Following 2016 potential draftees

[Thee Idiotic Minivan K]

Dejounte Murray is definitely the most Burks like player in this draft.

Definitely not as explosive as Burks, but seems to have a better feel for making plays for others.

Didn't Murray have a really good last game against the Utes or was that someone else on wash.

I'm not in on Sabonis at 12. At all.
I'd rather have Purtle. And I don't want him either.
Is it okay to want more?

I agree with the Sabonis thing here. Think people are over hyping him because he had the game of his life vs Utah in the ncaa's

Got news.
Hayward is okay.
Favors is okay.
That's it.

17 and 20 point scorers that play great defense. Ok

Why?

Hayward shoots average.
Handles average.
Rebounds average.
Paid max.

I love Hayward, I do, but trying to understand the sacred cow thing.

Hayward was defended like a star He was doubled and trapped like crazy with the strategy of getting the ball out of his hands and let someone else beat us. He was also better in the clutch then most realize.

Less than 35% from 3.
Less than 43.3% overall.

What is elite that suggests MAX money?

Again. See my post above.

I usually have defended u in regards to your objectivity regarding players from Kentucky, but your Murray love way past over the deep end. If anything the C's need to give up #3 and other assets just so Utah doesn't hang up laughing. I still feel like Hayward is still improving, and see perennial allstar in his future, like when the rest of the talent catches up to him. Namely Hood Lyles Exum Gobert and Burks and upgrading the other role players on the team. Put him on a contender last year and he's an allstar having more room to shoot and drive getting to the ft line, which he does at a nice rate already.

Again this team is rebuilding and all the focus of the defense is on Hayward. He is guarded like a superstar. Will he ever be a superstar? Most likely not but as good as most others.

 

[stitches]

Got news.
Hayward is okay.
Favors is okay.
That's it.

I posted this in another thread, but here it is again:

starting lineup with Neto: +7.2 net rating
starting lineup with Mack: +10.2 net rating
Burks+starting lineup(triple wing): +11.3 net rating.
Lyles instead of Gobert + starting lineup(Neto lineup): +11.4 net rating.
Lyles instead of Favors + starting lineup(Neto lineup): +9.0 net rating
Lyles instead of Favors + starting lineup(Mack lineup): +19.9 net rating
Exum + starting lineup last year(with Exum and Hood being rookies): +10.8 net rating

There is something brewing with this team. We are competitive when our main guys are on the floor. Actually, scratch that - we are killing it when our main guys are on the floor, virtually every lineup with our top 7 players has a rating similar to that of the Warriors/Spurs as a team. I can't get the desire by Jazz fans to trade away our best players right when they are starting to click and build something good. We don't need big changes if we keep that type of success of our main units - we need health and we need to strengthen the bench.

 

[stitches]

Why?

Hayward shoots average.
Handles average.
Rebounds average.
Paid max.

I love Hayward, I do, but trying to understand the sacred cow thing.

Less than 35% from 3.
Less than 43.3% overall.

What is elite that suggests MAX money?

In a league where the salaries are capped between 25% and 35%, most contenders have 2-3 max salary guys. The question is not whether or not Hayward is a no. 1 option. The question is whether or not you can get anyone better for the same money? If the answer is no - you give him the money and you keep him. I agree that he's not a traditional first option, but he's improved tremendously as a focal point of our offense in the last couple of years. People look at his 44/35 and think nothing special, but forget to see that he's a top 10 player in the league at drawing fouls. His efficiency is well above average(57% TS% last year and 56% TS% this year) for the league and that's with him shouldering the offensive load with an extremely young team and while being asked to prop up some horrendous back up units. If you adjust his counting stats per 100 possessions(because of our extremely slow pace), there aren't many players in the league that give you what he does.

Hell.. let me check... pts/rbs/ast per 100

Here it goes: list of players with higher pts, ast and rbs / 100


Somewhere between 25 and 30 teams in the league would love to have Hayward as a second or third option and would give him the max for it.

 

[stitches]

That would be a mistake.

I wouldn't trade Hood for Murray straight up.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Are the trade-Hayward ppl really ****ing coming out again? Same posters who whined when we maxed him.

And now there's ppl wanting to trade Hood and a 12th for Jamal Murray. Jesus ****ing christ.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Hey guys we have what Rick Carlisle referred to as the best young wing tandem in the NBA-- coachable players with diverse offensive repertoires who play well off of each other.




WHY DONT WE TRADE BOTH OF THEM!!!!

 

[Deleted member 848]

I still don't think Hayward's worth a max contract.

Ya this is a completely **** take

 

[Deleted member 848]

Less than 35% from 3.
Less than 43.3% overall.

What is elite that suggests MAX money?

Name one player in the NBA who has played with worse point guards in the last 5 years than Gordon Hayward.

 

[Deleted member 848]

The fact that Favors averages 16PPG on the percentages that he does, with the point guards that we've had, is nothing short of miraculous.

 

[RandyForRubio]

A total game changer.
It.
Scorer.
Leader.

Klay Thompson.

He's got it.

Klay Thompson plays defense. Murray is not capable of that.

 

[RandyForRubio]

In regards to Hayward and Favors, I think people miss the defensive equation. They're both really good defenders, and that matters. It's why Kevin Love ain't ****. If you can get guys that are good on both ends of the court, you keep them. Getting players who can only play one side? Unless they're incredibly elite, it doesn't do you much. You won't ever be a contender with a guy like Murray as your leading player, unless of course you have LeBron. Look at Irving (all offense, no defense). Look at Love. Those guys didn't do **** before a top 5 of all time player came to them. The chances of that happening here are pretty slim.

Tldr; most of the really good players on winning teams are two way players.

 

[Thee Idiotic Minivan K]

Last time I checked Hayward averaged 19.7 ppg this past season with 5 rebound and 4 assist per game. There are playoff teams who had their leading scorers average less points at a less efficient clip. There is nothing about Hayward scoring ability that is holding us back. It's the rest of the roster (namely the young parts like PG and only having 1 other playoff rotation worthy healthy wing) on the team.

That would be a mistake.

I still have a lot of faith in the core of this team and how it has been built. with an emphasis on 2-way players and length. Even though Hood isn't known as a defender, he does have great size for a 2 guard. I think trading him for a small SG (who at best will be an average defender) would be a mistake.

Cy is killing it lately. Couldn't have said it better.

In regards to Hayward and Favors, I think people miss the defensive equation. They're both really good defenders, and that matters. It's why Kevin Love ain't ****. If you can get guys that are good on both ends of the court, you keep them. Getting players who can only play one side? Unless they're incredibly elite, it doesn't do you much. You won't ever be a contender with a guy like Murray as your leading player, unless of course you have LeBron. Look at Irving (all offense, no defense). Look at Love. Those guys didn't do **** before a top 5 of all time player came to them. The chances of that happening here are pretty slim.

Tldr; most of the really good players on winning teams are two way players.

This is what held back the DWill, Boozer era Jazz, all offense no defense to speak of. There was zero rim protection, and Brewer, the he bestowing defender had major flaws on defense while AK was disillusioned about losing oppertunities on offense and became lazy on defense, then would cry like a baby. The more two way players u can accumulate the better.

 

[RandyForRubio]

We still need to fix our offense though. I think that largely depends on Exum being as good as we think he can be, and Snyder actually trying to run an offense worth a damn.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Good morning, losers!

 

[Dr. Jones]

[MENTION=1066]Thee jazz fan[/MENTION]

If you concede my past objectivity toward UK players (which is 100% true), then why is it unthinkable that I truly believe Murray is going to be a total stud?

How is it suddenly less than objective when I promote one guy?

 

[spycam1]

Klay Thompson plays defense. Murray is not capable of that.

To be fair, people didn't project Thompson as a good defender either.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

 

[spycam1]

I really like the Hood/Hayward combo, but I also think Jamal has a very bright future in this league. Whether or not I'd trade Hayward for him would depend on whether I think Hayward will stay here. Hopefully DL has a good idea of what that answer is, cause I honestly could see it going either way.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

 

[spycam1]

[MENTION=1066]Thee jazz fan[/MENTION]

If you concede my past objectivity toward UK players (which is 100% true), then why is it unthinkable that I truly believe Murray is going to be a total stud?

How is it suddenly less than objective when I promote one guy?

Would you trade Exum for Jamal and try to turn him into a fully fledged PG? I'm curious cause I know you're also high on Exum (or at least you have been in the past).

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

 

[Coach Ellis]

I'm fine with Murray, but I'd rather not pay the exorbitant price that it undoubtedly would cost to get him.

I still like Gobert, Favors, Hayward, Hood, Lyles and Exum more than any obtainable player in this draft AND I'd rather keep all of those guys and see how they play together (if they can stay healthy) instead of hitting the reset button again.

I also think that it's a pretty damn solid draft once you get past the top 7/8 picks. The Jazz can scout their asses off, sit tight and still get a really good player at #12. I think that they can find a starting caliber player there. And I think that there's going to be solid players that fall into the mid-to-late 20's range (like Gobert and Hood) that they can aggressively target for a trade up with their multiple assets. Grab two swing for the fences guys in the draft and stash them in the D-league for a year, then use any remaining picks on draft and stash Euro players, then add two solid free agents to replace Booker and Burke. With internal growth and good health, this team is a solid middle of the pack playoff team.

 

[Deleted member 848]

I'm fine with Murray, but I'd rather not pay the exorbitant price that it undoubtedly would cost to get him.

I still like Gobert, Favors, Hayward, Hood, Lyles and Exum more than any obtainable player in this draft AND I'd rather keep all of those guys and see how they play together (if they can stay healthy) instead of hitting the reset button again.

I also think that it's a pretty damn solid draft once you get past the top 7/8 picks. The Jazz can scout their asses off, sit tight and still get a really good player at #12. I think that they can find a starting caliber player there. And I think that there's going to be solid players that fall into the mid-to-late 20's range (like Gobert and Hood) that they can aggressively target for a trade up with their multiple assets. Grab two swing for the fences guys in the draft and stash them in the D-league for a year, then use any remaining picks on draft and stash Euro players, then add two solid free agents to replace Booker and Burke. With internal growth and good health, this team is a solid middle of the pack playoff team.