Keeping Lauri seems increasingly pointless

[Schrödinger's Gerbil]

If we had cleared the decks in the Wemby draft, I think we would have ended up with one of Wemby, a Thompson twin, Brandon Miller, or Scoot. Then in 2024, we’d likely have landed one of Sarr, Risacher, Sheppard, Castle, or Holland.

Best case, we’d have Wemby and Castle.

Worst case, we’d have Scoot and Holland.

In reality, we ended up with Hendrix and Williams.

I’m not sure how the pick value would have netted out if we had traded our guys then vs. now, but it seems pretty clear we would have gotten more back at that point.

Honestly, I’d probably rather have the worst case (Scoot and Holland) than Hendrix and Williams, especially with Williams looking like a bust right now. Plus, we’d have more picks.

I'd hate to be the team building around Scoot and Holland. It may be bleak in Utah, but a team built around those two would be as if not more bleak.

 

[Schrödinger's Gerbil]

We don't want to trade him. It's just hard to envision the Jazz being a championship contender while he's still in his prime. He doesn't fit our timeline.

I don't get this insistence that the Jazz absolutely MUST be on a certain timeline. There's no reason, in theory at least, why the Jazz couldn't pivot reasonably quickly if a core emerged in this or next season, while maintaining the flexibility and assets to make major or incremental moves that shore things up. Look at Houston. They were on a youth "timeline," but they quickly and unexpectedly pivoted a couple of years ago by signing veteran talent to augment their young core (with many commentators criticizing the move at the time based on similar "timeline" thinking), and two years later, they were the #2 seed. Now they've built on that and look like legit contenders next year (on paper).

I keep asking people, how much longer do you want to keep losing? There seems to be an unlimited appetite for it as long as people can convince themselves that there's hope for salvation in the lottery...someday.

Shouldn't the FO be developing pivoting strategies that won't condemn the team and fans to another 3-4 years of losing because of some imperative to hew to an arbitrary, self-imposed "timeline?"

 

[bigmike]

It's because of a new owner.

I listened to some podcast about new owners.... They talked about how a new owner comes in and likes to change and make a 'good impression' when what they should do is absolutely nothing for a year and then start working on things. They also mentioned new owners who have -0- experience in the sports world in ownership and say that it gets nasty quick.....

I think we've seen a lot of that. We're now in year 4 of Ryan's "10 year championship plan" .... and just by being a spectator, I think we can all agree that we're still years away from being competitive, let alone, being close to championship contention.

If Ace turns out to be a bust, we will be 5+ years away from being competitive at all and our rebuild will be 10 years in the making.

LHM had his faults but he definitely ran the Jazz better than Ryan has so far in his short time.

EDIT: I will say tanking this year was the best thing we've done since Ryan took over though.

I sadly agree with much of this. Ryan has a lot to learn wrt effective ownership of the Utah Jazz.

 

[seattlejazzfan]

I'd hate to be the team building around Scoot and Holland. It may be bleak in Utah, but a team built around those two would be as if not more bleak.

Of course but that’s the absolute worst case scenario. More likely you get Miller, Amen or best case Wemby.

 

[fishonjazz]

I get the thinking of holding on to the vets. They were shooting for a best case scenario and with lottery luck we could have been in the playoffs next season because we held into the vets.
Jazz didn't get lottery luck sadly and so it didn't work.
If we had wemby or Flagg along with Collins and Lauri and sexton and Clarkson plus guys like flip, Collier, key, etc then the jazz could quickly add guys through free agency and trades and be really good really fast.
That would be awesome for me because I like winning games and hate losing games.
On the other hand let's say the jazz got rid of all the vets from day one. And we still don't have any lottery luck. Not sure we would be any better off.
It sucks that in the end it all comes down to luck.

 

[Rubashov]

I get the thinking of holding on to the vets. They were shooting for a best case scenario and with lottery luck we could have been in the playoffs next season because we held into the vets.
Jazz didn't get lottery luck sadly and so it didn't work.
If we had wemby or Flagg along with Collins and Lauri and sexton and Clarkson plus guys like flip, Collier, key, etc then the jazz could quickly add guys through free agency and trades and be really good really fast.
That would be awesome for me because I like winning games and hate losing games.
On the other hand let's say the jazz got rid of all the vets from day one. And we still don't have any lottery luck. Not sure we would be any better off.
It sucks that in the end it all comes down to luck.

It is not luck!!!

 

[Isaiah 1:13]

I spent a lot of time away watching from afar. I just don’t understand many of the moves made. A genius move would have been to trade Lauri after that first year here. Yes, he looked amazing, but we had zero team around him. We might have gotten another small fortune for him like we did Rudy and Donovan.

Overall, I like Lauri but I also think it’s a massive mistake if we have him AND Kessler on massive deals. Neither guy is taking us to title contention. They would both be role players behind somebody like Ace, Clayton or some unforeseen internal growth player or a draft pick next year.

If Ace and Clayton have dynamite summer league showings, we should consider offers if we feel like these kids can be the face of the franchise moving forward.

I just really don’t like the idea of spending a ton on Lauri AND Kessler.

Kessler seems to improve every season and fits the timeline, Lauri not so much. Lauri had such a bad season last year, looked gimpy and was held out so much, makes me think maybe he suffers lower back issues similar to what hampered and eventually pushed Larry Bird into retirement.

 

[Schrödinger's Gerbil]

I get the thinking of holding on to the vets. They were shooting for a best case scenario and with lottery luck we could have been in the playoffs next season because we held into the vets.
Jazz didn't get lottery luck sadly and so it didn't work.
If we had wemby or Flagg along with Collins and Lauri and sexton and Clarkson plus guys like flip, Collier, key, etc then the jazz could quickly add guys through free agency and trades and be really good really fast.
That would be awesome for me because I like winning games and hate losing games.
On the other hand let's say the jazz got rid of all the vets from day one. And we still don't have any lottery luck. Not sure we would be any better off.
It sucks that in the end it all comes down to luck.

Basing the success of one's strategy on getting lucky may work for dance hall lotharios, but it's not necessarily the most reliable strategy for building a winning basketball team.

I infer from Houston's action that they were sick of losing, didn't see winning in their near future with the current crop of players or a strategy of continuing to speculate in the lottery ad infinitum, and decided to pivot to bring capable veterans on board, notwithstanding the criticism they initially took for it.

 

[The Fresh Prince]

Lauri and Collins will be good mentors for Ace. Keep them around until trade deadline.

 

[fishonjazz]

Basing the success of one's strategy on getting lucky may work for dance hall lotharios, but it's not necessarily the most reliable strategy for building a winning basketball team.

I infer from Houston's action that they were sick of losing, didn't see winning in their near future with the current crop of players or a strategy of continuing to speculate in the lottery ad infinitum, and decided to pivot to bring capable veterans on board, notwithstanding the criticism they initially took for it.

Exactly. Tanking sucks because its based so much on luck. We agree.

 

[underdog]

No reason to force anything. Aside from tanking.

As long as Lauri doesn't interfere with that, you let him recoup his value if there isn't a good offer available right now. Which there doesn't appear to be.

But if we're going to tank via roster construction like it sounds, & appear to have already started doing, I do think at least one of Lauri or Kessler will need to be traded. And we may still have to trade Collins on top of that depending on how our young core looks.

Personally, I'd prefer to recoup LM's trade value vs committing significant long-term money to Kessler as his skillset is easier to replace & his trade value is likely much closer to it's peak.

Also, the removal of his skillset may actually have as much or possibly even more of an impact on our ability to organically tank.

Maybe we can get away with keeping both by just trading Collins & banking on our young core to struggle out of the gate. But I'm not sure it's worth risking missing out on finding a potential 2nd star to pair with Bailey. Especially not in such a loaded draft class when we're a single season away from retaining our draft pick entirely.

Ideally, a great offer comes in for Lauri. But if not, I hope we don't move him just for the sake of it unless it's completely unavoidable in order to preserve a top 8 pick for next year.

Good post. Does Austin want to keep Lauri or not? If the plan is to tank again next season, which I think we could do if we move Collins, would Lauri be OK with that? He has said he loves Utah, but does he like it so much that he would want to do it? Maybe Austin tells him it’ll be one more year before we pivot and hit the gas. Or maybe he doesn’t say anything, just keeps him. Or he trades him. I would trade Lauri if we can’t move Collins this offseason. Otherwise, I’d keep him, and if he threatens the tank, then I’d trade him before the trade deadline. It seems Lauri is in his home country now, apparently getting ready for the EuroBasket tournament.

Jazz Lead on X: "Lauri Markkanen making 24 pull-up 3-pointers in a row https://t.co/YtOMILwLU8" / X

 

[karl malone]

Good post. Does Austin want to keep Lauri or not? If the plan is to tank again next season, which I think we could do if we move Collins, would Lauri be OK with that? He has said he loves Utah, but does he like it so much that he would want to do it? Maybe Austin tells him it’ll be one more year before we pivot and hit the gas. Or maybe he doesn’t say anything, just keeps him. Or he trades him. I would trade Lauri if we can’t move Collins this offseason. Otherwise, I’d keep him, and if he threatens the tank, then I’d trade him before the trade deadline. It seems Lauri is in his home country now, apparently getting ready for the EuroBasket tournament.

Jazz Lead on X: "Lauri Markkanen making 24 pull-up 3-pointers in a row https://t.co/YtOMILwLU8" / X

I think AA wants to do whatever is best for the long-term future of the team & keeping Lauri could be the right move if we are able to tank with him still on the roster without getting fined again. Depending on how things play out. My guess is that our main priorities this season are:

(Non negotiable)
1. Top 8 pick
2. Develop young core via playing time
3. Acceptable basketball (ball movement/defense/hustle/etc)
(Fluid)
4. Trade/rehab value/potentially retain Lauri
5. Trade/extend Kessler

As far as Lauri being on board with another year of tanking, especially if we plan to start trying to seriously compete the following year (which I believe is the plan), I don't think he would have signed without being okay with it. I think he likes it in Utah, sees the vision, & wants to be here when it comes to fruition.

Whether that will be in the best interest of the team is the question. I think it will depend on: A) does he threaten the tank? B) can we tank with him & Kessler both on the team? C) who do we value more Lauri vs Kessler on their respective contracts? & D) does it disrupt the development of our young core by limiting minutes/touches?

I do question whether we'll be able to tank with both of them (& maybe even just one of them) as I'm expecting major improvements/contributions from our recent draft picks. I just think Lauri's value is too low for them to be able to find an acceptable offer right now but ultimately it will likely come down to if they can tank with him/Kessler & who they value more if not.

I'm not sure either are in the long-term plan but personally I would prioritize Lauri between the two as he has the rarer skillset, could be a great 2nd/3rd star for a few years depending on who we draft assuming we're close to being ready to compete, & has a contact that won't interfere with extending our potential stars when the time comes (as far as I know).

But I think it's all fluid right now & depends on a lot of factors. Including what's on the table for him, what a Kessler extension would look like, & how they asses the development of the young guys. And whether they think he can recoup trade value/fit long-term. Both of which I see as very possible.

Will be interesting to see how everything plays out.