What's new
By:
Filters

2023 Trade Rumors and Gossip Involving the Jazz

whatthe said:
I'd do this if we don't get THT back. Remove the 2024 protections for OKC and ask for a second rd pick and his rights. Unprotected pick is valuable.
Click to expand...
Hell no you don't make that pick unprotected. That would just be stupid since there is still a very good chance we would be bottom 5 in the west.
 
Windy on hoop collective says we were bidding on Zinger… also says we were in on another PF that may be traded… think it’s either John Collins or maybe… maybe Pascal but I am fairly sure it was Collins. Came up during a convo about Kuzma… so we might be in on that too… still.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
Windy on hoop collective says we were bidding on Zinger… also says we were in on another PF that may be traded… think it’s either John Collins or maybe… maybe Pascal but I am fairly sure it was Collins. Came up during a convo about Kuzma… so we might be in on that too… still.
Click to expand...
Does us drafting Hendricks change that? Am I the only one who doesn't want John Collins or Kuzma or Tobias Harris now that we drafted Hendricks this high? We need a PG much more than another 4...
 
stitches said:
Does us drafting Hendricks change that? Am I the only one who doesn't want John Collins or Kuzma or Tobias Harris now that we drafted Hendricks this high? We need a PG much more than another 4...
Click to expand...
I would have thought so… but Taylor also may not be a 25-30 minute a night guy… it’s okay to bring them along slowly.

I think it’s still about assets. If we acquire Collins it will come with draft assets and I think we’d try to push his value up and flip him if Hendricks is good early. I don’t think DA is afraid of having too many good players. They just have to be on movable contracts. And JC may not be movable for Atlanta… cuz they are trying to dump salary and stay relevant. If Collins and Hendricks are both solid it will bring trade opportunities for us. We can take back a salary that is higher but might be expiring if a team wants him. Think like Al Horford in OKC… get a pick coming and going.

Harris and Zinger are one year rentals that maybe become long term adds in Hendricks is good.

I don’t think DA will assume a rookie is awesome from day one (like we might) and if he is having Kuzma, Collins, or another player isn’t horrible as they are trade assets (hopefully).

I think if there was a pg available they’d go for it but the FA crop and trade candidates seem to be forwards… DA follows the opportunities.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I would have thought so… but Taylor also may not be a 25-30 minute a night guy… it’s okay to bring them along slowly.

I think it’s still about assets. If we acquire Collins it will come with draft assets and I think we’d try to push his value up and flip him if Hendricks is good early. I don’t think DA is afraid of having too many good players. They just have to be on movable contracts. And JC may not be movable for Atlanta… cuz they are trying to dump salary and stay relevant. If Collins and Hendricks are both solid it will bring trade opportunities for us. We can take back a salary that is higher but might be expiring if a team wants him. Think like Al Horford in OKC… get a pick coming and going.
Click to expand...
IF we get assets for taking on Collins' contract - then yes... sure, do it. I just don't believe we will get an asset for it. I think at best it will be salary dump...
Handlogten's Heros said:
Harris and Zinger are one year rentals that maybe become long term adds in Hendricks is good.

I don’t think DA will assume a rookie is awesome from day one (like we might) and if he is having Kuzma, Collins, or another player isn’t horrible as they are trade assets (hopefully).

I think if there was a pg available they’d go for it but the FA crop and trade candidates seem to be forwards… DA follows the opportunities.
Click to expand...
I think it's more lofty of an expectation to assume you will turn a player from negative asset into a positive asset than to assume a top 10 pick you just made will be good.
 
stitches said:
IF we get assets for taking on Collins' contract - then yes... sure, do it. I just don't believe we will get an asset for it. I think at best it will be salary dump...

I think it's more lofty of an expectation to assume you will turn a player from negative asset into a positive asset than to assume a top 10 pick you just made will be good.
Click to expand...

Salary dumps usually come with an asset my friend.
 
Elizah Huge said:
Salary dumps usually come with an asset my friend.
Click to expand...
There are levels to salary dumps... this is not what I mean... I meant the purest form of salary dump... all we will get is the contract without any major compensation.
 
John Collins could be a good buy low candidate if we get some assets to go with him. I think the biggest issue with him not living up to his contract was his 3pt shooting fell of a cliff, but I think that's easily explainable by his injured finger. There were signs towards the end of the year that he was figuring out his shot. I know this is a super cherry picked number, but his last 12 games of the regular season he shot 44% on 3s, and he shot 34% on 3s in the playoffs.

I think the problem with Collins is that *IF* he gets his 3pt shot back then he would probably just be worth his contract where he still has 3 more years (last year being a player option). Thus the need for assets to come with him since the team taking him is assuming the risk that he gets back to where he was.
 
SoberasHotRod said:
John Collins could be a good buy low candidate if we get some assets to go with him. I think the biggest issue with him not living up to his contract was his 3pt shooting fell of a cliff, but I think that's easily explainable by his injured finger. There were signs towards the end of the year that he was figuring out his shot. I know this is a super cherry picked number, but his last 12 games of the regular season he shot 44% on 3s, and he shot 34% on 3s in the playoffs.

I think the problem with Collins is that *IF* he gets his 3pt shot back then he would probably just be worth his contract where he still has 3 more years (last year being a player option). Thus the need for assets to come with him since the team taking him is assuming the risk that he gets back to where he was.
Click to expand...
I'm not really adverse to this, but only if Hendricks gets minutes. Our FC has him, Lauri, and Kessler already and while I'm not adverse to depth at the position, our youngins need time to play in order to develop.
 
stitches said:
IF we get assets for taking on Collins' contract - then yes... sure, do it. I just don't believe we will get an asset for it. I think at best it will be salary dump...

I think it's more lofty of an expectation to assume you will turn a player from negative asset into a positive asset than to assume a top 10 pick you just made will be good.
Click to expand...
It depends... rumor is Bertans and 10 for Collins and 15 was a no go. Bertans is dead money. If we sent KO (minor asset) and they got 13M in savings (huge relief) as well as no further obligations it does a lot for them. I believe they emptied the clip on second rounders so the Kings protected pick is likely the prize if we did that. We could also just take the full salary in and send nothing back if the prefer.

The reason we can maybe get more or a minor asset when flipping him is we wouldn't be looking for current salary relief or production (if Hendricks is good). Say he has a mild jump in 3 point shooting but is mostly unchanged. We could take an expiring contract (maybe even slightly bigger than his one year number) and some seconds. If he has a major uptick in production you might get more. Atlanta can't do a deal like that because they want the relief now.

SA or Sacramento or some other cap space team may do better for them and not require any asset. So you might be right. Atlanta has a lot of urgency though... trading Collins means they might keep Murray... trading Murray solves a lot of issues too... but would require swallowing some pride.
 
TheStormofWar said:
I'm not really adverse to this, but only if Hendricks gets minutes. Our FC has him, Lauri, and Kessler already and while I'm not adverse to depth at the position, our youngins need time to play in order to develop.
Click to expand...
There would still be 20 minutes or so there... and injuries happen... so I think it would be fine. I think it becomes an issue if Hendricks is clearly better early and Collins hasn't improved his trade value any... and now you are stuck with the contract. I'm not taking on Collins without an asset of some kind coming back.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
There would still be 20 minutes or so there... and injuries happen... so I think it would be fine. I think it becomes an issue if Hendricks is clearly better early and Collins hasn't improved his trade value any... and now you are stuck with the contract. I'm not taking on Collins without an asset of some kind coming back.
Click to expand...
I don't think Collins is necessarily a wash as a player, just has seen his role diminish some. Issue is, including this year, he's got 2+1(PO) and I think we want to hand those keys to Hendricks sooner than later.
 
stitches said:
Does us drafting Hendricks change that? Am I the only one who doesn't want John Collins or Kuzma or Tobias Harris now that we drafted Hendricks this high? We need a PG much more than another 4...
Click to expand...

Hendricks will probably find his way to playing 20 or so minutes a night. He'll take minutes that were given to Jared Vanderbilt last year. Probably Fontecchio slides back in the rotation and gets more spot minutes.
 
The Jazz Wonderbra said:
I think Ainge wanted cap flexibility more than anything in the Lakers trade. Having it means we can make a big splash if it becomes available. Ainge doesn't fish for 20" Browns. He goes for Marlin, King Salmon, and Halibut.

Punting on our cap space while grabbing assets is a not a bad move so long as we retain flexibility. Thats how I see Tobias Harris or Lowry type trades. If they maintain flexibility AND fetch us assets, then why not?
Click to expand...
I believe there's at least one Brown he'd fish for.
 
TheStormofWar said:
I don't think Collins is necessarily a wash as a player, just has seen his role diminish some. Issue is, including this year, he's got 2+1(PO) and I think we want to hand those keys to Hendricks sooner than later.
Click to expand...
Right... I understand which is why Atlanta is eager to move on... they are also out of runway... its either go deep into the tax or offload salary. Collins could be a short term flip for us... or insurance in case Hendricks is further away than we think (as well as injury insurance).

The "money" on the deal is more likely to be made on the buy side... so if that lines up then go ahead. If not then you go more short term route. I think to do deal like Danny does you need various types of assets. We unloaded the cupboard of expendable vets... have a lot of draft stuff... so use FA/cap space to either find some long term keepers, short term assets/placeholders, or straight salary dumps with picks attached. Guessing it will be some mix of the three.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
It depends... rumor is Bertans and 10 for Collins and 15 was a no go. Bertans is dead money. If we sent KO (minor asset) and they got 13M in savings (huge relief) as well as no further obligations it does a lot for them. I believe they emptied the clip on second rounders so the Kings protected pick is likely the prize if we did that. We could also just take the full salary in and send nothing back if the prefer.
Click to expand...
Bufkin.

Bufkin?
 
stitches said:
Does us drafting Hendricks change that? Am I the only one who doesn't want John Collins or Kuzma or Tobias Harris now that we drafted Hendricks this high? We need a PG much more than another 4...
Click to expand...
I doubt Hendricks changes much. Jazz have very few6'8 guys. Could use more
 
NUMBERICA said:
Bufkin.

Bufkin?
Click to expand...
Not sure. I think we took Key in the spot we'd have Bufkin... IDK.

I just think Atlanta has a bit of a corner they have painted themselves in. The kind of need two trades or a John Collins trade and a wink and a nod agreement from Murray to re-sign. If they trade Murray if the return is 70% of what they gave up then that would probably be the route to go... but i still think Collins is grumpy... but they could ride that arrangement a little longer. If they give up stuff to dump Collins then they still have the Murray issue of FA and may have to move him midseason.

Not a lot of optionality. Their ownership group should admit they are dumb and just eat the tax but it seems that is not an option.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
Not sure. I think we took Key in the spot we'd have Bufkin... IDK.

I just think Atlanta has a bit of a corner they have painted themselves in. The kind of need two trades or a John Collins trade and a wink and a nod agreement from Murray to re-sign. If they trade Murray if the return is 70% of what they gave up then that would probably be the route to go... but i still think Collins is grumpy... but they could ride that arrangement a little longer. If they give up stuff to dump Collins then they still have the Murray issue of FA and may have to move him midseason.

Not a lot of optionality. Their ownership group should admit they are dumb and just eat the tax but it seems that is not an option.
Click to expand...

What would you be willing to send asset wise if we traded for both Collins and Dejounte?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top