How about Jimmy Butler?
Pick or Trade: Zach Lowe on Jazz Future
- Thread starter Saint Cy of JFC
- Start date
How about Jimmy Butler?
NAOS
Well-Known Member
srs question: have you been sent here to kill us all?
jjscap
Well-Known Member
Lowe is usually a good poster but this one was a real mess, he seems clueless and contradictory about many things. For example he says how the Jazz FO values cap flexibility and hence draft picks but then he keeps on talking about adding Rodney Hood to sweeten the deal to get mediocre Avery Bradley for our 1st. What the hell? He might be unhealthy as **** but Rodney Hood is our starting SG for the years to come as he fits the team culture with his solid defense and unselfish high-IQ basketball, and he is the sharp shooter we need to work around the spacing.
karl malone
Well-Known Member
Good article, props to whoever posted it. Been trying to explain the quandary that we are currently in. We have the foundation of a team ready to legitimately compete now (with the right supporting cast surrounding it), yet one of the main pillars of that foundation is 19/20 years old & there is no telling how long it will take for him to catch up to the rest of the foundation. It could come as quickly as next year (although highly unlikely) or it could take as long as 3-4 years (& anywhere in between).
I can understand the philosophy behind not wanting to bring in another young player who is unlikely to be ready to contribute at the level in which we are likely to be ready to compete at, but I am a firm believer of being on one side or the other when it comes to competing vs rebuilding. That's not to say that you can't do both (when it comes to the team's performance), or that there isn't a transition year in which you go from rebuilding to competing, but as far as constructing the team, the focus should be on either forming a team who's intention is to win now or forming a team who's intention is to develop into a team that will eventually win. This isn't to necessarily say that I am against trading the pick, but like the article stated, it would have to be for a player who not only fits in age wise with GH & DF, but is on a long-term contract, & has a style of play that could coexist with Exum in the future (if we intend on keeping him, which we seem to be intent on doing so). Finding a player who not only fits those qualifications, but is on a team that would be willing to trade him could be nearly impossible, as the article also pointed out. I obviously have no way of knowing, but most of the trade suggestions in the article, that would be worth doing, would likely require adding other valuable assets along with the draft pick. What it comes down to is the team's level of commitment to Exum.
The scenarios in which I could see trading the pick for a current NBA player are:
1. Package the pick & another asset (or 2 or 3) for a PG (such as Holiday), & sign a SG/SF, in order to start, until Exum is ready to takeover (at SG).
This is likely the worst of the scenarios as it would not only delay the development of Exum, but also push him off of the position in which he has the most potential & provides the most value. Not only that, finding a FA wing who would be a major upgrade, while also being willing to sign a short enough term deal (3 years max) that wouldn't prohibit Exum from starting when he is eventually ready would be difficult. Matthews (due to his injury) or Carroll are the only 2 FA's that really come to mind that would be big enough upgrades to make it worthwhile. Maybe 1 of them would sign a 3/30(ish) deal. (Not sure this would even be financially possible with the added salary of Holiday/another PG, in which case we would likely either have to buyout Booker, in order to free up cap space, &/or settle for a lesser FA SG/SF).
Holiday (or another PG)/Exum
Matthews or Hayward/Exum
Hayward or Carroll
Favors
Gobert
+ whatever is left over from the trade to acquire a PG
2. Package the pick & another asset (or 2 or 3) for a SG/SF & sign a stop gap PG to start until Exum is ready to takeover.
I guess if we are intent on trading our pick, this would be the most likely scenario, as it would upgrade two positions, while still allowing Exum to develop in a role in which he is likely better suited for (although you have to consider the mental affect an apparent demotion would have on such a young player). Theoretically, you could still allow Exum to keep his starting role, while subbing him out early & using the FA PG to close out games (which would still take away playing time from him, thus potentially delaying his development, while still possibly hurting his confidence). I'm not sure exactly who we would target were we to make a trade for a wing. The trick, similar to the 1st scenario, would be finding a FA (PG) worth taking playing time away from Exum, who would be willing to sign a shorter-term contract (2-3 years). He would also have to be willing to accept less than a fulltime starting position, even if they were on the floor for the tipoff every game.
Beverley or Lin (or another FA PG)/Exum
SG or Hayward
Hayward or SF
Favors
Gobert
+ whatever is left over from the trade to acquire a SG/SF
3. Package the pick + Exum (& another asset or 2 or 3) for a PG/SG/SF & sign a FA at whichever position remained unfilled.
This is probably the least likely of the scenarios, but if we really were intent on trading our pick in order to upgrade our starting lineup, this may be the best option. I'm not saying that this is what I think we should do, just that if we are going to attempt to compete now, that we commit to it entirely. Exum is likely at least 2 years away from being ready to truly contribute & a package of him + this year's draft pick would likely bring back a great return (possibly even Russell- I know, I said current NBA players, but I just can't help myself-, who, although isn't established, seems closer to being ready to contribute & would bring the offensive firepower that this team is currently lacking- although it may require additional assets). We could then sign a FA SG/SF (such as Matthews, Middleton, Carroll, etc). Other than Russell, not sure who else could be acquired in this type of deal & as much as I like Russell & think he is the better fit, it doesn't make much sense to acquire a player (however talented & NBA-ready he may appear) who has yet to establish himself as ready to contribute, if our true intention is to legitimately compete next year. Although, if we do decide to trade up in the draft, Hezonja, Winslow, or Johnson may be better options, especially considering the fact that we would likely be able to hang on to Exum.
Russell
Matthews or Hayward
Hayward or Middleton/Carroll
Favors
Gobert
+ whatever is left over from the trade to acquire Russell (or whoever)
Maybe IND decides it doesn't want to risk paying a max contract to Paul George, who is coming off a terrible injury, in which case you sign a (cheap) PG, although I doubt they are ready to give up on him, even with the injury. Maybe CHI is ready to give up on Rose (doubtful), in which case you sign a (cheap) SG/SF. All of these trade scenarios are highly unlikely, though.
4. Package the pick & another asset (or 2 or 3) for a SG/SF while still starting Exum at PG
This would seem to be counterproductive as we could just sign a SG/SF (such as Matthews or Carroll) & keep the draft pick.
It doesn't make sense to attempt to truly compete if we are going to start Exum & I'm not sure it makes sense to keep Exum, if we don't intend to start him. I think it would have to be one or the other. My guess is that we either start Exum, sign a backup PG to mentor him/replace Burke, draft (1 of) Hezonja/Winslow/Johnson, & bring over Tomic/sign a backup C (if Tomic doesn't come over) or we start Exum, sign (1 of) Matthews/Carroll, & draft a backup big if Tomic doesn't come over (or draft a stretch 4 if Tomic does come over & release Booker in order to have more $ for FA). Committing entirely to competing next year would have to involve 1 of trading Exum or significantly reducing his role & I highly doubt either of those things happen. I say we trade our pick to move up for the best available long-term prospect & continue to display the patience we've shown over these last few years, which has already begun to pay off.
I can understand the philosophy behind not wanting to bring in another young player who is unlikely to be ready to contribute at the level in which we are likely to be ready to compete at, but I am a firm believer of being on one side or the other when it comes to competing vs rebuilding. That's not to say that you can't do both (when it comes to the team's performance), or that there isn't a transition year in which you go from rebuilding to competing, but as far as constructing the team, the focus should be on either forming a team who's intention is to win now or forming a team who's intention is to develop into a team that will eventually win. This isn't to necessarily say that I am against trading the pick, but like the article stated, it would have to be for a player who not only fits in age wise with GH & DF, but is on a long-term contract, & has a style of play that could coexist with Exum in the future (if we intend on keeping him, which we seem to be intent on doing so). Finding a player who not only fits those qualifications, but is on a team that would be willing to trade him could be nearly impossible, as the article also pointed out. I obviously have no way of knowing, but most of the trade suggestions in the article, that would be worth doing, would likely require adding other valuable assets along with the draft pick. What it comes down to is the team's level of commitment to Exum.
The scenarios in which I could see trading the pick for a current NBA player are:
1. Package the pick & another asset (or 2 or 3) for a PG (such as Holiday), & sign a SG/SF, in order to start, until Exum is ready to takeover (at SG).
This is likely the worst of the scenarios as it would not only delay the development of Exum, but also push him off of the position in which he has the most potential & provides the most value. Not only that, finding a FA wing who would be a major upgrade, while also being willing to sign a short enough term deal (3 years max) that wouldn't prohibit Exum from starting when he is eventually ready would be difficult. Matthews (due to his injury) or Carroll are the only 2 FA's that really come to mind that would be big enough upgrades to make it worthwhile. Maybe 1 of them would sign a 3/30(ish) deal. (Not sure this would even be financially possible with the added salary of Holiday/another PG, in which case we would likely either have to buyout Booker, in order to free up cap space, &/or settle for a lesser FA SG/SF).
Holiday (or another PG)/Exum
Matthews or Hayward/Exum
Hayward or Carroll
Favors
Gobert
+ whatever is left over from the trade to acquire a PG
2. Package the pick & another asset (or 2 or 3) for a SG/SF & sign a stop gap PG to start until Exum is ready to takeover.
I guess if we are intent on trading our pick, this would be the most likely scenario, as it would upgrade two positions, while still allowing Exum to develop in a role in which he is likely better suited for (although you have to consider the mental affect an apparent demotion would have on such a young player). Theoretically, you could still allow Exum to keep his starting role, while subbing him out early & using the FA PG to close out games (which would still take away playing time from him, thus potentially delaying his development, while still possibly hurting his confidence). I'm not sure exactly who we would target were we to make a trade for a wing. The trick, similar to the 1st scenario, would be finding a FA (PG) worth taking playing time away from Exum, who would be willing to sign a shorter-term contract (2-3 years). He would also have to be willing to accept less than a fulltime starting position, even if they were on the floor for the tipoff every game.
Beverley or Lin (or another FA PG)/Exum
SG or Hayward
Hayward or SF
Favors
Gobert
+ whatever is left over from the trade to acquire a SG/SF
3. Package the pick + Exum (& another asset or 2 or 3) for a PG/SG/SF & sign a FA at whichever position remained unfilled.
This is probably the least likely of the scenarios, but if we really were intent on trading our pick in order to upgrade our starting lineup, this may be the best option. I'm not saying that this is what I think we should do, just that if we are going to attempt to compete now, that we commit to it entirely. Exum is likely at least 2 years away from being ready to truly contribute & a package of him + this year's draft pick would likely bring back a great return (possibly even Russell- I know, I said current NBA players, but I just can't help myself-, who, although isn't established, seems closer to being ready to contribute & would bring the offensive firepower that this team is currently lacking- although it may require additional assets). We could then sign a FA SG/SF (such as Matthews, Middleton, Carroll, etc). Other than Russell, not sure who else could be acquired in this type of deal & as much as I like Russell & think he is the better fit, it doesn't make much sense to acquire a player (however talented & NBA-ready he may appear) who has yet to establish himself as ready to contribute, if our true intention is to legitimately compete next year. Although, if we do decide to trade up in the draft, Hezonja, Winslow, or Johnson may be better options, especially considering the fact that we would likely be able to hang on to Exum.
Russell
Matthews or Hayward
Hayward or Middleton/Carroll
Favors
Gobert
+ whatever is left over from the trade to acquire Russell (or whoever)
Maybe IND decides it doesn't want to risk paying a max contract to Paul George, who is coming off a terrible injury, in which case you sign a (cheap) PG, although I doubt they are ready to give up on him, even with the injury. Maybe CHI is ready to give up on Rose (doubtful), in which case you sign a (cheap) SG/SF. All of these trade scenarios are highly unlikely, though.
4. Package the pick & another asset (or 2 or 3) for a SG/SF while still starting Exum at PG
This would seem to be counterproductive as we could just sign a SG/SF (such as Matthews or Carroll) & keep the draft pick.
It doesn't make sense to attempt to truly compete if we are going to start Exum & I'm not sure it makes sense to keep Exum, if we don't intend to start him. I think it would have to be one or the other. My guess is that we either start Exum, sign a backup PG to mentor him/replace Burke, draft (1 of) Hezonja/Winslow/Johnson, & bring over Tomic/sign a backup C (if Tomic doesn't come over) or we start Exum, sign (1 of) Matthews/Carroll, & draft a backup big if Tomic doesn't come over (or draft a stretch 4 if Tomic does come over & release Booker in order to have more $ for FA). Committing entirely to competing next year would have to involve 1 of trading Exum or significantly reducing his role & I highly doubt either of those things happen. I say we trade our pick to move up for the best available long-term prospect & continue to display the patience we've shown over these last few years, which has already begun to pay off.
Last edited:
Coach Ellis
Well-Known Member
If that's the case, you can buy a later pick with any number of their accumulated assets plus cash. The Jazz won't be in the lottery again unless GSW fall apart. They should make the most out of their pick this year.
Trey Burke says keep the pick.
Obviously you look at everything, but I think the Jazz should mostly just let the cake bake. The Jazz are greater than the sum of their parts and developing an awesome culture and chemistry, I'd be wary of tampering with that much.
Get DMC and Tomic, try and trade up (using mostly future picks) and draft BPA.
Get DMC and Tomic, try and trade up (using mostly future picks) and draft BPA.
framer
Well-Known Member
Hell, if we can get DMC and Tomic, I would trade the pick for future considerations because the logjam at every position would be pretty tight. Trade the pick for a future pick top 8 protected maybe that we could use to build a bench later after we have to pay Gobert the max. If we pay enough money we can keep the core together for another 8 years without much downside from any players getting older but infinite upside.
Please never visit this message board again. Also, if you could, please delete your account.
Yep, I don't remember small ball hurting us this season at all.
In 2010, the Jazz were a playoff team. They had a lottery pick from the Knicks that they'd been looking forward to for years. They used it to take Gordon Hayward and never looked back. I don't see why the Jazz would trade their pick this year. It's going to be a couple years before Exum and Gobert start hitting their prime anyway. Why not develop another young stud? The Jazz don't need to be in a hurry.
Worst-case scenario, they get Turner or Oubre or another forward and make the team better.
Worst-case scenario, they get Turner or Oubre or another forward and make the team better.
Let the cake bake I like it.. lol
This is true. I get the feeling DL just put out there the possibility of a trade to generate interest. I have a feeling we'll just pick BPA.
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
I think that we should be leaning not trading the pick because of how valuable rookie contracts are and the control you have over the player. But on the other hand, this team is ready to win. And we have a lot of players we are developing already. Almost anyone we draft is probably going to be riding the bench quite a bit, and isn't going to help us for a few years. Of course it will be nice to have control over a player when some of these guys start bailing for more money because we can't afford them.
I say we target a couple players that make sense and have high potential, like Mario. I'd be all for getting him.
But if we can't get him, and some team makes us an offer we can't refuse for our pick, like say a couple future firsts with little to no protection, we would have to consider it, and just move on with what we have, and take a pass on this draft. Those future assets could come in to play when really could use them. We don't necessarily need this pick right now.
framer
Well-Known Member
Yep, and sometimes a pick is a more portable and shiny asset for a future move to put the finishing touches on a contender than a picked player sitting on your bench. If you have a choice between an opened pack of basketball cards that have all been determined to be of medium value and an unopened pack, what are you going to go with? Additionally, you aren't paying a future pick to sit on your bench.
freakazoid
Well-Known Member
Not everybody, just the ones who desperately need it. You're status is yet to be determined.