Trade up? What are you willing to give up?

[Handlogten's Heros]

You are suggesting trading 6-7 firsts for Scoot?

I would not quite go that far... but I think that is something we should consider with our treasure trove of firsts. If you can do #9 and like 3 unprotected firsts they can route those firsts to a team in a win now deal during FA... or at least convince Dame that is the plan. They can also split the baby.

I would feel better about sending 3-4 firsts to land an All-NBA prospect than I would sending 6-7 firsts plus extra stuff for an all-star that starts our championship window prematurely. Say its #9, Lakers pick, Cavs 2025, Minny 2027 for #3... they can convince themselves that they can flip the picks for some players and draft a prospect they like at #9 still.

The problem is we have so many picks they might keep saying "one more" not that DA plays those games but I can see a team moving the line a lot.

 

[Thee Jazz Fan]

I think so. I wouldnt use a lot of assets though. Just 16 and 9 or something like that.

Imo that’s too expensive to move I’m guessing two spots. We can still get a good building block with 16

How about trading for Portland's 3rd pick and taking Scoot Henderson with that 3rd pick. Just make 3 teams trade with Philadelphia and Portland? Philadephia is getting old and is in the situation, which they might have just to start over again, especially if Harden leaves or Embiid says that he wants to be traded. So what i am suggesting is that Philadelphia sends Embiid to Portland and Portland sends Scoot to Utah. And Utah sends something like 9, 16, 28 2023 draft picks and maybe Lakers first round pick and something like 3-4 more first rounders to Philadelphia and then just put needed fillers to make the salaries to match (can be done, tested it at ESPN nba trade machine). Idea is also not trading any of our future core players (Lauri, Kessler, Ochie) on this process. Then go after for some forward in free agent market or make some other trade to get one or just keep this draft's 9 pick and draft one (like hendricks, dick, whitmore?)? Any thoughs?

Basically yes. I think that it what it they want in minimum if we dont send lauri or walker in the process. Its just that that 28 pick is not very valuable. And Utah have what 13 first round picks in next 5 years? And i like the kid (Scoot) already.

Holy shnizzballs Batman!!! I’m not trading 6-7 picks for the rights to draft a rookie that may or may not be really good draft picks at any spot is a crapshoot. Just think how this trade would set us back if he turns out to not be a superstar. Not only do you limit your ability to get better you now can’t buy a star unless a star free agent chooses Utah. When has that ever happened?

 

[NUMBERICA]

I am not sure I trade 7 unprotected picks for ****ing Luka.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

So to directly answer the question...

If it is 9 plus one future first round pick to move to 6 and select Cam/Amen I would do it.

If it is 9 plus 3 future firsts to move to #3 I would probably do that too. Would be worth it for Scoot or Miller. Its a big bet but I think its the type of bet we should make now... so in 2 years we can make the follow up move.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I am not sure I trade 7 unprotected picks for ****ing Luka.

6-7 is excessive, but I like the thought of making the superstar trade before the guy is a superstar as there is a little more upside to offset the risk. I think 9+3 picks is the line I wouldn't cross probably... and you'd have to feel pretty good about Scoot or Miller... I do.

 

[JazzFanns]

Imo that’s too expensive to move I’m guessing two spots. We can still get a good building block with 16



Holy shnizzballs Batman!!! I’m not trading 6-7 picks for the rights to draft a rookie that may or may not be really good draft picks at any spot is a crapshoot. Just think how this trade would set us back if he turns out to not be a superstar. Not only do you limit your ability to get better you now can’t buy a star unless a star free agent chooses Utah. When has that ever happened?

Thanks. I like batman Anyway "experts" say that Scoot would be close 1 pick in another draft and he would also be in the rookie deal in few years. So Utah would have plenty of caproom to make more moves. Also you just dont collect picks, you try to make a winning team. It just depends what you think about Scoot. I think that he has a good potential to be very good player, maybe even all-star in the future. It just that you seldom have chance to get up in draft to get such a potential player. And it is possible to change the deal a bit, because now its very favorable to Portland i think (they get Embiid). If Portland sends on that 3 team deal Nurtic and A.Simons to Philadelphia, then maybe its enough to send 9, 16, 28 2023 draft picks and lakers first and something like 2 firsts to Philadelphia and philadelphia sends embiid to Portland and portland Scoot for Utah. I know it still is somewhere 5 firsts for Scoot, but one is just late first rounder (28?). I think that would be a good deal to Portland and for Utah. Not sure what philadelphia would think about it though (they have to give up Embiid) and start over.

 

[Elizah Huge]

I would not quite go that far... but I think that is something we should consider with our treasure trove of firsts. If you can do #9 and like 3 unprotected firsts they can route those firsts to a team in a win now deal during FA... or at least convince Dame that is the plan. They can also split the baby.

I would feel better about sending 3-4 firsts to land an All-NBA prospect than I would sending 6-7 firsts plus extra stuff for an all-star that starts our championship window prematurely. Say its #9, Lakers pick, Cavs 2025, Minny 2027 for #3... they can convince themselves that they can flip the picks for some players and draft a prospect they like at #9 still.

The problem is we have so many picks they might keep saying "one more" not that DA plays those games but I can see a team moving the line a lot.

3-4 is a lot different than 6-7.

 

[stitches]

I would not quite go that far... but I think that is something we should consider with our treasure trove of firsts. If you can do #9 and like 3 unprotected firsts they can route those firsts to a team in a win now deal during FA... or at least convince Dame that is the plan. They can also split the baby.

I would feel better about sending 3-4 firsts to land an All-NBA prospect than I would sending 6-7 firsts plus extra stuff for an all-star that starts our championship window prematurely. Say its #9, Lakers pick, Cavs 2025, Minny 2027 for #3... they can convince themselves that they can flip the picks for some players and draft a prospect they like at #9 still.

The problem is we have so many picks they might keep saying "one more" not that DA plays those games but I can see a team moving the line a lot.

First of all... as I have said already, I have not watched enough of these players to have this strong of opinion on any of them, but IF Danny feels strongly about any of them, I think we should seriously consider packaging some of our picks to move up to get him(whoever it is - Scoot, Miller, Whitmore, Amen?). Right now we are in the beginning of our rebuild, but relatively soon we will start having trouble rostering all those draft picks and we will start losing some of them for nothing or close to nothing. This happened with some of the recent picks Ainge had in Boston because they had too many 1st rounders they were unable to package and consolidate into one or two bigger/better pieces.

And of course yes - the alternative is - packaging those same picks for a star or two... The thing is... we have so many picks right now, we can afford to package half of them for a player we really love and still have plenty enough to go after pretty much any superstar in the league if such opportunity arises.

 

[SoberasHotRod]

So to directly answer the question...

If it is 9 plus one future first round pick to move to 6 and select Cam/Amen I would do it.

If it is 9 plus 3 future firsts to move to #3 I would probably do that too. Would be worth it for Scoot or Miller. Its a big bet but I think its the type of bet we should make now... so in 2 years we can make the follow up move.

Yeah, I agree. We have plenty of picks to make a big bet like this. Whether or not a team is willing to deal, that's the bigger questions.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

3-4 is a lot different than 6-7.

For sure.. its almost like 2x as much lol. Which is why I said I would draw the line there.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Yeah, I agree. We have plenty of picks to make a big bet like this. Whether or not a team is willing to deal, that's the bigger questions.

I think its the right time for a bet like this too... as a player can be ready in a year or two to really help. Then you make the follow up move. I also think you are at the mercy of which stars become available and am not sold on that model. This is a riskier route but I think the payoff could be enormous and it might be a more efficient use of picks.

Also, they may not bite unless they have a couple follow up moves lined up.

 

[KqWIN]

Take these things with a grain of salt, but here are some models that attempt to assess trade value: http://nbasense.com/draft-pick-trade-value/4/jacob-goldstein-4

There are 4 versions of the model, here is what it would take to get #6 according to these charts:

Goldstein 2017: 6 for 9 + 42
Pelton 2017: 6 for 9 + 34
Pelton 2015: 6 for 9 + 50
Restifo 2016: 6 for 9 + 30

These are EV centric calculations, so not a true trade value.....but yeah I think they underestimate the cost from moving up to 6.....but it is a warning shot to show that the difference in outcome between 6 and 9 is not as big as you may think.

Some relevant recent draft day trades:

2020: Jarrett Culver (#6) FOR Cam Johnson (#11) + Dario Saric
2019: Deandre Hunter (#4) + Jordan Bone ($57) + Solomon Hill FOR Jaxson Hayes (#8) + NAW (#17) + two future second round picks
2018: Luka Doncic (#3) FOR Trae Young (#5) + future top 5 protected first round pick


Honestly, I think #6 for #9+#28+stuff (some seconds?) would not be out of the ordinary. It will depend on how much ORL wants who they can get at #6 versus #9.

To get to #4, it would probably take #9+#16+future first (not sure #28 is good enough).