Lakers-Jazz Trade

[outerspacefan]

My best guess would be DA's not dealing Bogey, Beasley and another usable player for RW and swaps.
What's clear to me is that no friggin' one is safe in Jazzland. Danny boy would trade the Smith family along with the Tabernacle organ without even the blink of an eye.

 

[homeytennis]

I think there are quite a few reasons, but I think a more apt thing to question would be reasons why we would want him to stay.

Perhaps he returns to the 20 ppg form he showed a couple of seasons ago.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Why does everyone want to see Beasley go?

For picks cuz that's what this season is all about. Where you been?

 

[NUMBERICA]

So the reason the Lakers pick in '26 is swappable but not simply tradable is because the Pelicans can choose to receive the Lakers '24 or '25 pick, which is why the '27 pick is the next pick they can cleanly trade and why '26 is swappable.

What I'm getting at is that I think the Jazz and Lakers could theoretically hammer out a stipulation where if NOP takes the Lakers' '24 pick, then the Jazz automatically get the Lakers' '26 pick. They could probably design this so the Jazz either get something like
-'26 unprotected, '27 swap, and '29 swap (if the Pelicans take the '24 pick), or
-'26 blind super-swap, '27 super swap, '29 super swap, and 2nds (if the Pelicans take the '25 pick)

In either case, the Lakers preserve their '28 pick outright and their '30 would become available for trade at the end of the season.

I'm also curious if there's anything to the idea of a Jazz/Lakers/Nets trade to shortcut this silly rigamarole that everyone's doing to getting Kyrie to LA one year later than anyone actually wants (but maybe the Nets are understandably gun-shy right now about ****ing with the Kyrie/KD sitch). Westbrook and Laker draft stuff to Jazz; Conley, other good players (from Jazz), and draft stuff to Nets; Kyrie (and some Jazz players) to Lakers.

 

[The Fresh Prince]

For picks cuz that's what this season is all about. Where you been?

He's young though. If you're expecting us to completely gut the roster to nothing that's probably not going to happen. Clarkson, Conley, Bogey could get moved, and if you move those guys we aren't going to have that good of a year so the plan is still in place.

 

[NUMBERICA]

He's young though. If you're expecting us to completely gut the roster to nothing that's probably not going to happen. Clarkson, Conley, Bogey could get moved, and if you move those guys we aren't going to have that good of a year so the plan is still in place.

Okay but if Beasley is an integral piece in getting premier Lakers stuff then it's an absolute no-brainer that he goes. The structure of his contract is critical if it is critical that the Lakers be able to get off money to go shopping in '23 (which appears by all indications to be the case).

I'm of the viewpoint that I basically only want Sexton and Markannen on non-rookie scale or dead salary deals, though. I concede that unless it's in this package or another highly attractive one, he could be a useful longterm piece.

 

[Isaiah 1:13]

He's young though. If you're expecting us to completely gut the roster to nothing that's probably not going to happen. Clarkson, Conley, Bogey could get moved, and if you move those guys we aren't going to have that good of a year so the plan is still in place.

MSN

www.msn.com

“While no deal is imminent, ESPN’s Zach Lowe said recently on his podcast, The Lowe Post, that the Jazz believe each of their veteran talents are worth at least one first-round pick.”

Or we could just do the Lakers a proper and give ‘em three solid vets for one first, a 46 million dollar albatross and some trinkets.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

MSN

www.msn.com

“While no deal is imminent, ESPN’s Zach Lowe said recently on his podcast, The Lowe Post, that the Jazz believe each of their veteran talents are worth at least one first-round pick.”

Or we could just do the Lakers a proper and give ‘em three solid vets for one first, a 46 million dollar albatross and some trinkets.

Lakers future first is more value than a lotto protected first from a good team

 

[Isaiah 1:13]

Lakers future first is more value than a lotto protected first from a good team

Yeah but it's not nearly enough combined compensation for our three best vets! Jeesh, JC is 30 and Beasley is 25, these guys could still be very productive when we hit our window. (The 2006-2007 Ainge Celtics tanked for one year and won a championship the next because they still had vets like Big Al, Ratliff and Delonte West to trade in the offseason for Garnett. (Paul Pierce was also on that roster and was 30 years old at the time of the trade for Garnett.)

This deal would have to involve both picks and multiple pick swaps to make it moderately appealing as far as I'm concerned because the only assets we'd be acquiring are draft assets and we're going to need both down the line if we're to acquire an All Star level talent.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Yeah but it's not nearly enough combined compensation for our three best vets! Jeesh, JC is 30 and Beasley is 25, these guys could still be very productive when we hit our window. (The 2006-2007 Ainge Celtics tanked for one year and won a championship the next because they still had vets like Big Al, Ratliff and Delonte West to trade in the offseason for Garnett. (Paul Pierce was also on that roster and was 30 years old at the time of the trade for Garnett.)

This deal would have to involve both picks and multiple pick swaps to make it moderately appealing as far as I'm concerned because the only assets we'd be acquiring are draft assets and we're going to need both down the line if we're to acquire an All Star level talent.

I think it is tbh

 

[stitches]

I think it is tbh

People massively underestimate the downside of this Lakers team and their future picks. Unprotected picks from them anywhere past next 2 years are gold.

Also, I think people underestimate swaps. I would much rather have an unprotected swap far in the future than a heavily protected pick from a good team. And IMO Ainge apportions similar value to unprotected picks and swaps. He is looking for high upside with his picks. That's why the CLE swaps + 3 unprotected far in the future were enough to beat the 5 picks, 2 unprotected from the KNicks type of deals. Yes there is downside to the swap - namely - it might not convey, but in case of disaster scenarios to ANY of those teams in ANY of those years, this is a much more valuable asset than say DAL 23 lottery protected pick or DET or WAS heavily protected picks.

That's why I kind of actually like the idea of @NUMBERICA about unprotected swaps if they don't want to straight up give us the second unprotected pick. Unprotected swap from the lakers in 26 and unprotected in 27 should be enough IMO for us to do that deal.

 

[Isaiah 1:13]

I think it is tbh

It’s hard for me to comprehend forumite’s sympathies for the plight of the purple and gold tbh. Constructing Death Star line-ups comprised of Jazz guys I’ve rooted for goes against everything I stand for. I hope they choke hard on their own arrogance honestly.

And this pipe dream of bringing Westbrick to town because he’s a future HOFer and will somehow make us a better free agent destination is equally misguided. As I’ve said before this is his last go-round, he knows it and he’s not being bought out. So how many more fans is he going to bait into having them perm-banned before he’s done with us. He’s toxic and probably the impetus for Gail to decide to pack it in. If you didn’t notice, he doesn’t play well with others. He’ll infect our young and put us in a tailspin. And still the apparent adulation and hope among some here that he’ll finish his career in Jazz colors (pukes).