What does a Lauri to Detroit trade look like?

[Daddy 801]

I’m not nearly as high on Denver as some folks. They just haven’t looked on our level whenever we’ve played them over the past two years and I don’t think swapping MPJ for another tall shooter who can’t defend makes a massive difference…same way I don’t think Clarkson changes the equation for us, despite the hoopla some made over his acquisition.

Plus I don’t rate Val or thjr highly. Like the brown pickup, but he’s another mediocre shooter teams can ignore. And if defense is your hesitation with us despite how we cranked it up last postseason, then I don’t see how you can take Denver seriously. Their defense makes ours look like the 04 pistons.


I like Houston’s defense a lot, and Durant helps with their shotmaking, but they still don’t have much high level shot creation and I’m not sure they’re significantly better than Detroit even without a Harris-Markannen swap…unlike Detroit & Orlando they just don’t have that up n coming creator to drive their offense.


I do like Minnesota a lot, but I have them lower in the same tier as the Knicks / Cavs / Thunder / Magic until Ant learns to run an offense or Dilly is ready too take over. They just play too dumb, despite loving their talent & wanting to see juju thrive...though I have Orlando in that same part of the tier.

And the Spurs are a complete wildcard in my mind. Wouldn’t be shocked if Wemby led them to run away with 2nd out west, but also wouldn’t be shocked if they kept losing games they should win because they’re not yet a cohesive team. So I have a tough time ranking them ahead of a team like Detroit…much less Orlando, who’ve done it for multiple seasons and made their big move.

Appreciate your thoughts. I really wish we could just get rid of conferences and just have all teams play each other an equal amount. The eat just seems way below the west IMO and it’s allowed teams like Detroit to have a better record than they would had they played all teams an equal amount of time. At least that’s my opinion.

For sure, this plave would be a lot less fun if we all always agreed.

I've long been a proponent of cutting down the season and just playing every other team twice, home & away. Which would lend itself to doing away with conferences.

I think the difference between the conferences is overblown, the east has 1 or 2 more rebuilding/tanking teams, but last year the east had 1 or 2 more contenders as well. So which is more important, having a couple more teams planning for the lottery or having a couple more teams planning a trip to the finals?

I think the west had more contenders. Boston was the only team I saw as a threat to whatever team came out of the west. I just assumed it would be OKC or Denver who won it this year. I think the same thing applies to next year. But I’ll admit maybe I am underestimating the east. For all we know Indiana could have won had Hali not gotten injured. Which sucks and I was super into the finals just watching Indi be the underdog. I’d love to be wrong again next year and have a team like Atlanta just surprise everyone and make it to the finals. Unless the Bucks really improve whomever comes out of the east is going to be a new team in the finals which I think is awesome.

[Crymson]

Weighing in late, but it doesn't make sense for the Pistons to pay Ainge's price unless they've got a bona fide #2 creator in the lineup and won't need to give him up in the process. Markkanen, as a jumbo shooter who operates almost exclusively off the ball and creates only minor offense for himself, is an extremely expensive third option who's best suited as an acquisition that puts a team with the necessary foundation over the top into contender status.

[cgf]

Appreciate your thoughts. I really wish we could just get rid of conferences and just have all teams play each other an equal amount. The eat just seems way below the west IMO and it’s allowed teams like Detroit to have a better record than they would had they played all teams an equal amount of time. At least that’s my opinion.

For sure, this plave would be a lot less fun if we all always agreed.

I've long been a proponent of cutting down the season and just playing every other team twice, home & away. Which would lend itself to doing away with conferences.

I think the difference between the conferences is overblown, the east has 1 or 2 more rebuilding/tanking teams, but last year the east had 1 or 2 more contenders as well. So which is more important, having a couple more teams planning for the lottery or having a couple more teams planning a trip to the finals?

I think the west had more contenders. Boston was the only team I saw as a threat to whatever team came out of the west. I just assumed it would be OKC or Denver who won it this year. I think the same thing applies to next year. But I’ll admit maybe I am underestimating the east. For all we know Indiana could have won had Hali not gotten injured. Which sucks and I was super into the finals just watching Indi be the underdog. I’d love to be wrong again next year and have a team like Atlanta just surprise everyone and make it to the finals. Unless the Bucks really improve whomever comes out of the east is going to be a new team in the finals which I think is awesome.

You're certainly not alone...as I got a lot of heat for it before the playoffs started, but I spent most of last season on here arguing that OKC -- and Minnesota when at their best -- were the only western conference team(s) who could hang with Boston, Cleveland, New York, & Indiana...and that the East's top 4 were all very close together; as which of them would progress to the finals would come down to health, matchups, and luck.

Most people thought nobody could hang with the top 3 and if anyone could it must be a western conference team, but nobody else in that conference actually felt dangerous to me and I felt like this Knicks squad had another level once Robinson came back and thibs took the shackles off, the way Indy leveled up once Nembhard & Nesmith got healthy:

- Houston was Orlando/Detroit with better vets but without a Cade/Paolo/Franz to drive their offense.
- GSW & LAL were too tiny even before Steph got hurt & Luka got "sick".
- Memphis were total pushovers.
- Denver had 4 guys...and we've smoked them since getting OG, so I probably under-rate them.
- You can't trust the clippers in the playoffs, as they proved by losing to Denver's 4 guys.

Tatum & Hali are major difference makers that their teams will miss, but Orlando seems poised to pick up some of that slack to give the east a 3rd team who could win it all...and I think Detroit would be in that same boat if they turned Harris + Holland + 26 FRP into Lauri. Even if I don't see how Milwaukee gets out of round one in this conference with that group of wings / guards.

If Atlanta could guarantee they'd stay healthy, I'd be really high on them, but JJ and KP are too injury prone...which sucks, given how high I am on JJ.

[cgf]

Weighing in late, but it doesn't make sense for the Pistons to pay Ainge's price unless they've got a bona fide #2 creator in the lineup and won't need to give him up in the process. Markkanen, as a jumbo shooter who operates almost exclusively off the ball and creates only minor offense for himself, is an extremely expensive third option who's best suited as an acquisition that puts a team with the necessary foundation over the top into contender status.

This is very price dependant for me. I like it a lot for Detroit if they could swing it for "just" Holland & an unprotected 26 FRP. But think it turns into a mistake if the price is one of those young wings and two unprotected FRPs.

Holland was very impressive, but in the longrun, I feel like Markannen is a better frontcourt fit with Thompson and Duren/Stewart, so giving him up to turn Harris into Lauri...without tying your hands past next spring...would set Detroit up very well to take another step this season, and still have a full cadre of picks to upgrade Ivey or Markannen next summer / the summer after that, if a Cade / Ivey / Lauri trio wasn't enough to contend.

Lauri is very much a finisher rather than a creator, but a great finisher does make life easier on creators, so that swap should help Ivey rise to the occasion as the #2. Plus I like Levert as a 6th man who can create.

[Crymson]

This is very price dependant for me. I like it a lot for Detroit if they could swing it for "just" Holland & an unprotected 26 FRP. But think it turns into a mistake if the price is one of those young wings and two unprotected FRPs.

Holland was very impressive, but in the longrun, I feel like Markannen is a better frontcourt fit with Thompson and Duren/Stewart, so giving him up to turn Harris into Lauri...without tying your hands past next spring...would set Detroit up very well to take another step this season, and still have a full cadre of picks to upgrade Ivey or Markannen next summer / the summer after that, if a Cade / Ivey / Lauri trio wasn't enough to contend.

Lauri is very much a finisher rather than a creator, but a great finisher does make life easier on creators, so that swap should help Ivey rise to the occasion as the #2. Plus I like Levert as a 6th man who can create.

Ainge has set a high price (as the Warriors found out), and that price is substantially higher than Holland and a single FRP.

[cgf]

This is very price dependant for me. I like it a lot for Detroit if they could swing it for "just" Holland & an unprotected 26 FRP. But think it turns into a mistake if the price is one of those young wings and two unprotected FRPs.

Holland was very impressive, but in the longrun, I feel like Markannen is a better frontcourt fit with Thompson and Duren/Stewart, so giving him up to turn Harris into Lauri...without tying your hands past next spring...would set Detroit up very well to take another step this season, and still have a full cadre of picks to upgrade Ivey or Markannen next summer / the summer after that, if a Cade / Ivey / Lauri trio wasn't enough to contend.

Lauri is very much a finisher rather than a creator, but a great finisher does make life easier on creators, so that swap should help Ivey rise to the occasion as the #2. Plus I like Levert as a 6th man who can create.

Ainge has set a high price (as the Warriors found out), and that price is substantially higher than Holland and a single FRP.

A) nobody has met that price while Lauri’s form has faltered and he’s grown unsettled by the tanking
B) GSW didn’t have a prospect as exciting as Holland to offer Ainge as the centerpiece of his Lauri-return

If Ainge won’t bite then you move on, but I think that trade would be good for both sides.

[Crymson]

A) nobody has met that price while Lauri’s form has faltered and he’s grown unsettled by the tanking
B) GSW didn’t have a prospect as exciting as Holland to offer Ainge as the centerpiece of his Lauri-return

If Ainge won’t bite then you move on, but I think that trade would be good for both sides.

Holland is exciting only to Pistons fans at this point. Yeah, he's got good athleticism, a great motor, and upside as an off-the-dribble attacker, and Summer League was a promising look for his shooting. He's also completely unproven, his ceiling remains unclear, and his rookie season was very unremarkable. His value is no greater and probably considerably less than that of 2024 Podz, whom the Jazz asked for -- on top of Golden State's offer of Moody and multiple 1sts and pick swaps -- after a rookie campaign that was a great deal better than Holland's.

Historically, Ainge has not cared if his price isn't met. He just keeps the player rather than lowering his ask. He appears perfectly willing to do so with Markkanen, whom he still has under contract for four more seasons.

[cgf]

A) nobody has met that price while Lauri’s form has faltered and he’s grown unsettled by the tanking
B) GSW didn’t have a prospect as exciting as Holland to offer Ainge as the centerpiece of his Lauri-return

If Ainge won’t bite then you move on, but I think that trade would be good for both sides.

Holland is exciting only to Pistons fans at this point. Yeah, he's got good athleticism, a great motor, and upside as an off-the-dribble attacker, and Summer League was a promising look for his shooting. He's also completely unproven, his ceiling remains unclear, and his rookie season was very unremarkable. His value is no greater and probably considerably less than that of 2024 Podz, whom the Jazz asked for -- on top of Golden State's offer of Moody and multiple 1sts and pick swaps -- after a rookie campaign that was a great deal better than Holland's.

Historically, Ainge has not cared if his price isn't met. He just keeps the player rather than lowering his ask. He appears perfectly willing to do so with Markkanen, whom he still has under contract for four more seasons.

*shrug* I’d gladly take him on my Knicks. Kid’s already flashed some serious defense chops and toughness offensively. The shooting is the big swing skill still though I’d easily take him over Podz + Moody, those guys could be adequate starters, Holland could be a real two-way difference maker.

And yeah, Ainge has shown some very questionable decision making when his one move doesn’t work.

[tmorgan]

Not trading Holland for Lauri.

Detroit has drafted a lot of interesting players over the last five years. We hit on Cade, who has flaws but continues to improve and has a leader’s aura. He’a obviously the cornerstone. If you look at the rest of the guys (Stewart, Ivey, Duren, Ausar, and Holland, in order of “veterancy”), only Holland has shown potential as a two-way star. He’s a good defender and slasher already, so yeah, it’s a matter of his shot falling. Summer League was encouraging but doesn’t mean a whole lot. He needs time — IN DETROIT — to see if he can be the clear #2 here long term. I think he can.

The rest have value and talent but are all moveable if necessary.

Stewart’s a great defender, the enforcer, and has a reasonable contract, but he’s offensively shakey because he can’t finish in traffic and needs to be very open to shoot. Also, his hands kinda suck.

Ivey has great offensive potential and is a fantastic athlete and tempo pusher, but his defensive instincts continue to be pretty awful. This is a big year for him if he wants to be more than a sixth man on a good team.

Duren is an incredible rebounder and athlete and finisher in general, perhaps the best lob catcher in the league, something Cade needs to make his space. But, like Ivey, his defensive instincts are bad. Not much of a help defender, and only decent as a man defender. It was telling that Tobias did a much better job on KAT than Duren did in the playoffs.

Ausar is an otherworldly basketball athlete with solid passing instincts and a developing handle. But, as the whole league knows about the Thompson Twins, his shot is just pitiful. Unlike Holland, who looks good but just couldn’t hit as a rookie, Ausar’s had two years of throwing up godawful grade school-looking bricks from three and the chance he becomes an adequate outside shooter is extremely small. Still a very impactful and skilled player, but you can’t call a perimeter guy in the modern NBA a two-way player when teams play ten feet off him for the drive every time.

That leaves Holland. Well above average rookie wing defender, above average finisher at the rim, solid and slithery handle, takes no crap from anyone (Stewart’s apprentice), all at age 19 in the league. I hope Langdon views him as our second most-valuable player, because I think he’ll soon be just that, probably by his third year. He has all the stuff you want to see early — no fear, varied skillset, confidence in himself. Put an average three ball on Ron and give him 30 mpg (not this year, I’m sure) and a little more experience and I think he can easily replicate Ivey’s offense while still giving his man trouble on D. He’s also 6’7” or 6’8”, unlike Ivey, which helps in a lot of ways.

Say no to trading Ron!

(EDIT: of course Knicks fans like Holland… he reminds me a ton of Sprewell)

[cgf]

Not trading Holland for Lauri.

Detroit has drafted a lot of interesting players over the last five years. We hit on Cade, who has flaws but continues to improve and has a leader’s aura. He’a obviously the cornerstone. If you look at the rest of the guys (Stewart, Ivey, Duren, Ausar, and Holland, in order of “veterancy”), only Holland has shown potential as a two-way star. He’s a good defender and slasher already, so yeah, it’s a matter of his shot falling. Summer League was encouraging but doesn’t mean a whole lot. He needs time — IN DETROIT — to see if he can be the clear #2 here long term. I think he can.

The rest have value and talent but are all moveable if necessary.

Stewart’s a great defender, the enforcer, and has a reasonable contract, but he’s offensively shakey because he can’t finish in traffic and needs to be very open to shoot. Also, his hands kinda suck.

Ivey has great offensive potential and is a fantastic athlete and tempo pusher, but his defensive instincts continue to be pretty awful. This is a big year for him if he wants to be more than a sixth man on a good team.

Duren is an incredible rebounder and athlete and finisher in general, perhaps the best lob catcher in the league, something Cade needs to make his space. But, like Ivey, his defensive instincts are bad. Not much of a help defender, and only decent as a man defender. It was telling that Tobias did a much better job on KAT than Duren did in the playoffs.

Ausar is an otherworldly basketball athlete with solid passing instincts and a developing handle. But, as the whole league knows about the Thompson Twins, his shot is just pitiful. Unlike Holland, who looks good but just couldn’t hit as a rookie, Ausar’s had two years of throwing up godawful grade school-looking bricks from three and the chance he becomes an adequate outside shooter is extremely small. Still a very impactful and skilled player, but you can’t call a perimeter guy in the modern NBA a two-way player when teams play ten feet off him for the drive every time.

That leaves Holland. Well above average rookie wing defender, above average finisher at the rim, solid and slithery handle, takes no crap from anyone (Stewart’s apprentice), all at age 19 in the league. I hope Langdon views him as our second most-valuable player, because I think he’ll soon be just that, probably by his third year. He has all the stuff you want to see early — no fear, varied skillset, confidence in himself. Put an average three ball on Ron and give him 30 mpg (not this year, I’m sure) and a little more experience and I think he can easily replicate Ivey’s offense while still giving his man trouble on D. He’s also 6’7” or 6’8”, unlike Ivey, which helps in a lot of ways.

Say no to trading Ron!

(EDIT: of course Knicks fans like Holland… he reminds me a ton of Sprewell)

If you had to trade Holland or Thompson…not for Lauri, but to complete some hypothetical trade that you would give one of them up for, which would it be?

[tmorgan]

I assume Ausar currently has more perceived value than Holland, so he’d be the one I’d trade of the two. But not for Lauri.

My personal keeper list goes: Cade, Holland, Ausar, Stewart, Duren, Ivey. But I’m lower on Ivey than most of our board, and I still have some hope for Duren’s defense. I’m also a big culture guy, I think that stuff really matters unless the talent advantage is overwhelming.

[Daddy 801]

I assume Ausar currently has more perceived value than Holland, so he’d be the one I’d trade of the two. But not for Lauri.

My personal keeper list goes: Cade, Holland, Ausar, Stewart, Duren, Ivey. But I’m lower on Ivey than most of our board, and I still have some hope for Duren’s defense. I’m also a big culture guy, I think that stuff really matters unless the talent advantage is overwhelming.

I don’t think you’re getting any quality player if you have all of your young talent as untouchable. Any team you trade with isn’t only going to want only Tobias back. Something of value has to be sent unless you are willing to send even more FRP’s and no young players.

[theBigLip]

I assume Ausar currently has more perceived value than Holland, so he’d be the one I’d trade of the two. But not for Lauri.

My personal keeper list goes: Cade, Holland, Ausar, Stewart, Duren, Ivey. But I’m lower on Ivey than most of our board, and I still have some hope for Duren’s defense. I’m also a big culture guy, I think that stuff really matters unless the talent advantage is overwhelming.

I don’t think you’re getting any quality player if you have all of your young talent as untouchable. Any team you trade with isn’t only going to want only Tobias back. Something of value has to be sent unless you are willing to send even more FRP’s and no young players.

I’d flip Holland and Ausar on the tmorgan priority list.

As for not trading any of the young talent, I’m fine w that. I’d rather send out unprotected FRPs.

[tmorgan]

I assume Ausar currently has more perceived value than Holland, so he’d be the one I’d trade of the two. But not for Lauri.

My personal keeper list goes: Cade, Holland, Ausar, Stewart, Duren, Ivey. But I’m lower on Ivey than most of our board, and I still have some hope for Duren’s defense. I’m also a big culture guy, I think that stuff really matters unless the talent advantage is overwhelming.

I don’t think you’re getting any quality player if you have all of your young talent as untouchable. Any team you trade with isn’t only going to want only Tobias back. Something of value has to be sent unless you are willing to send even more FRP’s and no young players.

I don’t think you’re interpreting what I’ve said correctly, or perhaps you just overvalue Markkanen nearly as badly as Utah does.

See what I did there? I went two steps beyond what you actually said. Annoying, right?

No one is untouchable. But none of our three most valuable pieces should be going out for a guy that is going to have a very hard time justifying his contract. Lauri would need to play at his level from three seasons ago AND stay almost entirely healthy to be worth 50 million a year. We can argue theoretical scenarios about how he’ll bounce back in a different environment, but that’s all just speculation. Paying anything near Ainge’s reported asking price is assuming nearly all of the risk, and no competent GM is going to do that. Fortunately for Utah, there are still incompetent teams/owners/GMs out there, so maybe things go their way at some point. Or maybe they just hold onto him, as their latest difficult-to-believe press releases indicate.

Max or near-max deals for non-max players is the new competency check for NBA front offices. Detroit already took their gamble, paying Cade when he isn’t worth it yet, accolades aside. That’s a different, lower level of risk, though, banking on a developing young star that is your best player and leader. Teams that don’t have such a player but pay one anyway, that’s the issue, and Lauri is one of those guys. As I stated earlier in this thread, if you sincerely believe acquiring Lauri makes you a legit contender in the very near future, perhaps the calculus changes. It’s a big reach to think that’s true in Detroit. Taking another year to see what the young guys are looking like makes more sense unless the price is significantly lower.

[babyjax13]

I assume Ausar currently has more perceived value than Holland, so he’d be the one I’d trade of the two. But not for Lauri.

My personal keeper list goes: Cade, Holland, Ausar, Stewart, Duren, Ivey. But I’m lower on Ivey than most of our board, and I still have some hope for Duren’s defense. I’m also a big culture guy, I think that stuff really matters unless the talent advantage is overwhelming.

I don’t think you’re getting any quality player if you have all of your young talent as untouchable. Any team you trade with isn’t only going to want only Tobias back. Something of value has to be sent unless you are willing to send even more FRP’s and no young players.

I don’t think you’re interpreting what I’ve said correctly, or perhaps you just overvalue Markkanen nearly as badly as Utah does.

See what I did there? I went two steps beyond what you actually said. Annoying, right?

No one is untouchable. But none of our three most valuable pieces should be going out for a guy that is going to have a very hard time justifying his contract. Lauri would need to play at his level from three seasons ago AND stay almost entirely healthy to be worth 50 million a year. We can argue theoretical scenarios about how he’ll bounce back in a different environment, but that’s all just speculation. Paying anything near Ainge’s reported asking price is assuming nearly all of the risk, and no competent GM is going to do that. Fortunately for Utah, there are still incompetent teams/owners/GMs out there, so maybe things go their way at some point. Or maybe they just hold onto him, as their latest difficult-to-believe press releases indicate.

Max or near-max deals for non-max players is the new competency check for NBA front offices. Detroit already took their gamble, paying Cade when he isn’t worth it yet, accolades aside. That’s a different, lower level of risk, though, banking on a developing young star that is your best player and leader. Teams that don’t have such a player but pay one anyway, that’s the issue, and Lauri is one of those guys. As I stated earlier in this thread, if you sincerely believe acquiring Lauri makes you a legit contender in the very near future, perhaps the calculus changes. It’s a big reach to think that’s true in Detroit. Taking another year to see what the young guys are looking like makes more sense unless the price is significantly lower.

He played at that level two of the last three seasons. Not arguing with the logic of seeing the young players with more run, but Lauri was fantastic in 22-23 and 23-24. We shut him down in 23-24 and (a) our beat writers said he could play, and (b) he complained about sitting (he had a quote that was something to the effect of, "I didn't know I was injured until just before tipoff").

[tmorgan]

I don’t think you’re getting any quality player if you have all of your young talent as untouchable. Any team you trade with isn’t only going to want only Tobias back. Something of value has to be sent unless you are willing to send even more FRP’s and no young players.

I don’t think you’re interpreting what I’ve said correctly, or perhaps you just overvalue Markkanen nearly as badly as Utah does.

See what I did there? I went two steps beyond what you actually said. Annoying, right?

No one is untouchable. But none of our three most valuable pieces should be going out for a guy that is going to have a very hard time justifying his contract. Lauri would need to play at his level from three seasons ago AND stay almost entirely healthy to be worth 50 million a year. We can argue theoretical scenarios about how he’ll bounce back in a different environment, but that’s all just speculation. Paying anything near Ainge’s reported asking price is assuming nearly all of the risk, and no competent GM is going to do that. Fortunately for Utah, there are still incompetent teams/owners/GMs out there, so maybe things go their way at some point. Or maybe they just hold onto him, as their latest difficult-to-believe press releases indicate.

Max or near-max deals for non-max players is the new competency check for NBA front offices. Detroit already took their gamble, paying Cade when he isn’t worth it yet, accolades aside. That’s a different, lower level of risk, though, banking on a developing young star that is your best player and leader. Teams that don’t have such a player but pay one anyway, that’s the issue, and Lauri is one of those guys. As I stated earlier in this thread, if you sincerely believe acquiring Lauri makes you a legit contender in the very near future, perhaps the calculus changes. It’s a big reach to think that’s true in Detroit. Taking another year to see what the young guys are looking like makes more sense unless the price is significantly lower.

He played at that level two of the last three seasons. Not arguing with the logic of seeing the young players with more run, but Lauri was fantastic in 22-23 and 23-24. We shut him down in 23-24 and (a) our beat writers said he could play, and (b) he complained about sitting (he had a quote that was something to the effect of, "I didn't know I was injured until just before tipoff").

Out of respect for you as a poster, I’ll just say I addressed all of that earlier in the thread. I know how good Lauri is. I like him. I wouldn’t bother with any of this if I didn’t think he would make the Pistons significantly better. But… there’s still the contract, his minor but consistent injury history (not just last year), and the ridiculous price Ainge has set. Just doesn’t make sense.

[cgf]

I assume Ausar currently has more perceived value than Holland, so he’d be the one I’d trade of the two. But not for Lauri.

My personal keeper list goes: Cade, Holland, Ausar, Stewart, Duren, Ivey. But I’m lower on Ivey than most of our board, and I still have some hope for Duren’s defense. I’m also a big culture guy, I think that stuff really matters unless the talent advantage is overwhelming.

Interesting. I do like Holland, but I feel like I must be higher on Thompson’s offensive potential than you; as I feel like if he can develop even just a 15-18fter, he’ll make a really impact. Like McDaniels does with his slashing + defense. Holland doesn’t have the same game changing potential defensively, even if his two way impact is easier to project.

And I’m definitely higher on Ivey, your defense was a force last season, but to take that next step you need a second dynamic creator to take some attention off Cade and burn teams for selling out against him…like a suped up version of what Schröder gave you last year. Even if you upgrade Harris to an elite finisher/spacer like Lauri.

[babyjax13]

I don’t think you’re interpreting what I’ve said correctly, or perhaps you just overvalue Markkanen nearly as badly as Utah does.

See what I did there? I went two steps beyond what you actually said. Annoying, right?

No one is untouchable. But none of our three most valuable pieces should be going out for a guy that is going to have a very hard time justifying his contract. Lauri would need to play at his level from three seasons ago AND stay almost entirely healthy to be worth 50 million a year. We can argue theoretical scenarios about how he’ll bounce back in a different environment, but that’s all just speculation. Paying anything near Ainge’s reported asking price is assuming nearly all of the risk, and no competent GM is going to do that. Fortunately for Utah, there are still incompetent teams/owners/GMs out there, so maybe things go their way at some point. Or maybe they just hold onto him, as their latest difficult-to-believe press releases indicate.

Max or near-max deals for non-max players is the new competency check for NBA front offices. Detroit already took their gamble, paying Cade when he isn’t worth it yet, accolades aside. That’s a different, lower level of risk, though, banking on a developing young star that is your best player and leader. Teams that don’t have such a player but pay one anyway, that’s the issue, and Lauri is one of those guys. As I stated earlier in this thread, if you sincerely believe acquiring Lauri makes you a legit contender in the very near future, perhaps the calculus changes. It’s a big reach to think that’s true in Detroit. Taking another year to see what the young guys are looking like makes more sense unless the price is significantly lower.

He played at that level two of the last three seasons. Not arguing with the logic of seeing the young players with more run, but Lauri was fantastic in 22-23 and 23-24. We shut him down in 23-24 and (a) our beat writers said he could play, and (b) he complained about sitting (he had a quote that was something to the effect of, "I didn't know I was injured until just before tipoff").

Out of respect for you as a poster, I’ll just say I addressed all of that earlier in the thread. I know how good Lauri is. I like him. I wouldn’t bother with any of this if I didn’t think he would make the Pistons significantly better. But… there’s still the contract, his minor but consistent injury history (not just last year), and the ridiculous price Ainge has set. Just doesn’t make sense.

It is pretty clear Austin Ainge is in charge based on us actually choosing a direction. I think we would move him for reasonable value, and I honestly expect him to be traded as long as he plays well in the first 15 to 20 games.

[Daddy 801]

I assume Ausar currently has more perceived value than Holland, so he’d be the one I’d trade of the two. But not for Lauri.

My personal keeper list goes: Cade, Holland, Ausar, Stewart, Duren, Ivey. But I’m lower on Ivey than most of our board, and I still have some hope for Duren’s defense. I’m also a big culture guy, I think that stuff really matters unless the talent advantage is overwhelming.

I don’t think you’re getting any quality player if you have all of your young talent as untouchable. Any team you trade with isn’t only going to want only Tobias back. Something of value has to be sent unless you are willing to send even more FRP’s and no young players.

I don’t think you’re interpreting what I’ve said correctly, or perhaps you just overvalue Markkanen nearly as badly as Utah does.

See what I did there? I went two steps beyond what you actually said. Annoying, right?

No one is untouchable. But none of our three most valuable pieces should be going out for a guy that is going to have a very hard time justifying his contract. Lauri would need to play at his level from three seasons ago AND stay almost entirely healthy to be worth 50 million a year. We can argue theoretical scenarios about how he’ll bounce back in a different environment, but that’s all just speculation. Paying anything near Ainge’s reported asking price is assuming nearly all of the risk, and no competent GM is going to do that. Fortunately for Utah, there are still incompetent teams/owners/GMs out there, so maybe things go their way at some point. Or maybe they just hold onto him, as their latest difficult-to-believe press releases indicate.

Max or near-max deals for non-max players is the new competency check for NBA front offices. Detroit already took their gamble, paying Cade when he isn’t worth it yet, accolades aside. That’s a different, lower level of risk, though, banking on a developing young star that is your best player and leader. Teams that don’t have such a player but pay one anyway, that’s the issue, and Lauri is one of those guys. As I stated earlier in this thread, if you sincerely believe acquiring Lauri makes you a legit contender in the very near future, perhaps the calculus changes. It’s a big reach to think that’s true in Detroit. Taking another year to see what the young guys are looking like makes more sense unless the price is significantly lower.

No, I’m not annoyed. This is a basketball forum. Not worth getting upset over.

I don’t disagree with a lot of what you said. I would probably hold onto my young guys if I was Detroit. Having said that…the asking price is the asking price. GM’s either are or are not willing to pay that price. If a team doesn’t want to have to send out young players they will have to send out more draft capital. And that’s my point regardless if it’s Lauri or another player. That was my whole point. I wasn’t assuming anything or trying to make you annoyed. That’s a you thing, not a me thing. I’d suggest chilling and remembering we’re in a forum discussing guys making millions playing a game. I’m not attacking you personally by pointing out that if you don’t send young players you have to send more draft assets. It just is what it is.

[tmorgan]

No, I’m not annoyed. This is a basketball forum. Not worth getting upset over.

I don’t disagree with a lot of what you said. I would probably hold onto my young guys if I was Detroit. Having said that…the asking price is the asking price. GM’s either are or are not willing to pay that price. If a team doesn’t want to have to send out young players they will have to send out more draft capital. And that’s my point regardless if it’s Lauri or another player. That was my whole point. I wasn’t assuming anything or trying to make you annoyed. That’s a you thing, not a me thing. I’d suggest chilling and remembering we’re in a forum discussing guys making millions playing a game. I’m not attacking you personally by pointing out that if you don’t send young players you have to send more draft assets. It just is what it is.

Ugh, man. Spare me this “be calm” silliness. I’m approaching retirement age and the only things I’m getting better at are staying calm and taking naps. Your issue is your willingness to go beyond what was actually stated. I thought it was a personal attack? Saying it’s just a game? Please stop with that. Even someone as old as me knows what gaslighting looks like.