To borrow an analogy from the comedian Katt Williams, something might resemble a Rolls Royce Phantom until an actual one appears.
The Memphis Grizzlies possess many characteristics of a championship contender, including their core trio of Ja Morant, Jaren Jackson Jr., and Desmond Bane, and a consistent ability to find affordable role players. They`ve historically exceeded regular season expectations. However, they only *appear* to be contenders until faced with truly elite competition.
Their performance against top-six teams since February 8th was telling: a 1-13 record with a -126 point differential over 14 games. An attempt to salvage the situation in March involved dismissing head coach Taylor Jenkins and assistant Noah LaRoche. This coaching change clearly didn`t yield positive results in the postseason.
The Oklahoma City Thunder decisively swept the Grizzlies in the first round. They dominated the initial two games, winning by a combined 70 points, and even mounted a 29-point comeback in Game 3 after Morant`s injury. The series concluded with the Thunder`s Game 4 victory on the road. While Memphis showed resilience in their home games, Oklahoma City`s overall control of the series was never truly challenged; the Grizzlies posed no significant threat.
Although it may seem harsh to measure a team against the 68-win Thunder, Oklahoma City represents the current benchmark. Success in the Western Conference now means competing directly with them. The past week clearly demonstrated that the Grizzlies are not currently in the Thunder`s league, nor are they particularly close. While injuries certainly played a role (Brandon Clarke and Jaylen Wells would have helped, and Morant`s Game 3 absence was impactful), the difference in roster strength was far more significant.
Coaching consistency might help, but it`s unclear what coaching profile the team requires after this tumultuous year. Even if Taylor Jenkins had remained past March, the team had already attempted a radical strategic shift. Noah LaRoche`s offense, which minimized pick-and-roll actions, was largely effective, ranking fifth in the league before the losing streak against contenders began. Yet, just six weeks later, the organization was prepared to abandon it.
This rapid abandonment wasn`t merely a lack of faith in the scheme; it suggests organizational resistance, possibly linked to the roster composition. Some within the organization appeared unwilling to fully embrace LaRoche`s drastic changes. It`s uncertain if they would be receptive to the kind of strategic adjustments a new coach might propose.
However, the decisive defeat by the Thunder undeniably highlights the urgent need for fundamental change within the team.
This necessitates introspection from the Grizzlies, a quality they`ve fortunately demonstrated in the past. The midseason coaching change, for instance, showed a level of decisiveness uncommon among teams. Even amidst resistance to schematic shifts, the highest levels of the organization appear willing to take significant risks. They pursued major acquisitions earlier this year, reportedly targeting Jimmy Butler and Kevin Durant at the trade deadline. While Butler is no longer an option, acquiring Durant remains a potential path.
Kevin Durant`s potential fit is evident. In Phoenix, he lacked teammates capable of consistently driving to the basket (rim pressure) and anchoring the defense – roles perfectly suited for Morant and Jackson, respectively. Durant could seamlessly integrate as a clutch half-court scorer, capable of winning close playoff games and providing overall offensive equilibrium.
Just two years ago, trading significant assets for a player nearing 40 would have been unthinkable. The extended window for contention Memphis seemed to have built has significantly shortened. They are no longer just a promising young squad. The situation feels less like `now or never` and more like `soon or potentially never.` They can no longer afford to be particular about timelines. Within two years, Jackson will command a maximum contract, and many current affordable role players will require market-rate extensions or move on.
The current group`s championship potential is presently low, yet paradoxically, it might be at its peak effectiveness *now*. There`s uncertainty regarding Morant`s future health and availability.
Acquiring Durant would likely open a championship window, albeit a potentially short one, but would necessitate dismantling the current core. Memphis`s trade of Marcus Smart was partly aimed at creating financial flexibility for a Jackson extension, but it left them with limited mid-tier salaries to match Durant`s high contract ($54.7 million). With only Jackson, Morant, and Bane earning significant money (Clarke is next at $12.5 million), a trade is only feasible by including one of the main trio. Considering both basketball fit and salary, Desmond Bane appears to be the most likely candidate.
Naturally, this decision might not be entirely in their control. Durant`s expiring contract gives him considerable influence. Reports indicated Butler wasn`t interested in Memphis, and initial rumors about Durant`s potential destinations haven`t mentioned the Grizzlies. The kind of high-profile star acquisition General Manager Zach Kleiman pursued in February might simply not be an option in July. If that`s the case, the organization must consider whether it`s time to perhaps take a step back or at least make a different kind of move to alter the current core`s trajectory.
The current NBA salary cap structure poses significant challenges for teams built around traditional “big threes.” It`s increasingly difficult and expensive to build and maintain quality depth, even when supporting an elite top group. It`s debatable whether the Grizzlies even possess that necessary elite core.
The collective achievements of Jackson, Morant, and Bane include four All-Star nods and one All-NBA selection, with Morant`s seventh-place MVP finish representing the pinnacle of their individual star power. However, none are definitively considered a top-15 player in the league. Accounting for Morant`s and Jackson`s injury histories, they might be ranked roughly 18th, 22nd, and 35th best players overall. This relatively modest star power forms a vulnerable foundation when facing a team like the Thunder, which could potentially feature three All-NBA players and multiple All-Defense selections for years to come.
Should Jackson sign an extension this summer, the Grizzlies would be committing substantial “superstar” salaries to three players whose playoff performance hasn`t consistently justified such paydays. Jackson`s limitations include rebounding and foul trouble. Morant, even when healthy, hasn`t significantly improved his jump shot, making him somewhat predictable and reliant on athleticism that may be past its absolute peak. Bane, despite being a primary scoring option, has never ranked higher than 24th in per-game scoring. While individually appealing to other teams in different contexts, it`s reasonable to question if this trio, as a unit, has reached its collective potential.
Bane is likely the most readily tradeable asset. With four years remaining on his contract and a versatile offensive game centered around shooting, he fits well on many teams. He can handle significant usage in some lineups but can also adapt to a smaller role. Any team needing shooting could find him a valuable addition – for example, he could mentor young players in Washington, address Orlando`s scoring issues, or provide Detroit with a reliable long-term shooting threat. He`s not difficult to move, and crucially, he`s arguably the easiest of the core three for Memphis to replace.
Jackson is fundamental to the team`s defensive identity, and Morant represents their primary offensive dynamism. Both, when healthy, are plausible All-NBA candidates, unlike Bane. Finding a quality third option is simpler than replacing a player like Jackson or restoring Morant to his peak performance. Trading Bane could function more as a strategic reset than a full rebuild, allowing Memphis to replenish assets, improve salary cap flexibility, and reassess their position in 2026.
Trading either Jackson or Morant presents greater complexity. Jackson is nearing free agency and holds significant leverage. He could deter potential trade partners by indicating a preference for signing elsewhere (like the rumored `Lakers boogeyman` scenario that impacted Anthony Davis). Securing his extension in Memphis before a trade might require a renegotiation to reach his maximum salary, which isn`t guaranteed. Furthermore, trading him against his wishes is difficult; teams won`t pay a high price to “rent” him, and acquiring teams would need assurance of an extension, a negotiation made harder without the super-max option or immediate cap space. Thus, the realistic options are either keeping Jackson or trading him to a destination he approves.
Morant faces a different challenge: uncertainty regarding his trade market value. Setting aside his injury history and off-court issues, how many teams in today`s NBA are eager to acquire a high-usage guard who struggles with three-point shooting? While elite driving ability remains valuable for building an offense with sufficient spacing and secondary scoring, Morant`s current profile isn`t likely to spark a bidding war. A more probable scenario might involve trading him for another team`s problematic contract or player, potentially resulting in a lateral move rather than a significant upgrade (e.g., trading him for Trae Young or Jamal Murray might not fundamentally change the team`s ceiling).
Returning to the car analogy, few 300 owners manage to trade up for a Phantom; that usually requires winning the lottery. This highlights an area where the Grizzlies have faced difficulties: developing top-tier star talent. They excel at cultivating undrafted or low-round prospects into solid rotation players (like Scotty Pippen Jr. or Vince Williams). However, their higher-upside draft picks haven`t consistently panned out (e.g., Ziaire Williams instead of Trey Murphy, the failed Justise Winslow acquisition). Unlike teams like the Spurs, whose rare tanking efforts yielded generational talents like Tim Duncan or Victor Wembanyama, the Grizzlies` recent high pick resulted in Zach Edey (drafted after this article was written, but the point about struggling with high picks vs. depth development is valid). While Bane was a great find at pick 30, his success wasn`t a high-risk gamble; he fell because of his age, exceeding expectations primarily by being a *better version* of what was anticipated, not a completely unforeseen star.
Building a true contender is inherently challenging and costly. The simpler paths to improvement likely closed some time ago. The team doesn`t have an incoming lottery pick, and most of their young players have matured, with limited untapped potential remaining (apart from Edey, whose impact is TBD). As it stands, the Grizzlies appear to be a team capable of winning 45-50 games. There`s nothing inherently wrong with that, but their recent series against the 68-win behemoth vividly exposed the limitations of being merely a good, not great, team.
The Grizzlies organization clearly aims higher, as evidenced by the coaching change and pursuit of stars like Butler and Durant. Achieving those championship aspirations next season seems unlikely with the current core group intact.
Jasper Hawthorne