Does Lauri Get Traded?

[Handlogten's Heros]

Oh for sure, and thank you for clarifying. I could not decipher all these vague one liners. But the point is the same. The prize from GSW would be 29 and 31. You can only get that by getting WAS to play ball. We need WAS to play ball. If WAS does not play ball, GSW do not have a trade package for use.

Why is the prize 29 and 31? And why can't we monetize that upside with a swap? In 2029 we can loop in 2 other picks other than our own. 2031 it might leave some meat on the bone if we still suck.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

That's true, I'm not necessarily considering the pressure that they are likely under. I don't think that would be an easy decision.

I still don't think they owe him EVERYTHING.

I mean they can definitely say now and that's fine, but he's well within his right to ask for it and expect it.

 

[NUMBERICA]

More on the super swaps vs picks thing:

Given that the Jazz own three picks in '25, FOUR (basically) in '27, and three in '29, I would argue super swaps are as valuable as a pick anyway since the Jazz won't need more rookies to add to the mix. I value those super swaps almost the same as unprotected picks in those years. So, then getting picks in '26, '28, and '30 ON TOP OF that is actually better value than picks in the 25, 27, 29 and swaps in 26 (where the Jazz already own worthless swaps and no superfluous picks), 28 (already have a swap = diminishing returns because they only own their own pick), and 30.

TLDR; I value super swaps in 25/27/29 with picks in 26/28/30 as six picks. I value the inverse as three picks (with diminishing returns since the Jazz have too many prospects) and three swaps (of diminished value).

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

More on the super swaps vs picks thing:

Given that the Jazz own three picks in '25, FOUR (basically) in '27, and three in '29, I would argue super swaps are as valuable as a pick anyway since the Jazz won't need more rookies to add to the mix. I value those almost the same as unprotected picks in those years. So, then getting picks in '26, '28, and '30 on top of that is actually better value than picks in the 25, 27, 29 and swaps in 26, 28, and 30.

TLDR; I value super swaps in 25/27/29 with picks in 26/28/30 as six picks. I value the inverse as three picks and three swaps.

We will have enough picks in the 20s with the picks we already own. We want to make sure we get the upside of other picks. If the Warriors have the 25th pick in 27 and we don't swap... bummer... but am I losing sleep over not have the 25th pick in that draft when I have 4 picks that are higher than that. How much extra utility does that give me (or an acquirer).

If all the draft stuff is on the table as well as podz and moody you may not do better than that now or at the deadline. Do it now and you add a window of an additional 6 months for chaos to strike and to tank harder early in the season. I like podz and moody quite a bit so I'd want them in there.

 

[KqWIN]

Why is the prize 29 and 31? And why can't we monetize that upside with a swap? In 2029 we can loop in 2 other picks other than our own. 2031 it might leave some meat on the bone if we still suck.

If 29 and 31 are not the prize, what is the prize then? I know you don't think it's Kuminga, so what is then. Moody? A 2028 FRP?

 

[NUMBERICA]

More on the super swaps vs picks thing:

Given that the Jazz own three picks in '25, FOUR (basically) in '27, and three in '29, I would argue super swaps are as valuable as a pick anyway since the Jazz won't need more rookies to add to the mix. I value those super swaps almost the same as unprotected picks in those years. So, then getting picks in '26, '28, and '30 ON TOP OF that is actually better value than picks in the 25, 27, 29 and swaps in 26 (where the Jazz already own worthless swaps and no superfluous picks), 28 (already have a swap = diminishing returns because they only own their own pick), and 30.

TLDR; I value super swaps in 25/27/29 with picks in 26/28/30 as six picks. I value the inverse as three picks (with diminishing returns since the Jazz have too many prospects) and three swaps (of diminished value).

The big counter in the picks vs (super) swaps debate is that picks are liquid capital on the trade market and swaps are prohibitively difficult (if not functionally impossible) to trade.

In either scenario, the Jazz get three picks because I don't think GSW is doing four unprotected picks (unless it's Lauri already R&E-ed at the trade deadline, but only if GSW is good and Lauri is good and healthy).

 

[KqWIN]

Of course that package is better that’s not even a question but I think it just depends if that package is a dealbreaker vs what could currently be on the table.

Washington playing ball shouldn’t even be that hard honestly. Just offer them the worst of our 4 2025 firsts to get that pick back. Hell, a couple seconds might even do it.

You're 100% right about it not being that hard. I don't know why it's such a sticking point.

 

[NUMBERICA]

If 29 and 31 are not the prize, what is the prize then? I know you don't think it's Kuminga, so what is then. Moody? A 2028 FRP?

The prize is getting the best odds at getting to the top of a lottery.

 

[SoberasHotRod]

I mean they can definitely say now and that's fine, but he's well within his right to ask for it and expect it.

I completely agree with this.

 

[Elizah Huge]

Sorry guys but unprotected firsts > super swaps.

I don’t see having extra picks in years as a bad thing. You can never have too many picks in my eyes.

The years you’re valuing a super swap in we could just own the pick outright.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

If 29 and 31 are not the prize, what is the prize then? I know you don't think it's Kuminga, so what is then. Moody? A 2028 FRP?

Right... I'm asking why they are the prize... cuz the picks will be high right? Well if you have a swap with 3 other picks and it lands top 10 and you swap a pick in the 20s for it... then you still captured the prize. If it lands in the 20s and you have 3 other picks in the draft... do you really feel burned?

 

[Elizah Huge]

I completely agree with this.

That’s what I was trying to say.

 

[KqWIN]

The prize is getting the best odds at getting to the top of a lottery.

Anything you can have in the scenario where WAS does not play ball can be had if WAS does play ball.

 

[NUMBERICA]

We will have enough picks in the 20s with the picks we already own. We want to make sure we get the upside of other picks. If the Warriors have the 25th pick in 27 and we don't swap... bummer... but am I losing sleep over not have the 25th pick in that draft when I have 4 picks that are higher than that. How much extra utility does that give me (or an acquirer).

If all the draft stuff is on the table as well as podz and moody you may not do better than that now or at the deadline. Do it now and you add a window of an additional 6 months for chaos to strike and to tank harder early in the season. I like podz and moody quite a bit so I'd want them in there.

I pull the trigger on 3 supers, 3 picks, 1 swap, Podz, and Moody. I'm a little scared that's what's been offered and Ainge is being crazy.

 

[Elizah Huge]

The super swaps in 25/27/29/31 would be awesome. You know what would be even better? Owning those picks outright!

Plus we own swaps in 26/28 already so we’d be increasing the odds of those anyways.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Sorry guys but unprotected firsts > super swaps.

I don’t see having extra picks in years as a bad thing. You can never have too many picks in my eyes.

The years you’re valuing a super swap in we could just own the pick outright.

The difference between a super swap in those years and a pick is likely a pick in the mid-to-late 20's with three or four other rookies coming on board.

 

[NUMBERICA]

The super swaps in 25/27/29/31 would be awesome. You know what would be even better? Owning those picks outright!

Plus we own swaps in 26/28 already so we’d be increasing the odds of those anyways.

We only have our own picks in the even years (so super swaps are out), and the more swap rights we have on a single pick, the lower the odds that stacking swaps realize value at all. As it is, it is unlikely we realize any value from the '26 swaps (because they aren't super swaps and there are no other picks to boost value on them anyway). I also don't know if you can create super swap language if the receiving team doesn't already have the extra picks in question.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Sorry guys but unprotected firsts > super swaps.

I don’t see having extra picks in years as a bad thing. You can never have too many picks in my eyes.

The years you’re valuing a super swap in we could just own the pick outright.

No one is disagreeing but if you are trading 3 picks and 3 super swaps and 1 regular swap for 4 picks and 3 regular swaps... how much value did you lose elsewhere to get that deal? Does it cost you Podz or Moody? What was the sweetner you sent to Washington. I just don't see it as that much different so I would use those facts to extract other value.

You can never have too many picks but you won't always be able to consolidate efficiently. We have 7 guys on rookie contracts. Keep all of our picks next year and it goes to 10... add the warriors pick and it goes to 11. Taking the swaps now is a way to consolidate early. Having all the rookie scale deal isn't an issue but for like 5 or 6 out of 7 of those guys we don't really know what we have.

 

[KqWIN]

Right... I'm asking why they are the prize... cuz the picks will be high right? Well if you have a swap with 3 other picks and it lands top 10 and you swap a pick in the 20s for it... then you still captured the prize. If it lands in the 20s and you have 3 other picks in the draft... do you really feel burned?

But the cost of getting WAS to play ball would be extremely low. It can only be bad pick for WAS and there is a chance they do not get it at all. Instead of doing super swaps (which would make you lose the least valuable FRP), you can just give that to WAS and have 29 and 31 unprotected on the table. I understand that you guys don't care much about losing the "least favorable" pick in a super swap, but it doesn't cost much to get WAS to play ball. I don't want to lose the 31 UTA or GSW pick.

 

[Elizah Huge]

No one is disagreeing but if you are trading 3 picks and 3 super swaps and 1 regular swap for 4 picks and 3 regular swaps... how much value did you lose elsewhere to get that deal? Does it cost you Podz or Moody? What was the sweetner you sent to Washington. I just don't see it as that much different so I would use those facts to extract other value.

You can never have too many picks but you won't always be able to consolidate efficiently. We have 7 guys on rookie contracts. Keep all of our picks next year and it goes to 10... add the warriors pick and it goes to 11. Taking the swaps now is a way to consolidate early. Having all the rookie scale deal isn't an issue but for like 5 or 6 out of 7 of those guys we don't really know what we have.

Give Washington the worst of our 4 2025 firsts at that point, it would be worth it to get 2029 and 2031 unprotected.