What's new
By:

Jackpotting Around -Tony Jones Edition

Handlogten's Heros said:
It was a tragic pick for a lot of reasons. Our highest paid player was a center and the Favs smoke had already started. Doke wouldn't see the court in a meaningful way as they had like $50M in salary in front of him. He was already a senior. He wasn't projected to go that high. They could have traded back again if they were hellbent on getting him. They barely dipped their toes in the tax so every dollar mattered. It was a comedy of errors.
Click to expand...
I don't think any of that really matters when you're drafting 28 (or w/e number it was). You're just trying to get the player you think can have an impact. If he had a good work ethic, he would have been a very good backup. He just never got in great shape and was spraining his ankle constantly (if I remember the injuries correctly, I know he kept re-injuring something). I do remember a small stretch his 2nd season when he started when Rudy was out, and he played really well, but Utah had signed over him again with Whiteside, so when Gobert came back he was on the bench again. Not saying it wasnt a bad pick, because we know it turned out badly, but I think the bet was worthwhile.

But yeah, bringing back Favors was the much bigger mistake than drafting Udoka.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
I don't think any of that really matters when you're drafting 28 (or w/e number it was). You're just trying to get the player you think can have an impact. If he had a good work ethic, he would have been a very good backup. He just never got in great shape and was spraining his ankle constantly (if I remember the injuries correctly, I know he kept re-injuring something). I do remember a small stretch his 2nd season when he started when Rudy was out, and he played really well, but Utah had signed over him again with Whiteside, so when Gobert came back he was on the bench again. Not saying it wasnt a bad pick, because we know it turned out badly, but I think the bet was worthwhile.

But yeah, bringing back Favors was the much bigger mistake than drafting Udoka.
Click to expand...
I just don't know what is worse...

- Not factoring in the position and roster thing and thinking he was the best prospect on the board.
- Factoring it in and taking him anyway.

I just think you had to look at all of it with that pick and either trade back so you can get some assets and lower the cap hit... or make a better bet on a position of future and current need. It was tragic the night it happened and none of this is stuff I didn't say on that night.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
I still think the Udoka pick wasnt that bad on paper. The dude was a monster his last year at Kansas and he fit the system perfectly. He was absolutely massive and had a 40'' vertical (minus a few inches because he probably cheated the standing reach) It just seemed like he didnt really like basketball at all. No idea how much of that came through in the interview process. Did they just ignore it and draft him on his advanced stats/crazy tools?
Click to expand...
The issue with Dok is that he just isn't very good. Period. You don't need to love basketball in order to be good, especially for his position which doesn't require a whole lot of basketball skill to begin with. Just throw your body at people and stay big. But he isn't nimble enough to even do that as we were in the middle of the small ball era. And we constantly see him out of shape and struggle with the most basic conditioning. Dude thought he was Shaq but not anywhere near as talented. You don't have to love basketball to realize that you are now a professional athlete.
 
jom2003 said:
The issue with Dok is that he just isn't very good. Period. You don't need to love basketball in order to be good, especially for his position which doesn't require a whole lot of basketball skill to begin with. Just throw your body at people and stay big. But he isn't nimble enough to even do that as we were in the middle of the small ball era. And we constantly see him out of shape and struggle with the most basic conditioning. Dude thought he was Shaq but not anywhere near as talented. You don't have to love basketball to realize that you are now a professional athlete.
Click to expand...
He was great at Kansas

No one expected him to ever be Shaq. He was supposed to be a thicker Gobert. A huge lob threat who dominated the glass. It was a fine bet on paper. Take a 4 year guy with elite measurments and athleticism. He just could never stay healthy or keep the weight off. It was a failure on the interview side to not see that he wasnt motivated enough to be good. IIRC his rookie contract would have ended when Gobert's contract ended, so it was a great time to take a backup 5.
 
Last edited:
KqWIN said:
The "bigger picture" is a fantasy. But I care about if it prevents us from trying to win in the short term. I'm a reality-based GM. There are only wins and losses. Wins are good, losses are bad. It's not complicated.
Click to expand...
Just wanna point out that with this philosophy, Brooklyn coughed up two picks that became franchise cornerstones for a perennial contender.

There is always a bigger picture and to suggest otherwise is inane beyond belief.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I have the answer here. Pretty definitively. The contract issue is big... but not just that they didn't sign him but that they refused to negotiate. They would not even give him an idea of what they would offer if the cap space play wasn't available. Outside of that:

- The LA stuff is real. Walker wants to win. Jazz seem less sold on Walker... so he likely was excited by that opportunity to play and utilize his skillset as a roll man to its fullest extent.
- The Jazz don't like that Walker works out with his own people and doesn't stay in Utah all summer. Walk has his people and wants to utilize them. This is petty.
- They want him to do all the garbage work. He's cool with that but his numbers suffer because our PG play is less than optimal... that's okay as long as you pay him.
- They wanted him to improve guarding on the perimeter... he did... but the scheme isn't a perfect fit.
- He feels they painted him as a bit weak with the "Walker takes losing the hardest, Walker is his biggest critic" type stuff. He's not weak... he wants to win.
- I think he's had some clashes with Will but nothing that wasn't solved and wasn't more than two guys that want to win banging heads a little.

Here is my take... The Jazz would do very well to make Walker a good fair offer in the 2 week window they have before free agency opens (or whatever it is). They can still keep their cap space because you agree on terms and then execute the contracts in the right order.

They should not tell him to go find his offer... and he may tell them he is going to go out and do it anyway. I think there is also the possibility of a marriage of convenience or sign and trade to a team without space or a team unwilling to send a big contract offer.

My confusion is on why they don't just view him as a long term piece and treat him as such. They have really been wishy washy on him. Its weird.

Don't buy any of the unreasonable demands on his contract stuff. That was always nonsense... Jazz did not negotiate. Full stop.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's unsettling.

I can understand being cautious with what level of player he could reach, both in financial planning and team construction planning (they're heavily intertwined, but not 100% the same). Prior to this season he looked like a sure quality rim protector, but not prime Gobert level of great interior defense. On offense his roll wasn't impressive enough for me to think "just throw It high enough in the air enough times and he's a walking 25 a night", while he didn't look to have much off the dribble or post moves (not like he had near lead hands like Rudy, but he wasn't showing even flashes of a Isaiah Hartenstein) and his ft% was pretty underwhelming for the prospect of him developing an outside shot. The Kessler we've seen for 5 games this season looked more like "how much above 30~35 a year he can justify himself ?". And maybe because he only played 5 games, If he got 20 like that before going down, would we'd talking 40+ ?

Still, It shows that they should have treated him better in the sense of at least letting him showcase the best of his game while playing in the past. Even for tanking purposes. If they believe he's only a long term piece If he's dribbling, passing and hitting threes ? Well, they could've ordered him to do that on the floor throughout his 3 previous years.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
The only player you could possibly be referring to in the Udoka draft is Nick Richards, and he certainly was not a better prospect than Dok.
Click to expand...
There's also Paul Reed who was consistently ranked ahead of Dok in mock drafts. And Nick was at least in the same tier as Dok and has a better career as a NBA backup center.

And you conveniently left Tony Bradley out of the conversation. I wonder why
 
jom2003 said:
There's also Paul Reed who was consistently ranked ahead of Dok in mock drafts. And Nick was at least in the same tier as Dok and has a better career as a NBA backup center.

And you conveniently left Tony Bradley out of the conversation. I wonder why
Click to expand...
Because I havent talked about Tony Bradley the entire discussion. It was a bad pick and I do not defend the process in which led us to the Bradley pick. He was a bad athlete with weird advanced numbers because of his offensive rebounding prowess.

I do think the Udoka pick is defensible. Was it a good pick? No. Was it the smart pick? No. Where there better picks out there to bet on, yes. But I dont think taking a swing on a guy who was as big and athletic as Dok, who showed really high highs in college, was a terrible idea.
 
KqWIN said:
I actually found Ainge's left behind at the Best Buy parking lot. Here's what they said:

The "bigger picture" is a fantasy. But I care about if it prevents us from trying to win in the short term. I'm a reality-based fan. There are only wins and losses. Wins are good, losses are bad. It's not complicated.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what point you're trying to make. Not every single comment here needs to adhere to some narrow personal point of view. You're not the thought police.

The bizarre decision to keep Lauri in 22-23 didn't mean that Ainge wanted to win. On the contrary, we've been bad ever since, and the FO keeps kneecapping the team at regular intervals.

If you want to tank efficiently and rebuild the team, you sell high on Lauri as soon as possible. I think that's obvious. Sure, if it was up to me, we'd be trying to win every night and find ways of improving the team that don't involve throwing games... but that's irrelevant. I don't make the decisions.

Even for someone like me, tanking would be slightly easier to take if we didn't have a Top 25 guy on the roster going to waste.

(By the way, quoting someone on a message board and changing their words is pretty ****ing sad.)
 
Tremendous Upside said:
I have no idea what point you're trying to make. Not every single comment here needs to adhere to some narrow personal point of view. You're not the thought police.

The bizarre decision to keep Lauri in 22-23 didn't mean that Ainge wanted to win. On the contrary, we've been bad ever since, and the FO keeps kneecapping the team at regular intervals.

If you want to tank efficiently and rebuild the team, you sell high on Lauri as soon as possible. I think that's obvious. Sure, if it was up to me, we'd be trying to win every night and find ways of improving the team that don't involve throwing games... but that's irrelevant. I don't make the decisions.

Even for someone like me, tanking would be slightly easier to take if we didn't have a Top 25 guy on the roster going to waste.

(By the way, quoting someone on a message board and changing their words is pretty ****ing sad.)
Click to expand...

I'm not policing thoughts, I'm trying to understand how these thoughts can coexist. One post you say the big picture doesn't exist and you're constantly insert yourself into conversations about the future....and not to discuss the future but discuss how it's not important to you. Meanwhile, in this thread you complain about DA not trading our best player, presumably for a better future. Everything you're saying about trading Lauri at that time seems logical, but it's only logical if the big picture exists. But you have explicitly said the picture does not exist.

So what is it? Are you honorable, realistic fan who just wants to see wins and no tanking. Or are you an arm chair GM who wants to build a stronger team for the future?
 
rippimpc said:
But is that the question? I think it’s more along the lines of, is trading Lauri at 80 cents on the dollar worth the risk adjusted value of potentially grabbing one of Peterson, Dybantsa, Boozer, Wilson, Brown, Cenac, Carr, or whoever. Trading Lauri basically guarantees us a top 5 spot.
Click to expand...
Even if we traded Lauri, I am afraid the guaranteed top 5 spot is completely out of the question. Too many teams are playing bad that shouldn't be this bad.
rippimpc said:

View attachment 19733

They hatin on my boy
Click to expand...

Find somebody you love as much as Bill Simmons loves the sound of his own voice. . . Dude is now, and has always been, insufferable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top