What's new
By:

Following potential 2014 draftees

Core4 said:
Sorry to get off topic here by talking Jazz vs prospects. However, I see the day coming soon when we're talking about payrolls for college teams, certainly on the football and then probably basketball end.
Click to expand...

That was directed at OG.. not you.
 
PKM said:
That was directed at OG.. not you.
Click to expand...
I know. But I took the thread a little deeper off topic. And yes, while you were posting your responses, I edited mine noting the 2017 draft. And you were certainly the first one, probably almost a year ago (perhaps even before that) who started talking about 2017. I actually smiled when I heard the terms of that second first rounder from GS. May even have said a, "dang, PKM was right" under my breath.
 
Core4 said:
And you were certainly the first one, probably almost a year ago (perhaps even before that) who started talking about 2017. I actually smiled when I heard the terms of that second first rounder from GS. May even have said a, "dang, PKM was right" under my breath.
Click to expand...

Same. Everyone else I talked to thought it was stupid but because of the information PKM shared I knew that Lindsey was the man for the job.

Thanks PKM.
 
I think 3 big time frontcourt players would be a big problem long term...Even though there minutes available and Randle could move to the 3 spot for another 10 min/game if there's a favorable matchup scenario, I look at other teams and how much they pay for "size" you'd run into a dead end. Randle is going to command max + franchise player -> $80M/5yrs starting in 2018. Favors and Kanter if realizing their full potential are going to be $14M/yr at least. Add Hayward and another backcourt high level free agent, a starter on midlevel money and you reach the tax pretty fast. Are owners willing to exceed it for 2 years in a row if they're serious contender?The advantage of having the offensive production in the backcourt is you usually get more offense, have a player that you can give the ball in crunchtime and pay reasonable money for 1 scoring big man and 2 defensive anchors. That way you can contend w/o hitting the tax necessarily.
 
BTP said:
I think 3 big time frontcourt players would be a big problem long term...Even though there minutes available and Randle could move to the 3 spot for another 10 min/game if there's a favorable matchup scenario, I look at other teams and how much they pay for "size" you'd run into a dead end. Randle is going to command max + franchise player -> $80M/5yrs starting in 2018. Favors and Kanter if realizing their full potential are going to be $14M/yr at least. Add Hayward and another backcourt high level free agent, a starter on midlevel money and you reach the tax pretty fast. Are owners willing to exceed it for 2 years in a row if they're serious contender?The advantage of having the offensive production in the backcourt is you usually get more offense, have a player that you can give the ball in crunchtime and pay reasonable money for 1 scoring big man and 2 defensive anchors. That way you can contend w/o hitting the tax necessarily.
Click to expand...

I think we all agree.. but that time isn't now.. and trading one of those bigs in a few years for picks and fillers may be exactly what the team is looking to do.
 
BTP said:
I think 3 big time frontcourt players would be a big problem long term...Even though there minutes available and Randle could move to the 3 spot for another 10 min/game if there's a favorable matchup scenario, I look at other teams and how much they pay for "size" you'd run into a dead end. Randle is going to command max + franchise player -> $80M/5yrs starting in 2018. Favors and Kanter if realizing their full potential are going to be $14M/yr at least. Add Hayward and another backcourt high level free agent, a starter on midlevel money and you reach the tax pretty fast. Are owners willing to exceed it for 2 years in a row if they're serious contender?The advantage of having the offensive production in the backcourt is you usually get more offense, have a player that you can give the ball in crunchtime and pay reasonable money for 1 scoring big man and 2 defensive anchors. That way you can contend w/o hitting the tax necessarily.
Click to expand...

The Jazz would have a championship run to look forward to before they need to worry about that.
 
PKM said:
I think we all agree.. but that time isn't now.. and trading one of those bigs in a few years for picks and fillers may be exactly what the team is looking to do.
Click to expand...

orangello said:
The Jazz would have a championship run to look forward to before they need to worry about that.
Click to expand...

I'd hate picks and filler. I'd want promising talent from a team that wants a big man and accidentally got a high draft pick that's too young to fit their core's age. And you gotta find the right point when Kanter's/Favors' value is at an all time high between upside/production. Depending on how the Jazz score players in free agency I think a contention window would start earlierst in 3 years from now. 4 is more realistic since the Jazz don't have history in luring free agents.
 
BTP said:
I'd hate picks and filler. I'd want promising talent from a team that wants a big man and accidentally got a high draft pick that's too young to fit their core's age. And you gotta find the right point when Kanter's/Favors' value is at an all time high between upside/production. Depending on how the Jazz score players in free agency I think a contention window would start earlierst in 3 years from now. 4 is more realistic since the Jazz don't have history in luring free agents.
Click to expand...

The jazz have attracted plenty of free agents.... just not the superstar ones.

Thats why the jazz best chance is to draft or trade to get thier superstar and then use free agency to get the type of free agents that will come to utah (jason terry, corey maggette types) to fill out the roster.

Hayward, burks, kanter, favors, burke, wiggins/parker, + jason terry caliber free agent

Or

Burks, kanter, randle, burke + james harden (or other big time star aquired through trading a combo of 2 core 4 guys and picks)

Either of those things happen and we compete for chips pretty quick
 
BTP said:
I'd hate picks and filler. I'd want promising talent from a team that wants a big man and accidentally got a high draft pick that's too young to fit their core's age. And you gotta find the right point when Kanter's/Favors' value is at an all time high between upside/production. Depending on how the Jazz score players in free agency I think a contention window would start earlierst in 3 years from now. 4 is more realistic since the Jazz don't have history in luring free agents.
Click to expand...

That's essentially what I meant but just didn't cover it well. I was really just implying we can't trade for another high cost guy.. but rather better/cheaper contracts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top