All three are great but i won’t think about trying to keep any of them until we’ve won 3 games in the second round.
Well my answer is going to be kind of cheating because we can sign two players based on your hypothetical. One for the Tax-MLE and one on a minimum contract. We're also not factoring in trades. I think you take what you can get as long as it falls into one of those 3 categories I mentioned (Center/Wing/PG). For example, if someone like RoLo or Gortat or insert value big man here is willing to sign a one year vet minimum deal knowing they could earn a nice payday a year from now as a contributing center for a playoff team, I think that is adequate. Something like what the Bucks did with BroLo this year. Then you still have the the Tax-MLE to get the best available guy willing to come here that's a PG (a Rondo type maybe?) or a wing (maybe a Garrett Temple or Trevor Ariza type vet). So lose Curry, Hood, and Kanter but add RoLo, Rondo, and our 1st rounder. That's not too bad, plus like I said we still can make trades. However, I'm about 99% confident we'll be able to keep one of Curry, Hood, or Kanter with the Tax-MLE. So depending on which one of the 3 we keep alters things too. Even better if Hood happens to accept his ~$4 million offer and we keep Curry or Kanter with the Tax-MLE.
I don't think Curry was 100% back from his injury at the beginning of the season. His shooting and surprisingly good defense is super valuable IMO. Hood is streaky, but he's nice to have. If he'll stay for what we'd pay a "cheap" free agent, we're likely better off with Hood (than the cheap free agent). Kanter is extremely nice. We would miss his offense off the bench, and especially his offensive rebounding, and we're going to wish we had him if Nurk takes half a season to come back. If we could only keep one, Hood would have to be the first casualty. If it's between Curry and Enis, that's a tough one. I'd prefer to keep Curry, but depending on Nurk's prognosis come summer, it might be tough for Blazers management to pass on Kanter.
Yes. If it meant we could keep Curry, Kanter, and Hood. That pick is a straight up crap shoot, and even if the player does pan out, it will be the usual 3 year Blazers development curve. Essentially trading Turner and the pick for Curry, Kanter and Hood would be one of the biggest no-brainers of all time. Even being able to keep just two of them for Turner and pick is a no-brainer. We should be so lucky.
No offense to you at all for mentioning Trent, but I just want to take this opportunity to say that IMO Trent Jr. is so over rated on this board it's comical.
I'm not personally a fan. He can bully ball in the Gleague, and I think we all saw how excited he was to post up against Yogi Ferrell and Frank Mason when Sacto went with a micro guard lineup, but against guys his own size, he's pretty ineffective. For now. I have to continue to remind myself that he's also just 20, because he's not built like a youngster. He'll be a contributor, but not likely next year.
To be honest, I actually thought, based on the limited highlights I saw of G-league, that he was lighting it up there....better than Simons, in fact. Mind you, I didn't see much, just a few highlights.
He did light it up in the Gleague. It's a great place to showcase what he does well. But he doesn't (yet) have the chops to do the same against legit competition.
That could happen, but it's no guarantee. Nerlens Noel turned down $50million and is now playing for about the vet minimum. Javale McGee, Brook Lopez, Jahlil Okafor, all earn less than MLE. DeMarcus Cousins took the tax MLE. The market for centers is nothing like it was 10 years ago.
We don't have the Bird rights to Hood, Kanter, or Curry. There will be a million FAs this offseason. It's not obvious that we will bend over backwards to sign our bench guys when our bench has been routinely outplayed by the opposing benches. I think the board is overrating Curry. Historically, other tiny tots who can't play PG could create their own shot - Curry can't. He doesn't make up for that fact by being a good defender - he isn't. I'm sure Neil will try to keep guys who want to play here, including Hood, but we're in a tight cap situation. Because half the league will be FAs this year, we probably won't be able to trade for cap relief, 1st rounder included, or no. We're most likely stuck with Biebs and ET for one more year.
Im not claiming Seth is Steph! I kind of disagree with you about Seth. He’s not just a good 3 point shooter he is a great 3 point shooter and his defense to me isn't bad for an undersized guard. Yes he cant create for himself, but a guy that can shoot that well is a valuable weapon. Id love to keep him, but I think someone will offer have a lot of money. Obviously this is just my opinion, and I respect yours too.
Curry is hugely valuable. To the Blazers and any other team. Shooting is incredibly important and he does it extremely well. 30 teams would like Seth Curry.
I think Seth's defense is great for an undersized guard. I also agree a bit with Wizard Menor about Seth's offensive game. His shooting will get him a good contract this offseason if he wants it. But he's a niche player. He needs a PG to set him up. Portland also has a niche for a shooter Curry's caliber. And the Blazers have a point guard and a couple of other passers who can cover Seth's liabilities and complement his strengths. If he isn't getting a lucrative payday somewhere else, he'd be well-advised to look at his contract in relation to his fit on his team for next year.
Curry is valuable. I buy that in isolation. Hood is a starting quality guy who can play multiple position. Again, I buy it. Kanter is an elite offensive player. GREAT! THEN WHY IS OUR BENCH +/- SO BAD???? It's not some rhetorical question. I really want to know.
I am harping on it, but I think it's because none of those guys are really creators. ET can be but only in transition where his lack of shooting doesn't kill his ability to create. Hood can create a bit but mainly for himself. They need a real backup PG who can get them into sets run plays, make shots for himself and others. It's why I think platooning your bench (especially in the playoffs) is just a bad strategy, all of a sudden you can't score. Even when you have guys who can hit shots, they can't get good shots.
I think the decision to get Kanter shows what Blazers' management thinks is the main problem: the backup bigs don't play anything like what Nurk does and it makes for a disjointed offensive flow as they go from an interior scoring threat who sets great screens to guys who don't do any of that well. Kanter was supposed to resolve that problem because he plays so much like Nurk. We all know how the loss of Nurk threw that into total disrepair. There's also the plain fact that Damian Lillard's greatness is what elevates the rest of the team's play. When he sits down, this team goes from amazing to blah.
