Do you want our pick to convey this year?

[Handlogten's Heros]

I think Jordan will have a market when the salary match is easier. I could see some bench scorer openings popping up if Monk gets too spendy for Sacramento… there are probably a couple other spots too.

 

[HermanG]

The problem with this “instead of” argument is that it assumes we had optionality.

1. You assume that contending teams offered us better trades than the teams we transacted with, and our FO rejected the higher value. This assumes our FO is wholly incompetent.

2. You assume we were offered high potential young players for KO/ LS 30 game rentals. This assumes opposing FOs are wholly incompetent.

3. You assume that we were offered future first with little to no protection in out years. For KO/ls 30 game rental. You are really overvaluing what we traded.

First off, we had optionality. They both were connected to multiple teams who were looking for reinforcements, some of which didnt get any.

Secondly, they were among the 7 best players traded and all the others (Washington, Hield, Hayward, Gafford, Bojan) were traded to contenders for more value than we got (including those future firsts). Those trades included guys like Tre Mann, Quentin Grimes, Grant Williams and Furkan Korkmaz going the other way. Also Jaden Springer was traded for 1 second rounder.

Thirdly, there were teams like Miami and Warriors who were interested in KO but didnt get anyone. KO was also connected to Sixers and Celtics. Tech was connected to Celtics, Cavs and Suns at least.

Finally, if you think Raptors and Pistons are the highest bidders you find for competent players at the DL, then I dont know what to tell you.

It was a choice to get only 2024 picks and expirings. In that requirement context they probably got the best return.

 

[silesian]

First off, we had optionality. They both were connected to multiple teams who were looking for reinforcements, some of which didnt get any.

Secondly, they were among the 7 best players traded and all the others (Washington, Hield, Hayward, Gafford, Bojan) were traded to contenders for more value than we got (including those future firsts). Those trades included guys like Tre Mann, Quentin Grimes, Grant Williams and Furkan Korkmaz going the other way. Also Jaden Springer was traded for 1 second rounder.

Thirdly, there were teams like Miami and Warriors who were interested in KO but didnt get anyone. KO was also connected to Sixers and Celtics. Tech was connected to Celtics, Cavs and Suns at least.

Finally, if you think Raptors and Pistons are the highest bidders you find for competent players at the DL, then I dont know what to tell you.

It was a choice to get only 2024 picks and expirings. In that requirement context they probably got the best return.

This idea that the Danny/ Z had superior trades that they rejected is very strange.

You’re also assuming that conversations equal great trade offers. Usually not the case. Lots of GMs on fishing expeditions.

And you have dramatically overestimated the value of 30 game rentals.

 

[fishonjazz]

And you have dramatically overestimated the value of 30 game rentals.

30 game rentals that up to this point have resulted in a grand total of zero wins for our trade partners.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

 

[silesian]

30 game rentals that up to this point have resulted in a grand total of zero wins for our trade partners.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

Definitely worth a late first/ early 2nd.

 

[silesian]

30 game rentals that up to this point have resulted in a grand total of zero wins for our trade partners.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

In their defense, Bird rights could land Simone in Detroit long term. Which is the real reason the Jazz traded him. They got a sense of his market value and decided they did not want to overpay. IMO

And the raptors may have incumbency inside track to sign KO. Or maybe they just like abaji.

 

[HermanG]

This idea that the Danny/ Z had superior trades that they rejected is very strange.

You’re also assuming that conversations equal great trade offers. Usually not the case. Lots of GMs on fishing expeditions.

And you have dramatically overestimated the value of 30 game rentals.

Idea that best offers available in both trades randomly came from bottom teams instead of the known buyers and were also randomly centered on a 2024 pick is more than strange.

Also I cannot "dramatically" overvalue anything, if I'm not giving you values. i merely pointed out the fact that they prioritized 2024 picks instead of players or future picks.

You suggesting that being a coincidence is silly.

 

[silesian]

Also I cannot "dramatically" overvalue anything, if I'm not giving you values.

But you are giving values. You directly stated that there was much better deals to squeeze from contending teams. Much more than what the Jazz got is a dramatic overvaluing our assets.

What sort of package could we have gotten from one of the contending teams you mentioned? please give a few examples of trades we could have executed and why the counterparty would have done the deal.

 

[silesian]

Idea that best offers available in both trades randomly came from bottom teams instead of the known buyers and were also randomly centered on a 2024 pick is more than strange

I get it. You think Danny rejected better offers from better teams. I’m just challenging you to explain why Danny would choose to damage the team he works for, which is a necessary condition for your hypothesis to have merit. Plus you have to know that Ryan is in on these decisions so the owner has to be in on this self sabotage.

It is more likely that you are just disappointed that the warriors didn’t offer an unprotected first and kuminga for Simone’s rental.

 

[silesian]

i merely pointed out the fact that they prioritized 2024 picks instead of players or future picks.

You suggesting that being a coincidence is silly.

Attacking a straw man. Nice logical fallacy, dude. It is a desperate technique when your thesis has been dismantled.

 

[HermanG]

Attacking a straw man. Nice logical fallacy, dude. It is a desperate technique when your thesis has been dismantled.

My argument is solid. You instead felt the need to post 3 separate answers to one post, last of which is just pure defensive nonsense that doesnt even argue any point.

However you ignoring FO preferences and assuming face value is all that matters is not something I would expect in an intelligent debate.

Your whole case is based on that they randomly ended up getting two near identical returns, and that the best offers came from non-contenders. Thats not only a strawman, but a silly looking one as well.

The far superior logic is they preferred 2024 picks and valued them higher than their face value.

 

[silesian]

You instead felt the need to post 3 separate answers to one post, last of which is just pure defensive nonsense that doesnt even argue any point.

Sorry you missed the point of my post, so let me help you.

You fabricated an argument that I never made and then disputed that which you fabricated. This amateur tactic is called a straw man.

My response is the antithesis of defensive because i did not defend your something that you made up.

Hope that helps.

 

[silesian]

The far superior logic is they preferred 2024 picks and valued them higher than their face value.

Yet you can’t come up with one hypothetical better trade with a contender which a counterparty would have accepted.

You know, one where the Jazz get high potential young talent and/or better picks that the contender would give up for a 30 day rental.

Just one. Pretty please.

 

[silesian]

Your whole case is based on that they randomly ended up getting two near identical returns, and that the best offers came from non-contenders. Thats not only a strawman, but a silly looking one as well.

nope. That is not the basis of any of my arguments. I won’t re litigate this it is all explained earlier.

 

[HermanG]

Yet you can’t come up with one hypothetical better trade with a contender which a counterparty would have accepted.

You know, one where the Jazz get high potential young talent and/or better picks that the contender would give up for a 30 day rental.

Just one. Pretty please.

Dude that is absolutely trivial but it only leads to a silly argumet where you either say "lol they were never going to give that" or "that is not a better value". And high potential young talent is not a requirement, when you compete in value with picks landing in the 25-35 range. That is already in the hail mary area of the draft when it comes to high potential players.

Lets just throw 3 names that were moved that I would have loved to try and see if we can give them increased opportunity to elevate them: Tre Mann, Quentin Grimes and Jaden Springer. There are tons of others like Moses Moody but they are all in the "coulda should woulda" department since they werent actually traded at all.

Also that 30 day rental meme you try to pull is like this is the first ever trade deadline you are watching. Its even more hilarious since Buddy Hield's expiring contract was traded for twice the value Simone's was.

 

[HermanG]

nope. That is not the basis of any of my arguments. I won’t re litigate this it is all explained earlier.

You lost track of your thoughts already? Your only proper argument in this whole case and what started this nonsensical debate is that my "instead of" analysis was faulty, which can only be true if we got the best deals for each player. If we opted to favor 2024 picks, then that is the whole point of my post you decided to criticize and you lost this ensuing argument in your first post.

So which one is it? Have the guts to commit to a take:
Did our FO target/favor 2024 picks or get two of those by coincidence?

 

[silesian]

You lost track of your thoughts already? Your only proper argument in this whole case and what started this nonsensical debate is that my "instead of" analysis was faulty, which can only be true if we got the best deals for each player. If we opted to favor 2024 picks, then that is the whole point of my post you decided to criticize and you lost this ensuing argument in your first post.

So which one is it? Have the guts to commit to a take:
Did our FO target/favor 2024 picks or get two of those by coincidence?

Okay, I give in. Danny desperately wanted 2024 late firsts and early seconds and he spurned numerous other better offers, including higher picks in 2024, awesome young prospects, higher picks in 2025, two first round picks (2025 and 2027), etc, etc. He gave all this up just so he could get his heart's desire: 2024 late firsts/ early seconds. It was not a coincidence that they were "nearly identical" -- it was exactly his goal and he forewent much better options, much to the detriment of the his team. Ryan was cool with this.

 

[silesian]

Also that 30 day rental meme you try to pull is like this is the first ever trade deadline you are watching. Its even more hilarious since Buddy Hield's expiring contract was traded for twice the value Simone's was.

Let's compare the Simone trade to the Hield trade:

2nd round picks:
2024 Simone - 2nd pick
2024 Buddy -- 6th pick

2022 Simone -- 6th pick (Procida)
2029 Buddy -- ?? pick


You seriously think Hield yielded twice the value?

 

[silesian]

Lets just throw 3 names that were moved that I would have loved to try and see if we can give them increased opportunity to elevate them: Tre Mann, Quentin Grimes and Jaden Springer.

OKC trades Mann, choosing Simone over Hayward, please let's be realistic

I'd love moving Simone for Grimes, but let's be realistic

Hard pass on Springer, he'd destroy spacing

 

[HermanG]

Okay, I give in. Danny desperately wanted 2024 late firsts and early seconds and he spurned numerous other better offers, including higher picks in 2024, awesome young prospects, higher picks in 2025, two first round picks (2025 and 2027), etc, etc. He gave all this up just so he could get his heart's desire: 2024 late firsts/ early seconds. It was not a coincidence that they were "nearly identical" -- it was exactly his goal and he forewent much better options, much to the detriment of the his team. Ryan was cool with this.

Using sarcasm to avoid the question isnt really a sign that you are on solid ground.