They just wanted more picks to have more options for moves. I dont think they did it with any singular deal in mind.
Jazz Suns trade
- Thread starter nateboz
- Start date
They just wanted more picks to have more options for moves. I dont think they did it with any singular deal in mind.
Arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a pigeon - no matter how good you are, they're just going to knock the pieces over and strut around like they won.
SoberasHotRod
Well-Known Member
The Jazz Wonderbra
Well-Known Member
The jazz could take Nurkic' contract for another first. Since the 25, 27, and 29 just opened up, I would be fine with the 2029 pick.
We can keep doing Phoenix those favors.
We can keep doing Phoenix those favors.
Too many favors and they end up good in the future and hurt our pick's value. We only help in ways that they're likely to spend on their immediate needs, not in ways that will help them down the line.
HermanG
Well-Known Member
I like this trade. We needed consolidation, and this is not a trade aiming to draft someone in 2031. Its clearly a trade that aims to ensure that we have premium assets to trade away in the future.
Besides, we cant fit many more rookie contracts into the books anyways, unless we want to risk some potentially premature cuts.
Besides, we cant fit many more rookie contracts into the books anyways, unless we want to risk some potentially premature cuts.
The consolidation also opens up the prospect of again adding more quantity of lower-quality draft assets. (Early) 2nds/late 1sts for our vets are a lot more appealing now that we’ve offloaded some.
gomretat
Well-Known Member
This trade is an acknowledgement of how much of a total crap shoot it is to bet on the draft and how, in many cases, draft picks don't mean much in terms of value. We gave up 3 first round picks for a complete crystal ball hope and prayer that Phoenix will be bad when we want it to happen. No one has any clue about the landscape in 6 years with Phoenix or anyone else in the league. We are admitting that the gamble we took on these 3 picks did not pan out. This trade might be a great thing for the Jazz and it could completely blow up. I agree that continuing to draft young players has run its course - it made zero sense to hang on to all 3 picks the last two years. However, if you are convinced this trade was a smart move you are drinking way too much kool aid. Once you stock pile picks you need to trade for talent, not picks.
SoberasHotRod
Well-Known Member
I don't think the the trade was so much about a gamble, as it was about pushing out the timing of the pick. I'm pretty sure the FO thought they would be using picks on players by now, but they don't think we are ready for that yet. I don't think they really wanted to add 3 rookies last year, and they certainly don't want to add another 3 rookies this year.
It’s like every televised session of congress no matter who is in the majority.
We gave up THE WORST OF three picks in three separate years and we have too many picks to roster. The odds are very high that each of those picks will be in the 20’s which are marginally better than 2nd rounders. It is almost guaranteed we will get more value as this is also an asset we don’t even have to draft with and have all the time in the world to choose when to cash in.
But mostly I just want to stress that we are not looking in a crystal ball and just blindly assuming the picks we traded will be worth less, they are already (in essence, highly) protected.
Last edited:
gomretat
Well-Known Member
We do have too many picks, no argument there. And maybe if we had done a two for one I might wrap my head around the possible value being worth it, even though it is a complete crystal ball. Anyone that can accurately predict what teams in any pro sport will be like win 6 years is out of my league. The fact that it took 3 of our picks to get one in return, when the return could easily be just as bad as all 3 of the ones we gave up makes no sense to me.