Millsap for Bledsoe?

[The Midnight]

I kinda agree with Billy, the main question here is how much you value Bledsoe over Burke or MCW.

I think they have similar potential, but in different aspects of the game. I think Burke has the heart and determination to reach that potential but it'll take 2-3 years (ala Hayward).

So if we're patient, I think with Burke, we can get there. I still think:

Burke + Burks > Bledsoe

Burke + Hayward > Bledsoe

 

[mhindy]

His floor? Oh my.

Honestly, that explains it. I don't have anywhere near that confidence in Bledsoe, but if I did I'd happily trade Hayward for him too.

 

[spycam1]

Why are we discussing trading Hayward?

 

[GVC]

Why are we discussing trading Hayward?

Because apparently we have a shot at getting a player whose floor is the best player on a team on pace to win 50 games.

 

[billyshelby]

His floor? Oh my.

The biggest fear with Bledsoe, to my mind, is whether he has the vision. He's already an excellent PnR player, an excellent driver, and an excellent defender. And since he shares the ball a lot with Crawford, he's never been in a situation where he can really run the show. My feeling is he'll be just fine once he gets that chance, but I get concerns that he might wind up being a poor imitation of Westbrook. But when I watch him, I see the chance of him turning out less than Lawson as very low.

 

[billyshelby]

Why are we discussing trading Hayward?

It's not about trying to trade Hayward. It's about the various speculations that the Jazz might have to trade Burks to get Hayward. My opinion is we would be better off keeping Burks and dangling Hayward to get Bledsoe, but with the caveat that Hayward has much more trade value and thus it could never be as simple as Sap/Hayward for Bledsoe/Butler.

 

[GVC]

The biggest fear with Bledsoe, to my mind, is whether he has the vision. He's already an excellent PnR player, an excellent driver, and an excellent defender. And since he shares the ball a lot with Crawford, he's never been in a situation where he can really run the show. My feeling is he'll be just fine once he gets that chance, but I get concerns that he might wind up being a poor imitation of Westbrook. But when I watch him, I see the chance of him turning out less than Lawson as very low.

I don't see him as a guy who's going to be able to run the show. Potentially a great complement to Kanter-Favors-Hayward with his physicality, but not really a lead guard. Lawson runs the Nuggets. We'll see.

 

[The Midnight]

I actually think it would be the shrewdest move they could make, but let me qualify it: I think Hayward is a really good player. I think a lot of his value doesn't show up in the boxscore like AK. And for a lot of reasons, I would have no problem if they signed him to a reasonable extension this summer (even though I personally would wait till he's an RFA.)

But from an asset management perspective, I think his perceived value is higher than his actual value. Conversely, Burks perceived value is lower. Favors is the only guy getting an extension, and the only question is how much.

IF the Jazz are convinced he's going to be either the A or B star of the future, then you don't deal him except in a megadeal. But IF they see him as a quality third or fourth piece on a good team, THEN you explore what assets he can bring back BECAUSE you're already thinking about how you're going to lock in Favors, Kanter, and Burks/Bledsoe as the pillars.

For me, I like a future four of Favors/Kanter/Bledsoe/Burks much more than with Hayward in Burks' place.

I have to question this. If this is really the case, would another team offer him the "perceived value" of say $12m per year, when his "actual value" is only $8m per year?

I doubt it.

The "perceived value" only exists for the team that currently has him (i.e., only Utah fans love Hayward) - therefore it's irrelevant when pricing an asset such as Hayward.

 

[billyshelby]

I don't see him as a guy who's going to be able to run the show. Potentially a great complement to Kanter-Favors-Hayward with his physicality, but not really a lead guard. Lawson runs the Nuggets. We'll see.

We'll see by next year. Somebody's going to get him even if it's not us and he'll play 30 plus. He won't make the Harden jump in Year 1 as a starter, but whatever extension he signs will look cheap.

 

[billyshelby]

I have to question this. If this is really the case, would another team offer him the "perceived value" of say $12m per year, when his "actual value" is only $8m per year?

I doubt it.

The "perceived value" only exists for the team that currently has him (i.e., only Utah fans love Hayward) - therefore it's irrelevant when pricing an asset such as Hayward.

Hayward has more perceived value because he's more established, ie. teams know they won't be getting a dud. Opinions will differ on how much more upside he has, but there is security in knowing you will absolutely get a guy who can start. And certain teams, like the Clips, might figure they can slot him in for Butler money and make him that excellent 3rd piece on a team that has Paul and Griffin at the core.

Burks is only now showing his talent. So there's far more uncertainty. The irony is Burks' development isn't much different than Hayward's. It gets forgotten that Hayward was very mediocre until the last 20 games of last season. But he got far more minutes in his second year. Burks is only now getting regular minutes. My belief is Burks growth curve will be very sharp as his minutes increase because I think he has some elite NBA talents. With Hayward, I think we know what he's going to do per minute.

 

[Bawse Dawg]

So can I go to bed in peace? Nothing happening? Oh well. I really wanted Bledsoe, but I wouldn't want to give up Burks or Hayward. I had a feeling there was a deal on both tables, Jazz offer Millsap and a first rounder. Clippers wanted Millsap and Burks or Hayward instead. And neither team would budge. If that's was the case I'm glad the Jazz didn't give in. Tomorrow about an hour before the deadline i would call them one more time, if they still say no, offer the other first rounder as well. If they still say no, hang up. I hate the idea of both bigs walking for nothing after the season, but looks like that's gonna happen.

 

[mhindy]

Maybe I'm just going crazy but the more I think about it the more I think Bledsoe is what we need. I can see how Kahn gets ripped off.

 

[Game6Conley]

I question the quality of bledsoes 3pt% this season. is it a formation of luck + low volume??

with the emergence of burks in closing time, i think corbin and the jazz FO may have more faith in burks running point than many here. if thats the case they probably find bledsoe to be redundant with burks' skillsets(not halfcourt pgs). most importantly, not enough of an upgrade to lose Millsap for the playoff push

The more i think on it the more I cannot see the jazz FO paying a kings ransom for bledsoe. if theres anything the jazz have shown with their roster moves this year, they value shooters.

 

[crater77]

Damnit, I must work threw the deadline! Hope to God I come home and see we made this trade!

 

[green]

So can I go to bed in peace? Nothing happening? Oh well. I really wanted Bledsoe, but I wouldn't want to give up Burks or Hayward. I had a feeling there was a deal on both tables, Jazz offer Millsap and a first rounder. Clippers wanted Millsap and Burks or Hayward instead. And neither team would budge. If that's was the case I'm glad the Jazz didn't give in. Tomorrow about an hour before the deadline i would call them one more time, if they still say no, offer the other first rounder as well. If they still say no, hang up. I hate the idea of both bigs walking for nothing after the season, but looks like that's gonna happen.

I don't buy that the Clippers won't budge. What else are they going to do with Bledsoe? He is more valuable now then he will ever be (unless they let Paul walk). They will not get a player as good as Millsap/Al for Bledose. If the deal doesn't get done, the Jazz screwed up.

 

[GVC]

I don't buy that the Clippers won't budge. What else are they going to do with Bledsoe? He is more valuable now then he will ever be (unless they let Paul walk). They will not get a player as good as Millsap/Al for Bledose. If the deal doesn't get done, the Jazz screwed up.

Maybe they think they can get more in the summer. Maybe they want to hold onto him in case Paul leaves.

 

[mhindy]

Cross your fingers boys, we're in the home stretch.

 

[Bawse Dawg]

They've been crossed for days. Gotten me nothing but cramps...

 

[mhindy]

They've been crossed for days. Gotten me nothing but cramps...

Keep it up for a few more hours.

 

[The Midnight]

Maybe they think they can get more in the summer. Maybe they want to hold onto him in case Paul leaves.

I don't think they will ever get a better offer than Millsap. There are 4 decent PGs in this year's draft. So teams currently without a future PG can acquire someone there. (i.e., Jazz can acquire Burke, for example).

Then there's '14 draft as well.

So I think the market for Bledsoe will start to shrink. Also once they signed CP3, teams will know that Clippers will start to get desperate.

I doubt another team would be willing to give up more than Millsap for Bledsoe. Millsap + a pick is a pretty good deal - if they don't take it then do it at their own risk IMO.