What's new
By:

Lauri Markkanen Hype & Appreciation Thread

Thee Idiotic Minivan K said:
Not necessary everyone already knows you’re an idiot already.
Click to expand...

The last argument I had here, it was legitimately and argument as to whether or not I enjoy basketball. Apparently strangers know what I enjoy more than myself, so maybe they can tell me what I should get for lunch.
 
LogGrad98 said:
This is an interesting comparison:

View attachment 13647

Strikingly similar, except Lauri is way more efficient. Mitchell is averaging over 36 mpg and Lauri just under, so when adjusted for per36 they come pretty close together. And if we keep feeding Lauri he could be every bit the scorer that Mitchell is. He has a huge advantage as a 7-footer who can do what he can do on offense. Not a lot of player will match up well to defend Lauri. Damn he is going to be all-NBA good in a couple of years.
Click to expand...
I give the edge to player A in that comp. (if I weren't able to see who each player was)
Efficiency matters a lot to me. Plus one of them is a rebounder too. Lower turnovers. Then you tell me one of them is 7 feet tall and that is just icing on the cake. I bet Lauri is the better defender too. Cheaper too.
 
I wanted to trade Bogey two years ago to get Markannen from the Bulls. However, never ever did I think he would be this good. It's insane. He is turning out to be 3 times the player I thought he would be.

He does have a flaw that I would exploit, but it is still difficult to use against him. Make him put the ball on the floor and then double him when he drives. I don't think he is good enough to dish it consistently. But who knows, he may add that skill, but I do think he needs passing to set him up to get this kind of production we are seeing.
 
KqWIN said:
The last argument I had here, it was legitimately and argument as to whether or not I enjoy basketball. Apparently strangers know what I enjoy more than myself, so maybe they can tell me what I should get for lunch.
Click to expand...
Just be thankful people take pity on your idiocy. Just be thankful for the helping hand. I know I am.
 
whatthe said:
I wanted to trade Bogey two years ago to get Markannen from the Bulls. However, never ever did I think he would be this good. It's insane. He is turning out to be 3 times the player I thought he would be.

He does have a flaw that I would exploit, but it is still difficult to use against him. Make him put the ball on the floor and then double him when he drives. I don't think he is good enough to dish it consistently. But who knows, he may add that skill, but I do think he needs passing to set him up to get this kind of production we are seeing.
Click to expand...

I think there was a lot of potential to get him at different times....maybe he wouldn't have blossomed the same way, but I think he would have been great next to Mitchell. He's a second action type of guy. Just based on his interviews and past (Boylen victim) I think what he needed most was the confidence.
 
A hypothetical where you just do the Donovan trade, don't do the Rudy trade, don't do the Bojan trade, and trade some of the Donovan assets for OG Anunoby. What would be a nice sprinkle on top is if you then were able to trade for Ball and he were healthy.

Ball
Anunoby
Bojan
Lauri
Rudy
 
KqWIN said:
The last argument I had here, it was legitimately and argument as to whether or not I enjoy basketball. Apparently strangers know what I enjoy more than myself, so maybe they can tell me what I should get for lunch.
Click to expand...
hard eyeroll
 
He is making a case as reserve spot ,with the 49 last noght for sure, even though it was the Rockets.
Lots of attention grabbing stats are important for these types of rewards. I am leaning towards him being there, given it is in Utah, even though I was thinking he was right on the fringe of being a injury replacement at best 24 hours ago. Couple more high scoring efficient games and a bunch of highlight slams and he's got it
 
infection said:
A hypothetical where you just do the Donovan trade, don't do the Rudy trade, don't do the Bojan trade, and trade some of the Donovan assets for OG Anunoby. What would be a nice sprinkle on top is if you then were able to trade for Ball and he were healthy.

Ball
Anunoby
Bojan
Lauri
Rudy
Click to expand...
I mean Ball hasn't played yet... and doesn't sound like he's close.

I think doing both deals was the right move... literally put it in my signature. Part of Rudy's issue is roster fit but he is also slowing down a bit and the game is just moving away from that player type. Still useful but I think his contract becomes a millstone.

I think we would have been better off keeping Bogey. No reason he and Lauri can't survive. I'm actually fine with the trade I guess... we should have at least gotten some second rounders, but that may be the title of my book as a Jazz fan.

Not gonna start a whole thread about it, but the big inefficiency I think we could take advantage of is pick swaps. Everyone is like - Why do we want more picks? and teams are reluctant to trade picks because then they can't package picks and trade them later for a star. There is a diminishing return if you have like 7 picks in a 3 year span... but what if you focus on improving the quality instead of the quantity of the picks. There might not be a team better positioned for this scam than the Jazz. Its kinda wild so I'm sure GMs would be skeptical. But what if you traded Beasley/Vando to Phoenix for 2 or 3 pick swaps... a swap in 2023 with the Brooklyn pick and a swap in 2025 with either the Cavs or Wolves pick? The Lakers pick swap with NO this year was likely of very little value when they did the deal back in 2018 or 19... now it looks like it will yield at least a lotto pick. Trading for just swaps might be a sneaky way of squeezing value and it lets teams trade their other picks for an all in move if they need or want to.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I mean Ball hasn't played yet... and doesn't sound like he's close.

I think doing both deals was the right move... literally put it in my signature. Part of Rudy's issue is roster fit but he is also slowing down a bit and the game is just moving away from that player type. Still useful but I think his contract becomes a millstone.

I think we would have been better off keeping Bogey. No reason he and Lauri can't survive. I'm actually fine with the trade I guess... we should have at least gotten some second rounders, but that may be the title of my book as a Jazz fan.

Not gonna start a whole thread about it, but the big inefficiency I think we could take advantage of is pick swaps. Everyone is like - Why do we want more picks? and teams are reluctant to trade picks because then they can't package picks and trade them later for a star. There is a diminishing return if you have like 7 picks in a 3 year span... but what if you focus on improving the quality instead of the quantity of the picks. There might not be a team better positioned for this scam than the Jazz. Its kinda wild so I'm sure GMs would be skeptical. But what if you traded Beasley/Vando to Phoenix for 2 or 3 pick swaps... a swap in 2023 with the Brooklyn pick and a swap in 2025 with either the Cavs or Wolves pick? The Lakers pick swap with NO this year was likely of very little value when they did the deal back in 2018 or 19... now it looks like it will yield at least a lotto pick. Trading for just swaps might be a sneaky way of squeezing value and it lets teams trade their other picks for an all in move if they need or want to.
Click to expand...

I have made this point before that we should get as many pick swaps in certain years as possible to maximize the best possible outcome. I was met with disagreement on here saying that it wasn’t smart because we should get them in multiple different years to have a better chance in more years? I guess? Doesn’t really make sense to me as I’d like to guarantee the best possible pick in one or two years rather than maybe having a chance at a higher pick (much lower odds) in a couple years.
 
Elizah Huge said:
I have made this point before that we should get as many pick swaps in certain years as possible to maximize the best possible outcome. I was met with disagreement on here saying that it wasn’t smart because we should get them in multiple different years to have a better chance in more years? I guess? Doesn’t really make sense to me as I’d like to guarantee the best possible pick in one or two years rather than maybe having a chance at a higher pick (much lower odds) in a couple years.
Click to expand...
I'd aim for swaps in 25 and 27... a lot can happen in a couple years and we have 3 picks we can layer the swap with. I wouldn't get them in the even years because the only pick we have to swap with is our own. I want the swap to have value to us so the more picks we own the better.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I'd aim for swaps in 25 and 27... a lot can happen in a couple years and we have 3 picks we can layer the swap with. I wouldn't get them in the even years because the only pick we have to swap with is our own. I want the swap to have value to us so the more picks we own the better.
Click to expand...

I gotcha. Even years aren’t bad either though if push comes to shove.
 
KqWIN said:
Still open to lunch suggestions. You're the one who knows whether or not I like basketball so I thought you might know what I'd like to eat as well.
Click to expand...
Well if you tell me you can't stand In-n-Out because people say McDonalds is better... then I won't suggest you get a burger.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top