Does Lauri Get Traded?

[idiot]

I don't think we have to trade Lauri but we need to trade a couple more vets. The easiest way to tank is to move Lauri though and it obviously yields a "haul". I think unlike some years in the past there are less teams that will enter the tank race because they are all in on winning or don't own their own picks or are close enough to the play-in etc. I think it may cost Kessler or Sexton... maybe both? I think I'd try to retain Lauri unless there is a crazy offer out there.

I'm not sure if we're supposed to regard each other as adversaries in this debate, but I'm totally on board with this thought (though I'd keep Kessler -- I have a hard time seeing him as a vet, and I think his upside is still something very useful to strong teams).

 

[homeytennis]

Why do I have the feeling that a team made up of guys in the NBA Dumpster at the moment would likely beat our first string?

 

[KqWIN]

I think the options are different as I think we could legitimately keep Lauri long term. So I'd weigh the offers differently. I think if we extend him he likely finishes the season on the roster. At that point the trade might be motivated by his impatience. For me the question is... if they don't bowl us over for Lauri... what will I accept for Sexton and Kessler so I can tank.

I think the Sexton/Kessler decisions can be made on their own independent of Lauri, but of course they are intertwined to some extent. The stakes are just much lower all around compared to Lauri. I don't care to make the individual arguments for either, but I definitely can see someone talking themselves into seeing them have a long term future here. They are aren't valuable vets that have no use a team that is not capable of competing for the playoffs. It took Ainge forever to get to this point, but I'm ok keeping them or eating a little value to tank a bit more. Wish we were here two years ago.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

You werent the only one. There have been so many guys lamenting the "poor tanking" of 2022-23 and basically all of them are in the same boat. Those guys cant go back to rewrite history and tinker the "perfect tanking roster" in hindsight that also keeps Lauri, Sexton, Kessler and everyone who is of some value now.

We missed out on Wemby which sucks. But if we would instead do that deep tank now by selling Lauri and Sexton we could have like 5-6 extra FRPs compared to doing the "sell low to tank" trades in the 2022 offseason. And if we dont sell them, then we are already in position to build up really fast if we land our version of Jason Tatum or whoever.

And I didn't blame them too much for muffing the Wemby tank... they were much better than many thought. I did think we were a mid 30s win team and should have sold low on Bogey/Conley if we had to. Still didn't kill them.

Last year I really didn't care cuz the draft sucked.

This year is different. We know what we have with our vets. We know this draft is good. We know how the half assed tank has worked. They don't have many excuses if they don't do the smart thing imo.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I think the Sexton/Kessler decisions can be made on their own independent of Lauri, but of course they are intertwined to some extent. The stakes are just much lower all around compared to Lauri. I don't care to make the individual arguments for either, but I definitely can see someone talking themselves into seeing them have a long term future here. They are aren't valuable vets that have no use a team that is not capable of competing for the playoffs. It took Ainge forever to get to this point, but I'm ok keeping them or eating a little value to tank a bit more. Wish we were here two years ago.

I think Collin has the best chance at coming back to bite us a bit if we sell low, but he also might drive winning more than Kessler now. I just think it has to be one of those two unless we find a sucker for a JC or two.

 

[Bawse Dawg]

I beg to differ. Watching the same tired Mitchell-Gobert-Bogey team was absolutely terrible. Because the result was totally predictable even before the season started: a decent regular season where every player is playing the same exact role as the last year and the year before, followed by the inevitable limp first-round exit. And watching a squad of young prospects growing together is exciting because the result is unknown. Who will step up, who will fail, who will become a leader?

Definitely for that last season, it was obvious where things were headed, but I don't agree for the seasons before that. Sure we ended up with disappointing early exits, but the seasons leading up to them were fun, and you could definitely be optimistic about the team taking a jump into at least the Semifinals. Bubble year, and the year we had the one seed especially.

 

[stitches]

This is the right way to think about things. I think the "is tanking good/bad" is kind of a useless topic to talk about and especially in a bad sense, it always ends up at the same place. What you really have to assess is how much better do you think Lauri makes us, how much is that worth.

Yep, agreed. Lauri has value of his own that we no longer have once we trade him(for less presumably). So I guess the exact question is which one should we go for:

- Lauri+8th
- Lauri+3d - what it takes to get from 8 to 3
- 3d pick + whatever we diminished value we get for Lauri

This assumes you even get a willing trade partner at 3, in a lot of cases in those types of drafts teams are not willing to move off of a premier talent.

The only thing I would add is that "lotto position" is a lot different than draft position.

Yeah, I was just trying to simplify things.

 

[fishonjazz]

I'm very solidly in the team that thinks Danny will eventually be "forced" to trade Lauri. Its just not necessarily gonna happen this offseason.

Its just that one of two things will eventually happen (or they meet in the middle):
- Timeline gets too whacky
- The godfather offer comes

So unless something accelerates the timeline or unless the trade market outlook changes dramatically from this arms race situation... I dont see how DA would not eventually be put into the situation where making the move is the smartest thing to do.

I know what could accelerate the timeline......

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

There are just so many two edged swords. If Collin and Walker improve... it means we win more... bad for draft pick... good for their value? If they struggle or get hurt... draft position benefits... their value tanks as they only have one year left on their cheap deals.

 

[Bawse Dawg]

There are just so many two edged swords. If Collin and Walker improve... it means we win more... bad for draft pick... good for their value? If they struggle or get hurt... draft position benefits... their value tanks as they only have one year left on their cheap deals.

I think the only bad result for next season is getting wins off the backs of vets who are not in the longterm plans.

Dump Clarkson and Collins and I really don't think there is a bad outcome possible.

 

[HermanG]

There are just so many two edged swords. If Collin and Walker improve... it means we win more... bad for draft pick... good for their value? If they struggle or get hurt... draft position benefits... their value tanks as they only have one year left on their cheap deals.

I think Collins top value is sort of limited as he is bit of a tweener for his position/role. If he improves in a way where he expands his role, then it could be a different story.

Kessler improving is gonna be great for his value so if that happens we should be happy about it.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Like if you could move Clarkson and Kessler to Atlanta for Capela and the Kings pick they own and maybe a second or two... is that good enough. The Kings pick is top 12 protected this year and top 10 protected next year. Saves Atlanta a bit of money this year... we can keep or waive Capela... I don't really care much as I think he's kinda washed and likely wouldn't be 100% for very long.

 

[Elizah Huge]

There are just so many two edged swords. If Collin and Walker improve... it means we win more... bad for draft pick... good for their value? If they struggle or get hurt... draft position benefits... their value tanks as they only have one year left on their cheap deals.

The thing is what is the value of them improving vs the value of our pick improving.

 

[idiot]

I beg to differ. Watching the same tired Mitchell-Gobert-Bogey team was absolutely terrible. Because the result was totally predictable even before the season started: a decent regular season where every player is playing the same exact role as the last year and the year before, followed by the inevitable limp first-round exit. And watching a squad of young prospects growing together is exciting because the result is unknown. Who will step up, who will fail, who will become a leader?

At the risk of responding too exclusively to you (I think you have good arguments generally), I'd say that this can work (for some fans) for about 2-3 years max. After that, despair likely becomes the dominant emotion. If the odds of tanking getting you a true transformative players are once in every 8 years, or even more optimistically once in every 5 or six, we have something of a mismatch (again, unless you're one of the lucky teams).

 

[KqWIN]

I think Collin has the best chance at coming back to bite us a bit if we sell low, but he also might drive winning more than Kessler now. I just think it has to be one of those two unless we find a sucker for a JC or two.

If the FO does not believe in Kessler....I think he should be traded, I don't think his value is all that diminished. Also, while he's not the greatest player in the world he could have an outsized impact on winning because our defense is so bad and he can the raise the floor quite a bit on that end. I guess similar things can be said for Sexton.....I just think with the way he started last season the way we sandbagged him you're going to eat value no matter what. It's difficult that we spent two years kind of hovering and we feel so iffy about our own guys.

The JC's are a little different because I don't think Clarkson helps you win much (though it's hard to be as bad as rookies)....but the real downside there is the PT resources he takes up. Collins can/will help the Jazz win, but will need some to time to continue to rehab his value + find a taker if there ever is one.

 

[framer]

I beg to differ. Watching the same tired Mitchell-Gobert-Bogey team was absolutely terrible. Becausethe result was totally predictable even before the season started: a decent regular season where every player is playing the same exact role as the last year and the year before, followed by the inevitable limp first-round exit. And watching a squad of young prospects growing together is exciting because the result is unknown. Who will step up, who will fail, who will become a leader?

Bull crap. Nobody was thinking when the Jazz had the best record in the Regular Season, "This is boring, I can't wait until the draft starts." I have definitely felt that way the last two years though. Things didn't turn out, bit it was hella fun right up until that point.

 

[jazznik]

I didn't include Harden (or Curry, if looking outside the top 5) because I went back to the 2010 draft (thus the last 15 drafts). That was an arbitrary decision to do 15 years and make a nice round number, not an intentional one to exclude Harden. But yeah, things can look different depending on the starting point. Things surely look better for the pro-tank argument if you go back further and include Harden, Durant, Lebron, Duncan, Wade, and so on. I'm not sure whether the fact that the production from top-5 picks over the last 15 years has decreased is due to random variability or to something else (stronger overall talent pool, better player development programs, etc.) But yeah, I would probably have included Lillard, Mitchell, Brunson, Butler in the same category as Zion, Morant, maybe even AD, and Brown. I wouldn't have put Kyrie in there because he's mostly been a disaster as a #1.

OK, I guess I miscounted a bit with Harden. But I do think that you overestimate the number of potential championship team leaders by including a bunch of guards. Historically, it has been incredibly hard to win a championship with your guard being a clear number 1. In the last 25 years it happened exactly 3 times: 2010 (Kobe), 2015 (Curry), 2022 (Curry). The 2024 champion had several stars with none being the clear number one, somewhat similar to that Detroit championship. You need to be on the level of the prime Kobe, Curry or Wade to lead your team to the championship. Brunson, Lillard, Butler, Harden, Mitchell are very good players but they a level or two below and are a natural fit for being a second option.

 

[jazznik]

Bull crap. Nobody was thinking when the Jazz had the best record in the Regular Season, "This is boring, I can't wait until the draft starts." I have definitely felt that way the last two years though. Things didn't turn out, bit it was hella fun right up until that point.

I meant the last two seasons as well. They were good seasons record-wise but I would have much preferred watching a young rebuilding team instead.

 

[Fosto]

I meant the last two seasons as well. They were good seasons record-wise but I would have much preferred watching a young rebuilding team instead.

We'll be lucky if this collection of mid young players ever even touch the same level as that "boring" team that was seen as a top contender, but ultimately fell short.

 

[framer]

I'm old enough to remember us letting Paul Milsap go in free agency to get a great draft pick in an historically good draft and in order to let the "young guys play." We tanked our way to 5 and do you know what happened?

We retooled later on late lottery and mid twenties picks to become relevant later with almost none of those pieces, or really getting value for those pieces. If Lindsey could luck into that, I am OK letting someone who has proven they know what they are doing cook, even if I don't always understand the why.