Zombie Fire Olshey

We cannot keep him unless someone gets traded for a player significantly cheaper. We handed $100M to our backcourt and Meyers.

 

Who will offer him $20M? I don't see it. It won't be another Summer of cap going $20M up, will it? Only like $8M from $94M to $102M and a lot of teams will still have terrible contracts from this year on their books. Moreover there will be plenty of good free agents available who will command a lot of money - Paul, Griffin, Millsap etc. Plumlee getting $20M does not seem very likely.

 

Well when those guys are gonna be getting 30+ million a year. I think plumlee might get 20.

 

If Leonard got 10, I don't see why Plumlee won't get 20, since he's 5 times as effective. I don't remember my times tables from 4th grade, but I think that's right.

 

Sounds like a plan to do a proper rebuild instead of the half-baked one we got instead?

 

The plan only made sense if the contracts where for one season, this season.
When you extend the contracts out for three more seasons, it was a very dumb move.
Next season, Olshey could be paying luxury tax on his draft picks, before he re-signs Plumlee.

We have a few players with smaller contracts that might net a second round pick, maybe. Given the depth of the draft, why would any GM want to help Olshey out, UNLESS Olshey sweetened the deal by adding a draft pick to move a contract.

Anyway you paint this, Olshey will need help from other GMs just to keep the starters we have. Improving our stating lineup through trades is next to impossible. Improving the team through the draft is a long term project.

 

You must be watching re-runs of the Blazers 1991/92 games instead of this seasons games.

 

We have his Bird rights, why can't we go over the cap to sign him? We can always trade players later. Guys like ET and Meyers will be easy to trade (for little in return) if we want to.

 

Olshey need ask himself if there going keep Plum next year and if he is then he needs to make moves to fit his salary in. It don't have to be this trading deadline. It could during the draft, but to keep under the LT it must be done. But if they decide not to keep him then trade him and get something out of him this year.

 

You're delusional.... but keep on trying to argue that we're in a good spot.

1) You state to get under the LT, we have to get rid of Plumlee, Davis, & Meyers - and most likely we can get seconds for Davis & Meyers. This part is true, however you are forgetting that we would be getting rid of 3 front court players (and our best one by far in Plumlee). You are also forgetting the part where we would need to replace them, but have no money to do so while staying under the LT. What 'impact' player can we realistically get? Getting rid of Plumlee (and likely Davis) for 2nd round talent will make us WORSE.

2) Being over the cap doesn't hurt us, true... However, being within $500 of the LT does severely limit the trading options without a significant financial penalty. To act like it has NO impact on the Blazers future moving forward is being a little myopic.

3) "Other GMs would trade with us because our players on their roster makes their team better." How does that work when Crabbe and Meyers don't make the Blazers any better? Both are below replacement level players making significantly more. There is a massive opportunity cost associated with their salaries that you aren't factoring in. If a team has a chance to take Henderson at $9M per year or Crabbe at $22M (after trade kicker), the vast majority of GMs would take Henderson and spend the other $13M on other areas of the roster.

 

He certainly produces good numbers. But as with Lillard, only perhaps more so because the center position is ALL ABOUT defense in the modern NBA, the fact that he is not a great defender hurts us. I was so excited to have signed Ezeli for that reason. Certainly if we have not traded Plumlee (and the fact that he is about to be a FA will severely undercut his trade value) we WILL sign him, but only because, like Crabbe, we basically have to or lose an "asset" for nothing. But with the team playing so shittily, I'd be willing to let him go just to rebuild, or ideally trade him for a pick. Y'know, like Brooklyn did.

 

So why do we spend hours and hours every year discussing trading for players from shitty teams? Those players are not making their teams better. Not sure if you are a Nerlens Noel fan, but he certainly has not made Philly any better.

Sometimes a players meshes better with different players. But I agree with you, sometimes they jsut are not very good.