Nurk protect the cup, especially with Dame/Ant in the back court.
Re: hypothetically speaking
-
Dame Lizard
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 4,849
- And1: 2,363
- Joined: Dec 03, 2012
-
Re: hypothetically speaking
I love Josh Hart, but paying 4/112 for him would be one of the worst contracts in the league. Eeeeeek.PDXKnight wrote:Norm2953 wrote:It'll be interesting to see if Hart does want the $112/4 deal, for that's the same deal Grant wants. Do
you pay Hart or Grant if the team had to choose to pay only one?
That's a tough one. I like Hart better as a player but at the same time grant has more size
I honestly wouldn't pay him even close to that. I reckon for a four year contract he's worth no more than $18m per year. That's 4/72m.
Re: hypothetically speaking
-
Case2012
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,027
- And1: 2,101
- Joined: Jan 03, 2012
-
Re: hypothetically speaking
18 million for Hart is about the going rate for a starting sg. It sucks he doesn’t shoot 3s, but i would definitely pay him that.
Grant is good with what he makes for a forward that doesn’t have interest in rebuilding. I’ve been watching him a lot because I’ve lost a few bets that involved him rebounding and he doesn’t ever position himself to get boards, he’s always quick to get back on defense. 22 million seems fair for a 4th option- Dame, Ant, Nurk, Grant seems to be the pecking order on offense.
Grant is good with what he makes for a forward that doesn’t have interest in rebuilding. I’ve been watching him a lot because I’ve lost a few bets that involved him rebounding and he doesn’t ever position himself to get boards, he’s always quick to get back on defense. 22 million seems fair for a 4th option- Dame, Ant, Nurk, Grant seems to be the pecking order on offense.

Instagram: @casetwelve
Re: hypothetically speaking
- PDXKnight
- RealGM
- Posts: 26,269
- And1: 3,193
- Joined: May 29, 2007
- Location: Portland
-
Re: hypothetically speaking
Case2012 wrote:18 million for Hart is about the going rate for a starting sg. It sucks he doesn’t shoot 3s, but i would definitely pay him that.
Grant is good with what he makes for a forward that doesn’t have interest in rebuilding. I’ve been watching him a lot because I’ve lost a few bets that involved him rebounding and he doesn’t ever position himself to get boards, he’s always quick to get back on defense. 22 million seems fair for a 4th option- Dame, Ant, Nurk, Grant seems to be the pecking order on offense.
Keon can probably develop into a Hart sort of player too. Grant at 22 mil is good 30 and I run for the hills lol
Re: hypothetically speaking
-
Blazinaway
- General Manager
- Posts: 8,873
- And1: 1,635
- Joined: Jan 27, 2009
Re: hypothetically speaking
Norm2953 wrote:It'll be interesting to see if Hart does want the $112/4 deal, for that's the same deal Grant wants. Do
you pay Hart or Grant if the team had to choose to pay only one?
I really like Hart but the guy you pay is Grant, Hart I think can be replaced by a combo of GPII, Sharp, Nas, Keon, Winslow - meaning we have the pieces to replace Hart and not Grant who is the better player. IMO Hart is probably the most likely guy to be traded if we go for an upgrade at/before deadline.
Re: hypothetically speaking
-
Brandon-Clyde
- RealGM
- Posts: 23,495
- And1: 5,904
- Joined: May 29, 2008
-
Re: hypothetically speaking
A decision needs to be made before the trade deadline. I would much prefer we get something for whichever one we are not planning on keeping. Even what is likely to be a mid to late first would be better than nothing.
There are no constraints on the human mind, no walls around the human spirit, no barriers to our progress except those we ourselves erect." -- Ronald Reagan
Re: hypothetically speaking
-
GEE
- Starter
- Posts: 2,416
- And1: 369
- Joined: Aug 04, 2006
Re: hypothetically speaking
In Cronin I Trust! Though not perfect by any means, he definitely has this team trending in the right direction. I've said that it seems obvious where the weakness is in the roster(PF/C), but it's equally obvious that we have very good assets to address it in the army of wings that we have. The players even talk about the open competition on a daily basis. I also believe Cronin has a short list of targets already in mind and I have no clue who the guy will be: Big and sexy blockbuster trade, or will it be a small, smart one? Again, no clue, but I'm almost 100% sure we'll see a PF/C added using one of the mentioned Wings before the DL.
Re: hypothetically speaking
-
LillardTime
- Freshman
- Posts: 61
- And1: 36
- Joined: Jul 12, 2015
-
Re: hypothetically speaking
As much as I love what he brings to the team, I think Hart is the one that will have to go. Grant has the added size that we have lacked for so long, Winslow is incredibly versatile and can go from playing small ball 5 to PG, Nas is locked in now on a very team friendly deal that already looks like a bargain and GP2 is similarly on a more cap friendly deal than Hart will likely command.
The one variable that can’t be measured though it what Hart brings to the team in intensity. Dame has commented on it and the difference in the physicality and tenacity of this team compared to previous years is obvious. As a fan it is so much fun watching our guys really dig in an fight compared to what we have seen for the past 3-4 years.
The one variable that can’t be measured though it what Hart brings to the team in intensity. Dame has commented on it and the difference in the physicality and tenacity of this team compared to previous years is obvious. As a fan it is so much fun watching our guys really dig in an fight compared to what we have seen for the past 3-4 years.
Return to Portland Trail Blazers


