Who cares if it grabs your imagination. What matters is putting us in the best position moving forward and I think those warriors picks would do that.It doesn't really grab my imagination as a fan tho.
I'm just looking at rosters. Nets, Wiz, Porty, Detroit, Hornets... all suck... lots of young guys on some of those rosters. Cade may be way better but Lauri is the best player of any imo. Hardy is very competent. There is usually a team with an early injury... I think its playing with fire a bit top 5 is critical imoI think he made pretty damn sure with how young the roster is.
I don't see 2023 and this upcoming season as having enough parallels to make me concerned.
If the Jazz were actually willing to give up Lauri for that fake garbage offer you got excited about, he would have been long gone by now.Who cares if it grabs your imagination. What matters is putting us in the best position moving forward and I think those warriors picks would do that.
Top 5 is not critical in the slightest. If you can shame tank your way to it towards the end, go for it, but I don't see the need to do anything outside of what Danny has currently done, keep the roster young while retaining your core talent until someone buys so high on them it doesn't make sense to say no.I'm just looking at rosters. Nets, Wiz, Porty, Detroit, Hornets... all suck... lots of young guys on some of those rosters. Cade may be way better but Lauri is the best player of any imo. Hardy is very competent. There is usually a team with an early injury... I think its playing with fire a bit top 5 is critical imo
I tend to agree.I think this is actually a terrific pivot point.
The whole thing (keeping players in their short primes that help you win games while trying to lose games, such that you have to actively try to lose games at the coaching level or compromise all of the bottoming out that could alter your future) makes me queasy, honestly.I tend to agree.
But my brain is also apparently obsessed with the idea that the jazz should tell Lauri and Collin some version of, "Look, how about one more year where we ask you both to get well out of your comfort zone and expand your games into different skill sets? We'll lose a lot of games just one more year.... blah blah...."
How many teams have won significant amount of games when their entire bench consist of rookies, second year players, and under 24 year old journeymen (plus Eubanks, a 28 year old journeymen who has never impacted winning)?The whole thing (keeping players in their short primes that help you win games while trying to lose games, such that you have to actively try to lose games at the coaching level or compromise all of the bottoming out that could alter your future) makes me queasy, honestly.
Again… please… can we just do this right (comprise your roster poorly so nobody has to do anything shady and it still might not work)? One time? Please?
I want one of those top 5 guys badly. There may be a few other guys that emerge of course but 9-10th would be really disappointing to me.Top 5 is not critical in the slightest. If you can shame tank your way to it towards the end, go for it, but I don't see the need to do anything outside of what Danny has currently done, keep the roster young while retaining your core talent until someone buys so high on them it doesn't make sense to say no.
It feels like we’re on a path right now where we’re just going to keep doing what we did the last two years into the foreseeable future. There’s not a better time than now to **** or get off the pot. I vote we ****.I want one of those top 5 guys badly. There may be a few other guys that emerge of course but 9-10th would be really disappointing to me.
I tend to agree.
But my brain is also apparently obsessed with the idea that the jazz should tell Lauri and Collin some version of, "Look, how about one more year where we ask you both to get well out of your comfort zone and expand your games into different skill sets? We'll lose a lot of games just one more year.... blah blah...."