Grade the Jazz’s Trade Deadline

[outerspacefan]

I think the most reliable information we have is:

• Chris Haynes saying 2 unprotected firsts were offered by Indy for Kessler
• Tony Jones saying the 2026 pick was not part of the Indy offer
• Tim McMahon saying the Indy offer for Kessler was not as attractive as the Indy offer for Zubac

RealGM says Pacers 2026 pick included with the Zubac package is 1-4 and 10-30 protected...
Mathurin + unprotected FRPs 29 and 31 would have been acceptable to me.... but we've got no way to know for sure.
WK is kind of complicated for me. He was evolving the right way at the time of his injury, even showing a real trey which is super huge...
But LM, JJJ and WK salaries/play together....

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

They made an opportunistic trade to get a significant two-way player who fits with Walker and Lauri, and they didn't give up too much. The Lakers '27 pick is probably going to end up around 20. The Jazz's '27 pick will end up late teens or later (e.g., Jazz win ~45 games). The Suns pick in '31 is too far out to know what will happen.

Yes, JJJ has a big contract, but Ryan Smith must be willing to pay it. Jazz will be heavily invested in their 4 main starters: Keyonte, Lauri, JJJ and Walker, and will try to save money on other parts of their roster. When it's time to pay Ace and next year's rookie, then some decisions will need to be made, but Lauri's current deal will expire when Ace's 2nd contract kicks in. Jazz's books should be okay.

Jazz's ceiling as a team will be determined by Ace and the Jazz's '26 FRP.

 

[idiot]

Then it’s a question you should’ve asked

It was part of your initial statement. No need to ask about it since it made some sense, unlike the part I asked about.

 

[fishonjazz]

So difference between B- and A is almost entirely a matter of luck/non-luck -- something we have very little control over?

Yep. Sadly it is what it is. The trade could have a huge affect on the pick and therefore gets factored in heavily

 

[AK47]

Edit: After reading more post I see my answer is redundant.

I've already said I give it a A+ if we keep this years pick. If we lose this years pick and give up 3 first PLUS this year's first in a very deep draft, I give it a C-.

 

[NUMBERICA]

I think the most reliable information we have is:

• Chris Haynes saying 2 unprotected firsts were offered by Indy for Kessler
• Tony Jones saying the 2026 pick was not part of the Indy offer
• Tim McMahon saying the Indy offer for Kessler was not as attractive as the Indy offer for Zubac

Importantly, this is likely because Indy was concerned about how much it would cost to retain Walker in RFA.

 

[NUMBERICA]

RealGM says Pacers 2026 pick included with the Zubac package is 1-4 and 10-30 protected...
Mathurin + unprotected FRPs 29 and 31 would have been acceptable to me.... but we've got no way to know for sure.
WK is kind of complicated for me. He was evolving the right way at the time of his injury, even showing a real trey which is super huge...
But LM, JJJ and WK salaries/play together....

I think this is dead-on. I just want to stress that this cap environment is really incentivizing perfect construction and perfect timing, and we’re not there on either fronts with how this has played out so far. I am not comfortable with how much one Walker-horny team with capspace can determine how this plays out and the liquidity of ‘29/‘31 picks + an ideal off-ball wing would present a lot of very valuable optionality/flexibility heading into a crucial offseason (I will have Giannis designs until a trade occurs).

 

[jom2003]

C if we can't keep the pick.

A if we keep it.

Paying 50mil for JJJ a year till 2030 is still too costly for my liking. But if we can keep the pick and draft a guy like Wagler to fill out the roster, we’re in business.

 

[idiot]

Yep. Sadly it is what it is. The trade could have a huge affect on the pick and therefore gets factored in heavily

I don't think you quite got my point. I agree that keeping or not keeping the pick is something that the trade may affect. And it's something that we are in some control of (though the last two games show that losing is just not that easy; we have players that put it together on occasion even with our bare-bones squad).

But I think the original statement I responded to is that the trade should be judged based on whether we get a 1-4 pick vs. a 5-8 pick. This is the part we're just not in much control of. This is the part where luck or non-luck comes into play. This is the part where the trade really is unlikely to make a significant difference. I don't think the quality of the decision should be judged on whether we get luck in the future or not. (Unless you're willing to say that last year's decision to tank -- and success in achieving the #1 pre-lottery seed -- should be judged as not the best decision since we didn't get lottery luck.)