What's new

Trade Rumors Involving the Jazz

No one in their right mind wants a long rebuild. The goal is to win games, not accumulate assets. Trading Lauri is ridiculous unless you are getting great proven talent and that isnt going to happen. If it takes more than one or two years to be legit you have to question the logic in trading two all stars instead of trading just one of them. WIN games and get to the playoffs!
Think the new CBA makes long rebuilds less team friendly as well.
 
How are you arguing this. Yes, we traded our to top players in favor of a rebuild. We luck into an all nba caliber player and what? We going to trade him and start over AGAIN!! One year later?? We’d be the laughingstock of the NBA. Star players don’t exactly grow on trees. We were gifted a franchise player to jump start our rebuild and have assets to add a star or several really good players to add to Markkanen and Kessler. There is zero reason to talk trading Lauri unless a Booker, or Giannis is involved.
The NBA media would cover it for 15 minutes until Lebron or Wemby did something. It wouldn't be a thing.

I know the whole "get your players on one timeline thing" hasn't been super fruitful... but its partly a planning thing. We can overpay for a second star or draft a second star. If we don't hit this draft... well it will be Lauri Walker and stuff. Then Lauri's salary goes to $50M and a good chunk of our financial flexibility goes out the window.

The whole idea is #3 and Simmons for Lauri is close to a fair deal... if they find OG, Mikal, etc. aren't available and get desperate and throw in two future picks on top... I get that we have a lot of draft picks already... but a full reset might be the way to go. They should not and likely do not offer that.
 
No, that’s not what the argument was. I was a ****ing idiot for even suggesting we should trade him. He was getting traded regardless of the package.
Pre-mavs series I was saying we should consider a blow it the hell up trade. You don't want to just trade Rudy and be at Don's mercy. Lauri the convo is different because I think he'd stay for 7-10 years.

I think the tipping point is Scoot, Simons, and a future unprotected pick - if they go over you have to say yes. If that is the offer you have to consider it but could rationalize passing on the deal. They should not offer what it would take... but Minny/Cleveland shouldn't have either.
 
No one in their right mind wants a long rebuild. The goal is to win games, not accumulate assets. Trading Lauri is ridiculous unless you are getting great proven talent and that isnt going to happen. If it takes more than one or two years to be legit you have to question the logic in trading two all stars instead of trading just one of them. WIN games and get to the playoffs!
I agree... but pre-trade we were willing to be in a rebuild. Lauri and Walker caught everyone by surprise.

Its not about collecting assets but adding to the value of the potential to win the most games long term. If someone offers 120% of FMV for our star... we should pass... if they offer 150% or 200% you take the deal.
 
I think it encourages teams to build around players if they are good sooner. Sitting back and "letting it bake" just leads to your roster getting too expensive and not retainable.
I think it may very well do the opposite. You will only want to pay bona fide stars the max... you will want to churn a bit until you feel like you have those stars in the chamber. It will encourage some teams to flip guys... like OKC may flip Giddey or Williams before they get a super big deal... but there will be plenty of suitors for guys headed into the last year of their rookie deal.

You will need to find your stars and churn around them.
 
Think the new CBA makes long rebuilds less team friendly as well.
The new CBA also likely shortens the windows of contention... especially for teams without top 5-10ish talent.

This is part of the reason I think exploring trading Lauri is not as insane as some seem to think. This new CBA even more than previous CBAs incentivizes and rewards teams that have the best possible 1-2 punch. So the question we should be asking ourselves is - is Lauri that guy? Is he a 1 or a 2 on a championship contender? Honestly ... I don't know. Maybe he is? Or maybe he isn't... And I don't think the answer is as clear as some suggest... How certain are we that this is the new Lauri? How certain are we he won't regress to ... somewhere between his previous seasons and last season? How certain are we that when we actually are fighting for something and when the lights are brightest he will still shine?

Again... I am not saying we definitely should do it, but I also don't think it should be off the table completely. Now... of course, if we can get whoever we are targeting at 3-5 without trading him - of course, then it's a moot point, just spare the extra draft capital if you love that specific prospect that much and if you think he can be THE guy.
 
Back
Top