Some apparent realities: 1) We couldn't offer enough to get PG. End of story. Doesn't matter if he would stay or leave, Indy wouldn't trade him to us; 2) Olshey went with the backup plan and took a very promising rookie in a position of need; 3) There are likely no established stars available at a price we would be willing to pay; 4) Most reports seem to indicate that Crabbe is overpaid, but he is a key part of the team and they expect a rebound; 5) Weak minds and bad fits are gone as long as we don't have to pay to get them to go (Turner, Biebs, Davis)
I'm taking Crabbe over Levine, The Wolves actually played better without him. Crabbe is giving you better defense than Levine, he's a better team player and one of the top guys in his niche'. Harkless is better than Dunn right now, he is actually a starter. Dunn couldn't top freakin Rubio for the starting gig.
Apparently not even the celtics could get it done so I'm going to laugh at Pritchard when nobody is willing to pay his price and PG walks at the end of next season.
Are you implying that the Celtics offered their best assets and Pritchard turned even that down? There's no way for us to evaluate whether Pritchard is being dumb or not unless we know the offers. The Celtics might have offered three second-round picks over the next few years for all we know. Just because the Celtics' offer wasn't accepted doesn't mean much--the #3 pick, the Nets' pick next year, Jaylen Brown were probably not involved, since George is widely seen as a one-year rental. Teams are probably trying to lowball Pritchard. He's right that he doesn't have to make a move immediately.
What do you think is fair value for most likely a one year rental? Frankly he should be happy to get anything.
One year of a star/near-superstar is worth a fair amount. The offers could even be negative at the moment--for example, if teams are offering players like Crabbe/Turner plus some mediocre assets (like a late first-rounder or second rounders) then it's actually better to let him go in free agency and free up the salary. Most teams will have to match salary and the players they're offering may not be ones Pritchard wants cluttering his cap. There are a lot of cases where it's rational to decline a deal, even if you don't expect to re-sign the player in a year. If Olshey were currently in the same situation (star player who said he was going to leave next year), would you be agreeing that Olshey is an idiot if he doesn't trade that player within one week? My guess is you'd be saying, "Get a grip, guys. Just because he doesn't trade a guy within the first week, he's dumb? He has an entire off-season and even the trade deadline. If the deals are crap, he should wait."
If LaMarcus had actually come out and said "I'm not re-signing next year, and I plan on going to San Antonio," then yes. I would be telling him to try to get ANY value out of him. And you're right, a net negative wouldn't be worth doing ANY trade, but if the offer was Crabbe/3 firsts then I think that's actually pretty good value (if the alternative is nothing.)
Within the first week of Aldridge saying that, or else he's an idiot? But we don't know that that was offered. People have just proposed that on this forum and then seemed to accept as fact that that's what Olshey offered.
Thought I saw a rumor somewhere that Boston had a deal in place with Indy, with George willing to extend, but it was contingent on them landing Hayward.
I actually think Pritchard is doing this smart unless he actually had a top 5 pick on the table for PG. Teams will start to get real desperate for some help after they strike out in FA. Imagine if all the Celtics were offering was Crowder and a version of Brooklyns pick next year, something like adding a top 3 protection to it, Pritchard turns that down and waits for them to strike out on Gordon Hayward and that Brooklyn pick becomes completely unprotected or they are offering up Tatum or Brown as well as Crowder and some other asset.
I was a fan of offering that but I really doubt Olshey would have actually offered that if he didn't have a commitment from PG on resigning. The rumblings from the media was that teams weren't willing to pay a lot for PG and even on the Zach Lowe podcast they pretty much seemed to think the best asset that was offered was Kevin Love which might not interest Indy that much if they couldn't move him for other assets immediately.
Like many posting here....I came away from the draft a bit underwhelmed, but knowing that we added one solid big man and a promising reserve for the future. Adding Collins and Swanigan adds depth and (IMHO) helpful players to our roster. I can envision a day where Collins is the starter at PF for this team. That's a big front line with Nurk and Collins. But let's keep our heads. This Blazers team after the Nurkic trade, posted a .700 win pct. That's big!! Even if we average the two (.500 season with .700 after trade), we look to be a potentially .600 team! That's damn good for how young they are!! That's a likely 50+ win team. So, don't panic....we're a good young team and we are getting better. We have time to make the right moves and meanwhile some of our troublesome contracts/players will play out and/or move along. But meanwhile we're building a nice young roster (DL, CJ, Nurk, Collins) of talented players.
