RealGM

Onus wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:

Onus wrote:Jazz interested in Kuminga + Podz deal?

I would not be.

I mean I would add 2 1sts as well. 26 and 28

Really JK and Podz would just be a starting point.

I just am not enamored with either guy. It's not a bad offer, it is just not my favorite and I'd rather keep Lauri.

babyjax13 wrote:

Dthrill55 wrote:Kings should throw all the picks and swaps + filler for him.

Hes the perfect player for them

What are picks from a team with Fox, Lauri, and Sabonis going to do for us?

I heard this all year, "kings were just the 3rd seed.."

Nothing in the NBA is certain. Fox has 2 years left. Monk might be leaving. This team isn't some lock even with Lauri unfortunately.

LightTheBeam wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:

Dthrill55 wrote:Kings should throw all the picks and swaps + filler for him.

Hes the perfect player for them

What are picks from a team with Fox, Lauri, and Sabonis going to do for us?

I heard this all year, "kings were just the 3rd seed.."

Nothing in the NBA is certain. Fox has 2 years left. Monk might be leaving. This team isn't some lock even with Lauri unfortunately.

Utah already owns extra picks from other teams. I don't think that they need more, but it never hurts to get them.

My guess is that Ainge is hoping that whoever they pick in 2024 and 2025 are good players to pair with Lauri (plus anyone else on the roster...George, Hendricks, Sexton, Kessler, etc.). The issue with that is: Will Lauri be willing to wait that long? Let's say the 2025 pick is a good one...in that case it'll probably take at least a year for that player to develop. That takes us to 2027 when Markkanen is almost 30 years old.

I bet he'll still be productive at that point, but does he want to wait around for 3 more years?

As I've posted many times, Lauri/Sexton to Boston, all the Lakers picks/assets out to Utah/Boston, Jaylen Brown to LAL. Prob only happens if Boston wants to cut money which they have said they aren't looking to do.

As a Sixers fan, I would send four 1sts for Lauri. I think he's that good of a fit here.

Something like Reed + '24 PHI 1st, '26 OKC or PHI 1st, '28 LAC 1st (unp), '29 PHI 1st (unp). Trade can be finalized ~July 9th once Reed can be traded to Utah.

Dan Z wrote:

LightTheBeam wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:What are picks from a team with Fox, Lauri, and Sabonis going to do for us?

I heard this all year, "kings were just the 3rd seed.."

Nothing in the NBA is certain. Fox has 2 years left. Monk might be leaving. This team isn't some lock even with Lauri unfortunately.

Utah already owns extra picks from other teams. I don't think that they need more, but it never hurts to get them.

My guess is that Ainge is hoping that whoever they pick in 2024 and 2025 are good players to pair with Lauri (plus anyone else on the roster...George, Hendricks, Sexton, Kessler, etc.). The issue with that is: Will Lauri be willing to wait that long? Let's say the 2025 pick is a good one...in that case it'll probably take at least a year for that player to develop. That takes us to 2027 when Markkanen is almost 30 years old.

I bet he'll still be productive at that point, but does he want to wait around for 3 more years?

Yea if we know anything about Ainge he loves to bet on future picks from bad teams. So far it paid off massively for Boston. We will see what he does for Utah.

I think Lauri eventually gets traded. Lauri is good, too good to let Utah bottom out, not good enough to carry a team.

And for the record I don't even think Sac would be in play. Assets not considered I don't see our owner being willing to pay Fox/Keegan/Lauri/Sabonis(maybe Monk) what it would cost long term

165bows wrote:As I've posted many times, Lauri/Sexton to Boston, all the Lakers picks/assets out to Utah/Boston, Jaylen Brown to LAL. Prob only happens if Boston wants to cut money which they have said they aren't looking to do.

what is "all the Lakers picks/assets"

I imagine several teams can beat their offer?

LightTheBeam wrote:

Dan Z wrote:

LightTheBeam wrote:
I heard this all year, "kings were just the 3rd seed.."

Nothing in the NBA is certain. Fox has 2 years left. Monk might be leaving. This team isn't some lock even with Lauri unfortunately.

Utah already owns extra picks from other teams. I don't think that they need more, but it never hurts to get them.

My guess is that Ainge is hoping that whoever they pick in 2024 and 2025 are good players to pair with Lauri (plus anyone else on the roster...George, Hendricks, Sexton, Kessler, etc.). The issue with that is: Will Lauri be willing to wait that long? Let's say the 2025 pick is a good one...in that case it'll probably take at least a year for that player to develop. That takes us to 2027 when Markkanen is almost 30 years old.

I bet he'll still be productive at that point, but does he want to wait around for 3 more years?

Yea if we know anything about Ainge he loves to bet on future picks from bad teams. So far it paid off massively for Boston. We will see what he does for Utah.

I think Lauri eventually gets traded. Lauri is good, too good to let Utah bottom out, not good enough to carry a team.

And for the record I don't even think Sac would be in play. Assets not considered I don't see our owner being willing to pay Fox/Keegan/Lauri/Sabonis(maybe Monk) what it would cost long term

It's not a bad plan for Utah. The problems are: Will Markkanen want to stick it out? And will Markkanen plus the rest of the roster keep them too competitive to get a top 5 pick.

I agree with you about Markkanen on the Kings. Realistically it doesn't seem like it'll happen.

LightTheBeam wrote:

165bows wrote:As I've posted many times, Lauri/Sexton to Boston, all the Lakers picks/assets out to Utah/Boston, Jaylen Brown to LAL. Prob only happens if Boston wants to cut money which they have said they aren't looking to do.

what is "all the Lakers picks/assets"

I imagine several teams can beat their offer?

Ya, 'all the Lakers picks/assets' is pretty weak. They have no young guys worth anything really - Rui is the closest and he is 26-27 and at that age not someone you want as a rebuild team. Their picks look like -

They owe a 2024 or 2025 FRP to NO
They owe a 2027 FRP to UTA

So if NO takes the 2024 FRP they can trade 2025, 2029, 2031 and swaps.
If NO doesnt take the 2024 FRP, they can trade 2029, 2031 and swaps plus the 17th pick in this draft.

Either of those offers would get quite easily beaten even if all picks were considered worth the same - but being LAL I would devalue their FRP as they are generally a FA destination (I put that rule on MIA as well, arguably LAC too).

LAL simply doesnt have the assets to get a Lauri or Brown - not to mention BOS would NEVER move a star guy like Jaylen to LAL.

SkyHook wrote:

zimpy27 wrote:

Donuts83 wrote:What would a lakers deal look like

Reaves, Rui, #17, LAL27FRP(unprotect), LAL29FRP, LAL31FRP

For

Lauri, Clarkson

If all of the picks are fully unprotected, then this proposal would absolutely have to be considered.

That's not something to consider for Utah. That's something to take and run.

Overpay for LA.

LightTheBeam wrote:

165bows wrote:As I've posted many times, Lauri/Sexton to Boston, all the Lakers picks/assets out to Utah/Boston, Jaylen Brown to LAL. Prob only happens if Boston wants to cut money which they have said they aren't looking to do.

what is "all the Lakers picks/assets"

I imagine several teams can beat their offer?

You are correct that a lot of teams could beat their offer.

Assets are Reaves, 3 firsts, 3 swaps and then some maybe slightly positive values (Vando, JHS, Christie via S&T)

Donuts83 wrote:Lauri is a free agent this year. Those type of packages are unrealistic for a player coming up in free agency. Lauri will get to choose where he wants to go. You traded him a year too late.

Right, these kind of things come down to maybe 3-4 teams. It’s a short (list) of teams that are competing that also have the assets for that kind of move.

jayjaysee wrote:
Utah won 9 more games than SAS this year.

And SAS looked like they were trying, while Utah ugly tanked for 2-3 months.. If Utah keeps their young vets (which seems the preferred option) how are they more likely to finish in the top 3 than SAS?

Dude, they came out the gate with the "Point Sochan" experiment...

pad300 wrote:

jayjaysee wrote:
Utah won 9 more games than SAS this year.

And SAS looked like they were trying, while Utah ugly tanked for 2-3 months.. If Utah keeps their young vets (which seems the preferred option) how are they more likely to finish in the top 3 than SAS?

Dude, they came out the gate with the "Point Sochan" experiment...

Yeah the Spurs only started trying even a little bit after they had booked so many losses they were guaranteed to be near the bottom of the league (any bottom-4 record has the same chance at the top-4 picks).

LightTheBeam wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:

Dthrill55 wrote:Kings should throw all the picks and swaps + filler for him.

Hes the perfect player for them

What are picks from a team with Fox, Lauri, and Sabonis going to do for us?

I heard this all year, "kings were just the 3rd seed.."

Nothing in the NBA is certain. Fox has 2 years left. Monk might be leaving. This team isn't some lock even with Lauri unfortunately.

I think there are going to be a lot more appealing picks on offer. Sure, Fox might leave, but that means any real return is at least 3 seasons away - that is too far away.

Onus wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:

Onus wrote:Jazz interested in Kuminga + Podz deal?

I would not be.

I mean I would add 2 1sts as well. 26 and 28

Really JK and Podz would just be a starting point.

I would be interested but I probably like Kuminga better than most Jazz fans. I think he could be like a Gordon on the Nuggets a valuable contributor on a championship team in four or five years. We need players in conjunction of just picks at this point.

WinterSoldier wrote:

Onus wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:I would not be.

I mean I would add 2 1sts as well. 26 and 28

Really JK and Podz would just be a starting point.

I would be interested but I probably like Kuminga better than most Jazz fans. I think he could be like a Gordon on the Nuggets a valuable contributor on a championship team in four or five years. We need players in conjunction of just picks at this point.

I do think jk and podz are probably some of the better young prospects being discussed while also our picks after Steph retires should theoretically be really valuable. I’m preparing to return to the dark ages.

babyjax13 wrote:

LightTheBeam wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:What are picks from a team with Fox, Lauri, and Sabonis going to do for us?

I heard this all year, "kings were just the 3rd seed.."

Nothing in the NBA is certain. Fox has 2 years left. Monk might be leaving. This team isn't some lock even with Lauri unfortunately.

I think there are going to be a lot more appealing picks on offer. Sure, Fox might leave, but that means any real return is at least 3 seasons away - that is too far away.

Not saying they couldn't do better, just saying the idea that the Kings picks would be bad picks doesn't really hold up.

Well they would be getting #13 here. But as I said in the post above, I don't see Kings as a realistic landing spot. I can't imagine Vivek will stomach paying what that team would cost.

Realistically do you see one of the bad teams who have control of their picks (detroit, wizards, hornets, blazers, spurs) paying up 3 firsts with no protection for Lauri? I think Utah either needs to resign him, or find a middling team with picks + need + willing to pay max for Lauri. That gets really challenging.

OKC is probably the only team that comes to mind. They have plenty of upside future 1sts, can probably afford him while they wait to pay rest of the team, and he fits well into the starting lineup.

Giddey + #12 + Utah pick returned + one of the Miami, Philly, Dallas, Denver 1sts. They've got the team + assets to gamble on Lauri resigning.

OKC gets
- Lauri

Jazz get
Giddey
- 2024 1st from Rockets (basically pick 12)
- 2025 1st from Heat (top 14 protected) which becomes unprotected in 2026
- 2025 Philly 1st (1-6 protected in 2025, 1-4 in 2026, 1-4 in 2027)
- Jazz pick returned


This to me seems more than fair

LightTheBeam wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:

LightTheBeam wrote:
I heard this all year, "kings were just the 3rd seed.."

Nothing in the NBA is certain. Fox has 2 years left. Monk might be leaving. This team isn't some lock even with Lauri unfortunately.

I think there are going to be a lot more appealing picks on offer. Sure, Fox might leave, but that means any real return is at least 3 seasons away - that is too far away.

Not saying they couldn't do better, just saying the idea that the Kings picks would be bad picks doesn't really hold up.

Well they would be getting #13 here. But as I said in the post above, I don't see Kings as a realistic landing spot. I can't imagine Vivek will stomach paying what that team would cost.

Realistically do you see one of the bad teams who have control of their picks (detroit, wizards, hornets, blazers, spurs) paying up 3 firsts with no protection for Lauri? I think Utah either needs to resign him, or find a middling team with picks + need + willing to pay max for Lauri. That gets really challenging.

OKC is probably the only team that comes to mind. They have plenty of upside future 1sts, can probably afford him while they wait to pay rest of the team, and he fits well into the starting lineup.

Giddey + #12 + Utah pick returned + one of the Miami, Philly, Dallas, Denver 1sts. They've got the team + assets to gamble on Lauri resigning.

OKC also has the cap space to do the same extension that the Jazz people have been discussing a bunch.