Jerami Grant Extension?

Discussion in 'Portland Trail Blazers' started by B-Roy, Jan 6, 2023.

  1. Rastapopoulos

    Rastapopoulos Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    37,380
    Likes Received:
    21,977
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Ballin'
  2. Natebishop3

    Natebishop3 Don't tread on me!

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2008
    Messages:
    90,156
    Likes Received:
    52,173
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    I have a bad feeling about giving this dude a ton of money.
     
  3. illmatic99

    illmatic99 formerly yuyuza1

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    56,114
    Likes Received:
    53,918
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    NYstateofmind
    The only reason to retain him is for his contract slot. Losing that will remove one of the few avenues we have of acquiring 30 mil players.

    Hopefully we can get a shorter deal that's not too hard to move. But his impact towards winning cratered once his shooting regressed to the mean.

    We also traded Hart so that we could pay Grant and not have a tax burden. Losing him For nothing would be a devastating blow and yet another wasted pick.
     
  4. Graduate32

    Graduate32 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2018
    Messages:
    406
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    93
    No team with cap space there that is remotely more appealing than Portland really. And frankly, I don't see Portland being outbid (whether we should or not is a different question) unless something insane comes his way... and I don't really see the team (with cap space) that would do that. Would Dallas (if losing Kyrie) make that move?
     
  5. SharpesTriumph

    SharpesTriumph Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2018
    Messages:
    6,909
    Likes Received:
    6,780
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Does any of that impact what the Blazers pay Grant? Nobody was offering Nurk a contract and we gave him 70 million.
     
  6. Graduate32

    Graduate32 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2018
    Messages:
    406
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Probably not, no. That said, I do think it impacts the Blazers risk of losing him for nothing.

    In terms of pay, I am of the mind that the Blazers and Grant have worked out a number already, and it is likely higher than we here would like. My guess is that they will let Grant spend the first bit of free agency trying to find something stronger to bring back to the Blazers to potentially match, and unless it's obscene, the Blazers will.

    I will be shocked if these two things don't happen this summer: 1) Grant re-signs with the Blazers; and 2) he re-signs at a level with which we are all uncomfortable.
     
  7. Pinwheel1

    Pinwheel1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    21,007
    Likes Received:
    13,564
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So he regressed to 50% from two and 40% from three? That is still pretty good. I don't think his shooting is the problem. But I agree it would be best if he signed a shorter contract.
     
  8. RR7

    RR7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    17,596
    Likes Received:
    11,213
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We traded Hart because our team sucked, he was a free agent, and sounds like very unlikely to re-sign here. We got a 1st round pick for him. That's a great trade.
     
  9. MickZagger

    MickZagger Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    33,500
    Likes Received:
    11,925
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    UPS
    Location:
    V-Town Baby
    Would be dumb to get in a bidding war for this guy. I think he’s more of a 4th piece on a legit contender. Not another 100mil contract to get anchored down with.
     
  10. blazerkor

    blazerkor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2014
    Messages:
    13,901
    Likes Received:
    14,818
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Everyone, I think Joe has a track record now. I don't think he let's Jerami get pats the trade deadline without a handshake deal and I don't think Jerami is Carlos Boozer.

    On the first day that deals can be announced we will all see that Jerami is re-signed. It will be a deal that we all think is a little too big but won't make us lose our minds. I'm expecting him to get 30M next season and for it to ramp up from there over the next 5 seasons. Something in the ball park of 5 years 170M. I am not cool with that because it's what is to be expected buy I don't approve of it.

    I think Jerami is being paid market value right now at 21M. I don't think he has underperformed for that number but I don't think he has outperformed that either. So if I was in charge I would tell him he deserves a small raise every year for five years 23M first year, 25M second, 27M third 29M fourth and 31M fifth as a team option. That's like 5 years 135M. So I think Joe will overpay him by 35M but that should be expected given what happened with Ant and Nurk.

    No other team can give him the fifth year and every other team has to fit him under their cap for next season. We'll get him, it won't be a team friendly deal but it won't be a deal that ruins our ability to move him if we need to, it will be a deal that makes him a much less valuable trade chip than a team friendly deal would make him and likely seen as neutral value but that seems to be what Joe does.
     
    Cugel likes this.
  11. illmatic99

    illmatic99 formerly yuyuza1

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    56,114
    Likes Received:
    53,918
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    NYstateofmind
    He shot 23.7% from 3 in february.
     
    BBert likes this.
  12. blazerkor

    blazerkor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2014
    Messages:
    13,901
    Likes Received:
    14,818
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There won't be a bidding war because I would almost guarantee that we've already bid against ourselves and the dude's deal will be announced the moment it can be and if 100M seems like an anchor I think that closer to 200M deal Jerami ends up with is going to make you lose it. Like I just said I think it will be 5 years and 170M which is overpaying but not so much that most of us will immediately call for Joe's job. This is all assuming that Joe can get something done that brings in someone better than Jerami to play with Dame, Jerami and Shaedon.

    Should be interesting.
     
    illmatic99 likes this.
  13. MickZagger

    MickZagger Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    33,500
    Likes Received:
    11,925
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    UPS
    Location:
    V-Town Baby
    UghA. I will call for his job. But I’ve kinda thought he’s in over his head after several moves he made.

    This is a guy who hard capped us for Gary Payton’s blowhard son
     
    illmatic99 and blazerkor like this.
  14. blazerkor

    blazerkor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2014
    Messages:
    13,901
    Likes Received:
    14,818
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's reasonable. Joe fucked up with GP2, he bid against himself with both Ant and Nurk making them more like salary filler in a trade than wanted commodities and I think he'll do the same with Jerami.

    The only way he doesn't is if he punts on draft day, uses both picks on guys we want to play with Ant and Shae, tells Dame he can't land him immediate help, Dame asks to be traded because that's the corner Joe will have pushed him into and we trade Dame. That's when we will not overpay Jerami but we might still sign and trade him.
     
    Natebishop3 likes this.
  15. Graduate32

    Graduate32 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2018
    Messages:
    406
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    93
    As someone who is firmly in the "Blazers are likely to overpay Grant" camp, I will say that re-signing Grant for a higher-than-market value contract is still better than letting him go for nothing for a couple of reasons:

    1) The player is still useful/good, and you keep the player.
    2) His salary slot can be useful.
    3) Overpaid players can still be moved... and still be moved to acquire positive assets. CJ is a prime example. While he may not have brought back the same value he would have if he were making $20-25 million, the Blazers certainly acquired positive assets in return in the deal. (Other examples: Gobert, Kyrie, Westbrook from Washington to LA). Overpaid, but useful players still have positive value. What you are gambling on is that they don't become Ben Simmons headcases, Russell Westbrook team cancers, and/or John Wall walking injuries, etc. ... Knock on wood, but Grant has shown no signs that this should be feared.

    Assuming that re-signing Grant doesn't mean that you lose the opportunity to sign someone better or who is a better fit (and we'll have no cap flexibility regardless), we should certainly be hoping that Grant returns next year, even if he is making more than we'd like.
     
    HailBlazers and blazerkor like this.
  16. blazerkor

    blazerkor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2014
    Messages:
    13,901
    Likes Received:
    14,818
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If Joe punts we won't need salaries to match other salaries. We'll likely trade anyone older than Ant and Nas that has value of any kind or who can bring back an expiring contract in the stead of money owed in the future. We'll likely have cap space. After next season that is greater than what we would have in Jerami's outgoing salary. I could see a sign and trade though.
     
  17. Graduate32

    Graduate32 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2018
    Messages:
    406
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Yeah, if Dame's gone and "Joe punts," you immediately shift to sign-and-trade with Grant. But, if that can't be done over the summer, I still sign Grant and look to move him in February or even the following summer if necessary. I think we would be able to get return salary in a Grant trade that didn't extend any longer than the return (dead) salary that we'd receive in Dame and Nurkic trades (assuming we are rebuilding) anyway. I think Grant is still flippable for positive assets without impacting potential cap space in 2024/25. Given the historical value of Blazers cap space, I think its a gamble well worth taking. Others may disagree, of course.
     
  18. wizenheimer

    wizenheimer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    20,710
    Likes Received:
    32,569
    Trophy Points:
    113
    if there's any chance that Dame is gone Grant won't re-sign in Portland
     
    Natebishop3 likes this.
  19. Graduate32

    Graduate32 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2018
    Messages:
    406
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Eh, he might if the money's right... the other teams with cap space aren't any better positioned than a post-Dame Blazers team (maybe OKC? Would they be interested? Would he want to return?). Again, I could see him really valuing a sign-and-trade, of course, but if that doesn't come to fruition, he has already proven once that money and role might be a deciding factor. And the Blazers could sell him on, "listen, Jerami, we want to feature you for half a season/season, but then we can work together that gets you to a destination where you want to go and provides us with a reasonable package."
     
  20. BankTeller

    BankTeller Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2021
    Messages:
    2,540
    Likes Received:
    2,381
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Signing Grant for 5 years/$170m and trading our lotto pick for someone in the same summer would suck so hard.
     

Share This Page