UTA-SAS

[HadAnEffectHere]

(Had an OKC part in here before due to a brain fart)

Utah gets: Raptors 2024 pick (if conveyed to the Spurs), Zach Collins, 2025 Hawks pick, best of 2026 Spurs Hawks first round pick, 2027 Hawks pick

Spurs get: Lauri Markkanen

Why for Utah: Tear it down to actually tank for top prospects in 2025 and 2026 and get some really good picks as well.

Why for San Antonio: Get a star player who complements basically every team build and has many years left in his prime. They would probably only do this if they were uncomfortable trading for Trae Young because of his size. Still have a ton of assets left (including likely a top 3 pick) to trade for a star PG if one becomes available. Maybe have enough assets to trade for Donovan Mitchell if he is willing to extend in San Antonio due to Pop and Wemby.

[AingesBurner]

That’s a no, known commodity versus unknown.

[AingesBurner]

Nowhere enough picks.

[cjmcallist]

I don’t think OKC is interested in Sexton.

I also think if UTA is selling Markkanen for picks, OKC would get in on that deal instead.

[MoneyTalks41890]

Yeah OKC wouldn't be interested in Sexton. I don't think he beats out Cason for minutes.

[jayjaysee]

I don’t see how getting a pick likely 7-8, and three future picks is not enough for an expiring Lauri.. That's a strong offer.

I think someone could pay a late first for Sexton with the season he’s having, but it wouldn’t be OKC considering their guards.

[HadAnEffectHere]

Yeah, I know the OKC part sucks, just suggest something from Utah they would trade for their worst 2026 first, lol.

Utah just needs any late 2026 first to make this trade work.

Wait, actually, derp, because the Spurs have picks in 2025, 2026, and 2027, they can just send this without a swap, never mind, derp.

[Chinook]

Ew no from the Spurs side. They shouldn't be willing to trade that ATL pick by itself for Mark. Adding the others is horrible from my perspective. I don't see any way Mark's worth something like this but somehow isn't worth the Jazz keeping him and building around him. It's just immense cognitive dissonance

[HadAnEffectHere]

Ew no from the Spurs side. They shouldn't be willing to trade that ATL pick by itself for Mark. Adding the others is horrible from my perspective. I don't see any way Mark's worth something like this but somehow isn't worth the Jazz keeping him and building around him. It's just immense cognitive dissonance

The point is that Markkanen is a perfect #2 and the Jazz have no ways to get a #1 with him on the roster. The Spurs uhh, have a #1. The Jazz need to tank for Bailey/Flagg/Boozer/AJ

[RookieJazz]

I don't like the fit of Lauri and Wemby. I think SAS can do better with that package. Murray would be a lot better with less assets.

[Chinook]

Ew no from the Spurs side. They shouldn't be willing to trade that ATL pick by itself for Mark. Adding the others is horrible from my perspective. I don't see any way Mark's worth something like this but somehow isn't worth the Jazz keeping him and building around him. It's just immense cognitive dissonance

The point is that Markkanen is a perfect #2 and the Jazz have no ways to get a #1 with him on the roster. The Spurs uhh, have a #1. The Jazz need to tank for Bailey/Flagg/Boozer/AJ

The Jazz have a million picks. I don't how they lack the means of getting a star. If Ainge just doesn't want to do that and instead wants to sell shovels, that's his problem. The Spurs don't have a number 1 right now. They have a gold chip prospect. In a year or two, they might/should have a number 1, and at that point they should become more aggressive. When you add in Mark's impending free agency, there's no real justification in my mind for the Spurs placing even a large percentage of the the value the OP assigns to him.

The Spurs in your post seem to have a 1 AND the draft position you seem to be implying is necessary for Utah to get a star. They aren't in a position to win now -- so why would SA not just also go for the draft star the Jazz should apparently trade their star away to obtain? Just to be nice to the rest of the league by giving them a turn at the top of the lottery? The Spurs have the advantage of having a lot of potential lottery picks to build a supporting cast or to include in trades when the time is right. Trading almost all of those picks just to become "too good" to get more is extremely wrong-headed.

[SkyHook]

Ew no from the Spurs side. They shouldn't be willing to trade that ATL pick by itself for Mark. Adding the others is horrible from my perspective. I don't see any way Mark's worth something like this but somehow isn't worth the Jazz keeping him and building around him. It's just immense cognitive dissonance

The point is that Markkanen is a perfect #2 and the Jazz have no ways to get a #1 with him on the roster. The Spurs uhh, have a #1. The Jazz need to tank for Bailey/Flagg/Boozer/AJ

I disagree. They may not yet have a Batman, but that doesn’t mean that they should move on from the perfect Robin, a guy who can fit with virtually any #1 in any system. Though this trade proposal is at least tempting.

And I’m trying to imagine Ainge thinking “Pierce is a perfect #2 and the Celtics have no ways to get a #1 with him on the roster”. Of course now the Jazz just need another former Celtics teammate to gift him another Hall-of-Famer!

[SkyHook]

Ew no from the Spurs side. They shouldn't be willing to trade that ATL pick by itself for Mark. Adding the others is horrible from my perspective. I don't see any way Mark's worth something like this but somehow isn't worth the Jazz keeping him and building around him. It's just immense cognitive dissonance

The point is that Markkanen is a perfect #2 and the Jazz have no ways to get a #1 with him on the roster. The Spurs uhh, have a #1. The Jazz need to tank for Bailey/Flagg/Boozer/AJ

The Jazz have a million picks. I don't how they lack the means of getting a star. If Ainge just doesn't want to do that and instead wants to sell shovels, that's his problem. The Spurs don't have a number 1 right now. They have a gold chip prospect. In a year or two, they might/should have a number 1, and at that point they should become more aggressive. When you add in Mark's impending free agency, there's no real justification in my mind for the Spurs placing even a large percentage of the the value the OP assigns to him.

The Spurs in your post seem to have a 1 AND the draft position you seem to be implying is necessary for Utah to get a star. They aren't in a position to win now -- so why would SA not just also go for the draft star the Jazz should apparently trade their star away to obtain? Just to be nice to the rest of the league by giving them a turn at the top of the lottery? The Spurs have the advantage of having a lot of potential lottery picks to build a supporting cast or to include in trades when the time is right. Trading almost all of those picks just to become "too good" to get more is extremely wrong-headed.

This is well reasoned, though I’m inclined to think that Wemby is already on the precipice of being that #1 guy. Markannen would be a seamless fit next to him.

[Chinook]

I don't like the fit of Lauri and Wemby. I think SAS can do better with that package. Murray would be a lot better with less assets.

I'm not huge on bringing Murray back. His deal is a lot less friendly with the trade kicker added in. I think he could help somewhat, but he's also basically a worse version of Vassell in most ways. I'd rather the team bring in an older vet wing and draft a young fast PG to fill out their starting lineup.

Dillingham, Jones
Vassell, Champagnie
Hayward, Johnson
Sochan, Cody Williams
Wembanyama, Collins

Then they can see how that goes and make a play at the deadline if something comes up.

[HadAnEffectHere]

Ew no from the Spurs side. They shouldn't be willing to trade that ATL pick by itself for Mark. Adding the others is horrible from my perspective. I don't see any way Mark's worth something like this but somehow isn't worth the Jazz keeping him and building around him. It's just immense cognitive dissonance

The point is that Markkanen is a perfect #2 and the Jazz have no ways to get a #1 with him on the roster. The Spurs uhh, have a #1. The Jazz need to tank for Bailey/Flagg/Boozer/AJ

The Jazz have a million picks. I don't how they lack the means of getting a star. If Ainge just doesn't want to do that and instead wants to sell shovels, that's his problem. The Spurs don't have a number 1 right now. They have a gold chip prospect. In a year or two, they might/should have a number 1, and at that point they should become more aggressive. When you add in Mark's impending free agency, there's no real justification in my mind for the Spurs placing even a large percentage of the the value the OP assigns to him.

The Spurs in your post seem to have a 1 AND the draft position you seem to be implying is necessary for Utah to get a star. They aren't in a position to win now -- so why would SA not just also go for the draft star the Jazz should apparently trade their star away to obtain? Just to be nice to the rest of the league by giving them a turn at the top of the lottery? The Spurs have the advantage of having a lot of potential lottery picks to build a supporting cast or to include in trades when the time is right. Trading almost all of those picks just to become "too good" to get more is extremely wrong-headed.

Because Wemby is good enough to be the #1 guy on a title team very soon and it's not clear that the Spurs will actually be bad next year at the rate Wemby is improving.

All of the Jazz's picks are pretty mediocre as well outside of the 2029 Wolves pick and 2027 Lakers pick. The Jazz just have a ton of... stuff... And not stuff that they can use to get a #1 guy.

[Chinook]

The point is that Markkanen is a perfect #2 and the Jazz have no ways to get a #1 with him on the roster. The Spurs uhh, have a #1. The Jazz need to tank for Bailey/Flagg/Boozer/AJ

The Jazz have a million picks. I don't how they lack the means of getting a star. If Ainge just doesn't want to do that and instead wants to sell shovels, that's his problem. The Spurs don't have a number 1 right now. They have a gold chip prospect. In a year or two, they might/should have a number 1, and at that point they should become more aggressive. When you add in Mark's impending free agency, there's no real justification in my mind for the Spurs placing even a large percentage of the the value the OP assigns to him.

The Spurs in your post seem to have a 1 AND the draft position you seem to be implying is necessary for Utah to get a star. They aren't in a position to win now -- so why would SA not just also go for the draft star the Jazz should apparently trade their star away to obtain? Just to be nice to the rest of the league by giving them a turn at the top of the lottery? The Spurs have the advantage of having a lot of potential lottery picks to build a supporting cast or to include in trades when the time is right. Trading almost all of those picks just to become "too good" to get more is extremely wrong-headed.

This is well reasoned, though I’m inclined to think that Wemby is already on the precipice of being that #1 guy. Markannen would be a seamless fit next to him.

You could sell me somewhat on Mark if the Spurs had just traded for Trae Young and were hoping to take a three-headed approach to contention. Wemby is talented enough to be a number one, but he's too inexperienced and doesn't have the conditioning to do so. It's not about the amount of stats he puts up since that's definitely already there. It's about being able to handle a team who can game plan against him and who has the talent and coaching to make things harder for him.

Having better teammates will help, but Victor's not at the place where he can really use them. For all the talk about guys missing him you hear in the media, Wemby's just NOW started holding screens so the ball-handler can actually get open and has reduced how often he runs down the court and tries to post up when the ball is 70 feet away. Good teammates aren't going to do much to limit the turnovers he has to have as he builds his first-option skill-set.

My issue with getting one second-tier star is that the Spurs would still be waiting on Wemby to become a number 1 in order for them to start contending. If they were to go bigger with a true championship centerpiece like Lebron or Curry, then that player can be the first option for a couple of years while Wemby is arguably the best robin as he learns how to win from them.

I think if you're talking about three players, there's a least some support they can all provide for each other so teams can't overplay them. Victor can still be on reduced minutes because there would be other stars who could help. It would still be hard to see them as a contender, but with the right injuries or if someone gets hot, they could make a run. Mind you, this isn't my preferred plan for the team to follow, but I think there are multiple ways they could approach this, and so long as they are able to execute, I don't really care which way they pick.

[Chinook]

Because Wemby is good enough to be the #1 guy on a title team very soon and it's not clear that the Spurs will actually be bad next year at the rate Wemby is improving.

The Spurs currently don't have to bank on them being bad to get good picks. They have two this year that seem pretty locked in and then have various chances from ATL, Chicago, Boston and Dallas. This thread is based on the premise of the Spurs selling at least one of their good picks this year and their non-natural picks for a guy who should definitely make sure their natural picks aren't good. It feels like an even worse idea the more you think about it.

All of the Jazz's picks are pretty mediocre as well outside of the 2029 Wolves pick and 2027 Lakers pick. The Jazz just have a ton of... stuff... And not stuff that they can use to get a #1 guy.

I read this more as "The Jazz don't want to leverage their future the way they got other teams to do." I don't disagree that teams aren't going to take quantity over quality, but Utah has the ability to offer "triple picks" like "The best of Utah's, Minnesota's or Cleveland's pick in year X" that basically gives all of the upside of the war chest without the bulk. I don't see how that doesn't beat any actual trade we've seen from teams recently.

The issue isn't the value Utah can bring to bear. It's having a GM who seems to excel most at trading in one direction and who doesn't seem to have the appetite for being on the other side of such trades. It may be his plan to tank for a star, but that's not the only choice he could have made.

[babyjax13]

Our top priority, regardless of if he is here long term, needs to be renegotiating and extending Lauri. If we don't we can't get the assets he merits as a player in a deal, and if we are building around him the logic is obvious.