Following potential 2015 draftees

[Thee Idiotic Minivan K]

Screw trading down. This will likely be the last time for while that we are able to draft this high, and usually teams trade down when they need to add multiple players, which we really don't. Utah should be looking to consolidate assets to move up, but if the price is too high, take BPA and don't look back. Also, if we're taking on a rookie PG, it will be as a 3rd PG, not as a backup. We don't yet know if Exum will be ready for starter minutes, and our big 3 are ready to start winning now, even if we're not quite ready to contend. Burks played a bigger role off the bench than just a backup, and if anything, we should look to upgrade that role, not take a step back, which is likely with a rookie.

Just to clarify.. U r talking about Burke right? That inefficient small unathletic pg right? I am talking about adding either a Shawn Livingston type on the bench with an outside shot at being a stud like a young Rondo in Wright or a backup like Reggie Jackson type pg off the bench that provides a scoring punch in Grant. Anyway we need an upgrade at backup pg as I feel Burke is flawed and not conducive to a contender. And possibly getting a second first rounder in 2016 or a third first rounder in 2017 rounder will go a long way to help us get a nice player that will help us in the long run to getting into contention. And I'd only do this if I thought that we weren't going to get an impact player at 12. I do think Grant and Wright will have very productive long careers in the nba.

 

[BENTLEY]

I think as long as Frank, Johnson or Booker are available I'd stay at 12... If it is Turner I think I'd try and trade back to 15-19 ish and collect another good first rounder (in 2017) for our troubles.

Why you down on Turner?

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Why you down on Turner?

He is a good prospect and seems like a really good dude. Not sure he's a natural athlete... who the hell has to learn to run... seriously its a little weird. His stroke is really good and I think he'll be able to protect the rim, but I think laterally he'll be really bad... like really really bad. I don't think he's a good fit with Gobert, and I think he is a loooong term project. May take quite a while for him to get there.

I just think he'd have more value to us in a trade than to keep on the roster if that makes sense. I think Boston would likely be really interested and has a million first rounders... think we could move back to 15 (portis, Lyles, Looney will all likely be there) and get a better fit plus another asset to help us get more immediate help. I think Turner will have to play the 5 and I'm not sure he'd be ready for spot minutes next year.

He is intriguing because his stroke is really good... I'd be a bit scared to pass on him. Pelton says when you look at shooting in college you should focus on free throw shooting as it is a better predictor of a guy's 3 point percentage generally. He shot 84% and was killing the 3 early in the year.

 

[Spaniard]

Watching the vid of him doing work, seems to be moving just fine to me.

 

[Cappy_Smurf]

Just to clarify.. U r talking about Burke right? That inefficient small unathletic pg right? I am talking about adding either a Shawn Livingston type on the bench with an outside shot at being a stud like a young Rondo in Wright or a backup like Reggie Jackson type pg off the bench that provides a scoring punch in Grant. Anyway we need an upgrade at backup pg as I feel Burke is flawed and not conducive to a contender. And possibly getting a second first rounder in 2016 or a third first rounder in 2017 rounder will go a long way to help us get a nice player that will help us in the long run to getting into contention. And I'd only do this if I thought that we weren't going to get an impact player at 12. I do think Grant and Wright will have very productive long careers in the nba.

Yeah, Burke sucks and I am on board with replacing him, but not with a rookie if we need our backup to play a significant role like Trey did last year. If Utah can trade for a later pick like they did with Rudy, then fine, but I don't want to trade down from the 12. Like I said, this is probably the last chance we'll have to draft that high for long time. Trade up, stay at twelve with BPA, or hell, even package it in a trade for vet. Just don't trade down from the 12. There will be a player there that's worth sticking.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Trade out or trade up. The Jazz are swimming in nickels, they need to get some dimes and quarters or just get rid of some change in some way.

 

[Thee Idiotic Minivan K]

It's not like we are playing for a chip over the next two years and we are just as likely to find good players in the 20's like hood and Gobert or millsap in the second round or going back even more AK B Rruss. Let's be real. We aren't getting a star with the twelfth pick


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Elizah Huge]

I would package #12, GSW pick, OKC pick to move up to 7-9 easily.

 

[Thee Idiotic Minivan K]

Also getting a second pick in 2016 or third pick in 17 could go a long way to getting a really good vet or trading for a high draft pick. Either way trading down gives us options and possibly train a better option then Burk at backup pg. I'd rather have a backup pg that can't shoot in Wright, that plays defense and passes the ball and gets to the rim then a guy who can't shoot but shoots more then anyone on the team and doesn't play defense or pass the ball.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Thee Idiotic Minivan K]

I would package #12, GSW pick, OKC pick to move up to 7-9 easily.

Or we could wait trade down now and trade three picks in 17 for a better pick in a draft that is supposed strong


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

My thoughts for moving down... say one of those guys we really like isn't there (I think one of them would be) and we were unable to move up using our pick next year and other stuff (the price just gets too high). We move down the draft to 16 or 17 because Milwaukee or Boston wants Turner or Booker or whoever. You get another first rounder next year with limited protections and get one of the lesser PF prospects you wanted that fits long-term. We could then use the acquired pick and our pick next year and Trey Burke to get Holiday or Lowry... after the draft has passed these teams may realize they don't have many options left and settle for our offer.

 

[bigmike]

Just geeked out on some Emmanuel Mudiay videos.

He's quite good. Elite physical tools and overall a very advanced PG game for his age, minus a streaky shooting stroke. Could be the best player in the draft. He should be in play for all picks #1-6.

 

[Cappy_Smurf]

It's not like we are playing for a chip over the next two years and we are just as likely to find good players in the 20's like hood and Gobert or millsap in the second round or going back even more AK B Rruss. Let's be real. We aren't getting a star with the twelfth pick

It's possible to find good players later, but no, it's not just as likely. And although we probably aren't getting a star at twelve, our odds of finding a good player are higher at twelve than in the twenties. And if you want to use Millsap as an example, maybe we should trade the #12 for 6 second round picks, then we could draft 6 Millsaps. Your reasoning is faulty. There's a time when trading down makes sense, but most of the time it doesn't, and unless Utah is absolutely sold on a player projected later, they should grab the best player they can get their hands on. They'll have plenty of time over the next several years to try and find a hidden gem. The FO has talked about where they think the tiers are, and they aren't in a position where they need multiple 3rd tier players when they have a chance to grab a 2nd tier player.

 

[NAOS]

It's not like we are playing for a chip over the next two years and we are just as likely to find good players in the 20's like hood and Gobert or millsap in the second round or going back even more AK B Rruss. Let's be real. We aren't getting a star with the twelfth pick


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You know that we aren't "just as likely to find talent" later in the draft, right? There's an absolute mountain of very convincing evidence that proves you wrong.

We're at the doorstep to a pool of talent that we're unlikely to be so close to again in the next several years. And, we've got some assets to use. Cash them in and get to 7 - 9, so that we can get a talent that is much more likely to hit.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

You know that we aren't "just as likely to find talent" later in the draft, right? There's an absolute mountain of very convincing evidence that proves you wrong.

We're at the doorstep to a pool of talent that we're unlikely to be so close to again in the next several years. And, we've got some assets to use. Cash them in and get to 7 - 9, so that we can get a talent that is much more likely to hit.

This is option number one for me... problem is it takes a willing partner. We don't have the immediate help some of these teams want. May have to be a three team trade where we help facilitate and add some value. Charlotte is a real possibility, but Detroit and Denver I can see balking unless we provide help now. I'd be calling sacramento, NY, and Detroit every god damned day though. I think they will screw it up and if we are always there we can scoop up their mess.

 

[BENTLEY]

we've got some assets to use. Cash them in and get to 7 - 9, so that we can get a talent that is much more likely to hit.

Pelton at ESPN"s statistical model has Kaminsky as the sixth best player in the draft, taking his age into account. Here's his top seven: Towns, Russell, Porzingis, Mudiay, Okafor, Myles Turner, Kaminsky, Tyus Jones, Hezonja, Winslow.

No chance 7 - 9 gets any of: Towns, Russell, Mudiay, Okafor.
But at 7 - 9 these might be there: Porzingis, Turner, Kaminsky, Tyus Jones, Hezonja, Winslow, (as well as Johnson - who Pelton ranked 13th).

At least 1 of the latter players will be there at 12. But yes, picking 7 - 9 would give the Jazz more of their choice from this latter group.

But I don't know who is the better prospect out of this group (I just know their consensus rankings). Rankings don't necessarily mean better prospect. I don't want to be overly influenced by the rankings. So Pelton's personal rankings - which to a degree, go against the consensus - give me pause. I dunno if it's worth trading up into 7-9. Guess it depends on the cost. And if the FO thinks one of these guys is markedly better and won't be there at 12.

But I'm flummoxed as to who is better. Which is why I think I lean towards staying at 12. Granted, I have no confidence in my judgement of the prospects this year. A lot of them look pretty good to me.

 

[SojoDave]

Locke actually said something on the radio that I agree with. He thinks that Frank The Tank, is the riskiest pick in the draft. He said the Jazz want to have player development as their biggest asset. Frank does not have a high ceiling and his athleticism is not off the charts. DL was involved with drafting Gobert and Kawhai Leonard and were two guys with crazy measurables and freaky athletic ability. The one player that he got that was close to a finished product was Trey Burke and that hasn't worked out that great.

What Locke's point is that the Jazz will probably look for a player that has crazy measurables and athletic ability and teach them the skills to succeed. Guys like Oubre, Looney, RH Jefferson, Lyles have great athletic ability and may need to polish their bball skills and IQ. Oubre has the length and the athleticism DL likes.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

No chance 7 - 9 gets any of: Towns, Russell, Mudiay, Okafor.
But at 7 - 9 these might be there: Porzingis, Turner, Kaminsky, Tyus Jones, Hezonja, Winslow, (as well as Johnson - who Pelton ranked 13th).

At least 1 of the latter players will be there at 12. But yes, picking 7 - 9 would give the Jazz more of their choice from this latter group.

But I don't know who is the better prospect out of this group (I just know their consensus rankings). Rankings don't necessarily mean better prospect. I don't want to be overly influenced by the rankings. So Pelton's personal rankings - which to a degree, go against the consensus - give me pause. I dunno if it's worth trading up into 7-9. Guess it depends on the cost. And if the FO thinks one of these guys is markedly better and won't be there at 12.

But I'm flummoxed as to who is better. Which is why I think I lean towards staying at 12. Granted, I have no confidence in my judgement of the prospects this year. A lot of them look pretty good to me.

If Kaminsky is there I'd take him and forego trading other assets to move up... I'd try and use those assets to acquire one of the potentially available good vet pgs. After the draft teams will have showed their hands and we will have an idea of what is available. Both DX and Chad Ford have Frank available where we are picking and DL was watching Frank yesterday... Apparently he impressed and shot the lights out. The price has to be right to move up and if Frank, Booker, and Johnson are gone when we are picking I see if I can get a good return to move back. Gonna be an interesting night.

 

[spycam1]

Locke actually said something on the radio that I agree with. He thinks that Frank The Tank, is the riskiest pick in the draft. He said the Jazz want to have player development as their biggest asset. Frank does not have a high ceiling and his athleticism is not off the charts. DL was involved with drafting Gobert and Kawhai Leonard and were two guys with crazy measurables and freaky athletic ability. The one player that he got that was close to a finished product was Trey Burke and that hasn't worked out that great.

What Locke's point is that the Jazz will probably look for a player that has crazy measurables and athletic ability and teach them the skills to succeed. Guys like Oubre, Looney, RH Jefferson, Lyles have great athletic ability and may need to polish their bball skills and IQ. Oubre has the length and the athleticism DL likes.

Rodney Hood was even older when we drafted him and does not have crazy measurables or athletic ability. Not that I disagree with your overall point.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Locke actually said something on the radio that I agree with. He thinks that Frank The Tank, is the riskiest pick in the draft. He said the Jazz want to have player development as their biggest asset. Frank does not have a high ceiling and his athleticism is not off the charts. DL was involved with drafting Gobert and Kawhai Leonard and were two guys with crazy measurables and freaky athletic ability. The one player that he got that was close to a finished product was Trey Burke and that hasn't worked out that great.

What Locke's point is that the Jazz will probably look for a player that has crazy measurables and athletic ability and teach them the skills to succeed. Guys like Oubre, Looney, RH Jefferson, Lyles have great athletic ability and may need to polish their bball skills and IQ. Oubre has the length and the athleticism DL likes.

Lyles is not a good athlete.

I don't think Locke has watched Frank... when he does I want to hear his opinion. I've heard DL talk about risky guys and that they want their to be risk and payoff. I also don't understand the low ceiling on Frank comment. He is Brad Miller... Brad was a starter on Championship caliber teams and was an all-star. He'd also feed into the making other guys around him better with his shooting and passing. I'll be pissed if we pass on Frank for one of the aforementioned players. Oubre I would understand because he has a Paul George kind of ceiling, but with a very small chance of getting there imo.