What's new
By:
Filters

Off-Season Rumblings

A lot of decision makers in the NBA are swayed by analytics and Sexton's analytics crushed Monks this year and he proved it as a starter. There value isn't close and Monk will get a bigger contract for the next two seasons.
 
sip said:
No he didn't. There was no reason to come into that season with Conley, Clarkson and Olynyk on the roster. Remove those 3 pieces from the get go and it gets ugly early rather than after the trade deadline.
Click to expand...

I have serious questions about you actually watching games the past couple of years if you believe that keeping Clarkson was conducive to winning in the long run.

And as I and other have pointed out, that team looked terrible already. No one, and I mean no one, thought that keeping Conley would lead to the Jazz being a playoff team. Or that Olynyk would develop into some kind of a stoned man's Magic Johnson out there.
 
I wish people would just stop with the "trade Lauri with the sole purpose of tanking better".

Its so far outside the box of what our FO has been signaling that its not smart to waste time discussing it.

If you make projections that we trade him, at least back it up with some package which could cause our FO to change their tune.
 
HermanG said:
I wish people would just stop with the "trade Lauri with the sole purpose of tanking better".

Its so far outside the box of what our FO has been signaling that its not smart to waste time discussing it.

If you make projections that we trade him, at least back it up with some package which could cause our FO to change their tune.
Click to expand...
Not only has the FO never even hinted as such a move, it makes zero sense.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
People had their names chiseled on the Larry O Brien before the season started.
Click to expand...
Well I guess those people were wrong. Turns out they might'a had a better chance if they hadn't done the trade. I'm just not that excited about adding Laurie to very young 57 win team. Or trading Laurie at all for that matter.
 
My2Cents said:
Well I guess those people were wrong. Turns out they might'a had a better chance if they hadn't done the trade. I'm just not that excited about adding Laurie to very young 57 win team. Or trading Laurie at all for that matter.
Click to expand...
I'm not either... but they have a great team, cap space, lots of assets. Someone will help them and benefit from it. If they want to give us a haul then maybe it should be us.
 
I've been thinking about a statement Ainge made a while ago - he said something to the effect that when we make moves it won't be with the goal of just being a playoff team, it will be with the goal of a championship. And now I'm looking at those new rumors about Ainge looking to make big moves this off-season and a lot of the ones that are being floated around just don't make sense. If anything to a large degree they lock us into playoff contention rather than legit championship pursuit. Unless we really think Trae Young-Brandon Ingram-Lauri is a championship trio. I don't see it. I'm sorry, I just do NOT think this is anywhere close to enough. A team built around those 3 likely loses in R1 of the Western conference playoffs.

So... here's the question... is there a player we don't know is available but might be... if you give a godfather offer? Is he probing about Giannis? I know it's a super long shot. But MKE is in a weird spot where they have aging core where most of them won't be getting better but worse and they don't have avenues to improve(they are kind of like we were the summer we traded Gobert and Mitchell). Again... really long shot... but maybe?

Who are other similar really high end players, who seem like a pipe dream, but there might be a glimmer of hope?
 
Why the hell does Locke seem to be entertaining the idea of whether the Jazz can trade for Giannis? Did anyone listen?

Listing Trae, Ingram, and Giannis together like that is just wild lol
 
Last edited:
Bawse Dawg said:
Why the hell does Locke seem to be entertaining the idea of whether the Jazz can trade for Giannis? Did anyone listen?

Listing Trae, Ingram, and Giannis together like that is just wild lol
Click to expand...
Locke did entertain that idea? I swear I didn't listen when I made that post above...
 
JimLes said:
I have serious questions about you actually watching games the past couple of years if you believe that keeping Clarkson was conducive to winning in the long run.

And as I and other have pointed out, that team looked terrible already. No one, and I mean no one, thought that keeping Conley would lead to the Jazz being a playoff team. Or that Olynyk would develop into some kind of a stoned man's Magic Johnson out there.
Click to expand...
We are talking about 2 years ago and Clarkson was a big part of our hot start along with Olynyk and Conley. If the idea is to be bad then there is no point in having a bunch of solid vets hanging around to provide quality depth. Yeah no one thought that keeping Conley around would lead us to being a playoff team but there were plenty of people that thought keeping those vets around could keep us from the bottom of the west and giving us from improving our odds in the Wemby sweepstakes.
 
Bawse Dawg said:
Why the hell does Locke seem to be entertaining the idea of whether the Jazz can trade for Giannis? Did anyone listen?

Listing Trae, Ingram, and Giannis together like that is just wild lol
Click to expand...

stitches said:
Locke did entertain that idea? I swear I didn't listen when I made that post above...
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say he entertained it really... he mentioned it as a question or something. Its not a thing. He has some weird theories about stuff too. Some of the stuff I'm like "huh?". Its stuff that sounds smart and real but doesn't make sense.
 
sip said:
We are talking about 2 years ago and Clarkson was a big part of our hot start along with Olynyk and Conley. If the idea is to be bad then there is no point in having a bunch of solid vets hanging around to provide quality depth. Yeah no one thought that keeping Conley around would lead us to being a playoff team but there were plenty of people that thought keeping those vets around could keep us from the bottom of the west and giving us from improving our odds in the Wemby sweepstakes.
Click to expand...
Me personally I thought coach was part of the tank plan and wouldn't play those vets much. Boy was I wrong. I thought the young guys would get the bulk of the minutes and the vets would ride pine. I should have learned from the previous tank year (ty corbin year)
 
gomretat said:
Not only has the FO never even hinted as such a move, it makes zero sense.
Click to expand...
Front offices usually tell everyone before they do something like that. Lol

I’m not saying they are doing it… I’m saying we said we were going to build around Don while also having active trade convos.
 
Thee Idiotic Minivan K said:
Makes zero sense till someone sends a god offer. So it doesnt not not make sense at all. I don’t think the jazz are looking to deal him but if a god offer comes, suddenly it makes sense to trade him.
Click to expand...
I’ve tried to lay it out but folks still miss that part.
 
HermanG said:
I wish people would just stop with the "trade Lauri with the sole purpose of tanking better".

Its so far outside the box of what our FO has been signaling that its not smart to waste time discussing it.

If you make projections that we trade him, at least back it up with some package which could cause our FO to change their tune.
Click to expand...

Agree. The only trade you do for Lauri is to find your SGA, Haliburton etc ie a young player that has superstar potential. Those players are hard to find but Jalen Williams is possibly one. Cade may be another that just needs a change in scenery. Likewise for Lamelo or although not convinced is a point on Zion worth it.
 
Elizah Huge said:
So you only do it for a godfather offer? I feel like that hasn’t been what you’ve been saying lol.
Click to expand...
Well I feel like you haven’t been paying attention then lol. I’m not out here trying to trade Lauri for whatever offer comes through the door so we can tank like the OP said. I’ve been clear I’d have a high price for him. What constitutes a godfather offer is going to be different for everyone. I’m probably more willing to move him if that monster offer came in than most here. I’m flexible… I’m not so far dug in to the “we can’t trade Lauri or we will never be good again” camp. I also think if the offers are just fair that we can walk away.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
Well I feel like you haven’t been paying attention then lol. I’m not out here trying to trade Lauri for whatever offer comes through the door so we can tank like the OP said. I’ve been clear I’d have a high price for him. What constitutes a godfather offer is going to be different for everyone. I’m probably more willing to move him if that monster offer came in than most here. I’m flexible… I’m not so far dug in to the “we can’t trade Lauri or we will never be good again” camp. I also think if the offers are just fair that we can walk away.
Click to expand...
I feel like if we keep him and do good you’ll say see I only wanted to trade him for a godfather offer anyways!!! If we do trade him but not for a godfather offer you’ll say see tanking was the right choice!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top