RealGM

UTA trades: 2027 UTA/CLE/MIN/LAL 1st (Utah trades the second-best of Utah, Cleveland, and Minnesota's 1st-round picks (unprotected) or LAL's 1st round pick (protected 1-4) in 2027)
OKC trades: 2025 UTA 1st (1-10 protected in 2025, 1-8 in 2026)

There is a pretty decent chance Utah conveys a good pick to OKC in 2025 or 2026 if we keep Lauri (and it seems like we will) - but there is a small chance we don't. So, OKC gets a guaranteed pick - if the LAL 1st does not convey to Utah it will be the middle of UTA/MIN/CLE 1sts in 2027 - and Utah gets rid of the chance that they convey a pick in 2025/2026 without giving up an ultra-premium asset.

I think second best is too much. 3rd best is spot on.

AingesBurner wrote:I think second best is too much. 3rd best is spot on.

Third best gives OKC no incentive to do the trade given that the mostly likely range the Utah pick conveys at is 9-14. On top of that, it is Utah that gains both flexibility and the nearer pick in this situation.

AingesBurner wrote:I think second best is too much. 3rd best is spot on.

I debated on which one, but ultimately settled where I did because if Utah's pick conveys (and I think the odds are probably >50%) it will likely be late lottery. OKC needs some potential upside rather than another guaranteed late pick, but Utah needs to be protected somewhat in the deal.

I could see OKC doing for the reason of moving a pick down the timeline, but if I were them I'd probably just ride it out at least this year.

I don't think it'll convey in 2025 based on how loaded the West is, and the 1-8 is a wager that the Jazz don't want to try for two more full seasons and like another poster said may land them a 9-12 pick in 2026.

DrModesty wrote:

AingesBurner wrote:I think second best is too much. 3rd best is spot on.

Third best gives OKC no incentive to do the trade given that the mostly likely range the Utah pick conveys at is 9-14. On top of that, it is Utah that gains both flexibility and the nearer pick in this situation.

If the Jazz continue on a deep (tank) rebuild, there is a chance that the pick won't convey at all. How much does that affect the calculus for OKC?

SkyHook wrote:

DrModesty wrote:

AingesBurner wrote:I think second best is too much. 3rd best is spot on.

Third best gives OKC no incentive to do the trade given that the mostly likely range the Utah pick conveys at is 9-14. On top of that, it is Utah that gains both flexibility and the nearer pick in this situation.

If the Jazz continue on a deep (tank) rebuild, there is a chance that the pick won't convey at all. How much does that affect the calculus for OKC?

Is Lauri going to agree to stay for a deep rebuild?

Godaddycurse wrote:

SkyHook wrote:

DrModesty wrote:
Third best gives OKC no incentive to do the trade given that the mostly likely range the Utah pick conveys at is 9-14. On top of that, it is Utah that gains both flexibility and the nearer pick in this situation.

If the Jazz continue on a deep (tank) rebuild, there is a chance that the pick won't convey at all. How much does that affect the calculus for OKC?

Is Lauri going to agree to stay for a deep rebuild?

He has about 24.2 million reasons to next season.

babyjax13 wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:

SkyHook wrote:
If the Jazz continue on a deep (tank) rebuild, there is a chance that the pick won't convey at all. How much does that affect the calculus for OKC?

Is Lauri going to agree to stay for a deep rebuild?

He has about 24.2 million reasons to next season.

A compelling argument.

babyjax13 wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:

SkyHook wrote:
If the Jazz continue on a deep (tank) rebuild, there is a chance that the pick won't convey at all. How much does that affect the calculus for OKC?

Is Lauri going to agree to stay for a deep rebuild?

He has about 24.2 million reasons to next season.

With the increasing cap i think its in his best interest to do a Turner like extension of 2 more years only

Godaddycurse wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:
Is Lauri going to agree to stay for a deep rebuild?

He has about 24.2 million reasons to next season.

With the increasing cap i think its in his best interest to do a Turner like extension of 2 more years only

For Utah to give him the extra $24MM+ on the R+E this year, I think they're going to want additional years of control in return.

SkyHook wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:He has about 24.2 million reasons to next season.

With the increasing cap i think its in his best interest to do a Turner like extension of 2 more years only

For Utah to give him the extra $24MM+ on the R+E this year, I think they're going to want additional years of control in return.

He might ask out then or just play out the year. Theres a big diff signing a 5 yr contract with a 141M cap vs 188M cap in few years. This will realistically be his only big contract.

2 yr extension now = FA again at age 30 for a big payday

If he plays out the year, the extra 30% of diff between a 155M cap vs 141M cap means he would earn close to 20M more over the next 4yra, so the extra 24M this year isnt as big of a benefit as it initially seem

SkyHook wrote:

DrModesty wrote:

AingesBurner wrote:I think second best is too much. 3rd best is spot on.

Third best gives OKC no incentive to do the trade given that the mostly likely range the Utah pick conveys at is 9-14. On top of that, it is Utah that gains both flexibility and the nearer pick in this situation.

If the Jazz continue on a deep (tank) rebuild, there is a chance that the pick won't convey at all. How much does that affect the calculus for OKC?

Not too much at this stage. I do think that possibility means that a second best pick should still have some protections (1-4) just in case teams like Cleveland or Minnesota have a bad year and then get an Atlanta style jump in the lottery. If that happened then I think it should default to third best pick for that specific situation.

But the reason I don't think it matters that much in the context of this deal is that OKC can pair it with other assets or players with 28 other teams, so the permutations fluctuate is such a manner that a team can't really put the screws on them with that possible eventuality.

OKC does this. Complex enough for us .

I just don’t understand deep tank and keep Lauri.

But ymmv.

The only change I’d make to the OP is seeing about taking out the Utah option on the pick.

Give OKC “the best 2027 of LAC/Minn/Cleve with top 8 protection. If not conveyed, it turns into the Minn 2029 first…or maybe just the second best of the other picks?” or something like that.

Utah shouldn’t trade for their pick back just to tie it up again is all.