What's new
By:

2016 NBA Season Notes/Info

BTP said:
Just to level out your neediness:

https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php?51156-George-Hill-coming-to-Utah/page4&p=1244857#post1244857
Click to expand...

I don't take it back, I trust Exum. my opinion on this is concurrent with the master plan that I've detailed here for years - keep the team extremely young whislt running the cap up way over the luxury tax by way of making good draft picks and re-signing Restricted free agents, I still contend thats the best way to open a BIG championship window and I still contend the team would've made noise this season, put a solid product on the floor and would easily be one of the best young teams.. So I look at these win-now moves as a concession of sorts.

Lettuce not forget I was all for going after a player with a ring and tons of playoff experience(more than the entire roster at the times playoff experience combined), who happened to be 23 at the time.. Instead that $$ was spent on Johnson and Diaw.

I certainly don't trust going for it this year, I say one of the unspoken results of the trade is security for the F.O./Quinn and moral victories for the players/fans.

It's easy to overreact about Hill's early play this season, there's still a great deal of risk involved, If he gets injured and then walks its a disastrous trade, we can all agree on that..

It was clearly addition by subtraction, and the subtraction part might not be finished - if he rapes the Jazz in contract negotiations (which they've given him the platform to do, and all the leverage)It could easily cost the Jazz an opportunity to keep another one of the young studs in uniform, so in a way there could be a cost-cutting element to the trade that isn't being discussed much here..


The ramifications of that trade are far from settled.


I still view the swap as a double-down move, which Is why I keep using the word risk. they missed on Burke so they use the 12th pick years later on Hill, who turns 31 in the playoffs. It's the same FO involved so I'd be remissed not to mention that If they would've just taken Schroder as I was pleading for months, none of this would've been necessary, instead of 2 young player on rookie deals they've got a 30 year old, who if he's got any sense will be looking for his last big multi-year deal.
 
Last edited:
PG_AB said:
I don't take it back, I trust Exum. my opinion on this is concurrent with the master plan that I've detailed here for years - keep the team extremely young whislt running the cap up way over the luxury tax by way of making good draft picks and re-signing Restricted free agents, I still contend thats the best way to open a BIG championship window and I still contend the team would've made noise this season, put a solid product on the floor and would easily be one of the best young teams.. So I look at these win-now moves as a concession of sorts.

Lettuce not forget I was all for going after a player with a ring and tons of playoff experience(more than the entire roster at the times playoff experience combined), who happened to be 23 at the time.. Instead that $$ was spent on Johnson and Diaw.

I certainly don't trust going for it this year, I say one of the unspoken results of the trade is security for the F.O./Quinn and moral victories for the players/fans.

It's easy to overreact about Hill's early play this season, there's still a great deal of risk involved, If he gets injured and then walks its a disastrous trade, we can all agree on that..

It was clearly addition by subtraction, and the subtraction part might not be finished - if he rapes the Jazz in contract negotiations (which they've given him the platform to do, and all the leverage)It could easily cost the Jazz an opportunity to keep another one of the young studs in uniform, so in a way there could be a cost-cutting element to the trade that isn't being discussed much here..


The ramifications of that trade are far from settled.


I still view the swap as a double-down move, which Is why I keep using the word risk. they missed on Burke so they use the 12th pick years later on Hill, who turns 31 in the playoffs. It's the same FO involved so I'd be remissed not to mention that If they would've just taken Schroder as I was pleading for months, none of this would've been necessary, instead of 2 young player on rookie deals they've got a 30 year old, who if he's got any sense will be looking for his last big multi-year deal.
Click to expand...

Idk who the 23 year old FA is you're talking about(I'll assume he was restricted given his age - so probably impossible to get unless you follow up on that)

I think Schröder would've been horrible for the team. He's too ball dominant to be efficient next to Hood and Hayward and the disruptive, narcissistic elements of his personality have taken a lot more space in the picture he draws since he got drafted despite playing for Bud. He also still is a very shaky shooter.
Hill's and Johnson's range are proving to be HUGE assets for the Jazz in halfcourt. Having 35-42% shooters on all 3 backcourt slots makes it so much easier to get away with Favors and Gobert on the floor at the same time. And that size is what even Golden State admitted to have caused them the most trouble against OKC.

I also do not think we're contenders this year. I think the next 2-4 years are our main window when you look at the unexpected developments certain players have taken. But it's important to gel as a group and work towards that contention and eliminate as many flaws as possible. Because if the next CBA doesn't include some provision that allows teams to only have 1 top earner on their roster, then it's still Golden State's championship to lose, not the other way around. I hate that situation and can totally see myself skipping parts of the playoffs because of competitive boredom.

I think Hill, already turning 31 this season, has a lot of longevity left because of his length and skillset. I compared him with Chauncey Billups "golden fall" in another thread. So I'm excited that we have the opportunity to offer him a big *** contract and take a chance. Question is management's willingness to spend big time.
How many franchises have had long contention windows that lasted more than 3 years in the last decade(I know it's flawed window because the monitoring/analytics age really only began in the late 2000s for some teams and at the start of this decade for the rest)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top