I agree with what appears to be the Jazz's off season plans

[fishonjazz]

How many times has Hayward put this team on his back

Not all that many times imo. How many 30 point games did he have? (That would be putting a team on your back and carrying the load)

Per 36 last season hayward averaged 19.6 ppg.
Favors averaged 18.4 ppg

Hayward shot 43% from the field
Favors shot 51% from the field

Maybe we would be better off if hayward shot less and favors shot more.... In other words maybe the team would be better if favors role increased and haywards decreased.
(And favors is also a few years younger and has more potential imo)

And again, I think Hayward is better than favors.... But not by much

 

[str8line]

Not all that many times imo. How many 30 point games did he have? (That would be putting a team on your back and carrying the load)

Per 36 last season hayward averaged 19.6 ppg.
Favors averaged 18.4 ppg

Hayward shot 43% from the field
Favors shot 51% from the field

Maybe we would be better off if hayward shot less and favors shot more.... In other words maybe the team would be better if favors role increased and haywards decreased.
(And favors is also a few years younger and has more potential imo)

And again, I think Hayward is better than favors.... But not by much

Scoring is just one aspect of Haywards game, and I agree that there were times last year where he just seemed a little less impactful. But Hayward is definitely a player that the stats don't do justice. He plays massive minutes and gives it 100% almost all of the time. He also comes up with big plays at important times. I think less minutes would help his game, but when guys like Burks, Hood, Favors, etc. are injured he has to try to do more and I think that has worn him down mentally and physically over the last few years.

 

[fishonjazz]

Scoring is just one aspect of Haywards game, and I agree that there were times last year where he just seemed a little less impactful. But Hayward is definitely a player that the stats don't do justice. He plays massive minutes and gives it 100% almost all of the time. He also comes up with big plays at important times. I think less minutes would help his game, but when guys like Burks, Hood, Favors, etc. are injured he has to try to do more and I think that has worn him down mentally and physically over the last few years.

I don't disagree with any of that.
I think Hayward is a little bit better than favors though, not by far better.

 

[Thee Idiotic Minivan K]

The only way the Jazz lose Hay is if someone with a better situation offers him more money. The only team I see that happening is Boston.

You think a team of George hill, exum, hood, burks, favors, deng, gobert, lyles, mack, and the #3 pick, plus tons of cap space and future picks would be no good?

I think we would still make the playoffs.

I have a feeling Lyles can become a #1 option. He showed at the age of 19 he can absolutely get buckets at a rediculous rate, and he's only going to get much better. I have a feeling he could be really good. He'd make things so much easier for both Hood and Hayward, plus Exum is going to be a top 5 pg in time. This isn't the time to give away Hayward for a fraction of what Hayward is worth.



















IDIOT!!!!!!

 

[fishonjazz]

I have a feeling Lyles can become a #1 option. He showed at the age of 19 he can absolutely get buckets at a rediculous rate, and he's only going to get much better. I have a feeling he could be really good. He'd make things so much easier for both Hood and Hayward, plus Exum is going to be a top 5 pg in time. This isn't the time to give away Hayward for a fraction of what Hayward is worth.



















IDIOT!!!!!!

Wait a minute idiot. I didn't say we should get rid of Hayward. I said that if we did, we would still have a good team.
Do you agree? Or do you have no faith in the rest of our players?

 

[Thee Idiotic Minivan K]

Wait a minute idiot. I didn't say we should get rid of Hayward. I said that if we did, we would still have a good team.
Do you agree? Or do you have no faith in the rest of our players?

Just shows how good Hayward is. Has nothing to do with the rest of the core. Hood Gobert and Lyles are still pretty young and inconsistent, and that doesn't help Hayward and Favors much. If those guys and Exum take a big step forward Hayward and favors will have huge a huge year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[fishonjazz]

Just shows how good Hayward is. Has nothing to do with the rest of the core. Hood Gobert and Lyles are still pretty young and inconsistent, and that doesn't help Hayward and Favors much. If those guys and Exum take a big step forward Hayward and favors will have huge a huge year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Um ok. You didn't answer the question. Do you think the jazz could still be a good team if they didn't have Hayward and they added a good veteran free agent wing (bazemore, deng, batum, etc) and a top draft pick?

Simple yes or no.

 

[Ron Mexico]

Um ok. You didn't answer the question. Do you think the jazz could still be a good team if they didn't have Hayward and they added a good veteran free agent wing (bazemore, deng, batum, etc) and a top draft pick?

Simple yes or no.

No, because those players are not as good as Hayward and rookies very rarely contribute to winning their first year or two. Plus this team doesn't need to diversify their talent we need to consolidate it into one better player. I would rather trade multiple players to get one better player. Three years from now? Maybe.

 

[str8line]

I have a feeling Lyles can become a #1 option. He showed at the age of 19 he can absolutely get buckets at a rediculous rate, and he's only going to get much better. I have a feeling he could be really good. He'd make things so much easier for both Hood and Hayward, plus Exum is going to be a top 5 pg in time. This isn't the time to give away Hayward for a fraction of what Hayward is worth.



















IDIOT!!!!!!

I agree that Lyles could be a #1 option someday, he shows flashes of brilliance. That balance...

But no one is advocating giving Hayward away.

 

[str8line]

Do you guys think if Hayward were paired with someone like Kevin Durant or Lebron James his reputation as a player would go up massively?

 

[fishonjazz]

No, because those players are not as good as Hayward and rookies very rarely contribute to winning their first year or two. Plus this team doesn't need to diversify their talent we need to consolidate it into one better player. I would rather trade multiple players to get one better player. Three years from now? Maybe.

I think you are confused by the question.
I will phrase it a different way.

Do you think a team with exum, George hill, hood, burks, bazemore/deng/batum, favors, gobert, lyles, mack, a top 3 pick, ingles, and withey would be a good team or a bad team?

 

[fishonjazz]

Do you guys think if Hayward were paired with someone like Kevin Durant or Lebron James his reputation as a player would go up massively?

Good question. I would say probably. I think his stats would go down, efficiency would go up and wins would go way up.

 

[Ron Mexico]

I think you are confused by the question.
I will phrase it a different way.

Do you think a team with exum, George hill, hood, burks, bazemore/deng/batum, favors, gobert, lyles, mack, a top 3 pick, ingles, and withey would be a good team or a bad team?

I think they are a decent team but not as good as the Hayward team and a lower ceiling unless we land that 1% chance at a star at 3, which isn't happening in this year's draft.

 

[fishonjazz]

I think they are a decent team but not as good as the Hayward team.

I agree that they are not as good as the Hayward team. That was not the argument.

Others seem to believe that trading hayward would mean the jazz would be ****ed and forced to rebuild. I believe that trading hayward would mean we would be a little worse (assuming we get a wing in free agency to replace him and a top draft pick) but it wouldnt be total devastation.

I think a team of
Hill, exum, mack
Hood, burks
Hayward, deng, ingles
Favors, lyles
Gobert, withey
Would win around 49 games. Maybe the 4th seed

I think a team of
Hill, exum, mack
Hood, burks/#3 pick
Bazemore, burks/ingles/#3 pick
Favors, lyles
Gobert, withey
Would win about 45 games. Maybe the 6th seed.

I think I probably just have more faith in guys like favors, hood, burks, lyles, gobert, hood, quin, and snyder than most fans though.

 

[framer]

None of this takes into account that the #3 pick was absolute garbage. It wasn't a generic pick, it was the chance to draft from a list of players that aren't going to be NBA stars. The Celtics tried like hell to trade that pick and no one wanted any part of it. If people are going to bitch and moan about this they need to go ahead and identify the player at #3 that was worth giving Hayward up for. You don't get to say that "someone in this draft is going to be a star!" because the Utah Jazz have a much better scouting service than you and decided that none of the players after two was going to amount to anything worth Hayward.

How is giving up your best player for trash "a commitment to winning a championship?"

 

[fishonjazz]

None of this takes into account that the #3 pick was absolute garbage. It wasn't a generic pick, it was the chance to draft from a list of players that aren't going to be NBA stars. The Celtics tried like hell to trade that pick and no one wanted any part of it. If people are going to bitch and moan about this they need to go ahead and identify the player at #3 that was worth giving Hayward up for. You don't get to say that "someone in this draft is going to be a star!" because the Utah Jazz have a much better scouting service than you and decided that none of the players after two was going to amount to anything worth Hayward.

How is giving up your best player for trash "a commitment to winning a championship?"

It didn't have to be for a pick this year btw. Also could be for a pick and a player. Or multiple picks in the same draft. Or multiple picks in different drafts.

Regardless, this discussion was about how bad the team would be without hayward and adding a free agent wing pickup plus whatever we got for Hayward. Let's say worst case scenario we only get the #3 pick from Boston in this year's draft and that player ends up sucking balls.

I still maintain that exum, hill, mack, burks, hood, free agent wing, ingles, favors, Gobert, lyles, withey, snyder, and DL would be a good team that would make the playoffs. And that's even with the #3 pick sucking balls.

I'm not saying the jazz should trade Hayward here. Just saying that we have lots of good pieces and if we lost one good piece (hayward) and replaced that good piece with another good piece (bazemore, batum, deng, etc) then we would still have lots of good pieces.

 

[mellow]

Mike Prada@MikePradaSBN
"Who wants to predict the first signing that breaks tonight? Wild guess: Solomon Hill to Utah, 3 years, $39 million, Year 3 non-guarantee"


I could live with that.

 

[fishonjazz]

Mike Prada@MikePradaSBN
"Who wants to predict the first signing that breaks tonight? Wild guess: Solomon Hill to Utah, 3 years, $39 million, Year 3 non-guarantee"


I could live with that.

Me too.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Mike Prada@MikePradaSBN
"Who wants to predict the first signing that breaks tonight? Wild guess: Solomon Hill to Utah, 3 years, $39 million, Year 3 non-guarantee"


I could live with that.

I'm skeptical about his shooting to say the least. I want a time machine and a meeting with DL last year when FA was still kind of sane.

 

[seattlejazzfan]

Mike Prada@MikePradaSBN
"Who wants to predict the first signing that breaks tonight? Wild guess: Solomon Hill to Utah, 3 years, $39 million, Year 3 non-guarantee"


I could live with that.

Meh, somebody mentioned James Ennis in another thread. Better shooter, better athlete, and you get him for half that.