Go GET Teague

[The Midnight]

Not to disagree, just want to point out how hollow and silly it makes all the desperation seem from a few years ago when everyone was insisting that the Jazz were ruining their chance to develop players by making them play behind a veteran.

Still wondering why Teague's attitude would be better in Utah than Atlanta.

But let me throw out a hypothetical (no idea if it might be true): Since Quin has coached both Teague and Dante, suppose DL asks him which of the two he trusts over the long term more -- based on attitude, potential, likelihood of contributing to a long-term quality team, coachability, fit -- everything. Suppose Quin answers Dante. If you're DL, would you still put a priority on grabbing Teague?

I think the main difference is at that time we all knew Big Al and Millsap weren't going to cut it in the West, they are both flawed in their own ways (Big Al can't defend PnR at an elite level, breaks up plays, and Millsap is too undersized to compete amongst the West's bigs). We also had nothing solid in the SG/SF department.


Now though things have changed, we have an elite defender in Gobert, and a true 2-way PF with size in Favors. We also have an improving wing lineup with Hayward and Hood.


Totally different situation.

 

[idiot]

I think the main difference is at that time we all knew Big Al and Millsap weren't going to cut it in the West, they are both flawed in their own ways (Big Al can't defend PnR at an elite level, breaks up plays, and Millsap is too undersized to compete amongst the West's bigs). We also had nothing solid in the SG/SF department.


Now though things have changed, we have an elite defender in Gobert, and a true 2-way PF with size in Favors. We also have an improving wing lineup with Hayward and Hood.


Totally different situation.

Rather different team situation in regards to the possibility of winning, I agree. But no difference in regard to the argument that was commonly floated in the Corbin era -- that putting young, very talented players behind veterans in the lineup messes with their development trajectory. If we were beside ourselves in Burks's 3rd year, arguing that playing Marvin Williams ahead of Alec Burks (though Burks played 28 mpg), was preventing Burks from breaking out into a star, why wouldn't we have the same concern for Exum's 3rd year (even if he missed the second because of injury)? If you believe that Exum has star potential (and I know that many don't), wouldn't you want to keep the lane open for Exum's development?

 

[idiot]

And I might add that in comparing Teague's and Marvin Williams's career trajectory to the point at which Utah obtained him, I don't see a big difference. Each had one fairly strong year, a very decent year, and a bunch of quite average years (going more on win shares than PER).

Marvin was a year and a half younger when Utah obtained him than Teague is now. Marvin had his worst two years as a pro with the Jazz, aside from his first two out of college. I'm not saying it's the likeliest scenario, but are we willing to take the chance that Teague is essentially the Marvin Williams of PGs if we trade for him?

I understand the best-case scenario for Teague. And maybe it's worth the risk. But I think the likeliest scenario is that Teague is relatively average or maybe just barely above that. That's an improvement this year, for sure. But is it worth Burks and a first rounder (or whatever the likeliest trade seems to be), along with the possibility of playing-time issues between him and Exum next year?

 

[Stifle Tower]

And I might add that in comparing Teague's and Marvin Williams's career trajectory to the point at which Utah obtained him, I don't see a big difference. Each had one fairly strong year, a very decent year, and a bunch of quite average years (going more on win shares than PER).

Marvin was a year and a half younger when Utah obtained him than Teague is now. Marvin had his worst two years as a pro with the Jazz, aside from his first two out of college. I'm not saying it's the likeliest scenario, but are we willing to take the chance that Teague is essentially the Marvin Williams of PGs if we trade for him?

I understand the best-case scenario for Teague. And maybe it's worth the risk. But I think the likeliest scenario is that Teague is relatively average or maybe just barely above that. That's an improvement this year, for sure. But is it worth Burks and a first rounder (or whatever the likeliest trade seems to be), along with the possibility of playing-time issues between him and Exum next year?

Burke and a late 1st. And yes, it's worth it. Jazz can't afford to have another huge long-term salary on the books. In 17/18, Hayward and Gobert (and Burke) come up for contracts. The year after, Favors, Hood and Exum come due. Can't bring in someone like Conley as a FA if they hope to keep everyone. Teague's contract is perfect. It will expire in 1 1/2 years. And Burks and Burke will have to be dealt anyway as the 5 starters come up for big deals (unless Hayward leaves). Teague seems like the perfect fit, He makes the team a LOT better this season - maybe Utah even gets the 5th seed. Perhaps even wins a first round series. Next season he starts while Exum eases his way back. Dante is coming off a major injury and a horrible rookie season offensively. Is it worth risking ANOTHER year if Dante hasn't improved? Hayward surely walks if Utah makes no progress.

There's just no truth to Exum's growth being "stunted" if he plays behind Teague. It may even HELP Dante to learn from a former all-star, just as Stockton learned from Green for three years. Young players develop behind veterans all the time, with their minutes increasing as they prove themselves. Just look at our team: Gobert and Favors both had to earn their roles. Hayward only played 17 mins/per as a rookie. Maybe the WORST thing to happen to Dante was that he started last season when he clearly wasn't ready. He's basically the same age as Lyles. Just don't see him as being ready for 30 mins/per. Last season he averaged 22 mins. So splitting time with another very good PG, to me, sounds ideal.

 

[idiot]

Burke and a late 1st. And yes, it's worth it. Jazz can't afford to have another huge long-term salary on the books. In 17/18, Hayward and Gobert (and Burke) come up for contracts. The year after, Favors, Hood and Exum come due. Can't bring in someone like Conley as a FA if they hope to keep everyone. Teague's contract is perfect. It will expire in 1 1/2 years. And Burks and Burke will have to be dealt anyway as the 5 starters come up for big deals (unless Hayward leaves). Teague seems like the perfect fit, He makes the team a LOT better this season - maybe Utah even gets the 5th seed. Perhaps even wins a first round series. Next season he starts while Exum eases his way back. Dante is coming off a major injury and a horrible rookie season offensively. Is it worth risking ANOTHER year if Dante hasn't improved? Hayward surely walks if Utah makes no progress.

There's just no truth to Exum's growth being "stunted" if he plays behind Teague. It may even HELP Dante to learn from a former all-star, just as Stockton learned from Green for three years. Young players develop behind veterans all the time, with their minutes increasing as they prove themselves. Just look at our team: Gobert and Favors both had to earn their roles. Hayward only played 17 mins/per as a rookie. Maybe the WORST thing to happen to Dante was that he started last season when he clearly wasn't ready. He's basically the same age as Lyles. Just don't see him as being ready for 30 mins/per. Last season he averaged 22 mins. So splitting time with another very good PG, to me, sounds ideal.

I don't actually disagree with you. I wasn't on the playing-Marvin-equals-screwing-Alec bandwagon. Just pointing out the possibility that history could repeat itself in terms of fan reaction if Teague turns out to be quite average. (But I don't think that the Hawks will give us Teague for Burke and the GS pick. Maybe they would in the summer, but I don't see any reason why they would now.)

 

[GVC]

And they'll get a better return if they trade him now, not next season. The waiting game is not going to help them.

I guess we'll have to wait and see if he gets moved for more than a small upgrade at the backup 1 and a late first.

 

[Deleted member 848]

I guess we'll have to wait and see if he gets moved for more than a small upgrade at the backup 1 and a late first.

The question we should be asking is: who needs a PG?


WC: Dubs, Spurs, Clips, OKC, Grizz, Dallas, Sac, Portland, Minnesota, Phoenix all have better/similar PGs. Denver just drafted one in the lottery, so I doubt they go for Jeff. Lakers have a similar ordeal with D'Angelo. That leaves us with Houston, New Orleans, and Utah. NOLA has their weird & crowded guard rotation & I doubt they go for Teague. You never know with Morey so I'd leave Houston as a dark horse-- even tho I think Bev+Harden are a way way better fit.




EC: Cavs, Raptors, Boston, Orlando, Bulls, Heat, Pistons, Hornets, Pacers, and Wizards have no need for him.


Leaves us with Philly, Brooklyn, Milwaukee, and New York.



So of those 6 teams, who is likely to bid more than Burke and a couple late 1sts?


Philly has the assets-- but do they want Jeff? Lol, Brooklyn doesn't. Milwaukee could decide to give up on MCW I suppose.


I think it's between us, Milwaukee, New York, and Houston.

 

[The Midnight]

The question we should be asking is: who needs a PG?


WC: Dubs, Spurs, Clips, OKC, Grizz, Dallas, Sac, Portland, Minnesota, Phoenix all have better/similar PGs. Denver just drafted one in the lottery, so I doubt they go for Jeff. Lakers have a similar ordeal with D'Angelo. That leaves us with Houston, New Orleans, and Utah. NOLA has their weird & crowded guard rotation & I doubt they go for Teague. You never know with Morey so I'd leave Houston as a dark horse-- even tho I think Bev+Harden are a way way better fit.




EC: Cavs, Raptors, Boston, Orlando, Bulls, Heat, Pistons, Hornets, Pacers, and Wizards have no need for him.


Leaves us with Philly, Brooklyn, Milwaukee, and New York.



So of those 6 teams, who is likely to bid more than Burke and a couple late 1sts?


Philly has the assets-- but do they want Jeff? Lol, Brooklyn doesn't. Milwaukee could decide to give up on MCW I suppose.


I think it's between us, Milwaukee, New York, and Houston.

Good work Dala.


And to add, I doubt NY has any asset neither, well nothing that ATL would want anyway. MIL won't give up on MCW and besides they have 4 more "PGs" with Mayo, Bayliss, Vasquez and Ennis, thats 5 PGs, so no I doubt they need another PG rental.


That leaves Houston. The problem is they don't need a ball dominant PG, they found that out the hard way by trading for Ty Lawson. They need somebody who could knock down 3's when Harden drives and dish and I doubt Teague is that man.

 

[Stifle Tower]

Good approach, dalamon

Eliminate Brooklyn...they have nothing to offer. Teague is too old for Philly. And why would they want to get much better when they are the front runners for Simmons? Well, at least they'll head into the lottery #1. Milwaukee is toast; they're playing for the lottery now. The team that could gain the most from Teague is New York. PG is probably the difference between them making the playoffs and missing. Not sure what they'll offer.

 

[BTP]

Teague's contract expires when the Jazz contention window starts.

 

[veji1]

Burke and a late 1st. And yes, it's worth it. Jazz can't afford to have another huge long-term salary on the books. In 17/18, Hayward and Gobert (and Burke) come up for contracts. The year after, Favors, Hood and Exum come due. Can't bring in someone like Conley as a FA if they hope to keep everyone. Teague's contract is perfect. It will expire in 1 1/2 years. And Burks and Burke will have to be dealt anyway as the 5 starters come up for big deals (unless Hayward leaves). Teague seems like the perfect fit, He makes the team a LOT better this season - maybe Utah even gets the 5th seed. Perhaps even wins a first round series. Next season he starts while Exum eases his way back. Dante is coming off a major injury and a horrible rookie season offensively. Is it worth risking ANOTHER year if Dante hasn't improved? Hayward surely walks if Utah makes no progress.

There's just no truth to Exum's growth being "stunted" if he plays behind Teague. It may even HELP Dante to learn from a former all-star, just as Stockton learned from Green for three years. Young players develop behind veterans all the time, with their minutes increasing as they prove themselves. Just look at our team: Gobert and Favors both had to earn their roles. Hayward only played 17 mins/per as a rookie. Maybe the WORST thing to happen to Dante was that he started last season when he clearly wasn't ready. He's basically the same age as Lyles. Just don't see him as being ready for 30 mins/per. Last season he averaged 22 mins. So splitting time with another very good PG, to me, sounds ideal.

Word. Teague at the salary he is making for the duration of that contract is just exactly what this team could use without being forced to take a big long term commitment right now.

 

[Stifle Tower]

Teague's contract expires when the Jazz contention window starts.

Not sure the contention window even opens if Hayward leaves and if Exum doesn't develop. Who is better to advance the goals of the Jazz in the next 1 1/2 seasons, Burke or Teague? And I would define those goals as advancing as far as possible in the playoffs and mentoring Dante to become an impact starting PG. There are steps that have to occur BEFORE the Jazz can even think of contending.

 

[BTP]

Not sure the contention window even opens if Hayward leaves and if Exum doesn't develop. Who is better to advance the goals of the Jazz in the next 1 1/2 seasons, Burke or Teague? And I would define those goals as advancing as far as possible in the playoffs and mentoring Dante to become an impact starting PG. There are steps that have to occur BEFORE the Jazz can even think of contending.

Do you agree that Gordon is a legit primary facilitator?

 

[Stifle Tower]

Do you agree that Gordon is a legit primary facilitator?

I agree PG is our biggest weakness. Teague would address that on a contract Utah can easily afford for the next 1 1/2 years.

 

[fishonjazz]

Because I think it's pretty clear that the "Cake" is nearly ready now. With Gobert, Favors, Hayward and Hood now all playing at playoff worthy level, one could argue somebody like Teague could push us over the top and be in that #4 - #6 seeds and start to make some noise in the playoffs this year. Exum on the other hand is an unknown quantity at this point PLUS the question mark over the injury.


Some success this year could go a long way in convincing Hayward and Teague from looking to go elsewhere.

This
Good answer

 

[BTP]

I agree PG is our biggest weakness. Teague would address that on a contract Utah can easily afford for the next 1 1/2 years.

I don't see the game in terms of positions. I look at who can guard who and strengths/weaknesses. I don't care if my Center is my primary ballhandler. I just know you need someone to initiate my offense and he should be good enough to consistently get the defense moving.
He should be both capable of finding the open player after he caused the defense to rotate and also have moves that help him evade/overpower help defenders. I know that most of the time the screener deserves half the credit when it comes to giving the attacker the head start, but for simplicity reasons I chose to focus on the ballhandler.

I think GOrdon is a capable initiator. He's got a well rounded balance and he's aware of where his teammates are. The Jazz system features a lot of potential "secondary assists". And the ball movement Gordon initiates often results in someone else getting the boxscore credit for what he started. Gordon is good at positioning himself after he gives the ball up and that's big in the way they swing the ball around the perimeter to exploit a gap.
Hood and Burks are good secondary attacker, who are very good at creating good shots for themselves, if they can attack a defender who's closing out on them.
Burke is kind of a wildcard and we don't know how good Exum is gonna be. But I'm comfortable with the thought of contending for homecourt next season, while giving Exum the opportunity to find himself 10-15 mins a game with backup units and spot up another 10-15 min per game around Hayward. We'll probably still make strides forward since a lot of guys are still developing quickly.
What better argument than showing Hayward max money on HIS team, while HIS team improves and is a potential contender.

 

[fishonjazz]

Rather different team situation in regards to the possibility of winning, I agree. But no difference in regard to the argument that was commonly floated in the Corbin era -- that putting young, very talented players behind veterans in the lineup messes with their development trajectory. If we were beside ourselves in Burks's 3rd year, arguing that playing Marvin Williams ahead of Alec Burks (though Burks played 28 mpg), was preventing Burks from breaking out into a star, why wouldn't we have the same concern for Exum's 3rd year (even if he missed the second because of injury)? If you believe that Exum has star potential (and I know that many don't), wouldn't you want to keep the lane open for Exum's development?

And I might add that in comparing Teague's and Marvin Williams's career trajectory to the point at which Utah obtained him, I don't see a big difference. Each had one fairly strong year, a very decent year, and a bunch of quite average years (going more on win shares than PER).

Marvin was a year and a half younger when Utah obtained him than Teague is now. Marvin had his worst two years as a pro with the Jazz, aside from his first two out of college. I'm not saying it's the likeliest scenario, but are we willing to take the chance that Teague is essentially the Marvin Williams of PGs if we trade for him?

I understand the best-case scenario for Teague. And maybe it's worth the risk. But I think the likeliest scenario is that Teague is relatively average or maybe just barely above that. That's an improvement this year, for sure. But is it worth Burks and a first rounder (or whatever the likeliest trade seems to be), along with the possibility of playing-time issues between him and Exum next year?

I was more upset at the raja bell, richard Jefferson, and josh Howard signings.
Those were old, washed up hired guns. Way different than getting teague.

People didn't complain much about the Randy foye hiring and him playing ahead of Burks cause foye was actually good and still pretty young (like teague)


Plus allot of us were sick of the same team and same result every year and wanted change. We are not sick of this team right now

 

[fishonjazz]

I don't actually disagree with you. I wasn't on the playing-Marvin-equals-screwing-Alec bandwagon. Just pointing out the possibility that history could repeat itself in terms of fan reaction if Teague turns out to be quite average. (But I don't think that the Hawks will give us Teague for Burke and the GS pick. Maybe they would in the summer, but I don't see any reason why they would now.)

Playing Marvin never screwed burks. It screwed kanter if anyone.

Playing dick Jefferson screwed burks

 

[fishonjazz]

Not sure the contention window even opens if Hayward leaves and if Exum doesn't develop. Who is better to advance the goals of the Jazz in the next 1 1/2 seasons, Burke or Teague? And I would define those goals as advancing as far as possible in the playoffs and mentoring Dante to become an impact starting PG. There are steps that have to occur BEFORE the Jazz can even think of contending.

This.
Stifle killing it

 

[Willie G.]

Playing Marvin never screwed burks. It screwed kanter if anyone.

Playing dick Jefferson screwed burks

For me, history has clearly shown that Kanter never got "screwed" in Utah. And stats showed it at the time, too. He barely earned the minutes he played. You can't be that kind of liability on defense and such a black hole on offense and still command minutes. I think Utah really stuck by him, and earnestly tried to help him develop a more well-rounded game.