#10 for future 1st?

Post #1 » by **jazzfan1971** » Fri May 31, 2024 3:52 pm

I'm just not loving anything in this draft. I'm wondering if anyone wants to move into this draft and out of a future one.

I'd be open to picks in the far future.

Anyone want to jump into the top 10 of this year's draft?

Colbinii · Post #2 » by **Colbinii** » Fri May 31, 2024 4:03 pm

Seems like a "This player is available at #10 and I want to trade in for him" deal, but those deals are also likely discussed before hand.

New Orleans could trade the better of MIL/NOP/LAL 2025 1st [Top 5 protection? Top 4 Protection?]. I doubt they do it if they pick the LAL 1st [since that would give them 3 1sts].

OKC seems like an obvious candidate with a history of making these trades. They could likely get quite high if they wanted with #10 and #12 if they want to get say, Cody Williams, and value him as a Top 3 prospect in this draft. Though, at that point, the team OKC wants to trade up to would likely just prefer #12 + Future 1sts opposed to #10 + #12.

Toronto may want to trade up with #19 + 2026 IND 1st + 2nd(s) for #23 + #10 though this seems a bit off in value.

Charlotte has 2027 DAL 1st

Post #3 » by **MoneyTalks41890** » Fri May 31, 2024 4:05 pm

If Presti thinks there's value because others are bailing I could definitely see him getting in again either to move up or to grab another bite.

2025 UTA 1st top 10/8 prot for #10?

That thing may never convey, or it could convey in a better draft.

psman2 · Post #4 » by **psman2** » Fri May 31, 2024 4:23 pm

I really don't think 10 is a bad spot in this draft, especially if there is one or two surprise picks in the top 10. There are a couple players available at 10 that I would consider giving up Mem top 10 2025 1st and 39 for.

Like If Clingan was selected at 9 and Knecht is available at 10 that is something I thing we would do. Maybe for Carter too.

TGW · Post #5 » by **TGW** » Fri May 31, 2024 4:23 pm

Clingan won't be there at 9.

Post #6 » by **jazzfan1971** » Fri May 31, 2024 4:24 pm

MoneyTalks41890 wrote:If Presti thinks there's value because others are bailing I could definitely see him getting in again either to move up or to grab another bite.

2025 UTA 1st top 10/8 prot for #10?

That thing may never convey, or it could convey in a better draft.

As I expect to be terrible the next 2 years I want nothing to do with that pick.

Post #7 » by **165bows** » Fri May 31, 2024 4:25 pm

jazzfan1971 wrote:
MoneyTalks41890 wrote:If Presti thinks there's value because others are bailing I could definitely see him getting in again either to move up or to grab another bite.

2025 UTA 1st top 10/8 prot for #10?

That thing may never convey, or it could convey in a better draft.

As I expect to be terrible the next 2 years I want nothing to do with that pick.

So you think the "trading for win-now guys" is a smoke screen, or just terrible despite it? I pretty much lean to the former.

Post #8 » by **MoneyTalks41890** » Fri May 31, 2024 4:27 pm

jazzfan1971 wrote:
MoneyTalks41890 wrote:If Presti thinks there's value because others are bailing I could definitely see him getting in again either to move up or to grab another bite.

2025 UTA 1st top 10/8 prot for #10?

That thing may never convey, or it could convey in a better draft.

As I expect to be terrible the next 2 years I want nothing to do with that pick.

That's totally fair. However I don't really see keeping Lauri and being terrible for the next 2 years as compatible.

psman2 · Post #9 » by **psman2** » Fri May 31, 2024 4:28 pm

TGW wrote:Clingan won't be there at 9.

Then good chance he is overdrafted and we move on to the next guy. I like Clingan but he is around 8-10 on my board, he is not a must have guy for me and is lower ceiling prospect that bad teams imo really shouldn't consider drafting.

Post #10 » by **Texas Chuck** » Fri May 31, 2024 4:31 pm

I mean it only takes one team to like a guy sitting on the board when Utah hits the clock. Seems like a reasonable premise though I can't give you names now because I can't know who is available and which teams love a guy sitting there.

But seems silly to pre-determine to move out. I'm assuming Utah likes guys in this draft and if one is there, you should consider just taking him especially if the offer for the pick is underwhelming.

Post #11 » by **jazzfan1971** » Fri May 31, 2024 5:05 pm

Texas Chuck wrote:I mean it only takes one team to like a guy sitting on the board when Utah hits the clock. Seems like a reasonable premise though I can't give you names now because I can't know who is available and which teams love a guy sitting there.

But seems silly to pre-determine to move out. I'm assuming Utah likes guys in this draft and if one is there, you should consider just taking him especially if the offer for the pick is underwhelming.

I can't speak for the Jazz. But, I don't like anyone in this draft. While I agree that #10 isn't a terrible spot, someone decent will likely still be on the board, I think I'd much rather take my chances on kicking the can down the road.

But, like you suggest, if the offers are underwhelming I'm ok just taking BPA.

I don't know if the Jazz looking to win now is a smoke screen or not. Seems legit crazy to me. What are we going to do? Add Zach Lavine and say, now we are trouble? What does that really do for us? Even if we found a way to get Trae I'm not sure that really moves the needle that much in the stacked West. I'm not saying that the Jazz can't make a move for guys like those two, I just think that if we do it's because we think that we can then flip them for more down the road.

And as far as Lauri, I am fine keeping him, but I think in the next year or so he will be moved. Again it depends on the offers. But, by my eye, he's pretty high on the list of guys that can push a contending team to a title right now. Because right now he's cheap enough to trade for without breaking up the existing team, and also because he fits so easily into most systems/teams, and also because he's young enough to be around for a while before age related decline sets in. He's obviously not teams #1 target, but I think he may be the #1 available option.

drchaos · Post #12 » by **drchaos** » Fri May 31, 2024 5:23 pm

Nets don't have a first rounder this year and could probably take a point guard at # 10.

Any interest in DFS, Cam Johnson, Schroeder, or the Philly first rounder?

jayjaysee · Post #13 » by **jayjaysee** » Fri May 31, 2024 5:31 pm

Yeah, Utah can get a future unprotected first for 10 IMO. But I’d imagine it’s two slightly protected firsts works out better for both sides.. I don’t think anyone is trading a pick 4-6 years out with real variance unless they just love a guy at 10th..

Apz · Post #14 » by **Apz** » Fri May 31, 2024 5:42 pm

Tbh, last year was viewed as what, a 3 player draft? But now looking back at it, those 10-20 picks looks good. There is no pressure there to take the best prospect as it is at the top of the draft. Wallace, Lively Jaques been great. Also, u can actually draft more on need, which also gives more time on court

louc1970 · Post #15 » by **louc1970** » Fri May 31, 2024 5:51 pm

Texas Chuck wrote:I mean it only takes one team to like a guy sitting on the board when Utah hits the clock. Seems like a reasonable premise though I can't give you names now because I can't know who is available and which teams love a guy sitting there.

But seems silly to pre-determine to move out. I'm assuming Utah likes guys in this draft and if one is there, you should consider just taking him especially if the offer for the pick is underwhelming.

Exactly. I could see NOP offering a swap to move up and get a preferred PG rather than whoever falls to them. 17/22 (if NOP takes 17) for 10. Utah would then need to figure out if they should move both, 1 or just take BPA there.
I would take the later picks and go for players falling - Edey, Collier, Missi.

bkohler · Post #16 » by **bkohler** » Fri May 31, 2024 5:54 pm

I’ve wondered if Min would remove protections on the 29 pick and add a 30 swap and the #27 for #10?

Cappy_Smurf · Post #17 » by **Cappy_Smurf** » Fri May 31, 2024 6:49 pm

MoneyTalks41890 wrote:
I don't really see keeping Lauri and being terrible for the next 2 years as compatible.

I guess you missed the 2nd half of Utah's season this year, after the trade deadline.

SkyHook · Post #18 » by **SkyHook** » Fri May 31, 2024 6:54 pm

Cappy_Smurf wrote:
MoneyTalks41890 wrote:
I don't really see keeping Lauri and being terrible for the next 2 years as compatible.

I guess you missed the 2nd half of Utah's season this year, after the trade deadline.

Play George more minutes, lose more games. A simple formula.

Post #19 » by **MoneyTalks41890** » Fri May 31, 2024 6:57 pm

Cappy_Smurf wrote:
MoneyTalks41890 wrote:
I don't really see keeping Lauri and being terrible for the next 2 years as compatible.

I guess you missed the 2nd half of Utah's season this year, after the trade deadline.

I mean I don’t think Lauri will do that to be clear

Post #20 » by **Texas Chuck** » Fri May 31, 2024 6:59 pm

MoneyTalks41890 wrote:
Cappy_Smurf wrote:
MoneyTalks41890 wrote:
I don't really see keeping Lauri and being terrible for the next 2 years as compatible.

I guess you missed the 2nd half of Utah's season this year, after the trade deadline.

I mean I don’t think Lauri will do that to be clear

Let's say all he cares about is the biggest pile of money he can lock the soonest. Utah can offer that.

What I don't get is why Utah gives him a raise and extend and then intentionally wastes the best 2 years he has left intentionally being terrible.

IF you are going to be terrible, trade him. If you are going to re-sign him, try to be good. Smurf's plan is the worst of both worlds.