RealGM

Lauri Markkanen spoke to the finnish broadcaster Yle saying that tanking is a failed concept.

Generally speaking, it's a concept that's gone awry. Losing is rewarded. Losing intentionally is not part of sports, or especially professional sports. Everyone should be trying to win. I think this is perhaps a wrong direction for the business.

He also says he has more faith in Jazz's front office than he has on his own GM skills, and that he hopes for good players to join the team, either through draft or by other means.

In finnish: https://yle.fi/a/74-20156263

Machine translation: https://yle-fi.translate.goog/a/74-20156263?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=fi&_x_tr_pto=wapp

Axolotl wrote:Lauri Markkanen spoke to the finnish broadcaster Yle saying that tanking is a failed concept.

Generally speaking, it's a concept that's gone awry. Losing is rewarded. Losing intentionally is not part of sports, or especially professional sports. Everyone should be trying to win. I think this is perhaps a wrong direction for the business.

He also says he has more faith in Jazz's front office than he has on his own GM skills, and that he hopes for good players to join the team, either through draft or by other means.

In finnish: https://yle.fi/a/74-20156263

Machine translation: https://yle-fi.translate.goog/a/74-20156263?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=fi&_x_tr_pto=wapp

Depends on what he means when he says it's a failed concept. In the competitive and the spirit of the sport sense, yes, tanking is the complete opposite, and it rewards losing as long as it goes on. But there is no denying that most, if not all championship teams throughout history were built around players who were selected very high in the lottery, and that most franchise players were selected in the top 5 (we post the same chart that shows this every season). In other words, tanking does work as a means to get top-end talent to build your team around, and make your team competitive again.

I think we need to trade him, regardless. This has been a miserable season, but in part it is because the front office tried to run two tracks and so we walked away with Hendricks instead of a shot at Wemby, or Miller, or Amen, or even Scoot who I still think will be a good player. We walked away with Cody Williams instead of ... well, that draft sucked (but Kyshawn George was #2 on my big board and has been undeniably better). We didnt trade Lauri at the peak of his value, and we made some half hearted overtures to bring in Paul George and Mikal Bridges which would have led to more of the same. Commit to rebuilding, or commit to Lauri, don't repeat a season of resting everyone competent so that you can get the lottery odds you want...trade the guys you'd be resting, none will be here in 4 years, anyway.

babyjax13 wrote:I think we need to trade him, regardless. This has been a miserable season, but in part it is because the front office tried to run two tracks and so we walked away with Hendricks instead of a shot at Wemby, or Miller, or Amen, or even Scoot who I still think will be a good player. We walked away with Cody Williams instead of ... well, that draft sucked (but Kyshawn George was #2 on my big board and has been undeniably better). We didnt trade Lauri at the peak of his value, and we made some half hearted overtures to bring in Paul George and Mikal Bridges which would have led to more of the same. Commit to rebuilding, or commit to Lauri, don't repeat a season of resting everyone competent so that you can get the lottery odds you want...trade the guys you'd be resting, none will be here in 4 years, anyway.

I mean, why are we worried about not being committed when we just put up the worst record in the NBA?

If Utah lucks into Flagg, I don't think there's any chance the Jazz will be sitting Lauri/Kessler next year. That would be a great way to piss off the guy you're hoping to be a franchise player that will stick around. If the lottery doesn't go their way, then I think it becomes more likely that that we trade either/both. The whole point of keeping them was to shorten the rebuild time. Without those 2 players, we'd be waiting years to draft and then develop young players.

I really think fans underestimate the time/difficulty involved in rebuilding from the ground up. Not to mention that it's a difficult situation to develop young players when they are getting blown out every game.

Cappy_Smurf wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:I think we need to trade him, regardless. This has been a miserable season, but in part it is because the front office tried to run two tracks and so we walked away with Hendricks instead of a shot at Wemby, or Miller, or Amen, or even Scoot who I still think will be a good player. We walked away with Cody Williams instead of ... well, that draft sucked (but Kyshawn George was #2 on my big board and has been undeniably better). We didnt trade Lauri at the peak of his value, and we made some half hearted overtures to bring in Paul George and Mikal Bridges which would have led to more of the same. Commit to rebuilding, or commit to Lauri, don't repeat a season of resting everyone competent so that you can get the lottery odds you want...trade the guys you'd be resting, none will be here in 4 years, anyway.

I mean, why are we worried about not being committed when we just put up the worst record in the NBA?

If Utah lucks into Flagg, I don't think there's any chance the Jazz will be sitting Lauri/Kessler next year. That would be a great way to piss off the guy you're hoping to be a franchise player that will stick around. If the lottery doesn't go their way, then I think it becomes more likely that that we trade either/both. The whole point of keeping them was to shorten the rebuild time. Without those 2 players, we'd be waiting years to draft and then develop young players.

I really think fans underestimate the time/difficulty involved in rebuilding from the ground up. Not to mention that it's a difficult situation to develop young players when they are getting blown out every game.

See bold.

I actually think it is the FO who has underestimated the difficulty of doing so. They thought they could do this without any pain and realized in season 3 that they couldn't. If we had Wemby now (obviously we may not have gotten him) we'd be in a much better situation than keeping the vets around. By the time Flagg is starting his prime Lauri will be dealing, the timelines dont match. I just dont think this is a good strategy.

babyjax13 wrote:

Cappy_Smurf wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:I think we need to trade him, regardless. This has been a miserable season, but in part it is because the front office tried to run two tracks and so we walked away with Hendricks instead of a shot at Wemby, or Miller, or Amen, or even Scoot who I still think will be a good player. We walked away with Cody Williams instead of ... well, that draft sucked (but Kyshawn George was #2 on my big board and has been undeniably better). We didnt trade Lauri at the peak of his value, and we made some half hearted overtures to bring in Paul George and Mikal Bridges which would have led to more of the same. Commit to rebuilding, or commit to Lauri, don't repeat a season of resting everyone competent so that you can get the lottery odds you want...trade the guys you'd be resting, none will be here in 4 years, anyway.

I mean, why are we worried about not being committed when we just put up the worst record in the NBA?

If Utah lucks into Flagg, I don't think there's any chance the Jazz will be sitting Lauri/Kessler next year. That would be a great way to piss off the guy you're hoping to be a franchise player that will stick around. If the lottery doesn't go their way, then I think it becomes more likely that that we trade either/both. The whole point of keeping them was to shorten the rebuild time. Without those 2 players, we'd be waiting years to draft and then develop young players.

I really think fans underestimate the time/difficulty involved in rebuilding from the ground up. Not to mention that it's a difficult situation to develop young players when they are getting blown out every game.

See bold.

I actually think it is the FO who has underestimated the difficulty of doing so. They thought they could do this without any pain and realized in season 3 that they couldn't. If we had Wemby now (obviously we may not have gotten him) we'd be in a much better situation than keeping the vets around. By the time Flagg is starting his prime Lauri will be dealing, the timelines dont match. I just dont think this is a good strategy.

I think Lauri’s game will extend his playing “prime”. He’s really a tall SG. He can play off ball screen 3 pointy shooting well into his 30’s.