Interesting. Here's a bit from CBAFAQs: I'm not even going to pretend to understand 10% of that quote. But it since a buy out is essentially a team re-negotiating the guaranteed amount (down), then waving a player, it sounds like the contract with the new team does financially impact the player. (???)
No one thought that Nurk was going to be the player he ended up being once the Blazers traded for him (well, I'm sure some people did, but most people didn't). So to act like we *know* that Powell won't end up being a key figure in an extended run is pointless (conversely, the same is true of Gordon. We didn't know how much of an impact he'd have, good or bad). Also, I'm not sure that Gordon is a "much" better player than Powell is. Besides that they don't play the same position or have the same role, I think Gordon is overrated by Blazer fans (we love to do that). I don't know if Powell will transfer his production (or a pro-rated value). but what I do know is that it appears that Powell isn't just a 3 point shooter. You could make the argument that Trent, if he's not hitting 3 pointers, really doesn't provide much else. Powell goes to the FT line at a higher clip (3 more per game) and shoots a significantly higher % from the floor than Trent does. Trent averaged 4 points *fewer* a night, on .7 shots fewer per game. That's not really a compelling argument. I think Gary could end up being a better player than Powell, and I wish he had been able to stay in Portland, but I think Powell is a better player now, and a more complete player. Wish he had more combo skills though.
Just from my understanding listening to the cap experts on ESPN and reading the CBA, the negotiated buyout is still considered guaranteed money so the knew salary would still have to exceed the amount of the agreed to buyout. So they don't get extra money. Otherwise why wouldn't they all be jockeying for the over ten million that the Knicks could give them. That will tell us a lot. If anyone in the buyout market gets more than the minimum I'm obviously wrong.
Gordon is way overvalued. Orlando, with a legitimate all-star in Vucevic, is continually mediocre at best with Gordon playing next to him. Gordon hasn't improved his game at all in the last few years.
I'm with you on everything you said except our obvious difference in the way we evaluate Aaron Gordon. My question was does getting Powell make us a legitimate contender? I don't think it does. So the next question I have is, can Powell walk away no matter what we want him to do, at the end of the season? That answer is binary and is yes. So my worst fear in regards to Gary coming into this season has been realized. We attained zero future value in return for what I perceive to be a ton of future value that Gary has. Sure we might re-sign Powell and yeah the Bird rights can help with that but that isn't the kind of value going forward I was hoping to get for Gary or the kind of value I think he would have given us going forward if we retained him going forward. If Powell does re-sign and is a big part of a championship run then all of this is just philosophical and not practical but the philosophy behind it does matter. We had a guaranteed current and future commodity in Gary, we upgraded that commodity's current value but relinquished the guarantee on future returns. If we don't currently have the potential to attain our ultimate goal during the guaranteed time we have the commodity, that renders it void of value in relationship to our ultimate goal.
Gordon next to Vucevic might be similar to CJ next to Dame. They might not have had complementary games. Go ahead and say that Gordon is overrated and that I overrate him. I obviously think that you underrate him. That's fine. Since we didn't get him, I hope you are right.
to that I say, I don't think getting Gordon would have made the Blazers a legit contender either. But I think considering the team is lacking a consistent shooter from the back court (Dames current slump not withstanding, he's been consistent). Trent isn't consistent, and Powells game provides more stability and flexibility on the offensive end, and I think is defense is better than Trents. But also, Gordon isn't exactly lighting up the court on the offensive end (yes, the team needs help defensively, but Im not sure that Gordon (or Powell) would provide that needed boost).
we got a better more consistent playoff version of Gary Trent. Powell has played in championship games and won and knows what it takes to win. Trent at times seemed to be looking for his own if you want to win championships everyone has to know their role
They got a guy averaging 20ppg (in 30mpg) on 50/44/86 and can play good defense... And it's marginal... Lol.
Agree we get to test drive but Trent was going to be gone to, if he looks great in our system with Dame it opens up a lot of possibilities 1. resign 2. Resign and trade him 3. Trade CJ and keep Powell as starter
Gordon is inefficient inside the arc including terrible from mid-range. He's not a reliable 3pt shooter yet and a career 33% shooter from there. His defense is solid but overrated. Yeah he can pass, but do you really think Stotts would utilize that? Nah. He'd get put in the corner to launch 3s. Just look at what's happened to DJJ with his cutting ability and athleticism.
Powell was a long ways short of a home run, but he's certainly better than standing pat. I would have preferred an upgrade to the starting forwards rather than upgrading the bench at guard, but apparently that wasn't to be
@BonesJones i listened to you guys for a few minutes today. You didn’t really address the potential for Powell to leave and us basically getting nothing out of Trent. Aren’t you concerned that we won’t get any return at all out or Trent?
I feel like it's not as likely as people are saying, and it's a good risk to take considering the outcome was gonna be losing Trent or overpaying him.
