Question. Does anyone think there is a chance that NO actually has a really good relationship with the guys he drafted/tried to sign, then brought in to us? AMinu? Kanter? He took Moe from being a castaway into a starter. (Not him specifically). Combine that with how open everyone is about how great it is here, I seriously think NO might be able to get these guys to sign for less to stay. I actually think NO might be able to maneuver and tweak things, so that he finds the funds enough to keep these guys and they will help by signing for less to bring back a contender next year with a healthy Nurk.
we're all guessing from the blind because we really don't know now much luxury tax JA is willing to pay. We do know that even PA was concerned enough that Noah Vonleh and Ed Davis are on other teams, and either or both of those guys would be better in backup roles than what Portland has had so far in these playoffs, IMO the first question will be Aminu. Say he's re-signed for 8M...Blazers will already be over the tax line. Those 8 figure estimates for Layman are likely out the window; a player who ends the season & playoffs with a bunch DNP-CD's isn't going to be getting 10M a year offers and if he did, it would be loopy to match (hello Allen Crabbe). Say 4M...Blazers are now 6-8M over the tax line Hood? don't forget that Olshey paid 2 second round picks for Hood. That's a rather significant price to pay for a 30 game rental. Would he re-sign for his 4.1M non-Bird? Maybe, especially considering how poorly he has played in the playoffs, and if so, Blazers are now 10-12M over the tax line that leaves their tax-MLE and the decision between Curry & Kanter. Backup SG or backup C? At SG, Portland would have CJ, Hood, Simons, & Trent. At C, Portland would have Meyers, Zach, & Skal with no certainty on Nurkic. To me, that's an easy call since I think the inconsistency and situational issues at C are a bigger problem. But would Kanter re-sign for 5.5M? Say he does (or it's Curry if that's who you want), Portland is now 15-18M over the tax line and facing a luxury tax in the 29-35M range. That's pretty steep.
That could be cut in half by just shipping Turner out with a pick to a team with space though correct? (might have to be two picks now with his playoff performances). If thats what it takes, im game.
sure...Blazers can do what they've refused to do before and that's use a 1st to unload some salary. I think Turner is too shitty a contract to send him away without getting substantial salary back. Meyers, maybe, probably, but without Nurkic for who knows how long next season, that would leave the C-PF rotation as Zack & Skal....yikes!! Even adding Aminu to that doesn't make it comforting. The 2016 chickens are coming home to roost this summer
The Nuggets traded over $21 million in salary to the Nets last summer for a lottery protected 1st and a future 2nd. The Nets ended up waiving both eventually. I don't think it matters what the skill level of the player being traded is in these type of situations. The timing of it would have to be a 2020 1st though, not this year's pick so you're right that it will come down to whether or not the Blazers do something they haven't been willing to do and another team willing to use cap space.
that's not entirely accurate. Nets didn't waive Darrell Arthur; they traded him for Jared Dudley and a 2nd round pick from the Suns meaning their 'haul' for taking on those contracts was Jared Dudley, a first round pick, and 2 second round picks. Nothing too substantial but certainly an indication that the Blazers would have to give up considerably more that just a 1st to dump Turner. It's also the case that the trade happened more than a week into the off-season, an off-season when there wasn't much in the way of either cap-space or free agents.... http://www.prosportstransactions.co...ndDate=&PlayerMovementChkBx=yes&Submit=Search ...meaning that in this coming off-season, arranging a salary dump trade might take significant time in which teams determine whether or not their cap-space could fetch more than just an unattractive pick package for taking on bad salary. I'm not sure that delay on top of uncertainty will work in Portland's favor this summer. I'd also wonder, looking at what Portland "needs" to accomplish, if the full-MLE is that much better than the tax-MLE (5.5M vs 9M) that the Blazers need to mortgage even more future picks to gain that extra 3.5M. Sure, if JA insists on minimal tax that might have an impact. I'd also wonder if paying 8-9M a year for either Curry or Kanter is wise. I wouldn't pay it for Curry and maybe not for Kanter. still seems to me like the best option might be offering Meyers and the 25th pick to Atlanta before or during the draft. It would give the Blazers the breathing room for a full-MLE, but sure leave Portland crazy thin at C and PF
This forum cracks me up as the ones wanting to pay Layman anything over 10 mil should not be offering advice and what makes it funny is that some in this thread were ones complaining about the 2016 signings and here they suggest doing it again for Layman. Layman is a nice player but anything over 5-6 mil will likely be over paying.
maybe it would be a regret, but no way should the Blazers pay Layman 8M/year IMO. I even think 6 may be too high and for chrissakes, if they do re-sign him make it only a 2 or 3 year deal with the last year being a team option or non-guaranteed. If they would have done that with Turner and Meyers, Portland would be in great shape this summer. Not only did Olshey go batshit on the salary he offered those two, he dropped the ball big time by making the contracts max duration...stacking dumb on top of stupid
I don’t know, Napier had a great run of games last year as well and I think he got the minimum. Stotts should be playing Layman over Turner though, honestly.
