What's new
By:

green's annual crazy *** fix for the Jazz

Saint Cy of JFC said:
The issue is the Pacers go to the Lakers and tell them Utah is offering legitimate assets for PG. That might make Magic Johnson laugh, or it might make him go to Pelinka to offer up assets for PG. Lakers can definitely out offer Utah in an asset contest. Just depends on how much they worry about PG staying with Utah if we trade for him.
Click to expand...

Okay, but what is the problem here? LA gets him in a trade and the Jazz are out what?

As much as I am loathe to even appear to agree with green on anything, it's worth a shot. Celtics have the best assets but I don't think they're going to offer what the Pacers are going to ask given the risk that George might walk.
 
I like this idea except for trading Exum. If PG13 has a longer and that was the only way to get him I would be okay with it. I also don't think Lowry will sign for that little. It's more likely Hayward would take less and I don't think that is likely either. I also would rather go after other FAs first over Lowry. I really liked him but he has been terrible the last couple years in the playoffs and is getting to the age of decline as well. I think his game is not built to age as well as say Hill.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using JazzFanz mobile app
 
green said:
I do think that George is a realistic possibility and Utah should push hard for him.

Yeah, George wants LA. But, you pair him with Gordon and Gobert and that is a trio with 60 win potential.

Force George to leave more money and more wins on the table to go to LA.

If we win 60 games, I'd bet he stays.
Click to expand...
I would risk it.
Honestly, even if he left it would be worth it just to see an incredible season and be a contender at least for the year.

Worst case scenario we still have hayward and gobert and quin anyway so it's not like george leaving for LA would make us suck.

On the other hand, george sticking around makes us yearly contenders.

No brainer imo
 
NUMBERICA said:
Okay, but what is the problem here? LA gets him in a trade and the Jazz are out what?

As much as I am loathe to even appear to agree with green on anything, it's worth a shot. Celtics have the best assets but I don't think they're going to offer what the Pacers are going to ask given the risk that George might walk.
Click to expand...

Yeah, no issue, just speaking to the reality of getting George.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Additionally, if this causes the Lakers to have to cough up more assets in this hypothetical scenario, then all the better.
Click to expand...

Yes. Getting George is super risky though when we give up assets just to have George bolt to the Lakers. I think I'd almost prefer to have the Jazz just pressure the Lakers into trading more to get George than actually getting George. The stress of knowing if the Jazz dont greatly dominate and get to the WCF (at least) and take the GSW to 6/7 games likely means George would be gone.
 
Green,

Paul George with Hayward and Gobert does not make the Jazz a team with 60 win potential. It makes them a team with 65+ win potential. Seriously, that "Big 3" matches up with any other roster in the NBA and makes Utah a legit title contender. For what it's worth, whether it be George or another big name, I do think Lindsey's off-season plan is to take a huge swing at acquiring another star, thus making it nearly impossible for Hayward to walk away.
 
George is a free agent, and Indy traded him to us in the first place. If Indy traded PG for a package of Exum and Favors and low picks that would be so ****ing funny.
 
fallenchicken said:
George is a free agent, and Indy traded him to us in the first place. If Indy traded PG for a package of Exum and Favors and low picks that would be so ****ing funny.
Click to expand...
I don't think george is a free agent
 
kiri.de.carlos said:
I think he means our George...George hill


I'm not sure I am on the Paul George train. I am really not a fan of his "I'm the star I take the last shot" comments, but maybe on a better team he would be alright.

Sent from my VS990 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...
Ahhh, ya that's it.
My bad
 
Locke has said repeatedly on his podcast, that the Jazz have expressed to Dennis Lindsey that they would be willing to pay the luxury tax if that's what it takes to win a championship.

Our championship winning potential is higher than most think, when you realize that this season's team was a few more healthy players (realistically just a healthy George Hill) could have got us the #2 seed, and potentially a 2nd round match up with the Rockets - in which case the Jazz would be getting ready for tomorrow's game one of the WCF series.

Assuming the Jazz can sign Gordon Hayward - it might be worth taking a one-year flyer on Paul George, that would at least give us a chance to let him see what real winning is like. At that point, maybe the Lakers aren't so tempting anymore - because he doesn't want to be part of the re-build - and Magic is most likely going to run things into the ground. At that point, he may want to stay especially if we've just been to the WCF or if we've just been to the finals. If he still wants to pursue the limelight of LA - then the Jazz can pursue someone who is more interested in winning in free agency of 2019 (2018 is absolute crap).

Which is part of why THIS SUMMER is so crucial. You aren't putting together the roster for next season, but for the next two or three seasons. This is the year, the Jazz should look at hitting the luxury tax - and go after whoever you go after - Serge Ibaka/Paul Millsap/Danillo Gallinari/etc. Because there is going to be NO ONE like that available in free agency in 2018.
 
Look, you go get Paul George for three reasons:

1 - you guarantee that Hayward re-signs. Even if George leaves in a year, you still have Hayward. That right there makes the trade a no brainer. I'd rather have Hayward than Exum or Favors or Hood or whatever stupid end of first round player a draft pick brings. Also, unless you want to be a better version of the Blazers, you can't resign Hood, Favors and Exum. You will most likely only keep one. So, in three years, the trade becomes a single player from Utah for George (especially if George re-signs).

2 - Even if you only have George for a year, you are the second best team in the West. Maybe better. So, if George wants to walk away from that....

3 - Finally, if we trade for George, then we get his signing rights, no? That means that we can give him 230 million next summer and no one else can? That we'd be able to pay him something like 60 million more than the Lakers. And we'd be the second best team in the NBA.

It's a no brainer. For him and for us.

The rest of my post isn't likely...Lowry, Korver, etc. But George is.
 
karl malone said:
Living in MA, I watch a lot of Celtics games. Avery Bradley would be a great acquisition for this team. Boston seems to love him but with IT due for a max extension, Horford already locked in on the max, Bradley entering the final year of his contract (presumably in line for a big contract), & the presence of Smart & possibly Fultz, the Celtics could decide to trade him in order to maintain payroll flexibility. What they decide to do with their plethora of assets will likely be the determining factor.

Acquiring him would take a significant haul so IMO it should only be done with the intention of retaining him long-term, which likely wouldn't be financially possible if we pay Hill. But if he was available & we are able to retain Hayward while letting Hill walk, personally, I would give up a significant package for him (assuming we're able to re-sign him the following off-season).

IMO Bradley may be the best (realistic) addition to a core of Hayward & Gobert as he is not only young but would be a great fit. He plays well off the ball, is an elite perimeter defender, a very good outside shooter, & would bring a toughness/relentlessness that would fit perfectly with this team's culture & Rudy's drive/intensity.

Although he wouldn't be that 3rd superstar, IMO he would be an excellent Pippen to our 2 Jordans (just an analogy, not an actual comparison). I would be much more comfortable committing to him long-term than Hill (even with the loss of assets used to acquire him, assuming it's within reason).
Click to expand...
I've been pushing for Bradley for years. Great, humble, hardworking player.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top