Jerami Grant receiving a lot of trade interest- (Jake Fisher)

[mattao313]

This whole Grant discussion is a case study into if something gets repeated so many times then it basically becomes true after so long, or at least THOUGHT of as true.

This whole "Grant is just an iso scorer"/"Grant is only effective with the ball in his hands" narrative has gotten beyond outta control. I don't understand the need to make up things just to make a point.

Like if we get Banchero or Smith, do people expect these guys to be strictly spot up shooters? Or will we allow them the ability to fully develop into what we would need them to be? SCORERS! Grant shoots better from 3 than both Cade and Bey but somehow he's not effective off the ball. Pffft.

Sent from my SM-N975U using RealGM mobile app

You're looking at this from the wrong end. Yes, he's a decent catch & shoot guy from 3. But he's still shooting the ball when he catches it. This is a guy with a low assist % relative to his high usage. He's a ball-stopper.

The basic complaint is that while he's on the floor and being individually productive, the rest of the offense tends to stagnate. He's not helping to elevate the players around him. It's Grant playing well as opposed to the Pistons playing well.

Your argument still examines him as the recipient or beneficiary of other players as opposed to him being a catalyst.

In a vacuum that is not strictly a bad thing and has value. It's not what I want for *this* team. I want better ball movement.

Exactly if grant played like he did in Denver and OKC he'd be great. But instead we got the tunnel vision want to prove himself grant.

Like you said though player that can't playmake shouldn't be in high usage roles. We have a chance to replace his production with better well rounded players in fa hopefully.

Sent from my 5087Z using RealGM mobile app

[vege]

This whole Grant discussion is a case study into if something gets repeated so many times then it basically becomes true after so long, or at least THOUGHT of as true.

This whole "Grant is just an iso scorer"/"Grant is only effective with the ball in his hands" narrative has gotten beyond outta control. I don't understand the need to make up things just to make a point.

Like if we get Banchero or Smith, do people expect these guys to be strictly spot up shooters? Or will we allow them the ability to fully develop into what we would need them to be? SCORERS! Grant shoots better from 3 than both Cade and Bey but somehow he's not effective off the ball. Pffft.

Sent from my SM-N975U using RealGM mobile app

You're looking at this from the wrong end. Yes, he's a decent catch & shoot guy from 3. But he's still shooting the ball when he catches it. This is a guy with a low assist % relative to his high usage. He's a ball-stopper.

The basic complaint is that while he's on the floor and being individually productive, the rest of the offense tends to stagnate. He's not helping to elevate the players around him. It's Grant playing well as opposed to the Pistons playing well.

Your argument still examines him as the recipient or beneficiary of other players as opposed to him being a catalyst.

In a vacuum that is not strictly a bad thing and has value. It's not what I want for *this* team. I want better ball movement.

Exactly if grant played like he did in Denver and OKC he'd be great. But instead we got the tunnel vision want to prove himself grant.

Like you said though player that can't playmake shouldn't be in high usage roles. We have a chance to replace his production with better well rounded players in fa hopefully.

Sent from my 5087Z using RealGM mobile app

Since he's been back from his injury, he changed his game a lot, he is a lot more like Denver's Grant (he's been focusing a lot more on defense, and have been passing the ball more) but also he's been capable of create and score, when nobody else does, and he's also been a good go to option at the end of close games, which is good, we shouldn't have only Cade as option in those situations.

He's been showing a lot of chemistry with both Cade and Bey, they have a lot of assists between the 3 of them. His main issue is the lack of interest in rebounding, that's something I'm not going to deny.

[DetroitSho]

You're looking at this from the wrong end. Yes, he's a decent catch & shoot guy from 3. But he's still shooting the ball when he catches it. This is a guy with a low assist % relative to his high usage. He's a ball-stopper.

The basic complaint is that while he's on the floor and being individually productive, the rest of the offense tends to stagnate. He's not helping to elevate the players around him. It's Grant playing well as opposed to the Pistons playing well.

Your argument still examines him as the recipient or beneficiary of other players as opposed to him being a catalyst.

In a vacuum that is not strictly a bad thing and has value. It's not what I want for *this* team. I want better ball movement.

Again, a bunch of words that didn't address my actual point. All you did is point out further things you don't like about Grant. We get it.

Sent from my SM-N975U using RealGM mobile app

You complained about a label and pointed out his ability to shoot the 3. I conceded the point and applied a more appropriate label in it's place; "ball stopper". What part of that was not relevant? Would it have been better for me to continue arguing that "Grant is just an iso scorer" after you make a reasonable argument? What exactly were you hoping for as an outcome??

Look at your first sentence, just oozing with pretentious "genius". You basically tried to wrap your "concession" in further complaints. Like bro, one simple point, NO NEED TO MISCHARACTERIZE A PLAYER TO MAKE AN ARGUMENT is all I'm saying.

And yes, "you're right, he's not just an iso scorer" would've sufficed. Not, "yeah maybe he kinda a little might not be only an iso scorer, buuuuuuuuuuuuut (complaint #1, complaint #2, complaint #3)". Your concession was backhanded af.

You're quick to point out his flaws. I wonder why you don't speak on Bey's defense as much. Considering Grant is more likely to be gone than here next year, that is a greater point to hammer home as a long-term concern. You know who aids in that department? Grant. His defensive versatility in fact DOES make the team better. Go f*****g figure.

Cade is below average at getting to the FT line. You know who helps in that department? Grant. His ability to draw fouls, get the other team in foul trouble and make the defense have to play just a little less intense to not go into the bonus in fact DOES make the team better.

This entire roster has flawed players. There's things that certain players do that covers others' flaws. Apparently except Grant. Literally everything he does that doesn't involve making a shot is a detriment to this team.

Sent from my SM-N975U using RealGM mobile app

[DetroitSho]

Again, a bunch of words that didn't address my actual point. All you did is point out further things you don't like about Grant. We get it.

Sent from my SM-N975U using RealGM mobile app

You complained about a label and pointed out his ability to shoot the 3. I conceded the point and applied a more appropriate label in it's place; "ball stopper". What part of that was not relevant? Would it have better for me to continue arguing that "Grant is just an iso scorer" after you make a reasonable argument? What exactly were you hoping for as an outcome??

He just wants to argue and criticize.

And all you want to do is say, "ehhh" and basically provide some fake balance (more like a damper) to those who actually have a positive outlook on this team and it's outcomes. Literally in EVERYTHING you post. Go away snake.

Sent from my SM-N975U using RealGM mobile app

[DetroitSho]

You're looking at this from the wrong end. Yes, he's a decent catch & shoot guy from 3. But he's still shooting the ball when he catches it. This is a guy with a low assist % relative to his high usage. He's a ball-stopper.

The basic complaint is that while he's on the floor and being individually productive, the rest of the offense tends to stagnate. He's not helping to elevate the players around him. It's Grant playing well as opposed to the Pistons playing well.

Your argument still examines him as the recipient or beneficiary of other players as opposed to him being a catalyst.

In a vacuum that is not strictly a bad thing and has value. It's not what I want for *this* team. I want better ball movement.

Exactly if grant played like he did in Denver and OKC he'd be great. But instead we got the tunnel vision want to prove himself grant.

Like you said though player that can't playmake shouldn't be in high usage roles. We have a chance to replace his production with better well rounded players in fa hopefully.

Sent from my 5087Z using RealGM mobile app

Since he's been back from his injury, he changed his game a lot, he is a lot more like Denver's Grant (he's been focusing a lot more on defense, and have been passing the ball more) but also he's been capable of create and score, when nobody else does, and he's also been a good go to option at the end of close games, which is good, we shouldn't have only Cade as option in those situations.

He's been showing a lot of chemistry with both Cade and Bey, they have a lot of assists between the 3 of them. His main issue is the lack of interest in rebounding, that's something I'm not going to deny.

You know the world is upside down when I agree with Vege.

Sent from my SM-N975U using RealGM mobile app

[Cowology]

You're looking at this from the wrong end. Yes, he's a decent catch & shoot guy from 3. But he's still shooting the ball when he catches it. This is a guy with a low assist % relative to his high usage. He's a ball-stopper.

The basic complaint is that while he's on the floor and being individually productive, the rest of the offense tends to stagnate. He's not helping to elevate the players around him. It's Grant playing well as opposed to the Pistons playing well.

Your argument still examines him as the recipient or beneficiary of other players as opposed to him being a catalyst.

In a vacuum that is not strictly a bad thing and has value. It's not what I want for *this* team. I want better ball movement.

Exactly if grant played like he did in Denver and OKC he'd be great. But instead we got the tunnel vision want to prove himself grant.

Like you said though player that can't playmake shouldn't be in high usage roles. We have a chance to replace his production with better well rounded players in fa hopefully.

Sent from my 5087Z using RealGM mobile app

Since he's been back from his injury, he changed his game a lot, he is a lot more like Denver's Grant (he's been focusing a lot more on defense, and have been passing the ball more) but also he's been capable of create and score, when nobody else does, and he's also been a good go to option at the end of close games, which is good, we shouldn't have only Cade as option in those situations.

He's been showing a lot of chemistry with both Cade and Bey, they have a lot of assists between the 3 of them. His main issue is the lack of interest in rebounding, that's something I'm not going to deny.

Pre All-Star: 2.5 apg
Post All-Star: 2.0 apg

There have been flashes where he's moved the ball and our offense has looked amazing. It hasn't been the norm.

[440BB]

I think Grant can be a solid contributor here going forward, but can't quite see it if he is set on getting a max extension. Four years at $112m just seems a little too high. I see four years at $90m tops for the Pistons if they see him fitting their plans. With the sparse free agent market, another team may see the max as a good value and make a solid offer.

I can't believe Weaver would decide not to do the extension and let Grant leave for nothing. The Portland rumor sets the tone for his market to develop this summer. Other teams may want to talk.

I'm looking forward to a four team deal that nobody expected, leaving us with a top draft pick, a talented young vet and a star with something to prove. That's not too much to ask, is it?

[Manocad]

We've talked about Grant's ability to contribute more to the offense as a whole, i.e. he, Cade and Bey all have good games, and that it just doesn't happen enough. I don't think it's impossible that he couldn't be more consistent in that regard as well as improve his rebounding which I think most of us agree is simply an effort thing. Is Grant worth $28M a year then? Maybe still not. In any case, since it doesn't appear Grant will play much if at all the rest of this season to see if that possibility exists--especially in the tank-a-thon--the only way for the team to find out if he can be a more consistent contributor to the total team success is to play him next season which may require 4 years and $112 million. Does the team sign him to the extension then hope someone will trade for him, or let him walk for nothing? Obviously the hope was that the team gets a pick (or young prospect) but the reality may be that the "flippable asset" doesn't turn out to be flippable. It's not harmful to the team, it's just not ideal.

That's just restating the obvious but the reality is that the only two choices remaining at this point are signing him for $112M or letting him go for nothing.

[Cowology]

We've talked about Grant's ability to contribute more to the offense as a whole, i.e. he, Cade and Bey all have good games, and that it just doesn't happen enough. I don't think it's impossible that he couldn't be more consistent in that regard as well as improve his rebounding which I think most of us agree is simply an effort thing. Is Grant worth $28M a year then? Maybe still not. In any case, since it doesn't appear Grant will play much if at all the rest of this season to see if that possibility exists--especially in the tank-a-thon--the only way for the team to find out if he can be a more consistent contributor to the total team success is to play him next season which may require 4 years and $112 million. Does the team sign him to the extension then hope someone will trade for him, or let him walk for nothing? Obviously the hope was that the team gets a pick (or young prospect) but the reality may be that the "flippable asset" doesn't turn out to be flippable. It's not harmful to the team, it's just not ideal.

That's just restating the obvious but the reality is that the only two choices remaining at this point are signing him for $112M or letting him go for nothing.

I tend to agree with you that interest in him is not as high as we'd like to believe, but he's still a $20 mil expiring contract that can be moved even if we don't extend him. That has value as both potential cap relief and as an impact player, depending on the suitor. IF a team like POR were interested then I suspect they'd want to negotiate the extension as part of the trade.

I think for the most part people recognize that Grant does provide a skillset that we need. Having somebody beside Cade who can generate their own offense is certainly valuable. Being able to get a bucket when we're struggling or late in the game has value. The argument really comes back to whether Grant is the best person available to fill that need. It's kinda like we can say Stewart is important to the team because he brings defense & rebounding. That doesn't preclude the possibility of us still trying to upgrade that position. It doesn't automatically mean Stew (or Grant) are trash, just that we believe we can potentially upgrade one way or another.

The times when Cade/Bey/Grant have clicked our offense has looked *really* good. I just think Grant has trouble trusting his teammates. He always thinks he's the best option. Which in fairness, sometimes he's right. The problem is that you can't have long-term success like that. We need to figure out how to get everybody playing well at the same time.

I used to say that Iverson was more talented than Isiah and he played with just as much heart. The difference was Zeke knew when to pick his spots to take over games and he understood when to involve his teammates. Something Iverson never really learned. I realize we're talking about different positions here so it's a bit different, but at it's core it's really the same thing; situational awareness.

Grant can't come out thinking score 1st on every possession. He's gotta learn to pick his spots and understand when he should be asserting his authority. IF he could do that I wouldn't object to a sizable contract. He is an efficient scorer who provides solid defense. He does bring those good qualities I mentioned. But he also has to learn to trust his teammates. I just don't know that I have any great confidence in him changing his stripes. I definitely wouldn't give him $28 mil at this point.

So the question is not whether you like Grant or not but simply can we do better?

[bstein14]

It feels like the Grant trade may have been put on hold for a few reasons, mainly because the Blazers were all in on losing this year, getting their pick to be the best asset possible. They could not trade away their own pick because its already traded away to Chicago unless its a lottery pick.

They also couldn't really trade the New Orleans pick it appears they will be getting, because its got strange protections on it in both directions. It's top 1-4 protected, but also 15-30 protected to if New Orleans makes the play-in games and ends up winning and being the 7th or 8th seed Portland also doesn't get that pick this year, they instead get the Buck's first round pick in 2025.

[Manocad]

We've talked about Grant's ability to contribute more to the offense as a whole, i.e. he, Cade and Bey all have good games, and that it just doesn't happen enough. I don't think it's impossible that he couldn't be more consistent in that regard as well as improve his rebounding which I think most of us agree is simply an effort thing. Is Grant worth $28M a year then? Maybe still not. In any case, since it doesn't appear Grant will play much if at all the rest of this season to see if that possibility exists--especially in the tank-a-thon--the only way for the team to find out if he can be a more consistent contributor to the total team success is to play him next season which may require 4 years and $112 million. Does the team sign him to the extension then hope someone will trade for him, or let him walk for nothing? Obviously the hope was that the team gets a pick (or young prospect) but the reality may be that the "flippable asset" doesn't turn out to be flippable. It's not harmful to the team, it's just not ideal.

That's just restating the obvious but the reality is that the only two choices remaining at this point are signing him for $112M or letting him go for nothing.

I tend to agree with you that interest in him is not as high as we'd like to believe, but he's still a $20 mil expiring contract that can be moved even if we don't extend him. That has value as both potential cap relief and as an impact player, depending on the suitor. IF a team like POR were interested then I suspect they'd want to negotiate the extension as part of the trade.

I think for the most part people recognize that Grant does provide a skillset that we need. Having somebody beside Cade who can generate their own offense is certainly valuable. Being able to get a bucket when we're struggling or late in the game has value. The argument really comes back to whether Grant is the best person available to fill that need. It's kinda like we can say Stewart is important to the team because he brings defense & rebounding. That doesn't preclude the possibility of us still trying to upgrade that position. It doesn't automatically mean Stew (or Grant) are trash, just that we believe we can potentially upgrade one way or another.

The times when Cade/Bey/Grant have clicked our offense has looked *really* good. I just think Grant has trouble trusting his teammates. He always thinks he's the best option. Which in fairness, sometimes he's right. The problem is that you can't have long-term success like that. We need to figure out how to get everybody playing well at the same time.

I used to say that Iverson was more talented than Isiah and he played with just as much heart. The difference was Zeke knew when to pick his spots to take over games and he understood when to involve his teammates. Something Iverson never really learned. I realize we're talking about different positions here so it's a bit different, but at it's core it's really the same thing; situational awareness.

Grant can't come out thinking score 1st on every possession. He's gotta learn to pick his spots and understand when he should be asserting his authority. IF he could do that I wouldn't object to a sizable contract. He is an efficient scorer who provides solid defense. He does bring those good qualities I mentioned. But he also has to learn to trust his teammates. I just don't know that I have any great confidence in him changing his stripes. I definitely wouldn't give him $28 mil at this point.

So the question is not whether you like Grant or not but simply can we do better?

For some reason I was thinking that his contract was up after this year. Still being under contract next year definitely changes things.

[breezypeezy]

Honestly I'm still really split thinking on whether Grant should be moved or extended.
I kinda think it should come down to whether Grant wants to stay and be "all in" here, or does Grant himself want out?
If Grant wants out, I'm like make a deal to move him.
But if Grant thinks he can and wants to be a part of future playoff basketball here, I can embrace his value as a SF. He doesn't rebound well enough to be a PF.
Thing is to me if Grant stays, Bey should move to the 2nd Unit or be in a 6th man role. Especially if we draft a big that can start as our new PF.

It might be nice to see what a rotation like the following could produce?
Banchero/Bagley
Grant/Bey/Hamidou
F.A./Stewart/Olynk
Livers/Jax/Smith?
Cade/Hayes

That still leaves a bit of a question mark for a good shooting guard next to Cade. But a much improved 2nd unit.

[DetroitSho]

Edit

[Piston Pete]

If we draft a PF, we need to trade Grant.

And unless Grant dramatically decreases his extension asking price, his 4/112 contract demands don’t fit our team/timeline.

If we’re gonna spend big money on one player, it should t be on a SF/PF who doesn’t rebound and/or playmaker for others.

Now if he’d accept 4/75ish, that MIGHT be different. Still might rather go in a different direction, but I’d get it.

[Manocad]

Honestly I'm still really split thinking on whether Grant should be moved or extended.
I kinda think it should come down to whether Grant wants to stay and be "all in" here, or does Grant himself want out?
If Grant wants out, I'm like make a deal to move him.
But if Grant thinks he can and wants to be a part of future playoff basketball here, I can embrace his value as a SF. He doesn't rebound well enough to be a PF.
Thing is to me if Grant stays, Bey should move to the 2nd Unit or be in a 6th man role. Especially if we draft a big that can start as our new PF.

It might be nice to see what a rotation like the following could produce?
Banchero/Bagley
Grant/Bey/Hamidou
F.A./Stewart/Olynk
Livers/Jax/Smith?
Cade/Hayes

That still leaves a bit of a question mark for a good shooting guard next to Cade. But a much improved 2nd unit.

I wouldn't be broken hearted over that lineup but at some point that "F.A." would need to turn into "defensive stud center."

[tmorgan]

Yeah, at this point we need a rim protector in the worst way. Some one for our adequate perimeter defenders to funnel to.

As much as I often don’t like him, Bagley has impressed me a lot. But he absolutely cannot handle the above role. So, even if we don’t draft a big, one of Bagley or Grant likely needs to go. That’s too much money to spend on two guys that both fail miserably at one aspect of playing a big (Bagley’s defense, Grant’s rebounding).

[Piston Pete]

Yeah, at this point we need a rim protector in the worst way. Some one for our adequate perimeter defenders to funnel to.

As much as I often don’t like him, Bagley has impressed me a lot. But he absolutely cannot handle the above role. So, even if we don’t draft a big, one of Bagley or Grant likely needs to go. That’s too much money to spend on two guys that both fail miserably at one aspect of playing a big (Bagley’s defense, Grant’s rebounding).

Enter Jalen Smith, the 21 year old FA-to-be.

He’s more versatile scorer than Bagley and he’s a better rebounder than Grant. He’ll block more shots than both.

[Cowology]

Yeah, at this point we need a rim protector in the worst way. Some one for our adequate perimeter defenders to funnel to.

As much as I often don’t like him, Bagley has impressed me a lot. But he absolutely cannot handle the above role. So, even if we don’t draft a big, one of Bagley or Grant likely needs to go. That’s too much money to spend on two guys that both fail miserably at one aspect of playing a big (Bagley’s defense, Grant’s rebounding).

Enter Jalen Smith, the 21 year old FA-to-be.

He’s more versatile scorer than Bagley and he’s a better rebounder than Grant. He’ll block more shots than both.

Smith is interesting. It's another Monk type situation where the Pacers are restricted in what they are able to offer him, so he's almost certainly gone. He barely played for Phx and didn't do a whole lot while there, but he's put up solid numbers with the Pacers. It's a very small sample size though and I've barely seen him play.

[Scout Taron]

Exactly if grant played like he did in Denver and OKC he'd be great. But instead we got the tunnel vision want to prove himself grant.

Like you said though player that can't playmake shouldn't be in high usage roles. We have a chance to replace his production with better well rounded players in fa hopefully.

Sent from my 5087Z using RealGM mobile app

Since he's been back from his injury, he changed his game a lot, he is a lot more like Denver's Grant (he's been focusing a lot more on defense, and have been passing the ball more) but also he's been capable of create and score, when nobody else does, and he's also been a good go to option at the end of close games, which is good, we shouldn't have only Cade as option in those situations.

He's been showing a lot of chemistry with both Cade and Bey, they have a lot of assists between the 3 of them. His main issue is the lack of interest in rebounding, that's something I'm not going to deny.

Pre All-Star: 2.5 apg
Post All-Star: 2.0 apg

There have been flashes where he's moved the ball and our offense has looked amazing. It hasn't been the norm.

I don’t think assists are a great measure of his better play recently. IMO, he’s been more willing to let offense run and get his shots within the flow of action rather than running high post isos all the time. And his efficiency has increased significantly because of that. Still not a great passer but I think he’s been better for the team.

[zeebneeb]

This Grant talk is interesting. Everyone here knows that the team needs lob threats for Cade, as it opens up his game. We all also know the team needs rebounding out of that position, something Grant is horrible at.(He also rarely is a lob threat even though he's athletic, which I find odd)

The real problem is that Grant is actually a small forward, playing at PF. All of this would be fine, if he could in fact, rebound the ball.

So the real decision is of you want to replace Bey, with Grant.

If the Pistons land top 3, they are picking a big, and they are all natural PF's.

The Pistons need two big guys on the floor;

Chet/Banchero/Smith-Bagley

That solves the rebounding problem, and offers up amazing lob threats, and pick and pop/roll opportunities.

So;

Chet
Bagley
Grant
Free agent/Bey/Livers/???
Cade

That makes the team BIG, and offers up a ton of rim protection, rebounding, and shooting.

Keep Grant, play him at the position that fits him, and go from there. He cannot continue playing as a starting PF, as he cannot/won't rebound the damn ball.

Grant is 7th on the team in rebounding.