Keeping Lauri seems increasingly pointless
- Thread starter bigmike
- Start date
seattlejazzfan
Well-Known Member
i'd be curious how he feels about being on a team with a bunch of 22 and under year olds and losing 60 games. if he's good with that, i'd probably keep him around unless an offer blows me away.
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.
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.
seattlejazzfan
Well-Known Member
well said. even worst case is probably better than what we have now. and scoot was sneaky good in 2025 (since Jan) this season. there is a chance he becomes a really good pg in the league.
Last edited:
He's 22, has elite two-way potential, fits our alleged "positional size" mandate perfectly, and there's no way the return would be just Kuminga. I'm sure we'd insist on at least 1-2 unprotected firsts during a window where GSW could be really bad.
Maybe he has an attitude problem, I don't really know. He might just need a change of scenery and a real chance at consistent minutes. He came into the league as a really raw player and joined an aging nucleus that was trying to win now - pretty much worst case scenario for his development.
Markkanen also floundered for 5 years until Hardy and co. unlocked his game here. That's worked out pretty well for us.
outerspacefan
Well-Known Member
You freeze for a couple years, no direction, and all of a sudden you got compromised for several years ahead.
Natural consequences. Hopefully now RS continues to grow as an owner, AA continues to do what he's doing.
But make no mistake, Markkanen's trade value is now up in the air, no one knows what or if he will get us anything worth going forward.
It is what it is. No case to ruminate on it anymore. Let's enjoy on the fact that a direction at least appeared to be picked, and on the development of our new players..
Last edited:
Strutter
Well-Known Member
There's a minimum team salary: you have to pay someone. Lauri will be turning 30 in the 2026/27 season, which is when we will be pushing hard for wins. He shouldn't necessarily be washed up at that point and he just might help us with a quick restart if we hit on this draft and the next. From a team perspective, I don't see why signing him was devastating (although I think from Lauri's perspective he could lose out on some of his best seasons to tanking).
Minimum team salary is a terrible argument. You can achieve that in many other ways besides letting a star player waste his prime and lose all his trade value. At this point, the trade value is probably so low you have to keep him. I'm not sure there is a single team who really wants to trade for Lauri at the moment. It was a massive failure to keep him through the tank season. The "we don't have to trade Lauri" crowd looks so silly now—yeah, we didn't have to trade him, but we really should have.
Lauri playing well is at odds with our tanking strategy. One has to take a hit, and if Lauri doesn't play well he will not have any trade value.
Lauri playing well is at odds with our tanking strategy. One has to take a hit, and if Lauri doesn't play well he will not have any trade value.
I think that the problem lies with Ainge: the NBA world passed him by some time ago. All of his moves (acquiring and patiently waiting to trade Sexton and Collins, dangling Lauri, accumulating the assets for the future big game trades etc) were based on the decades of his experience and have been successful in the past. But the new CBA and flatten draft odds changed everything.
Ainge, like all old generals, came fully prepared to fight the last war and because of that the Jazz are where they are in this new environment. I think it is time for him to go, either completely or into a figured role.
Ainge, like all old generals, came fully prepared to fight the last war and because of that the Jazz are where they are in this new environment. I think it is time for him to go, either completely or into a figured role.
seattlejazzfan
Well-Known Member
hopefully austin will be a young version of danny as it relates to player personnel. so far, i'm pleased with what seems to be the direction he wants to go.
HeatCheck
Well-Known Member
Yeah I think they basically did that by bumping Danny up to more of a figurehead role and bringing in Austin.