If Portland thinks the best player in the draft outside of Smith and Banchero is there at 5 then you do whatever it takes to get there. Hypothetically, if Portland rates Ivey as a 95+ and the next guy at 85+, you go get Ivey
Nurk is more dependable than Nassir Little or the 23 game sample size of Simons playing well. My point wasn't that Nurk is a dependable NBA starter, he is not. My point is he is one of the most dependable Blazers, purely by default, because this roster sucks.
Any night like this is another night towards a more negotiable salary. All I know is the fit is right, and we need to keep him. Defensively, he was great tonight. Only 5 reb tonight, but 7rpg in the last four, so it’s climbing.
But but but, you'd said he was too old to buy in to how Chauncey wants to play and how you prefer chronically injured Jonathan Isaac. Defensively, Chauncey typically plays Grant at the top of their zone which is outside of where most boards fall. His length contesting shots and passing lanes has been consistently great STOMP
I voted other, but I don't think I ever explained why and now I have no idea what my reasoning was.....
Listened to Dan Patrick show they mentioned when he guarded Durant last night Durant shot 28%, and was shocked to see him block Durants shot.
I didn’t realize I was the only one with bad takes. My b, my b, I’ll do better. I’d go through your takes and remind you of your bad ones too but, who am I kidding, I don’t care like that lol.
You're hardly alone, which I noted with the "So many plates of delicious crow in this thread" comment when I bumped the thread. It just seemed odd that you are now expressing views 180 from where you were without acknowledging it. I read through the entire thread yesterday over my coffee and enjoyed more then a few laughs STOMP
Acknowledge what? He had a chance to come here or the Nets beforehand and declined because he wanted to get his shots up. And he suddenly changed his mindset and embraced being a number 3 option. I was against giving up our lotto pick and I was definitely against giving up more than one pick for him when the thought was it was going to be Hart + our lotto + the NOP lotto (if they missed the playoffs) for Grant. Grant had to do a complete 180 and chance his mindset for me to do my complete 180. If it really matters to you that much, quote my old posts and I’ll read them and acknowledge I was wrong. But I’m not moving off my previous claim that two lotto picks for Grant is ludicrous. I’m not going through 19 pages to see what I said. But if you care enough to bring up my quotes, I’ll be happy to say I was wrong.
I agree then and now that two lotto picks is too much for 29 year old Grant who is about to become an UFA. I root for the laundry over individuals, and that would be a lot for any player with a single year until they could walk. Start reading at post #156 to revisit the back and forth between you and I. I took you up on the statement that Grant wouldn't buy in to Chauncey's system and wasn't a good fit, You're saying the exact opposite now... you've come to the light! Haha, actually kudos to you to being open to new info and changing your mind. It was maybe 20 minutes over a single mornings coffee to read that thread. I've had a lot of back and forths with people over JG over the past couple years and yes, right about now I am finding some of those past conversations amusing. Like you, I had my limits on what was reasonable to give up to get him but was much more bullish on how he'd do here then most. STOMP
