Utah Trade Deadline Discussion

[idiot]

This guy is a reporter who is quoting sources:
Ryan McDonald @ryanwmcdonald
about 44 minutes ago

Atlanta, Boston and Philadelphia are the teams that have multiple first-round picks both this year and next. All three have been mentioned as possible destinations for Rodney Hood. Seems like any of them are in position to be involved with a Nikola Mirotic deal

This guy is indeed a reporter. I have no reason to believe that he's someone with NBA sources, however. And even if he does have some, there's no indication that he's relying on them in this text. The more likely explanation is that, like you and me, he's read around on the Internet and tried to figure out possible landing spots for Hood with the idea that ideally he might bring a first in a trade.

 

[idiot]

I think the problem we have is a repeating pattern of:

Training camp: We'll move them at the deadline when they have value to a contender.
Deadline: We'll move them on draft night.
Draft night: We'll move them when FA opens up.
Training camp: We'll move them at the deadline when they're a valuable expiring.
Deadline: They'll be more valuable after we re-sign them and we can move them at the deadline.

You say this like it's a problem unique to the Jazz. It isn't. It's inherent in the nature of the NBA with its ever fluid markets involving a small number of total assets, each rather unique and unpredictable.

I'm not arguing that DL is the best in the league, but I'm quite confident that we have a good GM who generally makes appropriate moves at appropriate times.

 

[infection]

You say this like it's a problem unique to the Jazz. It isn't. It's inherent in the nature of the NBA with its ever fluid markets involving a small number of total assets, each rather unique and unpredictable.

I'm not arguing that DL is the best in the league, but I'm quite confident that we have a good GM who generally makes appropriate moves at appropriate times.

I don't think it's a phenomenon exclusive to us. What I'm pointing out is it's a very weak argument of rationalization when it comes up. Also, I'm on record saying I think DL is an elite GM and probably top three. He, like any of the reset of us humans, has blind-spots, biases, and faults. The fact that he's landed Gobert and Mitchell doesn't mean that he executes every move with precision and exactness. It's funny that we critique players on what they do, while we still like them, but somehow there's a huge appeal to authority with FOs (again not a Utah phenomenon) where we rationalize their moves through something akin to Papal infallibility.

 

[idiot]

I find it a little strange that we're beginning to get bent out of shape 8 days (and longer) before the trade deadline itself. We may end up being disappointed in the lack of moves, but that's something that is yet to be determined. We all should know by now that most NBA deadline trades are still to come, yeah?

 

[radiohegel]

I don't think it's a phenomenon exclusive to us. What I'm pointing out is it's a very weak argument of rationalization when it comes up. Also, I'm on record saying I think DL is an elite GM and probably top three. He, like any of the reset of us humans, has blind-spots, biases, and faults. The fact that he's landed Gobert and Mitchell doesn't mean that he executes every move with precision and exactness. It's funny that we critique players on what they do, while we still like them, but somehow there's a huge appeal to authority with FOs (again not a Utah phenomenon) where we rationalize their moves through something akin to Papal infallibility.

There is a very significant difference in evaluating players and front offices though. Excepting things like unknown nagging injuries, personal life issues, etc., we get to see everything about players' performances on the court. We can see how they play with others -- both with and against, see their shooting and playmaking abilities, etc. The data is there, and we can put together a pretty complete picture.

The situation couldn't be any different when it comes to evaluating front office moves. As much as we like to think we know (myself absolutely included), we really probably don't even have 10% of the information that is being worked with. No idea what trades are available, being discussed, etc.

So, I don't think there's any kind of "papal infallibility" being credited to the front office, but at a certain point we can't critique too hard, just because we simply don't know what there is to work with.

 

[gomretat]

I think the problem we have is a repeating pattern of:

Training camp: We'll move them at the deadline when they have value to a contender.
Deadline: We'll move them on draft night.
Draft night: We'll move them when FA opens up.
Training camp: We'll move them at the deadline when they're a valuable expiring.
Deadline: They'll be more valuable after we re-sign them and we can move them at the deadline.

So in the same quandary as virtually every other team.

 

[infection]

I find it a little strange that we're beginning to get bent out of shape 8 days (and longer) before the trade deadline itself. We may end up being disappointed in the lack of moves, but that's something that is yet to be determined. We all should know by now that most NBA deadline trades are still to come, yeah?

I wouldn't be heartbroken over no moves, but what would (and does) bother me is our fairly apathetic attitude toward landing a key piece on the market.

 

[infection]

So in the same quandary as virtually every other team.

Read my posts. It's the idea that people think that's a rational argument.

 

[idiot]

I don't think it's a phenomenon exclusive to us. What I'm pointing out is it's a very weak argument of rationalization when it comes up. Also, I'm on record saying I think DL is an elite GM and probably top three. He, like any of the reset of us humans, has blind-spots, biases, and faults. The fact that he's landed Gobert and Mitchell doesn't mean that he executes every move with precision and exactness. It's funny that we critique players on what they do, while we still like them, but somehow there's a huge appeal to authority with FOs (again not a Utah phenomenon) where we rationalize their moves through something akin to Papal infallibility.

Sure. And I don't have a problem with the kind of stuff you're promoting for Miritic: something that seems achievable and on which you (seem to) differ from DL's judgment. Time will tell in this case, because we fairly clearly seem to know what's on the table.

It's more the "we've got to move this guy or that guy" kind of argument I'm getting at -- the kind of things where we don't really know what's on the table or what the markets generally are.

Is it indeed better to move Favors if all we can get is a late 2nd, for example? Is it best to move Hood if the best offer is Richaun Holmes and a 2nd? We really don't know what the cost-benefit calculations are for moving particular players at this point (and unfortunately we may never know with any detail).

We can speculate all we want about the market, but to hold these speculations against DL, so early in the trade-deadline game seems somewhat silly.

 

[infection]

There is a very significant difference in evaluating players and front offices though. Excepting things like unknown nagging injuries, personal life issues, etc., we get to see everything about players' performances on the court. We can see how they play with others -- both with and against, see their shooting and playmaking abilities, etc. The data is there, and we can put together a pretty complete picture.

The situation couldn't be any different when it comes to evaluating front office moves. As much as we like to think we know (myself absolutely included), we really probably don't even have 10% of the information that is being worked with. No idea what trades are available, being discussed, etc.

So, I don't think there's any kind of "papal infallibility" being credited to the front office, but at a certain point we can't critique too hard, just because we simply don't know what there is to work with.

I think the appeal to authority as an explanation to anything that doesn't make sense is what gets me. People do this with physicians where their wisdom or training is elevated to be an answer when something doesn't make sense. "So you question the doctor who's been in school and training for 12 years?" I'd view GMing as similar to being a physician -- running a team requires a lot of decisions and managing many things that the superiority of the professional over the layman gets noticed with aggregate decisions. On individual decisions alone? It becomes more of a toss-up. You wouldn't want some arm-chair quarterback taking care of your mom in the hospital, but when it came down to a question like "should mom be on _____ medication" you may be surprised how often a lay person could stack up against someone with more training based on one isolated decision.

e.g. "should we trade for Rubio?"

 

[infection]

Sure. And I don't have a problem with the kind of stuff you're promoting for Miritic: something that seems achievable and on which you (seem to) differ from DL's judgment. Time will tell in this case, because we fairly clearly seem to know what's on the table.

It's more the "we've got to move this guy or that guy" kind of argument I'm getting at -- the kind of things where we don't really know what's on the table or what the markets generally are.

Is it indeed better to move Favors if all we can get is a late 2nd, for example? Is it best to move Hood if the best offer is Richaun Holmes and a 2nd? We really don't know what the cost-benefit calculations are for moving particular players at this point (and unfortunately we may never know with any detail).

We can speculate all we want about the market, but to hold these speculations against DL, so early in the trade-deadline game seems somewhat silly.

Yeah. I guess I'm with you on that. I'm not really expecting a move for Hood and I've expressed much skepticism about there being a move or what the market is, so I suppose we're seeing eye-to-eye here. With Mirotic being there for the taking, I think the fact that we haven't moved for him will be a huge blunder, especially if someone swoops in unexpectedly like a New Orleans. Yes we can rationalize that we were trying to play a tight hand of poker but if we let a bird in the hand get away because we thought we could squeeze a little more out of a deal, then I'd view the bird that got away as much greater than the potential savings of squeezing the deal.

 

[idiot]

This was probably brought up yesterday but I missed it. Is there any reason why the following trade doesn't work?

Pelicans get: Derrick Favors
Bulls get: Omer Asik and the Pelicans 1st
Jazz get: Nikola Mirotic

The Pelicans want a serviceable big to help keep them in the playoff hunt with Boogie out. But they don't want to be locked into the second year Mirotic has with his team option. So they get Favors instead.

The Bulls get the 1st round pick that they want for Mirotic.

The Jazz get the stretch 4 they want and are fine with the Bulls picking up his team option for next year before he's dealt.

Mirotic gets his contract picked up like he wants and he ends up in his preferred destination.

Seems like a win-win-win-win for all parties. The only thing I can think of is maybe NO doesn't want Favs for whatever reason?

Only thing I've heard beside the "don't want Favors" and "don't help a rival" possibilities (which I don't take too strongly, but don't totally discount either), is that NO may be trying to leverage more out of the deal before accepting Mirotic's second year -- specifically unloading Ajinca's salary as well. ... But who knows?

I've also seen some sentiment (not specifically on this proposal but in general), that a straight up Favors-Mirotic swap is too favorable for the Jazz (Favors being an expiring and all) and so the Jazz need to be prepared to put a little more skin in the game.