Marc Stein: Jazz-Warriors discuss pre-Lottery trade (Source says trade "likely")
- Thread starter IBProfane
- Start date
You really need to end.
Pre-inferiority complex.
BluesRocker
Banned
I still want to give Ty a chance. Al, only for cheap off the bench.
Here is the best positive I can see in this.
Kevin gets really mad when a trade rumor leaks out, he then cancels the trade. This all because he takes great pride in in not letting rumors get out. So if the other team leaks it, then he pulls out.
So now that this trade will not go through because it was leaked. The Jazz will end up winning in the lottery and keep the pick. O Connor then ends up having to draft because he will not be able to pull off a trade out of the pick because he has a hard time trading. So we end up with another bad *** talent. This all against was KOC was trying to do.
I can be posotive about that, not Kevin.
freakazoid
Well-Known Member
The new CBA has changed things when it comes to buying draft picks. For one thing, draft picks are more valuable because of the additional limits on tax payers. It's going to be harder to find teams willing to sell picks, because even the rich teams will have to find at least a few of their players on cheap contracts. Teams are also limited to 3 million a year in cash when making trades, so even if you can find a team willing to sell, buying a pick takes away some of your flexibility.
I'm not saying it's not possible to buy a pick, but it's not nearly as easy as it used to be.
I'm the type of person that likes to shoot for the win. Unless the Jazz are really disinterested in the #8 pick, it's a better asset than a 2nd rounder. Odds are that next year's pick protection won't be a factor. If the jazz can offer #30 and a player for a mid first rounder, then that's worthwhile, but they'd better confirm it.
gregbroncs
Well-Known Member
since when does anything KOC say to the press ever have any worth? Seriously the best thing about the guy is that the press never gets any indication of what he is thinking or going to do.
Weezur
Well-Known Member
Nope, the best thing to happen is:
1) We trade the GSW pick and get 2 second rounders + their next year pick.
2) We trade Al + someone and get a mid rounder (10-20).
3) Lotto day comes and it ends up that the GSW would have gotten the 7th pick anyways and we end up screwing them for a pick they always had.
billyshelby
Well-Known Member
Nice. Let's see what KOC does with this.
billyshelby
Well-Known Member
Since KOC is always calling me up for advice, this is what I'll be telling him: All negotiations should have two compasses in mind: 1) Guaranteeing a 1st round pick (because presently we don't have that guarantee); 2) lowering restrictions on the pick.
Getting 3mil is foolish, even if it 'buys' a pick. Jazz can afford to invest 3mil of their own money on that pick if they're so inclined and keep the GS pick as is. The big debate is going to be the "sooner than later" conversation. Personally, I'd give GS what they want for the next 2 drafts. I'd want a guaranteed 1st with no strings attached in year 3. That's probably asking too much, but that's where I'd start.
Getting 3mil is foolish, even if it 'buys' a pick. Jazz can afford to invest 3mil of their own money on that pick if they're so inclined and keep the GS pick as is. The big debate is going to be the "sooner than later" conversation. Personally, I'd give GS what they want for the next 2 drafts. I'd want a guaranteed 1st with no strings attached in year 3. That's probably asking too much, but that's where I'd start.
I may have missed something, but I'm missing why that's too much to ask .. perhaps not even close to enough.
billyshelby
Well-Known Member
It's too much because: A) we don't even have a guaranteed 1st in this arrangement to begin with; B) Year 3 is probably too soon to be demanding "no strings". If they're willing to guarantee a 1st, then their angle is going to be to push out new restrictions.
In other words, GS will say, "We'll guarantee a first, but we want Top 5 protected in Year 3, Top 3 in Year 4, and unrestricted in Year 5". KOC's leverage is to say, "Screw you. We'll take our 25% chance of getting your pick this year, and we'll take the risk we never get a 1st."
The smart move is to get a guaranteed 1st. So KOC will have to concede some restrictions on getting that. Maybe not what I said, but something.
billyshelby
Well-Known Member
Think leverage. GS's leverage is we don't have a guaranteed 1st. If they sucked bad enough for the next 2 years, we would get nothing under the present deal. That's a real risk. Our leverage is we can roll the dice on that. But we'd love not to have to.
There has to be give and take. I forget the original terms, but it's only 2 more years as a I recall. So I may be screwing this all up, but my guess is GS's 'guarantee' of a 1st would want to start after the original deal has elapsed. Thus, their angle is going to be: the deal stands, but we'll guarantee a 1st, and once the original deal is up, we want these restrictions on the 1st -- top 5, top 3, then unrestricted.
To me, that's pretty fair and I'd take it. But I'm sure KOC will push for Top 3, then unrestricted at the back end.
Mission Accomplished
Well-Known Member
We give them the pick and RAja
for Curry and a 2nd rounder
for Curry and a 2nd rounder
BluesRocker
Banned
hep
New Member
I agree. inn that trade GS is fleecing us.