DOL on 1280--The Consequences of Standing Pat

[stitches]

I'll do it for you.


Now go back and reread the last page. Keep your eyes peeled for statements like "more than" and words like "necessarily".



You are arguing with yourself now. I have already acknowledged that we need someone else at least for injury insurance. I have further said that if we get a better opportunity to upgrade a big than another position that we should do it. Do you agree with tfivas' statement? Does mine make a little more sense to you now? Do you understand how less than/more than works?

Yah, it makes sense as a whole. I wasn't arguing your larger point... I was just responding to specific sub-points, that I felt needed addressing. If we are talking larger picture I would agree that if we have 2 prospects with about the same grade on our board(a wing and a big) I would choose to upgrade the wing through the draft.

 

[Jazz and Utes]

I think we're all agreeing?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[Stifle Tower]

Do the Jazz improve more by upgrading Ingles in our wing rotation or Booker in our big rotation? I'm actually ok with booker being a part of the rotation for the next few years. If I was DL I would certainly try and bring him back for an additional 3-4 year on a reasonable deal. I'm less enthusiastic about Ingles and baby Sap. I think we can get immediate and long term improvement by upgrading there.

The idea that all this team needs is another big is flawed imo. That doesn't mean that I am opposed to getting another big or upgrading if that's the bpa in the draft or we get a good trade offer. It just isn't our only need or even our most pressing one.

They improve more by upgrading Booker.
Why? Because they've already replaced Ingles in the rotation with Alec Burks. But we are SCREWED if a big goes down. Then what do we do? Play Cooley or Motum (or Pleiss) 30+ mins.?

If a wing goes down, we have Ingles and Millsap as the deep backups. Both are serviceable and we could survive a short-term injury to Hood, Hayward or Burks. Gobert aside, it is generally MUCH harder to find a serviceable big late in the draft and MUCH easier to find a wing. And the same holds true for free agency where bigs who can simply walk and chew gum at the same time command a king's ransom.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Do the Jazz improve more by upgrading Ingles in our wing rotation or...

Stop right there. With Burks and Hood healthy, the perimeter play is improved immeasurably. Furthermore, grabbing a known commodity that addresses an area of need is the best way to address it. The Jazz need a player exactly like Carroll and this is pretty much their last chance to splurge. And he happens to have played here, worked with some of our coaches, and even goes out of his way to show love to the fans here. It's too perfect.

On your other point, bigs don't take any longer to develop than anyone else. Bigs that are good are also had at a premium on the market and the Jazz aren't much of a destination anyway (or so it is said). Lastly, the nature of what big men do is changing RIGHT NOW and this draft's crop exemplifies that more than any other. If the Jazz want to find a longterm solution to the big rotation and they want him to space the floor, there is no better opportunity than this draft. Otherwise, what options are they left with? Developing Booker as a shooter? Prying Olynyk from the Celtics (who is not great but who is also playing for a team that has no reason to get rid of him)? True bigs that space the floor aren't the rarest thing in the world, but they're still pretty rare, everyone (smart) wants one, and no one wants to part with one. A true big that spaces the floor AND plays + D is like a unicorn.

Ultimately, the Jazz need more spacing, more perimeter D, and a backup big. However they want to address those things, fine, but my stance on how to do that makes the most sense to me.

 

[karl malone]

As a small-market team, we have to use all of our resources, one of which is identifying under-valued players (something that SAS specializes in). This statement seems to indicate that Cotton, Millsap, & Ingles will all be retained & given an opportunity to carve out roles for themselves on this team. The interesting part of his statement regarding not giving up on players is what that means for Burke. That statement coupled with the praise of Exum likely means that either: a) Exum has shown major improvement & it is less of a necessity to get significant contribution out of the backup PG position, b) Burke has shown major improvement & looks poised to breakout, or c) DL has tested the trade market for Burke & doesn't believe that he will be able to get fair value in return for him.

What happens with Burke & the backup PG position will be interesting as it will be a good indication of whether we are focused on the long-term or the short-term & if we have shifted our priority from development to winning. Although I think replacing Burke with a young vet PG is the right move as it would be best not only for Exum's development but the team's opportunity to succeed, I believe that DL is unwilling to sell low on an asset in which significant time & resources have been allocated to. With the team likely a few years away from legitimately contending regardless of who the backup PG is, I expect Burke to be given the chance to either solidify his role on the team or increase his trade value.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Yeah but Lilsap isn't good at basketball nor is he young. Everyone - including the Jazz - know that if he's a part of your franchises longterm plan, then your team is in trouble.

 

[karl malone]

But he is good at defense. 12th man/defensive specialist is still a role, even if it's not a significant one.

As far as standing pat, this likely means that DL is hesitant to potentially disrupt team chemistry by making any major trades involving players & is considering staying at #12 (or moving up/down using draft picks rather than players), drafting bpa, & using the cap space to sign a backup C (if we don't draft one) &/or an opportunistic low-risk/high-reward FA such as Booker last year. Character/potential impact on team chemistry will likely be a determining factor in who we draft/sign this off-season.

 

[veji1]

As a small-market team, we have to use all of our resources, one of which is identifying under-valued players (something that SAS specializes in). This statement seems to indicate that Cotton, Millsap, & Ingles will all be retained & given an opportunity to carve out roles for themselves on this team. The interesting part of his statement regarding not giving up on players is what that means for Burke. That statement coupled with the praise of Exum likely means that either: a) Exum has shown major improvement & it is less of a necessity to get significant contribution out of the backup PG position, b) Burke has shown major improvement & looks poised to breakout, or c) DL has tested the trade market for Burke & doesn't believe that he will be able to get fair value in return for him.

What happens with Burke & the backup PG position will be interesting as it will be a good indication of whether we are focused on the long-term or the short-term & if we have shifted our priority from development to winning. Although I think replacing Burke with a young vet PG is the right move as it would be best not only for Exum's development but the team's opportunity to succeed, I believe that DL is unwilling to sell low on an asset in which significant time & resources have been allocated to. With the team likely a few years away from legitimately contending regardless of who the backup PG is, I expect Burke to be given the chance to either solidify his role on the team or increase his trade value.

That's the key right there : Utah is never going to get the stars to come here for equal money as LA or else, so either you extremely overpay FAs to make them come, or you try to build a franchise that is known for building up talent, taking care of its players and keeping its core together.

 

[gregbroncs]

Do the Jazz improve more by upgrading Ingles in our wing rotation or Booker in our big rotation? I'm actually ok with booker being a part of the rotation for the next few years. If I was DL I would certainly try and bring him back for an additional 3-4 year on a reasonable deal. I'm less enthusiastic about Ingles and baby Sap. I think we can get immediate and long term improvement by upgrading there.

The idea that all this team needs is another big is flawed imo. That doesn't mean that I am opposed to getting another big or upgrading if that's the bpa in the draft or we get a good trade offer. It just isn't our only need or even our most pressing one.

We have replaced Ingles with Burks. That is why wing depth is not an issue to me. Ingles proved to be a good rotation wing to have. But he's already dropping a spot on the depth chart with the return of Burks. That is why I see wing depth as a virtual non issue. I want a backup C and a backup PG if Burke can be moved. I think a backup PG who can hit a 3 solves a lot of our shooting issues, him also being a decent defender is a must.

 

[DForceAUS]

Im fine with our wing depth, Hood, burks, Hayward, Ingles and lilsap, just pick a good shooting bigman (Kaminsky, Turner or Looney). Let this bunch play until the trade deadline if changes need to be made make them then.
Favors can play C in short spells maybe 10mpg the rest 20-23 at PF, thus Kaminsky, Turner or Looney makes a tonne of sense for 10-15mins

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Translation: We really screwed the pooch by letting Carroll go so early, so let's not do that again.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Yeah but Lilsap isn't good at basketball nor is he young. Everyone - including the Jazz - know that if he's a part of your franchises longterm plan, then your team is in trouble.

Something very similar could have been said about Carroll after his first year with Utah.

 

[LogGrad98]

I think we're all agreeing?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

I am disagreeing.

 

[NUMBERICA]

I like Lilsap. As a 5th or 6th wing.

 

[zman1527]

I am good with standing pat. We have a lot of young up and comers, and will likely make the playoffs with just the current lineup. This year we can figure out what needs there are for the next for year, when we can really think about challenging.

 

[Stoked]

I am good with standing pat. We have a lot of young up and comers, and will likely make the playoffs with just the current lineup. This year we can figure out what needs there are for the next for year, when we can really think about challenging.

I do not think that this team needs major overhaul but I would like to see the Jazz address a few points.

#1 Trade Burke (opens the need for #4)
#2 Re-sign Ingles
#3 Draft/trade for a back up C
#4 Draft/trade for a back up PG

(use Burke, Cooley, Johnson, Tomic, Neto, Pliess, and draft picks depending on the trade)

Call it an off season.

 

[♪alt13]

They improve more by upgrading Booker.
Why? Because they've already replaced Ingles in the rotation with Alec Burks. But we are SCREWED if a big goes down. Then what do we do? Play Cooley or Motum (or Pleiss) 30+ mins.?

If a wing goes down, we have Ingles and Millsap as the deep backups. Both are serviceable and we could survive a short-term injury to Hood, Hayward or Burks. Gobert aside, it is generally MUCH harder to find a serviceable big late in the draft and MUCH easier to find a wing. And the same holds true for free agency where bigs who can simply walk and chew gum at the same time command a king's ransom.

You are either an idiot with reading comprehension problems or an *** hole that doesn't bother reading before responding. I have already conceded twice in this thread(my original post was the first) that we need injury insurance.

Stop right there. With Burks and Hood healthy, the perimeter play is improved immeasurably. Furthermore, grabbing a known commodity that addresses an area of need is the best way to address it. The Jazz need a player exactly like Carroll and this is pretty much their last chance to splurge. And he happens to have played here, worked with some of our coaches, and even goes out of his way to show love to the fans here. It's too perfect.

On your other point, bigs don't take any longer to develop than anyone else. Bigs that are good are also had at a premium on the market and the Jazz aren't much of a destination anyway (or so it is said). Lastly, the nature of what big men do is changing RIGHT NOW and this draft's crop exemplifies that more than any other. If the Jazz want to find a longterm solution to the big rotation and they want him to space the floor, there is no better opportunity than this draft. Otherwise, what options are they left with? Developing Booker as a shooter? Prying Olynyk from the Celtics (who is not great but who is also playing for a team that has no reason to get rid of him)? True bigs that space the floor aren't the rarest thing in the world, but they're still pretty rare, everyone (smart) wants one, and no one wants to part with one. A true big that spaces the floor AND plays + D is like a unicorn.

Ultimately, the Jazz need more spacing, more perimeter D, and a backup big. However they want to address those things, fine, but my stance on how to do that makes the most sense to me.

quick thought experiment

1)Imagine a situation where Snyder would put 3 bigs and one wing on the floor.

2)Imagine a situation where Snyder would put 3 wings and one big on the floor.

Which scenario sounds more likely?

Conclusion: There are more wing mins than big mins in this league. It is easier to get by with a rotation of 3 bigs(+ injury insurance) than it is to get by with 3 wings. Look at the teams that are winning chips. Are they heavy on wings or bigs?

There is more value added by improving our wing depth than our big depth. We need injury insurance at the Big where as on the wing we need to improve our depth chart now. I don't know how that isn't obvious.

 

[karl malone]

I can't imagine any situation where Snyder would only put 4 players on the floor.

 

[seattlejazzfan]

Something I'm not seeing in the wing depth discussion is the fact that Exum can also play significant minutes at the wing if needed. Without Exum ever spending time at the wing, the Jazz are deep at the wing. With him, they have more than enough.

 

[Stifle Tower]

Alt...
My point remains...we HAVE injury insurance at the wings already; we don't at the bigs. We have 3 starting quality wings and only 2 starting bigs. So either way, we need a Big more than a wing.