Cronin blow it by not taking Wiseman?

[Chris Porter's Hair]

Wiseman sucks and his $9.6 million salary would have put POR over the luxury tax threshold. By moving Payton and not taking back any salary, POR is now $6.1 million under the tax threshold. A straight Payton for Wiseman swap would have put us $3.5 million over the threshold.

James Wiseman is simply not worth it. Not this year, and given Dame's huge extension, not worth repeater tax penalties going forward. This resets the clock on the repeater tax counter.

If we want a back up big man, the $6.1 million headroom under the tax threshold gives us plenty of room to sign a veteran big man to a vet min contract without becoming a tax paying team. In addition to the usual suspects like Boogie, Dwight, Whiteside, Kanter/Freedom, let's see who becomes available on the buy out market. Plenty of options that are better and cheaper than Wiseman that won't push us over the tax threshold.

I believe if the deal goes through you take on Kevin Knox. But he makes less than Payton, so it still would move you farther from the tax threshold rather than closer.

[TBpup]

It was tough to believe Cronin would rather have picks than Wiseman or Bey.

[Case2012]

I'm not sure about Wiseman, but bey would've been awesome. I can't remember if this was separate or how the deal worked but was Thybulle a different trade? Getting Bey and Matisse would've been a home run deadline especially if we had gotten the NY pick.

[Wizenheimer]

Question I have tho, if they try and make a trade this summer with their picks… (assuming lottery for Blazers and Knicks make POs), aren’t they still hampered moving future firsts because of the Nance trade?

the rule is a team can't trade any 1st's past the 7-future-drafts-line. Portland's 1st's are encumbered thru 2028. So after the draft in June, the Blazers will still have the encumbrance on their picks from 2024-2028. That's five drafts. And the Septien rule means the Blazers can't trade their 2029 pick because they possibly could be giving up their 2028 pick. So then, the Blazers could trade their 2030 1st round pick. But in 2023 it's real risky to trade that pick without protections. And, for instance, a lottery protected 1st 7 years in the future isn't going to have much value, at all, or generate much leverage

Olshey really screwed the Blazers with the conditions he gave Chicago in the Nance trade

[DeBlazerRiddem]

There have been creative protections used with language like "2 years after X pick is conveyed" but at the end of the day Portland can only offer one guaranteed pick in 2030, the 2024/2026 picks would have to turn into second rounders if we continue to miss the playoffs.

But look at what Denver has done with their picks

2023 first round draft pick to Charlotte
Denver's 1st round pick to Charlotte protected for selections 1-14 in 2023, 1-14 in 2024 and 1-14 in 2025; if Denver has not conveyed a 1st round pick to Charlotte by 2025, then Denver will instead convey its 2025 2nd round pick and 2026 2nd round pick to Charlotte (via Oklahoma City to New York) [Denver-Milwaukee-New Orleans-Oklahoma City, 11/23/2020; New York-Oklahoma City, 6/23/2022; Charlotte-New York, 6/23/2022]

2025 first round draft pick to Orlando
At least two years after Denver conveys a 1st round pick to Charlotte, Denver's 1st round pick to Orlando protected for selections 1-5 in 2025, 1-5 in 2026 and 1-5 in 2027 (if Denver has not conveyed a 1st round pick to Orlando by 2027, then Denver's obligation to Orlando will be extinguished) [Denver-Orlando, 3/25/2021]

2027 first round draft pick to Oklahoma City
At least two years after Denver conveys a 1st round pick to Orlando, Denver's 1st round pick to Oklahoma City protected for selections 1-5 in 2027, 1-5 in 2028 and 1-5 in 2029; if Denver has not conveyed a 1st round pick to Oklahoma City by 2029, then Denver will instead convey its 2029 2nd round pick to Oklahoma City [Denver-Oklahoma City, 6/23/2022]

Obviously Olshey screwed us with that horrible trade but also if Portland just wants to get out of it, Chicago would be more than happy to change the protection to unprotected at any moment. We only continue to be handcuffed as long as we don't want to give up a lottery pick. Obviously we don't but its not like we have any choice in the matter here, we are choosing a little bit harder road by allowing that protection to hang over us because we want the extra value.

[Case2012]

Can you imagine giving a lottery pick for Larry Nance? I wouldn’t be sad at all if we had traded for Lauri. I don’t even understand the Nance trade, Olshey was so bad at managing this franchise he did it like he hated the teams fans, which I believe.

[BlazersBroncos]

Can you imagine giving a lottery pick for Larry Nance? I wouldn’t be sad at all if we had traded for Lauri. I don’t even understand the Nance trade, Olshey was so bad at managing this franchise he did it like he hated the teams fans, which I believe.

We should have gone after Lauri in hindsight. Kid is showing how beastly he is in Utah, and was pretty great in the role that was asked of him in CLE as well.

Lauri likely would be the 2nd best talent Dame has ever played with after LMA. He is easily better than CJ, Ant, Grant, etc. Just took a while to get on a team that realized he was more dynamic than a catch-and-shoot big. Dude can handle, get to the rim, has a post game, hits the 3. Near complete package on offense.

[DaVoiceMaster]

The Warriors, Atlanta, and Detroit may have already had the deal done when the Blazers got brought into it. If that is the case, then they never had a shot at Wiseman or Bey. Have we heard any particulars for how that whole thing transpired?

[red_power]

Can you imagine giving a lottery pick for Larry Nance? I wouldn’t be sad at all if we had traded for Lauri. I don’t even understand the Nance trade, Olshey was so bad at managing this franchise he did it like he hated the teams fans, which I believe.

Cavs offered Lauri more money, plain and simple. If I recall the situation correctly, Blazers were capped and couldn't offer him more than the trade exception would allow.

It was enough to absorb Nance's contract but couldn't satisfy Markkanen's appetites.

[DusterBuster]

Can you imagine giving a lottery pick for Larry Nance? I wouldn’t be sad at all if we had traded for Lauri. I don’t even understand the Nance trade, Olshey was so bad at managing this franchise he did it like he hated the teams fans, which I believe.

The story behind that trade is still just mind bogglingly stupid. He’s negotiating a deal for Markkennen with Chicago, Cleveland comes in at the 11th hour of negotiations between everyone to outbid or convince Chicago to S&T Lauri to them instead of Portland… than instead of just saying… “ok that’s fine, we’re out”, Olshey just… decides to do Chicago a solid and still trade them the package they were offering for Lauri, but for Nance?!

It’s like going to a car dealer, negotiating for your dream car, then having the dealer sell that car after you agree on the price and you go… oh, that’s ok, just gimme whatever else you got on the lot.

[DusterBuster]

Can you imagine giving a lottery pick for Larry Nance? I wouldn’t be sad at all if we had traded for Lauri. I don’t even understand the Nance trade, Olshey was so bad at managing this franchise he did it like he hated the teams fans, which I believe.

Cavs offered Lauri more money, plain and simple. If I recall the situation correctly, Blazers were capped and couldn't offer him more than the trade exception would allow.

It was enough to absorb Nance's contract but couldn't satisfy Markkanen's appetites.

Which was true, but again, the deal they were trying to do was for Markkanen. If Cleveland outbids, they outbid. There was no reason you still do that deal for whatever scraps Chicago had left.

It was understandable to give up the pieces they did if Markkanen was returning. He wasn’t what he was today (at the point still a bit of a disappointment tbh), but still had enough potential that it was a good target and he would have been a starter. Larry was who he was, he was a vet and was never going to be starter quality for Portland… so to give up starter quality trade pieces for a backup is just loony.

[DusterBuster]

Question I have tho, if they try and make a trade this summer with their picks… (assuming lottery for Blazers and Knicks make POs), aren’t they still hampered moving future firsts because of the Nance trade?

the rule is a team can't trade any 1st's past the 7-future-drafts-line. Portland's 1st's are encumbered thru 2028. So after the draft in June, the Blazers will still have the encumbrance on their picks from 2024-2028. That's five drafts. And the Septien rule means the Blazers can't trade their 2029 pick because they possibly could be giving up their 2028 pick. So then, the Blazers could trade their 2030 1st round pick. But in 2023 it's real risky to trade that pick without protections. And, for instance, a lottery protected 1st 7 years in the future isn't going to have much value, at all, or generate much leverage

Olshey really screwed the Blazers with the conditions he gave Chicago in the Nance trade

Theoretically though, if the Blazer had some blockbuster deal lined up, they could just drop protection on the pick so it conveys to Chicago that year, then does the staggered firsts of swap/ufrp/swap/ufrp for the next maximum amount of years I would assume though?

Also tho, even without that theoretical trade, if this season ends up with Portland just missing the playoffs and a pick 12,13,14 and then getting the Knicks pick at like 17-ish…, I would be tempted to just tell Chicago to have the pick and stop with this nonsense. Maybe Portland and Chicago could work out a deal of trading the Knicks pick and a couple of seconds to pay off the trade… is that a thing? Seems like trades with pick protections and rules is relatively flexible.

Maybe they could even just give them the Knicks pick so the Bulls are guaranteed to get a 1st out of the deal. With the West as competitive as they are and the Blazers as shaky as they are, the Bulls could end up getting very little from that deal (if not conveyed by 2028, it becomes a second rounder and the Bulls can decline to take it if they want for some reason).

[Case2012]

It's pretty straight forward. Just trade then the Knicks pick for our pick back. Chicago could be sobs about it to try and leverage more assets if they wanted but that would be really petty and bad faith negotiating. Basically we're trading a first to to have the ability to trade 4 firsts or whatever for another star. At least that would/should be the goal. I still have a hard time imagining Jody will go into the tax though, which is what we'll have to do in order to contend. I don't like Phil knight as a person, but I think he'd be the ideal owner, hopefully he makes a real offer this summer.

[DusterBuster]

It's pretty straight forward. Just trade then the Knicks pick for our pick back. Chicago could be sobs about it to try and leverage more assets if they wanted but that would be really petty and bad faith negotiating. Basically we're trading a first to to have the ability to trade 4 firsts or whatever for another star. At least that would/should be the goal. I still have a hard time imagining Jody will go into the tax though, which is what we'll have to do in order to contend. I don't like Phil knight as a person, but I think he'd be the ideal owner, hopefully he makes a real offer this summer.

This is my hope as well. In reality, where the Knicks pick will land is best-case scenario for the Bulls getting the Blazers pick. It will never be a lottery pick of any sort since it reverts to seconds if not converted. Is the gamble that one day it'll be the #15 pick worth not just taking the Knicks pick this year that'll fall between 15-20?

From a Bulls standpoint, it would seem to make the most sense to just guarantee themselves that first-rounder now vs risk they never get it and end up with a 2nd rounder near when the decade is almost over.

[The Sebastian Express]

It's pretty straight forward. Just trade then the Knicks pick for our pick back. Chicago could be sobs about it to try and leverage more assets if they wanted but that would be really petty and bad faith negotiating. Basically we're trading a first to to have the ability to trade 4 firsts or whatever for another star. At least that would/should be the goal. I still have a hard time imagining Jody will go into the tax though, which is what we'll have to do in order to contend. I don't like Phil knight as a person, but I think he'd be the ideal owner, hopefully he makes a real offer this summer.

This is my hope as well. In reality, where the Knicks pick will land is best-case scenario for the Bulls getting the Blazers pick. It will never be a lottery pick of any sort since it reverts to seconds if not converted. Is the gamble that one day it'll be the #15 pick worth not just taking the Knicks pick this year that'll fall between 15-20?

From a Bulls standpoint, it would seem to make the most sense to just guarantee themselves that first-rounder now vs risk they never get it and end up with a 2nd rounder near when the decade is almost over.

I disagree about the BUlls standpoint. If we are in the lottery this year, unless that pick is top two - and even if it's two - I'm guessing we package it with Simons or Sharpe (I'm hoping Simons) plus future firsts to get a star back.

And Chicago will know that's our likely plan.

My bet is Chicago will ask for the Knicks pick plus seconds to get our own future pick back. Because they will have us where we need them, they don't need us.

[DusterBuster]

It's pretty straight forward. Just trade then the Knicks pick for our pick back. Chicago could be sobs about it to try and leverage more assets if they wanted but that would be really petty and bad faith negotiating. Basically we're trading a first to to have the ability to trade 4 firsts or whatever for another star. At least that would/should be the goal. I still have a hard time imagining Jody will go into the tax though, which is what we'll have to do in order to contend. I don't like Phil knight as a person, but I think he'd be the ideal owner, hopefully he makes a real offer this summer.

This is my hope as well. In reality, where the Knicks pick will land is best-case scenario for the Bulls getting the Blazers pick. It will never be a lottery pick of any sort since it reverts to seconds if not converted. Is the gamble that one day it'll be the #15 pick worth not just taking the Knicks pick this year that'll fall between 15-20?

From a Bulls standpoint, it would seem to make the most sense to just guarantee themselves that first-rounder now vs risk they never get it and end up with a 2nd rounder near when the decade is almost over.

I disagree about the BUlls standpoint. If we are in the lottery this year, unless that pick is top two - and even if it's two - I'm guessing we package it with Simons or Sharpe (I'm hoping Simons) plus future firsts to get a star back.

And Chicago will know that's our likely plan.

My bet is Chicago will ask for the Knicks pick plus seconds to get our own future pick back. Because they will have us where we need them, they don't need us.

Maybe. Hard to say… I mean, a star would have to realistically be on the market when Portland makes that offer for the Bulls to think that. If there isn’t one and the Blazers just want to free up that obligation…. And if they want a 2nd or two… go for it

[HoopsFanAZ]

3 college games at Memphis left a few question marks. Center is what they needed, high picks are rare for good teams, take the shot.
39 games as a rookie. Okay. Knee injury and didn’t play in his 2nd year where a team hopes for growth.
No starts for the Warriors this year and 12 minutes per in 21 games.

The 2020 draft isn’t looking stellar though there are plenty of guys who can play. After all, it was the CJ Elleby draft.

Detroit did the right thing. Take low risk shots on reclamation projects to see if change brings positive change. Wiseman to Portland would’ve been taking a shot like that, but perhaps the Warriors wouldn’t have wanted to trade him in the West.

Portland needed to trade Payton. Maybe not this in-season but soon. And 5 seconds replenished their draft capital … for shots in a draft, sweeteners in trade packages, to send something for castaways, AND should the Knicks pull a Pelicans to add 4 more of them. How many 2nd rounders does it take to pay off a lottery protected pick? ANSWER: As many as it takes.

IF Cronin doesn’t truly swing away this summer, then passing on available guys like Bamba, Wiseman, and Vanderbilt will look worse. But I applaud that he’s apparently sticking to his highest priority — bringing in a dude to go with Dame and Grant (and hopefully Sharpe).

[PDXKnight]

It's pretty straight forward. Just trade then the Knicks pick for our pick back. Chicago could be sobs about it to try and leverage more assets if they wanted but that would be really petty and bad faith negotiating. Basically we're trading a first to to have the ability to trade 4 firsts or whatever for another star. At least that would/should be the goal. I still have a hard time imagining Jody will go into the tax though, which is what we'll have to do in order to contend. I don't like Phil knight as a person, but I think he'd be the ideal owner, hopefully he makes a real offer this summer.

This is my hope as well. In reality, where the Knicks pick will land is best-case scenario for the Bulls getting the Blazers pick. It will never be a lottery pick of any sort since it reverts to seconds if not converted. Is the gamble that one day it'll be the #15 pick worth not just taking the Knicks pick this year that'll fall between 15-20?

From a Bulls standpoint, it would seem to make the most sense to just guarantee themselves that first-rounder now vs risk they never get it and end up with a 2nd rounder near when the decade is almost over.

I disagree about the BUlls standpoint. If we are in the lottery this year, unless that pick is top two - and even if it's two - I'm guessing we package it with Simons or Sharpe (I'm hoping Simons) plus future firsts to get a star back.

And Chicago will know that's our likely plan.

My bet is Chicago will ask for the Knicks pick plus seconds to get our own future pick back. Because they will have us where we need them, they don't need us.

Chicago should he happy with a first now over a future first that may not be a first and at best is 15. I'd take that if I'm them it's a fair swap that they'd be stupid not to take. A current first is always a better asset than a future one unless that first is unprotected and has the possibility of being clearly better imo. Our pick won't be clearly better.

More than likely if we go win now I think the nyk pick is dealt in a bigger package. And if we blow it up I'd just use the Knicks first and offer Chicago a bunch of the seconds knowing full well we will more than likely just use all of our firsts for 5 years anyhow

[HoopsFanAZ]

EDITED below to address arguments I've been reading and hearing.

[HoopsFanAZ]

THE fundamental questions for me on Cronin not taking Wiseman are the following:

(1) Would I prefer to take the chance on Wiseman being useful or the Blazers using Wiseman's contract as filler in a trade
OR
(2) Would I, instead, want to have 5 second rounders JUST IN CASE the Blazers didn't get the Knicks 1st rounder (ending up with 4 second rounders)? Would Chicago accept 4 second rounders instead of a first rounder? I wouldn't.

Would Chicago accept MORE 2nd rounders to pay off the debt AND thus free up the future Portland 1st rounders WHICH is the most important part of getting this draft capital in the first place? It's a helluva lot better to have 9 in the worst case than 4. Having Wiseman as trade filler but not having future picks to go with him would be a huge failure on Portland's part.

And with the Knicks doing their job so far, the five 2nd rounders Portland already has become possible picks for Portland to use for taking a shot on some BIGS, to grease the skids in trades, or to add a bit more so Chicago accepts the Knicks' pick.

I understand the arguments for acquiring Wiseman (trade filler on an expiring contract and as taking a flier on a reclamation project), but it utterly misses what Cronin MUST have been valuing, instead. PICKS and more picks. #free_our_1stRounders

I also understand if some posters disagree with the thinking above. Portland got lucky that the Milwaukee future pick (obtained from New Orleans) was actually useful last summer. That mistake was not repeated this year. I expect Nurkic and Ant are gone this summer in order to give Dame his best shot. Swing away, Cronin.