The Jazz need to stop chasing the crowd and get ahead of the curve for once

[franklin]

As a small market team they will never get ahead trying to copy other team's models. My suggestion is to start playing this draft value disparity and trading picks down and taking gambles on multiple guys who fall way farther than their career trajectory is worth. We need to draft our Kawhi, more Gobert, our Bledsoe, our Rondo, our Jimmy Butler, and then maximize value from them when they become wanted commodities.

Take the Kanter draft for instance. There was 1 player in that draft that was a sure thing. Derrick Williams was taken ahead of Kanter for hell's sake. Trade that ****in pick and acquire assets.

Look at Danny Ainge's words today. He admittedly tried to waste assets to trade up but no bites because fans think draft day is all that matters and GM's cannot do their job because of it.

Plenty more examples. Bottom line is NBA draft picks are the most highly overrated asset in professional sports and the Utah Jazz should capitalize on this situation to bring in a **** ton of young prospects ON THE WING that might blow up in a year or two.


The Jazz are a team that traditionally has either been cheap or has tried to think inside the box or has taken the conservative route. The draft is there best chance at grabbing multiple WING players between 11 and 20 who MIGHT blow up.

 

[franklin]

BTW, the conservative Jazz who couldn't match and trade a wanted Wesley Matthews, a guy who will get a huge contract regardless of a serious injury, could not have figured a way to maximize this strategy.

 

[Cappy_Smurf]

I'd much rather trade 3 lesser picks for a top 10 pick than the other way around. Pass.

 

[framer]

How did Philly's 5 second round picks work out for them?

 

[Dr. Jones]

This is not a new plan, frank.
Most call it "throw **** against the wall..."

 

[franklin]

This is not a new plan, frank.
Most call it "throw **** against the wall..."

Perfect description of the status quo.

If you're going to get into a **** fight then have the bigger pot.

 

[Stoked]

Perfect description of the status quo.

If you're going to get into a **** fight then have the bigger pot.

Than the Jazz FO has really good aim. Gobert, Hayward, Favors, Hood. Possibly Burks, Exum, Hanlan and Lyles.

Only recent players that didn't work out were Burke and Kanter.

Even found some nice end of benchers in Cotton and Millsap.

 

[7StraightIsGreat]

So the OP states that the Jazz shoulda explored trading the #3 pick the year they took Kanter due to the fact that there was only one clear cut "sure thing" that year. Problem is, EVERY OTHER TEAM IN THE NBA knew that as well. It's never as simple as: "Ok, we have the #3 pic. Now somebody give us multiple future 1st rounders to trade down. Thanks".

If anything, I think the moves the Jazz have made since Lindsay fully took over for KOC have been damn near spot on and actually ahead of the curve. Did the Jazz let Matthews walk when they shouldn't have? Yes, but talk to KOC and Greg Miller about that. Imo, that's a mistake that Lindsay doesn't bear the blame for. Some in here worry that Utah is falling into the small ball trend. If that were honestly what was happening, I'm guessing Booker would have been the pick instead of a 6'10" guy who depending on how he fills our physically can log minutes at the 3,4, and even 5 depending on the match-up.

Lindsay's been absolute money so far and I can't wait to continue watching this unfold.

 

[Stifle Tower]

As a small market team they will never get ahead trying to copy other team's models. My suggestion is to start playing this draft value disparity and trading picks down and taking gambles on multiple guys who fall way farther than their career trajectory is worth. We need to draft our Kawhi, more Gobert, our Bledsoe, our Rondo, our Jimmy Butler, and then maximize value from them when they become wanted commodities.

Look at Danny Ainge's words today. He admittedly tried to waste assets to trade up but no bites because fans think draft day is all that matters and GM's cannot do their job because of it.

I don't get this. No one bites on Ainge trying to move up because of the fans? Wow, didn't realize I could sit in the war room and advise on the draft process. I thought that was reserved for the GM, scouts, coaches and overbearing owners.

It was so silly of us to trade up to get Deron. WE should have been like Portland who ended up with much, much more in the draft by trading down with Utah. And by all means, it was certainly a mistake to keep Exum. Needed to trade out of the #5 spot. Look down that list from last season and tell me what 3 players you'd want instead of Exum and Hood.

While I agree trading up is sometimes a mistake (e.g. Trey), a lot of times there just isn't value in the late teens/early 20's, either. From 2013, Dieng and Gobert were the only impact players from 18 down.

And ain't hindsight grand? Tell me, which players from this draft that went #20-#60 are going to be studs? It's one thing to say "trade down for more picks." It's quite another to identify exactly which players are going to be stars. There's not a GM in the business, not even Buford/Pops that hits on every one of those picks.

 

[Stifle Tower]

And lest you cite my reaction from this draft, yes, I thought drafting Lyles was a mistake. I thought Portis would be a better pick as a PF and Booker or Oubre a better pick if they wanted a wing. I did overreact, but I can see the Jazz' reasoning. Still have doubts about Lyles, but it wasn't a huge risk.

And assuming the Jazz trade down with Boston, look at the players that went 13-15. Booker, Payne and Oubre were all off the board. Maybe that was EXACTLY what DL feared. Maybe he just didn't like the guys a tier lower than that (Portis, Dekker, RHJ and all the PG's).

 

[mellow]

I agree, get ahead of the curve, sign Lebron.

 

[Stifle Tower]

I agree, get ahead of the curve, sign Lebron.

Nope. If we had Lebron, we should trade him for 6 first round picks and hope we can catch lightning in a bottle with a couple of them.

 

[Jazz4ever]

The problem with developing players is all of them have different learning and improvement rates. Some show star signs in the first and second years, some much longer. Hayward and Favors both took 5 years to fully mature (and may have a little left). Butler went from rotational level player the first 3 years to one of the best 2 way players in the NBA in his fourth. As a GM if you sold early on these players you just made a cataclysmic mistake that set you back 3-4 years. If you hang onto them the 4th year and they don't improve (like Enes Kanter), you have a worthless asset.

 

[franklin]

Than the Jazz FO has really good aim. Gobert, Hayward, Favors, Hood. Possibly Burks, Exum, Hanlan and Lyles.

Only recent players that didn't work out were Burke and Kanter.

Even found some nice end of benchers in Cotton and Millsap.

That's a pretty standard copout Stoked.


*Edit* Your example of Gobert and Hood prove my point. Hayward was the only higher pick that worked out.

 

[franklin]

So the OP states that the Jazz shoulda explored trading the #3 pick the year they took Kanter due to the fact that there was only one clear cut "sure thing" that year. Problem is, EVERY OTHER TEAM IN THE NBA knew that as well. It's never as simple as: "Ok, we have the #3 pic. Now somebody give us multiple future 1st rounders to trade down. Thanks".

Every other team knows it but they don't trade down because they cater to fans like you who overvalue picks, and get hyped up like a pimple popping kid on draft day. It sells.

If Utah fans want to be as stupid then expect the same results (I wouldn't expect anything else, but still).

 

[Jazz Spazz]

There are only ever a couple of roster spots for rooks every year.
You can't grab 5 rooks every year and hope one works out unless you're thinking 2nd rounders?
Why not just grab as many undrafted players as you can and play 2 summer league teams to weed them out?

Part of the problem with this idea is that the percentage of players that do well in the league is 80% top 10 picks, 10% 11-20, and the remainder of players that get regular rotational minutes and do well are picked after 20.

The odds of getting the good players to build a team around on late round picks or 2nd rounders is so bad that the Jazz would have to have 8x the number of players to get the same odds as one player in the top 10. While a groundbreaking idea, there's a reason it is. It is most likely the least effective way to build a good team.

 

[The Midnight]

If it is that easy to pick a Gobert every year the Jazz would have had a Championship by now (still could).

 

[franklin]

There are only ever a couple of roster spots for rooks every year.
You can't grab 5 rooks every year and hope one works out unless you're thinking 2nd rounders?
Why not just grab as many undrafted players as you can and play 2 summer league teams to weed them out?

Part of the problem with this idea is that the percentage of players that do well in the league is 80% top 10 picks, 10% 11-20, and the remainder of players that get regular rotational minutes and do well are picked after 20.

The odds of getting the good players to build a team around on late round picks or 2nd rounders is so bad that the Jazz would have to have 8x the number of players to get the same odds as one player in the top 10. While a groundbreaking idea, there's a reason it is. It is most likely the least effective way to build a good team.

That is not true and you're looking at numbers over a couple decades' span instead of draft-by-draft,, and considering drafting position/trade possibilities.

It's pretty simple. If you like and rank 4 guys and can take only one or have a shot at possibly two then what do you do? And why the premium on big men when you can get one easily in free agency while "wasting" a pick "throwing **** at the wall" on a wing that might or might not pan out? Who have been the breakout stories from low picks that are now getting max contracts? All wings. Bledsoe, Butler, Klay, Kawhi, etc. There are no big men breaking out in this league. Spot your top 3-4 wings and take 2 of them instead of one, unless you're sure as **** from shinola and the draft is loaded.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

That is not true and you're looking at numbers over a couple decades' span instead of draft-by-draft,, and considering drafting position/trade possibilities.

It's pretty simple. If you like and rank 4 guys and can take only one or have a shot at possibly two then what do you do? And why the premium on big men when you can get one easily in free agency while "wasting" a pick "throwing **** at the wall" on a wing that might or might not pan out? Who have been the breakout stories from low picks that are now getting max contracts? All wings. Bledsoe, Butler, Klay, Kawhi, etc. There are no big men breaking out in this league. Spot your top 3-4 wings and take 2 of them instead of one, unless you're sure as **** from shinola and the draft is loaded.

I'm 90% sure I heard those numbers from a Jazz FO radio interview. I think it was DL.

Your point has merit, I'm mainly concerned with the percentages that would make this an effective strategy. One thing to keep in mind is you are holding your draft hostage to what the other teams in front of you do in order to get what is left over vs trading up or going and getting who you want. I see what you are saying, but one approach is more passive while the other is aggressive.

Personally I would say that you change your strategy up and go with the shotgun approach if you are not dead set on someone you think you can get. One situation use the target strategy, another shotgun it, another trade out. Be fluid and flexible.

Just my thoughts.

p.s. we might be saying the same thing...but you are saying it's time for the shotgun approach.?

 

[7StraightIsGreat]

Every other team knows it but they don't trade down because they cater to fans like you who overvalue picks, and get hyped up like a pimple popping kid on draft day. It sells.

If Utah fans want to be as stupid then expect the same results (I wouldn't expect anything else, but still).

I don't overvalue picks, I simply have the ability to understand the extremely basic concept of supply and demand. You can't trade what nobody wants. You complain that the Jazz should have traded down with the Kanter pick because there was no clear cut "sure thing" at #3, yet in the same breath you aknowledge the fact that with no superstar waiting to be picked at #3, the pick doesn't have nearly the value that some people think it does. If nobody is willing to pay whatever fair value for that pick is, the Jazz only have 2 options: Keep the pick and take a chance on a player with the #3, or cave in and trade the pick for a lower than average return rate. Your "theory" on what the Jazz need to do to get ahead of the curve is *********.