What's new
By:

Trade Rumors Involving the Jazz

I also don’t buy the “we aren’t tanking… we may keep our vets” narrative. I’m old enough to remember when we weren’t trading Don… then it was “well we will be open to offers that are ridiculously one sided in our favor”… then we held an effing auction for him. This is just what the narrative needs to be to get the best return for your vets. I don’t think we will or even can go to the Philly levels of tank… but by end of year we will be bottom 5 either through strategic benching moves or just offloading so many key pieces that it makes winning very hard. Maybe just playing THT a ton.
 

idiot said:
If this is the way we solve our numbers crunch, all it says to me is that the numbers crunch was not real in the first place.

If we throw in Butler or Dok, all that means is we don't care enough about them to keep them. So if we're not that invested in them, there's no real need have a trade involved. We could just waive them anyway. If something like this happens, it's more about saving a few million than anything else (which is fine, but hardly rises to the level of urgency that I thought Windhorst was portraying).
Click to expand...
Maybe another team does believe in them to some degree and they are giving you a distant protected 2nd round pick or something. And you still have to pay the dudes when you waive them. They don't magically disappear from your cap
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I also don’t buy the “we aren’t tanking… we may keep our vets” narrative. I’m old enough to remember when we weren’t trading Don… then it was “well we will be open to offers that are ridiculously one sided in our favor”… then we held an effing auction for him. This is just what the narrative needs to be to get the best return for your vets. I don’t think we will or even can go to the Philly levels of tank… but by end of year we will be bottom 5 either through strategic benching moves or just offloading so many key pieces that it makes winning very hard. Maybe just playing THT a ton.
Click to expand...
You are most likely right. You obviously can't come outright and say you're tanking.

I just think it's pretty clear this isn't an OKC/Philly level job.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
You are most likely right. You obviously can't come outright and say you're tanking.

I just think it's pretty clear this isn't an OKC/Philly level job.
Click to expand...
And it may not even be a message to the rest of the league for trade value purposes. It might be a message to our current players that we want to develop… they need to have hope/optimism to be able to develop and get the culture right. Can’t be like “we are gonna be total *** cuz we want a top 5 pick” and also sell the young guys that you believe in them and want them to be successful. If Sexton, Lauri, Simone, and the other young guys are the reason we are a play in team then it means they took a leap and they can be solid building blocks.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
The "too small backcourt" thing was greatly overstated with Donovan/Conley. We never failed because of lack of size at the guard spots.
Click to expand...
It was never the single biggest issue, it was however a considerable contributing factor. When we have a team like the Clippers with 4 guys rotating in and out that are all 4-6 inches taller than our back court we stand no chance to guard anyone with 2 guys barely pushing 6'2" out there.
 
LogGrad98 said:
It was never the single biggest issue, it was however a considerable contributing factor. When we have a team like the Clippers with 4 guys rotating in and out that are all 4-6 inches taller than our back court we stand no chance to guard anyone with 2 guys barely pushing 6'2" out there.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I get that, but it wasn't like contesting shots over the top was the thing killing us. It was just guys getting beat off the dribble, which having a shorter/quicker team (especially since our short guys are extremely long) that kind of thing should your advantage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top