What's new
By:
Filters

Trade Rumors Involving the Jazz

Saint Cy of JFC said:
This is still very strange to me. I get why Cleveland doesnt want him, they have Garland. Sexton doesnt really make sense next to Garland long term.

But no one seems to be very interested. I certainly dont like him that much, but if we got him I would probably start a "Collin Will be Better than Don" thread.

Would he simply be like 15-18 millions per year, Conley's contract, and one of the late first rounders we own? Is that possible under sign and trade? What would his contract have to come out to to be included in a S&T for Conley?
Click to expand...
I think that is an old rumor that they wanted Conley. If you read Jake's article it talks about Cleveland having interest in Mike and said Clips did also... but each spot kind of addressed the need. I think it is more to say "the Jazz have interest in Sexton" to illustrate the options we have. I think it would likely be Bogey and they get no picks... issue is the tax in Cleveland so can they clear enough room for a deal with Bogey/JC for Lauri/Sexton... is Lauri more valuable than Bogey... Caris subbed in there? Maybe they also dump Cedi into our trade exception in a separate simultaneous deal.

They are in a tough spot there.
 
If the Ayton to Indiana deal falls through I think Sexton might be a decent option for Indiana.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I think we could snag him for Bogey or JC maybe... its tricky because a move like that pushes them into the tax... so they might need to do some cleaning of the books with a Sexton deal.

When Anfernee Simons out here getting 100M for a couple good months of play in a complete garbage time scenario you'd think Sexton would have something in the $15M range right?
Click to expand...
I would assume he's at the minimum getting 15 per year, or he's taking a single season kind of contract.
 
KqWIN said:
Obviously you're being hyperbolic by saying "there are no ways to improve", but there are a lot of ways to improve a team. The draft isn't the only way to improve. I would feel differently about Don+Gobert if 1) I believe the roster that was just put together was optimal 2) the flawed roster played to their potential and 3) if tanking wasn't a permanently available option. The results are what they are, but by no means do I think it was representative of the potential we had. It's definitely not a "we did everything we could" type of situation.

Change the coach, make better moves on the margin, make a good trade, don't use the MLE on a guy who you have to pay to get rid of a year later. There are a lot of things you can do to get better. Basically, all the the Jazz did horribly were still able to be done better and improved the team. Tanking is permanently available option whereas having Don+Rudy at the same time is a special opportunity. I know, it all seems unlikely. But if/when we tank there's a long way to get back where we were, and there's no guarantee that when we get out of the other side it's going to be better. For as difficult as it is to retool, it is also difficult to find a Don and Rudy at the same time.

Perhaps personal issues made it impossible to continue anyways, but that makes the FO blundering even more devastating. I think the arrogance to sit on their *** for the past two years and not acknowledge any kind of weakness/failure is the biggest organizational failure I can remember as a Jazz fan. It will never sit right with me, and I cannot believe how many justified the inaction.
Click to expand...
WIth some of the things you say I absolutely agree... (it is hard to build a really really good roster that is perennial playoff team and in some years contender, I also agree that we could have done more)... but I also think we did a lot of irreperable damage with our moves on the margings to this roster. This was an aging roster with players around our 2 stars that were on the downhill of their careers. And we had our 1st round picks tied up. That in addition to the interpersonal issues between our two stars. To me it looked very much a lost cause and Mitchell himself had started steering the narrative toward asking out... something that pretty much everybody in the league expected to happen sooner rather than later. So yes, we had both Gobert and Mitchell under contract, but we really didn't have any commitment from one of them. We don't know what the conversations have been behind closed doors and it's very likely Ainge and the FO got more indications from Mitchell and his camp that he's not long for Utah.

In essence what we had was 2 stars that couldn't stand each other, aging roster on the decline, lack of picks to make serious moves and pivots, Mitchell seemingly itching to get the hell away from here. In that situation IMO keeping them together was definitely not the wise decision. And if we were going to trade one, IMO we should have traded both. And if we had to trade one first, I definitely would have traded Gobert 1st, because IMO we can drive a better bargain on Mitchell knowing Gobert is out rather than the other way around. I also agree that tanking doesn't automatically guarantee you anything, but I also think that this league is driven by superstars and the best way for a small market team, bar none, to get a superstar is to draft him, so... I think the path we seem to have chosen is not easy, and might not succeed, but if we are aiming at contention, it's probably our best path.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
I would assume he's at the minimum getting 15 per year, or he's taking a single season kind of contract.
Click to expand...
He can take the qualifying offer of 9M and be unrestricted. I think his price is above MLE but sometimes guys surprise with what they will take to lock in security. If they did him a solid and made him unrestricted maybe a 3+1 at the MLE with a player option on year 4 is a solid middle ground to give him security but also let him get back on the market.
 
There has never been a better time to have unprotected picks. Lotto odds changed and became more flat... you also have a play in with adds variance. A good team like the Clips misses the playoffs. The pick then becomes the #12 pick... and had an 8% chance of jumping into top 4. 8% isn't a lot... but you make enough of these bets and one will hit.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I'd be hoping to draft a star and less worried about getting a guy with star potential. If leaving RJ out of the deal has the effect that leaving McDaniels out did then I prefer that route. We got a lot of extra stuff because Minny said McDaniels was untouhable.
Click to expand...
This. I am kind of done with guys with "potential" because that often means like 30% chance of a star being born, 30% of total melt-down, and maybe 40% basic NBA player. I would rather take the shot on the complete unknown tbh and make our own destiny and either fly or drown in the outcome. A lot like buying a used car, you know it runs great, but it might have some transmission problems, but hey it could be the best car you ever owned. I would rather buy new and have all the problems be mine, not someone else's.
 
seattlejazzfan said:
the next best thing after legitimately contending is hope. all these garbage teams with good young players have hope. those teams drafting in the 13-22 range - eff that.
Click to expand...
You have to be lucky enough to draft a Giannis at that point. And then find a Middleton for nothing. Then a blue chip center that is a perfect fit that gets wildly undervalued and falls in your hands. Good for the Bucks! That's not something you can plan for.
 
NUMBERICA said:
You have to be lucky enough to draft a Giannis at that point. And then find a Middleton for nothing. Then a blue chip center that is a perfect fit that gets wildly undervalued and falls in your hands. Good for the Bucks! That's not something you can plan for.
Click to expand...
We kind of did the first 2, in that we drafted Mitchell and Gobert. But for us the blue-chip player was supposed to be Conley. Bummer.
 
TheStormofWar said:
Lakers fans being myopic as usual and the Warriors are one of the major thots of the NBA. It's always rumored they're doing everyone.
Click to expand...
Yeah Lakers fans are like Veruca Salt. Everything belongs to them whether it does or it doesn't, and the title is their birthright.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I'd be hoping to draft a star and less worried about getting a guy with star potential. If leaving RJ out of the deal has the effect that leaving McDaniels out did then I prefer that route. We got a lot of extra stuff because Minny said McDaniels was untouhable.
Click to expand...
This comparison between RJ and McDaniels in the context of trades that you just made is precisely what I was thinking earlier this morning; "You really value RJ? Fine, but you gotta find other premium asset(s), and no, Randle is not that. In fact, he's the opposite and you'll have to throw in more premium assets if we're taking him."
 
LogGrad98 said:
We kind of did the first 2, in that we drafted Mitchell and Gobert. But for us the blue-chip player was supposed to be Conley. Bummer.
Click to expand...
I don't think the comparison is apt. The Bucks got a terrific shooter that blocks shots and is one of the biggest players in the league for like the league minimum or some ****, then reupped (thanks auto-correct) for modest money. His anemic rebounding kinda doesn't matter because of Giannis, who basically needs to play next to a stretch 5.

We haven't had any luck of that kind. Saying nothing of what the picks turned into and saying everything of opportunity cost, the Conley trade was basically emptying the clip of the Jazz's assets and he cost a ******** of money on top of that. Also, perhaps the smallest player in the entire NBA that is any good.
 
NUMBERICA said:
I don't think the comparison is apt. The Bucks got a terrific shooter that blocks shots and is one of the biggest players in the league for like the league minimum or some ****, then erupted for modest money. His anemic rebounding kinda doesn't matter because of Giannis, who basically needs to play next to a stretch 5.

We haven't had any luck of that kind. Saying nothing of what the picks turned into and saying everything of opportunity cost, the Conley trade was basically emptying the clip of the Jazz's assets and he cost a ******** of money on top of that. Also, perhaps the smallest player in the entire NBA that is any good.
Click to expand...
All I was getting at is we had our "big 2" and brought in Conley to be our "big 3" and it was just the wrong piece. They did a guard, a big/wing, and a center. We did a guard, a center and added...a smaller guard. Not the best move all things considered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top