What next moves do you WANT to see?
- Thread starter Coach Ellis
- Start date
Bawse Dawg
Well-Known Member
I really have no idea, why I included the entire top three when I posted this earlier, so weird.I would love to see this
Hedda Gambler
Well-Known Member
Ideally I`d like to see two out of three of our vets moved for an injured or totally washed player. If Lavine needs to sit out most or all of the year, I`d consider him if they are willing to give up picks even though he has 3 years left. MIddleton would be an option of he gets injured, as would Nurkic, Ingram and Huerter.
I am not wishing an injury upon anyone, but in this league, players suffer injuries. When that happens, I want the Utah Jazz to be in a position where they can help out good teams by trading them helpful players and help ourselves play the young guys more.
Barring an injury, I would look at something like moving Kessler for PJ Tucker + 2030 and/2031 first round draft pick(s). We could also do Kessler for Nurkic + their first round pick in 2031.
Expanding on the above ideas, if a player like Jarrett Allen goes down during the season, I would propose a Kessler for Allen trade. If Allen is done for the season or would be limited in playing time, having him signed up for four more years on a controlled salary would be excellent for us. I could also se us doing a trade like this next off season.
I am not wishing an injury upon anyone, but in this league, players suffer injuries. When that happens, I want the Utah Jazz to be in a position where they can help out good teams by trading them helpful players and help ourselves play the young guys more.
Barring an injury, I would look at something like moving Kessler for PJ Tucker + 2030 and/2031 first round draft pick(s). We could also do Kessler for Nurkic + their first round pick in 2031.
Expanding on the above ideas, if a player like Jarrett Allen goes down during the season, I would propose a Kessler for Allen trade. If Allen is done for the season or would be limited in playing time, having him signed up for four more years on a controlled salary would be excellent for us. I could also se us doing a trade like this next off season.
Well if you go down that road then why not Lonzo Ball?
I wouldnt touch Lavine. Having him and Lauri on 90M+ per year for 3 years hurts our flexibility too much just for the sake of making this year's record worse. The problem is that we either make Lavine look good and rehab his value by screwing the tank, or then we make him look even worse in which case we are absolutely hooked to his contract.
Chargers Jazz Angels
Well-Known Member
Interesting ideas. I have flip flopped with the Ingram idea. If both JCs are used in the trade included with a couple on the Minny picks (should be mid 20s picks the next few years) I can live with that.
Next year make an offer to BI that is NOT a max but is still good offer. I don't think any team is going to offer him a max or even that great of an offer.
On the other hand I really want to see the young guys play. Ingram plays the same position as Williams. With some added strength he could be our future SF. Hendricks can also play the 3.
I really liked the idea of trade Collins for Huerter also. I think that is a good trade for both teams.
Clarkson is the player I want to see gone the most.
Next year make an offer to BI that is NOT a max but is still good offer. I don't think any team is going to offer him a max or even that great of an offer.
On the other hand I really want to see the young guys play. Ingram plays the same position as Williams. With some added strength he could be our future SF. Hendricks can also play the 3.
I really liked the idea of trade Collins for Huerter also. I think that is a good trade for both teams.
Clarkson is the player I want to see gone the most.
Hedda Gambler
Well-Known Member
I am not sure Lavine would be too much of a negative salary wise for our team. If we keep and extend Walker Kessler, he will be on a new deal after two seasons. The same applies for Collin Sexton. The rest of our guys - and i exclude Collins and our new veteran center here - are all on their first or second years of their rookie deals. By the time they are on new deals, Lavine`s deal will have expired.
The only thing trading for an injured Lavine would deny us, is cap space. I can`t see any game changer going to free agency with how the NBA is now and I actually think having a Lavine-like salary at the 2026 trade deadline would be much better for us that cap space next or that summer.
The 2026 offseason is where I see that argument fail. We are almost for sure in build up mode at that point, and Kessler and Sexton extensions would kick in with Lauri and Lavine on the roster. That already puts us so close to the cap that we would almost certainly be a negative cap space team.
2025 summer cap is not really something I would worry about that much, since we got 3 more first round picks coming up and we will be in more of a roster crunch than cap crunch. But if we did land, say Flagg, then I would probably be inclined to start the build up a year earlier and move some of the young guys in the process. At that point I'd rather have JCx2 salaries than Lavine salary on the books.
I've seen we have $8MM, $11MM, and $13MM in capspace now. Does anybody know the real number? Do we think we can get a first for a salary dump at whatever number we have? Probably just seconds, but there is a scarcity of options for anyone looking to get that done.
I believe it's 10ish million of cap-space with additional access to 8 million for a MLE signing.
I would be shocked if we got a first with how valuable first are.
It’s closer to the $13M for right now, but once we make the Eubanks and Juzang signings it will go down to about $6M. The reason why the cap space is temporary is because in theory, the Jazz could use all their cap space up and then sign Eubanks and Juzang with the room exception. But if they don’t find a use for the cap space, it just goes away once those two are signed.
Well yeah, I'm sorry not all aspects of basketball can be broken down into stats and tracking data. Sometimes you just have to trust people who are smarter than you.
I did a quick surface level search for an article about it, because I do remember beat writers discussing it, and this was what came out first as a hit
Maybe @Tony Jones can chime in. Do you remember the Jazz putting an emphasis on Lauri creating offense off ISOs and such from the 3pt line in the 2nd season in a way they didnt emphasize in his first season in Utah?
IIRC a lot of this had to do with the addition of Collins. Utah was playing with 3 bigs so they wanted to see if Lauri could be more SF type things with the ball in his hand from the 3pt line. It didnt really work out well and they ended up going back to what worked for Lauri and the team.
The amount of times you iso can be done with tracking data as well as a multitude of other numbers that are related. I legitimately don’t give a **** if you choose to remember differently and ignore the numbers. It doesn’t matter.
What you’re citing is an article before the season happened lmao. It’s basically saying what I said, if there’s growth for Lauri….it would be in the self creation category. Did that actually happen? Again, I don’t really care if you refuse to believe facts….I am saying the same thing as Tony. The Jazz should let Lauri expand his game. If they decide to restrict his game as you’re suggesting, it is completely stupid.
I am asking the same questions as Tony did before last season. We didn’t get an answer on things because he didn’t do those things.
Last edited:
Tracking data only shows play types for those plays that ended in a result. And I know you dont give AF. Keep trying to spin it in a way that will just let you argue endlessly because someone is making a point better than you and you cant accept it.
And again, we are not saying the same thing. The Jazz tried to expand Lauri's game last year. This year it will be more about going to what works and improving on the skillsets that make him a great player, not trying to expand him into a SF.
I keep trying to spin it by using facts, my bad. I should just accept the superior argument of "because I said so". That is the only argument you've presented. Tony writing an article before last season saying, "Lauri could expand his game by doing my isolation from 15-17 feet" isn't an argument for "Lauri did so much more isolation starting at the 3 point line".
You are right, I am not saying the same the thing as youl. I am saying the same thing as Tony did before last season. If Lauri has a next step, the next step is obvious and it's self creation. That's how he brings it to another level. Lauri has basically reached the pinnacle of what's possible as a non-creator. The area for growth is the ability to create his own shot. No significant scorer in the NBA had more of his baskets assisted than Lauri last season. The facts would say he didn't get to that point by iso'ing a lot, but go off and believe whatever you want to believe.
Whatever amount of initiating you think Lauri did last season, I want more of it. I do not want to limit his progress, especially in a year where winning is not the priority. Restricting Lauri would be the dumbest approach I can think of for next season. That is 100% on the list of things NOT to do.
Last edited:
I am ready for PG Lauri on offense and center Lauri on defense but only the next two years.
Utter stupidity. You dont diminish your best player in that way. If you want to lessen the impact of Lauri you play him less minute (like marginally less, nothing wild) and sit him more games. You dont put him in positions to fail. You want to further the development of his strengths.
Well I should have put a sacarasm tag out there but that is something that would be childish to do and harmful.
No, it's fine. Sarcasm is not easily read on the internet and you have a history of wild takes.
I'm having a hard time reading the board with your new avatar. It's a big contrast to your last one.
I'm not sure if I'm the only one that does this, but when I read a post I sometimes imagine the avatar saying it.
I’d like to see Sexton, Clarkson, and Collins all traded so we can roll with Lauri and the 6 young guns. I think that approach works out regardless of the final outcome because:
1- Either they suck bad enough to be top 5 headed into the lottery which gives us a shot at Flagg while giving the young ones a full season of building chemistry and individual development, or….
2- Some of the young guys develop faster than anticipated, we win 30+ games which signals that we probably have more of our future core already on the roster.
Also, if Jazz do suck enough to get into the top 5, I could easily see Ainge trying to leverage the hell out of our future assets to get a 2nd pick in the top 5.
1- Either they suck bad enough to be top 5 headed into the lottery which gives us a shot at Flagg while giving the young ones a full season of building chemistry and individual development, or….
2- Some of the young guys develop faster than anticipated, we win 30+ games which signals that we probably have more of our future core already on the roster.
Also, if Jazz do suck enough to get into the top 5, I could easily see Ainge trying to leverage the hell out of our future assets to get a 2nd pick in the top 5.