You can't just unprotect the pick...you have to take the pick back entirely. If you unprotect the pick, 29 and 31 cannot be traded. GSW must own 30 to make it work.
Does Lauri Get Traded?
- Thread starter Saint Cy of JFC
- Start date
You can't just unprotect the pick...you have to take the pick back entirely. If you unprotect the pick, 29 and 31 cannot be traded. GSW must own 30 to make it work.
What?
6 months, timing would take him past the deadline so next summer would be the soonest we can trade him.
It is available but they would have to go into the season with enough cap space to do it.
Unprotecting the pick does not allow the Warriors to trade 29 and 31. You have to incentivize WAS to give 30 back to GSW.
I worded it wrong, it wouldn’t be taking protections off it would be getting the pick back basically.
Oh that's right....I remember us talking about this before, just couldn't remember how we got to this conclusion.
So... it's either trade him on his current contract or extend him and keep him at least for one more year.
TheStormofWar
Well-Known Member
Trade him now if offers are very good
I don’t know why you wouldn’t be able to release protections and this is the first I’ve heard this point you’re making. If you have sources I’d love to learn more.
I’m aware that conveying a pick in 2030 means that 29 and 31 aren’t tradable (which is why I said they could swap those years).
OK, this makes it feel like a trade isn't going to happen, or if it does will be for significantly less than what we are all dreaming of.
It would be better for us to get that pick back altogether instead.
This guy isn’t credible.
Ah, misread your post. You can release the protections, but I was saying it was not useful for 29 and 31. Yeah, we can do swaps in 29 and 31 as it is right now....but I still think it would be more beneficial to buy the 30 pick back from WAS. The cost buy back the pick from WAS is less than the pick that would theoretically be swapped in 29 and 31. You trade one pick to ensure that you get two picks in 29 and 31 versus one pick in each year.
He doesn't have to be credible to have a good point. Why would a team give up a huge package for a player that could leave in free agency next year?
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
To me it makes me feel like how I have always felt. We will extend him and then either trade him or keep him.
Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
Is he right though? He is saying that the fact that most teams can't do the extension that we and the spurs can do means he is less valuable.
That is correct information whether the guy is credible or not right?
Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
David Stern
Well-Known Member
He is not correct about the Jazz because we could renegotiate and extend due to our cap space. He’s probably correct if we traded Lauri somewhere without sufficient cap space
I'd agree. This is why I've been saying to expect less than Bridges (despite Lauri being a better player IMO). Bridges was seen in similar regard to Lauri IMO, but he has another year on his deal and is as certain as you can get to resign bc all his buddies are on the Knicks. You take on a great deal of risk as a team acquiring Lauri.
A useful reference point to this may be Pascal Siakam. He was traded on an expiring deal. However much better than Siakam you believe Lauri is, we can expect that much more. Siakam was traded for Bruce Brown + OKC 24 (turned into #29) + IND 24 (turned into #19) + IND 26 (top 4 protected)