Yes they are the model for building a championship. So we tank this season get another high pick lose our team to Las Vegas still suck get another top pick and then we are going to be rolling in championships just like OKC is right?
Jazz vs Lakers - Why the Jazz need to lose.
- Thread starter green
- Start date
Yes they are the model for building a championship. So we tank this season get another high pick lose our team to Las Vegas still suck get another top pick and then we are going to be rolling in championships just like OKC is right?
Do you have a chrystal ball? The OKC experiment is far from over. Why don't you try one that's relevant to the discussion? Oh, that's right, it's because San Antonio has a pile of rings.
The Bulls are pretty damn good too.
KhaOZ
Well-Known Member
Genius
Last edited:
My point is that top lottery picks are not a guarantee of anything. You can argue that top picks are necessary, but they're not sufficient to contend. Each draft is different, and there are usually only a few gems in any draft. The Jazz could completely tank and end up with the #4 or #6 pick in this year's draft, but the player they get isn't a guaranteed game-changer. Generally, it's better to pick in the lottery, yes, but a strategy of tanking rarely pays off. What the Jazz really need is a guard who can shoot and create his own shot, as well as set up other players. If they can get a go-to scorer on the wing, that would be nice too. One of those players should be available for the Jazz in the next draft.
I was really responding to Green. Should have quoted him.
Is Harrison Barnes going to play better than Josh Howard did last night? Is Perry Jones going to play better than Millsap did last night? Maybe. But there are no guarantees. I think that Jazz and most teams think that a "bird in the hand is worth more than cutting your bush" (or something like that). In a sense, Millsap and Jefferson are still developing as players, and it's worth letting this happen too. Their improvement could mean as much to the Jazz as a bright young rookie. Lets say the Jazz trade Millsap or Josh Howard and get a good player back who is ready now. This is something else to consider.
Lets say the Jazz get pick #4 in this draft. They'd probably take Barnes or Gilchrist, maybe PJIII or Thomas Robinson. Actually Jeremy Lamb or Brad Beal might be the guy they should take. Do you play Gilchrist ahead of Hayward who helps steer the offense? Do you play Lamb ahead of Burks, who probably passes and slashes better? Probably the solution is that you pick either an SF or an SG and have Hayward start at either position alongside that player. However, a good player will probably be there when the Jazz pick with the GSW pick.....assuming that works out. There are some unknowns, but is it really worth tanking the season right when the team is trying to build an identity and rebuild another winning tradition?
No, but he can shoot better.
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
Or maybe KOC can use the TPE and a 1st to get "that guy." That's what it took to obtain Jefferson. Minnesota wanted to dump salaries and wanted two 1st-rounders. Jazz were able to give that to them. Or maybe it involves trading for two players: an all-star and a bad contracts. The more assets KOC has at his disposal, the better off we'll be. And that's one of the reasons I'm pleased Howard is playing so well. He'd definitely bring a late 1st from a contender at the deadline.
I wouldn't count out Burks or Hayward just yet. Alec can be a Maggette-type player. Corey was always able to get shots or get to the line. As for Hayward, the kid is raw, but he can drive and I know he can shoot. He's handling the ball more and has upped his assists. To me, it looks like he's still rushing and forcing his game instead of just letting the game flow. He'll settle down. If I were Corbin, I'd have Gordon just work on shooting off the curls. Just concentrate on ONE aspect of the game until he has that down, then move on to the next thing.
Gyp Rosetti
Banned
Burks could be that guy.