Still don’t get the Collins reclamation project though.. now he’s gonna be in the way of Hendrix playing time.
Jazz sign Svi Mykhailiuk for 4 years, $15 mil
- Thread starter Strutter
- Start date
Coach Ellis
Well-Known Member
Not if I was coaching. For better or worse, if I was Will Hardy, I’d know exactly how I feel about all of the young guys because they’re getting featured roles and consistent minutes in my rotation.
I’m still bullish on Sexton, but I could see them trade him for decent assets at some point. Clarkson and Collins get their roles reduced and either traded for somebody else’s 2 year contracts, or I wait until next year and package them as part of a big move for another star to pair with Lauri. I’m still in asset accumulation mode right now and will go “all in” next offseason.
I will be blunt: signing Svi and Eubanks while at the same time letting Dunn and Fontecchio go has zero sense if the Jazz are going to execute any reasonable long-term strategy.
If the Jazz are going to tank and give young players heavy minutes then Svi and Eubanks are simply blocking them and getting a meaningless win or two. If the Jazz is about accumulating assets then they could have used the cap space they wasted on Svi and Eubanks to take a bad player in exchange for a pick. Or simply to sign a risky player who has a good chance to become better and outperform his contract (Svi and Eubanks are exactly what they are and will not suddenly flourish). If the Jazz are going to compete then it makes no sense to bring Svi and Eubanks while letting Dunn go at the same time. Or trading Fontecchio .
The latest moves by the Jazz make sense only if their strategy is to continue doing exactly what they have been doing in the past two years: be mildly competitive and, thus, put butts in the seats and finish just outside the play-in. While hoping at the same time that someone drafted in the late lottery/late first round turns out to be a star and patiently waiting for a hoped-for collapse of the Wolves or Cavs. This is the worst imaginable strategy basketball-wise but, likely, the safest and most profitable for the team owner.
If the Jazz are going to tank and give young players heavy minutes then Svi and Eubanks are simply blocking them and getting a meaningless win or two. If the Jazz is about accumulating assets then they could have used the cap space they wasted on Svi and Eubanks to take a bad player in exchange for a pick. Or simply to sign a risky player who has a good chance to become better and outperform his contract (Svi and Eubanks are exactly what they are and will not suddenly flourish). If the Jazz are going to compete then it makes no sense to bring Svi and Eubanks while letting Dunn go at the same time. Or trading Fontecchio .
The latest moves by the Jazz make sense only if their strategy is to continue doing exactly what they have been doing in the past two years: be mildly competitive and, thus, put butts in the seats and finish just outside the play-in. While hoping at the same time that someone drafted in the late lottery/late first round turns out to be a star and patiently waiting for a hoped-for collapse of the Wolves or Cavs. This is the worst imaginable strategy basketball-wise but, likely, the safest and most profitable for the team owner.
Hardy really needs to get with the (tank) program this year. Hopefully he’s smart enough to play ball.
Sorry, did you just say that signing Drew Eubanks and Svi Mysjrkdj indicates that the Jazz are trying to win?
Yes: they are better than the young players at their positions that they will be taking minutes from. At least for this season. The Jazz will be slightly better with them than without them.
Not if Hardy is in on the plan.
Ok, so why sign Eubanks and Svi in the first place then? So that they do not play at all? I want someone explain to me the purpose of having them on the team.
We have young players at their positions who the Jazz can play and develop while getting more chances for a high-level pick. So, again, why did the Jazz need to spend the cap on Svi and Eubanks?
You do know about the rule that you need to have 14 players under contract... right?
homeytennis
Well-Known Member
I'm scratching my head this morning as to how the signing of Svi and Eubanks is superior to Yurt7, Bazely, Luka or Kenny. I know the guys we cut ties with all had their warts but Svi and Eubanks are in the same boat.
Maybe they train harder? Maybe they tell better jokes? Or perhaps they tell less jokes?
For these types of guys its not only about the skill or ceiling. It can just as well be about them being correct kind of guys to have around the facility.
You know the concept of grass is greener on the other side?
Or your friend’s wife is hotter than your own?
I’m guessing it similar.
Coach Ellis
Well-Known Member
I think it’s as simple as they’re two solid vets with experience and work ethic that won’t require them playing a ton of minutes. You get that commitment, effort, example and hustle in practice, but don’t have to necessarily reward them with the playing time. Not sure that Samanic, Bazley, Yurt7 or Lofton actually bring that to the table. Plus, it gives you another $8 million or so in traceable contracts to maneuver with at the deadline.
That is not the reason. The Jazz are deep for each of the position with young guys for the bigs they gave Kessler, Collins and Hendricks who are obviously going to get the bulk of the minutes. And they have Filipowski and Potter if anyone gets injured - no need for Eubanks. Svi is a bench SF (and sometimes a SG) and the Jazz have Lauri, Cody, Clarkson, Keyonte, Brice and Juzang - again, plenty of promising young players to fill in in case of injury.
This a is a supreme cope. You simply do not know if it's true and you are putting a theory that cannot be falsified. The same is true for "traceable contracts". The only reason why you reverted to that is because you cannot find any other (even remotely) plausible reason why the Jazz signed Eubanks and Svi and just inventing reasons on the fly relying on pure conjecture and the blind faith in the wisdom of the Jazz.
Eubanks and Svi are career average backups without any upside. It made sense for Boston and Phoenix to have them during the last season: they were both contenders who sunk the bulk of their payroll in a few stars and did not have any young players. It made zero sense for the Jazz - a bad team with tons of young projects - to sign them.
Last edited:
Coach Ellis
Well-Known Member
Hahaha. I could give a **** why they decided to bring in two career backups who routinely are praised for their hustle and work ethic in limited roles. You’re right that I have no idea why they decided to sign them, but I would be very surprised if they brought them in to take minutes away from the young guys.
It feels like low cost, low risk culture based moves. It’s not what I would’ve done, but it’s how they decided to spend their cap space. I doubt either guy is on the roster two years from now.
Stop it. You are making yourself look like an absolute idiot by saying "it makes zero sense".
Like sure, you can prefer giving the young guys automatic minutes by bringing in some absolute trash vets... but whether they should get automatic uncontested minutes or not is a debatable topic at the very least. Whatever YOUR preference to fill the roster spots would have been, you have to acknowledge that bringing in perennial end of benchers to fulfill the roster requirements is absolutely standard practice.
Tremendous Upside
Well-Known Member
So this is NOT going to be a 100% tanking season after all?
Help me out, I'm confused.