Grantland Article about Utah Trades and Approach to Free Agency

[Stifle Tower]

The article definitely had a different take on the trades that hasn't been discussed. It is interesting argument that Utah paid about $6m per pick or about $8m and $4m if you divide the value of the first and second rounders. It does seem like a lot when the average first round pick sells for $3-4m. The Jazz of course got three players who may in fact contribute positively on the court, this season and doubtfully but maybe beyond. I am definitely in favor of the trade, and thought that getting 4 picks and cash was good value, but this article definitely makes me wonder if they should have gotten another one or two picks.

AS GVC explained back on page 1, 90% of the cap is spent in one way or another, either on actual players or as a surcharge at the end of the season. Had the Jazz signed scrubs to fill the roster. they'd be hit with a surcharge. Alternately, the Jazz could have gone after players like Calderon, Landry, etc., to end up at the floor, but players like that are going to want multi-year deals. Right now, the picks have cost us a million or so, I believe. Salary cap is at $54M. We're sitting at $49? And the floor is around $48.6M. Maybe Lindsey adds another PG for $1M-$2M. So maximum cost of $3M that's offset by Utah receiving a share of the luxury tax penalties. I believe they don't receive that if they're under the floor. So, actually, the Jazz come out financially ahead - and maintain cap flexibility for next season (or the deadline) by having $31M in expirings.

 

[Bodhi]

AS GVC explained back on page 1, 90% of the cap is spent in one way or another, either on actual players or as a surcharge at the end of the season. Had the Jazz signed scrubs to fill the roster. they'd be hit with a surcharge. Alternately, the Jazz could have gone after players like Calderon, Landry, etc., to end up at the floor, but players like that are going to want multi-year deals. Right now, the picks have cost us a million or so, I believe. Salary cap is at $54M. We're sitting at $49? And the floor is around $48.6M. Maybe Lindsey adds another PG for $1M-$2M. So maximum cost of $3M that's offset by Utah receiving a share of the luxury tax penalties. I believe they don't receive that if they're under the floor. So, actually, the Jazz come out financially ahead - and maintain cap flexibility for next season (or the deadline) by having $31M in expirings.

Basically, this.

 

[GVC]

Zach Lowe is also generally making an argument about the opportunity cost of blowing the cap space. Presumably the Jazz FO is somewhat risk and ambiguity averse, and the future is highly unpredictable, especially under the new CBA, so it's difficult to evaluate this trade in those terms. What is the value of handing the leadership of the team over to the young players? What deals will be available later? What are the chances those picks turn into better assets than the free agents/players the Jazz could have acquired with the cap space?

The Jazz have a full roster, loads of flexibility, and a few more picks. They've essentially rolled over the cap space until the Summer of 2014, while collecting a couple first round picks. The young players have the team. If they can't handle the responsibility, the Jazz can move on AND collect a top pick in next year's draft. If they can, the Jazz have assets that have appreciated in value that can either be kept (re-signed) or moved.

 

[UGLI baby]

Are people really comparing buying a late first rounder during the draft with receiving unprotected picks, especially one that is a few years out?

Like, for really real?

This post brought to you by UGLI baby

 

[Bodhi]

Zach Lowe is also generally making an argument about the opportunity cost of blowing the cap space. Presumably the Jazz FO is somewhat risk and ambiguity averse, and the future is highly unpredictable, especially under the new CBA, so it's difficult to evaluate this trade in those terms. What is the value of handing the leadership of the team over to the young players? What deals will be available later? What are the chances those picks turn into better assets than the free agents/players the Jazz could have acquired with the cap space?

The Jazz have a full roster, loads of flexibility, and a few more picks. They've essentially rolled over the cap space until the Summer of 2014, while collecting a couple first round picks. The young players have the team. If they can't handle the responsibility, the Jazz can move on AND collect a top pick in next year's draft. If they can, the Jazz have assets that have appreciated in value that can either be kept (re-signed) or moved.

And also "this".

 

[Bodhi]

Are people really comparing buying a late first rounder during the draft with receiving unprotected picks, especially one that is a few years out?

Like, for really real?

This post brought to you by UGLI baby

And this one TOO!

 

[sgjazzfan]

What did the Jazz need to do in free Agency?

1. Depth for Pf/C that won't take too many minutes
2. Depth at SF, especially until Marvin comes back.
3. Depth at pg.
4. Reach the minimum payroll without dedicating long term money.

They did 3 of the 4 while getting 2 first round picks, 3 second round picks, and a really good player in Rush. All for Foye who was a free agent and Murphy who they might not have kept anyway. At the same time they eliminated any chance of Milsap and Jefferson taking time from Kanter/Favors.

They can still make a move at the deadline for one of the expiring contracts for teams looking for space for 2014, or do something similar next year.

At the same time they just need one or two injuries, or some bad luck/chemistry to get a second lottery pick from GS.

I don't get how you can't love this deal as a Jazz fan.

 

[Stifle Tower]

I see the people who oppose the GS deal falling into 2 categories:

1. Those who wanted to see Utah use cap space to get solid players like Mayo, Landry, Calderon, etc. OK, do you really think our Core5, plus a pick in the 12-16 range, + a couple of those FA's would be a contender in 3-4 years? I don't. And in 5-6 years, when Burke and then the 2014 pick come up for contracts, Jazz won't be able to afford ANY significant FA's (outside the 5 + 2014 pick), as they'll be up against the luxury tax limit. They might go a few million over briefly, but they WON'T go over the apron. The penalties are too high.

2. Those who think the Jazz should have reserved their cap space until the deadline. We still have $31M in expiring contracts. So the ONLY difference between giving a team exprings vs., giving them straight cap space is luxury tax relief for the 13/14 season. How many teams are in luxury tax "hell?" If the tax starts at $71M, then Miami, Brooklyn, Chicago, New York and LA Lakers were looking at being the tax payers. Miami doesn't care and Brooklyn and New York just spent money to get there. Cross those teams off the list. They're going for a championship THIS season. Cross the Lakers off too. They didn't sign Howard and just announced they're going to amnesty Metta WP. So Chicago is probably the only team looking to really cut payroll. And what would they offer? Certainly not Rose or Noah. I'll bet their best offer would be Boozer and their 1st. Maybe another future pick if we pushed them.

* Any other teams wanting to free up cap space for 2015 can trade for our expirings at the deadline. Or, more likely, Lindsey will carry that cap space into next summer and wait for the FA frenzy to drive up value. Then he can step in as a facilitator and either pick up future picks or veterans. And there will be ZERO effect to our 2013/14 standings. Wouldn't want to pick up a pretty good player at the deadline and have him drop us from the #5 pick to #10 with an extra 5-6 wins!

* Also, players like Rush and Marvin may have value at the deadline to contenders.

So, the only other type of trade that I see we may have missed out on (by sacrificing cap space vs. getting expirings), is something like Boozer + Chicago's #1. Is that better than two firsts and two seconds from GS?

 

[Deleted member 848]

I'm baffled by people who think this is a bad trade. Absolutely baffled.

 

[Jazz4ever]

I see the people who oppose the GS deal falling into 2 categories:

1. Those who wanted to see Utah use cap space to get solid players like Mayo, Landry, Calderon, etc. OK, do you really think our Core5, plus a pick in the 12-16 range, + a couple of those FA's would be a contender in 3-4 years? I don't. And in 5-6 years, when Burke and then the 2014 pick come up for contracts, Jazz won't be able to afford ANY significant FA's (outside the 5 + 2014 pick), as they'll be up against the luxury tax limit. They might go a few million over briefly, but they WON'T go over the apron. The penalties are too high.

2. Those who think the Jazz should have reserved their cap space until the deadline. We still have $31M in expiring contracts. So the ONLY difference between giving a team exprings vs., giving them straight cap space is luxury tax relief for the 13/14 season. How many teams are in luxury tax "hell?" If the tax starts at $71M, then Miami, Brooklyn, Chicago, New York and LA Lakers were looking at being the tax payers. Miami doesn't care and Brooklyn and New York just spent money to get there. Cross those teams off the list. They're going for a championship THIS season. Cross the Lakers off too. They didn't sign Howard and just announced they're going to amnesty Metta WP. So Chicago is probably the only team looking to really cut payroll. And what would they offer? Certainly not Rose or Noah. I'll bet their best offer would be Boozer and their 1st. Maybe another future pick if we pushed them.

* Any other teams wanting to free up cap space for 2015 can trade for our expirings at the deadline. Or, more likely, Lindsey will carry that cap space into next summer and wait for the FA frenzy to drive up value. Then he can step in as a facilitator and either pick up future picks or veterans. And there will be ZERO effect to our 2013/14 standings. Wouldn't want to pick up a pretty good player at the deadline and have him drop us from the #5 pick to #10 with an extra 5-6 wins!

* Also, players like Rush and Marvin may have value at the deadline to contenders.

So, the only other type of trade that I see we may have missed out on (by sacrificing cap space vs. getting expirings), is something like Boozer + Chicago's #1. Is that better than two firsts and two seconds from GS?

Just replying to point 2 and giving one example of something that could happen. Chicago does have Charlotte's unprotected 2016 pick and its gonna be real good. They also have Nikola Mirotic overseas and would probably go top 14 next year. If they are making a strong playoff push might be willing to go farther into the luxury tax to topple Miami, because they are really close. If we signed an asset like Mayo and Millsap, they might bite on one of those two assets. Specifically Mayo though, because Chicago needs a SG very bad and Deng is making too much money to fetch them a good one in a trade. Imagine netting the Bobcats 2016 for just a very small fraction of that 24 million....baffle on.

 

[NUMBERICA]

I think Zach Lowe's main argument with the "two to three moves down the line" piece is that he thought our cap space would be more valuable at the trade deadline than it would now. That's an argument you could make, I suppose, but I doubt anything will be available at the deadline that fetches even more assets while preserving future flexibility.

Exactly. If there's anything the org should've learned in the l ast year is that sitting around with your thumbs up your asses waiting for the knight in shining armor to show up miraculously at the last second is really just a dumb strategy.

Despite the Jazz owning this offseason, I am still a little bit miffed that the Jazz did nothing to capitilize on Millsap and especially Jefferson. I love this idea that Millsap and Jefferson were the only expiring contracts in the NBA because that's apparently what many fans and most in the media believe. I still feel like they could've been traded for lesser players on expiring contracts, especially if there was an extend-and-trade as part of the deal. But I'm just crying over spilled milk there.

 

[NUMBERICA]

I see the people who oppose the GS deal falling into 2 categories:

1. Those who wanted to see Utah use cap space to get solid players like Mayo, Landry, Calderon, etc. OK, do you really think our Core5, plus a pick in the 12-16 range, + a couple of those FA's would be a contender in 3-4 years? I don't. And in 5-6 years, when Burke and then the 2014 pick come up for contracts, Jazz won't be able to afford ANY significant FA's (outside the 5 + 2014 pick), as they'll be up against the luxury tax limit. They might go a few million over briefly, but they WON'T go over the apron. The penalties are too high.

2. Those who think the Jazz should have reserved their cap space until the deadline. We still have $31M in expiring contracts. So the ONLY difference between giving a team exprings vs., giving them straight cap space is luxury tax relief for the 13/14 season. How many teams are in luxury tax "hell?" If the tax starts at $71M, then Miami, Brooklyn, Chicago, New York and LA Lakers were looking at being the tax payers. Miami doesn't care and Brooklyn and New York just spent money to get there. Cross those teams off the list. They're going for a championship THIS season. Cross the Lakers off too. They didn't sign Howard and just announced they're going to amnesty Metta WP. So Chicago is probably the only team looking to really cut payroll. And what would they offer? Certainly not Rose or Noah. I'll bet their best offer would be Boozer and their 1st. Maybe another future pick if we pushed them.

* Any other teams wanting to free up cap space for 2015 can trade for our expirings at the deadline. Or, more likely, Lindsey will carry that cap space into next summer and wait for the FA frenzy to drive up value. Then he can step in as a facilitator and either pick up future picks or veterans. And there will be ZERO effect to our 2013/14 standings. Wouldn't want to pick up a pretty good player at the deadline and have him drop us from the #5 pick to #10 with an extra 5-6 wins!

* Also, players like Rush and Marvin may have value at the deadline to contenders.

So, the only other type of trade that I see we may have missed out on (by sacrificing cap space vs. getting expirings), is something like Boozer + Chicago's #1. Is that better than two firsts and two seconds from GS?

Also people that don't have a clue how **** works/dip****s.

 

[r_u_s_t_b_u_c_k_e_t]

Just replying to point 2 and giving one example of something that could happen. Chicago does have Charlotte's unprotected 2016 pick and its gonna be real good. They also have Nikola Mirotic overseas and would probably go top 14 next year. If they are making a strong playoff push might be willing to go farther into the luxury tax to topple Miami, because they are really close. If we signed an asset like Mayo and Millsap, they might bite on one of those two assets. Specifically Mayo though, because Chicago needs a SG very bad and Deng is making too much money to fetch them a good one in a trade. Imagine netting the Bobcats 2016 for just a very small fraction of that 24 million....baffle on.

Can you give us some examples of similar type deals that have been made the last few years? Thanks.

 

[Jazz4ever]

Can you give us some examples of similar type deals that have been made the last few years? Thanks.

A recent asset for pick that comes to mind last year was Gerald Wallace netting the 6th pick (Damian Lillard). The nets sent back the 6th pick and Okur so saved them a little money. Quote from King, Nets GM (and still is)

"in meeting with our scouts, we felt the player that we may draft beyond the protection would be somebody that would probably take a couple years (to develop), and at this point, we're trying to speed the process up a bit and start winning (more)."

 

[Nate505]

Wow. Grantland usually has really smart analysis. That's shockingly bad.

Lowe is the best writer there, or at least my favorite, but damn you're right.

Who cares if the Jazz overpaid for the picks. They had to spend money anyway.

 

[b_line]

Exactly. If there's anything the org should've learned in the l ast year is that sitting around with your thumbs up your asses waiting for the knight in shining armor to show up miraculously at the last second is really just a dumb strategy.

Despite the Jazz owning this offseason, I am still a little bit miffed that the Jazz did nothing to capitilize on Millsap and especially Jefferson. I love this idea that Millsap and Jefferson were the only expiring contracts in the NBA because that's apparently what many fans and most in the media believe. I still feel like they could've been traded for lesser players on expiring contracts, especially if there was an extend-and-trade as part of the deal. But I'm just crying over spilled milk there.

I have thought about this as well. I think the extend and trade was not an option for either Jeffy or Millsap at the deadline, as Millsap turned down his extension, and I don't think Jefferson was eligible for an extension. So the fact that they didn't get a good deal out of them at the deadline is not too baffling, but there are a couple things I don't understand.

1. If we are so willing to go young with no bench starting game 1 of the upcoming season, what was keeping us from trading these guys for even a second round pick at the deadline? I am sure we could have gotten something out of them, even if it was not that great. Big Al signed with Charlotte anyways, and Michael Jordan would probably have been stupid enough to trade a future first for him, who knows.

2. Why not start the process earlier with the young guys getting the minutes? Favors and Kanter would surely have benefitted from going into the offseason with a few huge games under their belts. All we have now is Kanters monster game followed by 3 quarters of Favors doing his best Karl Malone impression, then getting benched...

Like you said though, just crying over spilled milk.

 

[r_u_s_t_b_u_c_k_e_t]

A recent asset for pick that comes to mind last year was Gerald Wallace netting the 6th pick (Damian Lillard). The nets sent back the 6th pick and Okur so saved them a little money. Quote from King, Nets GM (and still is)

"in meeting with our scouts, we felt the player that we may draft beyond the protection would be somebody that would probably take a couple years (to develop), and at this point, we're trying to speed the process up a bit and start winning (more)."

Well done. Now, what is the likelihood that an offer like that was forthcoming? Let's be generous and say 50-50. Wasn't Lindsay smart to play the odds and just take the concrete offer he already had done, instead of waiting for the 50-50 chance of a better deal later? Seems like the smart move to me. I guess you disagree.

 

[b_line]

A recent asset for pick that comes to mind last year was Gerald Wallace netting the 6th pick (Damian Lillard). The nets sent back the 6th pick and Okur so saved them a little money. Quote from King, Nets GM (and still is)

"in meeting with our scouts, we felt the player that we may draft beyond the protection would be somebody that would probably take a couple years (to develop), and at this point, we're trying to speed the process up a bit and start winning (more)."

And the Nets pick was only that high because their great point guard was nursing a chronic joint injury... sound familiar? Maybe the GSW pick will turn out better than we all are expecting. Here's to Curry needing some extra time off for that ankle!

I like Curry and all, and feel bad that he has chronic ankle problems. But let's be honest, I would not be one bit sad if their pick won the lottery and got us Wiggins.

 

[Sneakers]

I have thought about this as well. I think the extend and trade was not an option for either Jeffy or Millsap at the deadline, as Millsap turned down his extension, and I don't think Jefferson was eligible for an extension. So the fact that they didn't get a good deal out of them at the deadline is not too baffling, but there are a couple things I don't understand.

1. If we are so willing to go young with no bench starting game 1 of the upcoming season, what was keeping us from trading these guys for even a second round pick at the deadline? I am sure we could have gotten something out of them, even if it was not that great. Big Al signed with Charlotte anyways, and Michael Jordan would probably have been stupid enough to trade a future first for him, who knows.

2. Why not start the process earlier with the young guys getting the minutes? Favors and Kanter would surely have benefitted from going into the offseason with a few huge games under their belts. All we have now is Kanters monster game followed by 3 quarters of Favors doing his best Karl Malone impression, then getting benched...

Like you said though, just crying over spilled milk.

Sometimes though, like if milk spilled all over your motherboard, you're allowed to cry about it

 

[b_line]

Sometimes though, like if milk spilled all over your motherboard, you're allowed to cry about it

hopefully it is milk...