You're right, but I was just trying to show how hard it is to draft a star player with picks outside top5.
Wemby is an anomaly. And that's why we have to take advantage of every single season of his.Most would trade your chosen 5 year range for LM. You dropped 2023 though, and no-one would trade the LAST 5 years picks for LM!
If I don't have a franchise player, I'd rather have a 40-50% chance to get a top4 pick (current odds for top5 worst records) than an all-star player who's not good enough to be the best player on a championship team.
But since we have Wemby, I don't want to take any more gambles or risks in the draft.
Maybe it's because I always get unlucky with odds and hate gambling, but for me gambling on unfavorable odds is just not worth it.
If we take current projected lottery situation, we'd have 32% chance to land a top4 pick with our own or Hawks pick.
What are the odds of that top4 pick being better than Markkanen? Probably not higher than another 32% chance.
That's 10% chance to get a player better than Markkanen...in like 3-5 years it takes for him to develop.
I'd like to be as optimistic as a lot of you guys in here, but first we struck gold with 14% for Wemby, then we moved up to #4 this year, then we got #8 with Raptors pick.
I don't think gambling with anything under 50% is worth it for us because sooner or later our lottery luck has to stop.
It's the exact call the FO made when they traded away Derrick and DJM, and it was the right one.
If we didn't have Wemby, I feel like we'd be having the exact same discussion about Devin that Utah is having about Lauri. And I think our fanbase would be equally split. I'd be advocating for getting the best haul as possible for Devin and hard tanking in 25 and 26 to land our star. Thankfully, we already have him.
Agree with most of this actually. I'd trade multiple picks for him as well, just with top 1-? protection on them. Excepting the MIN 30/31 pick and swap, I'd trade those unprotected as those picks 'should' be worth a lot more to UTA than us.
I agree that it was the right one, but now it's up to Utah ownership to come to that conclusion.
If it was up to Ainge, there would be no doubt. He'd tank for two years hoping to get two top5 picks and then he'd be ready with those two high picks and a ton of assets.
The biggest thing PATFO need to do right now is to find that fine line between being too agressive and blowing their load too early and being too passive and missing out on players that would take us to the next level.
To make people feel better about a potential trade, it would probably end with Spurs trading away DJ for better odds in Wemby lottery, Lauri and still having a leftover pick from the Hawks.
My offer would be Keldon, those two Minnesota picks, Chicago pick and either '26 SAS/ATL or '27 ATL.
I don't think we're getting Lauri without one of those Hawks picks going the other way. Unprotected.
Hawks might move up again with like 10% chance, but they surely won't be in top5 odds because no team that has no incentive to tank ever is.
Yeah, I think Ainge and Zanik are getting too cute in trying to have their cake and eat it to. But, I'm here for it... those clowns.
Though, I will say, I like the idea of the west being dominated by SAS, OKC and UTA. Rise of the small markets.
Sag for Flagg!
Be poop for Coop!
I still prefer Capture the Flagg.
I wonder, what a list of players would look like, that we should be ok with giving up four firsts including all the Atlanta stuff (probably what Ainge asks us to give up).
While needing that player to be at a relativ young age, I guess this list isn't that long.
Lauri is overrated on this board, but even then it’s more of a reflection of leverage. Utah’s is diminishing by the day.So crap and crap for an allstar?
And I can’t wait for half this thread to lap up Ainge’s horse manure spin when they extend him next week (“we love Lauri, we were never gonna sell him, the media sucks”, yada yada).
If you want to talk overrated on this board, Keldon is a replacement level player. He's just the salary throw-in to make a Markannen trade CBA-legal. Would you trade Vassell for two meh protected picks and mediocre matching salary? Markannen's worth is only two 33 year-old Thaddeus Youngs?
I would not trade Vassell (i dont see the equivalency personally). And, yea, you captured the most of what I would trade Lauri for right now. Salary and two decent FRPs (CHI FRP type protections).
Basically: don’t get it twisted. I like Lauri, just not now. A Lauri trade is the type of “finishing piece” move I’d like to see in 2 years when they’re going for it. Its too early to bust up the current strategy.
So trade for Lauri when you don't have the assets to trade for him?
Now I agree with Exstatic the most. In my initial guess, I forgot that Zach will likely be included and cost us extra.
Your offer indicates you're an agent for Ainge.
Warriors are offering Moody + 2 FRPS. We don't have to bid against ourselves like that.
Spurs won’t have assets to trade for a finishing piece in 2 years?
I think he’s his pretty much captures Lauri’s value in the current marketplace right now. Warriors aren’t willing to attach a good player (Kumnga or Pod), and they have to find a 3rd team to take on Wiggins.
Not my preferred realistic trade but scott already has that one called. Moody, 25, and 27 is laughable and no way Utah is accepting that.Your offer indicates you're an agent for Ainge.
Warriors are offering Moody + 2 FRPS. We don't have to bid against ourselves like that.
I don't agree that Markannen is a finishing piece. Markannen would be a core piece to finally add some respectable talent around Wemby. Finishing piece is more like 2015 Iguodala.
Also the current strategy looks to be stockpiling picks to make a trade if you assume competence from the front office. At least I hope that's the current strategy. Those 2030 and 2031 picks and swaps do nothing to advance the team now if they don't trade them for someone and god help us if let's punt on the draft because we like Sochan and Branham is the team's strategy.
A top-10 protected first, two seconds, and two distant picks is doubtful to get it done. Ainge is likely saying he doesn't want Wiggins because he's trying to extract way more draft capital out of GSW. But he has to take Wiggins to make a trade work and there's no reason not to since he has to hit the salary floor and Wiggins' negative trade value ensures he can extract more picks from taking him. Moody makes $5.8 million, Podz $3.5 million, and Kuminga $7.6 million so none of them puts much of a dent in the salary they'd have to send out to legally trade for Markannen.
Just based on the way things have progressed, I'd probably reduce my offer by one pick.
I think he's WORTH the package I have been talking about to the Spurs, but that's an overpay compared to the market. And I still kind of believe that Ainge knows his best basketball decision is to move Lauri, meaning we just have to beat the next best offer and not have to overcome the inherent value to Utah keeping him... but of course I'm just speculating.
If the Spurs offered my package, I think the deal would be done by now.
I still think Ainge would be nuts not to force GSW to give him their 29 and 31 FRP unprotected. That's the whole point of trading them a guy who'd be perfect for them to try to squeeze one more le out in the last 2-3 productive years of Curry's career, that they'd have to completely mortgage a bleak future to Ainge. So I very much disagree that your initial offer would have been accepted already when he can still try to extract blood from GSW.
Which pick would you pull from your offer? And let's say this is final offer, not let's see if Ainge will take three picks but still give him the fourth when he says no.
Sorry to be elusive and offer three answers to your question, but it kind of depends on what my sense is that GSW will do.
Scenario 1: I think GSW offer is capped out at Moody + 2 FRP (25 + 27), then I'm pulling the SA26 pick
Scenario 2: I think GSW might up the ante a little bit and somehow add 29 or 31 (by freeing up their obligation to WAS), then I'm pulling SA28
Scenario 3: I think GSW will cave and offer 25, 27, 29, 31 - then I'll go back to my original offer (though it honestly may lose at that point)
There is another scenario where GSW goes Scenario 3 and starts adding swaps, in which case I'm sticking with my offer 3 and know I'm going to lose out and that's fine.
If GSW thinks they can actually win a le with Lauri, then I think they should go all in with whatever it takes. I don't care if we are ed for 3 years after Curry retires if it gives me one more le with him. Some folks think that would be a mistake for GSW to do, but I disagree. This isn't a perfect example because Curry is a step ahead of where Duncan was at this point, but if we could have traded away our 16, 18, 20, 22 FRP to win another chip with Timmy in 2015 and be even stronger in 2016 and 2017 before Nephew lost his mind, I would have been down as . Would we still have Wemby? No clue, but I'd assume by 2022-23 with no picks reloading the team we'd have still been terrible and could have posted the same bottom dweller record.
IMO, a single banner is worth being bad for a few years.
I'll also follow up by saying I don't think Lauri makes GSW a le contender, but that's beside the point - it only matters what GSW thinks.
I think the three picks, Wemby and Castle for Mark and Clarkson would be pretty fair! PS I am Danny Ainge!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
