What's new
By:

Lauri + Tank

I've said this before, but the Jazz can tank simply by gutting their bench production. We don't have THT this year, but it's still possible.
 
SoberasHotRod said:
OK, here's an angle, not saying it's a good one...

Do the Olympics make it more difficult to tank this year? Most of the best players are playing and it might make their teams more cautious with their playing time this year. Especially when they come to Utah where the top players already rest more than anywhere else.
Click to expand...

Lebron and Anthony Davis don't need the extra workload, but I don't think it will affect most teams.
 
Ron Mexico said:
Teams will definitely rest their top guys against us a lot. They did last year and will even more this year.

This roster is far more likely a play in team than a bottom 5.
Click to expand...
They generally get a pretty big schedule advantage most years in part because of how games are scheduled and the elevation. It’s part of why our home record is always good.
 
You don't even need Lauri's stats, if you only watched the games. Post trade deadline doesn't really count bc Jazz rested so many key players at times,that was left after Fontecchio and KO trades.

Lauri's size and shooting allows so much room for every other player on court with this Jazz team... If Hardy can come up with a rotation that finds right complimentary pieces, glue guys around Lauri and Sexton two-man punch, like Fontecchio and KO were, this Lauri centered offense might be again quite effective. The good news for tank is how Filipowski as a possible,future KO equivalent is only a raw rookie and won't affect too much when he gets minutes.

Also,the amount of small little things Fontecchio offered as a complimentary piece, is not so easily replaced as there's really no one in this roster to take his place. That's why I see this team be 40-45% team at best instead of the 50-50 team it was all the way into the last trade deadline
 
More Questions:

- What would you consider a successful Tank + Lauri - e.g. best lottery odds, 5th best lottery odds, etc.?
- What players are you willing to give up for lesser value to help the tank? How much less value?
 
For me I think if we can get to the 6th best lottery odds or better, I'll consider that successful.

Like most, I'm obviously willing to trade Clarkson or Collins. Since I don't think they help winning by too much I don't want to take much of a discount. I would prefer not to trade Kessler of Collins if it's looking like we can still get to a bottom 6 record. If we're in the 7-10 record range and need a push to get to bottom 6 then I would be ok with taking back an expiring contract and a first for both.

We really need a front loaded schedule to get off to a bad start.
 
SoberasHotRod said:
More Questions:

- What would you consider a successful Tank + Lauri - e.g. best lottery odds, 5th best lottery odds, etc.?
- What players are you willing to give up for lesser value to help the tank? How much less value?
Click to expand...
5th or better = Success
6th-7th = Met expectations
8th = Not great
9th+ = You failed to understand the assignment

Sexton, Walker, JCX2 all are on the table for less value to aid the tank. Said in another thread 80-90% of fair value for Walker/Sexton and I'm cool... but I could go lower. Give me one solid first for Walker or Sexton and maybe a little something extra and I'm good.
 
SoberasHotRod said:
More Questions:

- What would you consider a successful Tank + Lauri - e.g. best lottery odds, 5th best lottery odds, etc.?
- What players are you willing to give up for lesser value to help the tank? How much less value?
Click to expand...

1) I think the success or failure of tank+Lauri is where the wins come from. I don’t mind if they come from younger players improving or playing well. If that is the cost of less lottery balls I al more than ok with it. I think we gave up our hard tanking aspirations by keeping Lauri. Realistically, we don’t have a player who can be traded for value or doesn’t have potential to be here for the long haul. There are no temporary vets grinding out wins which I’m happy with. I think we will see some intentional tanking activities once again, but for the most part we have to accept our choice with Lauri.

I’m assuming we pull the plug btw. If we keep playing our best players for the end of the year I’d consider that a failure in judgement. But I wouldn’t consider it a failure if our young players do well in the first half that it boosted our total season standing.

2) Kessler/Sexton are the two to discuss. I think I would be ok eating value on both. I am more inclined to trade Kessler because he has clear teams that need him + his anti tank potential. On top of that, while Kessler is a good young player I don’t see star potential in him. Sexton could be potentially a star player and I get more queasy about trading him. Having said that, for both players I have a hunch that UTA is not the situation for them to blossom based on how they’ve been managed so far.

For Kessler, I think I’d be willing to take the Knicks pile of stuff which is probably less than you’d hope for but still something.

For Sexton, I think if you get one really solid first and one mediocre/protected first I’d be ok with it. Sexton’s value is hard to peg, so I don’t even know if that’s an underpay, but I do a trade at that value. If the Lakers unprotected 27 and then gave us 29 (protected) I’d be ok with a deal like that.
 
KqWIN said:
1) I think the success or failure of tank+Lauri is where the wins come from. I don’t mind if they come from younger players improving or playing well. If that is the cost of less lottery balls I al more than ok with it. I think we gave up our hard tanking aspirations by keeping Lauri. Realistically, we don’t have a player who can be traded for value or doesn’t have potential to be here for the long haul. There are no temporary vets grinding out wins which I’m happy with. I think we will see some intentional tanking activities once again, but for the most part we have to accept our choice with Lauri.

I’m assuming we pull the plug btw. If we keep playing our best players for the end of the year I’d consider that a failure in judgement. But I wouldn’t consider it a failure if our young players do well in the first half that it boosted our total season standing.

2) Kessler/Sexton are the two to discuss. I think I would be ok eating value on both. I am more inclined to trade Kessler because he has clear teams that need him + his anti tank potential. On top of that, while Kessler is a good young player I don’t see star potential in him. Sexton could be potentially a star player and I get more queasy about trading him. Having said that, for both players I have a hunch that UTA is not the situation for them to blossom based on how they’ve been managed so far.

For Kessler, I think I’d be willing to take the Knicks pile of stuff which is probably less than you’d hope for but still something.

For Sexton, I think if you get one really solid first and one mediocre/protected first I’d be ok with it. Sexton’s value is hard to peg, so I don’t even know if that’s an underpay, but I do a trade at that value. If the Lakers unprotected 27 and then gave us 29 (protected) I’d be ok with a deal like that.
Click to expand...

With Kessler it's going to be tough. If he looks great he's going to hurt the tank, but then I won't want to trade him. I'm already prepared to admit my hypocrisy there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top