What's new
By:

Dennis Lindsey called out Dante on 1280thezone

Saint Cy of JFC said:
Each team gets two 2-way contracts. I think they are like 250K and they are D-League contracts. Teams can call them up a limited numbers of times for a limited number of NBA games. Not sure on the exact details.
Click to expand...
Do they count against the 15 roster spots?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
Kyoto said:
Why would you want to afford a Bogut? Does he get you closer to beating Golden State?
Click to expand...

Bogut would go full Zaza on GS. Knock that mouth guard right out of Currys mouth (along with some teeth)!

I don't think anyone at GS would want to drive the ball into Bogut.
 
Kyoto said:
Why would you want to afford a Bogut? Does he get you closer to beating Golden State?
Click to expand...

I think somebody like Bogut gives you a lift much larger than their minutes on the floor or stats. A couple things we really lack are nastiness and rebounding/interior defense off the bench. I think our ability to compete with GS is much greater than what the playoffs showed. I feel our team is a couple minor tweaks away from being legit and not major overhauls by trying to land another all-star. It's contingent on health but even with that we could use a little more quiet leadership, some real nastiness and someone who can grab a rebound. Bogut would be wonderful. Faried would be phenomenal.
 
green said:
Huh. DL wants Exum to have more urgency. So, it sounds like a mental issue. Weird. Who was it that said the Jazz were worried about Exum mentally? Weird.
Click to expand...
Sounds like a potential work ethic thing to me, not a mental thing.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Each team gets two 2-way contracts. I think they are like 250K and they are D-League contracts. Teams can call them up a limited numbers of times for a limited number of NBA games. Not sure on the exact details.
Click to expand...

Spot on. Except that the range from $75,000 to $250,000 depending on how long the player is in the NBA.
 
Cappy_Smurf said:
Sounds like a bull **** thing, because he had to say something other than we need Dante to have one more year of slow development so that we can sign him as cheaply as possible.
Click to expand...

The Jazz wanted Exum to take control of the 2nd string PG position but he kept on doing things Quin didnt like. That's the mental side, not doing what Quin wants of him.

I guess you could argue Quin has been to harsh on him, but that just goes hand in hand with DL's comments about wanting Dante's urgency to match Quin's urgency for Dante.
 
Last edited:
Cappy_Smurf said:
Sounds like a bull **** thing, because he had to say something other than we need Dante to have one more year of slow development so that we can sign him as cheaply as possible.
Click to expand...

No one wants to sign Dante cheaply. If the Jazz had their way, they'd be giving Dante a max deal.
 
Cappy_Smurf said:
Sounds like a bull **** thing, because he had to say something other than we need Dante to have one more year of slow development so that we can sign him as cheaply as possible.
Click to expand...

I can't disagree with you enough about this one. I don't think stalling Exum's development so he wouldn't command much money in FA comes into their minds at any point... like AT ALL. This to me sounds ridiculous. Those are precious years of development and once gone they don't come back. The Jazz want to develop Exum as much as possible right now. I bet they prefer moderate development to little development, and they prefer great development to moderate development. I don't think teams can afford to think in the terms you are outlining. Getting Dante for a discount on his next contract would be a nice bonus, but he has to become good enough player and lay the foundations for being a bargain in the future right now.
 
stitches said:
I can't disagree with you enough about this one. I don't think stalling Exum's development so he wouldn't command much money in FA comes into their minds at any point... like AT ALL. This to me sounds ridiculous. Those are precious years of development and once gone they don't come back. The Jazz want to develop Exum as much as possible right now. I bet they prefer moderate development to little development, and they prefer great development to moderate development. I don't think teams can afford to think in the terms you are outlining. Getting Dante for a discount on his next contract would be a nice bonus, but he has to become good enough player and lay the foundations for being a bargain in the future right now.
Click to expand...

The Exum fanboys are out of control.
 
infection said:
I think somebody like Bogut gives you a lift much larger than their minutes on the floor or stats. A couple things we really lack are nastiness and rebounding/interior defense off the bench. I think our ability to compete with GS is much greater than what the playoffs showed. I feel our team is a couple minor tweaks away from being legit and not major overhauls by trying to land another all-star. It's contingent on health but even with that we could use a little more quiet leadership, some real nastiness and someone who can grab a rebound. Bogut would be wonderful. Faried would be phenomenal.
Click to expand...

I just think that Bogut's wheels have fallen off. Injuries aside, when he plays he looks like he is in pain, like an old man trying to get in a hot tub of water.
 
stitches said:
I can't disagree with you enough about this one. I don't think stalling Exum's development so he wouldn't command much money in FA comes into their minds at any point... like AT ALL. This to me sounds ridiculous. Those are precious years of development and once gone they don't come back. The Jazz want to develop Exum as much as possible right now. I bet they prefer moderate development to little development, and they prefer great development to moderate development. I don't think teams can afford to think in the terms you are outlining. Getting Dante for a discount on his next contract would be a nice bonus, but he has to become good enough player and lay the foundations for being a bargain in the future right now.
Click to expand...

It's not about stalling his development. It's about not bending over backwards to shoot yourself in the foot. I mean, if Dante's development were so urgent, they might as well let Hill walk and just roll with Dante as the starter. Don't bring in anybody else to play in front of him, but throw him to the wolves and see how he does. There are a lot of people who believe that's how it should be done, so that you have a better idea of whether you should keep him or not. In some cases, that may be best, but I don't believe so with a player like Dante, who came in raw and then missed a year.

And I think you're kidding yourself if you don't believe this happens frequently when teams are up against the wall financially, or are afraid of matching a contract that ends up being untradeable. Utah did this with CJ miles years ago and managed to sign him to a decent deal that didn't hurt them once he didn't pan out. They did this to a degree with Kanter as well, regardless of how much people think it was just the coach. And low and behold, as much complaining as people have made about how bad we got robbed in the Kanter trade, that contract is definitely one they dodged a bullet on.

I'm not saying Utah will go to extremes to hold Dante's value down, but there's zero doubt in my mind that DL's best case scenario is developing him slowly as the backup for one more year. Having to match a max offer on Dante would be a kick in the teeth for a team who is going to fighting to get under the tax or keep it as low as possible.

I mean, if Dante's development was so urgent, playing Neto in front of him at the end of the season was just plain nutty.
 
Cappy_Smurf said:
It's not about stalling his development. It's about not bending over backwards to shoot yourself in the foot. I mean, if Dante's development were so urgent, they might as well let Hill walk and just roll with Dante as the starter. Don't bring in anybody else to play in front of him, but throw him to the wolves and see how he does. There are a lot of people who believe that's how it should be done, so that you have a better idea of whether you should keep him or not. In some cases, that may be best, but I don't believe so with a player like Dante, who came in raw and then missed a year.

And I think you're kidding yourself if you don't believe this happens frequently when teams are up against the wall financially, or are afraid of matching a contract that ends up being untradeable. Utah did this with CJ miles years ago and managed to sign him to a decent deal that didn't hurt them once he didn't pan out. They did this to a degree with Kanter as well, regardless of how much people think it was just the coach. And low and behold, as much complaining as people have made about how bad we got robbed in the Kanter trade, that contract is definitely one they dodged a bullet on.

I'm not saying Utah will go to extremes to hold Dante's value down, but there's zero doubt in my mind that DL's best case scenario is developing him slowly as the backup for one more year. Having to match a max offer on Dante would be a kick in the teeth for a team who is going to fighting to get under the tax or keep it as low as possible.
Click to expand...



I kinda agree with this. When they drafted him so raw and hearing some of the early commentary on Dante from DL and Quin my impression was that there goal was to develop him and have him taking over the team 4-5 years down the line.

Again, I believe DL and Coach Q are playing the long game with Dante.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top