This is the sort of discussion that is interesting to me. Not some version of me sitting behind a phone/monitor and saying "gah, what dummies for locking in money owed to a guy who was washed last year and most definitely will fall apart due to his size, usage etc etc". Those may all be true but until the outcome has been crystallized, its all just speculation. There really is no discussion to be had unless you want to debate how the future plays out. That is uninteresting to me.So Lillard’s contract was going to run out at the same time as the old TV deal and he would have been a free agent when the new deal kicks in (2-3 times the size of the old deal). Even with smoothing, assume most teams would have major money to spend. Apparently, neither Lillard or the blazers wanted to be part of that clusterf—k, so they both chose the security of an extension.
We are going to see a lot of teams and agents start planning around the 25-26 free agent season.
Does the tv deal expiry change our thinking about why the Blazers are doing it? It certainly makes more sense than them thinking that Lillard will defy aging or injuries. Portland more than likely wasn't just cajoled into this decision - there is some process at work here. Maybe the process is flawed or ill conceived but the background on that is far more fascinating than proclaiming a winner and a loser of a deal.