Do you want our pick to convey this year?

[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.

 

[HermanG]

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?

Well you got me there. Twice the value was a silly thing to say. But two 2nd rounders and 2 usable players is still better than what we got.

 

[HermanG]

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

Well you did exactly what I said. Dismissed all trades.

Simone is better, cheaper and younger than either Bojan or Burks, and about to be a RFA.

However that was not the Knicks trade that was speculated. That was more based on JC/KO for Grimes and company. Make that trade and keep Simone if you actually prefer young players over picks.

 

[silesian]

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

It is not sarcasm. Your entire argument is that the Jazz chose a far inferior deal due to their irrational desire for precisely the kinds of picks they got, that the late firstish were not coincidental and merely the best they could get, but they are specifically targeted. These are far superior trades and now you say imply they are hyperbolic? Or are you saying they could have gotten something marginally better, say a 27th pick instead of a 29th pick? That argument would be at least somewhat reasonable.

 

[silesian]

Make that trade and keep Simone if you actually prefer young players over picks.

The average age of an NBA player is 26, Simone is 28. The Jazz investing significant cap space for a low rotation piece into his 30s does not match our timeline.