It is time consider trade Hayward

[The Midnight]

For the most part, it's working. Hayward made a huge jump in year 4 to 5. Favors has made steady progression every year. Burke stalemated in his second year but is looking much improved in his third year. Burks the jury is still out, he's a frustrating player to watch because he has the tools to be a really good player. Kanter was the rawest player in the draft so keeping him 4 years was probably the right thing to do in hope he breaks out. We know how it went down, but doubt he would have fetched more than a mid 1st rounder at any point after his second year.

It's the most prudent approach for sure, especially for a small market. All we can hope for is for us to strike it lucky in the draft 1 year and grab the likes of Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili out of thin air and try to contend. We have a defensive super star in Gobert, I still think we need an instant offensive force to contend.


And if you say "well look at the '04 Pistons", yeah well they had Rip Hamilton who was pretty reliable as well as "Mr. Big Shot" himself who gave them that winning shot whenever they needed it.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

I think the Jazz team is starting to come into focus. Hayward should be a 2nd-option offensive player. Favors should be a 3rd-option offensive player. Gobert is a perennial DPOY-type player, whose offense is a bonus.

For the Jazz as currently constructed to reach their potential, they need to acquire a big-time scorer and #1 option in their backcourt. Exum should always be a good defensive player and ball distributor at the PG spot, and he should become reliable if not spectacular offensively. Gobert and Exum returning give the Jazz their top-5 defensive potential, while the new backcourt scorer to be determined makes the Jazz a top-8 offense.

So the question is --- who is that killer SG going to be? I can understand why the Jazz front office wants to take it slow and not rush into a decision before they have all the information they need. Right now, Burks and Hood look like bench players, as is Trey Burke.

The Jazz have a bunch of picks to keep or trade, but from here they need to hone in on a versatile wing who can really score the ball and hold his own on defense. They need a Jimmy Butler-caliber 2.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

I think the Jazz team is starting to come into focus. Hayward should be a 2nd-option offensive player. Favors should be a 3rd-option offensive player. Gobert is a perennial DPOY-type player, whose offense is a bonus.

For the Jazz as currently constructed to reach their potential, they need to acquire a big-time scorer and #1 option in their backcourt. Exum should always be a good defensive player and ball distributor at the PG spot, and he should become reliable if not spectacular offensively. Gobert and Exum returning give the Jazz their top-5 defensive potential, while the new backcourt scorer to be determined makes the Jazz a top-8 offense.

So the question is --- who is that killer SG going to be? I can understand why the Jazz front office wants to take it slow and not rush into a decision before they have all the information they need. Right now, Burks and Hood look like bench players, as is Trey Burke.

The Jazz have a bunch of picks to keep or trade, but from here they need to hone in on a versatile wing who can really score the ball and hold his own on defense. They need a Jimmy Butler-caliber 2.

Why in the world is everyone so obsessed with the numbering of "options"?

 

[Miggs]

There's some interesting wing players on the market this summer that combined with Hood could fill the void of Hayward, especially if the Hayward trade returned a trove of future assets.

Lets pretend the 76ers care to improve/revamp their team this year and they traded

Saric, Embiid and some future picks for Hayward. The Jazz could then throw Harrison Barnes the same type of deal the Hornets signed Hayward to.. The oft injured Brad Beal is also RFA too.

Saric could help fill in some of those lost minutes, and some of Trevor Bookers minutes, with Sap and Elijah off the books and the 1st round pick there's room for more reinforcements on the wing too... IMO Burks could play some SF depending on the matchup, so they could go for a SG.

You are such a clown? Yeah let's toss Hayward aside and roll the dice that the Wiz won't match on Beal (which they will) or Saric who is completely unproven or Embiid who is pretty much completely shot.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

We should be open to trading Burks and Burke at some point soon if things don't change. Give Hood another year to improve.

Hayward is one of the few things that is working at this point.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

Why in the world is everyone so obsessed with the numbering of "options"?

Because scoring points is an important part of the game.

 

[Miggs]

Barring a mind-blowing acquisition, I think Hayward and Favors and Gobert are absolute keepers. So is Exum at this point since we'd likely not get fair value for him in a trade. After that, I would list Hood as the 5th guy we should not trade at this point because again, we wouldn't get value back based on what he may likely become.

So far me, Burke and Burks are most tradeable. I haven't watched enough of the games this year but for those who have, is their low +/- a relatively accurate indication of what they've brought to the table? Or is that more of a reflection of our bad bench?

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Barring a mind-blowing acquisition, I think Hayward and Favors and Gobert are absolute keepers. So is Exum at this point since we'd likely not get fair value for him in a trade. After that, I would list Hood as the 5th guy we should not trade at this point because again, we wouldn't get value back based on what he may likely become.

So far me, Burke and Burks are most tradeable. I haven't watched enough of the games this year but for those who have, is their low +/- a relatively accurate indication of what they've brought to the table? Or is that more of a reflection of our bad bench?

Burks is definitely most tradeable. We aren't even using him right and he doesnt fit what Quin wants to do, plus he is pretty underwhelming on defense.

 

[GVC]

Why in the world is everyone so obsessed with the numbering of "options"?

+1. It's entirely unclear to me what this numbering even means. I think it's far more precise/useful to use player roles within an offense: offensive hub, spot-up shooter, pick-and-roll big, garbage man, etc.

 

[Miggs]

+1. It's entirely unclear to me what this numbering even means. I think it's far more precise/useful to use player roles within an offense: offensive hub, spot-up shooter, pick-and-roll big, garbage man, etc.

This. I meant to mention this in my post but I feel I'd prefer to trade Burks and Burke for guys who will have clearly defined roles for us. Say Burks for a Ryan Anderson-type. And Burke for a Korver-type. I'm not saying those are the players I'd specifically target but for me, right now, everyone's roles are sort of muddled. Favors should get more touches. So should Hayward imo. And everyone else should sort of plays their roles and fill in the gaps.

 

[GVC]

This. I meant to mention this in my post but I feel I'd prefer to trade Burks and Burke for guys who will have clearly defined roles for us. Say Burks for a Ryan Anderson-type. And Burke for a Korver-type. I'm not saying those are the players I'd specifically target but for me, right now, everyone's roles are sort of muddled. Favors should get more touches. So should Hayward imo. And everyone else should sort of plays their roles and fill in the gaps.

Burks is turning into an ok spot-up shooter. Unfortunately, he's yet to really harness his driving ability effectively -- which would make him a decent safety valve in late shot clocks when the offense breaks down -- and his defense is still spotty. With their suspect feel/passing, and decent ability to get their own shots (even if they don't hit them all that often), Burke and Burks is a decent bench duo (a bit like Toronto's Williams-Vasquez duo from last season, albeit not as good). Booker and Lyles have been mostly terrible coming off the bench this season, which is the real problem.

 

[gregbroncs]

Hayward is a very good player, and I don't think we can find a plausible trade that gives us anywhere near as much value back. Maybe Favors + picks for Cousins would work, since he's always in trade rumors.

**** that! My days as a Jazz fan would end the day that trade was announced.

 

[Getting Traded]

You guys are bleepin idiots. Look what the DWill trade got us. We're just beginning to recover now. No, I think we need to give these guys a chance. As it was said, O thee of little faith ...

 

[da ThRONe]

You guys are bleepin idiots. Look what the DWill trade got us. We're just beginning to recover now. No, I think we need to give these guys a chance. As it was said, O thee of little faith ...

I don't think the DWill trade is the prime example for the case of not trading Hayward.

 

[Jamezz]

+1. It's entirely unclear to me what this numbering even means. I think it's far more precise/useful to use player roles within an offense: offensive hub, spot-up shooter, pick-and-roll big, garbage man, etc.

I think what most people mean when they talk about options 1 through 5 in a team is how consistent a player is with his contributions to the team, along with how clutch he is. Option 1 being the player that contributes the most towards wins and option 5 being the weakest link in the starting lineup.

In this case you may argue that Hayward is our number 1 option but he isn't good enough of a number 1 option if your goal is to win a ring. In a league where historically teams who had a superstar caliber number 1 option have been the ones that have won the most rings (yes there are exceptions like the Spurs or Detroit in the 'Bad Boys' era) I think it's fair to question whether if we should consider trying to land such kind of player.

 

[Ellipse]

I think what most people mean when they talk about options 1 through 5 in a team is how consistent a player is with his contributions to the team, along with how clutch he is. Option 1 being the player that contributes the most towards wins and option 5 being the weakest link in the starting lineup.

In this case you may argue that Hayward is our number 1 option but he isn't good enough of a number 1 option if your goal is to win a ring. In a league where historically teams who had a superstar caliber number 1 option have been the ones that have won the most rings (yes there are exceptions like the Spurs or Detroit in the 'Bad Boys' era) I think it's fair to question whether if we should consider trying to land such kind of player.

By your definition, our number 1 option is Gobert, which makes Hayward just fine as our number 2.

This whole option numbering thing is so retro.

 

[Maneesh]

Well you guys can miss the whole point here. 1,2,3 it does not matter and you are right, but Hayward is not mentally stronger to handle primary focus of defense of other team. Is this better? We should not wait to pay this 30MM!

 

[Game6Conley]

By your definition, our number 1 option is Gobert, which makes Hayward just fine as our number 2.

This whole option numbering thing is so retro.

In the regular season, maybe. Once the playoffs start its important to have a hierarchy established.

 

[Game6Conley]

It's important to note in conversations about #1 options that there are teams with more than 1 #1 option.. One is not singular. 1 doesn't always imply the top option, it works a bit more like Aces on a pitching staff.. Kobe and Shaq.. Not MJ and Pippen, MJ was the only top option that team needed. When OKC had Harden, they had damn near 3 legit #1 options, can't go wrong with any of em, obviously Durant is/was the best...

When you get two big-time players that buy into the other being big-time, that's how it works. It's been a formula to win in the playoffs since at least the 70's..

Howeva -- it's quite understandable for anyone who had to watch Al Jefferson as the #1 option in Utah to want to play system/concept/team ball (or give it to whoever's hot on a given night), still someones gotta pull the trigger on the big shots, we all know if its Trey Burke, the Jazz will be light-work for a real playoff team..

In the Playoffs the opposition will know the Jazz personnel much better, there's gotta be someone everyone trusts on the team to throw it to when **** gets tough, who can get results, or games on the road with early mishaps can get out of hand quickly, thats when 'team ball' unravels. Even that Detroit Pistons championship team had Rip Hamilton to run those curls whenever they needed. They also had 4 all-stars, and by-far the best defense in the league..

The Jazz could aspire to land 2 #1 options, and a top-5 defense that's what the upgrade would be.. that should be the aim for any franchise IMO. So if they could do something like flip Hayward for a top pick in the draft like Jamal Murray, who can play and shoot the lights out at PG or SG(potential #1 option?), then somehow use the rest of Haywards salary coming off the books to find another near #1 option... Obviously two is better than one, and obviously the time to cash in on Hayward's trade value could be limited.. These scenarios are quite risky, obviously there's considerable upside though -- IMO(If everything goes according to plan).


Theoretically Hayward would be an outstanding #2 option, i'd even classify him as a 1½. He's also a plus defensively(vs the lower tier SF's), which certainly factors into his trade value, there's some top options that aren't plus defenders at-all..

Another interesting option for the Jazz is to try to go after like 6 #1½ type options.. and share the rock. That might be a way to win if the defense is top-notch. Right now they've got Hayward and Favors as 1½ options, Burks and Hood are certainly trending in that direction, maybe they think Lyles can develop into a top option eventually? Trey Burke certainly takes shots like he's a top option.. Maybe they hit a homerun in the 2016 draft? maybe that homerun is a 2nd round SG? and they also hit a homerun in the 1st round?!? What I'm saying here in this last paragraph is that I do think they could pull this off with Hayward as the top #1½ option if the surrounding peices(sans Rudy) are all mostly dangerous options too. I'd rather have two legit #1 options though (on 4 year deals)

/endrant

 

[Jazz4ever]

It's important to note in conversations about #1 options that there are teams with more than 1 #1 option.. One is not singular. 1 doesn't always imply the top option, it works a bit more like Aces on a pitching staff.. Kobe and Shaq.. Not MJ and Pippen, MJ was the only top option that team needed. When OKC had Harden, they had damn near 3 legit #1 options, can't go wrong with any of em, obviously Durant is/was the best...

When you get two big-time players that buy into the other being big-time, that's how it works. It's been a formula to win in the playoffs since at least the 70's..

Howeva -- it's quite understandable for anyone who had to watch Al Jefferson as the #1 option in Utah to want to play system/concept/team ball (or give it to whoever's hot on a given night), still someones gotta pull the trigger on the big shots, we all know if its Trey Burke, the Jazz will be light-work for a real playoff team..

In the Playoffs the opposition will know the Jazz personnel much better, there's gotta be someone everyone trusts on the team to throw it to when **** gets tough, who can get results, or games on the road with early mishaps can get out of hand quickly, thats when 'team ball' unravels. Even that Detroit Pistons championship team had Rip Hamilton to run those curls whenever they needed. They also had 4 all-stars, and by-far the best defense in the league..

The Jazz could aspire to land 2 #1 options, and a top-5 defense that's what the upgrade would be.. that should be the aim for any franchise IMO. So if they could do something like flip Hayward for a top pick in the draft like Jamal Murray, who can play and shoot the lights out at PG or SG(potential #1 option?), then somehow use the rest of Haywards salary coming off the books to find another near #1 option... Obviously two is better than one, and obviously the time to cash in on Hayward's trade value could be limited.. These scenarios are quite risky, obviously there's considerable upside though -- IMO(If everything goes according to plan).


Theoretically Hayward would be an outstanding #2 option, i'd even classify him as a 1½. He's also a plus defensively(vs the lower tier SF's), which certainly factors into his trade value, there's some top options that aren't plus defenders at-all..

Another interesting option for the Jazz is to try to go after like 6 #1½ type options.. and share the rock. That might be a way to win if the defense is top-notch. Right now they've got Hayward and Favors as 1½ options, Burks and Hood are certainly trending in that direction, maybe they think Lyles can develop into a top option eventually? Trey Burke certainly takes shots like he's a top option.. Maybe they hit a homerun in the 2016 draft? maybe that homerun is a 2nd round SG? and they also hit a homerun in the 1st round?!? What I'm saying here in this last paragraph is that I do think they could pull this off with Hayward as the top #1½ option if the surrounding peices(sans Rudy) are all mostly dangerous options too. I'd rather have two legit #1 options though (on 4 year deals)

/endrant

That doesn't work because those 1 ½ guys end up getting max contracts in the NBA. Obviously the Jazz hoped Burks could become that guy, it was a calculated gamble not signing anyone this off season. Burks has not delivered so far. While he's at a career high 18.9 points/36, his TS% is at a near career low. Hood could still be that guy if he finds his three point shot.