You're the GM this offseason. What do you do?

[One Brow]

One metric may say that but advanced numbers really like him.... if he was on par with Favs that’s great because we ain’t keeping Favs for what Olynyk makes and Kelly’s skillset is a better fit.

I'm not arguing Olynyk might be a better fit. However, his advanced numbers are not not on a par with Favors. Overall Olynyk has below-average numbers, and Favors has extremely good numbers. Talent-wise, Olynyk is a downgrade, but I agree fit matters.

 

[Ineptimusprime]

Don’t have the salary to match unless they agree to take Favs and he agrees to move up his guarantee date. I’ve never seen that done...

That’s one of the many reasons it blows that we didn’t get it done at the deadline.

I can think of $18 million reasons why Fav might agree to that. If we approach him about the trade, he’ll know there’s a chance we aren’t keeping him and we’d be waiving him anyway. It’d be pretty risky for Fav not to lock himself into $18 million when he won’t get close to that on the open market if we were to waive him.

As he said at exit interviews “I need my option picked up”

 

[Bawse Dawg]

It's also only going to cause a legitimately awful franchise to continue to suck into oblivion and eventual folding and having to move.

Stop excusing **** franchises. Brooklyn gave up their first round picks for half a decade and made the playoffs this year. Why does constant incompetence give you the right to ruin the careers of more young players?

Why is it always the same teams at the bottom of the standings? Shouldn’t they have figured it out by now? You’re really going to blame the NBA for them sucking? How many chances do these **** teams need?


Me thinks you are just salty that the Lakers got a top 4 pick, and for 5 minutes were legitimately in the running for Zion. This take seems to go against all usual Wes logic.

 

[Gameface]

Okay, I'm the GM this off season. Well, if I take a handful of posters advice (@Lakers_Slapper I'm looking at you) I think it would go a little something like this

 

[Carbon13]

How old was Nash when he went to the Suns?

 

[SCS]

If the changed lottery odds tip the scales into folding and moving than the team was terribly managed and should be moving anyways. The new odds aren’t what should be blamed.

But ok, you hate the new system. Fine. What should the lottery system look like?

The old lottery odds were better. All this new system does is keep the bad teams bad because they are more likely than ever to miss game changing talent. And it incentivizes more teams to tank for a better chance at a top pick. Even makes it easier to do so because they don't even have to be a bottom 3 team. They can suck just enough to be bottom 9/10 and have a great chance at getting rewarded. Disparity in talent is only going to grow because of this. Good teams are going to be even better. Bad teams will be worse than ever.

 

[SCS]

How old was Nash when he went to the Suns?

30

 

[RJF]

Okay, I'm the GM this off season. Well, if I take a handful of posters advice (@Lakers_Slapper I'm looking at you) I think it would go a little something like this

Too soon...

 

[Carbon13]

30

Suck my meat. Get Conley.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

The old lottery odds were better. All this new system does is keep the bad teams bad because they are more likely than ever to miss game changing talent. And it incentivizes more teams to tank for a better chance at a top pick. Even makes it easier to do so because they don't even have to be a bottom 3 team. They can suck just enough to be bottom 9/10 and have a great chance at getting rewarded. Disparity in talent is only going to grow because of this. Good teams are going to be even better. Bad teams will be worse than ever.

I don't see this really. Most of the bottom three teams the last 5 years have gotten to the bottom by being intentionally bad. I hate it, but it's a viable strategy. We tanked a year and it was awful... we are too functional to ever be bottom 3 so we would be punished if we were a middling lotto team. Taking some of the benefit out of tanking benefits functional teams that have an injury or two or just a somewhat down year. NBA can't give huge benefit to teams that aren't competing.

Plus its the same damn teams drafting in the top 5 every year... some can't get out of their own way so they should be rewarded with premier talent? This system isn't perfect but better than before. I'd like to see a pretty drastic overhaul and make it a bid system where you get draft capital or points based on where you finish... allow teams to carryover points or capital if there aren't players they like or bid appropriately on guys they do like... would also facilitate trades because you could trade some of your point allocation versus just a bad second rounder for guys.

 

[LoPo]

I've taken a ton of flack for being opposed to getting Conley. Let me breakdown my thinking:

Conley (much of the same could be said for Love)
- Pros: upgrade over Rubio. Seems to solve some of our pressing needs of shooting and shot creation
- Cons: past his prime, pretty injury prone. $34 and $36 million the next two years.
- Cost: Rubio (renounce), Favors (trade or waive), at least one 1st rounder, maybe Exum or Crowder, future financial freedom

Older Max Guys (Tobias, Klay, Middleton, Kemba, Kyrie, KD, Kawhi)
- Pros: upgrade to anybody we currently have in their position
- Cons: none
- Cost: Rubio (renounce) and Favors (waive), future financial freedom

Younger Max or Near Max Guys (Russell and Brogdon)
- Pros: upgrade to Rubio or what we currently have
- Cons: might be overpaying to hope they reach better long term potential
- Cost: Rubio (renounce), Favors (in most cases) and some future financial flexibility

Multiple 2nd Tier Free Agents (Rozier, Lamb, Beverley, Randle, Bogdanovic, others)
- Pros: brought in to address at least one need and/or one position. Lower cost than max guys/Conley. Growth potential for most. Since they don't cost as much, they can be moved. Financial flexibility still exists.
- Cons: not a comprehensive addition or they would be max players. Some have to grow.
- Cost: for free agents, the cost would be a fair price or we wouldn't do it. Rubio (renounce). Maybe Favors (he leaves or he's picked up via waiver)


I think if we went with Conley, we would be forgoing the opportunity to chase Older Max Guys, Younger Max Guys or multiple 2nd Tier Free Agents. I don't think he makes us as good as the sacrifices it takes to get him and pay him. If we could sign Conley with $34 million of cap space, I would have hesitations. Giving up a 1st rounder and potentially Exum or Crowder too? No thanks.

I would prefer an offseason of Lamb ($13ish), Rozier ($13ish), Favors ($13ish) and a 1st to an offseason of just Conley. To me, that's aggressive thinking over one guy. Maybe it's Favors, Winslow and Olynyk through a trade. Or Beverley, Randle, and Olynyk. To think Conley is going to make that much of a difference is pretty foolish. And I'm tired of giving away 1st rounders to old injury prone PG's who only have a 1 or 2 year contract.

 

[stitches]

I'm very torn on whether I want us to go for long-term below max level players in this free agency. I think I still prefer staying pat than tying ourselves to mediocrity with players like Lamb or Jamychal Green. I would rather overpay for 1 year than have to pay Lamb 4/75 or something of the sort.

If some of the max'ish players wants to come to the Jazz, that's a no brainer - sign them. I think the next scenario I prefer is short-term(1? 1+1) type of deals to mediocre players rather than long-term big contracts to slightly better than mediocre players.