Go GET Teague

[Stifle Tower]

Neto and teague > neto and trey

Yep.
But Teague should not come at the expense of Burks. Because Alec >>>> Ingles or Johnson. If Atlanta gets no other good offers, and I think our only competition comes from Houston (NY and Brooklyn don't have decent assets), then DL should stick with Burke + picks.

 

[Bawse Dawg]

PSA:

Whenever you are talking about whether or not you want Teague, it should be a requirement to say what offer you are saying no to.

If you say "I don't want to trade for Teague." I assume you mean you don't want him in any trade. And not wanting to get Teague for Burke and a pick or two should be ban worthy.

If you say 'I don't want Teague at the cost of Burks' that is much more defensible, and reasonable. Please qualify your statements. It's important to know exactly what we are actually talking about here.

Thank you for your time.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Yep.
But Teague should not come at the expense of Burks. Because Alec >>>> Ingles or Johnson. If Atlanta gets no other good offers, and I think our only competition comes from Houston (NY and Brooklyn don't have decent assets), then DL should stick with Burke + picks.

I'm not sure we make up the difference between where the two sides would be before trade deadline. I can't see that being a good enough haul to throw their season this year and I think if we can get a healthy burks back with Netos improved play I'd feel okay about it for this year. If we keep outlet main guys healthy we will make the playoffs.

 

[Willie G.]

A future first-round pick from Atlanta could be quite valuable. They've got a hefty number of question marks going forward. Not sure if they're willing to deal, but my ears would perk up if a Burks + Burke deal included a first with Teague. We could toss them a second-round pick or two.

 

[silesian]

Well I guess this raises another issue.

Sure you can pay Hayward the max. That is what it will cost, because there is some team out there that will. There's also teams out there willing to give the max to Favors, Gobert, and possibly Hood. We have a team of probably 4 players who are worth the max based on market value, but none of them fill the roll of 'Yea, he's a max player, but he's so much more than the average max player.' Think LeBron, Leonard, Davis, etc. We rely on all of our 'max' players. And it's impossible to have a team built like that. You can't pay all four. What do you do?

The likelihood of all 4 being max-worthy is very low. I recall conversations a few year back about "we have to pay Burke, Burks, Hayward maxes down the road." That narrative has changed a bit.

And if we pay them the max and their market value is the max, then others will also covet them we pay them the max and have a trade chip. This is a good problem to have.

 

[silesian]

I am one of the few fans that believe in Exum and his high potential.

You need to get out more. Or start reading posts on Jazzfanz. Or some other way to connect to reality.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Last 5 games... 19 minutes 29.5% from the field 32.1% from 3. 7 pts and 2.2 assists... zero free throws. Made several just flat out dumb defensive plays in the Pistons and Chicago game. Not even looking to push the pace. He's checked out these last 5 games and it's curious timing... laugh all you want.

He is having bad games, it happens. You are reading into how he looked in a huddle where he wasnt one of the players on the court.

 

[fishonjazz]

PSA:

Whenever you are talking about whether or not you want Teague, it should be a requirement to say what offer you are saying no to.

If you say "I don't want to trade for Teague." I assume you mean you don't want him in any trade. And not wanting to get Teague for Burke and a pick or two should be ban worthy.

If you say 'I don't want Teague at the cost of Burks' that is much more defensible, and reasonable. Please qualify your statements. It's important to know exactly what we are actually talking about here.

Thank you for your time.

I agree.
For me I want teague. For Burke seems like an impossible dream.
For Burke and picks I'm ecstatic.
For Burke, and booker I'm happy
For Burke, Booker and picks I still do it.
For Burks only. I lean more no than yes but I consider it.

Anything with Burks and anything more I say hell no

 

[fishonjazz]

I recall conversations a few year back about "we have to pay Burke, Burks, Hayward maxes down the road."

I just want to say that there is a huge difference between Burke, Burks, and hayward from a Couple years ago vs Hayward, Gobert and favors right now

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

He is having bad games, it happens. You are reading into how he looked in a huddle where he wasnt one of the players on the court.

I didn't mention that at all... You are reading into things I never said. It's his worst stretch of the season and he has had some awful defensive plays that show either lack of effort or just not being there mentally. He was replaced last night by Erick Greene for a moment and we've been throwing ingles out there at the point. I didn't see the huddle... I watch all games on dvr so I don't see half that stuff.

 

[franklin]

The likelihood of all 4 being max-worthy is very low. I recall conversations a few year back about "we have to pay Burke, Burks, Hayward maxes down the road." That narrative has changed a bit.

And if we pay them the max and their market value is the max, then others will also covet them we pay them the max and have a trade chip. This is a good problem to have.

There's a huge difference between spending cap space to max a player out and giving up assets in a trade. The return value on the latter is nowhere near as high as you're insinuating, unless it's a LeBron James level player and then still it's often not the greatest return value.

Just because we have to max x,y,z and then trade them because we cannot afford them does not ensure a great return. Going out and getting a guy when you can afford him and then having this problem is going to bring a good return (anything greater than zero is a return).

 

[franklin]

I don't want Teague for two reasons. #1. I want Exum to start and get the experience he needs. Due to the injury he's already behind the 8ball as it is. I am one of the few fans that believe in Exum and his high potential. #2. Because of his high potential, and my belief he will be great, I'm not willing to waste assets or picks just for a barely above average pg that had an over achieving year last year, and has come back to reality this year. This year is more of who Teague is more then who he was last year. I don't believe he impacts the Jazz this year that much more, or does anything to convince Hayward to stay.

This team is looking very good I'm not messing with the rebuild in its twilight. Also, I'm a big on Burks who will be that guy that impacts the Jazz when he gets back in two-three weeks. Don't think posters here realize the value he brings to the Jazz as a combo guard. Which also allows us to play our high impact playmakers more minutes each giving the Jazz something different. I am a firm believer in our cake baking, let it rise. Let this bitch rise.

You're pretty much wrong on everything, per usual, except that Teague is being highly overrated. If that's the case then Utah can acquire him or a player of his caliber in the next couple of summers without giving up anything.

Burke and a protected 1st round pick is enough.