What's new
By:

Trade Rumors Involving the Jazz

Handlogten's Heros said:
What if it was just Bogey and Mike for Westbrook and one of their picks? I’d probably do that in a second. Clears the cap even more next year. Still have the Minnesota guys to trade if we want. Can still kind of bluff and say we are keeping Donovan… say we are clearing the cap for adding a FA and using our 2023 picks to rebuild around Don.

Don
Bev
Beasley?
Vando/Simone
Doke/Kessler/Vando

JC off the bench… that good enough to bluff? Maybe not… certainly good enough to tank though.
Click to expand...
I would do that in a heartbeat. I'd try to add Beasley/Beverley (and Nunn, for matching) + 2029 as well, but I would definitely take '27 unprotected for Mike and Bojan (and a bunch of Ryan's millions).
 
One thing I got wrong from just listening to podcasts...

Lebron is actually extension eligible starting 8/4... I had heard it was a deadline. He can sign the extension at anytime... but can't do so until after 8/4. That is good for us imo. We can work out the Donovan deal and keep the Lakers hanging on until at least 9/6 when the Minny guys are eligible to be traded (aggregated). My bad yall. Nothing will happen this week. We can all check back in in a month.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
One thing I got wrong from just listening to podcasts...

Lebron is actually extension eligible starting 8/4... I had heard it was a deadline. He can sign the extension at anytime... but can't do so until after 8/4. That is good for us imo. We can work out the Donovan deal and keep the Lakers hanging on until at least 9/6 when the Minny guys are eligible to be traded (aggregated). My bad yall. Nothing will happen this week. We can all check back in in a month.
Click to expand...

We must have been listening to the same podcasts because that was my impression as well.
 
The one thing that feels like a little bit more of a rush than Donovan is the Lakers situation, though. I really want to be part of the whole "pay a king's ransom to get out of RW's deal" situation. What if Pacers or something gets in there first?
 
hgb said:
The one thing that feels like a little bit more of a rush than Donovan is the Lakers situation, though. I really want to be part of the whole "pay a king's ransom to get out of RW's deal" situation. What if Pacers or something gets in there first?
Click to expand...
It sounds like the Pacers want nothing to do with Westbrook. Their owner is old school and doesn't believe in buyouts.
 
homeytennis said:
It sounds like the Pacers want nothing to do with Westbrook. Their owner is old school and doesn't believe in buyouts.
Click to expand...
Could be, I've just been watching the rumur mill from time to time. There's also Charlotte (they say Hayward + stuff for RW without picks!? Who'd do that?). But if the market is dry, I'm all for waiting the whole bunch out, on both fronts.
 
Bodhi said:
This. The language that if they keep Donovan then they would be interested is weird.

I agree that going into tank mode, buying low on dudes that have upside and may have flamed out with another team is a great approach though. Sexton at a bargain number would rule.
Click to expand...
I think getting Sexton before trading Donovan might aid in bluffing about retooling when it’s really more of a straight play at asset accumulation.
 
hgb said:
Could be, I've just been watching the rumur mill from time to time. There's also Charlotte (they say Hayward + stuff for RW without picks!? Who'd do that?). But if the market is dry, I'm all for waiting the whole bunch out, on both fronts.
Click to expand...
Why would Charlotte want RW? And why would LA not take that deal? In any case, I'd be on the phone with them if we were to land RW and try to extract something out of that deal. You just add an additional year of contract with Hayward. Rehab Hayward's value then ship him off somewhere. Have this be the perpetual draft pick fund.
 
NUMBERICA said:
I think getting Sexton before trading Donovan might aid in bluffing about retooling when it’s really more of a straight play at asset accumulation.
Click to expand...
Well, at least that's what the FO seems to be putting out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top