What's new
By:

Bye Bye Burke

SCS said:
If I said the Jazz would trade Trey Burke for a future second round pick two years ago it would have received an lol too. The Exum quote might be extreme, but I'm definitely concerned with the FO when it comes to getting value for assets.
Click to expand...

Hill was a good return in this draft. Not great, but good. Several guys mocked in the 2nd round went lottery. Jazz would have used it if they liked someone....they didn't.

Burke never had more value than a late 1st after his first year.
 
SCS said:
- They trade #12 for George Hill. I love Hill as a player don't get me wrong. But we could have signed a guard (albeit not as good as Hill) without burning the #12 pick. We could have turned that pick into future picks.
Click to expand...

I just love when people nonchalantly say what the team should or could have done but never even suggest a name. Please tell me, who or whom could we have signed who was available? Who's the asset that we should have picked at #12 that is attractive enough to trade for future picks? It's the same with the people who wants to trade Hayward for a "star player", who? who is going to trade his star player for Hay and which star player is that?

It is not that easy, this is not a simulator, you need a team that wants to trade with you, you need a player who wants to play for you and that player has to be an asset to the team, this is not Christmas in The Hamptons where you say "daddy I want a pony" and you get it.
 
Jazz4ever said:
Hill was a good return in this draft. Not great, but good. Several guys mocked in the 2nd round went lottery. Jazz would have used it if they liked someone....they didn't.

Burke never had more value than a late 1st after his first year.
Click to expand...

Agree with the general premise.. but we traded the pick before we had any idea who would be available.
 
Jazz4ever said:
Who knows what the Wiz will be in 5 years lol, could be a higher 2nd.
Click to expand...

You do realize the Wizards have some young good talent right?
YOu act like the only team that can improve in hoops is the Jazz..
The Wizards will improve too

Looking 5 years from now you would say a mid to late 2nd round. Not an early second, dummy.
 
So... Do you think the Jazz pulled the trigger on this trade today in order to facilitate an incoming player tomorrow?

We all knew Burke was the odd man out, but the timing seems odd. Why not wait a few weeks to see if a better offer came along, or he could be bundled into something?

Sorry if I'm discounting the second rounder, but the trade today yields two benefits in my eyes: 1) roster spot, and 2) marginal increase in what we can pay others.

Contract extensions don't seem like an urgent item... So what's being done with that roster spot?
 
The Jazz have been waiting for something better to come along and it never happened. Was never going to happen. That they were able to get anything AND unload the salary is actually kind of impressive.
 
SCS said:
Not necessarily a promising star. More just assets in general. I feel like they haven't been getting a decent enough return on assets.

- They trade #12 for George Hill. I love Hill as a player don't get me wrong. But we could have signed a guard (albeit not as good as Hill) without burning the #12 pick. We could have turned that pick into future picks.

- They spent #55 and #60 on guards who will probably never play here. Felt like burning assets.

- They waited to long to trade Trey which burned the value they could have received.

I'm just a little concerned when I see moves like this.
Click to expand...
The expectation that every asset must be turned into something causes people to make arguments like this, but the NBA just doesn't work that way. If it did teams would eventually build up massive value. Instead all of them burn assets. JJ walked from Miami this year for nothing. We picked up JJ without giving up an asset. We spent second round picks that probably (hopefully) won't make our team. So did a lot of teams. This is because there are a limited number of slots. Sometimes an asset (especially a second round pick) turns out not to have value. It happens to every team.

The way I see it the Jazz have compiled a roster that I'm very excited about for next year. Nice work, management.
 
Pinhead said:
So... Do you think the Jazz pulled the trigger on this trade today in order to facilitate an incoming player tomorrow?

We all knew Burke was the odd man out, but the timing seems odd. Why not wait a few weeks to see if a better offer came along, or he could be bundled into something?

Sorry if I'm discounting the second rounder, but the trade today yields two benefits in my eyes: 1) roster spot, and 2) marginal increase in what we can pay others.

Contract extensions don't seem like an urgent item... So what's being done with that roster spot?
Click to expand...
The more likely result of holding on is that they would have had to eat his contract.
 
ONE LOVE said:
Also his value would have been higher during the season when guys start getting injured...



... but I guess DL wants to be rid of Burke wayyyyyy before the training camp start, that much is CLEAR.
Click to expand...

What value? Utah has been getting lowballed on Trey for quite some time now, and have continually decided to wait and see if he could raise his value. Instead, his trade value has sunk lower and lower to the point that we were damn lucky we didn't end up eating that contract. Right now DL is dancing a jig just have pawned him off on somebody else. The 2nd round pick is pure gravy. It wouldn't matter if it was a 2051 2nd rounder. This trade was a pure salary dump, and yet some fans want to hang on to the delusion that we could have gotten value by waiting until the right time. If there was a RIGHT time, it was 2 years ago, not a few weeks or months from now.
 
ncoloradojazz said:
You do realize the Wizards have some young good talent right?
YOu act like the only team that can improve in hoops is the Jazz..
The Wizards will improve too

Looking 5 years from now you would say a mid to late 2nd round. Not an early second, dummy.
Click to expand...
He said "who knows what the wiz will look like in 5 years?"
Meaning that they could be better or worse. He wasn't saying that he thinks the pick will be a better one in five years, he was just saying it could.
Dummy
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
The expectation that every asset must be turned into something causes people to make arguments like this, but the NBA just doesn't work that way. If it did teams would eventually build up massive value. Instead all of them burn assets. JJ walked from Miami this year for nothing. We picked up JJ without giving up an asset. We spent second round picks that probably (hopefully) won't make our team. So did a lot of teams. This is because there are a limited number of slots. Sometimes an asset (especially a second round pick) turns out not to have value. It happens to every team.

The way I see it the Jazz have compiled a roster that I'm very excited about for next year. Nice work, management.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right. This is a point that is so often missed in many discussions.

There is no crystal ball when dealing with the draft. Players picked in the first round OFTEN do not pan out ... even lottery picks. Look through every draft for the last 15 years and it will be riddled with players that didn't end up being worthy of that pick. What you'll also see is players that everyone missed on. Players drafted late in the first round and even in the 2nd round that end up being stars in the league.

The best that the various FOs can do is work with the best information that they have at the time. Sometimes they get it wrong. Sometimes EVERYONE gets it wrong. But sometimes you get it right and sometimes you get really lucky. The whole argument about "asset" is ridiculous. At the end of the day, the Jazz FO needs to put a team on the floor that can win. They have made moves this offseason that should make them better.
 
SCS said:
- They waited to long to trade Trey which burned the value they could have received.
Click to expand...


SCS said:
If I said the Jazz would trade Trey Burke for a future second round pick two years ago it would have received an lol too. The Exum quote might be extreme, but I'm definitely concerned with the FO when it comes to getting value for assets.
Click to expand...
The problem is that once the jazz knew for certain that trey was a bust, the rest of the league did too.

What did Washington get for the asset of jan vessley? I have no idea but I'm assuming they got pretty much nothing. He was a #4 pick iirc.
 
ONE LOVE said:
Also his value would have been higher during the season when guys start getting injured...



... but I guess DL wants to be rid of Burke wayyyyyy before the training camp start, that much is CLEAR.
Click to expand...


Asset management also includes treating your assets with class. Trey Burke never created a public scene about his demotion, so maybe DL felt he owed Burke a chance to restart his career on another team rather than suffer the humiliation of being the 4th pg on the Jazz.

Good luck, Trey.
 
Good luck Trey. He will likely find a place in the league as a scorer off the bench. Didn't work out, but nor did 60% of the players from the 2013 draft.

Our pick from 2013 was Gobert and a Washington second rounder. I am fine with that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top