Did I read it wrong that if traded his contract would be fully guaranteed? Only if waived was the lower number a factor?
not quite, as I understand it Portland could have guaranteed his contract at any level above the 3.9M, unless they were hard-capped. But the other team would be accepting a 19.3M salary with only 3.9M guaranteed. So salary matching was always a big issue
So if they stretch him they’ll have about 7 million? As well as Covingtons TPE of about 7 million? Or is it either or?
TPE is always by itself for trade purposes. They basically can absorb the smallest of the two in salary.
Duren would be much better instead of Grant if we're trading Lillard. Jalen Smith plus no hard cap would be much better than GP2 if we're trading Lillard. The Sharpe pick is great if we are trading Lillard, and as our most valuable asset the most critical piece of the offseason. So I'm glad Cronin made the right decision there. Wouldn't shock me at all if Lillard is moved by the deadline if its shown this team can't contend, or moved next summer. Dame not signing the supermax along with his comments last summer show he isn't 100% committed here long term. Joe failing to make the talent acquisition he admitted was needed as the "roster is not there yet" is another indicator moving Dame is possible.
if they stretch him, we'll be about 5.7 mil below the hard cap. that's without signing Walker yet. So we can use the RoCo TPE to bring in about a 5 mil deal. but keep in mind, with the current numbers, we are les than a million above the tax line, so we might be inclined to dump keon/didi/etc at the deadline to duck it. If that's the goal (as it appears from our disinterest in Roby), then we probably will let the TPE expire.
Just a quick note, unlikely incentives have to be counted if you're hard capped. No matter how unlikely.
Blazers are about 4M over the tax line....IIRC so if they stretch him it would be 3 years at 1.3M/year. meaning they'd still be about 1.4M over the line (and about 5M below the apron) meaning they might be able to pay somebody a 2nd to take Louzada and theoretically dodge the tax. Which I'm assuming the Vulcans would see as a higher priority than using a TPE
This is only the case for a team that isn't committed to winning. They could've used both had they not signed GP2.
Now those same people are spinning this into them being right all along, huh? I heard multiple Blazers media people say that Bledsoe's contract was going to be valuable, watch! Those same people are now saying "it was always one or the other between the TPE and Bledsoe." No it wasn't.
Appears we could have got John Collins, and as you mention Randle. I don't think the 7 would've been required for either. That might not be Cronin fault; our ownership may not want to risk paying luxury tax. Otto Porter and Bruce Brown both signed for the tax MLE; both guys with significant experience as starters. Not sure what TJ Warren signed for; if he is past the injuries thats an efficient 20ppg scorer. Jalen Smith was paid less than the tax MLE. Blazers also had bird rights on Ingles, so they could've retained him without any impact on the tax MLE; trade exceptions, or resigning Ant/Nurk. However it would've risked luxury tax. So there were many opportunities to acquire a starting level talent that the Blazers lack and were left without now that the draft and free agency are over. I've seen one consistent theme in the moves of the last 5 months, and that is being conservative with payroll and avoiding the risk of luxury tax. Too bad the Blazers have such a frugal owner putting the bottom line ahead of contending.
Two of those players (Grant and Wood) were on the last year of their contract, which lowered their value. Still good examples for the other two, but we also gave up RoCo in the deal (who they re-signed for two years).
Those two players are also better than Norm. And RoCo was absolutely a sunk cost from the previous regime. We got a second round pick and were lucky to get that. If they waited until the off-season he would have walked for nothing. Could we have gotten an actual late first if we had waited until the off-season? Sure, maybe.....but maybe we win a few more games and end up picking 9th. There's also the benefit of bringing in a guy into your system sooner. If you end up using the pick, it's much more likely that player becomes a rotation player during Dame's window if he's already on the team and learning from the coaching staff.
Yeah, for simply ducking the tax this would make sense. Like Ant has a $2 million bonus if he's MVP or something. Wouldn't be surprised if that's what happens.
Most of the same people who say this was the best he could do given what he was left with, also say "gotta take risks" and "Olshey never went for it!" Gotta have contracts to pull off a major trade. The Blazers made small time moves this summer and made a big time trade virtually impossible for the entire off season. The problem with Olshey wasn't getting role players or young developmental players, it was refusing to trade those players in an all-in move. Cronin just filled the team with slightly better of those same types of players. At least some of them play defense, so I'll give him credit there! But now we got people justifying it because he's a nice guy (mostly the same people that thought Stotts was immune to criticism too). The facts are simple. We were sold "flexibility." They wasted that flexibility on signing another guard after specifically saying numerous times they know they need to get bigger and more athletic in the front court. That signing rendered using Bledsoe's contract as salary filler for a star impossible. Could it work out? Of course, we still have Dame and we've seen him do a lot more with less. Sharpe could be the real deal. Ant/Nas could continue their development. But I don't want to hear this is the best they could've done with any of their moves. Thank goodness Grant forced his way here. Getting him for so little salvaged things and allowed them to keep the 7th pick. Now just gotta hope Sharpe is a star.
