Fire up the Trade Machine

[framer]

I mean I laid out the last 5 #10 picks in the trade you accepted. Outside of Bridges it was ugly. Not a non zero chance that Wemby busts... of course not... but that is not what you are trying to do with picks. You are trying to land the guy or guys with the most upside and best chances to realize that upside. If you prefer Mikal Bridges to the guy that MANY have called the best prospect since Lebron... a few guys that cover the league have said you have to go back to Kareem.

I really comes down to this... I will take a 50-60% discount trading a couple of vets to get a 4-5x better chance at a golden asset. The vets are worth like a first round pick on the market... that golden asset is worth like 10x that. Don't jump over dollars to pick up pennies.

I didn't recall you saying that the Jazz had to take the last 5 10 picks. I believe the Jazz would have done better than Bridges with those picks, especially with Ainge. My bad if I misunderstood though.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I didn't recall you saying that the Jazz had to take the last 5 10 picks. I believe the Jazz would have done better than Bridges with those picks, especially with Ainge. My bad if I misunderstood though.

Nah... but that is the most representative sample of what you'd get. It also shows the danger of saying if you take one particular pick and look at the hit rate. It really should be what you had reasonably available.

The scenario is Wemby or Scoot (so this year's #1... not any number #1 pick) for the next 5 #10 picks. Its just really to hit home that selling off a vet to lose a few extra games is well worth it to increase the odds. A top 4 pick is a super duper premium asset... if you don't hit then its fine... going from 12-13ish to 7-9ish still carries a ton of value. It would likely cost at least a solid young vet or a first to move from the 12 to the 7-8 pick imo and based on other similar trades.

 

[framer]

Nah... but that is the most representative sample of what you'd get. It also shows the danger of saying if you take one particular pick and look at the hit rate. It really should be what you had reasonably available.

The scenario is Wemby or Scoot (so this year's #1... not any number #1 pick) for the next 5 #10 picks. Its just really to hit home that selling off a vet to lose a few extra games is well worth it to increase the odds. A top 4 pick is a super duper premium asset... if you don't hit then its fine... going from 12-13ish to 7-9ish still carries a ton of value. It would likely cost at least a solid young vet or a first to move from the 12 to the 7-8 pick imo and based on other similar trades.

Ultimately it depends on what vets you are purging. Donovan worked because he dropped into a decent team. How much of SGAs and Bolmaros controlled 7 years is going to be wasted by the rest of the team sucking?

I was down with getting underpaid on Bojan because je was way too old for our timeliness, but I don't just want to give away serviceable younger players.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Ultimately it depends on what vets you are purging. Donovan worked because he dropped into a decent team. How much of SGAs and Bolmaros controlled 7 years is going to be wasted by the rest of the team sucking?

I was down with getting underpaid on Bojan because je was way too old for our timeliness, but I don't just want to give away serviceable younger players.

Exactly why I want us to tank now… how much of Lauri’s prime and contract are wasted being “meh”. I think we could get bad enough by offloading one of Beasley or JC… Vando maybe as well but just need to rest guys like Mike on top of it.

We land Wemby or Scoot and we in business… consolation prize of Black and I think we are in business too but just less upside. So you’d need to make up for it elsewhere. This draft is just so so critical.

 

[Ron Mexico]

There are no cheat codes lol. There have been like 11 franchises that have won titles in my lifetime. Whether you want to limit it to just #1 or be more reasonable and spread it out to top 5 picks... those teams are littered with guys that went top 5. I suppose we could move the beach or Hollywood to Utah if we wanted to get top talent to win a title instead of doing things we could control like making sure we have as many ping pong balls as possible I suppose.

Also the Spurs won how many titles? Miami won titles cuz they tanked and got Wade... who then recruited Lebron. GS sucked and got Curry... and tanked later as well. Like this is just part of the life cycle... sometimes you'll get Dwayne Wade and sometimes you'll get Michael Beasley.

If you think Lebron's first stint is sucky... well I don't know what to tell you... he took them as far as any Utah team has ever gone. On that list of #1 players there are an equal amount of champs and busts... sure... there are also a **** ton on all-stars. Discounting the value of landing top 4 in a draft with two guys that would go #1 in most years is just hilarious.

Its a very low probability that we ever get a title in Utah... its likely lower than the current odds of landing Wemby or Scoot... that's the thing... we are playing a bunch of low probabilities here... but aiming for a top 4 pick is the best of a bunch of low probability scenarios and I don't think its close. We might be successful with a middle build strategy... but that is where the Wiz, Magic, and Kings live... occasionally you will hit on a Giannis and pull off something awesome.

Put it this way... you just landed the #1 pick in this year's draft... you have an opportunity to trade it and get 5 #10 picks in the next 5 drafts... you taking #1 or the 5 #10s? I don't know about you but I wouldn't trade #1 or #2 for 5 straight #10 picks. It might get to like 7 or 8 #10s before I even start thinking about it.

Since that’s true then just go for a good consist team instead of risking for a highly unlikely outcome. I also think the draft has changed significantly. Players are far more unknown and teams are drafting more for potential.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Since that’s true then just go for a good consist team instead of risking for a highly unlikely outcome. I also think the draft has changed significantly. Players are far more unknown and teams are drafting more for potential.

Yeah I mean it ain’t like they scouting these kids in middle school now… you have to be kidding man or just not paying attention at all.

 

[Ron Mexico]

Yeah I mean it ain’t like they scouting these kids in middle school now… you have to be kidding man or just not paying attention at all.

You think it’s gotten better?! It’s not even close to when players usually stayed in college 4 years. Scouting long term isn’t new and it isn’t leading to more consistent drafting.

 

[HermanG]

Is there a certain age he has to do it by? Like 30 or 35 or something?

Before he turns 30.. so 2027 at the latest.

 

[HermanG]

Dude… think about what you just said lmao. 5 first round picks that end up #10 over one #1 pick. Where in the **** are you getting 5 #10 picks from? 5 years worth of drafts over one year of a #1 pick? I am struggling to find words to explain how dumb this sounds.

Hh offered him a choice of one #1 or 5 #10. Hypothetical question that didnt include terms like picking over 5 year period.

 

[Cptgrnlngs22]

So you'd trade Wemby or Scoot for Johnny Davis, Zaire Williams, Jalen Smith, Cam Reddish, and Mikal Bridges... ya nailed it!!!

Wemby and scoot for as great as they look may never translate to the nba. Lotto is a crap shoot plain and simple. I remember the wiseman hype. However wemby does look like a generational player. There is no guarantees at 1 or 10.


Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz

 

[fishonjazz]

In the end is still comes down to talent evaluation but having a higher pick gives you the opportunity to choose from more players. It really is that simple.

This is the absolute best way to put it. And its also the simplest and most obvious reason why you want the best pick possible.

If you have the 8th pick on the steph curry draft then you cant draft him.
If you have the 15th pick in the giannis draft then you cant draft him (i think he was 14th but not certain)

If you have the #1 pick in any draft then you can draft any player who is eligible to be drafted that year. You could take curry #1 or giannis #1.


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[fishonjazz]

Is someone arguing against #1 being valuable? Of course it is valuable. But its no cheat code. In fact, just go to wiki, scroll the list of #1 picks and you will find more busts than champions in that list.. and more players that didnt become superstars than those who did.

There is little to no correlation between picking #1 and winning a chip. If we discount players who left their original teams, that cuts the list to... 1 in last 25 years?

Thats why you also have to discount Lebron. He couldnt rescue the Cavs from suckiness of tanking until he left and let them suck again for 4 more years only to return to play with a long list of top picks.

Wrong. Lebron rescued them from the suckiness of tanking the day he was drafted. Didnt win them a title immediately but they were really good really fast


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[gomretat]

Wemby and scoot for as great as they look may never translate to the nba. Lotto is a crap shoot plain and simple. I remember the wiseman hype. However wemby does look like a generational player. There is no guarantees at 1 or 10.


Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz

Everyone wants very early picks which makes sense but the crap shoot part of the draft is why I would always take younger proven talent over picks.

 

[Eddie Zero]

Everyone wants very early picks which makes sense but the crap shoot part of the draft is why I would always take younger proven talent over picks.

Thats every gm though. Most will never part with recently picked lottery picks, at least not until 3rd season, or more specifically top 5 one's, unless they are headcases, injured, disgruntled. Or they are a contender that only wants win now 1 time allstars on rentals that need to get paid, and use the rook or pick as trade bait.

 

[underdog]

What would it take for us to get OG Anunoby from the Raptors? He’s 25, the same age as Lauri, and like Lauri, his peak years are still ahead of him. I don’t think the Raptors want to trade him, but in today’s NBA anything is possible if the price is right. Anyone wants to weigh in?

 

[whatthe]

Thats every gm though. Most will never part with recently picked lottery picks, at least not until 3rd season, or more specifically top 5 one's, unless they are headcases, injured, disgruntled. Or they are a contender that only wants win now 1 time allstars on rentals that need to get paid, and use the rook or pick as trade bait.

Near the top of the draft best player available makes sense, but somewhere near the middle of the draft, I would draft for need or what best fits for the team because it is just too costly otherwise. Yes, you can find hidden gems but you have to be fairly confident they emerge.

 

[Elizah Huge]

What would it take for us to get OG Anunoby from the Raptors? He’s 25, the same age as Lauri, and like Lauri, his peak years are still ahead of him. I don’t think the Raptors want to trade him, but in today’s NBA anything is possible if the price is right. Anyone wants to weigh in?

Two unprotected firsts at minimum would be my guess.

 

[Elizah Huge]

Thoughts on either one of these if we re-signed Clarkson?

 

[HermanG]

Two unprotected firsts at minimum would be my guess.

More I would say. He is widely considered as one of the best wing defenders in the league and has good offensive game as well. Has completely shut down Donovan twice (8 and 12 points).

I think its closer to 3 unprotected firsts plus players. Not quite Donovan price but not too far either.

 

[latin jazz]

View attachment 13675
View attachment 13676

Thoughts on either one of these if we re-signed Clarkson?

Terrible. You are not only giving up a decent player on a reasonable contract, you are absorbing overpaid -unplayable- players with atrocious contracts for only 1 unprotected pick.