What's new
By:
Filters

2023 NBA Draft Megathread

Thee Idiotic Minivan K said:
Oh stop it!!
Click to expand...

It's true...ask anyone. It's been widely reported that the Blazers are looking to trade the 3rd pick for a really good win now player to pair with Dame. The Blazers have absolutely no interest in trading it for picks or young talent.
 
Last edited:
idiot said:
I think you're too smart to the question from @framer (what would we need to have done to get those extra losses?) in any way that really nails you down. So I'm guessing you're content to throw out vague answers like this that don't directly say, but can easily be interpreted to mean, that the Jazz's record exceeded their quality of play this year; that if the Jazz weren't such try-hards, we'd have finished with a (worse) record more befitting the actual quality of our team.

Here's why I don't agree with this implication (again, it may not be your implication, but you're certainly not discouraging it). Here's why I think the Jazz got what they deserved for the type of team they had:
  • Jazz had 27 games within 5 points, winning 13 and losing 14. To nail down 6th draft position (pre-lottery, or tie for 5th) they would have had to go 9-18 in these games (which is pretty hard to do).
  • According to B-Ref's pythagorean calculation, the Jazz already lost two more games than they should have this year. So your argument is that we could have easily done a -6 on actual vs. pythagorean wins? Only one team this year had a discrepancy of 6 or more (and none in the minus column). As much as the Jazz were terrible under Snyder for actual vs. pythagorean wins, I don't know if they were ever a -6.
  • As far as actual team quality: all the teams that finished with better draft choices than us were actually worse teams, in terms of total net (own vs. opponent) points. Wizards were 22 points worse (I guess a little shaving could have gotten us to their level, although Cleaning the Glass's non-garbage-time stats show the gap to be considerably wider), but Magic were 133 points worse and Pacers were 184 points worse.
So my point is that we finished where we deserved based on the relative quality of the teams and the quality of our play. Do you disagree?

To get us to a record that would have ensured the 6th or 5th best pre-lottery odds would have meant some combination of: a) even more shenanigans than we already did; b) much earlier trades to get rid of decent players; c) being extremely unlucky (or fortunate draft-wise) with the wins vs. quality of play ratio. (For me, I don't care if you want to say that we should have done either a or b more; I just want us to recognize that we got what we deserved draft-wise for the quality of team we were. We were neither lucky nor unlucky.)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'd definitely say the Jazz got more than they deserved. They undeniably made conscious decisions that artificially deflated the team record. It's not quite the same thing, but complaining about the Jazz only tanking to 9 is kinda like complaining about not winning enough when you're trying to win. The Jazz were not the only team trying to lose on purpose. Just as there are teams in a better position to win, there were teams in a better position to lose. By virtue of having Lauri Markannen (among others) the Jazz were not able to be one of the worst teams in the league. The reason why we were in the 9 spot is not because the Jazz tried to win and were anti tank.

To echo your last point, it would have to take even more purposeful actions to lose on purpose to get even higher. Now I think the Jazz could have been quicker to execute on b)....but realistically speaking the Jazz did not have higher odds because they had Lauri Markannen. If you wanted a higher pick and that is what's most important, he is the man standing in the way. While it's easy to feel envious of a team with a higher draft position, having Lauri Markannen is also a position to be envied. He is the man most responsible for the Jazz not being higher in the draft, but I am very happy with the tradeoff he's given us.
 
Jingled said:
It's true...ask anyone. It's been WIDELY reported that the Blazers are looking to trade the 3rd pick for a really good win now player to pair with Dame. The Blazers have absolutely no interest in trading it for picks or young talent.
Click to expand...
With a third team, more is possible. I think there is something to the idea of looping in Cleveland by compensating them some of their draft assets and them sending Jarrett Allen.
 
NUMBERICA said:
With a third team, more is possible. I think there is something to the idea of looping in Cleveland by compensating them some of their draft assets and them sending Jarrett Allen.
Click to expand...

Jarrett Allen isn’t moving the needle for them. He is not worth as much as you think.
 
Elizah Huge said:
Jarrett Allen isn’t moving the needle for them. He is not worth as much as you think.
Click to expand...
I’m not saying that is all it would take. But Portland is going to want players and need a good center. Lauri is probably all you need to send, Allen would be the centerpiece to more.
 
NUMBERICA said:
I’m not saying that is all it would take. But Portland is going to want players and need a good center. Lauri is probably all you need to send, Allen would be the centerpiece to more.
Click to expand...

I understand and like the thought process… just with a different player than Allen. I just don’t see them trading the 3rd pick to upgrade from Nurkic to Allen while getting a couple firsts. Doesn’t seem like enough to me.
 
Elizah Huge said:
I understand and like the thought process… just with a different player than Allen. I just don’t see them trading the 3rd pick to upgrade from Nurkic to Allen while getting a couple firsts. Doesn’t seem like enough to me.
Click to expand...
Crazier things have happened, but I also don’t disagree.
 
Jingled said:
If you had been paying attention you would know that there is nothing we have besides Lauri that the Blazers would be willing to trade the 3rd pick for.
Click to expand...

We have plenty to offer without giving up Lauri. We would just have to include a third team that has the vets that Portland needs. We ain't giving up Lauri.
 
Elizah Huge said:
I understand and like the thought process… just with a different player than Allen. I just don’t see them trading the 3rd pick to upgrade from Nurkic to Allen while getting a couple firsts. Doesn’t seem like enough to me.
Click to expand...

Firsts have more value now than they did when we made our trades. Somebody like Allen and two firsts gets you something decent. If I am Portland though, I would really want some stuff, THEN swap Nurkic for Kessler. Kessler + 9 + the Laker's pick and we take back Nurkic and they can use 9 + the Laker's pick + a huge trade exception to grab something tasty. They re-sign Grant.

Of course, maybe I'm stupid, but I probably look elsewhere if that's the deal. I like the idea of building a solid defense and Kessler is a huge part of that. I'd just try to trade up for one of the forwards.
 
Elizah Huge said:
Russillo said he talked to a team at the combine and they said a player from this years class said his player comp is KD lol. The team that asked him what his player comp was didn’t like that answer. I wonder who it was. Miller or GG are the first two that came to mind.
Click to expand...
Def GG.

Actually NVM Emoni Bates
 
Jingled said:
Givony said on the Woj pod that GG didn't look very good in his pro day, said he was inefficient and looked out of shape. He thinks he could drop to the 2nd round.
Click to expand...
Then the jazz should definitely take a flier on him at 28 if available seeing as that would be the third pick they can potentially make.
 
Jingled said:
Givony said on the Woj pod that GG didn't look very good at his pro day, said he was inefficient and looked out of shape. He thinks he could drop to the 2nd round.
Click to expand...

Well, if he's out of shape with a 37" vertical and a 3.21 3/4-court sprint, that would mean he has even more potential and his stock would go up...
 
KqWIN said:
GG getting the stolen valor fat=potential by being out of shape lol.
Click to expand...
After watching GG in full game, I see the appeal and I'd be good with him at 16, but it's indeed damn funny how every negative about him is turned into a positive.:D
 
KqWIN said:
Yeah, I'd definitely say the Jazz got more than they deserved. They undeniably made conscious decisions that artificially deflated the team record. It's not quite the same thing, but complaining about the Jazz only tanking to 9 is kinda like complaining about not winning enough when you're trying to win. The Jazz were not the only team trying to lose on purpose. Just as there are teams in a better position to win, there were teams in a better position to lose. By virtue of having Lauri Markannen (among others) the Jazz were not able to be one of the worst teams in the league. The reason why we were in the 9 spot is not because the Jazz tried to win and were anti tank.

To echo your last point, it would have to take even more purposeful actions to lose on purpose to get even higher. Now I think the Jazz could have been quicker to execute on b)....but realistically speaking the Jazz did not have higher odds because they had Lauri Markannen. If you wanted a higher pick and that is what's most important, he is the man standing in the way. While it's easy to feel envious of a team with a higher draft position, having Lauri Markannen is also a position to be envied. He is the man most responsible for the Jazz not being higher in the draft, but I am very happy with the tradeoff he's given us.
Click to expand...
I think if you trade Conley at the beginning of the season, you end up with a very different result overall. Maybe sexton and THT show out, but Conley kept the Jazz in a LOT of games early on when they put together their strong run to start the year.
 
idiot said:
I think you're too smart answer to the question from @framer (what would we need to have done to get those extra losses?) in any way that really nails you down. So I'm guessing you're content to throw out vague answers like this that don't directly say, but can easily be interpreted to mean, that the Jazz's record exceeded their quality of play this year; that if the Jazz weren't such try-hards, we'd have finished with a (worse) record more befitting the actual quality of our team.

Here's why I don't agree with this implication (again, it may not be your implication, but you're certainly not discouraging it). Here's why I think the Jazz got what they deserved for the type of team they had:
  • Jazz had 27 games within 5 points, winning 13 and losing 14. To nail down 6th draft position (pre-lottery, or tie for 5th) they would have had to go 9-18 in these games (which is pretty hard to do).
  • According to B-Ref's pythagorean calculation, the Jazz already lost two more games than they should have this year. So your argument is that we could have easily done a -6 on actual vs. pythagorean wins? Only one team this year had a discrepancy of 6 or more (and none in the minus column). As much as the Jazz were terrible under Snyder for actual vs. pythagorean wins, I don't know if they were ever a -6.
  • As far as actual team quality: all the teams that finished with better draft choices than us were actually worse teams, in terms of total net (own vs. opponent) points. Wizards were 22 points worse (I guess a little shaving could have gotten us to their level, although Cleaning the Glass's non-garbage-time stats show the gap to be considerably wider), but Magic were 133 points worse and Pacers were 184 points worse.
So my point is that we finished where we deserved based on the relative quality of the teams and the quality of our play. Do you disagree?

To get us to a record that would have ensured the 6th or 5th best pre-lottery odds would have meant some combination of: a) even more shenanigans than we already did; b) much earlier trades to get rid of decent players; c) being extremely unlucky (or fortunate draft-wise) with the wins vs. quality of play ratio. (For me, I don't care if you want to say that we should have done either a or b more; I just want us to recognize that we got what we deserved draft-wise for the quality of team we were. We were neither lucky nor unlucky.)
Click to expand...
Look you went to a lot of trouble here and I appreciate the thought you’ve given… I said earlier had we done a deal earlier with the lakers where we include Bogey and then we pass on acquiring KO it changes our season quite a bit. Teams that tank generally have huge holes on the roster. Now Kessler would have filled a lot of those minutes but some has to fill his and there is definitely a learning curve.

We started 10-3 with a few close wins and KO had at least two games where if we don’t have him those are losses for sure… he came out shooting like 150% from three. Surely a couple other games turn along the way… there was a miracle game against GS we had zero business winning… there was another semi miraculous win against GS. The margins are thin and if we had taken tanking a little more serious (in the front office) then things change.

If you go to the preseason threads I basically told everyone this was a 35ish win team unless more tank moves happened… so we got kind of what we deserve. I think the last Quin team was so ****** closing out games this team felt like they won them all but it sounds like their record was pretty close to what was expected in those close games. Simply having one more hole would have swung a few more games the other way and made a few close games not that close.

You are free to disagree but the whole argument that Lauri could not have done what he did and we would have been a franchise in ruins if we had been a little worse is just kind of silly to me. If we don’t trade for KO I’m comfortable saying we likely lose 3-4+ games more and with the benefit of hindsight I think it’s actually more… he literally hit a couple game winners.
 
stitches said:
After watching GG in full game, I see the appeal and I'd be good with him at 16, but it's indeed damn funny how every negative about him is turned into a positive.:D
Click to expand...

Before you know it, we're gonna start questioning Wemby's potential because he's good at too many things lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top