Teague hasn't led anyone. He was a good player on a good team. That is literally it. That good team, by the way, dumped him for the sake of a minor headcase that has questionable shooting ability.
George Hill coming to Utah
- Thread starter mdalby
- Start date
Teague hasn't led anyone. He was a good player on a good team. That is literally it. That good team, by the way, dumped him for the sake of a minor headcase that has questionable shooting ability.
Jazz_junkie
Member
They like Hill more than Teague. Sorry this is so hard for you.
green
Well-Known Member
What??? The great thing about Teague is you can build around him. You can't build around Hill. He is a bench player. He is a Rodney Hood level player. Teague is an all star. Oh, and younger.
I like this deal. Hill has good years left in him and I believe we keep him for a while. Everybody is so paranoid is going to leave. I can see why they would go for him v. Teague, Hill's experience in San Antonio shows he's a good fit in the type of system we are working to build here. He plays with a chip on his shoulder... we need some of that.
This is a good basketball move.
This is a good basketball move.
Jazz_junkie
Member
When asking why we didn't want Teague back in that trade, remind yourselves that Q has already worked with him and may not want him.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using JazzFanz mobile app
Sent from my SCH-I545 using JazzFanz mobile app
green
Well-Known Member
Finally. An intelligent response. Thank you. What else?
green
Well-Known Member
Ahhh. Back to the nonsense. Well, it was good while it lasted.
olden_undercover
Well-Known Member
Where, in any of what has been written and said about this three-way deal, has there been the slightest indication that Utah could have gotten Teague for the #12, straight up? Teague is FROM Indianapolis-- the man has a tattoo of the map of the city on his arm, for godsakes. Hill evidently wanted to come to Utah, which is a gift horse if I've ever seen one. Atlanta was evidently looking for picks to either use or leverage into another deal. It was a perfect alignment of needs, and if you take out one of those factors, there's no deal.
The Jazz SPENT money on this. They picked up Hill's salary without sending any. The risk is this move doesn't pay off and they spend the next however many years wishing they drafted That One Guy that people are bound to be whining about not getting.
Your points couldn't be more wrong. Once again.
Ya, well this joke is week, and it probably took you all weak to come up with it.
jimmy eat jazz
Well-Known Member
Agreed. I'm tired of the rebuild. I want to begin winning now. We can't always be making moves for the future; sometimes we need to make moves for the here and now. DL said it himself some time back (I paraphrase), "we can't be in the rebuild mode forever."
Your posts remind me of dung beetle feces.
I'm on board with this trade, even if the Jazz don't get anything else abck. Although initially I was of the "Why didn't we get Teague?" camp, a closer look at the stats makes the Teague vs. Hill comparison much more of a wash than I had initially thought.
We'll see how this formats. From https://www.foxsports.com/nba/stats...&pos=0&team=0&qual=1&sortOrder=0&opp=0&page=2
Defensive rating is a wash. Offensive rating is very much in Hill's favor. Oddly, based on a different stat someone posted earlier in the thread, offensive rating was a wash and defensive rating was very much in Hill's favor. Hill has a much lower FT rate, which is bad.
Specific points in Hill's favor
Hill has a much higher 3 pt tendency, which is one of the things this Jazz team needs most.
Hill has a much lower TO %.
Hill has a much lower usage rate, which may be good.
Hill has a much lower TO %.
Specific points in Teague's favor
Hill has a much lower assist %.
Hill has significantly lower points per game (12.1 vs 15.7), which is bad... but which undoubtedly comes directly from his much lower usage rate.
Hill has a much lower FT rate.
Hill is two years older than Teague.
Points in no one's favor
3 pt % is a wash (not shown in those stats, but was 40.8% for Hill vs. 40% for Teague).
So overall, it seems that the two players are much more evenly matched than I initially felt.
Couple that with the statement from Hill's agent that he wants to re-sign in Utah, which I have to think he told the Jazz FO before the trade was finalized, and it looks like we got a darn good player on our roster who won't just be a one year rental, for the price of a 12 pick in a somewhat "meh" draft.
Edit:
P.S. Also, Hill is apparently friends with Hayward, so locker-room chemistry should be good, and as others have mentioned that may well help a bit in re-signing Hayward next year.
We'll see how this formats. From https://www.foxsports.com/nba/stats...&pos=0&team=0&qual=1&sortOrder=0&opp=0&page=2
Code:
ADVANCED GP GS MPG USG% OFF RTG DEF RTG TS% eFG% FT RATE 3FG TEND OFF REB% DEF REB% REB% AST% STL% BLK% TO%
Teague, Jeff ATL
79 78 28.5 26.6 105.4 104.0 .551 .495 31.6 27.8 1.6 8.6 5.2 34.2% 2.1% 0.8% 16.2%
Hill, George IND
74 73 34.1 15.9 111.8 105.5 .555 .528 20.3 42.5 2.5 10.3 6.5 15.6% 1.6% 0.5% 11.1%Defensive rating is a wash. Offensive rating is very much in Hill's favor. Oddly, based on a different stat someone posted earlier in the thread, offensive rating was a wash and defensive rating was very much in Hill's favor. Hill has a much lower FT rate, which is bad.
Specific points in Hill's favor
Hill has a much higher 3 pt tendency, which is one of the things this Jazz team needs most.
Hill has a much lower TO %.
Hill has a much lower usage rate, which may be good.
Hill has a much lower TO %.
Specific points in Teague's favor
Hill has a much lower assist %.
Hill has significantly lower points per game (12.1 vs 15.7), which is bad... but which undoubtedly comes directly from his much lower usage rate.
Hill has a much lower FT rate.
Hill is two years older than Teague.
Points in no one's favor
3 pt % is a wash (not shown in those stats, but was 40.8% for Hill vs. 40% for Teague).
So overall, it seems that the two players are much more evenly matched than I initially felt.
Couple that with the statement from Hill's agent that he wants to re-sign in Utah, which I have to think he told the Jazz FO before the trade was finalized, and it looks like we got a darn good player on our roster who won't just be a one year rental, for the price of a 12 pick in a somewhat "meh" draft.
Edit:
P.S. Also, Hill is apparently friends with Hayward, so locker-room chemistry should be good, and as others have mentioned that may well help a bit in re-signing Hayward next year.
RandyForRubio
Well-Known Member
Let's see: the Jazz clearly favor Hill. Pretty much every respected writer in the NBA loves this trade for Utah, and thinks Hill works better, but we should probly trust some random on a jazzfanz board bc Teague made an all star game once.
[MENTION=228]green[/MENTION], go look at [MENTION=4640]Rgiss[/MENTION]'s post. Respond with your thoughts. Please
[MENTION=228]green[/MENTION], go look at [MENTION=4640]Rgiss[/MENTION]'s post. Respond with your thoughts. Please
https://bleacherreport.com/articles...-three-teams-in-jeff-teague-george-hill-trade
The Utah Jazz are firmly in win-now mode.
Though rumors swirl around Gordon Hayward, their roster could be just about finalized for the 2016-17 campaign. Unless they choose to release one of their three non-guaranteed players (Shelvin Mack, Chris Johnson and Jeff Withey), they already have enough bodies under team control, and the depth chart looks terrifying:
The defensive acumen of that team is overwhelming, and the Jazz should be considered a serious postseason threat if they can stay healthy. Their win total masked their abilities this past go-round, as they finished No. 10 in simple rating system, which looks solely at margin of victory and strength of schedule.
Even treading water would have put them in the playoff picture. Now, they'll get to guard pick-and-roll sets with Hill and Derrick Favors/Rudy Gobert, which will make it difficult to run the NBA's pet play against them.
Had Utah held on to the No. 12 selection, it wouldn't have found as much immediate production. Even by hitting on a late-lottery pick, it would've required time for development, thereby forcing more responsibility onto weaker players. Additionally, the upcoming influx of draft picks mitigates the risk of trading one right now. The Jazz will be getting an additional first-rounder in both 2017 and 2018, courtesy of the Golden State Warriors and Oklahoma City Thunder, respectively.
With Hill, this team is ready to compete. And this offseason, that's all that matters in Salt Lake City.
Grade: A
Yes, this is my conclusion as well. The Jazz must be valueing efficiency over total production.
RandyForRubio
Well-Known Member
50 win season next year [MENTION=228]green[/MENTION], wanna take a bet on it? Let the dentist put his money (pride) where his mouth is?
There are those on the board claiming that Teague is light years ahead of Hill. I've asked what they are basing this on and most have kept silent. I'm not saying one is better than the other but I'd love to peruse anything that shows one is superior to the other...in either direction.
We don't want to build around Teague. We want to build around Exum. By picking up Hill we don't have to change the plan.