What's new
By:
Filters

Lakers-Jazz Trade

I do admit that watching the Lakers drown last year was terrific. You can't pay three guys >75% of your cap and expect a competitive rotation of 7/8 guys.
 
Avery said:
I do admit that watching the Lakers drown last year was terrific. You can't pay three guys >75% of your cap and expect a competitive rotation of 7/8 guys.
Click to expand...
You totally can, that's actually a formula of success. But only if all three of those guys are worth anywhere near their money and not actually one of the most destructive saboteurs ever.
 
I dont know why we would include Vando in a deal here. I doubt he's a deal breaker for the Lakers and he should be the exact kind of guy we wont in our rotation for the next 5-7 years at least.
 
Bodhi said:
I dont know why we would include Vando in a deal here. I doubt he's a deal breaker for the Lakers and he should be the exact kind of guy we wont in our rotation for the next 5-7 years at least.
Click to expand...
He's only under contract for the next two years and then he's an unrestricted free agent. He's worth something now because he's on a cheap contract but probably won't be in the future. He's also most useful playing next to a dynamic, rangy big since he has 0 offensive game so he will be less useful here than he would on the Lakers.

He also just signed with Klutch which is something to keep in mind. If he's the piece that clinches a 2nd unprotected pick then I will drive him to the airport, even if the Jazz had restricted free agency rights on him or more years on his deal (which again, they don't).

The Jazz will have to pay top-dollar to keep him, which if they really want to do that, then do it in two years.
 
Throwing in Vandy is icing if you have to - he's worth keeping just as a cheap contract, but if it's the only path to potentially getting a second unprotected or some other sweetener, you have to consider it.

I'd prefer to keep him all things being equal.
 
Avery said:
Throwing in Vandy is icing if you have to - he's worth keeping just as a cheap contract, but if it's the only path to potentially getting a second unprotected or some other sweetener, you have to consider it.

I'd prefer to keep him all things being equal.
Click to expand...
Clarify "all things being equal"? I read that as if we're not getting anything for him, then just keep him. In which case I agree.

But I really don't think in the net he moves the needle in the ultimately desired direction in the next two years either.
 
Coach Ellis said:
Jazz shouldn’t sacrifice any assets or quality of assets to unload Rudy Gay. Learn from the Favors mistake. Between Markkanen and Vanderbilt, all the 4 minutes are basically allocated early in the season. Try to talk him into letting go of next years player option in exchange for a buyout now so he can catch on somewhere before training camp. Otherwise, he can be a bench mentor until the trade deadline and try again then.
Click to expand...
Everything I read suggests that Markannen is earmarked as trade fodder for the Jazz to get another first. https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nb...novan-mitchell-trade-to-cavaliers/ar-AA11nwkB

We’ll see I guess. I like his game and hope he sticks around personally.
 
I think the window on a Westbrick deal is all but closed. Indy’s offer of Turner and Hield beats anything we can put together and Ainge balks at anything less than two firsts anyway.
 
Release the Kraken said:
I think the window on a Westbrick deal is all but closed. Indy’s offer of Turner and Hield beats anything we can put together and Ainge balks at anything less than two firsts anyway.
Click to expand...
I mean they could have done that deal weeks ago... but haven't... hmmmm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top