ESPN confident Jazz trade pick

[Hotdog]

It's a ridiculous overpay, but gets it done. Better hope he don't bust because tanking would do no good for the next 3 years. Might even result in the Jazz being sold.

It is an overpay, but I'm not even sure we have to pay quite that much. We could probably take a little off.

But again, we can't keep all this stuff anyways. Some of these pieces will just walk for nothing.

 

[Getting Traded]

I agree with that. At least with Burke, we "know who he is." He's a serviceable PG at a position of need. You don't trade away a position unless you can significantly upgrade. And Saric is a complete unknown. Do we then depend on Neto and LucasIII to play PG? Even if the first pick is Exum or Smart, you still need to see how they do. Now if Milwaukee said give us the #5 and Burk for Jabari, I'd do that in a heartbeat.

Why do people keep thinking Lucas III is going to be with the team next year? I thought it was established that it's a team option to keep him and Garrett is clearly better if it comes to deciding which one to keep?

 

[Getting Traded]

Jazz trade 5th pick and one of the Warriors future unprotected for Kevin Love.

Trade Kanter and the other Warrior's future unprotected for rights to Aaron Gordon.

Burke
Hayward
Gordon
Love
Favors

Oh My.

Surely not enough for Love, who wouldn't want to play for the Jazz anyway ... he wants to go to LA. In any case, I think he is overrated. Can't play a lick of defense, unless you consider rebounding part of defense like people used to say about Boozer -- however, he is a lot more versatile than Boozer.

 

[sgjazzfan]

1. What veteran is there that is up for trade that we could get for #5 without giving up more?
2. Would that veteran even be willing to re-sign with Utah? I don't want a 1-2 year rental on a player.
3. I would be OK with this if the Jazz only dropped 2-3 spots, although I can't think of a player on the Lakers, Celtics or Kings I'd want that they would trade for those few spots.

About trading up for Parker. Can we trade the rights to re-sign Hayward? Also, I don't think we can trade for 2015 and 2016 first round picks, just one of the two, right?

 

[Hotdog]

1. What veteran is there that is up for trade that we could get for #5 without giving up more?
2. Would that veteran even be willing to re-sign with Utah? I don't want a 1-2 year rental on a player.
3. I would be OK with this if the Jazz only dropped 2-3 spots, although I can't think of a player on the Lakers, Celtics or Kings I'd want that they would trade for those few spots.

About trading up for Parker. Can we trade the rights to re-sign Hayward? Also, I don't think we can trade for 2015 and 2016 first round picks, just one of the two, right?

Ya, you are right. We can't trade picks in consecutive years. So it would have to be the 2015 and 2017.

And yes to trading Hayward and his rights. I'm pretty sure we can do that.

 

[fishonjazz]

Seriously!

What was all this asset accumulation for if we aren't going to use some of it?

If all the pieces we have (present and future), turn out to be at least borderline all stars like we hope, we still won't even be able to keep them all. We have to start thinking consolidation at some point. Kanter and Burks are going to be due a payday soon. It might even be above 10 mil a piece if they both make that next step next year. Then what? We aren't going to be able to afford all these players. Right after them, we will be looking at maybe paying Burke some nice money. Then maybe Gobert. They would all be great to have but we can't have them all. It's best to start narrowing things down and possibly upgrading these pieces.

Look at what we have that are of positive value.

Neto - Burke

Give us flexibility in dealing one of those.

Kanter - Favors - Gobert

Gives us flexibility in dealing one of those

Burks - Hayward

Gives us flexibility in dealing one of those.

Our own 2014, 2015, etc,.... 1st and 2nd picks

The 2017 GS first and two GS second round picks


We have a dump truck full assets right now. Why not throw a little extra in to get to the top right now? How much is too much? I've heard people say a few times that a trade they read was too much to give. But then we hear that there is no way you could move into the top 3. Well, why not?

What if you offered a top3 team this?

Kanter
Hayward
The 5th pick
Our next year's first rounder unprotected
Our 2016 unprotected
This year's 23rd
The GS 2017
The 2 GS 2nd rounders
3 mil cash

That's a lot to offer a team.

And that still leaves us with

Burke
Burks
Favors
Gobert
Neto

and few other nice players.

Then add Jabari

Burke
Burks
Jabari
Favors
Gobert

How about that group growing together?

So how much is too much? Would all that get it done? I honestly can't see any of the top 3 not taking that deal. Wtf?

I bet we could come in even lower and get it to work.

We can't just keep farming and losing players. Gotta take a risk or two to get to the top imo.

The more I think about it, I can't see how this doesn't get done.

I agree with your premise..... but i dont think we can trade hayward since he is not under contract

 

[orangello]

totally agree.

or, we could trade them Burke....

I like this suggestion more.

 

[Hotdog]

I agree If with your premise..... but i dont think we can trade hayward since he is not under contract

I may be wrong but I think we can trade him.

He's essentially under contract. He's has to play for us if we make him by matching what he gets offered. Either that, or he is signed before the deal (if possible)

But even if he can't be traded. Him not in the deal doesn't really make it not possible. It's still a lot to offer a team.

 

[orangello]

Lindsey would look like a totally incompetent fool if he made this move...basically giving up on Trey after not even a full season, for a 12th pick? People around here act as if Trey Burke is Jason Hart 2.0 or something. He's the ONLY clutch player we have on the team and yet we want dump him so quickly. Last I checked, players that consistently come through during clutch situations are NOT a dime a dozen.

Trade while the value is high. After 3 years the Jazz could still be searching for a true starting PG if Burke is still the PG.

 

[orangello]

What if you offered a top3 team this?

Kanter
Hayward
The 5th pick
Our next year's first rounder unprotected
Our 2016 unprotected
This year's 23rd
The GS 2017
The 2 GS 2nd rounders
3 mil cash

That's a lot to offer a team.

And that still leaves us with

Burke
Burks
Favors
Gobert
Neto

and few other nice players.

Then add Jabari

Burke
Burks
Jabari
Favors
Gobert

How about that group growing together?

So how much is too much? Would all that get it done? I honestly can't see any of the top 3 not taking that deal. Wtf?

I bet we could come in even lower and get it to work.

We can't just keep farming and losing players. Gotta take a risk or two to get to the top imo.

The more I think about it, I can't see how this doesn't get done.

I don't know what to say about this besides that it is dumb.



Also, it is impossible according the NBA rules.

 

[Hotdog]

I honestly think that this could move us up in the top 3


Kanter
GS 2017 pick
GS 2 2nd rounders
Our 2015 unprotected 1st
The 5th pick
The 23rd this year

That's a lot right there, and we still have a lot left.

You could even swap Kanter out for one of our other players if they wanted something else.

 

[orangello]

I agree with that. At least with Burke, we "know who he is." He's a serviceable PG at a position of need. You don't trade away a position unless you can significantly upgrade. And Saric is a complete unknown. Do we then depend on Neto and LucasIII to play PG? Even if the first pick is Exum or Smart, you still need to see how they do. Now if Milwaukee said give us the #5 and Burk for Jabari, I'd do that in a heartbeat.

And "serviceable" got us the 4th worst record in the NBA (Corbin has a lot to do with this too).

So, please again explain how keeping Burke helps us to get a championship? TIA.