What's new
By:
Filters

Central tank command : the official thread

DasJazz said:
Curious, what draft position was Gobert drafted again? How about Mitchell? Top 5 right? Didn't think so. There are never guarantees so why not try to win instead of breed a culture of mediocrity and losing mentality?
Click to expand...

where was tim duncan drafted?
LoPo said:
We don't need to tank. We just need to trade Favors, Burks and/or Rubio. Maybe Hood too...

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

for what?
 
DasJazz said:
Curious, what draft position was Gobert drafted again? How about Mitchell? Top 5 right? Didn't think so. There are never guarantees so why not try to win instead of breed a culture of mediocrity and losing mentality?
Click to expand...

It's obviously possible to find talent any where in the draft & DL has clearly shown the ability to do so more than others but statisticlly, (again, not sure how reliable the source is) you generally have a higher chance of finding a "star" the higher you pick. Gobert & Mitchell (to a lesser extent) are outliers.

You're right, there are no guarantees so why not give yourself the best odds possible? I agree that avoiding developing a losing culture is important but I disagree that it's more important than giving yourself the highest percentage possible of find a star, especially when we're 1 away from having a legitimate, young, homegrown big 3.

If I believed we had a reasonable chance at making a decent playoff run, I may feel differently. But when seeing that the chance of find a star between #6-10 is 31% & #11-15 is 16%, I can't see a valid argument that we would be better off picking in that #11-15 range.

Not when we're gambling on acquiring the final piece of the (seemingly) biggest requirement to winning a championship these days.
 
karl malone said:
It's obviously possible to find talent any where in the draft & DL has clearly shown the ability to do so more than others but statisticlly, (again, not sure how reliable the source is) you generally have a higher chance of finding a "star" the higher you pick. Gobert & Mitchell (to a lesser extent) are outliers.

You're right, there are no guarantees so why not give yourself the best odds possible? I agree that avoiding developing a losing culture is important but I disagree that it's more important than giving yourself the highest percentage possible of find a star, especially when we're 1 away from having a legitimate, young, homegrown big 3.

If I believed we had a reasonable chance at making a decent playoff run, I may feel differently. But when seeing that the chance of find a star between #6-10 is 31% & #11-15 is 16%, I can't see a valid argument that we would be better off picking in that #11-15 range.

Not when we're gambling on acquiring the final piece of the (seemingly) biggest requirement to winning a championship these days.
Click to expand...

Now this is a well thought out, reasonable response.
 
Think Phoenix would take Favors, Rubio and Burks for Tyson Chandler and Monroe? It wouldn't be a tank move as much as a move to offer Gordon or Parker a max deal this summer. Chandler makes $13 next year; Burks and Rubio combine to make over $25.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
LoPo said:
Think Phoenix would take Favors, Rubio and Burks for Tyson Chandler and Monroe? It wouldn't be a tank move as much as a move to offer Gordon or Parker a max deal this summer. Chandler makes $13 next year; Burks and Rubio combine to make over $25.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

No, I don’t.
 
LoPo said:
Think Phoenix would take Favors, Rubio and Burks for Tyson Chandler and Monroe? It wouldn't be a tank move as much as a move to offer Gordon or Parker a max deal this summer. Chandler makes $13 next year; Burks and Rubio combine to make over $25.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...
You advocate trading non guaranteed or expiring contracts for assets on one hand, and then on the other you suggest using those contracts to get out of the last year of Rubio/Burks. Wouldn’t it be more prudent to try to do something with Favors, JJ, Jerebko and Thabo this year because of the nature of their contracts and then do the same with Rubio/Burks next trade deadline?

If expiring contracts have value, then the Jazz have $22+ million with Favors/JJ this year, $25+ million with Rubio/Burks next year and anywhere from $3-13 million in non guaranteed, cheap contributors that can be used any time between now, the draft or next tradeline depending on what they decide to do with Thabo, Jerebko and Udoh.
 
Last edited:
I think you do one of two things. You either create space trading Burks and/or Rubio OR you take a contract to get an asset.

Its easier to get the asset by taking a bad contract, but some might want to clear Rubio, Burks and/or Hood to make a run at Parker or Gordon.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
LoPo said:
I think you do one of two things. You either create space trading Burks and/or Rubio OR you take a contract to get an asset.

Its easier to get the asset by taking a bad contract, but some might want to clear Rubio, Burks and/or Hood to make a run at Parker or Gordon.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

Rubio for George Hill straight up. Would you do it?
 
DasJazz said:
Rubio for George Hill straight up. Would you do it?
Click to expand...

Hill seems to be a better fit next to Mitchell and within our offense. But questions would be -

1. What would getting accomplish for us?
2. Would he help us make the playoffs as a 8 or 7 seed?
3. Is his $5 million of salary this year and next worth it?
4. The salaries don't match up, so who else do we lose to get Hill?

I lean more towards either keeping Rubio and try to trade his expiring sometime next year or trade him immediately for an expiring (if we can find a team who wants him who has an expiring). I don't think Rubio or Hill are long term solutions for us.
 
Salary aside, I think I'd do that trade if it was on the table. I think Hill's style is much more suited for us as we are presently constructed. Doesn't mean Rubio can't fit, but it's been an difficult adjustment so far to say the least. Although he has started playing a lot better lately for us. Still, at the end of the day, if there was a chance we could make a run at the middle of the pack in the West this year by swapping Rubio/Hill, I'd take it and run.
 
Hill for Rubio the salaries are close enough to work.

I would do it if we are trying to win now and have other moves... like a Mirotic deal up our sleeves.
 
Rubio is good for a stealth tank and that's about it. But what else are you losing by strangling everyone else offensively?

I'm fine losing a ton of games and I'm fine squeezing into the playoffs. But if the Jazz are pinning any hope on free agency, winning is what's up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top