What's new
By:

Competing while allowing Dante Exum to develop

Jeffrey32 said:
Not sure why everyone is trying to trade Trey Burke. Not every draft pick needs to be a starter or a superstar. He is still on his rookie contract and he has proven that he doesn't need to be a starter to be effective. Every team needs a solid back-up PG and a potentially volume scorer off the bench and he is both. Plus, if he continues to improve as a player and in his bench role, he will be a valuable member of the team and possibly an affordable piece. Maybe he re-signs for deal in the range of Jamal Crawford, Lou Williams, or JR Smith, around 4 years/ $22m-$25m, which would be a reasonable contract for the role.
Click to expand...
Ummm no, he isn't. Burke is NOT a solid backup. He's a chucker. He's inefficient. And when he's in the game, ball movement just STOPS. Virtually every time he gets the ball he tries to go 1-on-3. "Volume scorer" is a hilarious term, IMO. For Trey it means taking 20/shots to score 16 points.

AS for the OP, Burks is NOT a PG, so wipe that off the board right now. He and Hayward would get KILLED defensively at the 1/2. Rondo and Dragic AIN'T coming to Utah, so the only realistic PG we could sign would be Lin. Unfortunately, I think our PG situation is going to remain exactly like it is. Exum is going to start; Trey is going to continue to ignore everyone else when he's on the floor.
 
The Fresh Prince said:
Lol the best players on the plant.
Click to expand...

Wait so your saying that Steph Curry, Damion Lillard, and Tony Parker aren't the some of the best players on the planet at PG? Those are guys he as gone up against since being a starter.

I guess I don't understand your comment
 
Ben10 said:
Wait so your saying that Steph Curry, Damion Lillard, and Tony Parker aren't the some of the best players on the planet at PG? Those are guys he as gone up against since being a starter.

I guess I don't understand your comment
Click to expand...

It says plant, not planet, hence it is funny.
 
karl malone said:
You guys are probably correct, just trying to come up with reasonable alternatives as I feel it would be somewhat of a waste to start a project 19/20 yr old PG alongside 3 guys who are all capable of putting up all-star caliber #'s next year. By the time Exum is beginning to truly tap into all of that potential, Hayward/Favors/Gobert will likely be due significant raises. I just think that we have the opportunity to have our cake & eat it too by competing now while still projecting to have an elite starting 5 in the future (given that we somehow acquire that 5th missing piece- maybe Hezonja). I know we have been winning recently (& against playoff caliber teams at that) on the strength of our defense, in no small part to Dante, but I think the offensive improvement that we would gain by inserting an offensively competent player at the 1 would outweigh the defense that would be lost in such a move. I know Burks is not a PG, I just feel that Hayward would be enough to offset his deficiencies at the point. Also, it's not that I want to get rid of Burke, I just don't think there would be enough mins to go around between him & Exum without 1 of them starting or Exum getting a bulk of his playing time at the 2 (which is not be the position we should be looking to develop him at). With most of the obvious options having already been discussed thouroghly, I just wanted to throw out something different. Hayward, Favors, Gobert all strike me as loyal guys, but they also all strike me as guys who will accept nothing less than being on a championship contending team (especially Hayward & Gobert- who is clearly the key to our future. If we stick with Exum as our starting PG from here on out, we could essentially be betting our future squarely on his development. Also, I don't think a slightly reduced role would do much, if anything, to disrupt Exum's development (ie: Trey Burke moving to the bench).
Click to expand...

tl.gif
 
Jeffrey32 said:
Not sure why everyone is trying to trade Trey Burke. Not every draft pick needs to be a starter or a superstar. He is still on his rookie contract and he has proven that he doesn't need to be a starter to be effective. Every team needs a solid back-up PG and a potentially volume scorer off the bench and he is both. Plus, if he continues to improve as a player and in his bench role, he will be a valuable member of the team and possibly an affordable piece. Maybe he re-signs for deal in the range of Jamal Crawford, Lou Williams, or JR Smith, around 4 years/ $22m-$25m, which would be a reasonable contract for the role.
Click to expand...

Because based on his play this season, Trey is not worth keeping. Did you see his ranking on Pts-Per-Shot of 118 players in the league -- he was dead last. Hayward was 22 and Favors 24. Either he learns how to pass the ball and play defense, or he has got to go.
 
karl malone said:
Question #1: How do we compete while still developing Exum?
Click to expand...

13 - 9 as a starter

8 - 2 since the All-Star Break and Trade Deadline.

I think that the simple answer is that the Jazz are very competitive with Dante Exum in the starting lineup while he's developing, despite having to play Jingles and/or Millsap as SG starter for most of those games. . .

. . . imagine how well he might do with 5-10 lbs of muscle, a better grasp of the offensive and defensive schemes, much better conditioning, Burks back and healthy, Tomic/Booker as the 3rd and 4th bigs (respectively), a shiny new rookie drafted 11 or 12, a free agent or two (as needed), Jingles and Millsap playing spot minutes as role players and continued improvement from Gobert, Favors, Hayward, Burks, Hood and Burke?

I think that the Jazz and Exum will be just fine letting him play while he develops.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top