Bogey/Clarkson/Royce/30 along with our 2024 1st, 2026 1st and 2028 1st.
Last edited:
To get out of his last contract he would have had to make himself look absolutely horrible, take a qualifying offer vs his first giant $160 million payday. Getting out before your restricted free agency is unheard of. The supermax, there is plenty of precedent for turning it down, and he can opt out a year later, and has the leverage to demand a trade at that point, and he knows he'll be traded if he turns it down. If he actually signed it (he won't) it would show a willingness to stay, when he didn't have to.But that's the exact same argument you could and would use if he signs another deal - "he had no choice but sign it because it was more money than anybody else could offer. But the 5th year is a player option so he really hates Utah...."
If I'm Portland, and Dame really does demand a trade, I go ahead and trade it all. Forget trying to get players to keep a mediocre team going.Sure, but POR is either going to want to get an AS-caliber player in return and/or multiple future assets of a good value to rebuild. Dame can ask for a trade as much as he wants, but his leverage is only his discontent.
If the fixes I’ve seen rumored happen with the next CBA it will improve it. Only count as a normal max against the cap, and also the player cannot be traded the first 2 years of the contract.The Supermax is an awful contract.
I don’t think that’s possible. We’d have to s&t Conley and I believe you can’t package a s&t player. I don’t see how seperate trades would work. If it was possible, I probably would though.Seriously though, what about:
Ben Simmons and Clarkson to Portland
Dame to Utah
Conley and Bojan to Philly
This is assuming that Dame makes it public that he wants Utah. Other parts of the deal would be included (picks here and there).
Oh, I'm just throwing stuff out there. I don't think we really have a realistic shot. We could get involved as a 3rd team getting something else, but I just don't see us getting Dame in any scenario. He would literally have to come out and say he wants to play for us. I don't see that happening.I don’t think that’s possible. We’d have to s&t Conley and I believe you can’t package a s&t player. I don’t see how seperate trades would work. If it was possible, I probably would though.
Then you have Dame's teammate saying this:
Which is why him refuting it seems like he probably got a hold of Dame right when he saw it reported. Nurk has flat out said he won't be back without Dame. I believe Nurk's money is not guaranteed next year and he can be a free agent if he truly wanted. So it seems like Nurk likely got a hold of Lillard the second he saw all this and wanted to know so he could start making his own decisions. Dame must have told him it wasn't true. Also Haynes reported Dame is going to address this report after Team USA practice today at 1:30 our time I believe.Nurkic has said something along the lines that if Dame leaves, he will too. Guess we’re trading for Dame & Nurk.
And while we’re at it, I’ll take Roco too.
That’s the great thing about off season/draft season. You get to feel like a kid in a candy store imagining any player you like coming to the Jazz!Oh, I'm just throwing stuff out there. I don't think we really have a realistic shot. We could get involved as a 3rd team getting something else, but I just don't see us getting Dame in any scenario. He would literally have to come out and say he wants to play for us. I don't see that happening.
And really, I don't see Dame and Don being a great pairing unless we brought Covington with Dame and got more perimeter defending.
If you have Dame and Donovan, but no Rudy, we are just a slightly better Portland team, and Portland is not as good as we currently are, in large part because they don't have Rudy.Oh, I'm just throwing stuff out there. I don't think we really have a realistic shot. We could get involved as a 3rd team getting something else, but I just don't see us getting Dame in any scenario. He would literally have to come out and say he wants to play for us. I don't see that happening.
And really, I don't see Dame and Don being a great pairing unless we brought Covington with Dame and got more perimeter defending.
Nurk’s contract is partially guaranteed at 4m. Let’s just go for a complete Blazers-Jazz merger. In Utah ofcourse under the Jazz name.Which is why him refuting it seems like he probably got a hold of Dame right when he saw it reported. Nurk has flat out said he won't be back without Dame. I believe Nurk's money is not guaranteed next year and he can be a free agent if he truly wanted. So it seems like Nurk likely got a hold of Lillard the second he saw all this and wanted to know so he could start making his own decisions. Dame must have told him it wasn't true. Also Haynes reported Dame is going to address this report after Team USA practice today at 1:30 our time I believe.
The majority of owners will start to raise a stink about it. There's only a handful of owners who this benefits and the other 25 or so have to be growing tired of it. You could go as far as implementing a rule that if you sign a full max or supermax extension, you can't be traded by team or player choice for the first 3 or 4 years of that contract. It really is getting to a point contracts are totally meaningless, and that's beyond just player empowerment. At some point owners will swing the pendulum back. The whole Harden situation really started creating a lot of tension for Silver from some things I read, and this? Well this has potential to really set off some fires if true. Dame won't go to the lengths Harden did though. It will be interesting because the Blazers are in every position here to fight back, and Dame's public image is something he won't burn to the ground just to get moved(Portland has to know that). If he asks for a trade, hold firm and don't do it. At some point the other side of this issue has to start using their own leverage, and Portlands leverage is, say no, and if Dame wants to make an *** out of himself, let him for a year or two before you trade him.I really do think the league needs to address this idea if players demanding trades or buyouts with multiple years left on a contract. I’m all for player empowerment and understand that teams can (mostly) trade a player at any time, but this is getting to the point where it defeats the point of a contract. Players get guaranteed money but teams to not get the guaranteed player.
It is clear the “super max” did not accomplish its intent so I do hope they remove that from future CBAs. I