Culture of winning or tank?

[Ron Mexico]

No… because you can trade for guys on Lauri’s level but guys on SGAs level are almost never available lol. That’s the whole point. You have to get that guy. Lauri is a one time all star. It’s a totally different conversation.

And again you are way underselling Williams and Chet to a degree that I think either aren’t paying attention or you are being disingenuous.

Look all this keep Lauri and draft in the 6-9 range stuff is real cute. You only get to try to walk two paths for so long. If we make no changes and are relatively healthy we will be right on that line again. Go ahead and see how everyone reacts when we manage the tank again or lose in the first round of the play in (best case scenario) see how happy Lauri is to be a team player. Would be great to have our cake and eat it too but also pretty fine line to walk.

Above average starters are what they are. They are not all-stars. They might become that but right now they are not.

But I guess we agree on what a big deal having SGA is, which is the point I have made all along so ill move on. Having that guy is huge and they got lucky getting him in a trade not the draft.

Your argument against me isnt what I have made at all. But the above is the most important so Ill gloss over the rest of this "cute" stuff and call it good.

 

[Ron Mexico]

He made a list. Go look at the post

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

Things have changed so much in the NBA and in the Draft. Evaluating talent is so much harder and guys are becoming MVP level players from all over the draft. This year is a 2nd round draft pick winning but following him you have guys like SGA that no one expected out of college or even after his first year in the NBA at #2 and Brunson at #5 on the MVP vote list who was also a 2nd round pick.

Look at how many guys after Lebron were highly rated at #1 that turned into not much. Zion, Wiggins, KAT, Oden, and Simmons were supposed to be sure things and very hyped up. Thats not to mention the other 1st picks like Ayton, Fultz, Bennett, and Bargnani that didnt have much hype but were complete busts at #1.

 

[stitches]

Ok, let's look at this the other way then. In the past 30 years, the average spot where the NBA MVP was picked has been 9. Last decade, it's trended lower and it's 17. Of course, Jokić repeating skews that, but a number one pick hasn't won the MVP in more than a decade. Nor has anyone picked 2nd.

The problem with that type of stat keeping is that even a few outliers skew the stats a ton. You need four no.1 pick MVPs just to get 1 of the Jokic ones to the average of 9. Or... you need 12 to "compensate" for the 3 Jokic ones. What is easier in your opinion? To get an MVP at the top of the draft or one in the second round? BTW note that one doesn't prohibit you from doing the other since you are supposed to have second round picks too. If you actually take the median... the median over the last 45 years is #3!!! This means half the MVPs have been won by players taken at 3 or above. 33 of the last 45 MVPs have been taken 6 or above.

And if you want to make it unique players - 25 players have won MVPs over the last 45 years. The median is again #3. Half of the players who have won an MVP since 1980 have been drafted in the top 3.

I don't really know why there is a conversation about where you want to be drafting if you want to maximize your chance at taking an MVP... sure there will be outliers and sure you can always try to get an MVP in the second round or in the teens. But the odds are just A LOT better at the top of the draft.

You wanna expand this a bit? Let's take top 5 MVP vote getters in the past 5 years. The average is 14. Of course, there are a lot of players repeating. It's only been 13 unique players getting top 5 votes the past 5 years. The average is 12 if you just take each of the 11 players once.

Same conversation as above. Do you want me to go over the stats over a prolonged period of time and see the results? I don't know why it's even a conversation - do you really think it doesn't matter where you draft for your chance to draft an MVP level talent?

Of those 13 players, only 6 were drafted with the team's own pick of the team they were on when they got the votes. The other 7 were either obtained in trades or drafted with a pick obtained in trades. In other words, those picks had nothing to do with the records of those teams the year before. You know the average of the players drafted with their team's own picks and still on the team when they were getting these MVP votes? Twenty! Brunson and Jokić were both second round picks, Giannis went 15th, Booker went 13th, and Curry was 7th. The only one picked in top 5 of those six was Embiid at #3.

This I agree with and this is one of the benefits of tanking BTW - when you trade most your current value(vets that won't be part of the next contending Jazz team) and turn it into future value(picks) you get the benefit of getting other teams picks and you get the benefit of having more shots at the target, the benefit of having more ammunition to be able to maneuver around the draft board for the players you really want.

I mean, I'd love to tell you that teams get MVP level players by tanking and finishing bottom 5 in the league, but it doesn't look like it.

I just fundamentally disagree. Getting an MVP level player is NOT easy. Drafting at the top does NOT guarantee you get one. But the chances when drafting at the top are just much MUCH better. Otherwise you wouldn't have to trade huge hauls if you wanted to trade into the top of the draft and teams wouldn't care much where they draft. This is just demonstrably false.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

The problem with that type of stat keeping is that even a few outliers skew the stats a ton. You need four no.1 pick MVPs just to get 1 of the Jokic ones to the average of 9. Or... you need 12 to "compensate" for the 3 Jokic ones. What is easier in your opinion? To get an MVP at the top of the draft or one in the second round? BTW note that one doesn't prohibit you from doing the other since you are supposed to have second round picks too. If you actually take the median... the median over the last 40 years is #3!!! This means half the MVPs have been won by players taken at 3 or above. 33 of the last 45 MVPs have been taken 6 or above.

And if you want to make it unique players - 25 players have won MVPs over the last 45 years. The median is again #3. Half of the players who have won an MVP since 1980 have been drafted in the top 3.

I don't really know why there is a conversation about where you want to be drafting if you want to maximize your chance at taking an MVP... sure there will be outliers and sure you can always try to get an MVP in the second round or in the teens. But the odds are just A LOT better at the top of the draft.


Same conversation as above. Do you want me to go over the stats over a prolonged period of time and see the results? I don't know why it's even a conversation - do you really think it doesn't matter where you draft for your chance to draft an MVP level talent?

This I agree with and this is one of the benefits of tanking BTW - when you trade most your current value(vets that won't be part of the next contending Jazz team) and turn it into future value(picks) you get the benefit of getting other teams picks and you get the benefit of having more shots at the target, the benefit of having more ammunition to be able to maneuver around the draft board for the players you really want.

I just fundamentally disagree. Getting an MVP level player is NOT easy. Drafting at the top does NOT guarantee you get one. But the chances when drafting at the top are just much MUCH better. Otherwise you wouldn't have to trade huge hauls if you wanted to trade into the top of the draft and teams wouldn't care much where they draft. This is just demonstrably false.

Your top 7ish picks likely almost all come from your own poor record as teams don’t trade those picks. So if you own other teams picks you likely get some in the 10-14 range and some in the 20s. Chase all star talent in both ways… but you likely only get those top 7ish picks one way.

We might catch some fish with one pole in a pond that is somewhat stocked… or we can fish in a pond with twice as many fish and can use a couple poles. I get that the fish still have to bite and there are no guarantees.

And I’m cool trading Lauri and drafting top 5 or keeping Lauri and being 7 or 8ish… but is he really way more satisfied and happy with that? I think at max you have one more year where you can duck around like that with Lauri on the roster. Better hit all the home runs that year. There is also the chance you land 11-14 and look around and your fortunes haven’t changed at all and watch a tremendous draft slip through your hands with only the Cavs and wolves picks to show for it.

Again… if we wanted the type of team some of y’all want to build we had a better version of that already and voluntarily blew that **** up. If you did that with thoughts of winning a title then don’t get squeamish at the thought of a multi year drop in the standings.

 

[Ron Mexico]

I don't by any means think we voluntarily blew the last team up. Mitchell was leaving. That forced our hand.

We probably traded him a season early but the FO knew we would get more for him sooner than later.

If Mitchell and Gobert got along and wanted to be here you should have kept them and adjusted the roster. We could have made plenty of moves around them with what we had. I would have enjoyed that team. But they didn't get along and Mitchell wanted out.

I'm also not sure but I get the feeling Gobert also said me or him to the FO.

 

[stitches]

Your top 7ish picks likely almost all come from your own poor record as teams don’t trade those picks. So if you own other teams picks you likely get some in the 10-14 range and some in the 20s. Chase all star talent in both ways… but you likely only get those top 7ish picks one way.

We might catch some fish with one pole in a pond that is somewhat stocked… or we can fish in a pond with twice as many fish and can use a couple poles. I get that the fish still have to bite and there are no guarantees.

And I’m cool trading Lauri and drafting top 5 or keeping Lauri and being 7 or 8ish… but is he really way more satisfied and happy with that? I think at max you have one more year where you can duck around like that with Lauri on the roster. Better hit all the home runs that year. There is also the chance you land 11-14 and look around and your fortunes haven’t changed at all and watch a tremendous draft slip through your hands with only the Cavs and wolves picks to show for it.

Again… if we wanted the type of team some of y’all want to build we had a better version of that already and voluntarily blew that **** up. If you did that with thoughts of winning a title then don’t get squeamish at the thought of a multi year drop in the standings.

Yep. I don't mind people wanting us to field a good roster and not bottoming out. I don't mind us just trying to be a good team that is in the playoffs/playin every year. I just don't want us to fool ourselves about what exactly it is that we are doing. You can be a playoff/playin team by just... trying to be. Hell we were in that picture half way through this season with severely limited roster and a ton of youth. We were in that picture the previous year.... and ever since Rudy got into the starting lineup really. We can be 2016-2022 Jazz... we can be Memphis or Pacers of the 2010s... Just ... don't fool yourself that you are more than that. Or that there is some big chance that you are going to strike an MVP in the 20s or in the second round.

No shame in fielding good teams, filling the arena and giving your fans a good product to get behind. Just... don't fool yourself that you are maximizing your chances at a title this way.

 

[fishonjazz]

Yep. I don't mind people wanting us to field a good roster and not bottoming out. I don't mind us just trying to be a good team that is in the playoffs/playin every year. I just don't want us to fool ourselves about what exactly it is that we are doing. You can be a playoff/playin team by just... trying to be. Hell we were in that picture half way through this season with severely limited roster and a ton of youth. We were in that picture the previous year.... and ever since Rudy got into the starting lineup really. We can be 2016-2022 Jazz... we can be Memphis or Pacers of the 2010s... Just ... don't fool yourself that you are more than that. Or that there is some big chance that you are going to strike an MVP in the 20s or in the second round.

No shame in fielding good teams, filling the arena and giving your fans a good product to get behind. Just... don't fool yourself that you are maximizing your chances at a title this way.

Cool thing is you can simply be a first round team and go from that to a championship team by getting lucky with a draft pick.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Anyone who thinks taking steps backward when you have the assets the Jazz have is stupid. Just straight up. You don't move Lauri.

 

[sip]

Anyone who thinks taking steps backward when you have the assets the Jazz have is stupid. Just straight up. You don't move Lauri.

Dump him!

 

[Elizah Huge]

Anyone who thinks taking steps backward when you have the assets the Jazz have is stupid. Just straight up. You don't move Lauri.

It’s not stupid at all. Having Lauri at the current moment is what has us in the middle. What exactly would your plan be this upcoming offseason and going forward? I’m all for trading for a top-15 guy but who is it and when is he coming available?

 

[Elizah Huge]

The absolute worst is when people act like the other side is stupid in these discussions. Both sides have valid points.

 

[sip]

It’s not stupid at all. Having Lauri at the current moment is what has us in the middle. What exactly would your plan be this upcoming offseason and going forward? I’m all for trading for a top-15 guy but who is it and when is he coming available?

He already stated that his plan is to get Paul George and Jimmy Butler while keeping Lauri and Sexton. Unfortunately that is not possible because you need Sextons salary to match Butler's incoming salary.