Name a better wing rotation than Hayward Hood Burks

[fishonjazz]

Klay, Barnes, Iggy off the top of my head is better

I take Hayward over klay, hood over iggy, and burls and barnes is debatable.

Oh wait, ncoloradojazz? Lolololol.
Nevermind, carry on

 

[margodydek]

Redrafting the 2014 draft, does Hood slip past 3 or 4?

 

[seattlejazzfan]

I get that, but how are we to say Hood doesn't outplay that guy and get the starting job? How can I say that he wouldn't have improved just as much by playing 28 minutes a game? Most of a players improvement comes during practice and what not. Again, all I'm saying is that we don't know.

I don't disagree with your overall point that it's impossible to know. But will say that I'd rather Hood play 35 minutes the way he's currently playing at age 23 than than some 28-30 wing who isn't as good and doesn't have the upside taking a bulk of those minutes and Hood just getting 25-28 minutes.

 

[Deleted member 848]

And that's a fair, and logical argument. I'm not saying we did it wrong, just that there are other options, and I prefer adding talent when possible. I don't view Burks as a solid piece of our future, so if we could have signed somebody that could adequately replace him, and then trade Burks to improve another piece of our team, I would've been fine with that. I'm also ok with what we did. However, at some point we do need to upgrade our roster. That's all I'm saying.

I think we nailed what we did. Developed Hood & let him explode, still have Burks around and have incredible trade flexibility to target almost any roster-need while still keeping our core intact.

I'm really insure with Burks, and I also would rather have Batum or Bazemore (or someone) as our 3rd wing. i just don't think that Batum is willing to accept the role as 3rd wing, and Bazemore might command too many dollars for a 3rd wing.

Your Winslow proposition is an interesting one, but a risky one. It's hard to have wings out there who can't hit shots, particularly threes. Tony Green or PJ Tucker could provide similar production for less? Who knows.

 

[fishonjazz]

I get that, but how are we to say Hood doesn't outplay that guy and get the starting job? How can I say that he wouldn't have improved just as much by playing 28 minutes a game? Most of a players improvement comes during practice and what not. Again, all I'm saying is that we don't know.

You are right we don't know that stuff.

But there is something we do know. Hood, hayward, and Burks might be the best wing tandem in the world. We don't have to speculate or wonder. It's happening. So the jazz did the right thing by not getting a big name free agent wing last year. Which is what this argument (cake baking vs not last summer) is about

 

[fishonjazz]

Wade, Deng, Justice

Lolz

 

[Coach Ellis]

A.) Hood has progressed much faster than I expected him to. He's looking like a major steal and a core player now.

B.) I had no problem chasing a wing (for the right price) in free agency because I like Burks better off the bench and I didn't think Hood would be ready to start any way near as well as he has. Thankfully, the prices were too much and not worth the investment.

C.) Jazz realistically could have either extended Carroll on the cheap back in 2013 OR drafted Antetokounmpo instead of Burke OR signed Bazemore for cheap in 2014 OR signed Casspi for cheap this year even after they had drafted Hood. That's 4 scenarios that would have been an upgrade to Jingles/CJ/Millsap that the Jazz realistically could have done to add to Hayward/Burks. Key would have still been drafting Hood in 2014 though, and it's anyone's guess as to if they'd have still done that with good depth at the position.

D.) With Hood's development, I'd still try hard to get a meeting with Durant. KD is one of the few guys that would be an upgrade to Hood in the starting lineup. Other than that, Id say that you look to upgrade CJ as the 5th wing and hope the guy you get can push Jingles down to #5.

 

[RandyForRubio]

That's all fair.
Jazz did the right thing last summer. It's all working out right before our eyes.
I think we all agree on that. (Which is what dala and I have been trying to say)

Considering we don't know what the outcome would have been if we had done otherwise, we can't really say for sure we did the right thing. I'd still like to see a larger sample size.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Wes Matthews originally signed for 4/57. I think he's a better fit on this team than Burks. Would I like paying him that much? Not really. But there's one example.

Yeah, that number was a clear downgrade only because DAJ was expected to show up. No way could the Jazz have had him for that number.

 

[fishonjazz]

Wes Matthews originally signed for 4/57. I think he's a better fit on this team than Burks. Would I like paying him that much? Not really. But there's one example.

Do I have to post the numbers again?
Burks is shooting better from everywhere, rebounding better, assisting better, scoring better, getting to the line better, is younger, is cheaper.

But defense and fit > than everything.
And we don't know for sure he works even be a better fit, would be happy playing cj/ingles minutes or if he is past his prime

 

[RandyForRubio]

You are right we don't know that stuff.

But there is something we do know. Hood, hayward, and Burks might be the best wing tandem in the world. We don't have to speculate or wonder. It's happening. So the jazz did the right thing by not getting a big name free agent wing last year. Which is what this argument (cake baking vs not last summer) is about

Too small of a sample size with Hood to say that for sure, and Burks is average, IMO.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Too small of a sample size with Hood to say that for sure, and Burks is average, IMO.

what's a small sample size? the advanced stats aren't.


His scoring and stats coming out of P&Rs (for one) stretch back to last season, when he started coming onto the scene.


Trust me, the likes of Carlisle aren't gonna come out here and call the two the best young wing tandem in the league for some flash-in-the-pan player. Unless you know something Rick Carlisle doesn't.

 

[RandyForRubio]

Do I have to post the numbers again?
Burks is shooting better from everywhere, rebounding better, assisting better, scoring better, getting to the line better, is younger, is cheaper.

But defense and fit > than everything.
And we don't know for sure he works even be a better fit, would be happy playing cj/ingles minutes or if he is past his prime

Are you dense?

But naw, let's take this one year of Matthews and give it more weight than his past. Let's ignore that Burks is a low IQ player who sucks at defense. Let's ignore that we could use some perimeter defense and 3-pt shooting. Anyways, you're missing the point (again). Matthews is close enough to Burks, that it's ok, IMO. Then we trade Burks and hopefully upgrade another position, leading to an overall team upgrade. Do you get that, or not?

 

[fishonjazz]

Considering we don't know what the outcome would have been if we had done otherwise, we can't really say for sure we did the right thing. I'd still like to see a larger sample size.

I can say that the goal should be to have the best guys at a position in the league. We have the best wings in the league. I think we accomplished the goal.
Im confident we did the right thing.

(And I was confident not adding a wing was the right thing to do last summer to fwiw. No hindsight then)

 

[RandyForRubio]

what's a small sample size? the advanced stats aren't.


His scoring and stats coming out of P&Rs (for one) stretch back to last season, when he started coming onto the scene.


Trust me, the likes of Carlisle aren't gonna come out here and call the two the best young wing tandem in the league for some flash-in-the-pan player. Unless you know something Rick Carlisle doesn't.

I like Hood. I think he's a good starter right now. I'd like to see him do it for longer, that's all. Carlisle is a great coach, and I respect his opinion a lot, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with everything he's said.

Right now Hood has played well for as long as he's played bad. So which is the real Hood? Somewhere in the middle? The good? The bad? I'm an optimistic fan, so of course I'm going to think and hope it's the good, but I can't know for sure. That's what I mean when I say he has a small sample size.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Are you dense?

But naw, let's take this one year of Matthews and give it more weight than his past. Let's ignore that Burks is a low IQ player who sucks at defense. Let's ignore that we could use some perimeter defense and 3-pt shooting. Anyways, you're missing the point (again). Matthews is close enough to Burks, that it's ok, IMO. Then we trade Burks and hopefully upgrade another position, leading to an overall team upgrade. Do you get that, or not?

Wait so we need perimeter D more than we need scoring and versatile offense?

News to me.

 

[fishonjazz]

Are you dense?

But naw, let's take this one year of Matthews and give it more weight than his past. Let's ignore that Burks is a low IQ player who sucks at defense. Let's ignore that we could use some perimeter defense and 3-pt shooting. Anyways, you're missing the point (again). Matthews is close enough to Burks, that it's ok, IMO. Then we trade Burks and hopefully upgrade another position, leading to an overall team upgrade. Do you get that, or not?

Give me some examples of teams that add expensive free agent talent to a position of strength. Do you not get that?

Seriously, give me some examples of teams doing what you are proposing. Even if they simply traded one of their players at that position the very next year like you suggest the jazz would do.

You probably can't. Maybe you are living in fantasy land.
Or you are just dense.

 

[RandyForRubio]

Honestly Fish, any wing rotation that contains LeBron, Durant, or Leonard is better than what we have.

 

[RandyForRubio]

Wait so we need perimeter D more than we need scoring and versatile offense?

News to me.

Burks gives us one of those, while being a major weakness at the other.

Matthews would be better overall.

Just my opinion. You can never have too much defense, especially if it improves your shooting.

 

[Deleted member 848]

I like Hood. I think he's a good starter right now. I'd like to see him do it for longer, that's all. Carlisle is a great coach, and I respect his opinion a lot, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with everything he's said.

Right now Hood has played well for as long as he's played bad. So which is the real Hood? Somewhere in the middle? The good? The bad? I'm an optimistic fan, so of course I'm going to think and hope it's the good, but I can't know for sure. That's what I mean when I say he has a small sample size.

No one is saying that he's a 29 ppg player. Obviously he has ebbed and flowed, but there have 100% been constants, which certainly can't be cast away due to "small sample size":


- he is absolute mayhem in the P&R
- he is a great passer for player of his size and position
- his midrange game is superb
- he has good mechanics and fundamentals across every realm of offense, as well as a good IQ with decision-making
- his defense is sound


These are all things that haven't changed at any point in the season. That's why Carlisle is high on him. That's why Zach Lowe is high on him. That's why every intelligent mind in basketball is high on him. He passes every visual test, and the advanced stats are right there with him.