What's new
By:

Following 2016 potential draftees

That 5 sititches mentions would get abused, absolutely abused on the glass... Exum hasn't proven he can shoot it yet either... Lyles at the 5 is a joke right? He would get manhandled.. A better 5 would be this
Exum
Hood
Hayward
Lyles
Favor

But then you are sitting Gobert who most here think is DPOY for somne reason.lol... Burke is a good 6th man. Come get you points off the bench like the Microwave did for the Pistons
 
ncoloradojazz said:
That 5 sititches mentions would get abused, absolutely abused on the glass... Exum hasn't proven he can shoot it yet either... Lyles at the 5 is a joke right? He would get manhandled.. A better 5 would be this
Exum
Hood
Hayward
Lyles
Favor

But then you are sitting Gobert who most here think is DPOY for somne reason.lol... Burke is a good 6th man. Come get you points off the bench like the Microwave did for the Pistons
Click to expand...

I'm not saying start them or even play them a lot... I'm saying use it opportunistically against certain small lineups.
 
#bern said:
Oh I'm not saying he doesn't help. He's fine off the bench, I just don't like the fit. He's arguably our best bench player.
Click to expand...

Oh I know, it's just that ever since that stat started floating around that didn't show a uptick in production with Alec's presence showed up, I feel like ppl have taken it too far.

14/4/3 with accurate three point shooting & slashing doesn't grow on trees, especially at 8-9mill a year
 
King Cy said:
5 out is dumb, that isn't good for spacing and is terrible on the glass.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

True. You gotta only space out that 5 when u pull the 1/4 P&R. Opens that paint quite nicely.
 
fishonjazz said:
Of course you think cy has been killing dudes. He agrees with you after all.


I agree with this part of your post. That is part of the problem.

We have lots of good players and lots of depth. But we don't have any top level special elite players. Because we have good depth and lots of good players we could lose a good player and still have lots of depth and lots of good players

Some of us think that we should use one of our good assets to get a star player. What is the best and most common way to get a star player? In the draft.
Click to expand...

Your solution for me is the problem, because it's only a solution if u get incredibly lucky. And in the end for years and years u are recycling asset upon asset never building anything resembling a well oiled machine. If u could tell me for sure that sometime in the next few years we will luck into a star, great!! Sign me up for this plan. The problem is we are good enough to make the playoffs. If we trade Hayward for the third pick, we are good enough still to just make or miss the playoffs and hope that 0.7 chance of winning a top pick comes. Chances of that happening are extremely unlikely.

The way I see it is u do one of two things.

1. U start completely over. Not only do u trade Hayward for the 3rd pick but u trade Hood Gobert Burks and Favors for future assets and hope u find a stare over the next 6 or 7 years. My guess is that u are more likely not to find a star then the other way around. If that happens, then what, start the process all over again??

2. As a fan I want to be entertained. Over the last year of watching Jazz basketball my wife would probably think that I've had the least fun watching games as she watched me yell curse and complain about some turnover or bad pass or ill advised shots or what not, but what really sucked was going through the motions of a rebuild whee the goal wasn't to win games, but to develop young talent and watching games with nothing but apathy for what's going on in games and during the year as a whole. Why not be patient, and build team chemistry. Hell it took Stockton and Malone 15 or so years to get to the point to where they were good enough to make a finals.

This team is loaded with high upside talent up and down the lineup, and if we can largely keep this team together as time goes by I believe they can build a Spurs like execution and minimize mistakes. If u can build this kind of chemistry, you don't need to worry about Hayward leaving.
 
In an industry where patience isn't practiced, maybe just maybe we should try showing some. Hayward and Favors are damned good players. Hood isn't far behind. Gobert is becoming an elite defender if not already and Exum has the tools to be the best pg in the game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Minor prediction -- Jazz will offer 12 + OKC pick or Trey Burke to move up a few spots in the draft.

If Dunn and J.Murray are off the board when Sacto picks at 8, they may take the deal. Sacto targets Deytona Davis, Wade Baldwin or Dejounte Murray at 12.

Toronto might also bite at 9.

Deal with Sacto may get expanded to include Burks and Rudy Gay.
 
Thee jazz fan said:
In an industry where patience isn't practiced, maybe just maybe we should try showing some. Hayward and Favors are damned good players. Hood isn't far behind. Gobert is becoming an elite defender if not already and Exum has the tools to be the best pg in the game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with any of this. We have lots of good players. If we trade Hayward we will still have lots of good players except then we have lots of good players plus a very very high draft pick.
Then we can always try to replace Hayward with another good player in free agency.

The #3 pick + #12 pick + free agent (bazemore, batum, etc whatever) + burks hood exum lyles gobert favors all being healthier and more experienced would more than make up for Haywards production imo.
 
Catchall said:
I could picture the Jazz taking Jaylen Brown at 8 or 9 if they can move up. Maybe Skal.
Click to expand...

Under the deal you outlined I would take Skal.
Jaylen would be unnecessary with Burks, Hood, Hayward, and Gay.

Plus, our team is intact, a year older, and adds Gay... We can afford to swing for the fences and be patient (very) with Skal. Huge risk/reward.
 
Dr. Jones said:
Under the deal you outlined I would take Skal.
Jaylen would be unnecessary with Burks, Hood, Hayward, and Gay.

Plus, our team is intact, a year older, and adds Gay... We can afford to swing for the fences and be patient (very) with Skal. Huge risk/reward.
Click to expand...
To be honest, I'm fine with the Jazz taking ANY of the high risk/reward players in this draft. In fact, I hope they put themselves in a position to take two of them and build the SLC Stars around them with the sole purpose of the D league team to accelerate the development of those two players. Whoever the Jazz draft shouldn't be someone that they're counting on for production this year. As such, swing for the fences as many times as possible. I'm totally fine with using this philosophy at #12 (or higher) and then trading Burke, 2nd round picks, cash and maybe the OKC pick to move up for another one.
 
fishonjazz said:
I don't disagree with any of this. We have lots of good players. If we trade Hayward we will still have lots of good players except then we have lots of good players plus a very very high draft pick.
Then we can always try to replace Hayward with another good player in free agency.

The #3 pick + #12 pick + free agent (bazemore, batum, etc whatever) + burks hood exum lyles gobert favors all being healthier and more experienced would more than make up for Haywards production imo.
Click to expand...

Still doesn't get us a star, just recycling assets.

Either u didn't understand my post or didn't read me entirely too long windbag of a post, but basically u need to start over meaning not just trade Hayward but everyone. We aren't going to find a star by picking between 12-20. Or be patient and let the guys we have grow as a team seeing as we have the 4th youngest team in the league.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Just don't see how trading Hayward gets us a star? If Murray is your answer, yikes. He looks like a good player, but nothing about him really stands out. He's average to short for his position and not very athletic. Guess I could be wrong. I was about Curry so...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I'm all for trading Hayward for a star, I just don't see it happening. More then likely we take a step back, but not enough to where we are putting our selves in a position to draft a star. Unless u get lucky, extremely lucky.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top