Notice Festus Ezeli Won't Be on Trail Blazers Next Season, According to Neil Olshey

Pat Bev for FEEC straight up makes the most sense for both teams - if HOU is indeed trying to move Pat Bev to clear cap space. Let the GMs figure our the details, swapping future 2nd round picks or whatever, but this is one of those trades that helps both teams get what they (supposedly) want/need.

BNM

 

Imagine Olshey getting a first team all defender for Ezelis contract....lol

 

Two years older than the oldest member of our core, frequently injured and owed over $60 million over the next three seasons. No thanks.

We should be looking to dump bad contracts, not take on another one.

Do you really think it makes sense to add another $20+ million a year player to this roster at this point in time? He's not going to move the needle enough to matter. He won't get us any closer to catching GSW at any point in the next three years.

Give the minutes to the young guys and the save the $20+ million for Nurk's extension.

BNM

 

you failed to mention it freeing up the inclusion of Shabazz in the unannounced, yet inevitable PG13 trade. Indiana has been holding out for this!

 

You're looking at this move in a vacuum. Other guys could get traded after we acquire Anderson. Crabbe would be expendable, with his shooting replaced. Guys like Davis, Aminu, and Harkless could be traded rather easily.

 

I'd love to see it happen and it has all the earmarks of an Olshey opportunistic move.

BNM

 

And you're talking about moving multiple players without taking on significant salary in return. Easier said than done.

As much as I think Crabbe is overpaid and 1-dimensional, at this point in time, if HOU offered me Ryan Anderson straight up for Allen Crabbe, I'd say no. The salaries match and Anderson is a better player - when healthy, but he's 4 years older and frequently injured. The ONLY way I'm taking on Anderson's contract at his age is if we are in win now mode. We are not.

BNM

 

Well yeah, there is that...

BNM

 

Why wouldn't we be?? Because the Warriors are good? Dame is 27 years old. They better be in win mode. Or are we going to waste his prime, watch him sign elsewhere in three years, and then contend?

 

The Warriors aren't just good. They may very well be the most dominant team in the history of the NBA. Adding Ryan Anderson to our roster does not change that.

Yes, Dame is 27 and JUST starting to enter his prime. The rest of our core are all younger. Realistically, our potential championship contention window is 3 - 5 years from now, when the rest of our core are entering their prime and the Warriors have declined due to age.

Three years from now, Dame will be 30 and still right smack in the middle of his prime. Smallish PGs that don't rely on great leaping ability tend to have extended careers. Chris Paul is every bit as good statistically at 32 as he was at 27. Tony Parker had three of the best years of his career in his early 30s. Isiah Thomas was an all star at 32.

Three years from now, Ryan Anderson will be 32. He'll still be injury prone and he still won't play defense. He'll also be in the last year of his contract about to become an unrestricted free agent. Adding Ryan Anderson doesn't help get us over the hump now, and having 32-year old Ryan Anderson on the roster three years from now will do nothing to help us re-sign Damian Lillard.

And, even if none of those things were true, why would HOU trade him to us in the next 4 days? They are looking to dump as much salary as possible before July 1. We're not under the cap. If they send us Ryan Anderson, we'd need to send them back just as much salary in return. Yes, we can give then FEEC, but that only saves them $6.7 million. They can get that same savings by trading Pat Bev straight up for FEEC and still have Anderson's $20 million a year contract to potentially trade to a team under the cap.

Ryan Anderson to POR does not make sense for either team. Patrick Beverly for FEEC makes sense for both teams.

BNM