3-wing lineups are a bandaid + we shouldn't wait for Dante

[NAOS]

Axiom #1: The 3-wing lineups being discussed are a bandaid. The jazz lack a ball-mover who can shoot and play the point guard.

Axiom #2: Dante's year-long absence really hurts the trajectory of this team. By the time he gets back, he'll need time to (re)develop and play at a high level -- and just how high is that?

Axiom #3: Dante can play either guard spot, so acquiring another point guard does not signal giving up on Dante. I'm not suggesting that. IS THAT CLEAR?


The time to make a trade is SOON. This team cannot afford the continual lack of production from the point guard position. We have assets, and our books are in order. We've just shown that our defense might be enough to get us into serious contention for a playoff spot. This core needs playoff experience. Get it done.


Is this a better discussion? probably. Is it fun waiting for the Utah Jazz to make a trade? No. Bandaids can be more fun.

 

[MDAV28]

I mean sure, but name me a PG we could trade for that would either:
1. Compete with Dante when he is back as our future at that position
2. Be a competent PG and then just take a backseat role to Dante when he comes back

This is exactly the type of knee-jerk reaction the Jazz DON'T make (especially in preseason before we even KNOW how this team is going to mesh). If that PG is out there and we don't give up any of our core-6 to get him, please do share.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Check out this three wing lineup:

I'd post some more but I need to go create some content.

 

[NAOS]

I mean sure, but name me a PG we could trade for that would either:
1. Compete with Dante when he is back as our future at that position
2. Be a competent PG and then just take a backseat role to Dante when he comes back

This is exactly the type of knee-jerk reaction the Jazz DON'T make (especially in preseason before we even KNOW how this team is going to mesh). If that PG is out there and we don't give up any of our core-6 to get him, please do share.

#1 assumes that Dante must compete with minutes at the point guard spot. Why? You don't appear to have read the axioms in the OP
#2 same problem. Why would this newly acquired point guard have to be supplanted by Dante, even if Dante proved worthy of a starting role (which is kind of a big question mark, all things considered)?

There's nothing knee-jerk about this. We lack a piece. That's why you stockpile assets.

 

[Gameface]

Axiom #1: The 3-wing lineups being discussed are a bandaid. The jazz lack a ball-mover who can shoot and play the point guard.

Axiom #2: Dante's year-long absence really hurts the trajectory of this team. By the time he gets back, he'll need time to (re)develop and play at a high level -- and just how high is that?

Axiom #3: Dante can play either guard spot, so acquiring another point guard does not signal giving up on Dante. I'm not suggesting that. IS THAT CLEAR?
.

The time to make a trade is SOON. This team cannot afford the continual lack of production from the point guard position. We have assets, and our books are in order. We've just shown that our defense might be enough to get us into serious contention for a playoff spot. This core needs playoff experience. Get it done.


Is this a better discussion? probably. Is it fun waiting for the Utah Jazz to make a trade? No. Bandaids can be more fun.

I agree in many ways. The clock is ticking on our roster. We have to start making progress this year in order to keep the team we have intact 2-3 years from now. If this year is a big disappointment I expect some of our biggest pieces to leave

 

[MDAV28]

#1 assumes that Dante must compete with minutes at the point guard spot. Why? You don't appear to have read the axioms in the OP
#2 same problem. Why would this newly acquired point guard have to be supplanted by Dante, even if Dante proved worthy of a starting role (which is kind of a big question mark, all things considered)?

There's nothing knee-jerk about this. We lack a piece. That's why you stockpile assets.

I'm well aware that you believe Dante can play either guard spot, which I disagree with but that's a different topic.

Except it is a knee-jerk because we only lack the piece this season.

 

[NAOS]

I'm well aware that you believe Dante can play either guard spot, which I disagree with but that's a different topic.

Except it is a knee-jerk because we only lack the piece this season.

You're uber-confident in Dante. Uber.

 

[Siro]

If Dante + asset can net us someone like Dennis Schroder, then we should do it. I actually don't see how Exum can play "either guard spot" since he's not a good shooter and hasn't shown to possess any offensive instincts. I know I'll get crucified for saying this, but I think the Jazz should take a serious look at trading Exum for a decent PG.

 

[Stoked]

If Dante + asset can net us someone like Dennis Schroder, then we should do it. I actually don't see how Exum can play "either guard spot" since he's not a good shooter and hasn't shown to possess any offensive instincts. I know I'll get crucified for saying this, but I think the Jazz should take a serious look at trading Exum for a decent PG.

It is way, way, way to early to even assume that Dante is or is not a decent or good PG. But Trey clearly is not and Dante is gone for a year. So I am not against bringing in another PG to help alleviate that.

@NAOS, I assume you mean Schroeder, correct?

What other options do people have in mind?

 

[Siro]

It is way, way, way to early to even assume that Dante is or is not a decent or good PG. But Trey clearly is not and Dante is gone for a year. So I am not against bringing in another PG to help alleviate that.

@NAOS, I assume you mean Schroeder, correct?

What other options do people have in mind?

Wasting an asset on a second stringer in hopes that Exum develops into a good enough PG doesn't fill me with excitement. IF, and I emphasize if, trading Dante can get us a legit starting PG, I say we take the chance.

 

[MDAV28]

You're uber-confident in Dante. Uber.

Of course Dante is still a question mark but the "missing piece" of a potential franchise PG is on our roster right now.

Trading one of our core-6 guys is to acquire another potential franchise PG (or an already proven franchise PG?) is definitely a knee-jerk reaction. What other assets that we have would it take to land a player like that?

 

[Stoked]

Wasting an asset on a second stringer in hopes that Exum develops into a good enough PG doesn't fill me with excitement. IF, and I emphasize if, trading Dante can get us a legit starting PG, I say we take the chance.

My argument is that the Jazz have enough other assets that they can bring in a vet PG and still retain Exum and allow him to heal and develop. Trading Exum to bring in another PG is not the only option.

Burke, multiple 2nds, cash, multiple 1sts...

I just am not that high on giving up on Exum which is part of what this is.

 

[Gameface]

I'm okay with trading any player except one of our core-15 guys.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

I'm okay with trading any player except one of our core-15 guys.

Lol.

 

[NAOS]

Of course Dante is still a question mark but the "missing piece" of a potential franchise PG is on our roster right now.

Trading one of our core-6 guys is to acquire another potential franchise PG (or an already proven franchise PG?) is definitely a knee-jerk reaction. What other assets that we have would it take to land a player like that?

I never said I'd trade a core piece. Right?

We have picks, Lyles, Pliess, Burke, more picks, lots of un-guaranteed contracts, Booker, etc.

I'm not saying we need a world-stopper All-Star.

You've been pushing my argument to the extremes. How about trying another way?

 

[MDAV28]

I'm okay with trading any player except one of our core-15 guys.

It's not the fact the core-6 can't be traded, it's the knee-jerk reaction of trading one of those players.

Let's make a trade for a franchise PG with all the assets we have sounds terrific. Can't wait to find out who this mystery player is that we can trade a whole bunch of assets for.

 

[Gameface]

It's not the fact the core-6 can't be traded, it's the knee-jerk reaction of trading one of those players.

Let's make a trade for a franchise PG with all the assets we have sounds terrific. Can't wait to find out who this mystery player is that we can trade a whole bunch of assets for.

If you don't mind me asking, who are the core-6?

I think we have three core players, Hayward, Favors and Gobert.

I love our team as a whole, but if I had to reduce it to our "core" I can't go very far past 3 guys.

 

[NAOS]

It's not the fact the core-6 can't be traded, it's the knee-jerk reaction of trading one of those players.

Let's make a trade for a franchise PG with all the assets we have sounds terrific. Can't wait to find out who this mystery player is that we can trade a whole bunch of assets for.

why should I give you names while you continually slaughter the premisses the thread (that I started)?

 

[MDAV28]

I never said I'd trade a core piece. Right?

We have picks, Lyles, Pliess, Burke, more picks, lots of un-guaranteed contracts, Booker, etc.

I'm not saying we need a world-stopper All-Star.

You've been pushing my argument to the extremes. How about trying another way?

You're absolutely right. This hypothetical player sounds terrific.

 

[MDAV28]

If you don't mind me asking, who are the core-6?

I think we have three core players, Hayward, Favors and Gobert.

I love our team as a whole, but if I had to reduce it to our "core" I can't go very far past 3 guys.

Sure, I consider our core 6 those 3 with Exum, Burks, and Hood.