hayblurbs injury still a blessing in disguise..

[yamers]

We can get Hayward like production for 10-11 million.

i think so too. 17PPG is good, but the game has had ample playing time in the NBA. It's be increadible impressed if this was his first year, but lets not forget his 34 point game came in his ROOKIE season! 3-4yrs ago?

He has always been on and off. Lets see what happens though...he did pull 20-20-37 last few. See what happens.

if anything it seems lots of GMs are over valueing hayward....might get a 1st rounder if we try deal him.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Why does everyone assume that a player that they think is better than Hayward will take less money than Hayward?

 

[fishonjazz]

Why does everyone assume that a player that they think is better than Hayward will take less money than Hayward?

Are you talking about burks?... Burks is still on his rookie contract next year so he will definitely take less money than Hayward at least next year (he has no choice)

 

[fishonjazz]

Why does everyone assume that a player that they think is better than Hayward will take less money than Hayward?

Also I think that favors is a better and more valuable player than Hayward and he took less money than what I think Hayward is after.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Are you talking about burks?... Burks is still on his rookie contract next year so he will definitely take less money than Hayward at least next year (he has no choice)

That's a non-sequitur. People are talking about Burks' next contract.

Also I think that favors is a better and more valuable player than Hayward and he took less money than what I think Hayward is after.

That's a matter of opinion as well. And just because one guy MIGHT take what COULD be considered a cut rate, does not mean that another guy will.

All I'm asking is why people think that it's MORE likely that a BETTER player takes LESS money. Because even if possible, that doesn't mean likely. And it doesn't make sense.

 

[fishonjazz]

That's a non-sequitur. People are talking about Burks' next contract.



That's a matter of opinion as well. And just because one guy MIGHT take what COULD be considered a cut rate, does not mean that another guy will.

All I'm asking is why people think that it's MORE likely that a BETTER player takes LESS money. Because even if possible, that doesn't mean likely. And it doesn't make sense.

Maybe burks wont be better but be good enough for what we need and be cheaper

 

[NUMBERICA]

what about maybe dealing hayward for a 1st rounder to boston?

interesting article here - NBA Wakes to Find Andrew Wiggins and Entire Class of '14 Aren't All That
https://www.forbes.com/sites/markhe...ins-and-entire-class-of-14-arent-that-good/2/

To swing off of the Simmons/Rose podcast thing: No, there are no freaks like Lebron or Durant in this draft, but there are 6 players in it that would easily be 1st picks in a "bad" draft or top-3 picks in a common/decent/good draft. The Jazz could really use a player like that if this contending idea is to have legs.

 

[LogGrad98]

The problem is we have a bunch of #3 and borderline #2 players. Put them all together and you get a halfway decent team that will NEVER get anywhere in the playoffs as is. But they are too good to properly tank. We run a very real risk of staying in mediocre-land for the foreseeable future if we don't make some moves, or manage to turn a few of them into a true #1. Personally I am very nervous. I am not liking where we are heading right now.

 

[NUMBERICA]

The problem is we have a bunch of #3 and borderline #2 players. Put them all together and you get a halfway decent team that will NEVER get anywhere in the playoffs as is. But they are too good to properly tank. We run a very real risk of staying in mediocre-land for the foreseeable future if we don't make some moves, or manage to turn a few of them into a true #1. Personally I am very nervous. I am not liking where we are heading right now.

I know it means I am broken, but "good" games just fill me with dread.

 

[JAZZGASM]

The problem is we have a bunch of #3 and borderline #2 players. Put them all together and you get a halfway decent team that will NEVER get anywhere in the playoffs as is. But they are too good to properly tank. We run a very real risk of staying in mediocre-land for the foreseeable future if we don't make some moves, or manage to turn a few of them into a true #1. Personally I am very nervous. I am not liking where we are heading right now.

The 2003-4 Pistons team was made of #2 and #3 type players. Very good, but not great. They played as a team and had very complimentary players.

While I think we do need another piece, I think a coach that can get this team to jell and play good D is even more important. We also need two good point guards.

 

[NUMBERICA]

The 2003-4 Pistons team was made of #2 and #3 type players. Very good, but not great. They played as a team and had very complimentary players.

While I think we do need another piece, I think a coach that can get this team to jell and play good D is even more important. We also need two good point guards.

I would love to have a team like that, but they are THE exception that proves the rule. They also filled a vacuum in a terrible conference to get to the finals twice (and in a pretty poor era of basketball, too). They are also the team that couldn't stop Lebron James and a bunch of gas station attendants from beating them in a 7-game series.

 

[LogGrad98]

The 2003-4 Pistons team was made of #2 and #3 type players. Very good, but not great. They played as a team and had very complimentary players.

While I think we do need another piece, I think a coach that can get this team to jell and play good D is even more important. We also need two good point guards.

I would love to have a team like that, but they are THE exception that proves the rule. They also filled a vacuum in a terrible conference to get to the finals twice (and in a pretty poor era of basketball, too). They are also the team that couldn't stop Lebron James and a bunch of gas station attendants from beating them in a 7-game series.

The other difference was a few of them were capable of legitimately stepping into the #1 role as needed. We have seen that a bit from Hay and Burks so far, but neither of them compare to Prince or Hamilton really. Is there anyone here who wouldn't take championship Prince/Hamilton over Hay/Burks right now?