What's new
By:
Filters

Worst Case Scenario

I'm not sure I have one. Probably Dick, Wallace, and 28th being traded for something lame down the road.

The thing is I don't even hate Dick or Wallace as prospects or anything. It would just feel very underwhelming.
 
Elizah Huge said:
Worse case scenario is not trading up and reaching for someone hard at 9. The good thing is I’m certain that is not going to happen.
Click to expand...
What if the guy that the jazz would take at 4 is there at 9. Would you still want to trade up just to waste the asset or would you rather keep the asset and still get the guy you want?
 
My worst case scenario is trading up and using assets to get Jarace Walker as even though he has upside I’m not a huge fan I think there will be better players available at 9.
 
I would like to see #29 parlayed into two or more second round picks. #29 has the potential to be the next RJ Hunter, Denzel Valentine, Chandler Hutchison or Justin Jackson. With multiple picks around there your chances of finding a good player should go up.
 
fishonjazz said:
What if the guy that the jazz would take at 4 is there at 9. Would you still want to trade up just to waste the asset or would you rather keep the asset and still get the guy you want?
Click to expand...
The guy you trade up for has to be one you KNOW won't fall to you. Thats 2 maybe 3 in this class imo
 
fishonjazz said:
What if the guy that the jazz would take at 4 is there at 9. Would you still want to trade up just to waste the asset or would you rather keep the asset and still get the guy you want?
Click to expand...

To be honest, i'd go with depends of the assets given. Sexton for example is one i'd be ok if we could get a higher upside in the top 10 instead of "the guy everyone from 4 to 8 felt ok letting slide". Would be ok with taking salary dumps to move a few spots too (tho It feels more reasonable at 16 or 28 than at 9).

On the other hand, i feel like there's too much value in 16 and 28 to just go on a 2 for 1 deal (a 2 for 2 where the second one downgrades, maybe i could think, but for 28, i imagine being better getting a rookie scale contract instead of picking someone at 31 and not necessarily having full control of the matching rigths come their RFA, tho we might have enough cap space to offer a long teen contract to a 2nd rounder anyway). Agbaji is the one i feel more torn about, as he looks on the edge off not exactly sure he's "untradeable material", but also in "he showed enough qualities for you not want to trade him", so that It would be hard to tell what would feel right to include him (still wouldn't call him a no go under any circumstance as i'd say with Lauri and Kessler)
 
rjfan said:
To be honest, i'd go with depends of the assets given. Sexton for example is one i'd be ok if we could get a higher upside in the top 10 instead of "the guy everyone from 4 to 8 felt ok letting slide". Would be ok with taking salary dumps to move a few spots too (tho It feels more reasonable at 16 or 28 than at 9).

On the other hand, i feel like there's too much value in 16 and 28 to just go on a 2 for 1 deal (a 2 for 2 where the second one downgrades, maybe i could think, but for 28, i imagine being better getting a rookie scale contract instead of picking someone at 31 and not necessarily having full control of the matching rigths come their RFA, tho we might have enough cap space to offer a long teen contract to a 2nd rounder anyway). Agbaji is the one i feel more torn about, as he looks on the edge off not exactly sure he's "untradeable material", but also in "he showed enough qualities for you not want to trade him", so that It would be hard to tell what would feel right to include him (still wouldn't call him a no go under any circumstance as i'd say with Lauri and Kessler)
Click to expand...
I don't think you understood my scenario.
Let's say the jazz draft black. Would you rather the jazz give up Sexton to move up and draft black or would you rather the jazz draft black at 9 and keep Sexton?
It's a redundant question as everyone would rather keep Sexton.
It just seems like some people think the jazz failed if they don't move up. I think they're is a scenario where the best possible outcome for the jazz is to stay and 9 and get the guy they would draft at 4 if they had that pick while keeping all their assets.
 
fishonjazz said:
I don't think you understood my scenario.
Let's say the jazz draft black. Would you rather the jazz give up Sexton to move up and draft black or would you rather the jazz draft black at 9 and keep Sexton?
It's a redundant question as everyone would rather keep Sexton.
It just seems like some people think the jazz failed if they don't move up. I think they're is a scenario where the best possible outcome for the jazz is to stay and 9 and get the guy they would draft at 4 if they had that pick while keeping all their assets.
Click to expand...

I understand that If the Jazz trade up to draft Black It is because they highly believe that Black is a guy that wouldn't make to 9 and would be worth what they'd give to make the trade up (same logic to apply to any trade up and/or name for 9, 16 and 28). Just went on over what I see over scenarios and assets (not really counting guys that i see as neutral or negative value like Gay, Olynyk or THT as assets).

But i'm also pretty happy If they just keep the picks where they are and go with whom they believe is the best player available.
 
Hypothetically, would people trade all three picks and another future 1st to move up to 3 to draft Scoot or Miller?
 
Keefe said:
Hypothetically, would people trade all three picks and another future 1st to move up to 3 to draft Scoot or Miller?
Click to expand...
Portland may not do this Blazers are in win now mode for Dame
They will keep Scoot or Miller if they can immediately help Dame win or trade #3 for vet win now pieces
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top