What's new
By:

Does Lauri Get Traded?

Does Lauri Get Dealt Before The Season Starts?

  • Total voters
    134
  • Poll closed .
MT Steve said:
If we're blown away with a Kessler offer then we should trade him.

If there isn't a good offer, then we shouldn't let "losing a few more games" be a motivating factor to accept a meh offer is my whole point.
Click to expand...
There is a another factor.

Let's say we get a meh offer and don't take it and coach and jazz management don't think Kessler is part of the future and so he rides pine a lot gets even less confident and the offers go from meh to garbage. Then maybe we should have taken the meh?

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
If they get a great package, they should trade Lauri. The team is too young and inexperienced to win with Lauri, and the team as constructed is on a different timeline. I am guessing the odd that Utah can trade or sign difference maker players to pair with Lauri would be low, just like they missed out on Bridges (and he is not a difference maker imo, and neither is P George).

If they don't get a great offer, keep Lauri until such an offer happens. I hate to lose him, he is fun to watch.
 
fishonjazz said:
There is a another factor.

Let's say we get a meh off and don't take it and coach and jazz management don't think Kessler is part of the future and so he rides pine a lot gets even less confident and the offers go from meh to garbage. Then maybe we should have taken the meh?

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
The "meh" is relative to what you think his value is. If you don't think he's part of the future, then sure, accept a lower offer, if it seems worth it given that you don't plan on having him around in the future.

If it doesn't seem worth it, then don't do it anyways just for a ~3% better chance of getting a star next draft.
 
MT Steve said:
My question was to those who are worried about winning a few more games because we will add vets, and therefore think trading Kessler would be a good idea to mitigate that.

You somehow miconstrued that to me saying I myself am worried about winning a few more games. I am not.
Click to expand...
Why would that be a viable solution though. If trading Kessler isn’t also a viable solution?
 
MT Steve said:
Because not adding vets is preferable to trading Kessler for a package that is less valuable to the Jazz than Kessler.
Click to expand...
How so? If we add a vet who adds 4 wins that player is really good… if we trade Walker who represents 4 wins… then we have whatever we got for Walker PLUS the other good player. And since none of it matters to draft positioning then we come out way ahead.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
How so? If we add a vet who adds 4 wins that player is really good… if we trade Walker who represents 4 wins… then we have whatever we got for Walker PLUS the other good player. And since none of it matters to draft positioning then we come out way ahead.
Click to expand...
The hypothetical is that we trade Kessler for a package worse than Kessler's value to us.
 
MT Steve said:
The "meh" is relative to what you think his value is. If you don't think he's part of the future, then sure, accept a lower offer, if it seems worth it given that you don't plan on having him around in the future.

If it doesn't seem worth it, then don't do it anyways just for a ~3% better chance of getting a star next draft.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
Totally fair and measured response

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
I think the "Front Office Hates Kessler" crap is way overblown. I don't think the Jazz are going to trade him for a bag of peanuts, tank or no.

Last year they were quite obviously limiting his minutes to impact winning (or perhaps to see what they had in Collins.) At this point in his career, he probably isn't enough to get you from 40 to 45 wins, but he is enough to get you from 20 to 25 quite easily if you give him burn on the court. I'd imagine that being held out of games to ensure a loss probably didn't go well with Kessler which accounted for some of the moping.

If anyone gets traded for peanuts, it will be Clarkson.
 
MT Steve said:
The hypothetical is that we trade Kessler for a package worse than Kessler's value to us.
Click to expand...
Yeah if we sign someone that adds 4 wins and trade Kessler who adds 4 wins… even if it’s at 85% of value… then we still have more overall value… big win!!!
 
framer said:
I think the "Front Office Hates Kessler" crap is way overblown. I don't think the Jazz are going to trade him for a bag of peanuts, tank or no.

Last year they were quite obviously limiting his minutes to impact winning (or perhaps to see what they had in Collins.) At this point in his career, he probably isn't enough to get you from 40 to 45 wins, but he is enough to get you from 20 to 25 quite easily if you give him burn on the court. I'd imagine that being held out of games to ensure a loss probably didn't go well with Kessler which accounted for some of the moping.

If anyone gets traded for peanuts, it will be Clarkson.
Click to expand...
no one said peanuts… lol. You trade him for future value that is in line with his value. Getting 90% of value versus 115% of value doesn’t change our franchise… even if it’s low probability getting a superstar does. If it adds 5-10% to the chances we get our all star I will take the reduction on the price for Kessler.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top