What's new
By:

Utah's long journey to relevance

JimLes said:
You can tell these people because they're constantly posting in threads like this one, but when they show up in a game thread once in a while, the post starts with "Didn't catch the game tonight, but..."

Hence people who want to trade players still on a rookie contract because apparently, if a player isn't a franchise cornerstone by the age of 24, you should trade him for picks. People who clamor for more draft picks because the draft 2 years from now is always full of players better than the ones we drafted this year. Naturally, 2 years from now, the sequence will repeat. People who talk about how we're never going to win a championship with a certain player, as if we're on the cusp of winning one. We have yet to make the playoffs, but people are talking about what needs to be done to win a freaking championship.

It's all a video game to them. Just enjoy the present, enjoy the team we have, hope they do well. Hayward's only a year older than the Claw, 2 years younger than Curry, and the same freaking age as John Stockton when he was finally given the starting position. And people are talking about how this is as good as it gets and we need to trade him.
Click to expand...

I don't think this comment is getting enough attention. Spot on.
 
ONE LOVE said:
But can any of these guy be our #1 go-to player in the future? Don't think we can say that with even an 80% certainty....


I'd much rather us get a solid 2017 pick which I'd heard is a loaded year talent wise.
Click to expand...

Rip Hamilton running those screens were the Pistons championship teams #1 go-to option right?? Jamal Murray can do that, and thats playing off the ball, he's better with the ball in his hands..

Dragan Bender has a ton of talent and he projects to be a player like Pau, so I wouldn't rule out him being a top option. He's crafty and very coordinated, and legitimately 7'1".

Skal has a wicked repotiore of near 'go-to' level moves, just needs to keep adding strength and polish to his game, and he'd be a great top option, you can't put him on the FT line.

Jaylen Brown with an NBA range J is a scary thought, he'd be great value and could put up an easy 15ppg with that adjustment. I wouldn't rule it out either.
 
PG_AB said:
Salary cap ramifications are very real, it's prudent to deal with some issues ahead of time, this might be one of them - we're talkng about the difference between a high-end rookie contract and a near 30million dollar per year contract.. It presents flexibility issues. It was first brought up in this thread in the article, not by me.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I'm talking about. You're suggesting taking real actions to deal with hypothetical situations. All the while conflating the possible with the likely. You say yourself "it presents flexibility issues." Present, not conditional tense. Not this might happen, not this has some likelihood of happening, but this is sure to happen. Done deal. Except that, as Gameface pointed out in his original, succinct assessment, it's all speculation, and it's based on massive assumptions.

You talk about the cap flexibility, and I ask you how likely is that to become an issue that prevents us from contending? How likely is it that all of our young players pan out and turn into above average players in the league, necessitating a large contract offer to all of them, where it will then become impossible to sign one because of Gordon's contract? How likely is it that a major star and a first option would want to come here as a free agent and that Gordon's contract would prevent us offering the max?

How likely is anyone from any upcoming draft to turn into a player capable of putting up Gordon's numbers? How likely is anyone NOT drafted first to do it? And if they are, don't we already have Gordon? Shouldn't we only trade him if absolutely certain we are getting a significant improvement on him? Not on some crapshoot chance?

It's like when half this board was clamoring for Millsap to be let go because Kanter might develop into a 20-10 player? Except that Millsap was already a border line All-Star and close to those numbers and played defense and had a good attitude AND he was already playing for us. It's like that bit on Family Guy..."A boat's a boat, but a mystery box could be anything....even a boat"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKZJdaiJF84&feature=youtu.be&t=23

That's how many of you sound like to me. Hayward is a borderline All-Star shooting guard, but a high draft pick could be anything...even an All-Star shooting guard.
 
MDAV28 said:
I don't think this comment is getting enough attention. Spot on.
Click to expand...

The one part thats not right is about the draft in 2 years, it's not chasing of the wind typa deal. the FO has made moves to acquire picks in those drafts too, that's not a coincidence (IMO).

That class has the most epic crop of PG's you've ever seen, guaranteed, PG's that compare to Jason Kidd, John Wall, Jay Williams and Steve Francis, to name a few. Here's the one they compare to J. Kidd - Single game highlights 32 Points - 16 Rebounds - 15 Assists - 3 Steals - 3 Blocks

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJvftpbCqs4
 
Red Jazz Fan said:
Make a deal before he can walk or Jazz are left with zip, zilch, nada.
Click to expand...

We care about being left with nothing?

2488.png
 
JimLes said:
This is exactly what I'm talking about. You're suggesting taking real actions to deal with hypothetical situations. All the while conflating the possible with the likely. You say yourself "it presents flexibility issues." Present, not conditional tense. Not this might happen, not this has some likelihood of happening, but this is sure to happen. Done deal. Except that, as Gameface pointed out in his original, succinct assessment, it's all speculation, and it's based on massive assumptions.

You talk about the cap flexibility, and I ask you how likely is that to become an issue that prevents us from contending? How likely is it that all of our young players pan out and turn into above average players in the league, necessitating a large contract offer to all of them, where it will then become impossible to sign one because of Gordon's contract? How likely is it that a major star and a first option would want to come here as a free agent and that Gordon's contract would prevent us offering the max?

How likely is anyone from any upcoming draft to turn into a player capable of putting up Gordon's numbers? How likely is anyone NOT drafted first to do it? And if they are, don't we already have Gordon? Shouldn't we only trade him if absolutely certain we are getting a significant improvement on him? Not on some crapshoot chance?

It's like when half this board was clamoring for Millsap to be let go because Kanter might develop into a 20-10 player? Except that Millsap was already a border line All-Star and close to those numbers and played defense and had a good attitude AND he was already playing for us. It's like that bit on Family Guy..."A boat's a boat, but a mystery box could be anything....even a boat"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKZJdaiJF84&feature=youtu.be&t=23

That's how many of you sound like to me. Hayward is a borderline All-Star shooting guard, but a high draft pick could be anything...even an All-Star shooting guard.
Click to expand...


Do you think the Jazz have enough $$ to pay all the core players plus all these draft picks these next few years though?? Somethings gotta give, what If they draft a player this year that's gotta be kept, and 2 next year with those 1st round picks?

It'd be a shame to see the Jazz overpay Hayward (1/3 of the cap) then have their other talent poached because of it.

Id also argue trading Kanter for Tibor 'I cant feel my Pleiss' signals this process has already begun..
 
PG_AB said:
That class has the most epic crop of PG's you've ever seen, guaranteed,
Click to expand...

Dante Exum will be 21 when the next season starts. He played one NBA season in which he didn't get serious burn until late January, and his dumb father and equally dumb agent made him pass up a whole year of basketball before that. He suffered a bad injury, but it's the same injury several other players suffered early on in their careers and recovered enough to be stars. Can we just have a little bit of patience? Just a little bit? Before we assume, like some posters on the first page of this thread, that the current rebuild is already a failure, that Dante won't amount to anything because he got hurt and is raw and that we need to already draft the next point guard of the future?
 
JimLes said:
This is exactly what I'm talking about. You're suggesting taking real actions to deal with hypothetical situations. All the while conflating the possible with the likely. You say yourself "it presents flexibility issues." Present, not conditional tense. Not this might happen, not this has some likelihood of happening, but this is sure to happen. Done deal. Except that, as Gameface pointed out in his original, succinct assessment, it's all speculation, and it's based on massive assumptions.

You talk about the cap flexibility, and I ask you how likely is that to become an issue that prevents us from contending? How likely is it that all of our young players pan out and turn into above average players in the league, necessitating a large contract offer to all of them, where it will then become impossible to sign one because of Gordon's contract? How likely is it that a major star and a first option would want to come here as a free agent and that Gordon's contract would prevent us offering the max?

How likely is anyone from any upcoming draft to turn into a player capable of putting up Gordon's numbers? How likely is anyone NOT drafted first to do it? And if they are, don't we already have Gordon? Shouldn't we only trade him if absolutely certain we are getting a significant improvement on him? Not on some crapshoot chance?

It's like when half this board was clamoring for Millsap to be let go because Kanter might develop into a 20-10 player? Except that Millsap was already a border line All-Star and close to those numbers and played defense and had a good attitude AND he was already playing for us. It's like that bit on Family Guy..."A boat's a boat, but a mystery box could be anything....even a boat"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKZJdaiJF84&feature=youtu.be&t=23

That's how many of you sound like to me. Hayward is a borderline All-Star shooting guard, but a high draft pick could be anything...even an All-Star shooting guard.
Click to expand...


I watch the games and I do agree with the sentiment... I don't want an eternal rebuild.

I have no problem with Gordon the player. He's really good and I think he helps us win games. I'd take him over several guys considered to be "superstars" but I have issue with management not trying for the NOW to help us who are watching the games to enhance our enjoyment (sounds like a viagra commercial) by surrounding Gordon and these young guys with some already somewhat developed players.

If we are all about internal development then I'm not sure our progress will be fast enough to make retaining Hayward possible. The timing of his deal combined with the salary cap and the teams that will have money make him a Mega Max player and he can pick to go home, to go to his old coach, or to another contender.

We don't have to sell out to win now, but lets prioritize adding talent that can contribute now over developing third stringers (Neto, Pleiss, Johnson).
 
JimLes said:
Dante Exum will be 21 when the next season starts. He played one NBA season in which he didn't get serious burn until late January, and his dumb father and equally dumb agent made him pass up a whole year of basketball before that. He suffered a bad injury, but it's the same injury several other players suffered early on in their careers and recovered enough to be stars. Can we just have a little bit of patience? Just a little bit? Before we assume, like some posters on the first page of this thread, that the current rebuild is already a failure, that Dante won't amount to anything because he got hurt and is raw and that we need to already draft the next point guard of the future?
Click to expand...

Oh I'm very high on Exum, I actually disagree with what some of Lowe says in the article 'nobody knows what he's gonna do, and whoever does is lying' - I think I have a pretty good idea.

I was just citing the PG's in that draft to show that the hype is real in 2017, the Jazz already have 5 or 6 picks in that draft...... . there will be franchise players, a handful of them, maybe more. I'm not saying they have to go chasing rainbows. The Jazz have Rudy, which is a find of great magnitude, now it's time to surround him with as much firepower as possible. There's many ways they can go about doing that - the safest ways aren't always necessarily the best..
 
PG_AB said:
Do you think the Jazz have enough $$ to pay all the core players plus all these draft picks these next few years though?? Somethings gotta give, what If they draft a player this year that's gotta be kept, and 2 next year with those 1st round picks?
Click to expand...

Yes, I think the Jazz can pay everyone.

Here's what the numbers look like: https://hoopshype.com/salaries/utah_jazz/

Let's assume all team options are picked up by the Jazz, even if that's a stretch because someone like Lyles could easily not pan out and be playing in Italy somewhere by 2018. Most of our "core" is either on guaranteed contracts until 2018 or have team options. Rudy and Gordon are the ones who will have to get paid that summer. Both handsomely, quite likely. The league is predicting a 100-105 million cap by that year. Suppose we have to give both Gordon and Rudy in the range of 25 million a year. That's 50. Favors, Burks, Exum, Lyles, Hood will get around 32 million that year. That's 82 million altogether. That's 4/5 of the cap and it may seem like a lot, but it's also 7 players. The Warriors' top 7 paid players make up 82% of their total salaries right now. Same goes for OKC. I could go through the rest of the league, but I feel like it'd be similar. Lottery picks get about 3-4 million a year on the rookie scale, so you could easily have a couple of good draft picks by 2018 who are costing you less than 10 million.

Now, sure you'll say, what about after 2018? What about when the 5 who aren't Rudy and Gordon come to the end of their contracts? Again, the likelihood of all of them developing into above average players is smaller than you make it out to be. And even if they do, teams don't usually have 7-8 quality starters on their team. You just can't keep that, even if you have the money. If all of those players developed, we'd have no game time for them, never mind the money. You don't have to worry about that possibility. There are build in mechanisms in the game itself to make sure you don't have to worry about those things.

It's like people who still give OKC crap for the Harden trade. Well deserved, if the issue is what they got for him and what players they have today as a result of it. But when people suggest they should've kept Harden, it's just ignorant. You can't have 3 ball-dominant players all scoring 25+ a night on the same team. You just can't. We don't have to worry about that. If Hood turned into the next Klay Thompson and Burks turned into the next Dwyane Wade, money would not be the reason we couldn't keep them AND Rudy and Gordon. It'd be the lack of possessions in a single basketball game.
 
JimLes said:
Yes, I think the Jazz can pay everyone.

Here's what the numbers look like: https://hoopshype.com/salaries/utah_jazz/

Let's assume all team options are picked up by the Jazz, even if that's a stretch because someone like Lyles could easily not pan out and be playing in Italy somewhere by 2018. Most of our "core" is either on guaranteed contracts until 2018 or have team options. Rudy and Gordon are the ones who will have to get paid that summer. Both handsomely, quite likely. The league is predicting a 100-105 million cap by that year. Suppose we have to give both Gordon and Rudy in the range of 25 million a year. That's 50. Favors, Burks, Exum, Lyles, Hood will get around 32 million that year. That's 82 million altogether. That's 4/5 of the cap and it may seem like a lot, but it's also 7 players. The Warriors' top 7 paid players make up 82% of their total salaries right now. Same goes for OKC. I could go through the rest of the league, but I feel like it'd be similar. Lottery picks get about 3-4 million a year on the rookie scale, so you could easily have a couple of good draft picks by 2018 who are costing you less than 10 million.

Now, sure you'll say, what about after 2018? What about when the 5 who aren't Rudy and Gordon come to the end of their contracts? Again, the likelihood of all of them developing into above average players is smaller than you make it out to be. And even if they do, teams don't usually have 7-8 quality starters on their team. You just can't keep that, even if you have the money. If all of those players developed, we'd have no game time for them, never mind the money. You don't have to worry about that possibility. There are build in mechanisms in the game itself to make sure you don't have to worry about those things.

It's like people who still give OKC crap for the Harden trade. Well deserved, if the issue is what they got for him and what players they have today as a result of it. But when people suggest they should've kept Harden, it's just ignorant. You can't have 3 ball-dominant players all scoring 25+ a night on the same team. You just can't. We don't have to worry about that. If Hood turned into the next Klay Thompson and Burks turned into the next Dwyane Wade, money would not be the reason we couldn't keep them AND Rudy and Gordon. It'd be the lack of possessions in a single basketball game.
Click to expand...

It's not necessarily just the affordability for me... its the risk of loss after next season when Gordon can go to whatever team he wants. I'm not saying we have to trade him, but I hope management understands his priorities and has a good understanding of their chances to bring him back.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
It's not necessarily just the affordability for me... its the risk of loss after next season when Gordon can go to whatever team he wants. I'm not saying we have to trade him, but I hope management understands his priorities and has a good understanding of their chances to bring him back.
Click to expand...

Thats what I'm saying, trading him now for multiple first round picks that would last for 4-8 seasons might look like a steal if he ends up walking from wherever he goes for the next season and a half. It also clears room for them to sign another bigtime player to replace him, on a longterm deal that has a chance to be a good contract.
 
Gameface said:
I think there are a bunch of fans, many of them here, who want to watch rebuilds, speculate on recruits, dream up trades, etc., more than they want to watch their team play to win.
Click to expand...

The Jazz play in a league where conference finalists are determined by October, before a game is ever played. What you say is true, but that is an NBA problem, not a problem with the fans.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
DL doesn't have the stones to do it. He needs more time and data points.
Click to expand...

I think 6 seasons is enough, but I might be wrong, because I don't know all the steps that can't be skipped.

Also, this article had the smell of public relations to me. Lindsey has hinted that the Jazz might be nearing the time to take risks, then this article appears making several suggestions about trades and the future of players, and the Jazz main PR guy, David Locke, starts linking and tweeting the article almost instantly. Don't get me wrong, I see nothing wrong with leading the audience, it is a good move for anyone wanting to maintain fans or voters. And the Jazz have learned this the hard way after several PR blunders in recent years. To me this is a warning for anyone that is listening, changes are coming soon.

Go Jazz!
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
DL doesn't have the stones to do it. He needs more time and data points.
Click to expand...

He might be thinking he can still get a big haul for Hayward at next seasons trade deadline, for a team pushing to the playoffs.

I doubt he pulls the trigger on anything Hayward related that isn't a massive haul.



Trading Burks isn't a good outcome IMO. he's gonna cost less than 10% of the cap for a few seasons, that's great value. He's not going anywhere at this deadline in his current condition anyways.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top