What's new
By:
Filters

Building around Gobert

Trading for Love was a bad move. Sure, the Cavs are better when they have him, and they'll look to re-sign him, but it would have been better to keep Bennett and Wiggins. Because it's not just about Wiggins and Bennett vs Love, it's about the financial flexibility they would have had as well. They would have been able to add another good player probably. And they probably would have been better as well.

What a huge biff.


Lebron pretty much sucks at being a GM. Someone should have talked him out of that request.
 
I wouldn't trade Hayward or Favors unless it was for an established superstar. My point wasn't that we should trade them, just that we should target elite offensive players. As someone pointed out earlier, we missed out on acquiring (or at least attempting to- although who knows if they did) Harden because we were over-committed to our core. I just don't want to see us get locked into a team that has a championship quality (which makes management reluctant to make significant changes), yet isn't championship caliber due to a roster imbalance. Maybe this type of move is a year too early, but I think addressing a roster deficiency (elite scorer is becoming harder by the day to fill) as soon as possible.
 
Last edited:
NUMBERICA said:
Harden had to sign an extension which means he had control over where he went and I am pretty damn certain he didn't want to come here.
Click to expand...

Exactly. When was the last time we heard a superstar (or even an all-star) have Utah on his list of preferred destinations? We aren't getting one in free agency, so why would a team trade a superstar? It won't be for monetary reasons like Harden. The landscape has changed: contracts are for 4 years (some at 5) and the cap is skyrocketing. So why, karl malone, would a team put a "star" on the market? It would have to be a situation like Cousins or Deron...either attitude or injury concerns. Is that a player we could build around? And does that player stay in Utah after 1 or 2 years (whatever is left on his contract at the time of the trade)?

Bloody hell! Utah's winning percentage after the all-star break equated to a 53-win pace. That's home court in the WC. And just 3 more wins puts them behind GS for 2nd place...with little contribution from our PG's, a weak bench due to injuries and no 4th big. Why not see how this squad develops before blowing it up? We have two fringe all-stars in Favors and Hayward and a legit DPOY in Gobert. Burks and Hood look pretty good. Now imagine if Exum develops! That's a team much like Atlanta, except our front line is better.
 
Cy said:
We likely could haves traded Burks, Kanter and picks for Harde. I'd take the risk of him doing something no one has ever done (sign qo instead of a m ax deal).
Click to expand...

Listen, I'm as big a Harden fan as anyone that doesn't root for his team, but 28 other teams wished their teams had ponied up the offer that landed Harden and left the other 28 teams scratching their heads. We don't know the particulars, it just didn't happen. If Harden was playing hardball on the extension, it's easy to say in hindsight that it would be all worth it for OKC to hypothetically accept a hypothetical package that hypothetically vaults the Jazz into the pantheon of greatness suddenly.

But it didn't for us, and it did for only one team. We got Gobert on the edge of the 1st round in a possibly historically bad draft. We got Millsap 47th in one of the worst drafts I can recall and Wesley Matthews undrafted in what was supposed to be a poor draft. They got the greatest tandem in pro sports history in the middle of the first round in different years. You can run a great play for a great player, but ultimately, the shot goes in or it doesn't. You win some, you lose some.

(I'm not ranting at you, Cy)
 
I feel like people are misinterpreting my point. I'm not saying we should blow the team up & rebuild again, I'm saying that we shouldn't get so locked into a core/plan that we are unable to adapt or take advantage of any opportunities that present themselves. We're in a league that has Paul, Blake, Jordan or Irving, LBJ, Love or Westbrook, Durant, Ibaka, or Harden, Dwight or Lillard, Aldridge all on the same team. I know some of those tandems may change, but superstars teaming up won't. I understand that we're small market & have to be careful of acquiring a superstar only to watch him walk, which is why you target players signed to long-term contracts, RFA's (doubt they risk millions to leave), or prospects. We're too good at this point to get our guy thru the draft so we need to do so by trade. I would be just as happy with a J.Parker or D.Russell (as it would likely mean trading Exum instead of Hayward or Favor) as I would be with an established star. I don't want to trade Hayward or Favors but I would if it brought in the right offensive player. They are both great players & would make great Pippens on a championship team but we still need our offensive Jordan to go along with our defensive Jordan. The league has changed drastically since the DET formula won them a championship & now it's even more difficult for small market teams (without that 2-way generational talent) to win a title. If it was up to me, we'd keep both Hayward & Favors, & instead trade who ever out of Exum, Burks, Hood, Burke, #12, future picks, etc to acquire that offensive superstar that I think will be necessary to win a championship. I don't care how he is acquired, so long that he is.
 
This whole debate about Harden makes no sense whatsoever !!! I mean what do Gobert and Harden have to do in the same sentence ? this is typical fan fantasizing about how the FO could have made "all the right available moves" and therefore by not doing so, somehow failed. So Harden out, it's like the Blazers fantasizing about Jordan or Durant... Makes no sense;

Re the current roster and team, what Karl says makes some sense, but the FO isn't crazy : yes Gobert is the only one with a possibly legit chance of being a superstar, a top 5 player in the league. Does not mean it will happen by any means though. The way the roster is built it is clear that the best route is to go for the inner growth : get to the Playoffs, win and lose, learn lessonrs and then see whether adjustments might be necessary. But until then you absolutely roll with Hayward, Favors, Exum, Gobert and the team. You take stock once the picture is a bit clearer.
 
Siro said:
There is no indication that Love is leaving. I would bet good money he resigns with Cavs.
Click to expand...

I would make that bet as well. I think Love wants to prove to all the naysayers that he can play with Lebron.
 
VINYLONE said:
I would make that bet as well. I think Love wants to prove to all the naysayers that he can play with Lebron.
Click to expand...

Had the Cavs folded earlier in the play offs, say against the Bulls, there would have been good chances he leaves. But after having seen what this team can do, after having witnessed from the stands how much of a leader on the court James can be, how good he is, I think Love has realised that there is much to be won by staying with the Cavs.
 
karl malone said:
I feel like people are misinterpreting my point. I'm not saying we should blow the team up & rebuild again, I'm saying that we shouldn't get so locked into a core/plan that we are unable to adapt or take advantage of any opportunities that present themselves. We're in a league that has Paul, Blake, Jordan or Irving, LBJ, Love or Westbrook, Durant, Ibaka, or Harden, Dwight or Lillard, Aldridge all on the same team. I know some of those tandems may change, but superstars teaming up won't. I understand that we're small market & have to be careful of acquiring a superstar only to watch him walk, which is why you target players signed to long-term contracts, RFA's (doubt they risk millions to leave), or prospects. We're too good at this point to get our guy thru the draft so we need to do so by trade. I would be just as happy with a J.Parker or D.Russell (as it would likely mean trading Exum instead of Hayward or Favor) as I would be with an established star. I don't want to trade Hayward or Favors but I would if it brought in the right offensive player. They are both great players & would make great Pippens on a championship team but we still need our offensive Jordan to go along with our defensive Jordan. The league has changed drastically since the DET formula won them a championship & now it's even more difficult for small market teams (without that 2-way generational talent) to win a title. If it was up to me, we'd keep both Hayward & Favors, & instead trade who ever out of Exum, Burks, Hood, Burke, #12, future picks, etc to acquire that offensive superstar that I think will be necessary to win a championship. I don't care how he is acquired, so long that he is.
Click to expand...

wow. U are delusional. What team or GM in their right mind would trade a superstar or as u called it a generational type star with that kind of contract with the cap going way up soon. Stars only get traded when the other team knows they are a long shot to resign. And you'd have to completely gut the team just to pull off a trade like that. That #12 pick isn't motivate any team to give up their star.
 
To Thee worst jazz fan:

Better to be delusional than whatever you are. I said it was unlikely & gave a few examples in which if certain scenarios played out, teams may be willing to trade those type of players. All I was saying was that every option needs to be considered. I also said targeting prospects with that type of potential is more realistic as superstars are rarely traded. Disagree all you want but stop with childish insults.
 
veji1 said:
Had the Cavs folded earlier in the play offs, say against the Bulls, there would have been good chances he leaves. But after having seen what this team can do, after having witnessed from the stands how much of a leader on the court James can be, how good he is, I think Love has realised that there is much to be won by staying with the Cavs.
Click to expand...

iawtp

I think Cleveland finally became a team during the playoffs. During the season it seemed like their big 3 weren't sure that they really wanted to play with one another. The injuries only served to solidify the team imo. They are going to be much more dangerous next season.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top