Simmons and Russillo were discussing this and they were guessing 4/112M and maybe up to a 20M "we know Dame's telling you you have to sign us" tax. 4/130M would be semi-brutal.
Grant blocked Tatum's similar shot a few minutes earlier. That's good defense, and I'm sure was in Tatum's mind when he took the last shot of the game.
If he does foul out in 5 minutes we have 5 minutes' better defense than we had in the last couple of seasons...
Grant is extremely athletic. The only problem I have with Grant is he isn't big enough to bang with certain 4s in this league but he can certainly defend 3s, a lot of 4s and 2s. What made his defense look bad last season was putting him at the point of attack against 1s... he's not that guy. He's not Ben Simmons. I think Grant is a wing on both ends of the floor and he has plenty of quickness both north south and laterally to defend in space, get chase down blocks and be effective switching. He can't cover for a bunch of terrible defense being played around him. He's a good defender not an all defensive team level guy.
It doesn't matter, the post above saying that Simmons and Russillo think that Jerami is going to give us a Dame discount shows you how little those guys pay attention to what our team and this front office do. They will have a five year 150M deal on a platter for Jerami if Dame is staying. They won't make Jerami go gauge his value on the market, they'll just bid against themselves... it was going on with Olshey and has continued with Cronin.
Thing is, 5/150 really isn't that bad. With 8% raises, that starts at about 25.8M next year, which currently would barely be top-50 leaguewide.
IF TRUE this pisses me off, don't mind paying a guy "fair value", but we are seemingly always over paying and it gets old and hurts us in the long run. Let the fukkin mkt set his value! We have bird rights correct?
"not bad", IMO it's another overpay, you disagree fine, bottom line its averages 30 mil per and that is simply too much IMO for Grant
I don't disagree that it's an overpay...just saying that it wouldn't hamper us as much as people might think.
We have bird rights, but he's not an RFA. If we "let the market set his value" without showing any specific desire to retain him, he likely walks, and we lose a significant asset for nothing.
We have bird rights but that doesn't mean Jerami has to give us the option of matching another offer. We have done this before with guys like Ant last year who were restricted and that made me furious. That being said, I think Joe just likes to have all of his ducks in a row and he's seemingly willing to overpay bidding against himself for peace of mind or something. I guess if Joe isn't the greatest at negotiating he could feel like if he just doesn't give opposing GMs a chance to give a better pitch than him then he won't risk losing the free agent. 5 years 150M for Jerami won't make me mad because I can see why that could be the smart move. If we give Matisse something right at the beginning of free agency that feels like an overpay that's when I'll be livid because just like Ant we can just tell Matisse go out and get the best offer you can and if we think it's fair we will definitely match it. Then you're not bidding against yourself for absolutely no reason.
It's like the Nurk deal if Nurk's style of play wasn't being phased out of the league. The Nurk deal was an overpay but probably by only like 2-3M per season. The Ant deal was total bullshit because we did have the right to match anything he could get on the market and I don't think the market would have dictated that much, again it was probably only an overpay of 2-3M per season but with Ant we didn't need to do that to retain total control over the situation.
Depends on what we pay him. If it's something less than a TPMLE-value deal, I'll have no problem with that, regardless of when it comes in.
IMO what "hampers" us is the mentality that we seemingly need to overpay, and we do and then players and their agents expect that, that needs to change
Like I said if it doesn't feel like an overpay and I don't think starting at 7 or 8M would be then I won't have a problem with it being announced on Saturday? if I'm not mistaken but if it's a deal that starts around 12M and goes up from there I'll be pissed and that's kind of how I saw Ant's deal.
