RealGM

And we gave up a 2nd round pick? Am I missing something?

Thats weird. They must really want to open up playing time for the young new players- which has to be the motivation.

Still a weird trade.

This was a stupid trade. I was trying to be optimistic with the new Ainge. But this makes me think my optimism was short sighted. Why would we make this trade?

I get giving the youngsters playing time, but why not just buy him out?

Either Nurkic is accepting a buyout so we are paying to save money, or there is a team that wants an expiring center instead of a guard and we needed one that makes around this exact salary to complete a different trade. If it is something else it is just a demonstration that Ainges are overrated.

Came here to see what possible rationale there could be from UTA side. I don't get it at all.

Weird deal. I assume this means Kessler might get traded to the Lakers.

aim2please wrote:Weird deal. I assume this means Kessler might get traded to the Lakers.

Why? Nurkic is a backup, if he even stays with the Jazz.

Sexton was my favorite Jazz player. It sucks he's going to another crappy team instead of a legit playoff performer. And I also don't like the trade itself at all.

When I scanned the league for possible destinations for Sexton, Clarkson and Collins; Charlotte jumped out because Sexton is more efficient offensively than Charlotte's top 2 SGs (Brandon Miller and Josh Green), and clearly the next best PG after LaMelo.

Even though Sexton, Clarkson and Collins will likely be bought out at the deadline if they are not traded to a team that will retain their Bird rights (if Utah misses the play-in), I figured Sexton was the one player who might net something. Somewhat surprised by Nurkic, since he is also expiring, except that he might have more use if Kessler is on the move or they view Filipowski as more of a PF. So, I guess his fit is better.

Still, Sexton was one of your most efficient offensive players when you discount Centers and PFs, especially with his ability to get to the line. Sexton is a WAY better scorer than Nurkic, who is a good rebounder and passer, but pretty lackluster for a Big as a scorer.

Don't really like this deal, especially since you gave up a pick. Obviously clearing the way for Walter Clayton to get sizeable minutes (and Ace Bailey).

I guess they value Nurkic’s Rebounding, passing, willingness to set screens, take charges, protect the paint, and be a good teammate in addition to clearing the way for Clayton and Bailey. I guess it makes sense. There is a logic. Definately gets Clayton and Bailey on the court more, especially since Sexton was likely gone by the trade deadline anyway. Oh well ...

Horrible value... right direction. This trade won't make or break this team, but this is not a good trade.

This deal makes zero sense. Why pay to take back more salary. Unless I've agreed to a buyout or there's someone else going on. Tony Jones said it was a salary dump which makes me think it's a buyout.

bkohler wrote:This deal makes zero sense. Why pay to take back more salary. Unless I've agreed to a buyout or there's someone else going on. Tony Jones said it was a salary dump which makes me think it's a buyout.

I don't know how this can be a salary dump when both Sexton and Nurkic are expiring. Unless Nurkic's contract has a team option, or isn't fully guaranteed.

The only way I see it being a salary dump is if they couldn't negotiate a buyout with Sexton but Nurkic was willing to do a buyout.

bkohler wrote:The only way I see it being a salary dump is if they couldn't negotiate a buyout with Sexton but Nurkic was willing to do a buyout.

Didn’t think about that possibility. Good thinking in that one. Could be the case.

But if it is the case what are we using that capspace for? As far as I can tell we had enough room and players to trade for the bad contracts (PG, Dame, Etc)…and we shouldn’t be going after free agents with cap space.

So what is more capspace for if it’s not to bring back bad salary??? Maybe a team has multiple bad deals they want to send out way? Maybe the Lakers want Kessler and Collins and want to send back 30+ million and assets? There better be a part 2 to this trade. And we are killing our 2027 pick value so we better get a haul from LA if we send both.

I may be wrong but a buyout simply means the team pays the player less money (usually) than his contract stipulates but it doesn't affect the cap. If Nurkic was making 19M and the Jazz buy him out for 18M, the cap hit is still 19M. Am I getting that right?

Inigo Montoya wrote:I may be wrong but a buyout simply means the team pays the player less money (usually) than his contract stipulates but it doesn't affect the cap. If Nurkic was making 19M and the Jazz buy him out for 18M, the cap hit is still 19M. Am I getting that right?

Yes, you are correct.

babyjax13 wrote:

Inigo Montoya wrote:I may be wrong but a buyout simply means the team pays the player less money (usually) than his contract stipulates but it doesn't affect the cap. If Nurkic was making 19M and the Jazz buy him out for 18M, the cap hit is still 19M. Am I getting that right?

Yes, you are correct.

So then a buyout still wouldn't qualify as a salary dump and it won't clear extra cap space.

Inigo Montoya wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:

Inigo Montoya wrote:I may be wrong but a buyout simply means the team pays the player less money (usually) than his contract stipulates but it doesn't affect the cap. If Nurkic was making 19M and the Jazz buy him out for 18M, the cap hit is still 19M. Am I getting that right?

Yes, you are correct.

So then a buyout still wouldn't qualify as a salary dump.

I think it does. It is savings that can go into the team or not come out of the Smith's pockets. We may not see the impact on the roster this year, but the same is true of saving a few million in a trade with a player making less.