OFFICIAL Around The NBA Thread- December 2020

Yeah Trent is a must keeper, if he becomes too expensive, it is actually a good sign because that means he improved more so we can move on from CJ and Trent can become a starter

 

Trent turned down 53 over 4 years... so 13M a season. Kuzma signed a three year version of the same deal. Trent is betting on himself and we'll see if it pays off.

 

I'll take door number 3... you put his ass on the trading block and get what you get. It's not an either pay or let them walk situation... ever. You offer them the extension that makes sense for your team and if they don't take it you trade them, unless they're restricted.

 

Trent betting on himself because he knows 3 and D guys are always in high demand.
Kuzma took the money because he's overrated as hell, and if he went out and threw up 12 and 5 with crap shooting and ugly and negative advanced numbers again, he knows he's not seeing that much. LA shine would fade.

 

Problem for next yr is its gonna be a bit like 2016 with a quite a bit of FA money available and a lot of the really good players that were going to be FA's now off the mkt, so guys like Trent if they have a good/solid yr could get very over paid. Good for decent FA's and not good for teams who need to retain their FA's

 

You need all the talent you can accumulate though. You gain Trent but lose cj it’s back to square one again because now you need a side kick for Dame

 

if you look at Kuzma's numbers, his PER, TS%, winshare/48, BPM, and VORP have all fallen each year in his three years in the league. That's not the trend you want to see for a 24 year old player

 

Gobert as the star of your team isn't a playoff team, nor does his presence catapult you to the conference finals.

I'm not saying he's not good, he is - so is CJ.

 

I agree with your point that Gobert may be overpaid and prevent the Jazz from building a contender.

But market size or owner worth doesn't matter much, basically all but a couple NBA teams won't repeatedly go deep into the luxury tax. If Gobert is overpaid in Utah its the same drag on the teams chance to win as in Miami, Houston, New York, or Chicago, etc.

The Blazers committed $80 million per season to Dame and CJ.

 

The Pistons did that with Drummond and got a second round pick.

You never 100% make or don't make a trade, it depends what the team will get in return. Even without an extension on an expiring deal a player such as Nurk has value. There is no guarantee a team will trade more compensation back to the Blazeres than 1 year plus bird rights of a player is worth. You factor in the value of players bird rights in your valuation, maybe its only a little bit above zero or maybe its worth much more.

This idea that we trade players on one year deals 100% of the time regardless of the return is stupid.

 

Yes with all the stars resigning we might see some really bad contracts. DJJ and Trent could be gone, or I say possibly should be gone.

Although maybe the team can ultimately work out a deal that both sides are happy with.

I guess some posters think we should trade them now so we don't have any chance of losing them for nothing.

 

The Gobert contract is fine IMO. His on/off numbers have always been spectacular and he's probably the best roll big in the league.

 

Gobert is the star of the Jazz and they are a playoff team.

 

Donovan Mitchell on Line 1.........

 

You're crazy. Gobert is way more impactful than CJ by almost every metric. Sure he may not carry you to the playoffs, but he definitely contributes more to winning. The comparison is completely unfair to Gobert.

 

The second half of our commitment to our back court (CJ's contract) was a bigger mistake than the Jazz just made with Gobert. The reason why I say that is not to say that Gobert's skill set is more valuable than CJ's because getting buckets is, will and always has been the greatest need a team can have, so CJ's ability to do that in such a variety of ways is just as valuable to a team as Gobert's inside specialization. The good thing for the Jazz is that Gobert and Mitchell are the opposite of redundant.

The bad thing for both Utah and us is that you can't pay Gobert 20 million more than Jarrett Allen is worth for doing the same thing he does but doing it only 20% better. The valuation doesn't match up and the same thing could be said about CJ and a guy like LouWill or formerly Jamal Crawford. The fact is both guys do specialized things at an elite level that others can do at just one tier below them for 50% the cost.

You're right, I was wrong about market size but I'm not wrong about an owner's financial situation. Jody can afford to make these mistakes a lot more than Ryan Smith because Jody Allen can afford to make any financial mistake exponentially more times than a person like Smith. A person like Allen who is worth around 20 billion has far more than 20 times the opportunities to use those assets than someone like Smith does with around 1 billion... so that does make the mistake worse as an individual but you're right it's just as big of a mistake for that Blazers as it is for the Jazz as insulated entities when looking at it from a purely financial perspective and forgetting about competitive shit.

 

If I had to start a team and had to choose between Mitchell or Gobert... it would be a tough decision which means that Gobert is not the clear "star of the Jazz" he's a co-lead for sure... he's in no way carrying that team or even a majority of the weight for that team.

Edit: I'd add to that, that you can do what we have done and Utah has done and invest 50% or more of your salary cap into two players but they just have to be way better players. It's working out pretty well for the Lakers but Dame is the only player of the four that Utah and us have that is in the same stratosphere as LeBron and AD and still Dame isn't as good as those two.

 

If Klutch thinks they can get Nurk more than he's worth... we might be OK making that gamble if we aren't overpaying CJ at that point but if we still have CJ and are committed to keeping him... and Nurk turns down the best we can afford to pay him, then we put Nurk on the block and take any offer that makes sense. A second round pick obviously doesn't equal the value Nurk would bring that final season but I think there's a good chance we could get value that between next season and going forward would make sense.

 

This is an absolutely stupid take. I can't believe I just read this.