RealGM

Markkanen 27 years..

PTS..20.1
REB..6.1
AST..1.9
FG%.42.8
MIN..31.0
3PT..36.5 in 8.4 attempts per game

It is in the first year of a 5-year extension that starts with 42 and climbs to 53 in the 28/29 season..

As the title indicates, what value does it have in your new contract?

Same as this offseason, he came down to earth effeciency wise, he'll end up somewhere between this low effeciency and last year's uber-effeciency, but he is no longer flight risk so this bumps up his value.
He's in the Mikal Bridges mold of trade value 2nd/3rd option type.

Mavrelous wrote:Same as this offseason, he came down to earth effeciency wise, he'll end up somewhere between this low effeciency and last year's uber-effeciency, but he is no longer flight risk so this bumps up his value.
He's in the Mikal Bridges mold of trade value 2nd/3rd option type.

I'd say 3 first round picks, no bad money.

I mean if you think how he's played this season is what he is more than the previous years this is just a bad contract. I don't think it is, think it's just a down year so far on a tragic team, but it's not similar to bridges at all who had two years left for less than half as much per year

Still has significant value, but this season puts in perspective the dangers of valuing a player for the absolute highest peak in his career, it's bound to come down and then it looks bad. Just look at the packages people were proposing for Markkanen last offseason and then tell me if those teams wouldn't be remorseful had they traded those hauls for him. Same thing happened with Mikal Bridges, Beal, Lillard, Durant, Dejounte Murray, etc. The majority of trades for 'stars or close' end in disaster for the acquiring team. Next up: Cam Johnson if he's traded for what Nets fans here expect.

K_chile22 wrote:I mean if you think how he's played this season is what he is more than the previous years this is just a bad contract. I don't think it is, think it's just a down year so far on a tragic team, but it's not similar to bridges at all who had two years left for less than half as much per year

For a player to be on a bad contract, exactly zero teams need to be willing to trade him for expiring contracts. He clearly has positive value, maybe not enough for the Jazz to trade him, but they'd get solid offers.

The test isn't whether you like him on your roster at that number, it's whether any of the other 28 other teams would. His great years didn't just disappear into the void.

wemby wrote:Still has significant value, but this season puts in perspective the dangers of valuing a player for the absolute highest peak in his career, it's bound to come down and then it looks bad. Just look at the packages people were proposing for Markkanen last offseason and then tell me if those teams wouldn't be remorseful had they traded those hauls for him. Same thing happened with Mikal Bridges, Beal, Lillard, Durant, Dejounte Murray, etc. The majority of trades for 'stars or close' end in disaster for the acquiring team. Next up: Cam Johnson if he's traded for what Nets fans here expect.

I don't think that you can take for granted that Lauri's numbers would be the same if he was traded to a better team with better guard play.

wemby wrote:Still has significant value, but this season puts in perspective the dangers of valuing a player for the absolute highest peak in his career, it's bound to come down and then it looks bad. Just look at the packages people were proposing for Markkanen last offseason and then tell me if those teams wouldn't be remorseful had they traded those hauls for him. Same thing happened with Mikal Bridges, Beal, Lillard, Durant, Dejounte Murray, etc. The majority of trades for 'stars or close' end in disaster for the acquiring team. Next up: Cam Johnson if he's traded for what Nets fans here expect.

I agree...what I don't quite understand is why Lavine (for example) would be less valuable than Markkanen... simply narrative?

jbk1234 wrote:

K_chile22 wrote:I mean if you think how he's played this season is what he is more than the previous years this is just a bad contract. I don't think it is, think it's just a down year so far on a tragic team, but it's not similar to bridges at all who had two years left for less than half as much per year

For a player to be on a bad contract, exactly zero teams need to be willing to trade him for expiring contracts. He clearly has positive value, maybe not enough for the Jazz to trade him, but they'd get solid offers.

The test isn't whether you like him on your roster at that number, it's whether any of the other 28 other teams would. His great years didn't just disappear into the void.

Well yeah, did you read what I said? "IF YOU THINK HOW HES PLAYED THIS SEASON...."

And why I said I don't think that's the case, other posters in this thread were saying they think this is real but he's still heavily positive.
If all 30 teams thought that way he'd be negative is the point you're nitpicking

Astaluego wrote:

wemby wrote:Still has significant value, but this season puts in perspective the dangers of valuing a player for the absolute highest peak in his career, it's bound to come down and then it looks bad. Just look at the packages people were proposing for Markkanen last offseason and then tell me if those teams wouldn't be remorseful had they traded those hauls for him. Same thing happened with Mikal Bridges, Beal, Lillard, Durant, Dejounte Murray, etc. The majority of trades for 'stars or close' end in disaster for the acquiring team. Next up: Cam Johnson if he's traded for what Nets fans here expect.

I agree...what I don't quite understand is why Lavine (for example) would be less valuable than Markkanen... simply narrative?

Lauri has career on/off of +3.4. LaVine's is -2.8.

K_chile22 wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:

K_chile22 wrote:I mean if you think how he's played this season is what he is more than the previous years this is just a bad contract. I don't think it is, think it's just a down year so far on a tragic team, but it's not similar to bridges at all who had two years left for less than half as much per year

For a player to be on a bad contract, exactly zero teams need to be willing to trade him for expiring contracts. He clearly has positive value, maybe not enough for the Jazz to trade him, but they'd get solid offers.

The test isn't whether you like him on your roster at that number, it's whether any of the other 28 other teams would. His great years didn't just disappear into the void.

Well yeah, did you read what I said? "IF YOU THINK HOW HES PLAYED THIS SEASON...."

And why I said I don't think that's the case, other posters in this thread were saying they think this is real but he's still heavily positive.
If all 30 teams thought that way he'd be negative is the point you're nitpicking

If you can't get off a contract for expiring deals, it's a bad contract. If you can, it's not. I'm pushing back on the idea that just because fans no longer like a player on their team on his new contract, it's a bad contract. Fans do this with potential trade targets who price themselves out of what they deem acceptable all the time.

He's not a guy who can't moved but we are only fooling ourselves to think he's super valuable on this huge deal.

Sent from my SM-A156U using RealGM mobile app

Yeah, having Lauri locked up is nice. And gives Utah a lot of options. But he’s signed to slightly over a 25% max so it’s not some high value contract.

Trying to come up with semi-realistic deals involving this year lottery picks? I could see CLT, Chicago, and SAS.

If Utah gets lucky in the lottery, I think Ainge could try and renegotiate Sexton in September and then trade Collins and prospects for a star to join Lauri? Makes for a sustainable payroll if they want to bet on Flagg/Harper..

jayjaysee wrote:Yeah, having Lauri locked up is nice. And gives Utah a lot of options. But he’s signed to slightly over a 25% max so it’s not some high value contract.

Trying to come up with semi-realistic deals involving this year lottery picks? I could see CLT, Chicago, and SAS.

If Utah gets lucky in the lottery, I think Ainge could try and renegotiate Sexton in September and then trade Collins and prospects for a star to join Lauri? Makes for a sustainable payroll if they want to bet on Flagg/Harper..

I would absolutely consider giving up lottery picks (top 4 proteccted) this year for Lauri. How much would depend on the whole package, but basically anyone but Wemby and Castle would be on the table, beware I don't mean everything TOGETHER. But if Ainge comes back down to Earth, he should definitely be a Spurs target.

Lauri is valuable but I will say the Jazz did try a few new wrinkles with him this season. They were trying to see if he could play more with the ball in his hands (iso's, etc) and that was a failure. He is still one of the very best finishers in the entire league. He definitely has value as a #2 or more likely as a #3 on a good playoff team. Who doesn't need a low usage 7 footer with a lightning quick shot. His numbers have improved recently as the two main chuckers Keyonte and Clarkson have been mostly out of the lineup. The other guards, Sexton and Collier, have both made it a higher priority to get the ball to Lauri. I'm assuming that may have been a directive from the FO to help keep Lauri's trade value high..

He should be worth at least two FRP's + young prospect if they decide to move him in the offseason... Just my guess.

jayjaysee wrote:Yeah, having Lauri locked up is nice. And gives Utah a lot of options. But he’s signed to slightly over a 25% max so it’s not some high value contract.

Trying to come up with semi-realistic deals involving this year lottery picks? I could see CLT, Chicago, and SAS.

If Utah gets lucky in the lottery, I think Ainge could try and renegotiate Sexton in September and then trade Collins and prospects for a star to join Lauri? Makes for a sustainable payroll if they want to bet on Flagg/Harper..

According to reporting, Sexton has been *available* every season he has been on the Jazz. I'll be surprised if he gets extended. It would require him embracing the sixth-man role and agreeing to extend for that type of money.

jbk1234 wrote:

jayjaysee wrote:Yeah, having Lauri locked up is nice. And gives Utah a lot of options. But he’s signed to slightly over a 25% max so it’s not some high value contract.

Trying to come up with semi-realistic deals involving this year lottery picks? I could see CLT, Chicago, and SAS.

If Utah gets lucky in the lottery, I think Ainge could try and renegotiate Sexton in September and then trade Collins and prospects for a star to join Lauri? Makes for a sustainable payroll if they want to bet on Flagg/Harper..

According to reporting, Sexton has been *available* every season he has been on the Jazz. I'll be surprised if he gets extended. It would require him embracing the sixth-man role and agreeing to extend for that type of money.

I know I like him too much. But his contract is one of the good ones to be renegotiated.. give him an extra 12-15 mil and drop him to a flat 20 mil or something..

I think if Utah wants to only do a one year tank (my example of keeping Lauri would suggest that) Sexton and Kessler should be kept.

jayjaysee wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:

jayjaysee wrote:Yeah, having Lauri locked up is nice. And gives Utah a lot of options. But he’s signed to slightly over a 25% max so it’s not some high value contract.

Trying to come up with semi-realistic deals involving this year lottery picks? I could see CLT, Chicago, and SAS.

If Utah gets lucky in the lottery, I think Ainge could try and renegotiate Sexton in September and then trade Collins and prospects for a star to join Lauri? Makes for a sustainable payroll if they want to bet on Flagg/Harper..

According to reporting, Sexton has been *available* every season he has been on the Jazz. I'll be surprised if he gets extended. It would require him embracing the sixth-man role and agreeing to extend for that type of money.

I know I like him too much. But his contract is one of the good ones to be renegotiated.. give him an extra 12-15 mil and drop him to a flat 20 mil or something..

I think if Utah wants to only do a one year tank (my example of keeping Lauri would suggest that) Sexton and Kessler should be kept.

I don't see him extending for that. He's a UFA in 2026. Teams are going to clear cap for that summer and some of them are going to miss on their prime targets. He's probably going to test the market. I suspect that he feels like his RFA status already cost him money on his second contract.

jayjaysee wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:

jayjaysee wrote:Yeah, having Lauri locked up is nice. And gives Utah a lot of options. But he’s signed to slightly over a 25% max so it’s not some high value contract.

Trying to come up with semi-realistic deals involving this year lottery picks? I could see CLT, Chicago, and SAS.

If Utah gets lucky in the lottery, I think Ainge could try and renegotiate Sexton in September and then trade Collins and prospects for a star to join Lauri? Makes for a sustainable payroll if they want to bet on Flagg/Harper..

According to reporting, Sexton has been *available* every season he has been on the Jazz. I'll be surprised if he gets extended. It would require him embracing the sixth-man role and agreeing to extend for that type of money.

I know I like him too much. But his contract is one of the good ones to be renegotiated.. give him an extra 12-15 mil and drop him to a flat 20 mil or something..

I think if Utah wants to only do a one year tank (my example of keeping Lauri would suggest that) Sexton and Kessler should be kept.

Lauri, Kessler, and Sexton are constantly in trade talks but I don't think any of them get dealt this year. They need a few NBA caliber players if they are lucky enough to win the lottery. Of course some team could come in and offer a prospect for Sexton or multiple picks for Kessler, etc and all bets are off. Jazz could also fall down to the 6-7 range with the lottery balls which could force this tank to go another season or two. At that point I think Ainge will be more willing to deal even if he doesn't "win" the trade.

The longer this sort of play keeps up, the longer you have to wonder if he’s a 50 million dollar Tobias Harris.

Recent history becomes distant past pretty quickly in this league.