What's new

Shams: Utah and Lauri expected to agree to long term deal

Why do you guys think BOTH sides want it to be signed, so he can't be traded mid-season? My reasoning would be it gives some peace for the developing of this team, and also for Lauri so he'll play his best (maintaining his value).
 
Why do you guys think BOTH sides want it to be signed, so he can't be traded mid-season? My reasoning would be it gives some peace for the developing of this team, and also for Lauri so he'll play his best (maintaining his value).
Signing today was like trying to get your spouse to sign a prenup. We both feel good enough about the marriage to not worry about the trade deadline cycle. I doubt we would say no if Lauri wanted to sign today... but its just a sign of mutual commitment.
 
I am sorry Kessler, Collins...it is time we play Lauri center full time this season. It would drain his effectiveness so we lose more games.
 
I am sorry Kessler, Collins...it is time we play Lauri center full time this season. It would drain his effectiveness so we lose more games.
The West is overloaded. You just have to be very weak at a couple spots to tank. Trade Sexton, Walker, Collins, JC and the tank is on. Regardless if we have Ingram or not. We get the high pick this year and then start the transition the next year and just hope the swaps help us for 2026.
 
One of the most valuable if he’s not a true max contract, at least. There are quite a few better players than him.

Definitely better players, but probably not a ton at his age + with that many years of team control. But yes I'm sure there's a handful at the least.
 
And, I think most will hate this....but I love the unconventional.

In a trade with the Pels I would offer Collins and the Pels the 2025 Utah pick if the Jazz fall in the 8 or 9 position only. That is just outside the all-star range and we save all the other picks and it would be super enticing to the Pels and the Jazz organization would motivated to be 7th or worst and the lottery could also save the Jazz from conveying (or wreck things too).
 
Definitely better players, but probably not a ton at his age + with that many years of team control. But yes I'm sure there's a handful at the least.
Most people would say he’s a top 20-40 player. I’ll have to dig into the question deeper but know for sure he’ll be more valuable if he’s sub-max. Shooting from the hip, it’s hard for me to believe he’s a tier-1 value piece on a true max since he’s not a creator and he’s only been good on bad teams (or so the conventional wisdom would say, at least).
 
Bobby Marks seemed to imply that waiting past Aug 6th would come at a tradeoff. At 5/$200M that does indicate that Lauri has taken something less than the full amount he could have gotten.
 
OK.

I said "one of the most valuable assets" - not top 5, 10, etc. You're getting awful hung up on semantics here.
If you don’t want to lose in an argument with words you’re using, then use better words.

What are you saying, then? He’s a valuable piece, but the difference between “valuable” and “most valuable” is the difference between an all-star and a perennial MVP candidate.

He’s valuable on a true max, he might be one of the most valuable on a sub-max. We’re back to where we started.
 
Back
Top