Trade ideas

[Handlogten's Heros]

What the seller wanted doesnt matter? Wow. Thats rich from a Jazz fan. Maybe Lakers fans can say that. Like we would ever have the leverage the Clippers had where we can say "No, we are not giving up our 4th best player Terance Mann".

Also you said:

Priority as a word implies its what the seller wanted. But it wasnt. Priority was actually players, and they settled for expirings because the situation was inflating and escalating quickly.

They knew they wouldn’t get a star. It was reported they wanted cap space. It was second on the list like if I told Santa I want a billion dollars and then he says try again… and I say I’ll have some new basketball shoes.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Also had to return to this point, since you are obviously counting Beasley as an expiring contract despite the team option. To say that DA wanted him as an expiring is just pure specualation.

Beasley had the exact type of contract I was saying you go get if you want to make deals (big or small). There is a reason he was able to be moved twice in 6 months. Yes he counts as an expiring… his deal ended up expiring… the TO was a feature that increased his value and trade ability.

The FO clearly wanted young talent under team control which makes sense when you are entering the rebuild as the Utah Jazz. It is also apparent by the Sexton sign-and-trade being part of the Cavs package. I'm pretty sure Cavs had expiring money to give. I mean didnt they have Kevin Love in the books for a 25M or something expiring? Vando and Beasley were both under team control for 2 years, Lauri for 3 and Sexton for 4.

Kevin would mean they had to take back even more salary. They also wanted the flexibility. Sexton was not required in that trade but he was adequate.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Dude.... "Selected/handpicked a sample" when I used the last 10? Really? The most honest, current and relevant sample you could use. I dont know why you keep scrambling and try to throw shade at me here. I'm not "truthtelling" here, you are. I simply questionned your point, and you already admitted it was valid criticism.

You selected a sample… current or past you limited the sample… when you expand it the percentage of star or big trades that included expirings and salary flexibility gets more pronounced.

I dont disagree with the notion that its a bad idea if DA traded Collins to use him as a pawn. They were celebrating the amount of tradable contracts we have last spring, which has now transpired into having too many guys who need minutes. So if Collins is just another tradable contract then its a really bad look. I personally think Collins was acquired as a true reclamation project. But if he rehabs his value to any extent Danny will for sure take calls on him and abandon that project as soon as he sees dollar signs. Collins is not looking like a building block, at least not at the moment.

Also Collins acquisition is not looking much worse as it appears Hendricks actually might be as ready as advertised.... which is also why I didn't love the trade despite advocating it during last season.

Whatever man… so argue and bend things to agree with me? You win… cap flexibility is not something needed in star trades. Teams prefer mid-*** players on ginormous contracts most of the time.

 

[infection]

the TO was a feature that increased his value and trade ability.

When you say “trade ability” instead of “tradability,” in my mind it puts a much larger emphasis on the “ability” portion and I believe there’s someone here to collect his royalties.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

When you say “trade ability” instead of “tradability,” in my mind it puts a much larger emphasis on the “ability” portion and I believe there’s someone here to collect his royalties.

View attachment 15524

It autocorrected me and I didn’t want to change it lol.

 

[infection]

It autocorrected me and I didn’t want to change it lol.

Patent-ability lawsuit against Apple incoming.

 

[HermanG]

You selected a sample… current or past you limited the sample… when you expand it the percentage of star or big trades that included expirings and salary flexibility gets more pronounced.

Whatever man… so argue and bend things to agree with me? You win… cap flexibility is not something needed in star trades. Teams prefer mid-*** players on ginormous contracts most of the time.

I dont want to fight with you. I just think while expirings are good for trades in general, the star player prices have been picks ++ for a while.

The analysts keep blaming the CBA rules for killing the FA markets, where the sign-and-trade especially plays a huge part. It protects the small clubs as well giving them return for their stars that dont want to re-sign and stay, but it makes rebuilding a lot tougher if you arent a destination.

However getting Collins is comparable to FA signing. Overpay on the salary, but use cap to add talent. People who hate it would have hated it even if it wasnt a trade.

 

[infection]

However getting Collins is comparable to FA signing. Overpay on the salary, but use cap to add talent. People who hate it would have hated it even if it wasnt a trade.

I believe people would have liked it less because they would have seen it for what it really was: tying up the cap. Instead it was seen as JC > Gay + second rounder.

 

[HermanG]

I believe people would have liked it less because they would have seen it for what it really was: tying up the cap. Instead it was seen as JC > Gay + second rounder.

Could be. I didnt like it because of the Hendricks drafting despite the fact that I liked the prospect of Collins as a player.

 

[Step-Back Lauri]

Get the best package for Lauri, if the intention is not to make this team drastically better via trades and FA on becoming summer. For me, it makes no sense to max, or near to max Lauri, before we will see this team having one playoffs series at least with that core. And for Lauri, he either needs to not think his career but his family, to extend the contract on becoming summer.

If we are not seeing Lauri traded on this season though, I am kind of convinced he has given a verbal agreement to extend with the team, even if things look as bad next season. It seems Buddy Hield might make the playoffs this season, making Lauri the longest streak of no post-season from active players.

Also, considering his brand of offense, his late prime might not be as long than someone who are less relied on their athleticism and huge amount of work to fight themselves open as the off-ball threats. Calculating risk factors and the timeline of the team, and how the western up and coming teams are way ahead in their build, and adding the personal goals Lauri might be having... Might be the best to grab 3-4 firsts and decent young projects for him, and look ahead into late 2020s to be relevant again.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Get the best package for Lauri, if the intention is not to make this team drastically better via trades and FA on becoming summer. For me, it makes no sense to max, or near to max Lauri, before we will see this team having one playoffs series at least with that core. And for Lauri, he either needs to not think his career but his family, to extend the contract on becoming summer.

If we are not seeing Lauri traded on this season though, I am kind of convinced he has given a verbal agreement to extend with the team, even if things look as bad next season. It seems Buddy Hield might make the playoffs this season, making Lauri the longest streak of no post-season from active players.

Also, considering his brand of offense, his late prime might not be as long than someone who are less relied on their athleticism and huge amount of work to fight themselves open as the off-ball threats. Calculating risk factors and the timeline of the team, and how the western up and coming teams are way ahead in their build, and adding the personal goals Lauri might be having... Might be the best to grab 3-4 firsts and decent young projects for him, and look ahead into late 2020s to be relevant again.

Unless someone comes with a mega offer like the one I outlined from OKC in other threads... I am not moving him until the summer. We should have the space to do a re-negotiate and extend deal that will lock him in for 5 years. He will still be worth 3 firsts... and you give yourselves a few more transaction cycles to get something going. We will be bad enough to get a solid pick this year and there is no need to tank for better odds.

I think an offer of 3-4 firsts is there this summer if things aren't working out. If someone got wild and offered our version of the Haliburton trade or something like that then we need to move him.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

On Locke's pod he seemed to think we are in for "the process" and that we won't be able to trade for a big enough star. Not sure how connected he is with the front office at this point but if we really are tanking for the next few years then a Lauri trade in the next 12 months may be in our future. I actually think we are more likely to do a Lavine type deal where we stretch to find another star rather than rip it to studs but everything is on the table is my guess.

 

[KqWIN]

Meh....there were many ways to get to the salary floor, and it's not hard to get matching salary in a star trade. I think the Jazz saw Collins as an asset at rock bottom and thought they could increase his value. Maybe that results in him being a good player for the Jazz, maybe that results in him being a better player and more trade value for later. What happened is that this team is in total disarray, and we just got a guy on a contract that's about double he would get on the open market. Sometimes these risks don't pan out, and right now it has not panned out with John Collins. Out of all the ways to use our cap space and reach the salary floor, this is like a D+ result.

 

[KqWIN]

On Locke's pod he seemed to think we are in for "the process" and that we won't be able to trade for a big enough star. Not sure how connected he is with the front office at this point but if we really are tanking for the next few years then a Lauri trade in the next 12 months may be in our future. I actually think we are more likely to do a Lavine type deal where we stretch to find another star rather than rip it to studs but everything is on the table is my guess.

We've been trying. Pozingis, Kuzma, Herro, Jrue. We went for these second tier star guys (don't know if all of them even fit that category, just didn't get one. I feel like it's fine to wait until the right deal comes, but there also isn't an infinite amount of time to wait.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Meh....there were many ways to get to the salary floor, and it's not hard to get matching salary in a star trade. I think the Jazz saw Collins as an asset at rock bottom and thought they could increase his value. Maybe that results in him being a good player for the Jazz, maybe that results in him being a better player and more trade value for later. What happened is that this team is in total disarray, and we just got a guy on a contract that's about double he would get on the open market. Sometimes these risks don't pan out, and right now it has not panned out with John Collins. Out of all the ways to use our cap space and reach the salary floor, this is like a D+ result.

But its like when my son had a D+ in weight training... like this isn't something that should be messed up. Its an "unforced error" as @infection called it.

I agree they wanted the player John Collins and likely had delusions of "we can flip him or increase his value". I think that's a mistake and said as much at the time. I just don't agree with the rationale that we got him to get to the floor and to use him as the cap placeholder in a star trade. Like would you rather have Collins at his number or DJJ on a 1+1 at $10M. The DJJ is a much better trade salary filler as it can be used in many different ways.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

We've been trying. Pozingis, Kuzma, Herro, Jrue. We went for these second tier star guys (don't know if all of them even fit that category, just didn't get one. I feel like it's fine to wait until the right deal comes, but there also isn't an infinite amount of time to wait.

Zinger didn't make sense... Kuzma is in the John Collins class imo. I think they tried with Jrue and understand why they passed - age/contract, but if they think a second tier star without a drawback will be available I have news for them... They will need to call someone's bluff.

I think they end up getting in on Lavine (I mean if you like Herro then Lavine isn't world's different). I think Collins will end up being part of that. While I don't love it the rationale is better to me than the Collins deal. I think Zach could change his value to a point he is worth a pick or two as he has had higher highs in his career and is an easier player to fit in most scenarios than Collins. I think it is one of those double down moves on a bad investment that could go one way or another. Like buying the dip when you already have a big position on a stock.

I wouldn't trade for Zach but "stars" under long term contract that are well below their peak trade value will appeal to DA.

 

[KqWIN]

But its like when my son had a D+ in weight training... like this isn't something that should be messed up. Its an "unforced error" as @infection called it.

I agree they wanted the player John Collins and likely had delusions of "we can flip him or increase his value". I think that's a mistake and said as much at the time. I just don't agree with the rationale that we got him to get to the floor and to use him as the cap placeholder in a star trade. Like would you rather have Collins at his number or DJJ on a 1+1 at $10M. The DJJ is a much better trade salary filler as it can be used in many different ways.

Yup, it would have been much easier to get someone like DJJ on a very tradeable contract. The Thunder used about $6M in cap space + one day of bad PR to take on KPJ and pick up a couple seconds. Do we really forsee getting more than a couple seconds worth of value out of Collins? Methinks we're in the opposite direction. Honestly, just using the cap space to **** with LAL and toss a big offer sheet at Reeves would have been a better use.

 

[KqWIN]

Zinger didn't make sense... Kuzma is in the John Collins class imo. I think they tried with Jrue and understand why they passed - age/contract, but if they think a second tier star without a drawback will be available I have news for them... They will need to call someone's bluff.

I think they end up getting in on Lavine (I mean if you like Herro then Lavine isn't world's different). I think Collins will end up being part of that. While I don't love it the rationale is better to me than the Collins deal. I think Zach could change his value to a point he is worth a pick or two as he has had higher highs in his career and is an easier player to fit in most scenarios than Collins. I think it is one of those double down moves on a bad investment that could go one way or another. Like buying the dip when you already have a big position on a stock.

I wouldn't trade for Zach but "stars" under long term contract that are well below their peak trade value will appeal to DA.

Zinger makes sense to me. John Collins is like great value Zinger. If the were able to turn the cap space in Porzingis, I think we'd be super happy right now with the way he's playing (and had been playing for WAS tbh). We just didn't get our first or second, or maybe even third choice. JC was the contingency plan, and I just don't think it has worked out.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Yup, it would have been much easier to get someone like DJJ on a very tradeable contract. The Thunder used about $6M in cap space + one day of bad PR to take on KPJ and pick up a couple seconds. Do we really forsee getting more than a couple seconds worth of value out of Collins? Methinks we're in the opposite direction. Honestly, just using the cap space to **** with LAL and toss a big offer sheet at Reeves would have been a better use.

I also think if you did like Collins you could wait Atlanta out. They should have been more desperate than us. They also have that Kings low level first rounder they might have ended up throwing in there. Think we were high on our own supply.

The other thing I don't like about the deal is when a player is paid that much its hard to move them out of a starting role... ego and trade value and the thought that you might "lose him" is real imo. I'd rather have a $10M rotation filler guy that you can yank in and out of the lineup as you please and as fit demands.

 

[Elizah Huge]

But its like when my son had a D+ in weight training... like this isn't something that should be messed up. Its an "unforced error" as @infection called it.

I agree they wanted the player John Collins and likely had delusions of "we can flip him or increase his value". I think that's a mistake and said as much at the time. I just don't agree with the rationale that we got him to get to the floor and to use him as the cap placeholder in a star trade. Like would you rather have Collins at his number or DJJ on a 1+1 at $10M. The DJJ is a much better trade salary filler as it can be used in many different ways.

Can we reserve a little judgement before we see what the end result is?