This is a little frustrating. You continue to address arguments I haven't made. More importantly, you've failed to recognize the internal inconsistency of your argument. Fortunately, you've made even stronger statements than freak, so it should be easier to address what you've said.
Then, yes. I'd say the Jazz are in better position to build a contender now than they were in 2012. A team with a "Big 3" of Hayward and any two of Jefferson, Millsap and Favors was NEVER going to contend.
Feel free to quote the post where I said otherwise.
Hayward was a cheap, controllable lottery pick? DL didn't sign Gordon to a bloated contract. He MATCHED a contract offer. There's a difference. The two sides couldn't agree on a deal and both decided to let it wait. Hayward had a horrible season, but Charlotte signed him to the max, regardless. I don't think ANY of us saw that coming. I'll bet you and others would have been calling for Lindsey's hide had Gordon even received "Favors' money" prior to the season. There most certainly would have been cries, after his terrible season, that no one would have offered even $8M for Gordon, so why didn't DL wait? As for Favors, that deal is looking very good. And Burks? Probably market value given that the cap is going way up over the next few seasons (doubt they build the entire new TV deal into one massive increase).
So the GM should only make moves if and when they're palatable to the fanbase and/or he's forced into them? I'd rather have a GM who's forward looking, and is willing to make the right moves even when they're unpopular. There are a couple other juicy bits in this section that I'll return to later.
What have we received for Jefferson and Millsap thus far? Hood and likely the difference between someone like Saric, Warren, or McBuckets and Exum. That was the tradeoff for being really bad last season or getting mid-tier vets and being like Phoenix. We also get a lot of salary cap this off-season. You're the expert on this, but according to shamsports, we'll be at just over $49M if we offer Kanter the QO. Add in $4M-$5M for holds (draft picks and roster filler). Not sure what the cap will be. Perhaps $68M? So nearly a max slot with Kanter and $20M+ if Jazz don't offer or withdraw the QO at some point.
The Jazz received nothing for Al and Millsap. The Jazz had two full seasons after Jerry quit and Deron was traded to try to get something for Al and/or Paul. Instead, KOC and DL did nothing. Again, I'll return to this in a second.
Teams simply can't contend in this league without superstars: Jefferson, Millsap, Favors are NOT superstars. Neither is Hayward, although his overall game places him - potentially - just a tier below. Can Utah trade for or sign a superstar in free agency? I seriously doubt that. So the only hope is to draft one. Utah missed on Kanter. Drafted Trey #9 in an incredibly bad draft year. Their best shot at building an EVENTUAL contender was/is to get a franchise player last season and in the upcoming draft. And to do that, Utah had to pursue their current path: keep the youngsters they feel will contribute to the team long-term and resist signing band-aids so they can finish in the top half of the lottery, where they MIGHT get all-star quality talent. Not a guarantee , of course (cough, Burke, cough Kanter), but it is MUCH, MUCH harder to do as that draft position drops, especially back in the 12-14 range where the team landed after missing the playoffs with their veteran heavy team of Jefferson, Miilsap, Carroll, Foye and Mo Willaims. Keeping that team (and still needing to pay the youngsters after their rookie deals expired) was a) going to be impossible financially and b) had already shown it would not contend.
This is the good part:
Let's assume I agree with your assertions that teams can't contend without superstars, that Gordo, Favs, Burks and Kanter aren't ever going to be superstars, and that the Jazz can't acquire a superstar through either trade or free agency. Effectively, if I understand correctly, you're arguing that the only thing that matters is building a contender, and the only way to build a contender is to land a superstar in the draft.
If that's the case, what's the point in signing young players who make the team better to bloated contracts that reduce their trade value (for more picks)?
Once again, if that's the case, what's the point in signing young players who make the team better to bloated contracts that reduce their trade value (for more picks)?
You seem to be arguing that it's a good idea to move your picks from the 12-16 range to the 5-10 range, but not a good idea to move picks from the 5-10 range to the 1-3 range.
Three key questions follow from the above:
1. Do Gordo, Favs, Burks and Kanter improve the team relative to dleague and other marginal players?
2. Which of Gordo, Favs, Burks and Kanter haven't peaked in terms of picks they can net the Jazz in a trade?
3. Isn't it far more likely to find a superstar in the 1-3 range than the 5-10 range?
I think those four are better than marginal players, and thus improve the Jazz record, which will hurt the Jazz's draft position. I think those players could have been traded for more before they signed their contracts than now (Favors may be the exception). It's absolutely far more likely to find a superstar in the 1-3 range than in the 5-10 range.
With all that said, you should be arguing that the Jazz should have unloaded Al, Millsap, Gordo, Burks, Favors and Kanter when the return, in terms of picks and hurting the Jazz record, was peaking. Unfortunately, the Jazz haven't landed a top-3 pick since Deron was traded, and probably won't get one this year. Instead, DL/the FO/ownership has opted for half measures, resigning players who improve the team but will never lead the team to a championship to large contracts. It's a worse plan than crafting competitive teams that top out at ~50 wins.
