What's new
By:

Following Potential 2025 Draftees

Saint Cy of JFC said:
I'd rather keep Lauri and draft in the 5-10 range than a top 4 with no Lauri
Click to expand...
And Cleveland or Minny (not likely) could tank... there's a small chance you could have both next year. It is not the way to maximize a shot at the top of the draft but it is still a possibility.
 
whatthe said:
And Cleveland or Minny (not likely) could tank... there's a small chance you could have both next year. It is not the way to maximize a shot at the top of the draft but it is still a possibility.
Click to expand...
Zero chance they tank. Small chance Cleveland ends up backend of the lotto if Don leaves and they have some injuries. Minny would have to have an Ant injury. I think our best picks the next two years are our own… 2027 hopefully that changes.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
Gotcha… I didn’t process/read the first post very well. My bad.

Yeah I just feel like the next two drafts have enough HIGH level HIM types mixed with good upside prospects at the top and so it’s a profitable window that should be more reliable. The other issue is the pick we owe. If we trade say two picks to put some help with Lauri then we are absolutely losing one of our picks the next two years… and likely pushing the other into a much less profitable draft range. If Lauri is cool staying on while we figure thing out then awesome… I just wouldn’t be trying to force the accelerator with a trade for Ingram, Young, Bridges or whoever right now.

I do think if we went scorched earth it’s likely a long term project BUT we already have stuff in the pipeline that could make year 3 and 4 bigger jumps. We’ve seen Orlando and OKC do this with some unexpected jumps up.

The other issue is the west is just so ripe for the next year or two. You could trade some capital for a “star” and go from 7th-8th worst to borderline play in team and is that anymore satisfying? Maybe but I think if you tried to build and said “Lauri we love you and want you to be here long term… we also are going to build this organically until we have an amazing opportunity or some other event pushes us to do so… you in?” He might be in and I think you could end up with high picks that could pop around Lauri’s timeline. It will put you in the 6-8 pick range which is fine with a little luck maybe you jump up… but the threat of that OKC pick would still hang over us and we’d be tempted to pull the plug again. That mid tank cycle seems to be the biggest source of fan and player frustration.

Unless the big trade is an absolute home run I am out in it. I would rather a mid tank with Lauri or a full tank in some other way. It’s just tough watching the playoffs right now and thinking “if we get Brandon Ingram we can compete with these guys”.
Click to expand...
I guess probably the difference is you really only want to build a contender. I don't really care. I'm happy with a consistent 5th seed or so and maybe we get lucky one year. It's all a lot of luck anyways for a small market. Even 4 more years of tanking or being at the bottom and I'll probably watch very few of those games. I'm sure I'll start watching again but I have no interest in watching a team trying to lose for multiple years and then sucking for multiple years.

Even supposedly high drafts aren't always that great and there are plenty of misses at the top. It's a long road to go for a multi year tank and the only decent example of it paying off in a meaningful way is 76ers and that's pretty meh.
 
Ron Mexico said:
I guess probably the difference is you really only want to build a contender. I don't really care. I'm happy with a consistent 5th seed or so and maybe we get lucky one year. It's all a lot of luck anyways for a small market. Even 4 more years of tanking or being at the bottom and I'll probably watch very few of those games. I'm sure I'll start watching again but I have no interest in watching a team trying to lose for multiple years and then sucking for multiple years.

Even supposedly high drafts aren't always that great and there are plenty of misses at the top. It's a long road to go for a multi year tank and the only decent example of it paying off in a meaningful way is 76ers and that's pretty meh.
Click to expand...
Yeah I definitely want a team that's a contender. Understand if folks aren't all in on that. I just think the bar to get to that 5th seed the next year or two is REALLY high. Aiming for that spot and hitting the play in has some long term consequences.

Lots of teams have tanked, bottomed out, or just plain been bad and drafted high for a few years and it worked well. OKC Minnesota Philly Cleveland Orlando... SA back in the day too. Lots of teams have had mid results too... some teams have sucked in perpetuity and can't seem to figure it out even though they have drafted high.

I just think if management's goal was to have a perennial 5th seed.... well they should have kept Don and Rudy together as that will likely be better than whatever they manufacture with Lauri and star trade X.
 
I still need to wrap my head around the new lottery odds. When we talk about bottoming out, I probably still have some lingering emotional reactions from the older odds. It was such a dramatic change, but if that's been fully processed. Before the changes, I think bottoming was really important for getting #1. Nowadays, the incentives for bottoming out is different. It's more about your floor vs your ceiling....but even then, the EV draft position is very tightly packed.

For example, the difference between #5 and #1 in the lottery is about 9% to draft in the top 3 and 3.5% to draft in the top spot. Don't get me wrong, you still want those extra percentage points, but it's a MUCH smaller gap than before. That would have been 35% and 16.2% previously. The incentive to be at the very bottom has really diminished.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
Yeah I definitely want a team that's a contender. Understand if folks aren't all in on that. I just think the bar to get to that 5th seed the next year or two is REALLY high. Aiming for that spot and hitting the play in has some long term consequences.

Lots of teams have tanked, bottomed out, or just plain been bad and drafted high for a few years and it worked well. OKC Minnesota Philly Cleveland Orlando... SA back in the day too. Lots of teams have had mid results too... some teams have sucked in perpetuity and can't seem to figure it out even though they have drafted high.

I just think if management's goal was to have a perennial 5th seed.... well they should have kept Don and Rudy together as that will likely be better than whatever they manufacture with Lauri and star trade X.
Click to expand...
I don't need to be 5th next year, just build towards that sooner than later. OKC is good because they traded for a mvp level guy. Minny did bottom and draft a guy who looks to be amazing for a long time. Cleveland bottomed out and built an okay team then traded for the guy leading them, we'll see what happens when he leaves. Orlando isn't a contender or that close but it's a fun team. SA is simply the luckiest team ever. The process was rough for fans and doubtful to work out in Philly.

5th seed type teams can improve and get better with smart FO drafting well, making good fringe trades, and FA signings. I just think it's a better path than sucking for 5 years or more. I don't think the FO has any intention of going that way after 2 years of sucking I can't imagine they trade away their best guys and try to bottom out for 2 years then slowly rise up. That's already 4 years sucking and there is no way they go from the worst to a contender in 1 or 2 seasons. 6+ years of being bottom 8.

And both of us are already die hard fans. Imagine the average fan. You'll lose so much interest in the team. If the Jazz had sucked when I was a kid for that long there is no way I would have become a fan.
 
Ron Mexico said:
I don't need to be 5th next year, just build towards that sooner than later. OKC is good because they traded for a mvp level guy. Minny did bottom and draft a guy who looks to be amazing for a long time. Cleveland bottomed out and built an okay team then traded for the guy leading them, we'll see what happens when he leaves. Orlando isn't a contender or that close but it's a fun team. SA is simply the luckiest team ever. The process was rough for fans and doubtful to work out in Philly.

5th seed type teams can improve and get better with smart FO drafting well, making good fringe trades, and FA signings. I just think it's a better path than sucking for 5 years or more. I don't think the FO has any intention of going that way after 2 years of sucking I can't imagine they trade away their best guys and try to bottom out for 2 years then slowly rise up. That's already 4 years sucking and there is no way they go from the worst to a contender in 1 or 2 seasons. 6+ years of being bottom 8.

And both of us are already die hard fans. Imagine the average fan. You'll lose so much interest in the team. If the Jazz had sucked when I was a kid for that long there is no way I would have become a fan.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t make decisions based on the last two years. Those are sunk costs. Being mid for two years before being good isn’t much more appealing than being bad for a couple years and having a chance to be special in 4-5 years. By year 2-3 you should be mid at least.


Also i live in a small market that had the longest playoff drought in the nba. They survived and have plenty of good young fans.

I’m cool with whatever they decide to do. But if they wanted to be a solid playoff team that might hit it rich on a late first rounder someday… the better way to do that was to keep one of Rudy or Don. So I’m not sure why it seems the spoken FO goal is to parlay the picks for a star so we can be a play in team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top