If the Jazz make a draft day trade......Predict the trade.

[JazzTalk]

You think Trey Burke has the skills to be an All Star? Really? I think he can improve a bit. But I don't see near the talent to ever be even considered for an all star team.

Basketball skills right now? No

Drive, determination, and willing to work hard to reach his goal of All Star, Yes. Burke has that chip on his shoulder of always being told he can't. He always proved the critiques wrong. Tony Parker couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with his jump shot, he now has an adequate jump shot

I think he will reach the All Star game at least once. But it will be with an Eastern Conferance team.

 

[Cappy_Smurf]

Utah trades Trey + the Okc pick and six 2nd rounders to nuggets and draft Super Mario.

 

[Cappy_Smurf]

Basketball skills right now? No

Drive, determination, and willing to work hard to reach his goal of All Star, Yes. Burke has that chip on his shoulder of always being told he can't. He always proved the critiques wrong. Tony Parker couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with his jump shot, he now has an adequate jump shot

I think he will reach the All Star game at least once. But it will be with an Eastern Conferance team.

Trey Burke does not belong in the same sentence as Tony Parker or all star.

 

[♪alt13]

Basketball skills right now? No

Drive, determination, and willing to work hard to reach his goal of All Star, Yes. Burke has that chip on his shoulder of always being told he can't. He always proved the critiques wrong. Tony Parker couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with his jump shot, he now has an adequate jump shot

I think he will reach the All Star game at least once. But it will be with an Eastern Conferance team.

Burke is not nor will he ever be an All Star. It isn't happening.

 

[Nate505]

If a trade is make I think they'll give up some assets (nothing major) to get to the Hornets spot. Possibly either the Thunder or Wariors pick, though if it's the Warriors pick I'd rather see them just sit at 12, unless it means getting Johnson (or even better, Henzjoa).

 

[gregbroncs]

Basketball skills right now? No

Drive, determination, and willing to work hard to reach his goal of All Star, Yes. Burke has that chip on his shoulder of always being told he can't. He always proved the critiques wrong. Tony Parker couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with his jump shot, he now has an adequate jump shot

I think he will reach the All Star game at least once. But it will be with an Eastern Conferance team.

He doesn't have the talent to be an all star. All the drive, determination and hard work in the world won't make him, Bigger, faster, or more athletic. Those things are keeping him from the all-star team every bit as much as his current skill set. And his current skill set is a long way from being all-star capable in any conference.

 

[Nate505]

Gobert > Towns.

Seriously, I'd rather have Gobert.

I'd draft Gobert #1 in this draft knowing what I know now.

If Gobert is traded for anyone in this draft I'll reconsider my nearly 30 years of fandom. Fortunately there's no chance of that happening at all.

 

[Cappy_Smurf]

If a trade is make I think they'll give up some assets (nothing major) to get to the Hornets spot. Possibly either the Thunder or Wariors pick, though if it's the Warriors pick I'd rather see them just sit at 12, unless it means getting Johnson (or even better, Henzjoa).

The warriors pick is extremely unlikely to be traded. Anything can happen injury wise, and that pick could turn to gold. Utah won't part with it for anything less than a home run.

 

[Coach Ellis]

The warriors pick is extremely unlikely to be traded. Anything can happen injury wise, and that pick could turn to gold. Utah won't part with it for anything less than a home run.

Agreed. Completely unprotected picks two years out are hard to score. You don't give them up because they might still be good down the road. Plus, having multiple picks in a given year allows the team to trade picks in 3 consecutive years. The Jazz could potentially trade 2016, 2017, 2018 (depending on when the OKC pick pays out) and 2019 picks in a blockbuster deal AND still keep a completely unprotected 2017 pick in their back pocket.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Agreed. Completely unprotected picks two years out are hard to score. You don't give them up because they might still be good down the road. Plus, having multiple picks in a given year allows the team to trade picks in 3 consecutive years. The Jazz could potentially trade 2016, 2017, 2018 (depending on when the OKC pick pays out) and 2019 picks in a blockbuster deal AND still keep a completely unprotected 2017 pick in their back pocket.

Yeah we need to stop mentioning those two picks (the OKC pick and GSW pick) as if they are equal. With the protections on the OKC pick and the fact that it is subject to them conveying another pick that has protections on it I don't think it is truly valued as a first round pick. Whereas the GSW pick could be a lotto pick... not likely, but there is a chance. Bogut is old and may fade fast... Iggy is no spring chicken and you never know if Steph might get hurt. They could have the year that OKC had this year.

 

[Jeffrey32]

Interesting non-Jazz Trade brewing...

Lakers get Cousins
Kings get Vucevic + Orlando's #5 (pick Mudiay)
Magic get Lakers #2 (pick Okafor)

My guess is Kings would keep their #6 (Pick Winslow or Mario).

There would certainly be other picks and players for balance and cap room, but this rumor actually seems to be a fair trade for all teams on the surface.

 

[Ellipse]

The Jazz won't trade down unless someone makes them an offer for the #12 pick that heavily favors the Jazz. Why? Because you don't trade down unless: a) there is no one on the board you think is worth a #12 pick or b) you can't decide who you want, so you let the other teams choose first to simplify your choice. I just can't picture DL working the phones to get a worse pick.
.
What I think might happen is we trade our #12, next year's first pick, plus the GS pick to New York for #4. Why? Because New York is shopping for first round picks and that deal gives them 2 more first rounders , one of which replaces the one they traded away and Utah get's to add a potential star to their team without hurting the current roster. Burke and one or more 2nd round picks might be added to sweeten the deal for New York.

 

[Cappy_Smurf]

The Jazz won't trade down unless someone makes them an offer for the #12 pick that heavily favors the Jazz. Why? Because you don't trade down unless: a) there is no one on the board you think is worth a #12 pick or b) you can't decide who you want, so you let the other teams choose first to simplify your choice. I just can't picture DL working the phones to get a worse pick.
.
What I think might happen is we trade our #12, next year's first pick, plus the GS pick to New York for #4. Why? Because New York is shopping for first round picks and that deal gives them 2 more first rounders , one of which replaces the one they traded away and Utah get's to add a potential star to their team without hurting the current roster. Burke and one or more 2nd round picks might be added to sweeten the deal for New York.

I think that's a pipe dream. NY won't trade the pick unless it improves them immediately.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

The Jazz won't trade down unless someone makes them an offer for the #12 pick that heavily favors the Jazz. Why? Because you don't trade down unless: a) there is no one on the board you think is worth a #12 pick or b) you can't decide who you want, so you let the other teams choose first to simplify your choice. I just can't picture DL working the phones to get a worse pick.
.
What I think might happen is we trade our #12, next year's first pick, plus the GS pick to New York for #4. Why? Because New York is shopping for first round picks and that deal gives them 2 more first rounders , one of which replaces the one they traded away and Utah get's to add a potential star to their team without hurting the current roster. Burke and one or more 2nd round picks might be added to sweeten the deal for New York.

I think its possible and I think they use those picks to get more proven players. Or we could do 3-team trades to deliver players they want using our flexibility and draft picks. At very least we would be taking Calderon though. I'd do it for sure.

They are clearly looking at trading to our range... they've worked out Frank, Lyles, Payne etc and one or two of those guys will be available.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

The Jazz won't trade down unless someone makes them an offer for the #12 pick that heavily favors the Jazz. Why? Because you don't trade down unless: a) there is no one on the board you think is worth a #12 pick or b) you can't decide who you want, so you let the other teams choose first to simplify your choice. I just can't picture DL working the phones to get a worse pick.
.
What I think might happen is we trade our #12, next year's first pick, plus the GS pick to New York for #4. Why? Because New York is shopping for first round picks and that deal gives them 2 more first rounders , one of which replaces the one they traded away and Utah get's to add a potential star to their team without hurting the current roster. Burke and one or more 2nd round picks might be added to sweeten the deal for New York.

The scenario in which we move down imo is if Turner falls. I don't think he is a good long-term fit because he is a true center... don't think he can play alongside Gobert. If Boston really likes him they could be willing to give one of their better future picks plus the #16 for him. I like Dekker, Portis, Hunter around that area.

Milwaukee would also likely be really interested in Turner... Say we get their 2016 or 2017 pick unprotected plus #17... would you do it? I think I would.

 

[Coach Ellis]

No.

Myles Turner is WAY better than anyone we can get at 16/17 and a future pick. If the Jazz want to maximize their asset, they'd be better off drafting him. Then they can have their phenomenal player development coaching staff work with him as the 3rd big behind Gobert and Favors and eventually feature him in a blockbuster trade down the line. The plain and simple fact is that the Jazz desperately need a center behind Gobert. Myles Turner is much better than what they deserve to fill that hole in the roster with.

I'd take Turner over every reasonably priced big in free agency this year. It doesn't matter if he can't play with Rudy, because someone has to fill in when Gobert goes out. It's easy to just say Favors can handle it. . . but the Jazz are better off if Favors doesn't have to handle it. Favors can play with Turner and Booker (for now) can fill in for Favors.

Getting Myles Turner would be a blessing. Like hitting a homerun 3 years in a row from the draft. Too bad they whiffed on Burke.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

No.

Myles Turner is WAY better than anyone we can get at 16/17 and a future pick. If the Jazz want to maximize their asset, they'd be better off drafting him. Then they can have their phenomenal player development coaching staff work with him as the 3rd big behind Gobert and Favors and eventually feature him in a blockbuster trade down the line. The plain and simple fact is that the Jazz desperately need a center behind Gobert. Myles Turner is much better than what they deserve to fill that hole in the roster with.

I'd take Turner over every reasonably priced big in free agency this year. It doesn't matter if he can't play with Rudy, because someone has to fill in when Gobert goes out. It's easy to just say Favors can handle it. . . but the Jazz are better off if Favors doesn't have to handle it. Favors can play with Turner and Booker (for now) can fill in for Favors.

Getting Myles Turner would be a blessing. Like hitting a homerun 3 years in a row from the draft. Too bad they whiffed on Burke.

We don't know that Turner is way better than anyone we can get at 16 or 17. He may be a better prospect, but there are many red flags on the guy. I think he'd fill a role next year... the 12 minutes or so that Gobert isn't on the floor, but barring a Rudy injury long-term its not a great fit. If I can take a chance on another guy who might be a better long-term fit and get a chance to get something really good in the future I move back.

One caveat... I wouldn't move back for a pick in the late 20s on the Clippers pick that Milwaukee owns that is lotto protected. It's gotta be a pick that DL thinks has a chance to be in the lotto.

I know we have a ton of assets, but I could see us burning a first rounder next year at the trade deadline on something that could help us immediately. We would have had a chance to have a look at the roster development and see where we still have needs. Also as teams fall out of contention they will sell off good players to go the way of the tank.

 

[NAOS]

I really don't understand the fascination with Turner.

 

[Coach Ellis]

We don't know that any player drafted at 12 will be better than what they can get at 16/17, but the odds clearly suggest that he will be. Especially for a team like Utah that has an exceptional scouting department. If he didn't have the red flags that he does, he'd be a top 5 pick and even more likely to succeed.

If the Jazz pick him, I think that he fills the role that Kanter should have had in Utah behind Rudy and Derrick. While giving up some on the offensive end of things, I think he brings a lot more to the defensive side. I think he'd be just fine off the bench and if he can improve his lateral mobility (he is just 19 and still growing / learning to move) then he would be able to play with Gobert. I also see him as a team first, hungry player that will thrive on the same team as a guy like Gobert.

Nothing I the draft is ever a sure thing. Talent is talent. I'd much rather roll the dice on Turner than traxe back for a player I like less that might be a better perceived fit. I don't think Boston or Milwaukee give up any real assets for any player I this draft.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

We don't know that any player drafted at 12 will be better than what they can get at 16/17, but the odds clearly suggest that he will be. Especially for a team like Utah that has an exceptional scouting department. If he didn't have the red flags that he does, he'd be a top 5 pick and even more likely to succeed.

If the Jazz pick him, I think that he fills the role that Kanter should have had in Utah behind Rudy and Derrick. While giving up some on the offensive end of things, I think he brings a lot more to the defensive side. I think he'd be just fine off the bench and if he can improve his lateral mobility (he is just 19 and still growing / learning to move) then he would be able to play with Gobert. I also see him as a team first, hungry player that will thrive on the same team as a guy like Gobert.

Nothing I the draft is ever a sure thing. Talent is talent. I'd much rather roll the dice on Turner than traxe back for a player I like less that might be a better perceived fit. I don't think Boston or Milwaukee give up any real assets for any player I this draft.

You can't remove the red flags though. If Dekker was a consistent shooter he'd be a top 5 guy too. I like turner, but he's a five... long term he won't fit well with Gobert and I think he has more value to another team that doesn't have a young stud center. I wouldn't be upset at all if we drafted and kept him, but if we had an offer to pick up another prospect in the same tier that might fit better and get another good draft asset I would rather pursue that option.