What's new
By:

Conley For Horford Discussion

LoPo said:
He means well but highlighting his game 3 performance while conveniently not mentioning his horrid game 5 and game 7 performances.
Click to expand...
i was highlighting his overall performance but you should read my comment again. I mentioned game 7 he performed badly.
 
FAILED STATE said:
If by “well” you mean he continued to drag the defense down the path of non-title contention, then sure.
Click to expand...
Yes i guess Mike was the only one playing bad defense. where is the criticism of Joe who disappeared and who got burned constantly on defense. Mike seems like the whipping boy on this board. Everyone else wants to over look how poorly Clarkson played in several games or how our 3-d guy Royce couldn't cover or slow down Murray and is also afraid to shoot it. Naing's lack of rebounding rarely gets mention and some people on this board defend the get rid of Niang comments as if he is the missing piece.
I am not against trading Conley but his stats were pretty good in the bubble. I certainly wouldn't trade him for Horford considering he has more years on his contract. I do not think Conley was the reason why the Jazz lost against Denver. The reason the Jazz lost is that they lack size and athleticism at the 2/3/4 positions.
 
cowhide said:
Yes i guess Mike was the only one playing bad defense. where is the criticism of Joe who disappeared and who got burned constantly on defense. Mike seems like the whipping boy on this board. Everyone else wants to over look how poorly Clarkson played in several games or how our 3-d guy Royce couldn't cover or slow down Murray and is also afraid to shoot it. Naing's lack of rebounding rarely gets mention and some people on this board defend the get rid of Niang comments as if he is the missing piece.
I am not against trading Conley but his stats were pretty good in the bubble. I certainly wouldn't trade him for Horford considering he has more years on his contract. I do not think Conley was the reason why the Jazz lost against Denver. The reason the Jazz lost is that they lack size and athleticism at the 2/3/4 positions.
Click to expand...

Mike isn’t the only one to blame in the playoffs but he shifts the matchups down the line. Can’t hide DM as well because mike is small. Joe and Royce struggled defensively for sure... but they won’t get hunted like Mike would. Mike got picked on during the year a bit... teams that go more iso in the half court would absolutely hunt his ***. You think LeBron is letting him hide? He’s not unusable but when your best player is a 6 foot guard you may want to avoid having another building block that is small. You can win 50 games that way but you ain’t getting to the finals that way.
 
cowhide said:
Yes i guess Mike was the only one playing bad defense. where is the criticism of Joe who disappeared and who got burned constantly on defense. Mike seems like the whipping boy on this board. Everyone else wants to over look how poorly Clarkson played in several games or how our 3-d guy Royce couldn't cover or slow down Murray and is also afraid to shoot it. Naing's lack of rebounding rarely gets mention and some people on this board defend the get rid of Niang comments as if he is the missing piece.
I am not against trading Conley but his stats were pretty good in the bubble. I certainly wouldn't trade him for Horford considering he has more years on his contract. I do not think Conley was the reason why the Jazz lost against Denver. The reason the Jazz lost is that they lack size and athleticism at the 2/3/4 positions.
Click to expand...
What HH said

And we ****ing half-gutted the team for Mike and paid him more than anyone. So.... yeah.
 
Cptgrnlngs22 said:
If we got horford and Milton would we save enough to resign JC and use the MLE? Or do we still need to dump Davis? Maybe they will take him too hahaha

I’d love to make that trade keep JC and sign KDunn with our MLE

Core players:
Mitchell
Gobert
Bogie
Joe
Royce
JC
Horford
KDunn
Milton

That’s a solid group.


Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...
If you look at their contract, Philly is more likely to give us JRich than Milton. Jrich will most definitely opt out and walk for nothing in 2021.
 
FAILED STATE said:
What HH said

And we ****ing half-gutted the team for Mike and paid him more than anyone. So.... yeah.
Click to expand...
Also, Mike is VERY MUCH a reason we’re undersized at the 2/3/4 because in order to be on the floor next to Mitchell, those positions SPECIFICALLY get shifted smaller to accommodate.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Also, Mike is VERY MUCH a reason we’re undersized at the 2/3/4 because in order to be on the floor next to Mitchell, those positions SPECIFICALLY get shifted smaller to accommodate.
Click to expand...
I’ve found that JFC seems to be perpetually in a space of needing to be reminded of this. Why don’t some people seem to understand this?
 
Horford at 4 is suicide. Conley is the better player, also the better fit. It doesn't matter much if he starts or not if we could add 2 good defenders that can contribute on offense. Our starting line-up is a tad small but it's not like they play the whole 48, if a guy like Moe Harkless or Kris Dunn came over they could play with starters. There is not one bench player on the Jazz that is a plus defender. The talk on Conley or our starting line-up would be hella different if we had players that could come in and play some defense.

Also Mitchell is not that undersized guarding 2s, He has good wingspan and could be a passable defender but he is just so ****ing lazy on defense. I wonder what would happen if he defended the point of attack.
 
If they did go the re-negotiate and extend route its the order of operations that would get really tricky for me. I think you could pawn Ed off and I think the cap will be $115M with a big escrow. Any other cap number will constipate the market... if it is just a one year luxury tax allowance then that is playing favorites to the teams next to the tax and teams with space would likely not feel it is fair.

You could clear enough space to get Wood (not that I think he'd even be DL's target) but you would likely have to do the Ed and Mike moves without knowing who will sign because of the calendar. We should be able to re-sing JC and use the MLE without hitting the tax... so unless you open up actual cap space it makes no sense to extend an older player just to give you some breathing room between the tax. Worst case you could waive and stretch Ed and avoid the tax.
 
Just throwing this out here for fun since it involves Horford and Conley (and since I consider Horford a full-time C these days, I can't really talk myself into taking him in as a Gobert backup/questionable PF). It's another trade idea that will (and should) never happen, though it does perhaps seem to solve several issues that are out there. I tweaked an idea on the internet that wasn't legal until it worked, it and seems to have some potential positives for each team.

Picture2.png

In case there are problems with the image:
Utah out: Gobert, Conley, Bogey, Davis
Utah in: Hayward, Horford, B. Simmons, Theis

Philly out: Horford, Simmons, Mike Scott, Zhaire Smith
Philly in: Conley, Bogey, Robert Williams (and would probably need some draft considerations)

Boston out: Hayward, R. Williams, Theis
Boston in: Gobert, Ed Davis, Zhaire Smith, Mike Scott (the last 3 for salary purposes to make the trade legal, though Scott is at least mildly useful)

Advantages for Utah:
Off of Conley contract; let someone else take the Gobert extension risk; lose the best player, but get 2nd & 3rd best players back; all four are useful pieces (each decent to very good defenders if utilized properly); 8 man rotation would be: DM, Hayward, Simmons, Ingles, Horford, O'Neale, Theis, Clarkson (hopefully), before getting to Niang, Bradley, Morgan, Oni, etc.; (of course we'd also have the all-bitterness/jealousy team by adding Hayward and Simmons)

Advantages for Philly:
Fixes their books; allow for a path to build smartly around Embiid; seems to give a starting 5 that makes pretty good sense together: Embiid, Tobias, Bogey, Richardson, Conley

Advantages for Boston:
Gets best player in deal; eliminates Hayward's positional redundancy in the process; saves a couple million (and I think should be able to accommodate Gobert raise); Likely starting 5 seems great: Gobert, Tatum, Brown, Smart, Kemba

Generally I think the trade is interesting because it allows all three teams to stay below the tax this coming year (and I think it offers a path for all to stay there in the future, if maybe a little trickier); it also allows for a better fit for the three players who were being underutilized because of the original team's makeup: Hayward, Horford, Conley (not sure if the troubles maximizing Simmons has been totally solved, but maybe it's also better?)

I'll leave the disadvantages (many of which I'm sure I haven't thought of yet) to anyone who wants to take a crack at them.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
We just don’t need a true pg. mike was also far worse at creating for others than I thought he’d be.

I think for Mike to be his best version he needs to be a primary ball handler. He still gives off ball value of course. I feel like Joe is best cast in that secondary role. When JC is in there is no secondary... it’s just all JC which is fine for a chunk of the game.

The fit just isn’t ideal.
Click to expand...
I want to see DM and Ingles as the primary playmakers. We don't need a Conley. I want to see a long defensive-minded combo guard to run with DM, and that's about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top