How do you know they did not plan for it? Maybe the plan was to sign their players instead of losing them for nothing and dumping the ones that did not work out. They lose nothing. If those players blew up this year after not resigning them......then he would get his ass fired. At this very moment they are not in tax hell nor are they bankrupt. Maybe they know more than you do, on who is movable and who is not. Even if they move a few of these players for late 2nd round picks, they still gained something. I will eat my words if NO ONE wants any of our young players for basically free. But I doubt that will happen. Either way it is a gamble, but I would prefer to have extra assets on the team to trade in the event that we need to match salaries for a disgruntled super star. Even if it is a long shot. That is also long term planning.......
If we don't use Plumlee's value in a trade, we pretty much overpay or let him walk for nothing as we've been doing. If you trade him though, you're going to get another decent player with no guarantees but you at least get a player...his trade value has never been higher than it is this season.
I think they "had" a long term plan until last year gave everyone a false impression of where the team was.
Yep. Losing him for nothing in free agency or paying more luxury tax to keep a crappy team intact are both worse options. This is a wasted season anyways at this point. Plumlee is our best realistic trade chip (i.e. not Dame/C.J.) and trading him for perhaps another draft pick would give us some return on him while also helping to set us up better for our own draft position. Give Plumlee's minutes to the young guys and let them sink or swim.
MM may need to change his name to "TradeWhisperer". I think that what he posted makes sense. Given how many "almost impactful" guys this team has, it's pretty tough to say definitively who should stay and who should go and I could see there being some internal disagreement over what types of players are needed for the long term. Regarding Plumlee, I'd say that he only works as center of the future if the Blazers are able to find a consistent scoring threat at the 4 spot. I'd also point out that the luxury tax threshold is only relevant if the Blazers are over it at the trade deadline next season. Signing Plumlee this summer and looking to dump salary before the deadline is something that the Blazers may consider.
Any other teams that could use Plumlee's services? Any contending teams? He might be a good fit in Houston's uptempo offense?
San Antonio. Imagine Plumlee under Pop. He'd probably be an all star. Plumlee is worth keeping, he does a lot of good things, and always plays his ass off.
Plumlee could have so much value to this team if we had a C or PF that played alongside him that rebounded and cut to the basket when Mason drives.
I'm curious to see if any teams offer Plumlee a starter's salary in free agency. He has such a peculiar game that it is hard to imagine any teams thinking of him as their missing piece and overpaying him.
I go back and forth on what Plumlee's ideal role might be. Super-sub center who can dribble, pass and do a little bit of everything (except shoot), or a middling starter who's not quite big enough to adequately anchor a team's defense. Whatever the case, I can see somebody running out of options (like Neil did) and throwing an ass-load of money at him on about day 5 or 6 of free agency.
yep, sounds so "easy" to move this guy or that but we have three very bad, large contracts that are not IMO going to be "easy" to move
