What does a Lauri to Detroit trade look like?

[Daddy 801]

It’s been reported the Jazz want two unprotected first round draft picks. The salary and players probably don’t matter much. But they would probably need to be contracts that expire sooner than later or more compensation would need to come to Utah. I think Utah has enough picks that convey in later years so the picks would probably need to be a 26 and a 27 or 28 pick.


No idea what Detroits draft assets are, but that’s probably what it takes.

The salary of a player means a helluva lot. It determines what sort of surplus value can be assigned to that player and whether he's worth the salary.


Why should a team trade for Kessler when you can just use your cap space to sign a comparable player AND not give up any assets.

I’m well aware salary matters and the implications.

You trade for a player like Kessler because free agency is all but dead in the new CBA. And players like him aren’t free agents very often and it will be less and less in the new CBA.

[Vae Victus]

I’m well aware salary matters and the implications.

You trade for a player like Kessler because free agency is all but dead in the new CBA. And players like him aren’t free agents very often and it will be less and less in the new CBA.

I just find it funny when fandoms posture on message boards as if our opinions matter in real life deals/transactions. Utah Jazz homers understandably pray that someone will grossly overpay for your teams assets, just like how Laker homers delusionally think Reaves is worth way more than he really is and how it considerably annoys people who understand the strict limits of the new CBA.

As i keep saying, Kessler is a fine young player, but trade value wise i dont think teams view him as a foundational piece to throw a sweet package for (2 unprot FRPs is the pretty common demand i see for him). As a Jazz fan all you can do is hope that Ainge doesnt overpay to retain and more importantly some idiot GM doesnt just wait til RFA to throw some ridiculous 25% rookie max at him and forcing Ainge's hand to either match it or lose Kessler for nothing. That's an immediate way for Kessler to lose his trade value if he comes saddled with a huge deal and is unable to develop further enough to turn his contract into surplus value. To maximize return trade value oftentimes means eating some bad money (which in Utah's case is irrelevent due to planned tanking) AND finding a team missing a major piece and willing to go all in. I feel the new CBA is reducing the number of teams who will gamble with moves like that and Gobert/DMitch/Bane type of deals wont happen anymore.

[daoneandonly]

Lauri has shown he's not a winning basketball player at 3 stops now. I dont think Det should rock the boat for him

[Daddy 801]

I’m well aware salary matters and the implications.

You trade for a player like Kessler because free agency is all but dead in the new CBA. And players like him aren’t free agents very often and it will be less and less in the new CBA.

I just find it funny when fandoms posture on message boards as if our opinions matter in real life deals/transactions. Utah Jazz homers understandably pray that someone will grossly overpay for your teams assets, just like how Laker homers delusionally think Reaves is worth way more than he really is and how it considerably annoys people who understand the strict limits of the new CBA.

As i keep saying, Kessler is a fine young player, but trade value wise i dont think teams view him as a foundational piece to throw a sweet package for (2 unprot FRPs is the pretty common demand i see for him). As a Jazz fan all you can do is hope that Ainge doesnt overpay to retain and more importantly some idiot GM doesnt just wait til RFA to throw some ridiculous 25% rookie max at him and forcing Ainge's hand to either match it or lose Kessler for nothing. That's an immediate way for Kessler to lose his trade value if he comes saddled with a huge deal and is unable to develop further enough to turn his contract into surplus value. To maximize return trade value oftentimes means eating some bad money (which in Utah's case is irrelevent due to planned tanking) AND finding a team missing a major piece and willing to go all in. I feel the new CBA is reducing the number of teams who will gamble with moves like that and Gobert/DMitch/Bane type of deals wont happen anymore.

Jazz fans, and the media reports, aren’t being Jazz homers about Lauri or Kessler. It’s just what the Jazz would be willing to trade those guys for. If a team doesn’t want to pay that then they won’t be moved which is fine. I happen to agree with those assessments. Depending on the first round picks involved I wouldn’t even do two first round draft picks.

What’s weird is people just assuming the Jazz should trade both for less just because they are tanking. The Jazz are in no rush to trade those guys.

[Gert42]

I’m well aware salary matters and the implications.

You trade for a player like Kessler because free agency is all but dead in the new CBA. And players like him aren’t free agents very often and it will be less and less in the new CBA.

I just find it funny when fandoms posture on message boards as if our opinions matter in real life deals/transactions. Utah Jazz homers understandably pray that someone will grossly overpay for your teams assets, just like how Laker homers delusionally think Reaves is worth way more than he really is and how it considerably annoys people who understand the strict limits of the new CBA.

As i keep saying, Kessler is a fine young player, but trade value wise i dont think teams view him as a foundational piece to throw a sweet package for (2 unprot FRPs is the pretty common demand i see for him). As a Jazz fan all you can do is hope that Ainge doesnt overpay to retain and more importantly some idiot GM doesnt just wait til RFA to throw some ridiculous 25% rookie max at him and forcing Ainge's hand to either match it or lose Kessler for nothing. That's an immediate way for Kessler to lose his trade value if he comes saddled with a huge deal and is unable to develop further enough to turn his contract into surplus value. To maximize return trade value oftentimes means eating some bad money (which in Utah's case is irrelevent due to planned tanking) AND finding a team missing a major piece and willing to go all in. I feel the new CBA is reducing the number of teams who will gamble with moves like that and Gobert/DMitch/Bane type of deals wont happen anymore.

Jazz fans, and the media reports, aren’t being Jazz homers about Lauri or Kessler. It’s just what the Jazz would be willing to trade those guys for. If a team doesn’t want to pay that then they won’t be moved which is fine. I happen to agree with those assessments. Depending on the first round picks involved I wouldn’t even do two first round draft picks.

What’s weird is people just assuming the Jazz should trade both for less just because they are tanking. The Jazz are in no rush to trade those guys.

This last statement is well said and trading or keeping Lauri and Kessler is not change the number of wins or place in the standings by a large amount.

I think the Pistons would be a great fit for Markkanen, but I do agree that they probably aren't great trade partners because of Lauri's contract and what could come back versus the young guys Detroit would want to keep.

[MotownMadness]

I really want him but have soured on an all in move right now. Let’s see if these young guys can repeat what they did last season first.

[vege]

It’s been reported the Jazz want two unprotected first round draft picks. The salary and players probably don’t matter much. But they would probably need to be contracts that expire sooner than later or more compensation would need to come to Utah. I think Utah has enough picks that convey in later years so the picks would probably need to be a 26 and a 27 or 28 pick.


No idea what Detroits draft assets are, but that’s probably what it takes.

The salary of a player means a helluva lot. It determines what sort of surplus value can be assigned to that player and whether he's worth the salary. It's why legit superstars are so invaluable, despite a 30/35% max or supermax, their value to a team from their on court impact goes way beyond the salary. Its why people rightly lost their **** when Luka was traded and Dallas lambasted, his value is so utterly immense the Lakers shoulda been pillage of all available draft assets and giving him a supermax was a no brainer that DAL refused to do.

Lauri making 30% of a team's cap severely limits a team's ability to build out the rest of the roster and its why 2 seasons ago after his crazy breakout while having 2 dirt cheap years remaining on his deal at the time is why Ainge was rightly demanding a superstar package of unprotected FRP/swaps. Ainge screwed up so badly in not trading him when his value/buzz was at its highest, even if he couldnt get the super star Harden/KD/Gobert/DMitch/Bane type of package, even getting 3 lightly protected FRPs/swaps woulda been been great, as it was clear that team wanted to tank and find their future superstar, hence all the benching of vets. Instead Ainge waited around til Lauri's value totally rotted away AND gave him a star level 30% max deal extension, which utterly obliterated whatever surplus value he could've had. Unless you truly believe Lauri is a #1/2 option on a contender, paying him 30% of your cap is far from ideal. 2nd Apron CBA has been team building MUCH harsher in how you allocate your cap.

Just look at Austin Reaves situation. Utterly amazing steal when the Lakers kept him after his rookie contract, 4yrs/50mil (4th yr PO), but as time went on and his cheap years ticked off his value rightly plummetted. Adding Reaves to an established team making 12-13mil a year for at least 2 years meant he had plenty of surplus value, but now that he's in his contract walk year, the Lakers need to decide if its worth keeping Reaves at market rate or not. Reaves already turned down a 4yr/90mil extension offer, so he's clearly hoping he's gonna get paid like offense only gunners like CJ McCollum or Tyler Herro, which is NEVER going to happen again in the new 2nd apron CBA for players of this archetype. Until Reaves is locked in on a fresh deal, his value is low due to the uncertainty of what his next deal may be and the Lakers would be wise to NOT extend Reaves to a deal anywhere past 22mil a year, as that would utterly obliterate any surplus value he may generate, for the type of player he is.

Walker Kessler is gonna be another interesting case study on whether Ainge learned a damned thing or not. A fine young player on his rookie deal and Utah has his RFA rights. It's doubtful Ainge can trade him for a crazy package, sure he has one cheap rookie year left, but he's gonna need to be paid soon (RFA rights is a big bonus though). If Kessler's 2nd contracts is a Zubac level deal (18-20mil a year), then he'll likely have alot of surplus value, if he gets a Poetl sized deal (28mil a year) then kiss any surplus value good bye. Why should a team trade for Kessler when you can just use your cap space to sign a comparable player AND not give up any assets. Kessler is young/good enough to keep around for the next Utah core, just need to be stingy with how much you pay him, HOWEVER you run the risk of turning Kessler disgruntled after a contentious RFA **** negotiation and you might get Ayton'ed.

90% of people posting here fail to understand this things. Good thing at least some people do understand that Lauri is a fine player on a terrible deal, and in today's NBA economy, that's toxic.

Tobias Harris have more value than Lauri Markkanen. Danny Ainge **** up, again. Trajan Langdon is a good GM, he will stay away from Markkanen, even if Ainge tries to give him away for expiring contracts.

People talking about 1st round picks don't understand today's CBA. Lauri Markkanen have negative value, despite being a fine player.

[Daddy 801]

I just find it funny when fandoms posture on message boards as if our opinions matter in real life deals/transactions. Utah Jazz homers understandably pray that someone will grossly overpay for your teams assets, just like how Laker homers delusionally think Reaves is worth way more than he really is and how it considerably annoys people who understand the strict limits of the new CBA.

As i keep saying, Kessler is a fine young player, but trade value wise i dont think teams view him as a foundational piece to throw a sweet package for (2 unprot FRPs is the pretty common demand i see for him). As a Jazz fan all you can do is hope that Ainge doesnt overpay to retain and more importantly some idiot GM doesnt just wait til RFA to throw some ridiculous 25% rookie max at him and forcing Ainge's hand to either match it or lose Kessler for nothing. That's an immediate way for Kessler to lose his trade value if he comes saddled with a huge deal and is unable to develop further enough to turn his contract into surplus value. To maximize return trade value oftentimes means eating some bad money (which in Utah's case is irrelevent due to planned tanking) AND finding a team missing a major piece and willing to go all in. I feel the new CBA is reducing the number of teams who will gamble with moves like that and Gobert/DMitch/Bane type of deals wont happen anymore.

Jazz fans, and the media reports, aren’t being Jazz homers about Lauri or Kessler. It’s just what the Jazz would be willing to trade those guys for. If a team doesn’t want to pay that then they won’t be moved which is fine. I happen to agree with those assessments. Depending on the first round picks involved I wouldn’t even do two first round draft picks.

What’s weird is people just assuming the Jazz should trade both for less just because they are tanking. The Jazz are in no rush to trade those guys.

This last statement is well said and trading or keeping Lauri and Kessler is not change the number of wins or place in the standings by a large amount.

I think the Pistons would be a great fit for Markkanen, but I do agree that they probably aren't great trade partners because of Lauri's contract and what could come back versus the young guys Detroit would want to keep.

If Detroit owned picks from another team that was likely to be bad I think they would be draft partners. But considering (I think) Detroit only owns their own picks I don’t see a trade happening. Utah has plenty of picks they know will be late first round. They want picks that have a chance at least being in the lottery. Detroit is going to be the 3-7 seed in the east next season.

[R-DAWG]

As long as the actual Ainges are thinking like the last two posts (Aingesburner, jazzfan… sorry, this ended up taking a while) in this thread, there will be no Markkanen deal to anyone.

I’m a Lauri fan. I completely understand the context of his last season, getting healthy-rested and playing on a tanking team. I know he’s capable of numbers similar to two years ago, maybe even three years ago (All-Star) on a real roster with a glaring need for a second banana and a PF. And yes, Detroit fits that description perfectly. So please don’t repeat all that stuff in a reply, because I agree with it and am aware of it.

The pricing issues are these:

1) He’s under contract for 4/198 guaranteed. He needs to be the player from two years ago to be worth that, and he needs to play 75 games.
2) Markkanen has NEVER played 75 games. I know Utah did some shenanigans last year, but Lauri’s career high is 68 games in eight NBA seasons.
3) There aren’t a bunch of realistic trade options out there. The market sets the price.

Utah needs to tank again and everyone knows it. Ace needs starter minutes and will take starter shots. Markkanen can theoretically rehab some of his value this season, but it’ll go against the needed tank. If they repeat last year, they’ll depress his value even further. He needs to be moved, and Detroit and everyone else knows this.

Memphis didn’t need to trade Bane. Orlando needing shooting so insanely badly that they were willing to overpay and bring in the guy they wanted. Memphis was in the position of negotiating power and used it. Utah is absolutely NOT in that position with Detroit or anyone else. Tobias Harris is a perfectly solid option in Detroit next year. He’s the locker room Unc, has a well-rounded game, and played well in the playoffs. The Pistons have another year to decide their direction at PF if necessary.

Five firsts is absolutely never going to happen from anyone. Three unprotected firsts is extremely unlikely as well, at least from Detroit. For all the accolades and attention the team got from tripling their win total, it was still just 44 wins, 6th in the (L)east, and an entertaining first round exit. One major injury to Cade (who already had one) and this is trading a lottery pick next year.

Detroit’s realistic offer is Harris, 27 FRP (unprotected), 28 swap (likely nothing), and 29 FRP (maybe unprotected, maybe top 4). We’d need to do some more to account for the extra 20 mil in salary incoming, but it absolutely will not be Stewart (our presence) or Holland (our GM’s first pick). It could be Ivey, but you’re losing one of the firsts that way.

And even with that change to an actual realistic price for Lauri, the odds are that Langdon is still going to pass. We need another development year and to decide the futures of Ivey and Duren on the team. We need to see if Ausar and Holland improve offensively. And, let’s face it, even in the weak East next year, are we really favorites against Cleveland, New York or perhaps Orlando or Atlanta with Markkanen instead of Harris? If the answer is anything less than “possibly”, which I think it is, there’s no reason to take this risk. And no matter how highly I think of Markkanen (very, actually), it’s still a risk financially, a risk in terms of his durability, and a risk in terms of the cost to get him.

This is a great post. In my opinion Ron Holland - who I question his long term fit with Thompson/Duran - should anchor the deal with 2 1sts in 26 and 28 - potentially with them both being unprotected.

Making the money work short and long term might be an issue as well. Durand and Ivey are entering the last years of their rookie deals this year with Thompson a year behind them. The biggest issue for Detroit is that none of them have proven to be a true #1 option at this point. But in 2 years from now, will you be able to pay all 3 with Cade/Ivey making a combined 100+ MM.

Also is there enough shooting in this lineup:

Cade-Ivey-Thompson-Lauri-Duran

To me, if I’m Detroit, I’m waiting to make this kind of a trade. I want to see what Ivey looks like off the injury, and make decisions on which young guys to pay before taking a big swing.

[cgf]

It’s been reported the Jazz want two unprotected first round draft picks. The salary and players probably don’t matter much. But they would probably need to be contracts that expire sooner than later or more compensation would need to come to Utah. I think Utah has enough picks that convey in later years so the picks would probably need to be a 26 and a 27 or 28 pick.


No idea what Detroits draft assets are, but that’s probably what it takes.

The salary of a player means a helluva lot. It determines what sort of surplus value can be assigned to that player and whether he's worth the salary.


Why should a team trade for Kessler when you can just use your cap space to sign a comparable player AND not give up any assets.

I’m well aware salary matters and the implications.

You trade for a player like Kessler because free agency is all but dead in the new CBA. And players like him aren’t free agents very often and it will be less and less in the new CBA.

Didn’t Milwaukee just sign a player like Kessler for cap space alone?

[cgf]

Lauri has shown he's not a winning basketball player at 3 stops now. I dont think Det should rock the boat for him

Eh, he hasn’t proven he can be a top option on a winning team, but Cleveland did pretty well with Lauri, before trading him to a Utah team that was half-ass’ing a tear down.

[cgf]

I really want him but have soured on an all in move right now. Let’s see if these young guys can repeat what they did last season first.

I think this is a very logical position to take…and often a mistake for young teams to make. The league is constantly evolving and improving, you need to be evolving with it just to stay where you are.

And development is not some predetermined thing that will happen the same no matter the circumstances around it, a lot of times you need to give kids different supporting pieces to see them continue to grow.

I think this is one of those cases, where you need to make a move to take that next step & solidify yourselves amongst the east’s elite. I agree it shouldn’t be an all in move, but that’s why I like the Holland + 26 FRP version.

I think Holland will be really good, but not as good as Thompson; so there’s a question about whether you’ll maximize Holland or if he’ll want to move on at some point to a team that’ll start him. So using him to avoid adding any picks past next spring would leave you with the draft capital to make an all in trade to upgrade Ivey or Lauri in the future.

It could certainly still go wrong, but I’ve been high on our kids for a couple years now and I do feel like a Lauri for Harris + Holland + 26 FRP trade would be the perfect next step for you that wasn’t the kind of all in trade that tied your hands but also avoid regression.

[oldncreaky]

As long as the actual Ainges are thinking like the last two posts (Aingesburner, jazzfan… sorry, this ended up taking a while) in this thread, there will be no Markkanen deal to anyone.

I’m a Lauri fan. I completely understand the context of his last season, getting healthy-rested and playing on a tanking team. I know he’s capable of numbers similar to two years ago, maybe even three years ago (All-Star) on a real roster with a glaring need for a second banana and a PF. And yes, Detroit fits that description perfectly. So please don’t repeat all that stuff in a reply, because I agree with it and am aware of it.

The pricing issues are these:

1) He’s under contract for 4/198 guaranteed. He needs to be the player from two years ago to be worth that, and he needs to play 75 games.
2) Markkanen has NEVER played 75 games. I know Utah did some shenanigans last year, but Lauri’s career high is 68 games in eight NBA seasons.
3) There aren’t a bunch of realistic trade options out there. The market sets the price.

Utah needs to tank again and everyone knows it. Ace needs starter minutes and will take starter shots. Markkanen can theoretically rehab some of his value this season, but it’ll go against the needed tank. If they repeat last year, they’ll depress his value even further. He needs to be moved, and Detroit and everyone else knows this.

Memphis didn’t need to trade Bane. Orlando needing shooting so insanely badly that they were willing to overpay and bring in the guy they wanted. Memphis was in the position of negotiating power and used it. Utah is absolutely NOT in that position with Detroit or anyone else. Tobias Harris is a perfectly solid option in Detroit next year. He’s the locker room Unc, has a well-rounded game, and played well in the playoffs. The Pistons have another year to decide their direction at PF if necessary.

Five firsts is absolutely never going to happen from anyone. Three unprotected firsts is extremely unlikely as well, at least from Detroit. For all the accolades and attention the team got from tripling their win total, it was still just 44 wins, 6th in the (L)east, and an entertaining first round exit. One major injury to Cade (who already had one) and this is trading a lottery pick next year.

Detroit’s realistic offer is Harris, 27 FRP (unprotected), 28 swap (likely nothing), and 29 FRP (maybe unprotected, maybe top 4). We’d need to do some more to account for the extra 20 mil in salary incoming, but it absolutely will not be Stewart (our presence) or Holland (our GM’s first pick). It could be Ivey, but you’re losing one of the firsts that way.

And even with that change to an actual realistic price for Lauri, the odds are that Langdon is still going to pass. We need another development year and to decide the futures of Ivey and Duren on the team. We need to see if Ausar and Holland improve offensively. And, let’s face it, even in the weak East next year, are we really favorites against Cleveland, New York or perhaps Orlando or Atlanta with Markkanen instead of Harris? If the answer is anything less than “possibly”, which I think it is, there’s no reason to take this risk. And no matter how highly I think of Markkanen (very, actually), it’s still a risk financially, a risk in terms of his durability, and a risk in terms of the cost to get him.

This is a great post. In my opinion Ron Holland - who I question his long term fit with Thompson/Duran - should anchor the deal with 2 1sts in 26 and 28 - potentially with them both being unprotected.

Making the money work short and long term might be an issue as well. Durand and Ivey are entering the last years of their rookie deals this year with Thompson a year behind them. The biggest issue for Detroit is that none of them have proven to be a true #1 option at this point. But in 2 years from now, will you be able to pay all 3 with Cade/Ivey making a combined 100+ MM.

Also is there enough shooting in this lineup:

Cade-Ivey-Thompson-Lauri-Duran

To me, if I’m Detroit, I’m waiting to make this kind of a trade. I want to see what Ivey looks like off the injury, and make decisions on which young guys to pay before taking a big swing.

100% on the last line in bold

I also want to see how Holland and Thompson develop for as long as possible -- I'd rather wait until they reach RFA status than bail on them early.

Last but not least, with Cade and Ivey having decent size and/or athleticism for guards, as well as Thompson and Holland being long and feisty, Detroit may not need to have a large PF as a full time starter at all. We've seen teams in the NBA increasingly go with line ups deploying a single big and 4 guards/wings -- OKC is a recent example -- and that approach may be a decent option for the Pistons collection of talent.

[zeebneeb]

As long as the actual Ainges are thinking like the last two posts (Aingesburner, jazzfan… sorry, this ended up taking a while) in this thread, there will be no Markkanen deal to anyone.

I’m a Lauri fan. I completely understand the context of his last season, getting healthy-rested and playing on a tanking team. I know he’s capable of numbers similar to two years ago, maybe even three years ago (All-Star) on a real roster with a glaring need for a second banana and a PF. And yes, Detroit fits that description perfectly. So please don’t repeat all that stuff in a reply, because I agree with it and am aware of it.

The pricing issues are these:

1) He’s under contract for 4/198 guaranteed. He needs to be the player from two years ago to be worth that, and he needs to play 75 games.
2) Markkanen has NEVER played 75 games. I know Utah did some shenanigans last year, but Lauri’s career high is 68 games in eight NBA seasons.
3) There aren’t a bunch of realistic trade options out there. The market sets the price.

Utah needs to tank again and everyone knows it. Ace needs starter minutes and will take starter shots. Markkanen can theoretically rehab some of his value this season, but it’ll go against the needed tank. If they repeat last year, they’ll depress his value even further. He needs to be moved, and Detroit and everyone else knows this.

Memphis didn’t need to trade Bane. Orlando needing shooting so insanely badly that they were willing to overpay and bring in the guy they wanted. Memphis was in the position of negotiating power and used it. Utah is absolutely NOT in that position with Detroit or anyone else. Tobias Harris is a perfectly solid option in Detroit next year. He’s the locker room Unc, has a well-rounded game, and played well in the playoffs. The Pistons have another year to decide their direction at PF if necessary.

Five firsts is absolutely never going to happen from anyone. Three unprotected firsts is extremely unlikely as well, at least from Detroit. For all the accolades and attention the team got from tripling their win total, it was still just 44 wins, 6th in the (L)east, and an entertaining first round exit. One major injury to Cade (who already had one) and this is trading a lottery pick next year.

Detroit’s realistic offer is Harris, 27 FRP (unprotected), 28 swap (likely nothing), and 29 FRP (maybe unprotected, maybe top 4). We’d need to do some more to account for the extra 20 mil in salary incoming, but it absolutely will not be Stewart (our presence) or Holland (our GM’s first pick). It could be Ivey, but you’re losing one of the firsts that way.

And even with that change to an actual realistic price for Lauri, the odds are that Langdon is still going to pass. We need another development year and to decide the futures of Ivey and Duren on the team. We need to see if Ausar and Holland improve offensively. And, let’s face it, even in the weak East next year, are we really favorites against Cleveland, New York or perhaps Orlando or Atlanta with Markkanen instead of Harris? If the answer is anything less than “possibly”, which I think it is, there’s no reason to take this risk. And no matter how highly I think of Markkanen (very, actually), it’s still a risk financially, a risk in terms of his durability, and a risk in terms of the cost to get him.

This is a great post. In my opinion Ron Holland - who I question his long term fit with Thompson/Duran - should anchor the deal with 2 1sts in 26 and 28 - potentially with them both being unprotected.

Making the money work short and long term might be an issue as well. Durand and Ivey are entering the last years of their rookie deals this year with Thompson a year behind them. The biggest issue for Detroit is that none of them have proven to be a true #1 option at this point. But in 2 years from now, will you be able to pay all 3 with Cade/Ivey making a combined 100+ MM.

Also is there enough shooting in this lineup:

Cade-Ivey-Thompson-Lauri-Duran

To me, if I’m Detroit, I’m waiting to make this kind of a trade. I want to see what Ivey looks like off the injury, and make decisions on which young guys to pay before taking a big swing.

100% on the last line in bold

I also want to see how Holland and Thompson develop for as long as possible -- I'd rather wait until they reach RFA status than bail on them early.

Last but not least, with Cade and Ivey having decent size and/or athleticism for guards, as well as Thompson and Holland being long and feisty, Detroit may not need to have a large PF as a full time starter at all. We've seen teams in the NBA increasingly go with line ups deploying a single big and 4 guards/wings -- OKC is a recent example -- and that approach may be a decent option for the Pistons collection of talent.

I would be 100% on board, if one of Ausar/Holland can start hitting from deep. Realistically, it's gonna have to be Holland, and of he can hit 35% on at least 5 attempts, the team is good to go.

Thats a BIG ask though.

[oldncreaky]

This is a great post. In my opinion Ron Holland - who I question his long term fit with Thompson/Duran - should anchor the deal with 2 1sts in 26 and 28 - potentially with them both being unprotected.

Making the money work short and long term might be an issue as well. Durand and Ivey are entering the last years of their rookie deals this year with Thompson a year behind them. The biggest issue for Detroit is that none of them have proven to be a true #1 option at this point. But in 2 years from now, will you be able to pay all 3 with Cade/Ivey making a combined 100+ MM.

Also is there enough shooting in this lineup:

Cade-Ivey-Thompson-Lauri-Duran

To me, if I’m Detroit, I’m waiting to make this kind of a trade. I want to see what Ivey looks like off the injury, and make decisions on which young guys to pay before taking a big swing.

100% on the last line in bold

I also want to see how Holland and Thompson develop for as long as possible -- I'd rather wait until they reach RFA status than bail on them early.

Last but not least, with Cade and Ivey having decent size and/or athleticism for guards, as well as Thompson and Holland being long and feisty, Detroit may not need to have a large PF as a full time starter at all. We've seen teams in the NBA increasingly go with line ups deploying a single big and 4 guards/wings -- OKC is a recent example -- and that approach may be a decent option for the Pistons collection of talent.

I would be 100% on board, if one of Ausar/Holland can start hitting from deep. Realistically, it's gonna have to be Holland, and of he can hit 35% on at least 5 attempts, the team is good to go.

Thats a BIG ask though.

I agree we need the shooting, and bluntly, if Holland doesn't improve his shooting that should and will get reflected in whatever rookie extension he might get.

I was more thinking from a defensive perspective: 1 big and 4 decent sized wings/guards can work on D provided if all of the non-bigs have enough size to switch and guard up a position or 2 (and you don't have to cover for smaller players)

[cgf]

100% on the last line in bold

I also want to see how Holland and Thompson develop for as long as possible -- I'd rather wait until they reach RFA status than bail on them early.

Last but not least, with Cade and Ivey having decent size and/or athleticism for guards, as well as Thompson and Holland being long and feisty, Detroit may not need to have a large PF as a full time starter at all. We've seen teams in the NBA increasingly go with line ups deploying a single big and 4 guards/wings -- OKC is a recent example -- and that approach may be a decent option for the Pistons collection of talent.

I would be 100% on board, if one of Ausar/Holland can start hitting from deep. Realistically, it's gonna have to be Holland, and of he can hit 35% on at least 5 attempts, the team is good to go.

Thats a BIG ask though.

I agree we need the shooting, and bluntly, if Holland doesn't improve his shooting that should and will get reflected in whatever rookie extension he might get.

I was more thinking from a defensive perspective: 1 big and 4 decent sized wings/guards can work on D provided if all of the non-bigs have enough size to switch and guard up a position or 2 (and you don't have to cover for smaller players)

It can work defensively, but your d was already excellent with just one of them starting next to Harris. So I feel like your d would still be really good with Lauri instead of Harris & Holland, while your offense would be a lot better than any realistic exception for a Thompson-Holland forward duo.

[Daddy 801]

The salary of a player means a helluva lot. It determines what sort of surplus value can be assigned to that player and whether he's worth the salary.


Why should a team trade for Kessler when you can just use your cap space to sign a comparable player AND not give up any assets.

I’m well aware salary matters and the implications.

You trade for a player like Kessler because free agency is all but dead in the new CBA. And players like him aren’t free agents very often and it will be less and less in the new CBA.

Didn’t Milwaukee just sign a player like Kessler for cap space alone?

And they had to extend Dame five years and wait for
Turner to be a free agent for 10 years. I mean if you want to use that as a good example in this CBA I guess you can. I wouldn’t really want to have to extend a player for five years just to sign Turner.

[Vae Victus]

The stretch Dame to sign Turned reminded me of when CHA stretched Batum to sign Hayward. And Batum was expiring so his stretch was only 3 years.

[cgf]

I’m well aware salary matters and the implications.

You trade for a player like Kessler because free agency is all but dead in the new CBA. And players like him aren’t free agents very often and it will be less and less in the new CBA.

Didn’t Milwaukee just sign a player like Kessler for cap space alone?

And they had to extend Dame five years and wait for
Turner to be a free agent for 10 years. I mean if you want to use that as a good example in this CBA I guess you can. I wouldn’t really want to have to extend a player for five years just to sign Turner.

They needed cap space to sign him. They created it in a stupid way but you said players like Kessler don’t become FAs often, when a better center just changed teams via FA

[Daddy 801]

Didn’t Milwaukee just sign a player like Kessler for cap space alone?

And they had to extend Dame five years and wait for
Turner to be a free agent for 10 years. I mean if you want to use that as a good example in this CBA I guess you can. I wouldn’t really want to have to extend a player for five years just to sign Turner.

They needed cap space to sign him. They created it in a stupid way but you said players like Kessler don’t become FAs often, when a better center just changed teams via FA

I used the phrase very often for a reason. They happen, just not very often.