What's new
By:

2018 Draft Trade Idea

LoPo said:
Good lord you guys jump to conclusions. Read the posts.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...
I read your posts, they don't make sense and you didn't do your homework.

I would link you to the Jazz cap calculator if I wasn't on my phone shooting the ****, but the Jazz have to offload basically everyone on team options and Burks (without salary coming back). That means no Simmons + George.
 
And if we truly in the mix for PG and we lose Exum, then so be it. My plan plus letting Exum walk gets us a full max for PG. If he even is a possibility.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
I get the idea behind it, but giving up a decent pick (#21) to rent Simmons for a year and maybe create space for a PG/LeBron meeting isn’t a good idea.

By your own numbers, stretching Burks gives the Jazz almost the exact same cap relief as trading for Simmons - without giving up any additional assets. Get the commitment first and THEN finesse the numbers.
 
Additionally, the cornerstones of this team were acquired with mid and late 1st rounders. Those dice need to be rolled by Lindsey or traded for a star. Straight up.
 
Ellis269 said:
I get the idea behind it, but giving up a decent pick (#21) to rent Simmons for a year and maybe create space for a PG/LeBron meeting isn’t a good idea.

By your own numbers, stretching Burks gives the Jazz almost the exact same cap relief as trading for Simmons - without giving up any additional assets. Get the commitment first and THEN finesse the numbers.
Click to expand...
and to echo HH, if you can't even get a meeting without clearing the deck first, they're probably not signing anyway.
 
@Ellis269 and @NUMBERICA

I respect what you guys are saying and I get what you are perceiving.

My idea is for Simmons. Its a DL type move. I trust Simmons for 1 or 2 years more than #21. I also think some of the guys in play at #21 might still be there at #35.

My approach is more win now. The meeting stuff is more window dressing than reality.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
LoPo said:
@Ellis269 and @NUMBERICA

I respect what you guys are saying and I get what you are perceiving.

My idea is for Simmons. Its a DL type move. I trust Simmons for 1 or 2 years more than #21. I also think some of the guys in play at #21 might still be there at #35.

My approach is more win now. The meeting stuff is more window dressing than reality.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

So Simmons was welcomed out the door by SA because of nonbasketball stuff really... DL comes from SA and knows all that stuff... some teams have a one knucklehead rule... our team has a no knucklehead rule.

Simmons as a player makes sense but there are other reasons it will not happen.
 
LoPo said:
@Ellis269 and @NUMBERICA

I respect what you guys are saying and I get what you are perceiving.

My idea is for Simmons. Its a DL type move. I trust Simmons for 1 or 2 years more than #21. I also think some of the guys in play at #21 might still be there at #35.

My approach is more win now. The meeting stuff is more window dressing than reality.
Click to expand...
I don’t think Simmons helps move the needle. Jazz need difference makers - either by getting lucky in the draft of by getting the assets needed to trade for a star player.

Even in win now mode, the Jazz can do better than Simmons. The only reason to make a move like this is to add/consolidate assets to add a star player. I don’t think this adcomplishes that at all.
 
I dont think Simmons makes us more or less of a contender, but he makes us a better team for next season and maybe the season after that. Picks in the 20s are more miss than hit. Creating a winning culture that stars want to join needs to happen soon. I feel better about Simmons helping do that than #21.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
If we used #21 to trade up for that star, I would obviously rather that. However, DL picks a proven talent over a draft pick (Hill and Rubio) quite often despite how much we fall in love with prospects.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
LoPo said:
If we used #21 to trade up for that star, I would obviously rather that. However, DL picks a proven talent over a draft pick (Hill and Rubio) quite often despite how much we fall in love with prospects.
Click to expand...
Situations are extremely different.

With Hill, DL (correctly) decided that the 2016 draft was extremely weak and trading for a vet was better value - especially since the goal was to provide a starting guard. Trading for Rubio filled the same need after Hill priced himself out of the Jazz comfort zone.

The OKC pick wasn’t expected to be of good value, and Ricky clearly outplayed that value. The Jazz don’t have cap space to take on a veteran before the draft.

I could see them trade up, but I think it’s pretty likely that they just stay put and pick their BPA.
 
LoPo said:
@Ellis269

The trade doesn't add future money. Simmons has a $5.7 team option for 2019.

And how do we realistically meet with a PG or LeBron if we have no cap space? Like I have laid out, this trade doesn't show our hand but it does get us closer to having the money necessary to even have the meeting.

If we still have Burks on July 1, we don't get a formal meeting with PG. If we somehow do, shedding Burks' $11.5 will be so much harder once everybody knows what we are trying to go after. We lose leverage.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...
Not true. And, IINM, FA's can start meeting with teams about one week before the official date they can sign. Hardly any teams have cap space due to cap holds. FA's and their agents know that maneuvering to free up space only starts once a FA agrees to sign with a team.

I understand what you're trying to propose with the Burks trade. But I think the better route is to try to trade him without taking back salary. After the draft...if PG wanted to sign with the Jazz...Utah could offer a team like Phoenix or Dallas (anyone that has cap space), Burks AND either a 2019 1st round pick OR the rights to the player they picked this year. I'm betting there would be at least one team willing to take Burks and the Jazz' pick. So no risk UNLESS PG says he wants to sign with Utah. Otherwise, you just keep everyone and whoever you select with the 21st pick.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I like him on court, but there is something to the off-court locker room stuff there. Pop didn't want him back and that team desperately needs a guy like him. In a vacuum it's reasonable... but considering how much value we put on character and that we'd absolutly have intel there... I think he's a no-go
Click to expand...
They didn't want him back because it would have put them in the LT.

*and he wasn't really good* Very replacement level. He put up OK stats on a **** team this year. Burks probably would do better.
 
Last edited:
NUMBERICA said:
I read your posts, they don't make sense and you didn't do your homework.

I would link you to the Jazz cap calculator if I wasn't on my phone shooting the ****, but the Jazz have to offload basically everyone on team options and Burks (without salary coming back). That means no Simmons + George.
Click to expand...
The Jazz could do the Burks/Simmons deal and offload Crowder to get the space
 
Okay @Cy. You are trolling again. Burks is better than Simmons?

Simmons: 14ppg, 3.5rpg, 2.5apg and plays really good defense as a starter.

Burks: 7.7ppg, 3rpg, 1apg playing terrible defense and sometimes clueless offense only in mop up duty.

And the kicker - Burks makes twice as much as Simmons next year. TWICE. The premise of the trade is to pretty much fit Simmons and Exum into what Burks and #21 would have made. We need another good wing to compete with GS. And, we have the financial flexibility to pitch PG confidently whether we truly have a shot or not.

And, I don't think we are sold on somebody at #21. We have worked out so many that we might be happy with who we get at #35.

Burks better than Simmons. C'mon Cy.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top