I think we sign Jerami to a 5 year deal whether or not that deal is for another team in a S&T is completely dependent on if we're keeping Dame or not. Jerami will know and might know already.
If Dame is going to ask out, I don't any compelling reason to re-sign Grant yeah...I know..."tradable contract". But in order to have decent trade value it has to be a decent contract and while Grant a 30M/year with Dame on the team can be justified, it can't with Dame gone if Grant is willing to sign for considerably less that's a different matter, but just like Dame, he will likely want to be on a competitive team, and Portland won't be that after trading Dame
We should give Grant long term job stability and give him a 5 year deal...he's a valuable piece to a contender..we don't need to start over with our good vets, we need to keep them. Lillard wants to play with Grant...they just went to Paris together. We finally get good players who want to be here, we shouldn't chase them away now.Grant is a good player.
players on bloated contracts aren't assets, especially on a 4 or 5 year bloated contract. Well, I guess a negative asset is still an asset
I agree with you. But unless Dame has already made up his mind to leave, then you have to move forward with signing him. We can't wait until mid-July.
Ben Simmons has a bloated contract...Grant is worth a stable contract and it is an asset compared to Ben Simmons or other 50 million dollar stars people keep talking about wanting to bring in here. Grant will get Ant money more than likely or slightly more..he wants the 5th year I'd guess.
Not sure. But just from my own research, there's hardly any players out there that are like Grant. It's weird how we seem to be in some kind of big man drought.
What was the amount he was eligible to get as a 4 year extension during the season? I think it was $118m or something. I don't think he comes back to Portland unless we offer more than that, or the deal would've already been done. How do you build a contender around a third option scoring forward that can't rebound and has defensive shortcomings? If I'm the Blazers I hold firm at a number around that $120 million and I don't offer the 5th year. If he walks then fine. Its likely we could do the deal as a sign and trade getting a trade exception and 2nd round pick. That is worth more than Grant on some stupid 5 year $174 million deal. After what we saw with the Ant and Nurk contract negotiations I'm not optimistic. Hopefully free agency/trade deadline Joe Cronin was fired and replaced by draft day Joe Cronin, then maybe we will have a chance.
Whats his max - $230 million over 5 years? Surely you can't think its a "no-brainer" to resign him at that amount. There is an amount you have to let him go. For me thats 4 years $120 million. I can't pay him more than $30 million per year. Even with Dame that basically locks us into never having luxury cap space to contend - and worse than that no flexibility to get the rebuild going for the 5 years he clogs up the cap when Dame demands out however many months later. It would be much better to let him walk and move on with building this team.
IF Dame is leaving then S and T him or let him walk. Grant is a nice piece but not a huge difference maker as we have seen.
Even at $30 million per year the contract might be tradeable. I'm fine with not offering him that much and walking away too, I don't see him having much value at $30 million. But if its $35-45 million per season no way am I agreeing to that. Then it'll become a Even Turner/Jusuf Nurkic boat anchor that prevents this team from rebuilding for the next 5 years.
If Grant is overpaid he's not an asset - he's a liability. It would literally be better to have nothing on our salary cap/luxury tax. Teams every year have to give up a draft pick to dump contracts - that would be the Blazers having to do this with Grant in a few seasons. If he is fairly paid or underpaid then fine sign him. Letting him walk is much better than locking in as an overpriced liability.
He's in his prime and he plays a position of scarcity right now. The dude will have trade value. We can backload his deal so that his contract is more tradeable.
A negative asset is a liability; remember accounting 101? Assets = Liability + Equity Well we would have negative equity in Grants contract. Much smarter to have nothing.
Dude will not have value if he is grossly overpaid like the Blazers have done many times - Meyers, Crabbe, Turner, Nurkic, etc. We were stuck with those contracts for many years and wasted a ton of Dames prime because of it. Don't make the same mistake with Sharpe and Scoot's future.
