Ole Dirty Klondike

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Ole Dirty Klondike

  1. 5 hours ago, Dwash said:

    Well this is a very multi layered problem. First, people keep saying things like they could have made "other deals." There is a lot of things we as fans can sit back and make guesses on. This really isnt one imo. Bottom line is they have a better grasp on what is likely to be available with their information from talking to GMs and agents. 

    You are acting like its a guarantee that they would get something positive from cap space. Every year there are a handful of teams with cap space. Vast majority of the time they either do nothing with it or sign some marginal player to a long term deal. 

    Second, they have suspended Waiters like 3 times. Fined him and everything else. How do you know they were going to buy him out? Maybe they were just going to keep doing that as long as they can. Keep him away from the team and let him hang around until traded. 

    Third, there is Dillon. So if they were going to play the keep the cap space game then most likely you dont resign him and keep his 3.1 million dollar cap hold. Once they realized the cap space wasnt of much value, they can negotiate with him now. What if they would have waited until July and some team gets excited and offerd him a 17-18 million deal. Now you gotta match that or lose him? There goes that cap space and Dillon is overpaid or gone. 

    I guess I dont get how we can get the best player in a trade (age considered) and another player who is on par with what we gave up (Dieng is about as good as Crowder or Iggy) and it be such a big deal like we lost. So what if they took on some useless money in Waiters? Cost of doing business sometimes to get better. I would think our fans would be appluading an FO spending money that they didnt have to spend in an effort to get better players. Instead they are dreaming of saving cap space for some imaginary deal that we have no clue if it would have been available (they have a much better idea than us). Really strange to me. 

    It's all speculation. None of us have any clue what deals were on the table or what hypothetical trades could have realistically happen. i'm coming from the position of I'm not really sold on this trade. i think the most realistic alternative was to stand pat. That was a realistic alternative. Everything else is speculation on everyone's part. I'm saying I'm not thrilled with this trade due to Waiters' contract so everything I say will be in support of my theory and any speculation will be biased in favor of my opinion. Others are saying they are fine with the trade, but they are throwing out speculation as well and their speculation is biased in favor of their opinion. No one is right or wrong and no one has made any definitive statements. My opinion is I'm not big on this trade. 

  2. 20 minutes ago, chipc3 said:

    I’m not sure how the Grizzlies could use cap space this summer to acquire Winslow. He’s under contract for two more years. This also would have left Iggy on the roster as well. 

    In a trade in the offseason. We would have had over $50 mil in cap space due to the expiring contracts of Iggy, Crorder, Hill and others  and we could have sent some draft picks and a trade exception. We would have absorbed his contract in a tarde. Iggy has nothing to do with this. His contract would have expired by this summer. I'm not saying sign him this summer, i'm saying we could have traded cap space for him. 

  3. 1 minute ago, I❤️JV said:

    ....and Miami refused unless we take 2 extra contracts...

    I have no clue but even if they did, you're still in a position to take on those 2 contracts as expiring contracts as opposed to taking them on now. It presents a different dynamic by doing next off-season as opposed to now. If you're going to get teh same result, why not wait until you get more info on Winslow's back and Winslow demonstrates that he is healthy?

    The thing is, Waiters may not even be bought out until this summer. They'll probably have him sit out because buying him out for 1.5 years doesn't make any sense unless they get like a 50% discount. 

  4. 1 hour ago, toocoolkellz said:

    What do you think the best course of action was?

    If there were no deals to be had that were better than this, just stand pat.

    I didn't see the reason for the urgency. These moves didn't make us that much better. I mean, we got a backup C that we really needed but the NBA is trending away from big Cs. We got a nice piece in Winslow but there are a lot of unknowns surrounding his back situation.  if they just had to have Winslow, why not wait until this summer? He wasn't going anywhere because MIA was very firm that Waiters and Johnson had to be attached. I doubt if many teams were going for that. I think we could have gotten Winslow for a much better price this summer if that's who they were truly targeting and not only that, it would have given us more information on his back situation. A lot of unknowns with his back right now. 

  5. 2 hours ago, Dwash said:

    I agree it would have been nice to get a pick. They dont really have any good picks to trade. So I guess we could have demanded a 1st due in like 2028 or some very weak second that they have in 2023. To which they probably say "this FA class isnt worth giving up much to clear room for." Now you just move on because they dont have any picks. But what are you moving onto?  Thats my question. People say stuff like "you never know" what you could use the cap space for but in this situation, I would say any FO person has a much better grasp of what that cap space can be used for than we do. 

    Obviously Waiters is worthless, but isnt the whole idea of using cap space for leverage in trades to get something a reduced value (Winslow) and in return you absorb some bad money?  It was a lot of money, but again, its only money/cap slace. Its not like they traded an asset (pick) that can hurt you for years and years. 

    How about using the cap space to acquire Justise Winslow this summer? Could we not have waited? What was the rush? i think it would have been much more prudent to wait until this summer to try to acquire Winslow. Questions about his back would have been answered by then. He probably wouldn't have played this season with MIA which would have decreased his value. they probably would have bought Waiters out by then. I think we could have made other deals and waited until this summer to grab Winslow if they wanted him so bad. 

  6. 36 minutes ago, Dwash said:

    I get that we didnt get the usual desired value for our caproom. And thats if you are looking at what has happened in some past offseason(which again as stated, they were stronger offseasons that 2020 should be). But they like Winslow and instead of fishing for picks they basically decided to spend the whole thing on Winslow, who is ready to go now. It may or may not work out but if thats the guy you like then why would we *not* pull the trigger? What did we really risk other than some cap room?  Didnt you say the other day that you dont want picks and we should be targeting under 25 guys to add to this core? 

    Yes, that's always been my position. My take on this is not Winslow but Waiters horrible deal. As a matter of fact, let me clear up a couple of things since people seem to be repeating stuff which is not what I am saying:

    - I don't necessarily have a problem with Winslow. His injury history is a big concern of mine. He'll have to prove that he can stay healthy before I get my hopes up. I'm not saying he's a bad player but having a PER of 8 is not something that good players have. Like I said, it could be situational and a new start may help. He seems to be a younger,.maybe slightly better version of some mix of Jae and Kyle which is fine. If he's going to be our defensive stopper, next TA, that's fine, but we still need a dominant scorer. He seems to be good on the ball and can dish and facility as a point forward, thought we had a guy like that in Kyle but whatever. I guess we want multiple guys like that. Have no problem with Winslow other than his injury history. I have no clue of when he will play. Will it be this year? Have no clue. It's fine that they targeted him and he fits what they are looking for but at what costs? Is he the only player in the league like that that was available? We had to take on almost  $30mil in bad contracts to get a guy who has been injury prone and not lived up to his expectations? I guess.

    -The bad contracts is what I'm not happy about. I get it that they like Winslow but was it really worth taking on those contracts? Nobody  and I mean nobody wanted to touch Waiters with a 1000 foot pole. His contract was basically untradeable, well until here comes the Grizz. Almost like a bad joke writing itself, "Nobody would trade for this idiot, well maybe the Grizzlies, hahaha" and here we are. We bailed Miami out. They would have had to buy him out, now it's us that has to buy this guy out. I don't get it. Yeah sure we used Johnson to get Dieng but that doesn't take away the sting from Waiters contract

    -Yes, I said I wanted young vets as opposed to picks and I still feel that way but I have two issues here..A) At what costs? Which I have already discussed. B) Its not about me wanting picks. It's about the Grizz throwing that out there and the Heat calling their bluff and fleecing them. The Heat drew the line in the sand and said if you want Winslow, you will take these two bad contracts back and we don't have any picks to give so that's the deal. The Grizz capitulated.

    I don't like the deal due to Waiters contract and not much will change my opinion. I just have a hard time believing this was the best deal they could get and there were no alternatives. They wanted Winslow so badly that they helped the Heat out so much by taking two contracts that they didn't want off of their hands as well as two contentious situations off of their hands. The Heat got everything they wanted and more, Iggy got what he wantes. Apparently, we got Winslow which is all we wanted but he's prone to injury and then we have to buy out a $24mil for a guy who mAy not see the NBA again.


  7. 5 minutes ago, Kevin B Moses said:

    If you have a low opinion of Justise Winslow the sure we got fleeced.

    But the problem is is that Miami heat would not have done that deal without getting the cap space the cap space was the most important thing, along with staying competitive this year.

    Everybody is looking for athletic wings like justise Winslow those guys aren't easy to come by regardless if he is an injury risk or not

    When and where did I say I have a low opinion of Justice Winslow? I posted his stats and said they aren't that great but I also had the caveat that it very may have been situational and that a new fresh start could rejuvenate him and I hope he does well with us.

    My problemi with this trade is Waiters. Not only did MIA get rid of 2 bad contracts where they were not getting production, they got rid of 2 thorns in their side as Waiters had been suspended what 3 times this season and Winslow and the Heat were at odds over whether he was healthy enough to play or not. They also got a TE. They fleeced us and we take on the risk of Winslow's injuries and Waiters horrible contract which they could not trade.

  8. 1 hour ago, Ursine Mammal said:

    The Waiters contract was the cost of doing business. These expirings had to be moved in order to get some kind of value for them. His contract also serves as filler to meet the salary cap floor for next year with a very weak FA class. I understand wanting to preserve the cap space but it seems the FO has identified the core and prefers the 21 FA period.

    Ok, doesn't change my opinion.

    1 hour ago, Kevin B Moses said:

    He is also 23. 23. If he were 28 then id be worried about his injury history more.

    Not only that, but how many games was jae crowder or iggy going to play for the grizzlies over the next 3 years.

    You can argue that he isn't THAT great, due to your data, but if you compare that to what we would have gotten from iggy and crowder, the grizzlies won the deal.

    I think it is disingenuous to use his 22% three point average this year to imply that he is a bad 3 point shooter, he has only played 11 games this year, some of which he might have had lingering injuries. Last year his 3 point shooting vastly improved and it has been on a steady incline for the past 2 years. Last year he made 96 three pointers in 66 games. The year before he made 49 three pointers in 68 games. Both were 37.5% and 38% averages for the year.

    If you want to argue that the money we owe him over the next 2 years is too much given his injury risk, and that that alone means it was a bad trade, okay, that's your opinion, but there is still a very decent chance that he outplays his contract and we got a steal. Thats what the grizz are banking on.

    We'll agree to disagree and I'll leave it at that.

    50 minutes ago, GrizzTigerFan said:

    Yep don't see how anyone can think our moves this trade deadline are bad.    They all make perfect sense when evaluating the entire picture.  

    Because it's their opinion?

    Nothing you have said changes my opinion. As a a matter of fact, I think it's a best case scenario which rarely happens. I'll wait and see. Until then, I don't think this was a good trade, nothing against Winslow, it's mostly Waiters deal that kills everything. Taking on Waiters contract when NO ONE and I mean NO ONE wanted him kills any good this deal has and  Winslow would have to be healthy for the majority of his contract and produce for me to even begin to change my mind. There's a lot of ifs with this deal. Also, this has nothing to do with keeping Jae or Hill but looking at this trade and I can't help but wonder if  they couldn't get any better deals than this.

    Iggy came out on top and got what he wanted without sacrificing, hell, he got a 2 year contract extension. MIA got what they wanted without sacrificing. They got rid of 2 bad contracts that they couldn't get rid of and all they had to do was give up an oft injured player who has only played 11 games this year so it's not like he was contributing. The Grizz? We take on the risk of an injury prone player. Will he even play for the Grizz this season? I have no idea. We take on a horrible contract in Waiters and plan on buying out his contract that ends in 2021 so it will be dead money on our books. James Johnson was at least not a distraction but still a bad contract. At least we flipped it for a position of need.

    We made a high risk, medium reward move and we're hoping it pays off. I like the optimism but I'm not there yet. Winslow is a gritty, hard nosed point forward who projects as a mix between Jae Crowder and Kyle Anderson only better(slightly). Let's hope it works out and he's better than I expect but the Waiters contract is still an albatross.

  9. After further consideration, we got fleeced, even if Winslow lives up to potential. Eating Waiters contract is enough to torpedo this deal for me and getting Dieng doesn't negate that for me.

    I really hope Winslow can stay healthy, I really hope having a fresh start rejuvenates his career and I hope he is more productive than he has been but bring that he is currently not healthy, I'm kind of skeptical.

  10. 13 hours ago, Zappastache said:

    I don't know how excited I was about his on-court fit, but I still am surprised by this also. 

    It'd be one thing if he was expiring, but we're gonna have his dead number on our books next year. Wouldn't he be more useful as a chip in trades for matching salary? 

    Do we absolutely need the roster spot to not cut someone? 

    No one wants this dude. He was about to be released a few months ago. MIA made it a condition to take on Waiters and Johnson if anyone was interested in Winslow.They also said Herro is off limits. They stuck to their conviction and public bluffing. We didn't. We demanded a 1st for Iggy and 1st for Jae, we didn't get either. Instead, we got an oft injured player and 2 bad contracts that MIA was trying to dump cause no one would take them. Luckily, we turned one of those bad contracts into a kind of sort of less bad one for a real backup C. Otherwise, we got fleeced.

  11. 13 hours ago, bhoyal said:

    There's too many threads right now to read them all.

    If this was high school, I would buy the Cliff Notes.


    Cash app me $1500 and I'll send you the Cliff Notes version of the first page of the Grizz board

  12. 8 minutes ago, QMemphis said:

    I believe he underachieved this year due to role. He was trying to be a point guard and that experiment didn’t work out well for him or the Heat. He is a good two way player with good handles, solid playmaker and good finisher. His shot will get where it needs be once he becomes comfortable playing off ball again. 

    We'll see how it turns out. As I said, hopefully a change of scenery will revitalize him. I'm not sure what role they want him to play. We also have no clue on what's going on with this bone bruise injury. 

  13. From ESPN Insider:


    Memphis Grizzlies: D


    Given how well the Grizzlies' new front office managed last summer, including getting a lightly protected first-round pick from the Warriors to take on Iguodala's salary, I'm perplexed at their logic for making this move. It seems to both hurt Memphis' pursuit of the eighth seed this season and cost the Grizzlies dearly in terms of flexibility this summer, all without equivalent upside.

    Let's start with the short term. As mentioned, both Crowder and Hill were playing key roles, while Winslow has played just one game since Christmas Day due to lower back issues. Josh Jackson, recently recalled from the G League, can help fill some of those minutes, and Kyle Anderson is capable of stepping into a larger role. Still, if Grizzlies coach Taylor Jenkins thought those were better options than Crowder and Hill, they would already have been playing.


    I also don't love Winslow's fit in Memphis. His best NBA season, 2018-19, came as a starting point guard in Miami. That role obviously isn't available for the Grizzlies, not with Ja Morant as the favorite for Rookie of the Year. Memphis also gave Tyus Jones a three-year, $26.5 million deal last summer to serve as Morant's veteran backup and plays him alongside another combo guard in defensive ace De'Anthony Melton.

    Between starters Jaren Jackson Jr. and Jonas Valanciunas and rookie backup Brandon Clarke, the Grizzlies' frontcourt is well stocked too, which means Winslow may end up getting most of his minutes as a small forward. Jackson's ability to stretch the court as a power forward will help, but Winslow is not the outside threat that Crowder was despite being a more accurate 3-point shooter (34% career, including 38% and 37.5% the past two seasons). That's come on limited volume (last season's 4.7 attempts per 36 minutes were a career high) and teams are mostly content to help off Winslow.

    It's also concerning that even when he shot so well from 3, Winslow was still an inefficient scorer overall (last season's 51.3 true shooting percentage was a career high; league average is 56.1%) because despite his size, he's a poor finisher. Crowder has nearly been as efficient during his worst shooting campaign since his rookie year.

    Still, Memphis should benefit at the defensive end of the court. Miami has defended better with Winslow on the court in each of his five NBA seasons, per Cleaning the Glass, and the wing duo of Winslow and Dillon Brooks -- who agreed to a three-year, $35 million extension on Wednesday night, according to ESPN's Adrian Wojnarowski -- will give the Grizzlies ideal size and strength to defend opposing perimeter players.

    The question is whether that benefit is worth taking on nearly $30 million in salary for 2020-21. Counting Brooks' extension, Memphis had been looking at about $43 million in cap space this summer. That's all gone now, as the Grizzlies will likely be better off staying over the cap and using their non-taxpayer midlevel exception. This year's crop of free agents is weak, but Memphis could have used that space to take on bad contracts for draft picks -- you know, sort of like what happened with Iguodala.

    If this was the price to get Winslow, I would have much rather tried to trade Iguodala for whatever draft compensation was available with expiring contracts and held on to Crowder and Hill for a playoff push.

    The Johnson-Dieng swap is interesting to the extent that it implies the Grizzlies want to play Jackson and Clarke exclusively as power forwards. That may not change much offensively, since Dieng is capable of stretching the floor as a 5, but it will put more pressure on Jackson and Clarke to defend smaller players full-time.


  14. 1 hour ago, QMemphis said:

    We won the trade got the best player when he is healthy. Also got a true backup center who can spread the floor. 

    also Justice is better than Joe Harris. Justice floor Kyle and ceiling is Iggy/Butler. Joe is a taller JJ Reddick

    Winslow has only played in 64% of games that he could have played in. He's started in only about 43% of the games he has played. He is currently out with another injury and has a PER of 8. If you have a PER in the single digits, you're generally trash. I'm not going to dog him out because it may be situational or may be related to his injury but that's not good. He's shooting 22% from 3 and is a below avg 3 pt shooter in his career. He is shooting below 40% from the field and for his career is right around 40% from the field. None of these numbers are good. He has also NEVER shot over 70% from the free throw line. That's never good.

    With all of that being said, I hope coming to a new team and having a fresh start will revitalize and rejuvenate him. I don't project him as the starter that we need. I think he's a good relentless, hard nosed determined player who can bring some grittiness when healthy, but he's only been healthy 64% of his career. 

  15. 1 hour ago, FrenchGrizzlies said:

    Schedule was the same before or after trade. What  i see is that we trade 2 player ( iggy and Bruno) who contribute for nothing ( or almost) this year and 2 vets player who were never part of the future of the Grizz.

    What we get,? on paper it looks good, let's see what  they bring before jump into conlcusion. But i truyl believe FO know what they do . We got several example since they arrive.

    And i also truly believe that our young people are able to go to PO. IT will be tough for sure but if they play the same way they play against Dallas, we wil be tough to beat too. Go Grizz !!

    Yes, we still had the toughest remaining schedule before the trade but that's the point, we were probably going to dip with or without these players. Winslow is currently hurt, not sure when he will play. Dieng is a nice backup C but our schedule for the past month and a half has been relatively weak. Luckily, we beat teams that were not good. Now we are about to play a lot of good teams. I believe teh winning % of our remaining schedule was like 55%. i just feel like we would come back to earth

  16. 13 minutes ago, GrizzTigerFan said:

    How will we be taking a step back?  Advanced numbers and eyetest show that Kyle is better option as starter.     All we lose are 2 replacement level vets and a dude that never played.   All of the talented players we have will now get more minutes.     

    Stepback we take will purely be based on more difficult schedule.   Dieng is a solid player and Bell can contribute.  Not sure why you think we could be worse. 

    You answered your own question

  17. I'm not sure if Winslow will even play this season and I don't see Dieng as being a leader. I think he's a guy on the bench who can contribute off of the bench and that's about it but I could be wrong.   At this point, I'm thinking we would be lucky to go .500 for the rest of the season. I just feel we will take a step back on the court, maybe not, who knows. I think making the playoffs would have boosted season ticket sales as well.