What's new
By:

Should we have traded Burks for Teague?

Should we have traded Burks for Teague?

  • Total voters
    9
The Midnight

The Midnight

#Baby_Talk
Contributor
I think we should have.


DL made it clear that he wasn't willing to give up Burks for Teague and added that he probably thinks more highly of our own players than other teams do, hence wanting to keep Burks.


We already have our 2 and 3 locked in with Hood and Hayward. Teague is a starting PG calibre player. Was Burks ever going to be anything more than a 6th man for our team?


At one point or another we've got our SOLID foundation, we just need to swing for the fence for that x1 missing piece, and oh man, Teague could have been that piece (or Reggie Jackson, but that ship has sailed).


I dunno.. what do you guys think? Vote in the poll.


Edit: OK so it was only a rumour/speculation but if Teague was available for Burks and Burke should we have pulled the trigger?
 
Last edited:
Only leaked rumor was Hood + 1st for Teague was the minimum Atlanta would accept. An injured, older, higher paid, bench player without the first round pick is your poll?

Reeks of "Why didn't GM trade bench player for LeBron" syndrome.
 
Darkwing Duck said:
Only leaked rumor was Hood + 1st for Teague was the minimum Atlanta would accept. An injured, older, higher paid, bench player without the first round pick is your poll?

Reeks of "Why didn't GM trade bench player for LeBron" syndrome.
Click to expand...

There were reports of Burke & Burks for Teague

https://www.sltrib.com/home/3472699-155/utah-jazz-notes-jeff-teague-to

The Jazz, meanwhile, certainly have the assets to get a deal done if they're interested. An ESPN report this week suggested the possibility of packaging guards Trey Burke and Alec Burks in a swap for Teague. Utah also owns the Warriors' 2017 first-round pick and a future first-rounder from Oklahoma City in addition to all its own picks and a plethora of second-rounders.
Click to expand...
 
ONE LOVE said:
I think we should have.


DL made it clear that he wasn't willing to give up Burks for Teague and added that he probably thinks more highly of our own players than other teams do, hence wanting to keep Burks.


We already have our 2 and 3 locked in with Hood and Hayward. Teague is a starting PG calibre player. Was Burks ever going to be anything more than a 6th man for our team?


At one point or another we've got our SOLID foundation, we just need to swing for the fence for that x1 missing piece, and oh man, Teague could have been that piece (or Reggie Jackson, but that ship has sailed).


I dunno.. what do you guys think? Vote in the poll.
Click to expand...

A very good 6th man is not a luxury for good team. It is a necessity. I don't think Alec is the guy you trade here. Burke and Booker.... Sure. Go for it!
 
mfree said:
A very good 6th man is not a luxury for good team. It is a necessity. I don't think Alec is the guy you trade here. Burke and Booker.... Sure. Go for it!
Click to expand...

ummm you're forgetting those two have pretty much no value ...

It's OK, we'll be adding three lottery picks to the roster next season.
 
Remember the Jazz will have the opportunity again in the off season, probably at a cheaper price.
If they don't like who is still on the board at 12 (or wherever they pick), could do a draft day trade of the pick and Burke for Teague.
 
- We have 2 starter wings but don't have a real PG
- Teague's a very good PG
- Teague can play starter until Exum get fully NBA basketball ready
- Exum can play off guard with Teague
- Jazz has more chance to get a good vet sixth man than to get a very good starter next summer
I guess it would not have been a bad thing to pull the trigger if the deal really was there.
The only things that bites me a bit is that I like Burks a lot, and he's in a good contract (if he actually can get rid of injuries...)
 
If it was possible, yes.

I dont think it was possible though. Pretty sure reports were they wanted Hood.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top