What would be even more awesome is if it were the Jazz who miraculously ended up in the top spot forcing the GSW pick down to #8.
Playoffs or lottery, I think we win either way. Especially if we somehow can get the GSW pick and have both.
The value of 9th and 13th picks.
- Thread starter Beantown
- Start date
What would be even more awesome is if it were the Jazz who miraculously ended up in the top spot forcing the GSW pick down to #8.
Playoffs or lottery, I think we win either way. Especially if we somehow can get the GSW pick and have both.
theNBAnerd
Well-Known Member
disagree. kanter and burks are still very much projects. hayward and favors have taken good steps, but they didn't get a summer camp or a full training camp before their soph seasons, so even they are behind where they would otherwise be. and while nobody is THAT invested in evans, if he comes back he will essentially be a rookie in terms of minutes played, and still needs a lot of development.
i just don't think it's good for these guys' development if the time the coaches have available for working with and teaching them is split 6-7 ways. as karl malone pointed out, you can't bring in two big men who were top three picks and then not spend the time to work on their skills.
look at any team that reloaded through the draft (OKC, CHI, etc.) and you'll see that they brought in a *few* top-10 picks and then complemented them with the right mix of veterans through free agency and trades.
theNBAnerd
Well-Known Member
my nephew and i were daydreaming about that possibility. i think that's the only way i'd be ok missing the playoffs. watch GSW suck their way to 7th-worst and then we get to be the ones to bump them back into 8th. i seriously just wet my pants thinking about it.
Pizza The Hut
Banned
If we do finish with the 14th worst record, we'd have a 0.5% chance of getting the #1 pick. Sounds extremely remote but 1 in 200 doesn't sound so bad really. It's also 880,000x better odds than winning the Mega Millions which is 1 in 176 million. I like the sound of that.
Believe.
spycam1
Well-Known Member
Has the team with the 14th worst record ever won the lottery? Or even gotten into the top 3?
Pizza The Hut
Banned
I'm not sure if it was under the lottery's current system of odds but yes, the Magic were the best non-playoff team after Shaq's rookie year and then landed the #1 pick again (back to back years) where they drafted Chris Webber and then traded it minutes later to get Anfernee Hardaway. I do think however that since then, they changed the way the odds work, thus making something like that happening again much more difficult.
freakazoid
Well-Known Member
Well, Nerd, you say you disagree with me, but you basically made my point about Evans. You're exactly right in that Evans is essentially a rookie in terms of minutes played. That's why he is a player that could EASILY be replaced by a rookie, with very little to absolutley NO negative impact to the team. He's a backup player who is averaging 6 MPG this year for a team who is just never going to have significant minutes for him...
....Ok, so I just read some of your posts in the Jeremy Evans thread, and I agree with those posts. Doesn't make sense that you would argue we can't replace Jeremy with a high potential rookie, because of the impact it would make on the team.
Just to be clear, I'm saying Utah could replace Evans and Carroll with two rookies, without having much, if any impact on the youth and inexperience of this team. You're disagreeing with That? We're talking about replacing 2 minimal impact players, with very little experience themselves, with a couple of players with much higher potential. I guess it's possible that it could have a small impact in the short term(I don't even buy this, but for arguments sake), but if this team is being built to be a serious contender in 2-3 years, now is the perfect time to add two more lotto picks at the end of the bench.
Look, I undestand that people prefer making the playoffs over keeping our pick, I really do, but when it gets to the point that Evans and Carroll can't be replaced because it would make the team too young, I think you have to ask yourself if you're making an objective argument.
Jeremy Evans is not a lotto pick. He is probably just happy to be on a NBA team. I am not sure why that is hard to understand. You bring in a couple of lotto picks and you ask them to warm the bench(which is what Evans is doing) on a young team, not to mention trying to keep them happy and not complain about their minutes. Good luck with all of that.
If I want a replacement for Evans or Carroll, I'd rather the Jazz try to get another vet like Tinsley at some other position, who can teach these young kids something while also helping out the coaches a bit. The Jazz coaching staff already have their hands full with the development tasks. They dont need to worry about Evans or Carrol developing, as these guys are just there to fill out the roster. Whereas you bring in a couple of rookies who were picked in early or mid first round you cannot afford to let them rot on the bench and forget about them.
And anyways, to build a contender it is more than enough if you have 3-4 really good picks rather than try to fill more than half the roster with lotto picks and splitting your hair about whom/how to develop, whom to re-sign, whom to play and so on. No team has won on a model like the latter.
You try to surround your 3-4 young players with a mix of veteran journeymen, a couple of impact veterans and such. Also, developing a winning culture is as important as developing the young players themselves.
You don't jump from not making the playoffs to being title contenders in a couple of years by just relying solely on the development of half a dozen young guys on your team. Unless one of them happens to be a Lebron or Durant-like talent. And even they needed some veteran help to get there.
If I want a replacement for Evans or Carroll, I'd rather the Jazz try to get another vet like Tinsley at some other position, who can teach these young kids something while also helping out the coaches a bit. The Jazz coaching staff already have their hands full with the development tasks. They dont need to worry about Evans or Carrol developing, as these guys are just there to fill out the roster. Whereas you bring in a couple of rookies who were picked in early or mid first round you cannot afford to let them rot on the bench and forget about them.
And anyways, to build a contender it is more than enough if you have 3-4 really good picks rather than try to fill more than half the roster with lotto picks and splitting your hair about whom/how to develop, whom to re-sign, whom to play and so on. No team has won on a model like the latter.
You try to surround your 3-4 young players with a mix of veteran journeymen, a couple of impact veterans and such. Also, developing a winning culture is as important as developing the young players themselves.
You don't jump from not making the playoffs to being title contenders in a couple of years by just relying solely on the development of half a dozen young guys on your team. Unless one of them happens to be a Lebron or Durant-like talent. And even they needed some veteran help to get there.
freakazoid
Well-Known Member
I am just as happy using one or both picks in trade for an established player/s, as in I would be in replacing 2 minimum impact players with high potential rookies, if not more so. I also would love to see Utah use both picks and possibly a player to move up in the draft. Whatever it takes to improve the team, just so long as we're not making arguments as to why it's a bad thing to have more assets with which to build the team.
Just the same, I'm just not buying the idea that we couldn't keep both picks, let them compete for a spot, and trade whoever doesn't rise to the top. No need to make it more complicated than it is.
Just the same, I'm just not buying the idea that we couldn't keep both picks, let them compete for a spot, and trade whoever doesn't rise to the top. No need to make it more complicated than it is.
theNBAnerd
Well-Known Member
no. the worst team to ever win the lottery in the current system was when the bulls won as the 9th worst in 2008, with 17 chances out of 1000.
since the current system was created, the winners have been: 3rd worst, 7th, 3rd, 5th, 1st, 1st, 6th, 5th, 6th, 9th, 2nd, 5th, 2nd.
*edit: check that, that is not since the system was created, but since the expansion agreements for van & tor expired and all lottery teams were eligible for the 1,000 combinations.
theNBAnerd
Well-Known Member
freak and vj, good points about jeremy, although they're a bit off point for what i was saying overall.
yes, you're right, if you can upgrade on jeremy -- in draft, free agency, whatever -- you do it. the guy isn't even under contract, so absolutely we shouldnt' feel married to him. and as my posts in the other thread indicate, i agree that he's a ways off from having a positive impact on the jazz's record.
but my broader point (whether we include jeremy in that thinking or not) is that we have a lot of young guys who are probably already NOT getting all the one-on-one time and development opportunities they need. during the grind of an NBA season, coaches only have X number of hours they can spend working a guy out individually, doing skill-building drills that are target to personal needs, etc. my guess is that the coaching staff is already not getting to derrick, gordon, enes and alec enough to turn them into the future stars we hope they become... so why continue to add people to that mix with whom they'll be competing for attention of the coaching staff when there is down-time and an opportunity to work on getting better?
yes, you're right, if you can upgrade on jeremy -- in draft, free agency, whatever -- you do it. the guy isn't even under contract, so absolutely we shouldnt' feel married to him. and as my posts in the other thread indicate, i agree that he's a ways off from having a positive impact on the jazz's record.
but my broader point (whether we include jeremy in that thinking or not) is that we have a lot of young guys who are probably already NOT getting all the one-on-one time and development opportunities they need. during the grind of an NBA season, coaches only have X number of hours they can spend working a guy out individually, doing skill-building drills that are target to personal needs, etc. my guess is that the coaching staff is already not getting to derrick, gordon, enes and alec enough to turn them into the future stars we hope they become... so why continue to add people to that mix with whom they'll be competing for attention of the coaching staff when there is down-time and an opportunity to work on getting better?