Do you want our pick to convey this year?

[Handlogten's Heros]

Every team in the league has their own valuation of the picks. Sure, you can "avoid" trading presumably good picks and try to trade only the high 20s picks - but then the trade partner will also value them as such and demand much more. And of course a top10 pick (in whatever year) has more value than 2025 picks every trade partner assumes will be in the high 20s. You can't try to pass of a $10 note as a $20.

Right but unprotected picks from other teams are very valuable. We have plenty of those and the ones beyond 2025 have semi-unpredictable value. We have enough unencumbered picks to beat the other offers on a particular player without dipping into our own picks which have consequences that should be avoided. Our own picks to acquirers might be worth $20 to them... should be worth $30 to us. And we have other picks that are worth $10-20 to provide.

Presumably if a team is sending us a good player worth a lot of picks... then our picks shouldn't be considered lotto picks anyway.

 

[Hearsky]

Odds are they are later picks based on the rosters of the cavs and wolves. I know many on this board think that Mitchell won't re-sign with the cavs but I don't believe that for a second. He's got something great brewing with the cavs and he isn't going anywhere.

Bruh, he had some great brewing with the Jazz, too. Now, it might have been non-alcoholic, but still.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Odds are they are later picks based on the rosters of the cavs and wolves. I know many on this board think that Mitchell won't re-sign with the cavs but I don't believe that for a second. He's got something great brewing with the cavs and he isn't going anywhere.

I'd say they are brewing a second round exit and Donovan being non-committal on an extension. I'd love for them to take it down to the wire though... the best option is they get nothing from trading Don and he walks.

 

[sip]

Bruh, he had some great brewing with the Jazz, too. Now, it might have been non-alcoholic, but still.

We didn't have even close to what is brewing with the cavs and the age of the core around him. I think in the end they trade Garland so that Mitchell can play the point full time and they will get a nice haul from that trade to round out the roster long term.

 

[sip]

I'd say they are brewing a second round exit and Donovan being non-committal on an extension. I'd love for them to take it down to the wire though... the best option is they get nothing from trading Don and he walks.

He isn't going anywhere.

 

[Hearsky]

He isn't going anywhere.

Oh yeah? That's what my high school principal said about me and look me now.

 

[Tanktastic]

Right but unprotected picks from other teams are very valuable. We have plenty of those and the ones beyond 2025 have semi-unpredictable value. We have enough unencumbered picks to beat the other offers on a particular player without dipping into our own picks which have consequences that should be avoided. Our own picks to acquirers might be worth $20 to them... should be worth $30 to us. And we have other picks that are worth $10-20 to provide.

Why do you think they are very valuable?

The only chance the Cavs are below average is if Donovan leaves and that's after 2025 and even then they'd still have decent pieces in Garland and Mobley - presumably. Mike won't play forever and Rudy will soon start to show his age, but Ant is only getting better.

I can see an argument that they might be only slightly below average for 1sts for the ones that are 2027-2029. Can't see how they would be very valuable or even above average.

 

[SoberasHotRod]

I just changed my vote since I'm super on the fence and didn't want to follow the crowd. Also, it would be fun to get more in the 2024 draft and having picks all over the draft will be fun to start prepping for.

I might change my vote a few more times, FWIW.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Why do you think they are very valuable?

The only chance the Cavs are below average is if Donovan leaves and that's after 2025 and even then they'd still have decent pieces in Garland and Mobley - presumably. Mike won't play forever and Rudy will soon start to show his age, but Ant is only getting better.

I can see an argument that they might be only slightly below average for 1sts for the ones that are 2027-2029. Can't see how they would be very valuable or even above average.

Because **** happens. Very few unprotected picks used to get traded until this last run of "YOLO" gm-ing. You can look at several examples of teams that were setup and traded picks a year or two ago and now are in the lotto (Houston, Brooklyn, Warriors, Toronto) ... also look at the Grizz... life comes at you fast and a key injury or a player requests out and that pick jumps. If teams are valuing those as "late firsts" then I keep them. Any team can have the season from hell.

If teams are giving you a player worth one of your own first round picks... then that player must be pretty good and you would jump to the class of Wolves, Cavs, or a tier below... so why wouldn't those picks be considered mid/late firsts?

 

[Tanktastic]

I'm still having trouble finding the logic. Sure, unprotected picks (usually) have more value than protected ones, that's obvious.

But why would any FO analyse the value of the Minny & Cavs picks based on them being in the lottery? Sure, that's possible. But right now it seems very unlikely. Whereas there's a lot of teams are bottom-10 and will probably stay as such.

If you want everyone to value a probable late first as something else and will keep them all otherwise... well, then the Jazz are not trading a single pick and soon won't have a player on the roster that's over 23.

Are you willing to bet at even odds that either the Cavs or Wolves are in the lottery in 27?

And there sure isn't anyone in the league that's available for a single Jazz's own 1st that would catapult the team to top3 in the conference. Sure, if the Jazz are paying out 4 firsts, then that's another thing.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I'm still having trouble finding the logic. Sure, unprotected picks (usually) have more value than protected ones, that's obvious.

But why would any FO analyse the value of the Minny & Cavs picks based on them being in the lottery? Sure, that's possible. But right now it seems very unlikely. Whereas there's a lot of teams are bottom-10 and will probably stay as such.

If you want everyone to value a probable late first as something else and will keep them all otherwise... well, then the Jazz are not trading a single pick and soon won't have a player on the roster that's over 23.

Are you willing to bet at even odds that either the Cavs or Wolves are in the lottery in 27?

And there sure isn't anyone in the league that's available for a single Jazz's own 1st that would catapult the team to top3 in the conference. Sure, if the Jazz are paying out 4 firsts, then that's another thing.

Unprotected picks have assurance they will convey. Protected picks you don't know when they will convey (if ever) and they have less of a chance of being something really good. While chances of those teams being in lotto is low... its not impossible. A year ago most teams would have said Memphis, GS, and maybe the Lakers would be more likely to be lotto picks than picks in the 20s. So there is a 80% chance its a pick in the 20s (might be high 20s like Phoenix) but a 20% chance its something more. But there is 100% chance it conveys.

And yes... I'd probably be fine betting one of those teams is a lotto team in 2027. Even if Don stays Cavs will have issues retaining their 4 best guys and all will be super expensive. Minny has a salary issue and Rudy will be 35 and will hit FA. Mike will be long gone. They may have sold off KAT to balance the budget. btw... Rudy and Mike are 2 of their 3 biggest players in on/off.

3 years is an eternity in the NBA. I would happily bet on **** happening.

Also if there is a team that has a 1 pick valued player... we don't have to give them exactly what they want. We just have to give them the best offer. We have a lot of ways to do that without putting our pick in the deal. If we are putting our picks in its cuz its Luka or Giannis.

 

[FalseFlagg K]

was there some entaglement with the pick that if it doesn't convey to OKC this year that we're somehow hamstrung in trading first rounders until it does ?? Vaguely remember hearing something about that