The Jazz don't have much young talent...

[The Midnight]

Still not as bad as burke. Lyles coulda shoulda been booker.
Burke coulda shoulda been McCollum and giannis iirc.

I get what you're saying, but Burke was college player of the year that year, and he was the consensus player at the pick. Nobody complained about it.


Lyles was more of a stab in the dark and many here thought Booker was clearly the best player available at that point of the draft. Many here really questioned the pick but had to buy into that 'balance test is everything' narrative from DL.

 

[fishonjazz]

I get what you're saying, but Burke was college player of the year that year, and he was the consensus player at the pick. Nobody complained about it.


Lyles was more of a stab in the dark and many here thought Booker was clearly the best player available at that point of the draft. Many here really questioned the pick but had to buy into that 'balance test is everything' narrative from DL.

True. Though I never liked the trey burke pick.

 

[Ron Mexico]

because he does not fit that description.

Its okay if you dont see the obvious talent. Its hard when the only two seasons you got to see him play was his rookie year as the youngest NBA player that was a project and last year when he was recovering from injury. He showed enough at the end of the season and beginning of this year but not for everyone. Time is on his side to prove himself.

 

[MVP]

Its okay if you dont see the obvious talent.

I see talent bro. I also see tons of red flags. That's why he does not fit description given to Mitchell.

 

[Ron Mexico]

I see talent bro. I also see tons of red flags. That's why he does not fit description given to Mitchell.

The only thing that concerns me is him getting injuries. But that is a concern of just about every player for me. Exum is not an higher of an injury risk than others.

Not sure whats not to see in his potential. When healthy he has shown he is an elite defender and can get to the basket very well. His shooting from 3 the second half of the season last year was good and he showed it has greatly improved. He also showed his ability to finish at the rim is improving. His handle needs some work and he just needs time on the court with the ball in his hand.

He has shown the same amount of potential as Mitchell. They are only a year apart in age as well. Mitchell actually has more experience playing as well since this is going to be the 3rd year in the last 5 years he has missed playing for a season. Mitchell is coming in much older as well, almost 3 years older.

 

[MVP]

The only thing that concerns me is him getting injuries. But that is a concern of just about every player for me. Exum is not an higher of an injury risk than others.

Not sure whats not to see in his potential. When healthy he has shown he is an elite defender and can get to the basket very well. His shooting from 3 the second half of the season last year was good and he showed it has greatly improved. He also showed his ability to finish at the rim is improving. His handle needs some work and he just needs time on the court with the ball in his hand.

He has shown the same amount of potential as Mitchell. They are only a year apart in age as well. Mitchell actually has more experience playing as well since this is going to be the 3rd year in the last 5 years he has missed playing for a season. Mitchell is coming in much older as well, almost 3 years older.

Not sure how to explain but Exum is not very gracious or fluid when he runs, shoots, drives or dribbles the ball. He just does not have natural basketball movement fluidity and always looks somewhat awkward. Maybe that's why he falls on the floor so many times after his drives or misses some layups badly - something is off with his balance and coordination and I did not see it change in 4 years. Not sure you can teach it... you either have it or not ( and Mitchell has it). That's why I think he will never be a star. His size and quick first step will make him serviceable backup aka S. Livingston if he stays healthy.

 

[Ron Mexico]

Not sure how to explain but Exum is not very gracious or fluid when he runs, shoots, drives or dribbles the ball. He just does not have natural basketball movement fluidity and always looks somewhat awkward. Maybe that's why he falls on the floor so many times after his drives or misses some layups badly - something is off with his balance and coordination and I did not see it change in 4 years. Not sure you can teach it... you either have it or not ( and Mitchell has it). That's why I think he will never be a star. His size and quick first step will make him serviceable backup aka S. Livingston if he stays healthy.

Thanks an interesting take. He can move awkward or different but I don't see it being a problem. Livingston with a three point shot, much younger and more speed sounds great to me.

 

[The Midnight]

For some reason the Jazz seem to be very reluctant to draft a 'shooter'?


There's Devin Booker. Then there's Kyle Kuzma that the Jazz were reportedly cold on because they didn't think his shooting is legit? Kuzma has been killing it for the Lakers and looks like a legit scorer for years to come for them. Instead they traded up to draft a back up center, Tony Bradley.


I mean, you've got to take a calculated risk sometime, right? Otherwise how can you get a good player? It's like how Quin keeps telling Ingles to put up 3's. If you don't put them up, how can they go in? Same thing with picking players. If you keep hesitating to draft 'shooters', then where are you gonna get them? From outer space??!?!

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

Just catching up on this thread. I think the Jazz have a very good front office. We seem to have a problem, however, whereby we draft players, build that team up to become a top 4 or 5 team in the Western Conference, capable of getting to the 2nd round of the playoffs, and then we lose a key player and slip into a treadmill status--meaning, the Jazz might make the playoffs as a low seed, but that's really their ceiling. This happened when DWill left, and may be happening again with Hayward leaving.

To break this cycle, the Jazz are going to have to be resourceful about acquiring and developing young talent. There just isn't much room for error. So even missing on a couple of drafts--e.g., Trey Burke and Trey Lyles--becomes costly.

We did well to trade for Rubio and to pick up Mitchell. However, right now the Jazz have Ingles, Sefalosha, Jerebko, Favors and Joe Johnson at the forward positions. All of these guys are basically role players, and a couple years from now when our young core is ready to start really competing again, most of these guys will be gone. Hence, the Jazz need to find at least a couple solid young players at the 3 and 4 who fit the development timeline set by Mitchell (21) and Gobert (25). We need to acquire and develop at least two more solid young players and do it without losing Gobert along the way. Otherwise we're going to get stuck again and finding ourselves drafting between #12 and #14 perpetually.

 

[The Midnight]

Just catching up on this thread. I think the Jazz have a very good front office. We seem to have a problem, however, whereby we draft players, build that team up to become a top 4 or 5 team in the Western Conference, capable of getting to the 2nd round of the playoffs, and then we lose a key player and slip into a treadmill status--meaning, the Jazz might make the playoffs as a low seed, but that's really their ceiling. This happened when DWill left, and may be happening again with Hayward leaving.

To break this cycle, the Jazz are going to have to be resourceful about acquiring and developing young talent. There just isn't much room for error. So even missing on a couple of drafts--e.g., Trey Burke and Trey Lyles--becomes costly.

We did well to trade for Rubio and to pick up Mitchell. However, right now the Jazz have Ingles, Sefalosha, Jerebko, Favors and Joe Johnson at the forward positions. All of these guys are basically role players, and a couple years from now when our young core is ready to start really competing again, most of these guys will be gone. Hence, the Jazz need to find at least a couple solid young players at the 3 and 4 who fit the development timeline set by Mitchell (21) and Gobert (25). We need to acquire and develop at least two more solid young players and do it without losing Gobert along the way. Otherwise we're going to get stuck again and finding ourselves drafting at #12 perpetually.

I think we also need to be smarter and know whether our 'star' is staying or leaving, if he is 60% leaving, then it might be more prudent to trade him rather than losing him for nothing.


Take DWill - obviously KOC knew something we all didn't - that he was gonna take off anyway. We got Favors out of him and a nice pick, which we sort of wasted it on Kanter, but the strategy was right.


Same thing with what Chicago did they got Lavine, Kris Dunn and Lauri Markkanen, and that's a HUGE haul for Jimmy Butler. Indiana got a promising Sabonis and Oladipo who is fantastic right now for them for Paul George.


We got absolutely nothing for Hayward - and that can't happen again IMO.

 

[Crawlnstall]

Heading into the 2011 draft Kanter was a big big prospect. College analysts said that if he had played in college his freshman year he would've been #1 and Kentucky would've been favored to win it all (iirc).
He was a project, but was viewed as a future start. Clearly he wasn't but he also had awful coaching.
Burks is a solid roleplayer off the bench but has had injury issues the past two seasons.
What hurts about this draft is that we could've taken Klay at #3 and then Kawhi at #12.
But here's the thing, they weren't viewed as future all stars heading into the draft. I remember there was a ton of skepticism on Kawhi, how he couldn't play the 3 or the 4 and was likely to turn out what Derrick Williams career has been (the #2 pick in that draft)
In other words, they weren't viewed as bad picks, no one expected Klay and Kawhi to be the players they are. Otherwise they would've gone top 3.
2013 draft looking back sucked because he wiffed on Trey and passed on CJ Mcollum, Schoerder and Giannis.
All of those players are much much better than Trey.
But Trey was the college player of the year and I remember the board being happy we drafted him.
But that draft was viewed as being very very weak, and Giannis was viewed as a major project.
The key though is that we did draft Rudy.
Hindsight is 20/20, but Burke definitely was a bust and a bad pick.
2014 was a good draft. Exum was always viewed as a project and he was the best player on the board. ANd you should always take the best player on the board. Getting Hood at #23 was a steal.
2015 draft sucks, getting Lyles was a mistake. Booker is gonna be a star, but he doesn't play defense and is a high volume shooter. I'm not saying this to try and make the pick look better. But we needed help at back bigs and we had plenty of guards already on the team.
Still though, Lyles was a bad pick, but at least it got us Mitchell, right?
2016 draft was a bad draft, getting Hill to get us in the playoffs was the right move and helped get the organization some momentum.

Basically, the Trey's are the only really bad picks

 

[str8line]

Not sure how to explain but Exum is not very gracious or fluid when he runs, shoots, drives or dribbles the ball. He just does not have natural basketball movement fluidity and always looks somewhat awkward. Maybe that's why he falls on the floor so many times after his drives or misses some layups badly - something is off with his balance and coordination and I did not see it change in 4 years. Not sure you can teach it... you either have it or not ( and Mitchell has it). That's why I think he will never be a star. His size and quick first step will make him serviceable backup aka S. Livingston if he stays healthy.

Dante has half the lateral speed of Mitchell. And way less hops. Dante could be good but Mitchell could be great.

 

[str8line]

Heading into the 2011 draft Kanter was a big big prospect. College analysts said that if he had played in college his freshman year he would've been #1 and Kentucky would've been favored to win it all (iirc).
He was a project, but was viewed as a future start. Clearly he wasn't but he also had awful coaching.
Burks is a solid roleplayer off the bench but has had injury issues the past two seasons.
What hurts about this draft is that we could've taken Klay at #3 and then Kawhi at #12.
But here's the thing, they weren't viewed as future all stars heading into the draft. I remember there was a ton of skepticism on Kawhi, how he couldn't play the 3 or the 4 and was likely to turn out what Derrick Williams career has been (the #2 pick in that draft)
In other words, they weren't viewed as bad picks, no one expected Klay and Kawhi to be the players they are. Otherwise they would've gone top 3.
2013 draft looking back sucked because he wiffed on Trey and passed on CJ Mcollum, Schoerder and Giannis.
All of those players are much much better than Trey.
But Trey was the college player of the year and I remember the board being happy we drafted him.
But that draft was viewed as being very very weak, and Giannis was viewed as a major project.
The key though is that we did draft Rudy.
Hindsight is 20/20, but Burke definitely was a bust and a bad pick.
2014 was a good draft. Exum was always viewed as a project and he was the best player on the board. ANd you should always take the best player on the board. Getting Hood at #23 was a steal.
2015 draft sucks, getting Lyles was a mistake. Booker is gonna be a star, but he doesn't play defense and is a high volume shooter. I'm not saying this to try and make the pick look better. But we needed help at back bigs and we had plenty of guards already on the team.
Still though, Lyles was a bad pick, but at least it got us Mitchell, right?
2016 draft was a bad draft, getting Hill to get us in the playoffs was the right move and helped get the organization some momentum.

Basically, the Trey's are the only really bad picks

I hate Trey's now. Not even gonna use tray's anymore. No more Trey's or tray's in my life.

Who the hell names their kid Trey anyways? I'm gonna name my next kid Plate.

 

[Archie Moses]

The thing is with Jazz rookies, I've noticed, is they don't ever seem to pass the "yeah, he's a rookie, but he's the real deal test." Sometimes our rookies show potential, but that's about it.
For example, Lonzo Ball is struggling with shooting this year (nothing like Mitchel still) but he has looked and played like "the real deal." Gawd, I hope Mitchell breaks this trend.

 

[Archie Moses]

Dante has half the lateral speed of Mitchell. And way less hops. Dante could be good but Mitchell could be great.

This is false. Dante, for his length, moves laterally smoother, quicker and faster than almost anyone I've seen in the NBA.

 

[Jazz4ever]

Dante has half the lateral speed of Mitchell. And way less hops. Dante could be good but Mitchell could be great.

Dante was the better draft prospect, he just was, and it's not close. Exum is a legit 6'6" and had drawn comparisons to Kobe Bryant by some.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

Dante was the better draft prospect, he just was, and it's not close. Exum is a legit 6'6" and had drawn comparisons to Kobe Bryant by some.

No scout in their right mind would compare Dante Exum to Kobe Bryant. Dante has never been much of a shooter. Dante's ceiling was and still is very high. He's just been derailed by injuries.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Dante was the better draft prospect, he just was, and it's not close. Exum is a legit 6'6" and had drawn comparisons to Kobe Bryant by some.

And they were all wrong.

The only thing Exum had was speed and intrigue. It's still the only thing he has.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

Projecting forward, the Jazz have Mitchell, probably Exum, Hood, Gobert and Bradley. They need young forwards. They also need to see if they can hold on to Gobert at the end of his current contract.

 

[Lakers_Slapper]

Lets revise, "The Jazz don't have much young talent that's working". We have young talent, we started from years ago in the rebuild. Our young talent was going to get better and grow and be experienced and not so young....
That's today. They're not as young anymore. We are supposed to be in a much more developed phase than what we are.