What's new
By:

Does Lauri Get Traded?

Does Lauri Get Dealt Before The Season Starts?

  • Total voters
    134
  • Poll closed .
NUMBERICA said:
Be selfish and deny himself at least $24 million?
Click to expand...
He did acknowledge that in the article and noted that Utah is the only team capable of giving him that money.

However he was talking about being selfish aboiut driving his competitive goals.
 
karl malone said:
I agree. They aren't completely comparable situations & rebuilding around Lauri is clearly an option when it really wasn't with Mitchell. But even if it had been, do you think they would have preferred that vs flipping him for assets?

I don't. It wouldn't have made sense. We didn't have the roster or assets to put a championship caliber supporting team around him at the time. And that's if you even considered him to be a guy that can lead a team to a title as it's #1. I doubt that we did. And I doubt we do when it comes to Lauri. So we still need that missing star.

Logically, philosophically, etc, looking at the roster, what makes more sense?

Retaining a 27 year old 2nd star on a max contract, hoping we are bad enough to obtain a top 5 pick, hoping that pick not only develops into a superstar but does so before your 2nd star begins to decline/lose value, hoping enough of your young talent develops quick enough, etc

Or

Trading that 27 year old near peak value ( if possible with contract situation), likely ensuring that we are bad enough to obtain a top 5 pick, giving more time for that pick as well as our other young talent to develop, while also adding to our collection of future assets

I know which one would be plan A for me.

Right now we have two conflicting sets of players on our roster. Lauri & Sexton vs our young talent/future assets. Walker is somewhere in the middle.

Logically, it makes sense to pick one. And judging by the trade rumors & our current roster construction, it seems pretty clear which they prefer.
Click to expand...

Mitchell’s camp also approached the Jazz and expressed interest in a trade to NY or Miami that summer. It wasn’t a hard demand, but it signaled that Donovan wasn’t planning to stay for the long haul.
 
karl malone said:
I agree that Lauri would prefer to stay & that it is definitely going to take an overpay for another team to acquire him but it seems pretty clear that our FO is actively looking to generate an acceptable offer for him. Otherwise why would they allow these rumors to persist, potentially upsetting the star that they're planning to build around?

I'm sure they would be comfortable with just extending & retaining Lauri for the time being if they don't receive the level of offer that they're seeking, but it seems pretty obvious imo that the FO wants to trade him for a haul. And I believe the rumor of not wanting to move him is just further posturing, similar to how it was rumored that we intended to build around Mitchell right after Gobert was traded.

Looking back, Ainge clearly had a plan all along. And trading Lauri was always part of it imo. Step 1 was to acquire draft picks, young talent (Kessler, Agbaji, THT, etc.) & flippable assets with the potential to increase in value (Lauri, Sexton, Collins, etc.). Step 2 is to cash in on those flippable assets & allow our young talent to develop, simultaneously positioning us near the top of two potentially historic draft classes.

Lauri's unexpected development may have caused the FO to genuinely consider pivoting & adding a 2nd star this off-season, although I believe those rumors to have been more posturing/raising prices for when it came time to deal him, but these persistent GSW rumors definitely seem to indicate that they are back to (or never left) wanting to trade Lauri. Just has to be at their price. I also believe GSW are being used for posturing, similar to NYK with Mitchell.

I'm sure we'd be okay with hanging onto Lauri, but plan A is clearly to trade him for a haul imo. As it always has been.
Click to expand...
What I will say here is that if the Jazz don't trade Lauri in the next two and a half weeks, and if they extend him, the date they extend him will tell us a ton about where the Jazz are and what they are thinking with him

If he extends on August 6, this is correct, 100 percent

If he extends on August 7, they love him, they think he's someone to build around and the notion that they aren't going to trade him outside of a godfather offer isn't lip service
 
Tony Jones said:
What I will say here is that if the Jazz don't trade Lauri in the next two and a half weeks, and if they extend him, the date they extend him will tell us a ton about where the Jazz are and what they are thinking with him

If he extends on August 6, this is correct, 100 percent

If he extends on August 7, they love him, they think he's someone to build around and the notion that they aren't going to trade him outside of a godfather offer isn't lip service
Click to expand...
Lauri has a say on when the extension happens tho so I'm not sure it's necessarily reflective of the FO's preference as much as it is Lauri's. Even if we do extend him, regardless of the date it occurs, I believe it will be done with the intent of still eventually trading him for the type of package that his current contract is/would be preventing us from receiving in this hypothetical.

And for the record, I think they do love Lauri & view him as someone to build around. I just don't think they view our current roster as the right situation to do it, especially when considering his age. And I think they'd be right. We have two conflicting sets of players (Lauri/Sexton vs 2nd yr guys/rookies/future draft picks with Kessler somewhere in the middle) & logically it makes sense to pick one.

I also don't think they will move him for anything less than a godfather offer. They're just seeing if those offers are available now without having to go thru the extra steps of extending & trying to tank with him, only to trade him in the following off-season, risking injury, regression, etc.

Appreciate your reply & contribution to this place. As well as everyone's. First place I come to read about jazz bball.
 
Last edited:
karl malone said:
Lauri has a say on when the extension happens tho so I'm not sure it's necessarily reflective of the FO's preference as much as it is Lauri's. Even if we do extend him, regardless of the date it occurs, I believe it will be done with the intent of still eventually trading him for the type of package that his current contract is/would be preventing us from receiving in this hypothetical.

And for the record, I think they do love Lauri & view him as someone to build around. I just don't think they view our current roster as the right situation to do it, especially when considering his age. And I think they'd be right. We have two conflicting sets of players (Lauri/Sexton vs 2nd yr guys/rookies/future draft picks with Kessler somewhere in the middle) & logically it makes sense to pick one.

I also don't think they will move him for anything less than a godfather offer. They're just seeing if those offers are available now without having to go thru the extra steps of extending & trying to tank with him, only to trade him in the following off-season, risking injury, decline, etc.

Appreciate your reply & contribution to this place. As well as everyone's. First place I come to read about jazz bball.
Click to expand...
If the Jazz offer the full money he will sign on Day 1
 
karl malone said:
Lauri has a say on when the extension happens tho so I'm not sure it's necessarily reflective of the FO's preference as much as it is Lauri's. Even if we do extend him, regardless of the date it occurs, I believe it will be done with the intent of still eventually trading him for the type of package that his current contract is/would be preventing us from receiving in this hypothetical.

And for the record, I think they do love Lauri & view him as someone to build around. I just don't think they view our current roster as the right situation to do it, especially when considering his age. And I think they'd be right. We have two conflicting sets of players (Lauri/Sexton vs 2nd yr guys/rookies/future draft picks with Kessler somewhere in the middle) & logically it makes sense to pick one.

I also don't think they will move him for anything less than a godfather offer. They're just seeing if those offers are available now without having to go thru the extra steps of extending & trying to tank with him, only to trade him in the following off-season, risking injury, regression, etc.

Appreciate your reply & contribution to this place. As well as everyone's. First place I come to read about jazz bball.
Click to expand...
Lauri could still play at a high level for the next six seasons. If Danny thinks he’s too old, he would’ve traded him long time ago. Also, he would’ve not talked about big game hunting.
 
underdog said:
Lauri could still play at a high level for the next six seasons. If Danny thinks he’s too old, he would’ve traded him long time ago. Also, he would’ve not talked about big game hunting.
Click to expand...
Yes he def could. But that doesn't mean that Ainge views him as a fit with the current timeline of the rest of our roster.

Do you think a 27 year old 2nd star in need of a max contract brings more value to a team still in search of their superstar, still in need of at least another year or 2 of development for the rest of their roster, as a trade chip or as a contributor in his 29/30+ year old seasons?

And why wouldn't Ainge talk about big game hunting if it maintains leverage & drives up prices for when we try to trade Lauri? I would say it's more likely that he wouldn't talk about it if he was actually big game hunting. Otherwise, why signal our intentions & give other teams leverage in negotiations?
 
karl malone said:
Yes he def could. But that doesn't mean that Ainge views him as a fit with the current timeline of the rest of our roster.

Do you think a 27 year old 2nd star in need of a max contract brings more value to a team still in search of their superstar, still in need of at least another year or 2 of development for the rest of their roster, as a trade chip or as a contributor in his 29/30+ year old seasons?

And why wouldn't Ainge talk about big game hunting if it maintains leverage & drives up prices for when we try to trade Lauri? I would say it's more likely that he wouldn't talk about it if he was actually big game hunting. Otherwise, why signal our intentions & give other teams leverage in negotiations?
Click to expand...
You agreed that Lauri could still play at a high level for the next six seasons, so why wouldn’t Aigne view him as a fit with the timeline of the rest of our roster? In my view, to become a contender, we need two of our young players to develop into good starters (ideally one of them into a star or close to it), which is possible with Lauri’s timeline, and use our draft capital to get a star or two (depending on the players and cap space) via trades. As for your comment on Danny’s big game hunting, he means what he said. He’s been doing it since Lauri broke out, and just earlier this month tried to get Mikal Bridges.

Personally, I’d like to R&E Lauri and tank this upcoming season with him, and if our situation still doesn’t change for the better, then trade him next summer. Now, I’m not saying Danny won’t trade him this offseason. He might, we’ll see.
 
Last edited:
underdog said:
You agreed that Lauri could still play at a high level for the next six seasons, so why wouldn’t Aigne view him as a fit with the timeline of the rest of our roster? In my view, to become a contender, we need two of our young players to develop into good starters (ideally one of them into a star or close to it), which is possible with Lauri’s timeline, and use our draft capital to get a star or two (depending on the players and cap space) via trades. As for your comment on Danny’s big game hunting, he means what he said. He’s been doing it since Lauri broke out, and just earlier this month tried to get Mikal Bridges.

Personally, I’d like to R&E Lauri and tank this upcoming season with him, and if our situation still doesn’t change for the better, then trade him next summer. Now, I’m not saying Danny won’t trade him this offseason. He might, we’ll see.
Click to expand...
I should have said ideal fit. A productive player fits any timeline regardless of age when the goal is to win. But it seems pretty clear that that's not our current goal for at least the next season or two. So even if Lauri does have another 6 years of prime production left, how does it make sense to waste at least a third of that, risking injury, depreciation, etc, if we're able to get full value for him now, giving us even more assets & flexibility down the road for when we're actually ready to compete? It also likely secures us a top 5 pick in a loaded draft while allowing us to be more patient with the rest of the roster.

I understand why people don't want to see Lauri go. Ideally, I don't either. He's a high character, uniquely talented 7 footer who actually wants to be here. But you have to take the rest of our roster into consideration & when you do, imo it seems like Lauri would best serve our ultimate goal of an eventual championship as a trade chip. Unfortunately.

As far as big game hunting goes, I take the rumors & anything Ainge says with a grain of salt. He's been around long enough to understand how to use rumors & perception to his benefit. He also knows that telegraphing his intentions only hurts his leverage when it comes time to negotiate.
 
Last edited:
I don't know if this has been posted yet, but Stein reporting almost exactly the same as Shams. The only difference between the two reports is that Stein specifically mentioned Moody (who was not mentioned by Shams) and Shams mentioned the specific picks (Stein does not report specific picks).

There is a belief in some corners of the league that Utah's interest in Golden State's Brandin Podziemski, in combination with future draft compensation … is serious enough that it keeps alive the prospect of a Markkanen trade between now and Aug. 6.

Yet there is also a growing belief leaguewide that the Warriors would be more willing to move Jonathan Kuminga in a Markkanen trade — or any big-swing deal — than Podziemski. To this point, however, it must be noted that Golden State's offers for Markkanen have centered around a package featuring Moses Moody and draft compensation without including Podziemski or Kuminga.
Click to expand...
 
karl malone said:
I should have said ideal fit. A productive player fits any timeline regardless of age when the goal is to win. But it seems pretty clear that that's not our current goal for at least the next season or two. So even if Lauri does have another 6 years of prime production left, how does it make sense to waste at least a third of that, risking injury, depreciation, etc, if we're able to get full value for him now, giving us even more assets & flexibility down the road for when we're actually ready to compete? It also likely secures us a top 5 pick in a loaded draft while allowing us to be more patient with the rest of the roster.

I understand why people don't want to see Lauri go. Ideally, I don't either. He's a high character, uniquely talented 7 footer who actually wants to be here. But you have to take the rest of our roster into consideration & when you do, imo it seems like Lauri would best serve our ultimate goal of an eventual championship as a trade chip. Unfortunately.

As far as big game hunting goes, I take the rumors & anything Ainge says with a grain of salt. He's been around long enough to understand how to use rumors & perception to his benefit. He also knows that telegraphing his intentions only hurts his leverage when it comes time to negotiate.
Click to expand...
If you look at teams historically, they don’t trade All-Star caliber players of Lauri’s age and tank when they have a lot of draft assets to get better because they know how hard it is to find these players from drafts (an All-Star already on your team always beats a low probability of drafting one, and if you build from scratch, you need a lot of luck (like Boston had with Tatum and Brown) to draft two of them in a short period of time). Anyway, I said I would R&E Lauri and keep him until at least next summer. Then, depending on how we do on draft night and with possible trades, I’d decide whether to trade him or not. Lauri is a rare archetype (fits every contending team and is seen as a “missing piece” in most of them). You’ve got to hold on to a player like him unless you’re pretty sure trading him is a better option. But like I said, I don't know what Danny's gonna do. Maybe he trades him. Idk, blowing our team up to bare bones scares me tbh. If we do that, I probably won't be watching the Jazz games for a few years.
 
Last edited:
karl malone said:
Lauri has a say on when the extension happens tho so I'm not sure it's necessarily reflective of the FO's preference as much as it is Lauri's. Even if we do extend him, regardless of the date it occurs, I believe it will be done with the intent of still eventually trading him for the type of package that his current contract is/would be preventing us from receiving in this hypothetical.

And for the record, I think they do love Lauri & view him as someone to build around. I just don't think they view our current roster as the right situation to do it, especially when considering his age. And I think they'd be right. We have two conflicting sets of players (Lauri/Sexton vs 2nd yr guys/rookies/future draft picks with Kessler somewhere in the middle) & logically it makes sense to pick one.

I also don't think they will move him for anything less than a godfather offer. They're just seeing if those offers are available now without having to go thru the extra steps of extending & trying to tank with him, only to trade him in the following off-season, risking injury, regression, etc.

Appreciate your reply & contribution to this place. As well as everyone's. First place I come to read about jazz bball.
Click to expand...
If Lauri signs on August 7, he won't be eligible to be traded until after the Jazz make their draft pick next season. If that pick is any one of about seven guys, (cooper, Dylan Harper, VJ Edgecombe, Nolan Traore, Ace Bailey), I don't expect the Jazz to trade him with one of those guys in hand
 
Tony Jones said:
If Lauri signs on August 7, he won't be eligible to be traded until after the Jazz make their draft pick next season. If that pick is any one of about seven guys, (cooper, Dylan Harper, VJ Edgecombe, Nolan Traore, Ace Bailey), I don't expect the Jazz to trade him with one of those guys in hand
Click to expand...
What about AJ dybantsa?
Is he 2026?

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
Tony Jones said:
If Lauri signs on August 7, he won't be eligible to be traded until after the Jazz make their draft pick next season. If that pick is any one of about seven guys, (cooper, Dylan Harper, VJ Edgecombe, Nolan Traore, Ace Bailey), I don't expect the Jazz to trade him with one of those guys in hand
Click to expand...
That's a good point. I'd probably have to agree depending on how the rest of the roster develops over the course of the season. I do question if we will be in a position to draft one of those guys if we retain Lauri without blatantly sitting him &/or trading Sexton/Kessler.

I also believe that the protections expiring after 2026 on the pick owed to OKC strongly factor into Ainge's thought process & I can't imagine that there's any way we could be bottom 8 in 2026 with Lauri, a top prospect, & any sort of progression from the rest of our young talent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top