What's new
By:

General NBA Craziness and How it Applies to Utah

The problem with the Jazz is that they've drafted like ****.

Since Hayward was drafted, we've drafted Kanter, Burke, Burks, Exum and Lyles.

Absolute garbage. We were super lucky to get Gobert (which I've heard was at Sloan's demand).

Had we drafted one good piece with those 5 lottery picks, we are in another world right now.

Lindsey may be the worst drafting GM in NBA.
 
Back to the actual topics at hand.

IF our willingness to spend affecting Hayward was ever on display, it would be in the next 12 hours. If we exit the draft without using our available $13 million in cap space, it is a clear sign that we're unwilling to spend. Our $13 million in space right now is one of the biggest assets in the entire NBA. With the cap shrinking below expectations, salary dumps are bigger than ever. So if we don't absorb a salary or make a lopsided deal since we can take on more salary, we are wasting an asset.

Today will tell. If I'm Hayward, I'm paying very, very close attention to how Utah uses this asset today.
 
And to nail the point home... Spending doesn't mean you throw money around recklessly you want to be flexible. Last year's offseason was great. Had we acquired one of the targets from the year before we'd be in great shape cap wise and everything that was available to us last season would have been available and we'd still have options plus another potential asset.

Those that say spending may not be an issue also fail to recognize we have sold picks in every draft.

Now you walk into the meeting with Gordon and can promise to spend, but he has nothing more than your word that you will. I think we will... I don't think we are super cheapskates, but the last 2-3 years we have been quite frugal and I think Gayle saw that the family was operating in this manner and mover the team into the trust.
 
LoPo said:
Back to the actual topics at hand.

IF our willingness to spend affecting Hayward was ever on display, it would be in the next 12 hours. If we exit the draft without using our available $13 million in cap space, it is a clear sign that we're unwilling to spend. Our $13 million in space right now is one of the biggest assets in the entire NBA. With the cap shrinking below expectations, salary dumps are bigger than ever. So if we don't absorb a salary, make a lopsided deal since we can take on more salary, we are wasting an asset.

Today will tell. If I'm Hayward, I'm paying very, very close attention to how Utah uses this asset today.
Click to expand...

Totally. I don't feel torn about leaving either. If we don't use that cap space, best case we keep Hill and Ingles. Probably a 3 seed ceiling. I can pass on that if I am Hayward.
 
green said:
The problem with the Jazz is that they've drafted like ****.

Since Hayward was drafted, we've drafted Kanter, Burke, Burks, Exum and Lyles.

Absolute garbage. We were super lucky to get Gobert (which I've heard was at Sloan's demand).

Had we drafted one good piece with those 5 lottery picks, we are in another world right now.

Lindsey may be the worst drafting GM in NBA.
Click to expand...

This is just bad... You can't say Gobert is luck and the other picks are trash... and ignore Hood.

Burks and Kanter were under KOC and you could argue so was Burke.

The only pick he's made that I didn't like was Lyles and I understand his rationale... you have a guy who was an all american and he's playing a role on a super team, so maybe he's undervalued... problem was it was his teammate that was undervalued.

Exum was the right pick... wasn't supposed to be there... it was a moonshot. Randle, Vonleh, Smart.... not taring the league up right now.
 
Yeah, we haven't drafted all that well, but I haven't given up hope on Exum or Lyles yet. They have the potential to be specialists if we can find a way to get that from them. Lyles could be a premiere stretch 4 and Exum with his size and athleticism. I don't believe in calling a draft pick a failure until he goes the route of a Trey Burke. With Kanter, it wasn't the pick as much as how we waited too long to trade him for better value.
 
As for deals right now... short of PG or Love we won't do anything that convinces him to stay... if we trade Hood to move up in the draft it may be what convinces him to leave.

Our options at this point need to be limited to deals we would do if he was staying or leaving... With that I present to you the following meh trade...

Mil wants to re-sign Snell, but is now right at the tax if they do so... would you take Hawes into space plus 24 for 17? Depending on how desperate they are we could sub 30 in for 24.

I think his salary is okayish and he could be a solid backup for 10 minutes. I think we could waive and stretch him if we needed more space to retain hayward/hill etc.

At #17 could take OG or whoever slides a bit. Right now Patton and OG would be available, but there are other potential targets. It may allow us to move up further if need be.
 
I don't know if the Bucks would sacrifice 7 spots in the draft. And doesn't Hawes have a player option?

Personally, I think the no brainer trade is for Beverley. It's a good message to Hayward, but one that works whether he stays or goes. $6 million the next two years will not get in the way of keeping Hill and Ingles too if that's what Hayward wants. We can make that happen through additional moves.

Beverley is the smartest move we can make and I bet we make it if we don't find something bigger first.
 
LoPo said:
I don't know if the Bucks would sacrifice 7 spots in the draft. And doesn't Hawes have a player option?

Personally, I think the no brainer trade is for Beverley. It's a good message to Hayward, but one that works whether he stays or goes. $6 million the next two years will not get in the way of keeping Hill and Ingles too if that's what Hayward wants. We can make that happen through additional moves.

Beverley is the smartest move we can make and I bet we make it if we don't find something bigger first.
Click to expand...

We can do both moves... we have 13M in capspace and Diaw's contract. Hawes will almost certainly exercise the option. He'd get a contract next year but it'd likely be vet min.
 
LoPo said:
I don't know if the Bucks would sacrifice 7 spots in the draft. And doesn't Hawes have a player option?

Personally, I think the no brainer trade is for Beverley. It's a good message to Hayward, but one that works whether he stays or goes. $6 million the next two years will not get in the way of keeping Hill and Ingles too if that's what Hayward wants. We can make that happen through additional moves.

Beverley is the smartest move we can make and I bet we make it if we don't find something bigger first.
Click to expand...

I think they are looking at a center right now and at 24 one of Bam, Ike, or Patton is surely available.
 
The San Antonio Spurs have "strong interest" in both Chris Paul and Derrick Rose.
The Spurs have been maneuvering their cap situation in order to clear space to pursue free agents.*San Antonio is even considering trading away LaMarcus Aldridge.
Rose will come at a significantly lower cost for the Spurs than Paul. The Los Angeles Clippers are expected to offer Paul a max contract at 35 percent of the cap, while Rose could only command up to 30 percent of the cap, which he's unlikely to even receive considering the point guard market.
Rose has said he would like to re-sign with the New York Knicks.
Click to expand...

Interesting that they are interested in Rose but no mention of Hill.
 
Cappy_Smurf said:
Interesting that they are interested in Rose but no mention of Hill.
Click to expand...

Who is Rose's agent... feel like the Spurs are doing someone a solid by throwing this out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top