What's new

Trade Rumors Involving the Jazz




Elizah Huge

Respect All, Fear None
Contributor
My weird conundrum is if we trade Beasley and get back Fournier then Kennard and Fournier are kinda redundant. I'm concerned that Luke's knee is not good. He plays low minutes and has issues staying healthy. I think that contract is one injury away from being a negative deal. Its not horrifically negative but I don't view it as the big item I'd want back in a Conley deal.

That’s a good point although if Sexton is starting at PG we would need someone to replace his minutes as well.
 

Mongoose

Well-Known Member
I could convince myself that keeping Conley is not a terrible move, but keeping Clarkson is pretty dumb. He's a wasted asset that will be gone at the end of the year. Keeping one or the other might be alright for culture or whatever. Keeping Conley makes more sense because he still may have value next year, where keeping Clarkson does nothing for you. Keeping them both simply does not make any sense to me.
 

YoungJefe

Well-Known Member
I could convince myself that keeping Conley is not a terrible move, but keeping Clarkson is pretty dumb. He's a wasted asset that will be gone at the end of the year. Keeping one or the other might be alright for culture or whatever. Keeping Conley makes more sense because he still may have value next year, where keeping Clarkson does nothing for you. Keeping them both simply does not make any sense to me.
It doesn't seem like there's a ton of interest in Clarkson, I'm assuming his PO has a role in that because he could just bounce after the season.
 

Coach Ellis

Well-Known Member
I think Lebron is going to become incredibly toxic if they don’t do something. They need to make a move that helps them this year and blunts the sting of Kyrie getting shipped to Dallas.

Jazz should give them an off ramp. . .

Give the Lakers Mike Conley, Jordan Clarkson and Kelly Olynyk and offer to take back Russell Westbrook (buyout), two minimum contracts (Troy Brown and Max Christie would be preferable) and two pick swaps - 2023 (Lakers/Pels for Nets/76ers) and 2027 (Lakers for Jazz/Cavs/Wolves - I’m fine with them putting protections on it as well). Solves a lot of problems for both teams - at least in the short term.

Jazz get to improve two of their current assets - possibly significantly - and clear the deck on cap space moving forward. Lakers get three starting caliber players that should help the Lakers significantly for the next two seasons and they don’t give up their premium assets to make it happen.
 

Handlogten's Heros

Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
I could convince myself that keeping Conley is not a terrible move, but keeping Clarkson is pretty dumb. He's a wasted asset that will be gone at the end of the year. Keeping one or the other might be alright for culture or whatever. Keeping Conley makes more sense because he still may have value next year, where keeping Clarkson does nothing for you. Keeping them both simply does not make any sense to me.

It doesn't seem like there's a ton of interest in Clarkson, I'm assuming his PO has a role in that because he could just bounce after the season.
I could be wildly wrong but i don't think JC is a flight risk. He wants 20M ish on a new deal so all the MLE teams are out. Cap space teams are Indiana, SA, Orlando, maybe the Lakers... outside of LA I am not sure anyone is making him that offer. He likely isn't getting the role he wants there. I feel pretty comfortable we can keep him.

I think he'd have interest... but he's definitely worth a first and probably worth a bit more.
 

YoungJefe

Well-Known Member
I could be wildly wrong but i don't think JC is a flight risk. He wants 20M ish on a new deal so all the MLE teams are out. Cap space teams are Indiana, SA, Orlando, maybe the Lakers... outside of LA I am not sure anyone is making him that offer. He likely isn't getting the role he wants there. I feel pretty comfortable we can keep him.

I think he'd have interest... but he's definitely worth a first and probably worth a bit more.
It seems like teams are starting to get a little more stingy with 1sts
 

sip

Well-Known Member
Ochai is already our Beasley replacement. If we get Kennard he is coming off the bench.
Hoping for Kennard makes no sense when we are already loaded with young guards and we are highly likely take another guard in the draft because he is the best player available.
 

Elizah Huge

Respect All, Fear None
Contributor
Hoping for Kennard makes no sense when we are already loaded with young guards and we are highly likely take another guard in the draft because he is the best player available.

In that scenario we are moving Conley and Beasley.
 

KqWIN

Well-Known Member
That’s a good point although if Sexton is starting at PG we would need someone to replace his minutes as well.

It depends on what our goals are for the rest of the season. If we want to continue a playoff pursuit, the biggest drop off between Conley-Sexton is actually between Sexton-bench replacement as mentioned so we would need to get a better PG than THT/NAW. Part of me believes that if if we just stick with NAW it won't be as bad and THT is the only problematic one. I also think Kennard has some potential as a ballhandler. He showed more when he was DET.

But for me....I'm not too concerned about the playoff chase. I don't mind rolling THT and letting him vomit some mostly bad, but some good things as well. I also have been in favor of trying to scour the G-League to find a hidden gem. If you look at playing time as resource, the Jazz have a good opportunity to dedicate some of that to discovery/development. If we can use these last 30 games to find our Caruso/Jose Alvarado/Cam Payne, that is a huge win for the franchise.
 


Top