What's new
By:

Best Playoff Outcomes for Jazz Trades

framer said:
Meh, they got those players with capspace. And, if I remember correctly, because they struck out on their primary targets. Although Brunson and Randle had suiters, they were hardly the cream of the free agent crop. There has been many times in the past 5 years that you could have grabbed Randle from the Knicks for a pick and matching salary. We groused because we thought he might be a throw in in the possible Don deal. The Knicks just put players around Randle to finally make him a winner.

The Knicks true success has been on turning their late round picks into a consolidation of better players. Just don't bust out on your picks (especially when you have as many as we do) and we will be fine. Need a lot more Keyontes and fewer Ochais (although we didn't pick him.)
Click to expand...
They got Brunson because of relationships
 
fishonjazz said:
Brunson wasn't a star player when he went to new York. Neither was randle. Neither player had been an all star when new York got them.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
And they still were in-high-demand players, young, on the upswing on their career, had multiple options and went to NY. I do not know why it is such a controversial opinion that the Jazz struggle to attract impactful, in-demand players via free agency. Who were the biggest free agents in the last 25 years? Boozer (thanks to contract shenanigans), Okur, 30-year old Bojan, broken down Joe Johnson, Raja Bell and Matt Harpring?? Is it based on this illustrious free-agency track record we are supposed to seriously consider following the LA and NY blueprint in signing future core players as free agents?

I might offend some folks from SLC but the vast, vast majority of Americans in general, and professional NBA players in particular would rather live and work elsewhere but in Utah if given a choice. And moneywise, a star (or hoping to become a star) player would rather go to LA or NY even on a considerably lower contract because there they will get much more exposure and money from advertisers.
 
jazznik said:
And they still were in-high-demand players, young, on the upswing on their career, had multiple options and went to NY. I do not know why it is such a controversial opinion that the Jazz struggle to attract impactful, in-demand players via free agency. Who were the biggest free agents in the last 25 years? Boozer (thanks to contract shenanigans), Okur, 30-year old Bojan, broken down Joe Johnson, Raja Bell and Matt Harpring?? Is it based on this illustrious free-agency track record we are supposed to seriously consider following the LA and NY blueprint in signing future core players as free agents?

I might offend some folks from SLC but the vast, vast majority of Americans in general, and professional NBA players in particular would rather live and work elsewhere but in Utah if given a choice. And moneywise, a star (or hoping to become a star) player would rather go to LA or NY even on a considerably lower contract because there they will get much more exposure and money from advertisers.
Click to expand...
You used the term "star player" not me. I was simply saying that those 2 weren't stars (which you seem to now agree with). You could have simply responded to my post with "ya you are right, those guys weren't stars". I never disputed that players choose other markets over slc lol.
 
fishonjazz said:
You used the term "star player" not me. I was simply saying that those 2 weren't stars (which you seem to now agree with). You could have simply responded to my post with "ya you are right, those guys weren't stars". I never disputed that players choose other markets over slc lol.
Click to expand...
I am not sure that those two could be even indisputably called not a star. Brunson went to NY after a playoff run where he certainly played like a star. Randle came as a young player who just broke out and averaged 21-9 for a season and 24-7 in the last 2 months. They were not yet indisputable stars, but quite a few people already considered them to be if not stars, then stars-in-the-making. And both of them already looked better than any free agents that the Jazz have actually signed in the last 25 years.
 
And Brunson is about one more round of the playoffs or everyone realizing he has maximized his talent. But he isn't good enough to be the best player a championship team.

Also random pet peeve, people say Josh Hart is 6'3.75" barefoot per official nba measurements. Other measurements put him at 6'4" barefoot. But since he plays basketball in shoes, he is 6'5" or 6.5.5".
 
Suns owner has gone on record that he wants to trade the #22 pick this year and their 2031 pick.

Jazz draft Clingan/Sarr/Edey and trade Walker+Clarkson for Nurkic and both picks?

I really have no idea what they can really do. Those picks aren't enough to get off Beal. Nurkic is their most tradeable salary for matching purposes. They really have no need for a guy like Clarkson so it's probably a no.
 
My assumption on Phoenix is they trade KD for better depth and then trade the rest of their picks for better players. Ishibia seems like he is ready to double down on everything
 
Won implying the Lakers are going to push draft capital in to improve the roster.

That's a place I see making sense for Sexton.
 
I'm not sure I am all that excited about a 2031 Lakers pick. If we somehow offload Sexton and keep Clarkson I may sit next season out.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
My assumption on Phoenix is they trade KD for better depth and then trade the rest of their picks for better players. Ishibia seems like he is ready to double down on everything
Click to expand...
Without KD, the Suns are really bad. I'm not sure they get enough real stuff back to fix that, especially as a team that could use KD, wouldn't want to become the new Suns and gut their bench on the way to a first round sweep. Suns are just kind of screwed.
 
framer said:
Without KD, the Suns are really bad. I'm not sure they get enough real stuff back to fix that, especially as a team that could use KD, wouldn't want to become the new Suns and gut their bench on the way to a first round sweep. Suns are just kind of screwed.
Click to expand...
They are fine without KD if they can get pieces that fit around Booker better. Booker is better than KD
 
framer said:
I'm not sure I am all that excited about a 2031 Lakers pick. If we somehow offload Sexton and keep Clarkson I may sit next season out.
Click to expand...
Lakers will have the 17th pick this year, 2029, 2030, and 2031 available to them in trades. Plus ability to remove protections on the 2027 they already owe the Jazz

Plus they have the best player from last year's draft who didn't get a fair shot, Jalen Hood Schifino.
 
jazznik said:
I am not sure that those two could be even indisputably called not a star. Brunson went to NY after a playoff run where he certainly played like a star. Randle came as a young player who just broke out and averaged 21-9 for a season and 24-7 in the last 2 months. They were not yet indisputable stars, but quite a few people already considered them to be if not stars, then stars-in-the-making. And both of them already looked better than any free agents that the Jazz have actually signed in the last 25 years.
Click to expand...
If you have never been an all star then you aren't a star

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
fishonjazz said:
If you have never been an all star then you aren't a star

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Yea, this is the thinking of a certain type of GM who lets players like Brunson walk. Not believing his own eyes and, instead, pursuing old, multiple-times All Stars. I hope that Ainge is different. I also considered Conley to be a star long before his eventual All-Star selection.
 
jazznik said:
Yea, this is the thinking of a certain type of GM who lets players like Brunson walk. Not believing his own eyes and, instead, pursuing old, multiple-times All Stars. I hope that Ainge is different. I also considered Conley to be a star long before his eventual All-Star selection.
Click to expand...
It's just facts.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
I think Kyrie > Brunson. He's more versatile offensively and a better complementary player. Brunson needs the ball to be effective. That said, Brunson was a lot to lose in free agency.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top