What's new
By:

Rubio traded to Jazz

Cappy_Smurf said:
We would have until the trade deadline to make other moves to get under the tax. I think we could easily get back similar value to what we spent on Rubio if we flipped him.

As for Exum, all 3 could spend some time at the 2, and between Rubio and Hill, we might have one of them injured more often than not.
Click to expand...

Hill-Rubio-Exum
Hood-Mitchell
Hayward-Ingles-Johnson some

There's not enough time for Mitchell and/or Exum to develop.
 
Wes Mantooth said:
I'm having trouble buying into this.
Click to expand...

I'd rather have Hill for his shooting, but this is a whole lot better than trying to negotiate with Hill for a week or more, only to miss out and then have to pick from the scraps left over after the better players have signed elsewhere. God forbid we had another season with Mack playing lots of minutes.
 
Cappy_Smurf said:
We would have until the trade deadline to make other moves to get under the tax. I think we could easily get back similar value to what we spent on Rubio if we flipped him.

As for Exum, all 3 could spend some time at the 2, and between Rubio and Hill, we might have one of them injured more often than not.
Click to expand...

Who would give us a 1st for Rubio at the deadline with less than 1.5 years left on his deal when almost all good teams already have a really good effing point guard?
 
Cappy_Smurf said:
I'd rather have Hill for his shooting, but this is a whole lot better than trying to negotiate with Hill for a week or more, only to miss out and then have to pick from the scraps left over after the better players have signed elsewhere. God forbid we had another season with Mack playing lots of minutes.
Click to expand...

I think I'd have preferred to overspend on Hill, retain Hayward and Ingles, opt out of Diaw, and do everything in my power to move Burks. **** that guy.
 
I don't get the Exum angle. Those who want him to get the playing time is putting all the vegemite into one basket, a basket that is no where near a slam dunk. That's not how you run a franchise.
 
Catchall said:
ESPN

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBnbFsqtoyw
Click to expand...


ESPN's take on the Jazz and Hayward: "bda bdabdadaaada Gordon Hayward....bdaaadadada... Relationship with Brad Stevens... Bdadaaada blah blah.... Hayward and Boston (because we reaaaaalllllly want him in Boston not Utah)"

stfu ESPN
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PioSPfgVnQ

Rubio's pull-up jumper was so nasty this game. Towards the beginning shows how bad Rubio is attacking the rim. Goes 1-on-1 against Diaw and gets his shot blocked.
 
Wes Mantooth said:
I think I'd have preferred to overspend on Hill, retain Hayward and Ingles, opt out of Diaw, and do everything in my power to move Burks. **** that guy.
Click to expand...

Then 70% of your cap is dedicated to Hill, Gobert, and Hayward, and Hill is the weak link of those three and there's a clear ceiling that's got Chris Paul painted on it.

This moves allows flexibility. I'm not enthusiastic about Hayward on a max deal, since it's a lesser value than most players on a max deal, but that's a better option with a guaranteed player to be on the roster, as opposed to Hill, and a player that will up Hayward's PPG and ranks highly on analytics.
 
Wes Mantooth said:
Hill-Rubio-Exum
Hood-Mitchell
Hayward-Ingles-Johnson some

There's not enough time for Mitchell and/or Exum to develop.
Click to expand...

Hood could be traded, as we need another PF. Otherwise JJ can get all his minutes at PF. Exum and Mitchell might have to bite the bullet until we flip somebody. Also, again, injuries.

It's not a perfect situation by any means, but Hill is an asset at the right price, and he's the only one of that Value we can acquire due to his bird rights. I'd be surprised if DL just decides to let an asset go for nothing if a reasonable deal could be made. It's also possible that they already know Hill is going elsewhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top