I think a small forward who can play some minutes at power forward is not a position of need for the C's right now. If it's a big upgrade like Hayward or George, I get it. But Porter doesn't seem like an upgrade over any of our guys that can do that already.
I disagree. He'd be the best we have next year at the position. Whether that's enough of an upgrade given the long-term resources we have invested there is a different question, but he'd be our best there unless Jaylen Brown takes a monster leap in year 2.
You've got him rated a lot higher than I do. I look at Porter as basically a lateral move from Crowder. He's younger so maybe he can continue to grow but I don't see him as advancing much of an offensive game beyond the spot up shooting he's very good at now.
I mean, he's more than very good at spot up shooting. He's elite. Again, his eFG% led the league for non-centers (since guys like Howard, Jordan, and Capela just take all their shots at the rim, it's not fair to compare them with other players). He's a plus rebounder for the swing position. His length is elite -- 6'8" with a 7'1" wingspan. That's equates to 3 inches of standing reach compared to Jaylen Brown. About 6 inches on Crowder.
Can he be a shot creator in the half court? That I'm not positive on. With Wall and Beal he was given very few opportunities to do so. He's decent at attacking closeouts, but I can't honestly say if he can beat players off the dribble and make his own shots.
He's 24. You'd be gambling he improved a bit. But I think Stevens would happily play a lineup with all four of Crowder, Porter, Brown and Tatum in it (just as I think he's play such a lineup with Hayward or George instead), so I'm confident on the fit. And the difference between Porter and Hayward/George in salary could be an amount large enough to enable maxing IT while keeping Bradley beyond this year, or resign Olynyk.
The other thing I like about Porter is that he's taken large steps forward in his game every year. To me that looks like someone who's been putting in the work and seeing results, and accordingly someone less likely to have a drop off after a big payday.
So yeah, as I said back in November, I think Porter is a Plan D or so, but I do think it's viable. Maybe a bit riskier than other plans, but that's why it's not Plan A. Ideally he'd sign for closer to
$22 million than the max that's approaching $25 million. I don't think Washingnton matches either. Ownership is too cheap, and they're running low on draft picks with which to dump bad contracts.